Do these factors make the English opening ideal for beginners?
No. As a beginner it is OK to study the English along with other openings but what you seem to be suggesting, that it be the only white opening a beginner learns, is very bad.
By definition a beginner doesn't know very much about chess and to progress needs to learn much. In openings the standard approach, therefore, is to learn the classics: Ruy Lopez, Italian, Kings Gambit, 4 Knights, Scotch, Sicilian, French, Caro Kann.
You notice these are all e4 openings and the list starts with the reply e5 by black before moving on to other replies. A beginner needs to start by learning about control of the centre in the most direct way. He needs to learn about the importance of development and then tactics.
Some chess teachers would start by teaching the Kings Gambit for this reason. Chess needs to be fun and tactics are fun and most games end because of some missed tactic by the opponent. If you only ever learn how to play calm positions then you will lose all your games where your opponent manages to make the game tactical.
You also seem to suggest a formulaic way of playing the opening. Play more or less the same moves in the English and you will end up in one of two tabiyas which you give. This is also very wrong. One of the key skills a beginner needs to develop is to always consider the ideas and aims of his opponent's moves. Just playing automatic moves will lead to many quick defeats.
There are many ways for black to respond and they give rise to different problems for white which can't be addressed by just playing more or less the same moves. The opening theorist IM John Watson actually wrote 4 separate books on the English because of this. He wrote one book each for black's responses: 1 ... e5, 1 ... c5, 1 ... Nf6 and a catch-all "other replies".
So, no, the English is close to being the least suitable opening for beginners. Better than the Grob, obviously, also better than Bird's, but a long way behind 1. d4 and even further behind 1. e4 openings.