New Portobello High School- Where and how?

[Pal of Porty]

...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.....

Sold!

[Gemini]

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.

Porty - Interested to know, when you became the decision maker for a
alternative development site's for PHS?

As for you other ref. that I prefer Tree's before Kids, a bit below the belt
don't you think! Or was that just to add weight to your argument?

As for the rest of your remarks about consultations, well let's face it you
have already made your mind up that its a goer! therefore no point
in consulting you, or me.

I am not privvy to how council wastes - oops - sorry, spend the taxes,
but I am sure that there is a suitable alternative to PGG for a new high
school.
Why has there been no feesability study on the existing site?

[Bob Jefferson]

I am sure that there is a suitable alternative to PGG for a new high
school.

Good, let's hear it.

Why has there been no feesability study on the existing site?

Because no-one wants another tower block school. Because we want on-site playing fields for our kids and for after-school community use. Because new schools cost money and re-building on-site wouldn't raise capital. Because we don't want our kids dispersed among other schools in Edinburgh while it is being re-built.

[Gemini]

I am sure that there is a suitable alternative to PGG for a new high
school.

Good, let's hear it.

Why has there been no feesability study on the existing site?

Because no-one wants another tower block school. Because we want on-site playing fields for our kids and for after-school community use. Because new schools cost money and re-building on-site wouldn't raise capital. Because we don't want our kids dispersed among other schools in Edinburgh while it is being re-built.

Therefore it's what YOU want, and probably what some other people
want. It's certainly not what everybody wants.
You are not the spokesperson for the Portobello Community.

[Jbrock]

It's not an easy decision but the euphoria among many of the teachers and parents in St John's that at last a building and environment that has long passed its use-by date will be replaced shouldsurelycount for something among those who are against these proposals. Also, at last the PHS children have a chance to get the building and facilities they deserve - shouldn't this be the number one priority for those who want to strengthen the localcommunity.
I think we shouldmove on and unite to ensure we getthe best possible design with the bestpossible facilities for the c1,800 children thatwill use these schools each year and work to make the proposals as sensitive as possible to the local residents. I'msure we can collectively achieve this.

[Bob Jefferson]

I agree. It is already clear that those who have prematurely declared themselves to be against the proposal have no alternative to offer. That is because there is no alternative, unless we want to preserve the status quo and watch our local schools crumble around us with no prospect of them ever being replaced, to the detriment to thousands of local children.

This should be a positive discussion about how the whole community can get the best value from our new School in the Park and associated facilities.

Gemini - the term 'we' simply refers to those of us who are FOR the proposal. I don't pretend to speak for the whole community and, until everyone has been polled individually on this matter, neither can anyone else.

[Gemini]

I agree. It is already clear that those who have prematurely declared themselves to be against the proposal have no alternative to offer. That is because there is no alternative, unless we want to preserve the status quo and watch our local schools crumble around us with no prospect of them ever being replaced, to the detriment to thousands of local children

This should be a positive discussion about how the whole community can get the best value from our new School in the Park and associated facilities.

Gemini - the term 'we' simply refers to those of us who are FOR the proposal. I don't pretend to speak for the whole community and, until everyone has been polled individually on this matter, neither can anyone else.

And its apparently clear, that those who have prematurely declared themselves to be for the proposals, don't want to look at any alternatives.
I detect an air of sensationalism, creeping into their arguments.

Your response regarding a feesability study, was met by 'We don't want another Tower Block'! Who has said that a new PHS built in situ would be another Tower block?

As for the secret location - The large field next to Newhailes House has been mooted - Wonder how much COEC are paying the owner for this
piece of prime land? If this is indeed the 'secret location' then we are
talking about the proposed Portobello Golf Course being loacted in
East Lothian!


Quote Bob>>
This should be a positive discussion about how the whole community can get the best value from our new School in the Park and associated facilities.<<

I agree, we should have a positive discussion on how the whole community can have thier say on the best possible site for the New
PHS.

But Not (as you have written) 'best value for 'our' new School in the Park with its associated facilities'. Rather premature ,dont you think?

[Pal of Porty]

And its apparently clear, that those who have prematurely declared themselves to be for the proposals, don't want to look at any alternatives.

As one of those who, at this point in time, has declared myself for the proposal in principle, I therefore fit into your criteria as above. I find it quite insulting that you can state that I would would not listen to alternative arguments that could deliver a better overall solution.

[Porty]

Also, at last the PHS children have a chance to get the building and facilities they deserve - shouldn't this be the number one priority for those who want to strengthen the localcommunity.
.

Well put, children deserve the best. Golfers deserve a golf course, portobello deserves green space and it seems that proposal delivers all of the above.

I admit that I am pro the idea and I dont know the detail. The first step is to establish whether there is enough public support for the council/community to take the propoal to the next stage, which is presumably to avaiil us of the detailed plan. They deserve that much at least.


ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL

I have yet to see any alternative proposal that has funding, location, playing fields and is deliverable for this generation of schoolkids. Gemini, keeps telling us that there are alternatives and berating me in particular for "judging" her proposal. Gemini, I am more than happy to listen to any viable alternative that will free our suffering children and give them the education they deserve in a safe conducive environment.. You simply have not come up with an alternative, you keep saying that you have but you look bankrupt from here. What is this alternative that you speak of, where will the school be, where is the money coming from?, when will it happen?

[Porty]

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

Paula, I ken whit he means.

I believe what Reverend means is creating more public green space.

Currently there is a bit of land that is in private ownership to which the public have no access. The council will create a golf course, which will give public access to green space, where currently there is no access. Therefore, A new bit of public open/green space is created. Simultaneously part of the GC area will be developed but some will be retained and a new park created at the site ofthe existing school. So effectively Portobello will gain two new public, open, green spaces and there will be an overall gain in open, public space. The Golf course is not at risk, it is being relocated,more public space is created and everybody wins.

This may not be clear to everyone which is why we need (IMHO) to support the council at least as far as producing the detailed proposal.

[Gemini]

And its apparently clear, that those who have prematurely declared themselves to be for the proposals, don't want to look at any alternatives.

As one of those who, at this point in time, has declared myself for the proposal in principle, I therefore fit into your criteria as above. I find it quite insulting that you can state that I would would not listen to alternative arguments that could deliver a better overall solution.

Afraid you just came under the umbrella POP, nothing personal intended.
I followed this on from Bob's Statement - work's both ways you know.

Its not up to me to come up with alternatives - although I have came up with two. Porty decided that it was not 'feesable' although I am surprised by this remark - and also at the council's reluctance to carry out a feesability study, eg. we apparently have to have a feesability study for a bandstand or some other minor feature, but we can't have one for a School? Millions of pounds to be spent, swathes of open space will be gone for good - yet no sudy, from a council that loves to spend fortunes
on studies?

Just as a note : PHS were not on PP1 or PP2 for new build, does this mean
that there are more needy cases than PHS, in the City of Edinburgh?

When Firhill High was rebuilt in situ - it was not easy for staff and pupils,
however they managed. The recreational area for this school, was slashed back to 2 all weather pitches!

[Gemini]

Porty you continue berating me for not coming up with 'proposals/funding'
time scales etc. It's well known that COEC have a Financial Problem,
whether this is down to bad housekeeping etc. I have no idea?
PHS - as said - was not on PP1 or PP2, so obviously not as in desperate
state of disrepair than other City High Schools?


Portobello was made an annex to Edinburgh in 1896 . As a stipulation, the WISE Fathers of Porty
rquested a few paybacks from Edinburgh - one of them being the
Town Hall and the Portobello Park, therefore who does the Park belong too?

[Pal of Porty]

Afraid you just came under the umbrella POP, nothing personal intended.

I know. xx

[Porty]

Its not up to me to come up with alternatives - although I have came up with two.

I wish you would tell us what they are? All I can see so far is you nominating two possible sites and nothing else.

The details (or at least as far as we are aware) of the council proposal are as follows:

Council Proposal

Where: School in the park

When : new school in 2010

Funding: in place, raised by sale of land and relocation of golf course, does not require PPP or PFI.

Facilities: on-site playing fields

Environment: School in The Park, adjacent to playing fields and park land.

Other Factors: relocation of golf club and overall increase in public open space, creation of new park in the heart of portobello, possibility of a shared facility and new school for St Johns. Proposal meets one-school, one site policy of COEC education department.

Gemini's Alternatives

Where?

When?

Funding: ?

Facilities?

Environment?

Other factors?

[Porty]

Just as a note : PHS were not on PP1 or PP2 for new build, does this mean that there are more needy cases than PHS, in the City of Edinburgh?

Yes. Which shows you how bad the situation is. Decades, indeed almost a Century of under-investment. These are times of adversity and we have children of this community who are badly in need of proper education facilities.

We need a solution. Snide remarks, blame, insults, accusations of deliberate manipulation,don't really help. We need to move forward as a community and we have the chance to make a real difference for the children of the community.

This situation dictates that needs the community to pull together, to forget about political point scoring, to lay aside more global issues, to lay aside selfishness, we need a recognition that we cannot have everything.

Ironically the council proposal almost gives us everything.

[Epykat]

alternative that will free our suffering children....

I would hardly say they were suffering! Fair enough, PARTS of the building are in a state, SOME of the furniture is in a state and we are all agreed that we need a new school. What should not be in dispute is that the education the children are getting is not an issue. What Gemini, I think, is trying to say, and I agree with her, is that other options have not been given a public airing because they are not going to make the Council any money. If the school was in imminent danger of collapse why didn't it have enough points for PPP? If it were ONLY PHS that was going to be built on the new site then that would be a lot more palatable for many people (and, don't forget, there are actually people who don't have any children either at school or ever going to the school and therefore have no interest in the state of it- don't they have any rights?). However, as I understand it, and correct me if I'm wrong, there are going to be TWO schools, housing and a possibility of the Pitz (in a sort of sharing capacity) all going on that site. To my mind that doesn't leave a lot of greenery. If the Council want a fair and unbiased consultation with the local community then let them make public all the other options that they have discounted, the reasons and the truth about what is ACTUALLY going on the site and give us the true picture from whence we can make an educated decision instead of drip feeding us snippet of a 'nearby' golf course, only one third of the site being used and 20% green space.

[Bob Jefferson]

I agree with Porty. This is an important debate so let's keep personal differences and petty politics out of it and concentrate on the issues.

I don't think that those of us who have declared our support for the proposal in principle are unwilling to consider alternatives. Rather, we recognise that there are no alternatives. Even Gemini seems to recognise this, as she has changed tact and is now arguing that perhaps we don't need a new school after all. I don't see that argument convincing anyone.

Every conceivable alternative, including re-building on site, has been thoroughly explored and dismissed. If people need proof of that, or stated reasons why other sites have been ruled out, then I'm sure someone will be able to provide us with that information. Give me a day or two.

What remains is a simple choice.

• A. Two badly-needed brand new schools for local children. 21st Century environmentally-friendly design with their own playing fields. Shared facilites, meaning cost savings. A brand new golf course and club house to replace the existing facility and designed to their specification. The securement of private land for public recreational use that would otherwise be lost to development. The creation of a new public park, with design input from the community. Much needed new housing, including affordable housing.
  
  B. Nothing. The continuing deterioration of our local schools to the detriment of the education of our children. (I just read Epykat's post while composing this. Education is suffering. As you stated yourself recently, it can take 10 minutes to get kids from one class to another. Taking kids to the Jack Kane for PE is a joke. By the time they get there it's time to turn round and come back again) Where was I? Oh yes - no prospect of either school being replaced in the forseeable future.

It may be premature, but I must confess that I've made my decision.

[Porty]

I would hardly say they were suffering! Fair enough, PARTS of the building are in a state, SOME of the furniture is in a state and we are all agreed that we need a new school. What should not be in dispute is that the education the children are getting is not an issue.

We are all agreed that we need a new school, I think. It is not accurate to say that the children are getting the education they should. Particularly when it comes to PE. Can you imagine having 50% of the english department on a different site and pupils being bussed there.

What Gemini, I think, is trying to say, and I agree with her, is that other options have not been given a public airing because they are not going to make the Council any money.

It is not a question of making money, it is a question of having no money. We are in a period of consultation, which I presume includes the opportunity for other proposals to be put forwrad. Everyone, including Gemini is bankrupt when it comes to other proposals, particularly when it comes to funding those proposals.

If the school was in imminent danger of collapse why didn't it have enough points for PPP? If it were ONLY PHS that was going to be built on the new site then that would be a lot more palatable for many people

I don't think its imminent danger of collapse but I believe there are fire and other serious issues. The PPP-PFI priorities were sorted out 5 or 6 years ago and we are possibly 5 or 6 years away from the next batch. It is a long time and the school deterioration is accelerating. In any case PPP funding is not good enough for many people.

(and, don't forget, there are actually people who don't have any children either at school or ever going to the school and therefore have no interest in the state of it- don't they have any rights?).

Of course they do. I suspect many of the most virulent objectors will be among the group you describe. My instinct is that many of these people will realise the importance of family and education in a community and support a new school. Others will no doubt crusade for their own ends.

However, as I understand it, and correct me if I'm wrong, there are going to be TWO schools, housing and a possibility of the Pitz (in a sort of sharing capacity) all going on that site. To my mind that doesn't leave a lot of greenery. If the Council want a fair and unbiased consultation with the local community then let them make public all the other options that they have discounted, the reasons and the truth about what is ACTUALLY going on the site and give us the true picture from whence we can make an educated decision instead of drip feeding us snippet of a 'nearby' golf course, only one third of the site being used and 20% green space.

To be fair on the council, they are inviting consultation, I believe they want a feel for support in principle with the detail of the plan to follow. It sounds like you want to learn more before deciding for or against. I think thats fair enough and that the council deserve encouragement to divulge all of the facts in detail, don't you?

Incidentally, do you have a proposal?

[Epykat]

It is not accurate to say that the children are getting the education they should. Particularly when it comes to PE. Can you imagine having 50% of the english department on a different site and pupils being bussed there.

This isn't a new thing. I remember being bussed to Meadowbank 30 years ago. Not ideal, but not new.

I don't think its imminent danger of collapse but I believe there are fire and other serious issues. The PPP-PFI priorities were sorted out 5 or 6 years ago and we are possibly 5 or 6 years away from the next batch. It is a long time and the school deterioration is accelerating. In any case PPP funding is not good enough for many people.

Fire? Why are the fire issues any more serious now than when it was built? School deterioration is accelerating because no money has been spent on it for years. PPP is not good enough for many people? Neither is taking away an important green space.

To be fair on the council, they are inviting consultation, I believe they want a feel for support in principle with the detail of the plan to follow. It sounds like you want to learn more before deciding for or against. I think thats fair enough and that the council deserve encouragement to divulge all of the facts in detail, don't you?

Incidentally, do you have a proposal?

They are inviting consultation on a proposal that they have already made up their mind on. Any proposal I might have had would not be divulged on here to be shot down in flames and/or ridiculed. The Council need no encouragement to divulge all of the facts in detail - that should be a matter of course. Unfortunately, and sadly, I have to agree with the quote in the paper that there probably isn't much that can be done about it - that doesn't mean to say I am in agreement.

[Bob Jefferson]

I don't consider that the Council is keeping anyone in the dark over this. From the meetings of the School Board and the Community Council on Monday, my impression was that officials were perfectly open about what is proposed, the only details being withheld are those that demand commercial confidentiality, though it's an open secret where the new golf course is to be sited. Certainly, all my questions were answered to my satisfaction.

The detailed drawings you want simply don't exist yet. At this stage, as Porty has said, the Council simply wants us to give them the go-ahead to produce that detail and complete their costings. What do you have to lose?

I'm optimistic and excited about the possibilities and I'm looking forward to filming the demolition of the old Portobello High School for Portobelly Telly.

[Bob Jefferson]

we are all agreed that we need a new school.

I would be careful about making sweeping statements like that.

[Epykat]

What do you have to lose?.

I will lose a beautiful, open, green, undeveloped space where I, my children, my husband, my dog and my general family have spent many recreational hours over many years. I personally will gain nothing. My children have left school and I don't have any forseeable grandchildren.

[Bob Jefferson]

What do you have to lose?.

I will lose a beautiful, open, green, undeveloped space where I, my children, my husband, my dog and my general family have spent many recreational hours over many years. I personally will gain nothing. My children have left school and I don't have any forseeable grandchildren.

Beautiful? You have a very romantic view of municipal golf courses! Won't you gain a more pleasant working environment, or are you thinking of giving up your day job? And you'll be a glamorous granny before you know it.

[Gemini]

we are all agreed that we need a new school.

I would be careful about making sweeping statements like that.

Look again, it was Porty who made the sweeping statement.

I have not, incidentally, changed my tact! I merely pointed out to
you and other's that PHS, is not on the Priority List under PPP/PFI,
Why not ?


Your impression/understanding of what was/was not said at the meeting, is of no interest to me, only I would rather
hear it from an Elected representative.

Your further ref. to no viable alternatives, another personal view point
perhaps, or will all other alternatives considered, be open to public scrutiny?


I am more inclined to believe DC and Epycat, regarding the Council's
apparent lack of spend on PHS. The bigger picture is slowly emerging.

[Bob Jefferson]

Gemini, do you agree that we need a new Portobello High School? Just a simple 'yes' or 'no'.

[bellybabe]

One of the few things I don't like so much about living in Porty is the lack of green space, I have to say - I moved here from the greenest city in Britain and I've always felt that lack. The golf course/park is a green space, and I would be loathe to lose it for that reason.

But...I don't think it's fair to say the children's education isn't suffering - at both schools - from the environmental conditions they have to put up with. At PHS the kids are clearly losing a lot of time because of the lack of facilities. And there have been various times when we've been told educational opportunities have not been available to the kids at St John's because of the terribly cramped conditions. For example, most primary schools have computer suites now. St John's does not because there is no room. The nursery have really inadequate accommodation, with only a small bit of the concrete playground railed off for nursery use.

Bussing children to other schools while work is done on their own is actually a nightmare for them. Parsons Green had to share Brunstane's campus for a while about five years ago, and the whole situation was really difficult for staff and pupils, involving having to go to and from PG each day, at the usual school time, to get buses to Brunstane, in school time, having to stagger breaktimes and lunchtimes which meant some kids ate at really weird times, and the staff having few of their own resources available. I don't think the fact it happens elsewhere means it's ok for it to happen here.

So I still don't know where I stand, but I am beginning to see there is no viable alternative.

Paula

[Gemini]

Gemini, do you agree that we need a new Portobello High School? Just a simple 'yes' or 'no'.

I don't know, I am not aware of what/what has not been discussed to date. The Community have not been fully informed of the proposals,
and what reasons for dismisal of any other alternatives that may have been submitted.
Until fully informed - I reserve my judgement.

[Porty]

One of the few things I don't like so much about living in Porty is the lack of green space, I have to say - I moved here from the greenest city in Britain and I've always felt that lack. The golf course/park is a green space, and I would be loathe to lose it for that reason.Paula

More green space would be desirable, I agree. However, Portobello comprises the EH15 and EH8 post codes. We have more public parks than any other district in Edinburgh. We are also blessed with the seafront. Some people are talking about a "severe restriction of open space" if part of the Golf Course is built on. This is no more than sensationalism.

If my understanding of the proposal is correct. Not only will a substantial park remain at the golf course, if one cares to take a three minute walk from the Golf Course they will discover, not 1(brighton Park), not 2 (Rosefiled Park) but 3 beautiful public parks, including one of the largest in the city (Figgate). Park number 4 will be created on the site of the old school. There are curently 4 public parks within 500 meters or so of Bailyfield traffic lights, there may soon be 5. What is the problem? Are people trying to claim that our parks are filled to overflowing?

[Bob Jefferson]

Gemini, do you agree that we need a new Portobello High School? Just a simple 'yes' or 'no'.

I don't know

OK. Do you agree that we need a new school to replace St Johns? (You might want to read Bellybabe's earlier post before answering this one.)

If we don't need new schools then we can bring a swift end to this whole debate. If we do, then we have to examine the next logical step.

[Porty]

It is not accurate to say that the children are getting the education they should. Particularly when it comes to PE. Can you imagine having 50% of the english department on a different site and pupils being bussed there.

This isn't a new thing. I remember being bussed to Meadowbank 30 years ago. Not ideal, but not new.

I am not saying its a new problem, I am saying there is a solution.

As for the fire problem? I don't think this is new either, it is something to do with Fire fighters not being able to use certain equipment above the 3rd floor, I don't know the specific detail. (thought it was a bit cheap saying you would be shot down in flames, tho )

Some people don't like PPP (not that its currently available), some people detest giving up green space., something has to give if we are to have a new school.

[Porty]

Gemini, do you agree that we need a new Portobello High School? Just a simple 'yes' or 'no'.

I don't know

Bob, Gemini doesn't do simple 'yes' or 'no'. Although, she is proficient at simple 'No'. And an absolute expert at "I don't know". In fact if she were to go on mastermind, not knowing would be her specialist subject.

[Porty]

(and, don't forget, there are actually people who don't have any children either at school or ever going to the school and therefore have no interest in the state of it- don't they have any rights?).

How remiss of me. I overlooked that I am one of the very people you speak about. There is nothing in this for me. Bruce has left PHS and Lisa will be gone in 2 years, before ground is broken.

[Pal of Porty]

Having lived in several parts of the UK over the years, one of the reasons I have settled back in Edinburgh is the abundance and easy access to open and green spaces. Even if they concreted over the golf course to make a car park, it would not chnage my view.

[Bob Jefferson]

Has anyone had a look at an aerial view of Edinburgh? I would go head to head with Sheffield any time. Bring it on BB!

In all seriousness, I'm not prepared to give up a square inch of our green space, or accept that it should be re-located as in this case, unless there is a VERY good reason. And that's exactly what we have.

[bellybabe]

Has anyone had a look at an aerial view of Edinburgh? I would go head to head with Sheffield any time. Bring it on BB!

More trees per head of capita than anywhere else in Britain blah blah...

Sheffield is greener. Also vastly bigger. And I never said Edinburgh isn't green, I said Porty. Nor did I say there's not much open space. I said not much green.





But seriously, I see no alternatives for the schools.

Edit: Sorry, Porty, i realise you weren't saying I was saying there's not much open space.