New Portobello High School- Where and how?

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 06 Jan 2006, 07:54

It's time to re-ignite the debate:

[quote]PRESS RELEASE
PORTOBELLO HIGH SCHOOL NEEDS A NEW BUILDING

2006 must be the start of a new future for Portobello's children. Portobello High Schoolâ€™s building is in a very poor state and should be the centrepiece of a revival in the town. The High School is currently having new windows fitted for a fraction of its classrooms. The School Board has expressed its concern about the poor state of the school buildings and believes the money would be better spent on plans to replace the entire building.

Dr Andrew Fraser, Chair of the School Board said: "What is more important than the education of our children in Portobello and the surrounding area? What would the people of Portobello want more from the Council than good schools? The High School building has come to the end of its life. The roof and windows leak, the drains donâ€™t work properly, the water and power systems have each shut the school for a day. The school is not designed for modern education. Nothing short of replacement will meet the needs of Portobello's children.

â€œMany parents were Portobello High School pupils themselves and the school is an important reason for people wanting to stay, or move into the area. Portobello must look to the future. Its children are the townâ€™s future, and they deserve a better school system than they have now.

â€œAfter years of lobbying by the Board, the High School has no plans, no prospects for replacement - just patch and mend repairs. That must change and the parents, pupils and community of Portobello should consider any viable proposals that guarantee a bright future for the education of local children.â€

Ed · Post by Ed » 06 Jan 2006, 09:52

Sounds reasonable, a well structured press release.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 10 Jan 2006, 18:10

From today's EN:

Parents spell out need for action over crumbling school

Ed · Post by Ed » 11 Jan 2006, 09:48

I heard this mentioned on Radio Forth the other day in a news bulletin, no new news, just a rehash of the previous article.

Ed · Post by Ed » 11 Jan 2006, 09:52

news article wrote:Dr Fraser, who works as the head of health for the Scottish Prison Service

I bet the prisoners have better facilities, maybe we should swap buildings. Last time I went past Saughton it was getting a whole nice shiny new bit built on it, probably a sauna.

news article wrote:Also, the building is eight storeys high and children have to walk up flights and flights of stairs to get between classrooms.

I dont think this is a reason for a new school though, exercise will do them no harm, didn't do me any and if there is a medical reason for it, they can use the lift. With the amount of fatties these days (more and more of them kids), I say, build it higher, 20 floors!

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 22 Jan 2006, 15:10

Watch this space for an exciting development, its a beauty.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 22 Jan 2006, 18:02

Oh go on just tell us. The suspense is killing me - along with the stairs (two weeks with only an intermittent lift service

)

Mate of Marya · Post by **Mate of Marya** » 22 Jan 2006, 19:37

Go on Porty, tell us.
We can keep a secret!

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 31 Jan 2006, 00:48

What Porty has been alluding to is simply confirmation of what we have expected for some time. The PHS School Board met this evening with Andrew Holmes - the Director of City Development, Rev Ewan Aitken - exec member for Children and Families, Roy Jobson - Director of Education and local councillors to outline the proposal to build a new PHS on the Golf Course site.

All other proposed sites have now been considered and ruled out. This remains, in the Council's view, as the only viable option. A new golf course would be created on green belt land in the Brunstane area, which has been purchased by the Council.

The proposal goes further than just re-locating PHS and takes in St Johns as well, with associated savings through shared sports facilities for example. The whole of the existing site could then be sold for housing value, between Â£10-12M. Housing would also be built on part of the Golf Course site and it is hoped that any shortfall, with a new school now budgeted at Â£30M, would be made up by the Scottish Exec. The site has been defined as the Golf Course plus the Milton Road playing fields. Where this leaves the proposed re-location of the Powerleague facility is not clear though Maureen spoke at tonight's CC meeting of the possibility of some tie-in with the new school's sports provision. Part of the site would remain a public park.

The new Head Teacher, Mrs Peigi McArthur, welcomed this 'hugely exciting proposal' while other board members were at pains to underline the necessity for urgent action to replace a building at the end of its useful life.

A press conference will be held tomorrow, so you can expect coverage in the Evening News. It is being stressed that this is the beginning of a pre-consultation 'conversation' with the local community. It will take another 3 months to work up detailed drawings and to resolve the financial implications of the various land deals.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 31 Jan 2006, 00:55

Parents of all PHS and St Johns pupils will receive a letter tomorrow, explaining in broad terms what is proposed.

Following this evening's meeting I was sent a copy of this message from the school board to local representatives.

Portobello High School
Duddingston Road
Edinburgh
EH15

31 January 2006

City Councillors in the East Edinburgh Area
MSPs, MP for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh, Edinburgh and Lothians
City of Edinburgh Council Education Officials

Dear Sir / Madam
PORTOBELLO HIGH SCHOOL
This week, The City of Edinburgh Council sets out for discussion its major development plans for Portobello and surrounding area, featuring a new Portobello High School. You may have seen or heard recent press coverage of concern expressed by Portobello High School Board about the state of the school's current building, the urgent need for plans to maintain the building fit for current children to see through their schooling safely and in a decent environment, and for future children to benefit from a school facility that is excellent as opposed to inadequate.

The Councilâ€™s outline plan is ambitious and wide-ranging, and will attract strong views from several standpoints. It offers Portobello and the east of the city the prospect of a first class school in its own grounds. The Board has considered the plan in outline, and recognises the outstanding educational merits as well as potential community, environmental and housing implications of such a development. It will listen carefully to a range of views on the plan, and seek to represent those of parents and the school community.

Portobello High School's claim is urgent, important and on a substantial scale. There is no shortage of evidence to back the School's case for replacement and, also, evidence that inaction will see further basic systems of the building's fabric fail. The School Board calls on you to accept the strong educational case for action, for urgent replacement of the school. Otherwise, inevitable deterioration of the current facility will force a hasty and unsatisfactory set of decisions on the Council, school, staff, pupils and parents. We ask that all local public representatives unite in supporting the school.

Yours faithfully,

ANDREW FRASER
Chair, Portobello High School Board

Mate of Marya · Post by **Mate of Marya** » 31 Jan 2006, 02:45

Exciting times. What is the time scale? When you say "takes in St Johns as well" what exactly do you mean? Surely St Johns is not being re-located? Is St Johns just sharing sports facilities with the new PHS? So many questions!!! Could a copy of the letter which will be sent to parents be published on POL?

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 31 Jan 2006, 08:03

Yes, one scenario would involve the re-location of St Johns. This would release the whole site for development. The schools might then also be able to share boiler plant for example, so it makes a lot of sense.

I'll post a copy of all and any information that comes my way.

Mate of Marya · Post by **Mate of Marya** » 31 Jan 2006, 08:14

Thanks.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 31 Jan 2006, 10:55

Fantastic news it seems but lets wait and hear what the official position is.

We could have two new schools benefitting tens of thousands of children and households for years to come, additional sports facilities, retain some parkland and get rid of the blot on the landscape that is Portobello High School. Hundeds of households that currently look out at that hideous monstrosity will benefit. Golfers will move up the road a bit. In my book everything is ticketty boo. (with the exception of the possibility of the powerleague participation, which I am firmly against)

There will no doubt be objectors, it would be good if they could come up with some viable alternatives. And by that I mean, location, funding, timescale, on-site sports fields, shared infrastructure and so on.

Gemini · Post by **Gemini** » 31 Jan 2006, 15:12

What is wonderful about this proposal? The community have not been consulted on it. A handful of people on this site are for it - this is not representative of the Portobello community as a whole.
I am not saying that Portobello High School does not need rebuilt - what I am stongly against is the Portobello Golf Course, being concreted over for a new school/schools and housing!! Other Schools in Edinburgh
have been re-built insitu! Firhill for example.
Again for the sniff of a quick buck, this labour lead council would sell their grannies eye teeth.

Also I should like to know, who was supposed to be representing the Community at last night's meeting? Where they elected? on whose invitation where they there? and who were they representing, because they were not representative of the majority of the residents in Portobello.

I would also like to know from Cllr Child, where is the secret location
at Brunstane for a new Golf Course?

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 31 Jan 2006, 15:29

The meeting held last night was for the two school boards (St John's and PHS's) Gemini. Cllrs Child and Perry then arrived late at the monthly Portobello Community Council meeting where the news was also announced there.

It was stressed that this was the start of consultation with the community.
If letters go home today to parents of pupils currently at the two schools then it will be the start of a much wider consultation.

I believe that the land for the proposed new golf course cannot be identified until the purchase has been finalised.

Gemini · Post by **Gemini** » 31 Jan 2006, 15:49

Marya wrote:The meeting held last night was for the two school boards (St John's and PHS's) Gemini. Cllrs Child and Perry then arrived late at the monthly Portobello Community Council meeting where the news was also announced there.

It was stressed that this was the start of consultation with the community.
If letters go home today to parents of pupils currently at the two schools then it will be the start of a much wider consultation.

I believe that the land for the proposed new golf course cannot be identified until the purchase has been finalised.

I am doubtful that the 'whole' community will have much of a say.

In your last para Marya, why would they be purchasing the site for the proposed - new golf course, when the community has still to be consulted?

I smell BS

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 31 Jan 2006, 15:58

Gemini wrote:In your last para Marya, why would they be purchasing the site for the proposed - new golf course, when the community has still to be consulted?

I smell BS

Cllr Child would be best placed to answer that herself Gemini, but as she doesn't post on POL all I can say is that last night she stressed the council's commitment to keeping the 'green belt' and said that they were after purchasing this land for that reason - to keep it as a public open space - and it could be used as a replacement golf course if necessary.

Personally, I feel torn on this proposal. Like the majority, I'm sure, I don't want to lose our green spaces, but I'm a teacher and a parent and want the best for our young people. If this is the only way that we can get our new schools then I'm willing to listen.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 31 Jan 2006, 16:01

Gemini wrote: What is wonderful about this proposal?

Porty wrote:
We could have two new schools benefiting tens of thousands of children and households for years to come, additional sports facilities, retain some parkland and get rid of the blot on the landscape that is Portobello High School. Hundreds of households that currently look out at that hideous monstrosity will benefit. Golfers will move up the road a bit.

Gemini wrote: The community have not been consulted on it. A handful of people on this site are for it - this is not representative of the Portobello community as a whole.

Noone here claims that they represent the community as a whole, we will just have to join in with the consultation process. I don't know that you need a consultation tho, as you seem to have already made up your mind, and we aint heard the full proposal as yet.

Gemini wrote: Other Schools in Edinburgh
have been re-built insitu! Firhill for example.

And other schools have been relocated involving the compulsory purchase of peoples homes.

What specifically are your objections and can you offer us a credible alternative?

Gemini · Post by **Gemini** » 31 Jan 2006, 17:11

Porty - I Thought I already had given more than one - credible alternative?
perhaps you just ovelooked them?

I am surprised that COEC have not carried out a feesability study, to determine whether the current site of both schools, could not be comfortably re-built in situ.

Concreting over PGG is not everyone's idea of a sustainable developement.

I have just learned that there will be a Public Meeting in the Town Hall
re this very topic. Date and times to be arranged.

Marya, I realise and sympathise with your dillema - and that of other
parents. But I am strongly against PGG being used for PHS/ST JOHN's
and whatever else COEC have up their sleeve for this site.

Yet another area of open land - gone - and gone for good,
what will be left by way of open recreational space?

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 31 Jan 2006, 17:24

Gemini wrote:Porty - I Thought I already had given more than one - credible alternative?

Not as far as I am aware. You mentioned a couple of potential sites, none of which are suitable and you failed to identify any source of funding. You imagined some re-channeling of Iraq war funds but quite honestly you would be better suggesting a donation from the lottery. You could not offer a timescale either. Meanwhile the children of our community suffer, their education suffers, their lives are put at risk quite unneccessarily.

From what I understand about this proposal, we can have a new school, without PPP or PFI and we can have it soon. This thread has been open for months and although its by no means the only place to air views or ideas, the GC proposal is the only one to date that gives us tangible hope.

You seem to put trees before children, i say we can have trees and do the best for the children and students of our community.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 31 Jan 2006, 17:31

Gemini wrote: what will be left by way of open recreational space?

For starters:

Rosefield Park
Part of the Golf Course/Playing fields
Brighton Park,
Figgate Park,
Daisy Park,
Joppa Quarry,
and lets not forget the massive Promenade and its green areas.

Oh, I forgot the beach and the new pier if that should happen.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 31 Jan 2006, 17:35

Bob Jefferson wrote: The PHS School Board met this evening with Andrew Holmes - the Director of City Development, Rev Ewan Aitken - exec member for Children and Families, Roy Jobson - Director of Education and local councillors to outline the proposal to build a new PHS on the Golf Course site.
.

Roy Jobson is Director of Children and Families (the new dept that unites the old Children and Families part of the Social Work dept. and the old Education dept.).

dccairns · Post by **dccairns** » 31 Jan 2006, 17:40

It is reprehensible that the council has allowed the school to fall into such an appalling state of disrepair. I wonder if they deliberately underinvested in it so it would come to a crisis situation like this in order to rush through their plans.

I don't think Gemini is putting trees before children - the children of the area benefit from the golf/course and need open green speace that is easily accessible. The new golf course at its seret location near Brunstane would not be accessible by foot from the centre of Portobello thereby creating more traffic - or denying affordable golfing to those who do not have cars. As I said before, the needs of the golf course users and the school pupils are not mutually exclusive. The needs of the whole community need to be balanced in this and the current proposal does not offer that.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 31 Jan 2006, 18:36

dccairns wrote: It is reprehensible that the council has allowed the school to fall into such an appalling state of disrepair.

I agree. The whole situation was badly thought out way back in the 50's. The design of the building is 60's and unsuitable, it was built for 1100 and has had to cope with up to 2000 students. I don't believe the same mistake will be made again. Whatever has been, whoever is to blame, this is no longer about blame, it is about what is best for our communities children.

dccairns wrote: I don't think Gemini is putting trees before children - the children of the area benefit from the golf/course and need open green speace that is easily accessible. The new golf course at its seret location near Brunstane would not be accessible by foot from the centre of Portobello thereby creating more traffic - or denying affordable golfing to those who do not have cars. As I said before, the needs of the golf course users and the school pupils are not mutually exclusive.

A High School is the heart of a community, a golf course is a "nice to have" and we are still going to have one. It may interest you to know that I have spoken to about a dozen golfers who use PGC and they are excited about getting a new course. You may find very little objection from the golfing community. Your argument on driving/walking/traffic is trounced by the cessation of PE coach trips made by PHS pupils. Some golfers will have to walk further than they do at the moment, some golfers will have to walk less.

dccairns wrote: The needs of the whole community need to be balanced in this and the current proposal does not offer that.

Can you elaborate? Whose needs will remain unsated?

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 31 Jan 2006, 18:37

Building a new High school on the golf course does not sit 100% easily with me but I cannot think of a better solution. I am therefore in support of this move as I believe the advantages to outweigh the negatives. A good school is at the at the heart of any community and is essential in giving our children the best possible preparation for life.

With a brand new school and everything else that Portobello has to offer - people will soon be queueing up to live here!

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 31 Jan 2006, 19:39

Marya wrote:....commitment to keeping the 'green belt' and said that they were after purchasing this land for that reason - to keep it as a public open space - and it could be used as a replacement golf course ...

Would that be the same as the commitment they made to the Pitz site?

Mate of Marya · Post by **Mate of Marya** » 31 Jan 2006, 20:04

Were any letters sent home to parents today?
There is no coverage in the City Final of the Evening News.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 31 Jan 2006, 20:22

The pupils at St John's got a letter from Roy Jobson which was very general and gave no details of the new proposal other than there was a possibility that the school would be rebuilt. I'll see if I can get a pdf. of it put on here.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 31 Jan 2006, 22:23

The story was too late for today's EN but expect coverage tomorrow. No letter as yet from PHS.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 01 Feb 2006, 13:05

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index ... =162172006

Golfers tee up for school fight
GARETH ROSE
PROTESTERS today vowed to fight Â£36 million plans to build two schools on a golf course.
Education chiefs this week revealed proposals to replace the crumbling Portobello High School and adjacent St John's Primary School on land at Portobello Golf Course, off Milton Road.

Although the plans have the backing of parents and teachers, nearby residents and golfers are prepared to fight tooth and nail to keep the nine-hole course and the adjoining football pitches and parkland.

Under the plans, the council's development firm, EDI, would build homes on the current school sites in Duddingston Road, with profits ploughed back into the new school buildings.

Public opinion on the plans is being sought informally, and many in the community are incensed about the impact on the local area if the new schools are built.

Diana Cairns, of West Brighton Crescent, Portobello, said: "I'm horrified by the thought of losing all of that green space in the centre of Portobello.
"It's used by all sorts of people - not just golfers, but dog walkers and children - and the great thing is it's so central. "This is going to put severe restrictions on the amount of green space in the area."

Ian Boggie, secretary of Portobello Golf Club, which has about 120 members, said: "I imagine a lot of people will not be very happy about this. It will cause a lot of upset, and there will be a lot of protests.

"We were just about to start up a junior section, and were hoping to attract about 50 kids from local schools. Now that may have to be put on hold.

"However, if the council has got something in mind I'm not sure there's an awful lot we can do."

The council has promised to build a new golf course and club house in Brunstane to replace the historic one in Portobello, which is 150 years old this year.

Golfer Marion Summers, 59, of Mountcastle Drive South, said: "We will get a petition up. I have played golf there for 30 years, a lot of people learned to play on that course. The great thing is it is in the heart of the community and people can walk to it. If it moves so people have to drive to play, it will lose members."

Councillor Ricky Henderson, the city's culture and leisure leader, said: "This solution will only work if an alternative location can be found for Portobello Golf Course.
"It is an important facility in the community. It provides health and fitness activities for a lot of people."

City education leader Ewan Aitken added: "We're very aware that this is important green space. But we intend to provide more through this proposal. At least one third of the golf course will remain green space, and all of the trees will be kept there.
"And 20 per cent of the current Portobello school site will be green space."

The new buildings will be funded through the sale of the current school sites, EDI's profit from the new housing development, and council funds.
If the council does win public backing architects will be invited to draw up plans and the new schools could be opened by 2010.

Councillor Aitken said: "This is going to be a 21st-century school built for 21st-century education. There will be sports facilities on site - unlike at the current school where children have to travel to the Jack Kane Centre for some activities - which will also be available for the community to use."

Dr Andrew Fraser, chairman of Portobello High School board, said: "The school we have is in a dilapidated state. The in-coming headteacher said she was shocked when she first saw the building.

"This plan is a big step forward for Portobello High School. The staff and pupils there do very well educationally. It's a good school but it could be a brilliant one with a building that helps them realise their potential."

From Edinburgh Evening News February 1st 2006

bellybabe · Post by **bellybabe** » 01 Feb 2006, 17:17

Porty wrote: City education leader Ewan Aitken added: "We're very aware that this is important green space. But we intend to provide more through this proposal. At least one third of the golf course will remain green space, and all of the trees will be kept there.
"And 20 per cent of the current Portobello school site will be green space."

The council leader for education seems to need a little help with his maths, does he not? How does one third plus one fifth equal more than one whole?

And he's in charge of education?

Although the plans have the backing of parents and teachers

I don't know if I've just been completely dense about all of this, but I had no idea whatsoever until this week that St John's was to be included in the PHS relocation, and I don't recall being asked whether or not I support it, so I wonder where the comment about the backing of parents comes from.

I find myself with a similar dilemma to Marya.

Paula

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 01 Feb 2006, 17:37

Bellybabe wrote: The council leader for education seems to need a little help with his maths, does he not? How does one third plus one fifth equal more than one whole? And he's in charge of education?

Now you have me baffled, I do understand that the 1/3rd and 20% relate to two different spaces but where does he say that it is greater than the whole?

Although the plans have the backing of parents and teachers

Bellybabe wrote: I don't know if I've just been completely dense about all of this, but I had no idea whatsoever until this week that St John's was to be included in the PHS relocation, and I don't recall being asked whether or not I support it, so I wonder where the comment about the backing of parents comes from.

I think the EN has overstated the case here. There is undoubtedly support from some parents and many teachers but it is not fair to imply a majority, as you say no-one has been properly consulted or fully informed.

The article is misleading in bits. For example, it begins with the claim that Golfers are going to "fight tooth and nail" and goes on to quote the club president as saying something like "If the council have decided to do something there is not a lot we can do about it"

That's hardly PCATS spirit, is it?

I am also gobsmacked to discover that the Portobello Golf Course has been going for 150 years and has no junior section. This doesn't show much commitment to community children, does it?

bellybabe · Post by **bellybabe** » 01 Feb 2006, 18:00

I took the more of this phrase to relate to the important green space.

"We're very aware that this is important green space. But we intend to provide more..."

Otherwise the sentence makes no sense whatsoever. There is no object for the "more" to modify. Either another sign the Mr..sorry, Rev...Aitken could do with nipping back to school, or that the EN folks should.

Paula

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 01 Feb 2006, 18:26

I think it's fine to have a dilemma or to be undecided at this point. Very little of the detail has been worked out, it's a massive decision and one that affects many future generations of local children. We don't have to make any decisions right now, but we should be taking the time to carefully consider the proposal. Unfortunately, some people seem to have already made their mind up before they have even begun to hear the arguments.

Like Carla, I think we should be spending more money on education and less on waging war. Like most people, I think it is important to preserve green spaces. And along with most parents, I want the best education for my kids that the local state school can offer in a fit for purpose building. My son has only been at PHS for a few short months, but I've already heard and seen enough to be extremely concerned about health and safety issues with the school. I have particular concerns about the safe evacuation of the building in the event of a fire and I have already had reports of children being crushed in the stair under normal circumstances.

The school board desperately wants a new school and is pleading with local politicians to support its aspirations. No-one in their right minds would suggest that we should continue to pour money into renovating a building that is long past its sell by date. If we accept that a new school is required then it has to go somewhere. If we are to have a low-level building with its own playing fields (to be shared with St Johns) then there is only one site that is large enough to accomodate this.

A large part of the Golf Course site will remain a public park. What that park looks like and what function it serves will, as far as I'm concerned, be for local people to decide. I would hope and expect that it would be of more value to the wider community than the rather featureless playing fields and sterile, eco-unfriendly (relatively speaking) golf facility we have at present.

A new, better golf course will be provided at Brunstane. For a few of the 120 golfers this may indeed cause some inconvenience. They may have to hop on a bus. However, I would guess (from observation) that a large percentage of members do not walk with their heavy clubs but arrive by car, so for them it will make little difference.

The land that the new course is to be sited on is green belt and is privately owned. The pressure to build new housing in Edinburgh over the next few years means that, almost inevitably, this land would have ended up being developed. By purchasing it for recreational use, the Council has in fact strengethened its green status.

So, we get a new golf course, two new state of the art schools with their own playing fields (available for community use), the removal of a very ugly 60s building that is a blot on the landscape, much needed housing (20% affordable, 20% green space), a new public park that we can help to design. A self-financing deal that doesn't rely on the much maligned PPP system.

What's the alternative? Where else could the new school(s) go? Where would the money come from? Before you sign your name to the inevitable petition, these are some of the questions you need to consider. Please take your time - the future education of thousands of kids, including mine, may rely on your decision. Let's get our priorities right.