New Schools proposal - document archive

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 08 Nov 2006, 18:32

PPAG response to the consultation:

PPAG response

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 09 Nov 2006, 18:23

From the EN, 9 November 2006:

Leading QC sides with park protesters in high school battle

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 29 Nov 2006, 21:58

Portobello Amenity Society submission to the consultation, dated 24 August:

Dear Mr Jobson,

Proposal to Relocate and Rebuild Portobello High School

I write on behalf of Portobello Amenity Society concerning proposals to relocate and to rebuild Portobello High School. In the light of further information now available, we wish these to be the society's comments and these to replace the comments the society made previously.

While fully in support of Portobello High School being able to provide its pupils with the highest standard of education possible, the society is concerned that the public open space, which is already at a premium in Portobello, should be retained to as full an extent as is possible. We are extremely disappointed that the options put forward have eliminated brown field sites from the list of sites being considered and that all of the options involve building a new school on green field sites.

We are also concerned that the proposed new site for a golf course, adjacent to the historic Brunstane House, is too far away from Portobello itself to provide the same function that the present golf course provides where children and teenagers can access the golf course on foot and with great ease, which they would not be able to do at the proposed location.

The society is strongly in favour of rebuilding Portobello High School upon the merged sites of the old St John's and the present High School. (option 1a and 1b) We feel there would be enough space on the combined site for this to be possible and for one pitch to be included in the design of the site. The present St John's Primary could be used as part of the decant process while the nearest part of the Figgate Park, to which there is quick and easy access, could also be used if needed.

As regards the siting of a new St John's Primary School, we are most unhappy that there seems to be no alternative to building a new primary school on other than a green field site. The society feels very strongly that a brown field site within Portobello would have been a far better option, thus allowing all the open green spaces in Portobello to be preserved for use by the general public. If absolutely forced to say which green field site should be the new location for the primary school then, with the greatest of reluctance, we would say that option 2b, the S.W. corner of Portobello Park, would, in our view, be the least damaging to Portobello's green spaces. We do not however like being forced into this position. If this is to be the new site for St John's, then we would insist that as many football pitches as is possible are retained on the S.E. section of Portobello Park as these are well used by clubs such as Portobello Thistle.

Under no circumstances should any housing be built on either Portobello Golf Course or Portobello Park. If Portobello Park is to be the site of the new primary, and a new high school built on the combined existing sites, then we would wish the Golf Course to remain where it is as a fully functioning golf course.

We also feel that the building of new schools should not be funded by the selling off of publicly owned open spaces. A thriving community needs both good schools and open green spaces and the only way of achieving one should not be at the expense of the other. If new schools are needed to be built then greater government funding needs to be provided.

We also feel, most strongly, that full public consultation regarding possible alternative sites for Portobello High School should be sustained at all stages of this decision making process and we look forward to taking our full part in that process.

Yours sincerely,

John M. Stewart,
Chair, Portobello Amenity Society

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 30 Nov 2006, 20:36

Replacement of Portobello High School and
St John's Primary School

Children and Young People Scrutiny Panel
28 September 2006

Purpose of report
1 To refer consultation papers for the replacement of Portobello High School and St John's Primary School to the Scrutiny Panel for consideration.

Details
2 On 12 September 2006, the Executive considered the attached joint report by the Directors of Children and Families and City Development on a proposal to carry out a statutory consultation for the replacement of Portobello High School and St John's Primary School.

3 The Executive heard the following deputations:

(a) Portobello High School Board
Andrew Fraser, Chair, Portobello High School Board welcomed the proposal to consult on the site options for replacement premises for Portobello High School and St John's Primary School. He stated that the consultation should also include funding options for the project. Other issues raised included the proposed reduction in the capacity of the new Portobello school, the reduction in the size of the building footprint, the development timescale and the need to recognise Portobello High as not only an educational facility but as a community centrepiece.

He urged the Executive to approve the recommendations in the joint report by the Directors of Children and Families and City Development and to proceed with the consultation.

(b) Portobello for New Schools (PFANS)
Jackie Brock, Chair, Portobello for New Schools welcomed the proposal to proceed with the consultation exercise. The present building at Portobello High School was not fit for purpose both in terms of the fabric of the building on health and safety grounds and the facilities it was able to provide for pupils and members of the wider community. She urged the Executive to approve the recommendations in the joint report by the Directors of Children and Families and City Development and to proceed with the consultation.

(c) St John's Primary School Board
Alison Connelly, a parent representative on St John's School Board welcomed the proposal to consult on the site options for both St John's Primary School and Portobello High. She expressed concern that funding options would not form part of the consultation process at this stage.

In addition, she asked that the Powerleague site and the Scottish Power site (both of which had been discounted as being suitable for Portobello High) be included in the consultation as possible options for St John's Primary.

She also queried the use of the golf course and park site as she believed that they were held on the Common Good Fund which could restrict the use to which the land, or any proceeds from it, were put. She also felt that the funding options should be included in the consultation documents.

(d) Portobello Park Action Group
Ros Sutherland, Chair, Portobello Park Action Group welcomed the consultation proposal but stated that it should include details of the funding options. Issues requiring clarification included potential housing developments on parkland, increased traffic problems and the loss of green space in the area. The Scottish Executive wished to protect open space.

She asked that consideration be given to rebuilding Portobello High on its existing site and refurbishing the existing St John's Primary School building. Any decant arrangements would represent a one-off cost, but any loss of green space would be irretrievable. The Powerleague, Figgate Park and the Freightliner sites should also be considered as options for St John's Primary School.

4 The Director of Children and Families confirmed that the consultation process would play a major part in reinforcing the Council's funding bid to the Scottish Executive for the projects. The Council's preferred site options were as detailed in the joint report; this would not preclude other potential sites from being discussed and considered as part of the consultation process. He further advised that legal advice indicated that there was no legal impediment to the use of the golf course and park site for the purposes outlined.

The Executive agreed:-
i) To commence the consultation process for the reprovision of Portobello High School and St Johnâ€™s Primary School as set out in the consultation papers attached to the joint report by the Directors of Children and Families and City Development.

ii) To refer the consultation papers to the Children and Young People Scrutiny Panel as part of the consultation process.

iii) That a further report on the outcome of the consultation process and financial implications be submitted to the meeting of the Council on 21 December 2006.

Recommendation
5 That the Scrutiny Panel consider the consultation papers as part of the consultation process.

Ewan Aitken
Leader

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 06 Dec 2006, 19:23

From the EN, 6 December 2006:

Â£100m plan to upgrade five schools in Capital unveiled

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 15 Dec 2006, 15:09

Report

Minutes of PHS Meeting

Minutes of St Johns Meeting

Minutes of Town Hall Meeting

Summary of Contents

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 15 Dec 2006, 18:49

From the EN, 15 December 2006:

Backlash awaited as park gets planners' vote for Porty High

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 21 Dec 2006, 17:48

From the EN, 21 December 2006:

Controversial school plan gets go-ahead

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 21 Dec 2006, 17:54

From the EN Letters Page, 21 December 2006:

Listen to the public over Porty High

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 22 Dec 2006, 13:31

From the EN, 22 December 2006:

Gridlock fears over decision to build new high school in park

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 05 Jan 2007, 15:30

From the EN, 5 January 2007:

Why cap doesn't fit for school

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 08 Jan 2007, 14:05

From EN, Monday 8th January 2007:

Schools need to land prime sites

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 22 Jan 2007, 20:10

Copy of a letter sent to Portobello Community Council by Andrew Fraser, Chair, PHS School Board. It should be noted that the letter was sent prior to the Council decision of 21 December and the Board is asking the Community Council to support the decision (whatever that might be) rather than any particular option.

REPLACEMENT OF PORTOBELLO HIGH SCHOOL

The consultation period to consider plans for replacement of Portobello High School, also St John's Primary School next door, has now passed. Early indications are that a clear preference exists in the community to replace one or both schools on part of the Portobello Park or adjacent golf course. The full results of the consultation go before the City of Edinburgh Council on 21 December. There is general, and welcome, acceptance that re-building both schools is a necessary and urgent matter, and that the sites shortlisted in the report for consultation were broadly accepted as the only viable options.

During the consultation, the City of Edinburgh Council made clear its intentions to seek funding primarily from the Scottish Executive to re-build both schools, on the basis that such an approach was consistent with the Executive's policy on the previous 2 Parliaments. The Council also said that there was no intention to build housing on Portobello Park, or sell portions of the Park for this purpose by private developers. Without this assurance, the consultation would have been in serious trouble. Although affordability of the whole venture is at risk, we commend this approach.

Looking forward, regardless of which option succeeds, there are 2 key tasks for public representatives:

1. to expedite planning and avoid hampering progress through objection and legal challenge if at all possible; and

2. to secure a clear funding commitment at an early stage.
On the matter of planning, there needs to be wide involvement of local community interests. a range of stakeholders and, in particular, neighbours to the chosen sites. Portobello Community Council should remain a key forum for disconsolate community members, although the community has nothing to gain and much to lose from further delay after the decision of 21 December. Adherence to the planning process is important, as is the attraction of designing a structure and surrounding environment that is an asset to the community, a centrepiece to East Edinburgh, and potentially a magnet for the community due to excellent and sustainable design.

Whatever the outcome of forthcoming elections, the Scottish Executive will want to invest in education and complete programmes of renewal in school building. Withholding commitment to fund the re-build of 2 schools makes no sense. This commitment would remove uncertainty and enable planning with confidence.

We therefore call on local representatives at Community, City and Parliamentary level to lead the East Edinburgh community through the most efficient planning process with wide ownership of the venture, to broaden the scope of re-building to become much more than two schools â€“a community asset; and to ensure that the City secures funding commitment at the earliest possible stage.

Yours sincerely

DR ANDREW FRASER
Chair, Portobello High School Board