I was wondering where the 81% number comes from? Is it 2009 results because when I looked here http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/education/08/school_tables/secondary_schools/html/206.stm which is based on 2008 numbers published in Jan 2009 it seemed to be 30% or am I misunderstanding something ? (quite likely).
The last Ofsted Report in Jan 2008 seems to give a good report on the teaching approach etc so it would be good to see that filtering through into the kid’s achievements etc. I guess Ofsted must be due back for another inspection soon.
Also what happens to kids that want to do A levels or go onto Univesrity?
Arts and Media at 81%? From memory it came almost near the bottom of LB Islington in the Evening Standard round up this year, and Islington is the worst London borough.
Just checked BBC website. Confirms 30% pass A-C.
I agree with Ali. Schools should be the priority round here.
Too high and too ugly. Why do all these developers want to dominate an area? They may meet the legal requirements regarding light and neighbours but walking down SGR it's nice to be able to look at a panorama of the sky towards the park and opposite towards Islington. This 6 story building will mean we'll only have a narrow strip of sky to look at. Only the tennants on the upper floors will have a nice view, the rest of us will see only concrete and glass.
City and Islington looks like an impressive place wit a very positive web site http://www.candi.ac.uk/
Even has connections with Corpus Christi, University Challenge here you come !
Is there some sort of break for developers who build student housing? They seem to be going up all over the place. There's one planned for Isledon Road and a huge, massively ugly concrete block has opened outside the Tottenham Hale train station.
There's also a large one in Stoke Newington, a friend of mine lives close to it. Like Reg she's noticed it's filled with students for 30 weeks of the year and then in the summer it serves as cheap tourist accommodation. Not exactly a Coin St/Chocolate factory vibe.
I can see the site needs developing, it's been awful for years. However I'm sorry to say that it doesn't actually inspire confidence that John Jones have left it that way for 20 years already. The existing John Jones building is unimaginative to say the least for an arts focussed organisation. There are probably reasons etc, but it's not impressive as a track record.
JoeV, not a break exactly but the residential market is in the doldrums, you can't raise finance to build flats at the moment and you're also required to provide affordable housing. When you do the numbers, student accomodation is more profitable and you can sell it to a fund and not have to rely on individuals.
@poxy, thanks, I suppose that will teach me to post coming home from the pub on the bus.
I’ve never liked that orange box not facing the street thing, seemed like a real waste.
I’ve no doubt that John Jones with their developers have good intentions. From experience I am suspicious about developers, all that stuff about how we care, we’re ethical, we're part of the community is really heart felt, but can all go tits up when it comes to the economic realities.
Agree with Dorothy, the 8ft high fence around an industrial factory unit was never a nice look.
And yes, Vista (blue hoarding building site next to JJ) not a good advert for developers. "Oh the market's bottomed out and we need another builder? Let's just leave the place looking like cr@p for the next year until it picks up and we can turn a profit, we live in Hampstead and don't have to walk past it every day".
I've just realised, Vista are unlikely to be chuffed at the idea that their luxury flats (should they ever happen) will be surrounded by the biggest building site in N4 for the foreseeable. Not a great selling point.
Are there any pictures of the development proposal online, other than the one on the John Jones site?
My first reaction is that it looks good, and would radically improve the area. Given how high City North will be this development will represent a mid-point between the surrounding 2-3 story buildings and the centre of FP at City North. Given that it's at the bottom of the hill it shouldn't impact the skyline significantly. And there is a limited amount of space for which high-rise is remotely feasible immediately north of FP, I think fears of 'tower creep' north into SG is probably unfounded. There are plenty of towers that I think should come down (like the one near the junction of Crouch Hill and Mount View) because they are ugly and out of context, but much of the area west and immediately north of the station would benefit from being levelled and redeveloped, and some well-chosen iconic structures would not go amiss.
Also, a neighbouring development has been mentioned here a few times, one that is currently on hold. Is that for the Wells Terrace/Morris Place plot currently occupied by ugly buildings and the car wash? Are there any details of the development online, planning applications, etc?
Thanks for the comments - some of the more specialist questions I will hand over to our planning consultants to get back on...
@Dorothy, Yes i agree with you completely, our current site is an eyesore. Nasty red brick around a big concrete car park and a wire security fence. It really doesn't reflect what we do at all. However, one thing I must point out is that whilst we're successful in terms of our reputation in the artworld and the types of client we work for, we are not in a financial position to facelift the current site (the recent article about a £3m Damien Hirst job was not correct! we wish it were). Have you ever been INSIDE John Jones? Its much different on the inside and we want our new building to reflect us on the outside too... We've done the best we can with what we have now, but to really make improvements - and ones that will have longevity (currently 2nd generation family business, which will hopefully get to 3rd generation one day!) - we have to turn to developers to help us.
I can't repeat enough how important it is for us to develop something of benefit to the local area. We're still in discussions with Islington, Developer, Architects and whilst we have to be realistic (if we don't build up, there isn't a financial incentive for the developers to work with us so nasty red brick building won't be going anywhere...), we will pay attention to the comments made and hopefully achieve at least 99% approval from local residents ;-)
In the meantime I'll leave you with an art recommendation - we've just framed the show at Whitechapel Gallery Where Three Dreams Cross. Its a survey of photography from Bangladesh, Pakistan and India - works from the past 150 years, many of which have never been seen before. Some amazing stories are told through the images http://www.whitechapelgallery.org/exhibitions/where-three-dreams-cross-150-years-of-photography-from-india-pakistan-and-bangladesh
Thanks for the update Kate. Are you able to give us an idea of timelines, when we should be able to see the planning application, etc?
Have you heard any further rumours about the progress of the neighbouring development facing Stroud Green Rd? If it's stalled indefinitely then we probably ought to start protesting about the hording.
Hi Kate - I was at the Whitechapel gallery last night for the opening and a Q&A with the curators and some of the photographers. I'd encourage people to go and have a look as most of the work has never been seen outside of India or Bangladesh and is very good....oh, they have great frames too!
@Kate: This suggestion probably comes a little late in the process, but why not throw open the task of designing the new building to an architectural competition. That way you give a chance for young and up-and-coming architects to express new and exciting ideas. This may be less common for smaller developments but it is certainly a tried and tested process and would certainly seem more in keeping with your organisation’s philosophy. In this market you'd probably get responses from some proven, high quality outfits too! You'd be far more likely to end up with an inspiring building as a result.
I did go to the open day - many thanks for organising this and giving us a chance to comment. I'm sorry to say that I was a little underwhelmed. While I can see that tricky logistical issues are addressed quite effectively by the proposal, and there is some reflection of the local architecture (bricks, tall slim building segments like the terraces), it is not very exciting or imaginative.
There was a statement in the intro saying that the highest ‘sustainablilty’ standards where being strived for, or something to that effect. I gather that the residential areas are aimed at Code for Sustainable Homes level 4. The requirements for level 4 are a long way short of the highest (level 6). In fact, elements of code 4 are expected to become the legal minimum this year. From the looks of the highly glazed commercial areas, I can’t image these will be high performing either. So, I though the statement was dishonest and there was not much in imagery to suggest a design which responds to the environment effectively enough to be properly low-impact.
All of the perspective views displayed at the open-day were from above, as if the viewer was floating by on a hot air baloon. I would have appreciated some street level views to give a better sense of scale (the elevations go some way but you’d have to hundreds of meters away to get a similar view). Not only is the proposed building about three times the height of the existing, it also extends much closer to the site perimeter. I am not against taller buildings but the proposed design is quite a lump! There would certainly be less imposing ways of achieve a similar volume of sellable/lettable space. Could some of the internal courtyard space be position on the outside for example?
With economical conditions as they are you should be is strong position in terms of choosing developer and architect. You’re the boss! If you are going to stick with your current developer and architect then they may need to be pushed a bit harder if you want something a little more imaginative to come out of this process.
@kate, I know I'm a bit sniffy about your current building, but one thing I do like, is your little front lawn, especially when it has the daisies on it in the summer. I like the climbing shrubs on the fence too. You can hear birdsong there sometimes. (Little things, make me happy). It must be a drag having to cut that lawn constantly, so I'm grateful to whoever does it.
Like Richard, above, I feel it would be great to see more of the courtyard/green space on the outside of the build, think it makes a real difference seeing a bit of green, especially there.
I haven't been into John Jones for a while, I admit. I used to go into the shop a lot when you sold art materials. It doesn't seem very inviting. I'll give it a go though.
By comparison, The City North application had all the docs attached from the off. I've emailed matthew.rosel@islington.g.... to ask if they can be attached.
It does seem a shame that the genuinely historic <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroud_Green,_London#Scala_Cinema" Target="+blank">ex-Scala cinema building (one of London's earliest purpose-built cinemas)</A> was destroyed for a development that has now - from what I read here - stalled.
It shouldn't really take that long to get everything online, as presumably, the application would have been submitted electronically. It may be that the Council have to print out the application documents,stamp the relevant application number for clarification and scan it again, although from memory, i think for the City North Development they uploaded the original electronic copies. So err, I don't know is the conclusion here. Presumably the public consultation hasn't started yet if the docs aren't online.
With regard to wider consultation - there's no requirement for anything more than the standard neighbour consultation, i presume islington will be consulting haringey residents given that they are neighbours as well as consulting haringey council itself?
Comments
I can see the site needs developing, it's been awful for years. However I'm sorry to say that it doesn't actually inspire confidence that John Jones have left it that way for 20 years already. The existing John Jones building is unimaginative to say the least for an arts focussed organisation. There are probably reasons etc, but it's not impressive as a track record.
5 or 6 cheap shots against one undeserving target in a single paragraph. Well done.
I’ve never liked that orange box not facing the street thing, seemed like a real waste.
I’ve no doubt that John Jones with their developers have good intentions. From experience I am suspicious about developers, all that stuff about how we care, we’re ethical, we're part of the community is really heart felt, but can all go tits up when it comes to the economic realities.
And yes, Vista (blue hoarding building site next to JJ) not a good advert for developers. "Oh the market's bottomed out and we need another builder? Let's just leave the place looking like cr@p for the next year until it picks up and we can turn a profit, we live in Hampstead and don't have to walk past it every day".
I've just realised, Vista are unlikely to be chuffed at the idea that their luxury flats (should they ever happen) will be surrounded by the biggest building site in N4 for the foreseeable. Not a great selling point.
My first reaction is that it looks good, and would radically improve the area. Given how high City North will be this development will represent a mid-point between the surrounding 2-3 story buildings and the centre of FP at City North. Given that it's at the bottom of the hill it shouldn't impact the skyline significantly. And there is a limited amount of space for which high-rise is remotely feasible immediately north of FP, I think fears of 'tower creep' north into SG is probably unfounded. There are plenty of towers that I think should come down (like the one near the junction of Crouch Hill and Mount View) because they are ugly and out of context, but much of the area west and immediately north of the station would benefit from being levelled and redeveloped, and some well-chosen iconic structures would not go amiss.
B
B
@Dorothy, Yes i agree with you completely, our current site is an eyesore. Nasty red brick around a big concrete car park and a wire security fence. It really doesn't reflect what we do at all. However, one thing I must point out is that whilst we're successful in terms of our reputation in the artworld and the types of client we work for, we are not in a financial position to facelift the current site (the recent article about a £3m Damien Hirst job was not correct! we wish it were). Have you ever been INSIDE John Jones? Its much different on the inside and we want our new building to reflect us on the outside too... We've done the best we can with what we have now, but to really make improvements - and ones that will have longevity (currently 2nd generation family business, which will hopefully get to 3rd generation one day!) - we have to turn to developers to help us.
I can't repeat enough how important it is for us to develop something of benefit to the local area. We're still in discussions with Islington, Developer, Architects and whilst we have to be realistic (if we don't build up, there isn't a financial incentive for the developers to work with us so nasty red brick building won't be going anywhere...), we will pay attention to the comments made and hopefully achieve at least 99% approval from local residents ;-)
In the meantime I'll leave you with an art recommendation - we've just framed the show at Whitechapel Gallery Where Three Dreams Cross. Its a survey of photography from Bangladesh, Pakistan and India - works from the past 150 years, many of which have never been seen before. Some amazing stories are told through the images http://www.whitechapelgallery.org/exhibitions/where-three-dreams-cross-150-years-of-photography-from-india-pakistan-and-bangladesh
Have you heard any further rumours about the progress of the neighbouring development facing Stroud Green Rd? If it's stalled indefinitely then we probably ought to start protesting about the hording.
Arky
@Kate: This suggestion probably comes a little late in the process, but why not throw open the task of designing the new building to an architectural competition. That way you give a chance for young and up-and-coming architects to express new and exciting ideas. This may be less common for smaller developments but it is certainly a tried and tested process and would certainly seem more in keeping with your organisation’s philosophy. In this market you'd probably get responses from some proven, high quality outfits too! You'd be far more likely to end up with an inspiring building as a result.
I did go to the open day - many thanks for organising this and giving us a chance to comment. I'm sorry to say that I was a little underwhelmed. While I can see that tricky logistical issues are addressed quite effectively by the proposal, and there is some reflection of the local architecture (bricks, tall slim building segments like the terraces), it is not very exciting or imaginative.
There was a statement in the intro saying that the highest ‘sustainablilty’ standards where being strived for, or something to that effect. I gather that the residential areas are aimed at Code for Sustainable Homes level 4. The requirements for level 4 are a long way short of the highest (level 6). In fact, elements of code 4 are expected to become the legal minimum this year. From the looks of the highly glazed commercial areas, I can’t image these will be high performing either. So, I though the statement was dishonest and there was not much in imagery to suggest a design which responds to the environment effectively enough to be properly low-impact.
All of the perspective views displayed at the open-day were from above, as if the viewer was floating by on a hot air baloon. I would have appreciated some street level views to give a better sense of scale (the elevations go some way but you’d have to hundreds of meters away to get a similar view). Not only is the proposed building about three times the height of the existing, it also extends much closer to the site perimeter. I am not against taller buildings but the proposed design is quite a lump! There would certainly be less imposing ways of achieve a similar volume of sellable/lettable space. Could some of the internal courtyard space be position on the outside for example?
With economical conditions as they are you should be is strong position in terms of choosing developer and architect. You’re the boss! If you are going to stick with your current developer and architect then they may need to be pushed a bit harder if you want something a little more imaginative to come out of this process.
I also thought that many of the drawings failed to show the side profile of the John Jones design in relation to the neighbouring buildings.
Like Richard, above, I feel it would be great to see more of the courtyard/green space on the outside of the build, think it makes a real difference seeing a bit of green, especially there.
I haven't been into John Jones for a while, I admit. I used to go into the shop a lot when you sold art materials. It doesn't seem very inviting. I'll give it a go though.
Good news for the Budget Supermarket though, on the corner of Woodstock Road.
<a href="https://www.islington.gov.uk/onlineplanning/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=P100197&backURL=<a href=wphappcriteria.display?paSearchKey=387789>Search Criteria</a> > <a href='wphappsearchres.displayResultsURL?ResultID=499476&StartIndex=1&SortOrder=APNID:asc&DispResultsAs=WPHAPPSEARCHRES&BackURL=<a href=wphappcriteria.display?paSearchKey=387789>Search Criteria</a>'>Search Results</a>">Application details</a>
Arky
Residents in Stroud Green (Harringey) have not had much chance to consult, over Islington Council's plans according to <A HREF="http://www.richardwilson.me.uk/2010/02/06/residents-should-have-a-say-on-huge-stroud-green-road-development/" target="+blank">Richard Wilson, a local LibDem Councillor, in his blog</A>.
Was the ex-Scala in really bad condition? Was it worth saving?
Arky
With regard to wider consultation - there's no requirement for anything more than the standard neighbour consultation, i presume islington will be consulting haringey residents given that they are neighbours as well as consulting haringey council itself?
Arky