New Portobello High School- Where and how?

[bellybabe]

[
You're all missing (or avoiding) the point. My main posting related to Seanie's 'recommended' sizes. (This often happens, someone asks a question and make a passing point. T

I wasn't missing the point; I had nothing to add to the discussion on the main point. You can't really choose that people don't pick up on your passing point, though! I've been hearing a lot of "Where else can we put PHS?" but I also seem to be hearing a lot of "Shove St John's any old place!" - a loose translation, i grant you . I was making a point that so far doesn't seem to have been made - that although holyrood might be accessible for children aged 12+, the same distance is a nightmare for children as young as 3, 4, or 5, and would render the school completely inaccessible for many Portobello residents. I made the same point to Lawrence last week.

[Alison Connelly]

..

[Stephen McIntyre]

Bellybabe, dont fret. Portyman's main point was to ask Seanie a question. Then we were all accused of "avoiding it". I did avoid it, as I already knew the answer. Portyman ought to have known the answer too as he follows the thread. Its amazing how he can flip back 40 pages to make a quote that suits him then finds it a 'challenge to filter Seanies 150 posts.

BB You are right about your observations on St John's. It does play second fiddle in this debate. It also plays second fiddle in real life. Here is my opinion:

There are only two possibilities for St Johns; it stays where it is with no sizable development in the foreseeable future or it moves to the park with portobello. St Johns was a last minute inclusion in this proposal for two reasons 1) the potential savings that can be made from a two school campus and the consequent increased prudential borrowing, potential. 2) The housing value of the schools land is significantly increased. The combination of these two factors is like gaining a brand new school for free. St John's was fortunate that their school building is not listed, as it would probably have been excluded.

St John's is not on COEC radar for refurb, rebuild or re anything else. I don't like that but i fear its true. I'm sure those on the school board or PTA will be able to confirm this. I doubt there was any serious discussion about "future development" until this proposal hit the headlines. If this proposal fails it will be the same old same old. IMHO

[Stephen McIntyre]

Dear Mr Pedant ...oops sorry, I meant McIntyre
I was meaning the figures Seannie gave about the sizes of the current sites (which were quite precise). The clue was when I went on to ask about the sites of other schools across Edinburgh and further
Yours skulkingly
Alison

Oh come off it. Why would it be interesting to compare just the size as in the area of PHS with other schools.?

Do you deny that you skulked off? What about the question I asked you yesterday? More skulking.

[Stephen McIntyre]

Marya, I am quite pleased that you did not lock this thread. I started it to get the truth about the history of the golf course whatever that may have been?

It has been proved that the council did not act in an underhand manner in relation to the Abolution Act. Indeed there was nothing that they could have done to prevent what happened from happening.

However, there is more.

Today I procured a copy of the OS for Portobello Golf Course from some time ago and I have a copy of the title deeds. Both documents are in the public domain. I wish to consult with one or more of our on-board experts, just to make sure my interpretation is accurate. On first perusal it appears that history is repeating itself, I'm not sure whether to divulge or to wait til' another "walking on a dead man's grave" announcer speaks at the next meeting?

[seanie]

That last figure... 14.8 acres... that's a summed figure, isn't it? You don't really mean 15 acres of playing fields? Do you? That's 50% bigger than the school! That would give room for ponies!

That’s the statutory “minimumâ€

[Bob Jefferson]

Re PPP2, I just received this PowerPoint presentation from Lawrence Marshall. There's more stuff on an Excel sheet that I will try to put up later.

PPP2 Prioritisation Methodology

[Epykat]

Oh go on....you know you want to. Or would you rather just wait in your lair to shoot somebody down in flames in public

[Bob Jefferson]

With thanks to wangi:

Prioritisation Scoring (Excel version)

Prioritisation Scoring (html version)

Should keep some of you quiet for a while.

[Stephen McIntyre]

So what will the compromises be?

[Bob Jefferson]

Are you referring to the document I just posted? I can't be bothered reading it and don't really care why we didn't make PPP2. What compromises?

[Dave Connelly]

With thanks to wangi:

Should keep some of you quiet for a while.

I doubt it

[Poppy]

With thanks to wangi:

Should keep some of you quiet for a while.

I doubt it

Was thinking that myself, DC!!

[Bob Jefferson]

Oi, back to the girls' forum. This thread is for grumpy old men (and women).

[Stephen McIntyre]

Parsons Green school board voted unanimously for the proposal to go to consultation.

Bob, I mean the compromises the council will make. They are simply bound to be highballing. I'm thinking they may come up with a St Johns compromise and maybe reduce the housing from 33%.

[Poppy]

Oi, back to the girls' forum. This thread is for grumpy old men (and women).

Eh? Am I neither a man nor a woman?? And vice versa for DC!!

Grumpy Poppy

[Bob Jefferson]

I wouldn't be so sure about the housing. They are already talking about a shortfall, so surely any less housing means more of a funding gap? I would be wary of offering people false hope though Maureen seems to be doing just that in her latest newsletter, which I will post next.

[Stephen McIntyre]

I'm not offering anything but I do know a bit about negotiating and they are not going to start with a proposal that doesn't have room for compromise.

[Bob Jefferson]

From Maureen Child's most recent newsletter:

Portobello High School - Possible Way Forward?

There has been a lot of debate and discussion, conversations and meetings about the possible way ahead for schools in Portobello and district and understandably so. I have spent more time and effort on this issue in the last month than anything else put together and it has been a pre-occupation for years before that. Contrary to popular myth, this new proposal is not a done deal by any means. It needs everyone's input to make it happen, to stop it happening or to make the very best of what might happen.

I very much hope we can continue to discuss the issues without personal attacks, although people on all sides of this question have told me they feel pretty bruised. Some are being caught in the middle, torn in more than one direction. It seems to be dividing families and friends and we should all take great care to ensure that pressure is eased. Making tough decisions is a bruising process, by its very nature, without any of us making it more so. Let's make this a positive community process.

As I think I have said throughout, there is no way I would be supportive of taking forward this radical idea if I could see another practical way forward than using the golf course option, that would afford the kind of schools and community facilities which the whole of Portobello and district needs. There is no question that this wide community's children and families very much need this facility for themselves and for future generations.

There are a number of apparent alternative solutions being put forward, but I do not yet see a viable one among them. A simple look at the map of Portobello will tell you that there is only one site at the centre of the catchment area and that it is enormous. I have asked myself the key question - what should be at the heart of a community? Excellent community schools in woods and parkland, with playing fields for all? Or a golf course? If that is the choice, there's no real contest in my view: the community school has it hands down.

So far, most of what I see and hear and read is that people are desperately seeking other ideas and alternatives, as I have myself for about three years. But none have emerged yet; none that are really achievable or even desirable, in my view. I remain to be convinced that any of the other suggestions are good enough for the Portobello High School or good enough for our community, but I recognise that some people will take a lot of time and trouble to be even half convinced of that. And some will never, ever be convinced. Some feel they have a great deal to lose in their neighbourhood and we must work to make that less bad for them, a lot less bad than many of them fear right now.

I believe there is a winnable battle to be had to find other sources of funding to minimise, or even eliminate, the need for housing on the site to pay for the new schools. We must also explore the possibilities of associating the primary and secondary school shared campuses. But the suggestion of amalgamating Holyrood and Portobello High Schools at a shared Duddingston campus does not get my support for educational, transport and landscape value reasons.

The fact is that that the Portobello High School building - as it stands - is structurally sound. It is not falling down around the ears of pupils and staff. It is as safe as we can make it. But, as it stands, the ill-conceived building needs investment and replacement of its major systems - electricity, drainage, heating pipes and lifts. It is really not possible to deliver the full modern curriculum in this building. In physical education, this is particularly acute and impossible. Despite all this, the staff and pupils do a really excellent job with what they do have. The school's innovative system of school management, with house heads, senior pupil mentors and excellent guidance staff, means that the school does not seem huge to pupils. There is a real community spirit in the school, where different communities and age groups get on very well. It is "a true comprehensive school and a place I want to teach in", as one staff member put it. They could do even better for all of us in a building, which works for them and not against them.

Local Councillors have started the discussion as soon as we could, rather than spring a report on people with a week's notice. A decision will be taken in a month whether or not to do more detailed work on the option of using the Portobello golf course site. A report is to go to the Council's Education Executive on 25 April and the community's divided voice will be heard there loud and clear. That event should set a timetable for the extensive, in depth, formal consultation process. It will answer some of the questions, which we all need to ask, and then ask some more.

This is not my first or last word on this matter.

[Stephen McIntyre]

I read something recently about the Jewel Park. Wasn't it gifted to the community? Can't recall where I found it, but I found this info on Portobello Golf Club, which may be of interest, from Margeorie Mekie's collection of postcards and photographs of 'Old Portobello'.

The Golfers Handbook of 1936 included Portobello amongst the oldest golf clubs, giving the year of institution as 1856, although a golfing annual of 1886/1887 quotes the much later year of 1883, when ex-Provost Wood was captain. At that time the golf course was in Joppa in an area known locally as The Quarry. The (present) course ...was created in 1908, and although play continued throughout the First World War, the land was put under cultivation during the years 1939 to 1945 and the course was not reopened until 1953.

Elsewhere, she informs us that the clubhouse was opened in June 1911.

Bob, I missed this earlier. The "known" history of the golf course is debatable in almost every detail.

[Bob Jefferson]

Surely not? The proud 150 year history, set to be torn apart by the dastardly Council? Are you suggesting that there is more here than meets the eye? Pray tell.

[Stephen McIntyre]

Its still in the lab but I believe its worth waiting on.

[Dadaist]

Do you deny that you skulked off?

[Alison Connelly]

[Stephen McIntyre]

She's the smiling skulker

[Rex_Mundi]

Do you deny that you skulked off?

I wasn't expecting this!

[Dave Connelly]

Just walked past the Porto Golf club. Saw a poster. There is apparently a meeting on Saturday morning at 11am, where councillors, the press and many other interested parties will be on hand.

Does anyone else know anything about it

[Stephen McIntyre]

Just walked past the Porto Golf club. Saw a poster. There is apparently a meeting on Saturday morning at 11am, where councillors, the press and many other interested parties will be on hand.

Does anyone else know anything about it

Is that Saturday April 1st?

[Dave Connelly]

Is that Saturday April 1st?

[Dave Connelly]

Found these washed up on the beach at Portobello whilst walking yesterday morning, found about 20 in all from Bath Street to the Musselburgh end of the prom.

<img src="http://www.clanconnelly.com/agallery/golf2.jpg">
<img src="http://www.clanconnelly.com/agallery/golf1.jpg">

Do you think they were

1) Lost and looking for Porty golf course
2) Very long drives from Fife
3) A local art Exhibit
4) The end of some depressed Golfer

Answers on a post card please

[seanie]

With thanks to wangi:

Prioritisation Scoring (Excel version)

Prioritisation Scoring (html version)

Should keep some of you quiet for a while.

I had a closer look at the Prioritisation Scoring for PPP2.

14 schools were given a score reflecting a number of factors, the higher the score the greater the priority. Of those 14 Portobello ranked 11th overall, but 6 of those 14 ranked as unsuitable for PPP. Discounting them Portobello ranked last.

When it comes to the individual categories for the 14 schools, Portobello scored highly on matters relating to the school itself:

For Fitness for Purpose only 3 schools ranked worse and 9 ranked better.

For Accessibility only 1 school ranked worse.

For Condition only 2 schools ranked worse, 10 ranked better, with Holyrood the same.

Judged on those three criteria alone only one school ranked as a higher priority – Boroughmuir.

However Portobello scored low on the remaining categories:

For Demand (catchment numbers) Portobello scored low with a forecast decline in line with the city average. 9 schools ranked higher, some considerably so, and 4 ranked lower.

For Developing Disadvantaged Areas Portobello scored very low with a comparatively advantaged intake. Only 2 schools were better off and 11 were worse.

For Community Facilities Portobello scored low with 9 schools ranked higher, 2 the same and 2 lower.

For Assisting Estate Management Portobello was one of 4 schools to score 0 (in part due to anticipated decline in demand).

So whilst PHS was rated as a lower priority by some PPP2 criteria, it was clearly one of the most urgent in terms of physical condition. That situation can be expected to deteriorate as time progresses.

[Alison Connelly]

..

[Stephen McIntyre]

Were they looking for an excuse to get their hands on that big piece of land some people call the golf course?

What do you mean? Does the council not already own Portobello Park?

[Dadaist]

It's ok Alison - I know what you meant.

Sometimes I think he's like Dustin Hoffman out of "Rain Man" but with less charm.

"Quantas - has to be Quantas"

[Stephen McIntyre]

Hey, it is a serious question but I will rephrase. I am assuming they do own the land but Alison, what does "an excuse to get their hands on it" mean?