Dear Residents

Cloudesley Association - Update

We just wanted to let you know that the planning application for the school site has been registered:

ref: P2015/0081/FUL

Please note that comments have to be received by 12th February.

For maximum impact, we believe that the Association should comment, but that it is important for individuals to comment separately.

Please do let us know if you have any comments to add to the Association response - click here for Contact Page.

Best regards

Amanda and Florence

Dear Residents

Cloudesley Association – Planning Application

Nick Black kindly suggested we share his observations on the plans that have been submitted as part of the planning application for the redevelopment of the school site (click here to view). Some, but not all of Nick’s observations may well be relevant to other residents.

The Association intends to comment on aspects of the plans that have an impact on the public realm (that is shared by everyone) within the conservation area, e.g. street railings, the 6ft high skylights and the railing around the roof; and not aspects that affect individuals. However, we might also consider commenting on issues relating to particular streets if the majority  of residents down such street feel that a particular aspect is unacceptable. For instance, we would be keen to establish whether residents down Stonefield Street are happy to have new/significantly denser fencing on the back of their gardens. We would encourage residents to share their views with their street reps.

Whilst most people we have spoken to are broadly happy with the plans, you should not hesitate to comment on aspects of the plans that you do not agree with. Please feel free to send your comments back to me or liaise with your street rep, but most importantly, please comment in your individual capacities to the Council. At this stage we anticipate the Cloudesley Association will be supportive of the development in principle but may object on a few specific points where we feel there could be some improvements and also suggest conditions such as restriction on building working hours. We will send a draft of our response to all members by 8 February.  

As a reminder, residents only have until 12 February to comment on the plans. Please note that this being a major application, it will go to Committee and the Council may allow someone or several people to express their views at the meeting, but this is at their discretion. 

Best regards

Amanda and Florence

on behalf of 

The Cloudesley Association

Dear Amanda

I've had a thorough look at the proposed plans and have several concerns that I intend to raise as objections in my personal response to the Council.

1. Siting of the school building

The building has gradually migrated north over the past few months despite requests to ensure the impact of the new buildings are fairly shared across the site. I would favour the building being shifted south by 3-4 metres to reduce its proximity to the Mission Hall and Richmond Avenue houses. This seems a fairer course of action even if a tree needs to be replaced and the football pitch shortened slightly.

2. Height of the school building

Throughout the autumn, at every consultation meeting, the planners reassured us the building would, at most, be 0.5m taller than the existing building. They have reneged on that promise. In practice the top of the parapet is about 1.5 metres higher than the parapet on the main two storey existing building.

3. Roof skylights

In addition, there has previously been no mention of additional infrastructure on the roof beyond low lying skylights and photo-voltaic cells. In practice it is proposed to erect 9 skylights, each 1.8 metres in height. Together with the increase in height of the building, the proposed school building will be almost 3 metres (9 feet) taller than the existing building - an increase of 38% in the height. There is also proposed to be a handrail around the roof. No explanation is given for this addition, which no other flat roofs appear to need.

The proposed roof lights should be replaced with flat skylights.

4. Parking spaces

In contravention of Council policy to discourage car use in the borough, seven parking spaces have been included in the plans. Again, residents were reassured previously that no parking facilities would be provided. This suggests that there will be considerable traffic not only during the working day but also at weekends and at night as resident staff shifts begin and end.

5. Construction traffic

In addition to focusing all the new buildings towards the northern end of the site rather than try and spread the development fairly across the whole site, the planned logistics involve all the heavy traffic for demolition and construction will be at the Dowery Street entrance. Given the narrowness of Richmond Avenue, it is likely that parking in that road will have to be suspended for the duration of the building work (maybe 18 months) to allow access for large lorries.

This would not be a problem at the southern side of the site, where the existing fence is due for replacement anyway, as the road is wide and only a few parking places would need to be suspended.

6. Perimeter fencing

All sides of the site currently have chain link fencing above their garden wall. It is proposed to maintain that on all sides except Stonefield Street where it is proposed to replace it (or supplement it) with open mesh steel panelling. Such panelling will make residents feel they are in a detention facility and it obstructs light to the gardens. The reason given for this addition is for 'security' but no explanation of 'who's security' needs protecting - intruders to the School or school children intruding into the gardens? Also, it is implied that the only risk is for Stonefield Street, not for the other sides.

I can see no reason for such additional panelling, the exclusion of which will also help reduce costs.

Whilst these will form the basis of my response, I am happy for you to share my views with other members of the association.

Best wishes


Presentation by James Kidgell and Julian from Morgan Sindell with Tom and Sachin from LBI. Both headteachers also in attendance.


The indicative programme gives a start date of the 29th February and is aiming for completion in May 2017.

  • 29th Feb - 5th April: The first phase will be soft strip and site set-up (including welfare cabins)
  • 6th April - 18th May: Demolition.
  • 10th May - 29th June: Excavation, piling mat and Piling (auger drilling rather than hammer)
  • 22 June -31st October: Construction of the Teaching block (concrete frame)
  • 5th July - 19th September: Construction of the residential block (light steel frame)


There will not be a tower crane, but materials will be moved around using mobile cranes as required plus a hoist. Concrete will be pumped from a discharge point in the vehicle area.


The two storey welfare cabins will be about 6m tall. These will be installed in the North-East corner (i.e at the back of 100-108 Richmond Avenue). Windows will be facing into the site. Blank elevations to the North and East. No overnight security presence. The toilets will be connected into the main. There might be a generator temporarily on site to support the cabins, and this until the site is connected onto street services.

Working hours:

The site will be opened from 7.30am until 6pm although work won't start until 8am. No weekend work planned at this stage although they do have permission if required to work on Saturdays until 1pm.

Vehicle Movement & parking suspension:

All vehicles will access from Cloudesley Road. This will require parking suspension of three street parking places: One at the top of Richmond Avenue and two by 91 Richmond Avenue. Vehicles will leave down Richmond Avenue onto Liverpool Road.
All vehicle movement will be supervised by a banksman in high viz. There won't be any lorries coming in before 8am and they won't be allowed to stay idle in the neighbouring streets.
Lorries will not be allowed to leave their engines on once they have stopped inside the site.

Dust and vermin control:

They have a duty to keep the site free of pests/rodents for the safety of their employees against Weil/ Leptospirosis and have a 24hr call-out agreement with a specialist contractor should there be an issue on their site. Dust will be controlled by water spray and there will be wheel washing carried out on site to prevent mud spread down Richmond Avenue.


Tree work will take place to remove and prune trees as per planning permission and to protect roots of those remaining. No thinning/ pruning or maintenance work to trees anticipated during the construction year.


There will be a resident liaison officer appointed and the contact details of that person will be on the newsletter.
Newsletter will be circulated once a calendar month.

Design alterations:

There has been some minor alterations agreed with the planning authority including:
- reduction of the roof ventilation stacks to seven instead of 13.
- The curtain walling of the internal Hall on the East elevation of the teaching block has been simplified.
The amendments should be available not the local authority website under the same planning application reference P2015/0081/FUL.

Site fencing:

They will erect 2.4m tall heras fencing with protective fabric sheeting along the wall perimeter, and hoarding in place.

Re: Cloudesley Association - Dowrey Street Site - Interim Update

A number of residents have complained this week about:

(i) cracks in walls;
(ii) vibrations being so strong that they have concerns for the foundations of their houses;
(iii) mice suddenly appearing in their houses;
(iv) kids trying to get into the site overnight; and
(v) builders opening port-a-cabin window blinds and looking straight into the houses/gardens on Richmond Avenue.

The council have contacted me to tell me that they are waiting for the contractor to get back to them with some information in relation to some of the resident's concerns and will arrange a call with me once they have this information. In the meantime the contractors have arranged for obscure film to be applied to the windows of the port-a-cabins that back on to the residents gardens and whilst they are awaiting for this to arrive on site they will reinforce to their staff & operatives that the blinds are to be kept closed.

Project and Site Manager Details:

Florence and I wanted to reassure you that we have contacted the council and they are looking into each of these matters. Florence and Erica Brealey have also both been down to speak to the site managers.

The site managers have confirmed that they do monitor vibrations (it is not clear how well!). They are also considering 24 hour security on site.

As previously promised, here are their contact details if any of you have any urgent complaints/matters that need to be dealt with:

Steve Kemp, Morgan Sindall, Project Manager: 07976 191934
Tom Butvillas (possibly spelt wrong!), Site Manager: 07895 647232

Please do continue to let us know of any complaints you have though as it is useful to know of all your issues when speaking to the council.

We will update you further in due course.

Best regards

Amanda and Florence
On behalf of
The Cloudesley Association

Following a successful development project, the Dowrey Street site now hosts two separate schools, which opened in 2017:

The Bridge Integrated Learning Space (ILS) - see

New River College Primary Pupil Referral Unit (PRU) - see

Re: Planning Reference P2015/0081/FUL

The Cloudesley Residents Association (the “Association”) is in favour of maintaining the Dowrey Street site for educational purposes and is supportive of the continuation of the PRU occupying the space, along with the new Bridge School and its small school-term only residential block.

However, the Association objects to the following aspects of the plans submitted to the Planning Department of Islington Council:

The Height of the Main School Building

According to the plans, the height of the parapet of the new building will be 1.4m taller than the parapet of the current building. This is substantially higher than was originally discussed with the Association. One of the main concerns of many of our residents at inception of the planning process was that the main school building would be more or less the same height as the current building and residents were vehemently opposed to the provision of a third storey for this reason. The proposed height is not dissimilar to that of a three storey building. We would ask for the height to be reduced as much as possible. We understand that this can be achieved relatively easily by the use of more efficient materials. 


In additional to the overall height of the building, the plans submitted include a number of very tall skylights, which would take the height of the building up 1.5m above the proposed parapet. This would result in the uppermost point of the building being 9.2m tall, which is imposing on the amenity of most residents with houses overlooking the main school building. We would ask that the design of the skylights be changed to lower their impact on the surrounding area.


The current plans include the provision of a continuous handrail along the periphery of the main school building. This is unsightly and could be replaced by other safety measures hidden behind the parapet. This would greatly improve the elevation of the building.

Car Parking

The Association notes that the application has been advertised as a car-free scheme, in line with current Islington planning policy. However, the plans include the provision of 7 car parking spaces including 2 disabled parking spaces. The Association appreciates the need for the disabled parking spaces. However, it is felt that one disabled parking space should be at each end of the site (to allow disabled children to enter their respective schools through the main entrance). All other parking should be on the street.

Construction Traffic

The Association would like the Council to carefully consider the impact of construction traffic on local businesses and residences.


As the site is contained in a residential block, the Association would also like to request that planning conditions include the following:

  1. That landscaping is completed before the schools are allowed to commence operation; and
  2. That construction work is limited to Monday-Friday 8am to 5pm.