The Fun Fair has disappeared!

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 03 Nov 2004, 15:18

Did I miss something on here? This morning, I looked out of my window for the first time in daylight since the weekend, and discovered the Fun Fair on the prom has GONE .....

Can anyone tell me anything about this? I HOPE they are not going to build ANOTHER mulit-storey block of flats in its place

Lizzie · Post by **Lizzie** » 03 Nov 2004, 16:44

Which one Jay, the indoor or outdoor one

If you mean the outdoor Fun Fair, then yes there is a possibility of more flats

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 03 Nov 2004, 16:49

Lizzie wrote:If you mean the outdoor Fun Fair, then yes there is a possibility of more flats

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 03 Nov 2004, 16:50

Thanks for letting me know, Lizzie. Was there an enquiry? Was there a protest?

Lizzie · Post by **Lizzie** » 03 Nov 2004, 17:01

No enquiry or protest as yet Jay. The residents in the surrounding area did receive some information about plans to build flats a while ago and are waiting to hear further as there are diggers in the site as we speak doing a full archeological survey of the area to assess its suitability for a building development.

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 03 Nov 2004, 19:19

Lizzie wrote:as there are diggers in the site as we speak doing a full archeological survey

Oooh!! That sounds exciting!!!

That's approximately where the original harbour was, if my maps are correct!!!!!! I've said - facetiously - on two or three occasions, "We ought to get Tony Robinson up here to dig up the Fair and look for Porty's lost harbour"!!!!!! I never expcted it to happen (well, we can manage without Tony Robinson!)

But I certainly don't want more blocks of flats either

ecm · Post by **ecm** » 03 Nov 2004, 19:49

My son and I were having a look around the site last week. The gates were open so we went in and wandered about a bit.
I was telling him all about the things that used to be there when I was his age.
I was amazed at how small the space seemed but it brought back lots of memories of waltzers, chair-o-planes, candyfloss etc.
I must go check it out on our halfie on Friday.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 03 Nov 2004, 21:14

What on earth is wrong with Flats? I honestly cannot see the problem.

I can understand the concern about the loss of an amenity. An amenity that could be replaced on a temporary basis each 'season'

Its like "well we all have our flats and houses in portobello, how dare anyone else build more?" What gives?

What we lack is a community infrastucture plan as Rathbone correctly pointed out at length a few weeks ago.

bearcub · Post by **bearcub** » 03 Nov 2004, 22:35

Porty, totally agree re flats, we've not even seen plans or details of what is proposed and already people are shouting "No!"

What is wrong with building new homes for people instead of a (barely used recently) funfair? There will still be another funfair there for people that want to use it - and i do visit occasionally.

Just as well POL hadn't been available when Portobello started or we'd be staying in a 1 house town!

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 03 Nov 2004, 22:37

Oh, be honest Porty - all you're interested in is the possibility of new custom!

There's a limit to the amount of people the area can sustain without them having to then build a supermarket

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 03 Nov 2004, 22:40

Epykat wrote:Oh, be honest Porty - all you're interested in is the possibility of new custom!
There's a limit to the amount of people the area can sustain without them having to then build a supermarket

And they might be terrorists, never thought of that.

If you want to get angry about dwelling types, get angry about bungalow dwellers.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 03 Nov 2004, 22:49

But bungalows are so much fun. They're like Playdoh houses and you can add bits and bits and more bits until they turn into things resembling space ships! You're just no fun.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 03 Nov 2004, 22:51

BTW to all you Promenade Flat b itchers out there. I believe there is a serious plan by the owners to build 4 or 5 storeys above the existing indoor amusement arcade. Offices on the floor directly above the arcade on the assumption no one will want a flat on that floor and then residences above that. The arcade shall remain open throughout. Not a wind up. I applaud the entreprenurial thought and risk in such a venture.

"They say these jobs are going boys and they ain't comin back, to your Hometown"- Bruce Springsteen 1984

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 03 Nov 2004, 22:57

Hang on! Don't we have a HUGE thread about this sort of thing already?

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 03 Nov 2004, 23:06

Epykat wrote:Hang on! Don't we have a HUGE thread about this sort of thing already?

That thread was/is about a specific development, which perhaps and I stress perhaps people were right to have issues with. Each proposal should be looked at individually. I get the distinct impression that there are a bunch of people that think that ANY type of development with an intended profit element is bad. Its negative and tiresome.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 03 Nov 2004, 23:28

Oooo.....get you!

How can we look at the proposal when we don't know what it is? I'm not against SOMETHING being built on the site but why does it always have to be flats? The answer to that I'm afraid comes down to intended profit element! Never mind what would be aesthetically more pleasing - as long as they can cram as much into the space as possible to make more money.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 04 Nov 2004, 00:33

Epykat wrote: The answer to that I'm afraid comes down to intended profit element! Never mind what would be aesthetically more pleasing - as long as they can cram as much into the space as possible to make more money.

Tell me, does the incessant Cuckoo sound not trouble you?

CatzVP · Post by **CatzVP** » 04 Nov 2004, 06:45

why dont they build a new pier....... Im sure there will be room somewhere on it to build some more flats

I dont think its the bitching about people moving to Portobello..i think its that everything has to be 5 stories high and overpowering... soon the whole town will just be housing, all the history will be gone.

although the Fun City has had its day, it could have been turned into something the whole community would enjoy

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 04 Nov 2004, 10:16

CatzVP wrote:I dont think its the bitching about people moving to Portobello..i think its that everything has to be 5 stories high and overpowering .....

Exactly - that was my thought. Of course, people need houses. And I have no thoughts about the funfair, as I never really knew it, although I understand people who did know it being nostalgic about it. But my complaint is yet another multi-storey block in what is supposed to be a Conservation Area. The seafront area will end up looking like the Costa del Sol eventually. What happened to the 90's ideas that local communities were consulted about housing and even had a hand in drawing up the plans. It's been done elsewhere. And I am too cynical to believe that the proposed flats are because someone said 'People need houses'. Someone said 'How do we make the most money out of this bit of land?'.

ceejam · Post by **ceejam** » 04 Nov 2004, 14:18

Is there actually a planning application in? If so, find out what it is before you jump on your high horse and oppose it!

The only thing that is goping to happen with any bit of land anywhere in the developed world is someone will want to make money out of it. Clearly the funfair wasn't making money, so something else will take it's place. Unfortunate if it's something you don't want, but why are you wanting to stop people moving into our area?

Don't want to open up the clique?

Post by **wangi** » 04 Nov 2004, 15:01

and, this site is of course outside the conservation area.

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 04 Nov 2004, 15:31

ceejam wrote:but why are you wanting to stop people moving into our area?

I don't. And I think you'll find that is not what I said.

wangi wrote:and, this site is of course outside the conservation area

That I didn't know, wangi. I thought the whole seafront area along the prom was.

ceejam wrote:Is there actually a planning application in? If so, find out what it is before you jump on your high horse and oppose it!

I would be interested to know if there has ever been building activity in Portobello that has actually - as I mentioned - involved local people in the whole process, including the actual design, size etc.

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » 04 Nov 2004, 16:14

A new pier would be great!

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 04 Nov 2004, 16:20

Jay wrote: I would be interested to know if there has ever been building activity in Portobello that has actually - as I mentioned - involved local people in the whole process, including the actual design, size etc.

My house extension qualifies on the criteria above. I bet there is quite a few other examples too.

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 04 Nov 2004, 16:34

Sorry - I'm not making myself very clear - late afternoon brain exhaustion. I wasn't thinking of individual house alterations or extensions. I meant things like a new housing development, which involves quite a lot of building and will also later have an effect on the people who move into it - or something like the proposed supermarket development. I am thinking of schemes that have been successfully operated in other areas, where new housing went through a consultative process with the local community, and where impracticalities that local people could see, and designers and developers couldn't, were discussed and alterations made. It seems to me to be a good idea.

Post by **wangi** » 04 Nov 2004, 16:41

Jay wrote:
wangi wrote:and, this site is of course outside the conservation area
That I didn't know, wangi. I thought the whole seafront area along the prom was.

Only as far as Beach Lane-ish I beleive - http://download.edinburgh.gov.uk/caca/c ... obello.pdf

The conservation area is enclosed to the north east by the sea and to the south west by Sir Harry Lauder Road which creates a visual and physical boundary for the conservation area as far as Windsor Place. At this point, the boundary turns north down Windsor Place and excludes the housing on the former Mount Lodge Estate. The north western and south eastern boundaries are less well defined: the north western boundary being generally defined by Beach Lane on the north side of the High Street and to the rear of Adelphi Place properties on the south side of the High Street, and the south east boundary extending to the end of Joppa Road taking in Dalkeith Street and Morton Street.

However I have seen this detailed on a map somewhere - the library?

Went past the site this afternoon, and two guys were taking core samples.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 04 Nov 2004, 17:36

Jay wrote:Sorry - I'm not making myself very clear - late afternoon brain exhaustion. I wasn't thinking of individual house alterations or extensions. I meant things like a new housing development, which involves quite a lot of building and will also later have an effect on the people who move into it - or something like the proposed supermarket development. I am thinking of schemes that have been successfully operated in other areas, where new housing went through a consultative process with the local community, and where impracticalities that local people could see, and designers and developers couldn't, were discussed and alterations made. It seems to me to be a good idea.

You mean like a commune type of thing?

Think that was tried in the 60's. Fortunes are now being spent to obliterate the memories.

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 04 Nov 2004, 18:59

Porty wrote:You mean like a commune type of thing?

No!

These schemes started in the 80's, I believe, and are still going on in some areas. Don't - at ten to six, when I'm still working (and shouldn't be !

) - ask me where! There was one on the news recently - like in the past year or so. If I had time, I would try and Google for examples, but I can't tonight. Sorry - I keep doing this, don't I!

Not being able to give chapter and verse.

The first one - which I do know about - was the Byker development in Newcastle. Whatever one may think of the Byker Wall - and I don't like it very much - the whole scheme was designed and built with the participation of the local community, who had had years in tower blocks and hated them. It gave people what they wanted as an environment. And as far as I know, people have been happy living there. I know there are others and more recently. It involves real consultation with the community, not just tokenism.

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 04 Nov 2004, 19:15

wangi

Thanks for that information - I'd never seen that detailed out before.

It would be nice if the archaeologists found the original harbour.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 04 Nov 2004, 19:18

Jay wrote:
Porty wrote:Whatever one may think of the Byker Wall - and I don't like it very much - the whole scheme was designed and built with the participation of the local community, who had had years in tower blocks and hated them. It gave people what they wanted as an environment. And as far as I know, people have been happy living there.

I lived in Newcastle for many years and the Byker Wall was well known as a place liked by the residents. Personally, I would never walk through that area with a table leg in a plastic bag, even in broad daylight.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 04 Nov 2004, 20:25

Anyway,the saddest part of all this is that it removes the reminders of one of the best summer jobs I ever had - 5 weeks on the dodgems. Cool or what!

Nearly got sacked on my 1st day tho when he sent me to the Waltzer to get change. I was away for 10 minutes because I didn't realise you were meant to jump on and off when it was moving! Soon got the hang of it though.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 04 Nov 2004, 22:34

ceejam wrote:why are you wanting to stop people moving into our area??

Nobody wants to stop people moving into the area!

If Portobello Town Centre (!) is to be revitalised and restored to the kind of place I remember when I was young(er) we obviously need more people to use more shops. HOWEVER - as Jay has already said - what some of us do object to is the constant building of flats. I might be wrong (and I'm sure somebody will be quick to correct me!) but they seem to be building on that teeny weeny bit of land at Joppa Grove/Crescent/?? where the houses were demolished years back due to subsidence. 10 storeys maybe?

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 05 Nov 2004, 00:15

Jay wrote:I know there are others and more recently. It involves real consultation with the community, not just tokenism.

Tokenism was the beginning of the downfall of the fruit machine. And no doubt had a signifigant part to play in the demise of the "shows".

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 05 Nov 2004, 00:48

Pal of Porty wrote:Nearly got sacked on my 1st day tho when he sent me to the Waltzer to get change. I was away for 10 minutes because I didn't realise you were meant to jump on and off when it was moving!

Christ, you even needed a Manual back in those days.

Lucky the Waltzer was on a timer or you may still have been on it until last Friday!!

Mind you even if you were, you still wouldn't have gone home til you'd watched the men doing the core samples.

CatzVP · Post by **CatzVP** » 05 Nov 2004, 01:44

Pal of Porty wrote:one of the best summer jobs I ever had - 5 weeks on the dodgems. Cool or what!

The best job I had as a kid was helping on the MoonBuggies/ BeachBuggies at the bottom of Bath Street on the beach... The Land/ Water Duck vehicles that used to take people out into the Forth to the powerstation pylons and back to the beach during one summer. and yes...... I was very young at the time!!!

Talk Porty ~ Portobello