Replacement of Meadowbank

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 31 Jan 2007, 19:09

From Lawrence Marshall:

31st January 2007

Dear Councillor

Re: The National Facilities Strategy â€“ Meadowbank/Sighthill

The Council will be considering a report on the above at its meeting tomorrow and I have recently been asked for my views on the proposals by individual councillors; I have alongside this read the articles in the Evening News since Friday last following the release of the report to be considered.

Clearly this issue is generating some discussion and a potential polarisation of perspectives on the way forward. It may be of help to you in considering your own perspective to be aware of my personal views given that I have been responsible for many years for the operation of Meadowbank Sports Centre. There appear to be four areas under particular scrutiny i.e.

Why not refurbish Meadowbank rather than replace the facility?
If it is replaced why move to Sighthill as opposed to remaining on the existing site?
Why an athletics track around the main pitch provision?
Stadium capacity.
Refurbishment vs. Replacement; the venue no longer meets the requirement or expectations of users â€“ both community use and for major events. Although the venue has served Edinburgh [and Scotland] extremely well over the past 36 years and is still a busy centre it is apparent from feedback from users and those who choose to no longer use the centre that the facilities provided fall well below that expected in the 21st century. Essentially Meadowbank is a 1960â€™s design and was one of the first purpose built leisure centres in the UK; its layout, technical provision and the standard of finish reflects that period. The stadium can no longer be fully utilised due to safety requirements, it is the wrong design for current needs and is uncovered on three sides. A similar view can be taken re the indoor facilities with the configuration no longer being appropriate along with a failure to meet the needs and expectations of many modern day sports and the users.

When considering the question of refurbishment vs. replacement the reality is that should a decision be made to remain on the existing site then a demolition then rebuild would be required. It should not be overlooked that to undertake such a project would require the site and its facilities to be unavailable for 2 to 3 years to allow such work to take place. This would have an extremely detrimental effect on sport in Edinburgh for that time. The facilities provided cannot be replicated on a temporary basis elsewhere during the building period. In addition the cost of demolition and rebuild are unlikely to be less than a new build elsewhere.

Meadowbank vs. Sighthill; this issue was considered as far back as 2004 with a report being considered by the Council on March 18th. Initially 19 sites were identified with these being narrowed down to 3 potential venues, including Meadowbank, concluding with a recommendation to pursue the Sighthill option. The Sighthill site is bigger than the Meadowbank site and offered the opportunity of extending the range of facilities already provided. The site is well serviced in transport terms and is close to the central belt population. Alongside this there is I believe a financial imperative with the funding only being available to progress with a new facility should the Meadowbank site be released for development.

Athletics Provision; Edinburgh requires a quality athletics facility if it wishes to promote the sport and if Edinburgh wants in the future to attract athletics events then spectator seating is required. It may well be desirable to have a â€˜rugbyâ€™ facility separate to such a facility however neither the Meadowbank site nor the Sighthill site is large enough to accommodate two stadia nor in my view would the expense of doing so were it possible be justifiable in terms of use. Space could be found but only at the expense of a significant amount of indoor provision which recent research has demonstrated is in short supply. A shared municipal facility is a compromise but one that is affordable, deliverable and a sensible way forward â€“ the venue will be used for more than athletics and rugby as the recent concerts this summer demonstrate when over 60,000 people used the arena at Meadowbank over a three day period. Such events are not restricted by the level of permanent seating provision.

Stadium Capacity; recent articles in the Evening News have focused not only on the athletics vs. rugby issue but also the spectator capacity. It is understandable that Edinburgh Rugby would want to maximise the capacity to accommodate potential future growth. It cannot be overlooked however that the city has a limited budget and to provide what Edinburgh Rugby would like would be at the expense of other provision which we know will be well used. The proposed provision of 6,000 plus 4,000 temporary seats is in excess of their existing need and future demand is as yet to be proven. Once again there is a compromise but one based on demonstrated need by a wide range of sports and communities which we also have obligations to.

Finally it should not be overlooked that there is a commitment to build a community sports centre on the existing Meadowbank site and that plans are currently being developed for this.

I hope the above is of some help to you.

Regards

Keith Jackson
Chief Executive, Edinburgh Leisure

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 31 Jan 2007, 19:26

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 31 Jan 2007, 19:48

This is a bit scary - they've put "Potential Future Redevelopment" over our office!!

Post by **wangi** » 31 Jan 2007, 21:44

Poppy wrote:This is a bit scary - they've put "Potential Future Redevelopment" over our office!!

It's no secret that the ROS are wanting to flit, is it? Sorry, that our daft numpty overlords are wanting them to flit...

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 31 Jan 2007, 21:54

The draft Meadowbank Development Brief was approved by the Planning Committee on 7 December 2006 for consultation purposes. The consultation period will run until 9 March 2007. Comments on the draft brief are welcomed and should be made in writing to the Head of Planning & Strategy, City Development Department, Waverley Court, 4 East Market Street, Edinburgh EH8 8BG. A summary of consultation responses will be presented to the Planning Committee prior to the final approval of the brief. Should you wish to discuss any aspect of the brief, you can contact Alison Kirkwood on 0131 469 3590.

Draft Meadowbank Development Brief

Draft Meadowbank Development Brief Report to Planning Committee

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 31 Jan 2007, 22:03

wangi wrote:
Poppy wrote:This is a bit scary - they've put "Potential Future Redevelopment" over our office!!
It's no secret that the ROS are wanting to flit, is it? Sorry, that our daft numpty overlords are wanting them to flit...

It's all gone quiet on that front cos of the election, but only a few will flit and chances are MBH will remain. And we've just been redecorated/recarpeted and new lifts are being installed. St Mag's is still unlet though ...

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 27 Feb 2007, 18:40

It is not clear from their website or leaflets who is leading the campaign to save Meadowbank Sports Centre but Caroline Hosking, the prospective area candidate for Solidarity in the forthcoming Council elections, was circulating a petition at last night's CC meeting.

More info at www.savemeadowbank.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 13 Mar 2007, 20:29

Stadium fans rally round

"Kevin Connor, a spokesman for the Save Meadowbank group, said..."

I think Kevin Connor is in Solidarity as well.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 13 Mar 2007, 21:34

I think the campaign would have more credibility if they checked their facts:

The East is already set to lose the Pitz football pitches in Portobello, Leith Waterworld, and Portobello Golf Course.

I think it would be more accurate to say that the Pitz is to be re-located within the area, though they seem in no rush to move. And the Golf course? News to me.

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 14 Mar 2007, 09:37

seanie wrote:I think Kevin Connor is in Solidarity as well.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 16 Mar 2007, 17:41

Whoever is behind the 'Save Meadowbank' campaign has a cheeky approach to funding. My son came home from Primary School today with his weekly school newsletter, printed on the back of which is an A4 poster advertising the campaign and condemning Edinburgh City Council!

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 16 Mar 2007, 17:45

Marya wrote:...condemning Edinburgh City Council!

How could they when the Council are so trustworthy?

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 16 Mar 2007, 17:49

Epykat wrote:
Marya wrote:...condemning Edinburgh City Council!
How could they when the Council are so trustworthy?

More to the point how did the campaigners manage to get their leaflets printed and distributed by a Council service? You have to admire their initiative!

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 16 Mar 2007, 19:33

seanie wrote:Stadium fans rally round
"Kevin Connor, a spokesman for the Save Meadowbank group, said..."
I think Kevin Connor is in Solidarity as well.

And the website is registered in his name.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 16 Mar 2007, 19:41

Here is some more misinformation from the Save Meadowbank campaign, this time from their (very interesting) hijacking of the St John's newsletter and (presumably) printed at rate payers' expense:

The Pitz at Portobello is closing

I think I have dealt with this previously

the Commonwealth Pool shutting for two years, so local kids will have nowhere to go

Apart from Portobello Swim Centre?

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 16 Mar 2007, 20:09

And here is the leaflet in question:

Sporting Chance

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 16 Mar 2007, 21:56

800 "luxury" flats may be pushing it a bit.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 16 Mar 2007, 22:11

Again from the 'Save Meadowbank' website:

Tue 13/03/07

PORTOBELLO PARK CAMPAIGNERS SAY 'SAVE MEADOWBANK'

Portobello residents today became the latest to publicly back the campaign to save Meadowbank Stadium from demolition.

"We fully support the Save Meadowbank campaign," said Portobello Park Action Group chair Ros Sutherland.

"Communities in Edinburgh have already given up green space and other amenities so that the Council can sell land for development. The east of the city is being hit particularly hard at the moment.

"The Council cannot be allowed to destroy facilities that they have refused to maintain. They must be called to account.

"Local people must believe it's possible to make a difference. People in Portobello stopped the supermarket and stopped the Council building houses on Portobello Golf course. But the only way is to challenge the Council loudly, publicly and consistently."

Portobello Park Action Group was formed last year when the City of Edinburgh Council announced it would build a new high school on Portobello Park instead of rebuilding on the existing site.

Save Meadowbank spokesman Kevin Connor welcomed their support. He said "This is another example of the Council selling a facility for housing and building a replacement on a green field site.

"The Council try to encourage us to reuse and recycle yet they seem unable to do so themselves."

Post by **wangi** » 16 Mar 2007, 22:43

Bob, i'm unsure what your point is here - yes this group may have made a few inaccuracies in their publications... But this looks a bit more than simply pointing that out. What's the real issue?

Do you not think the disposal of Meadowbank is an amazingly bad idea? All levels of government chant the mantra of doing more exercise, yet somehow the closure of an essential piece of infrastructure which promotes that is a good idea. A replacement at a site at the other side of the city is not good enough, a poorer replacement is not good enough.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 17 Mar 2007, 09:40

Draft Meadowbank Development Brief

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 17 Mar 2007, 10:22

Wangi, my point is that these are examples of a politically-motivated deliberate distortion of the truth leading up to an election and a classic case of a cause being hijacked for political ends.

I will be sorry to see Meadowbank go. We have been very fortunate to have this national sports facility on our doorstep for so long. But, as with Portobello High School, we now have a 1960s building that is no longer fit for purpose and would cost more to refurbish than to replace.

The running track, velodrome and athletics stadium are facilities that serve all of Edinburgh and beyond, not just people who live in and around Meadowbank. There is no logical reason why they should not be located elsewhere in the city. Yes, it is more inconvenient for those of us living in the east to get to Sighthill, just as it was inconvenient for people from the west of the city to get to Meadowbank for all those years.

What is important is that a new purpose-built sports facility at Meadowbank offers more flexible space and a better user experience for the wide variety of community acitivites that currently take place there.

From the draft development brief:

5.3 A key element of redevelopment proposals will be the inclusion of a local sports centre to replace some of the facilities currently provided on the site.

The exact specification of the facilities to be included has not yet been agreed.

As part of the consultation on the draft development brief, comments are invited on the following indicative list of potential facilities :-

• 6 court sports hall including seating and storage
• Fitness centre including two further activity studios
• Martial arts room
• 4 x squash court
• Specialist fencing provision
• Synthetic floodlit training area
• Crèche
• Reception/sales/office/meeting/function/admin/staffroom/first aid facilities
• Shower/change accommodation
• Car park

I think it is also worth remembering that:

3.1 In 2004, SportScotland invited bids for funding towards the provision and upgrading of sports facilities of national and regional significance.

Within this context, the Council is proposing to upgrade the Royal Commonwealth Pool and to establish new sports complexes at Sighthill and Hunter’s Hall Park which will replace existing facilities at Meadowbank. The sale of the Meadowbank Sports Centre site and ring fencing of the capital receipt is an integral part of the overall funding package for the provision of the new facilities.

(my emboldening)

In my opinion, we should concentrate our efforts to ensure that the community facilities at Meadowbank are retained and enhanced and the percentage of development reduced, if necessary, to provide this.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 17 Mar 2007, 12:13

This letter from Keith Jackson, Chief Executive of Edinburgh Leisure, appeared in yesterday's EN:

Sporting chance for Sighthill

Dadaist · Post by **Dadaist** » 17 Mar 2007, 13:45

Bob Jefferson wrote:Wangi, my point is that these are examples of a politically-motivated deliberate distortion of the truth leading up to an election and a classic case of a cause being hijacked for political ends.

Or maybe it's because you don't agree with Carla this time.

Are you by any chance related to the Bob who agreed and worked with her during the Superstore campaign?

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 17 Mar 2007, 21:59

I have a great deal of respect for Caroline (Carla) but I disagree with her on this matter.

bellybabe · Post by **bellybabe** » 20 Mar 2007, 14:38

The thing is, the part of the brief dealing with the replacement facilities only talks of an "indicative list of potential facilities". So we can all say yes, then , ok, demolish our facility to build a nice new one at Sighthill, nice and convenient for all those commuters who don't pay council tax to Edinburgh, and then find that the "potential" facilties remain nothing more than that.

And I don't think it's true that Sighthill is no harder to reach for us than Meadowbank is for people on the other side of the city. Meadowbank is within walking distance of the city centre. Sighthill isn't. Of course, if fitness is only for people who can drive to facilities, then yes, it's the same; but a lot of us don't.

Here we are again with another polarised argument, where we're all either goodies or baddies. I don't think I'm either; I'm just concerned at the running down of fitness facilties for the people of the east of Edinburgh to finance facilities for people lucky enough to live in the west.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 20 Mar 2007, 14:48

At last nights PHS Board meeting one of the parents representatives, whom I believe lives in Northfield, told us that she had a leaflet posted through her letterbox at the weekend, it was authored by COEC. The leaflet sought to assuage peoples concerns about the loss of some facilities at Meadowbank and one of the ameliorations was the relocation of PHS onto the park. The inference being that new sports facilities will be provided on this site. Which would be a fantastic boost for the people of East Edinburgh and beyond.

Unfortunatey the lady did not keep the leaflet, she recycled it. Has anyone else see this? It would be good to see a copy posted here on TP.

(the wink is for the abbreviation TP not the leaflet)

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 21 Mar 2007, 15:29

From today's EN:

Meadowbank protesters gain Porty support

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 21 Mar 2007, 19:11

Charwoman Ros Sutheralnd wrote:"The east of the city is being hit particularly hard at the moment. Local people must believe it's possible to make a difference."

For once I agree with the head greenkeeper. Local people can make a difference and they ought to believe it. Look what we locals helped to achieve in securing unanimous council support for relocating Portobello High School in Portobello Park. Just shows you the power of the local voice, we gubbed the New Zealanders, Americans and Brazilian PPAG supporters.

PPAG are obvioulsy unhappy that the national athletics stadium is not being replaced in the same street. That's one of their rules isn't it?

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 21 Mar 2007, 21:01

The replacement of Meadowbank has to be seen in a wider context:

National, Regional and Local Sports Facilities Projects

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 27 Mar 2007, 18:24

From Maureen's March report to CC:

The Facts About Meadowbank Replacement

It is unfortunate that misinformation has been put around about what is really being proposed. The Council is not selling the whole site for housing. Meadowbank was built 40 years ago and £250,000 is spent on it every year to keep it up to standard, but it was not built to last, and it now needs replacement. There is not enough room to build a good sports stadium at Meadowbank, so the Council plan to build a new stadium at Sighthill and this was agreed and reported in 2004. All the sports bodies were involved and agreed with the plan. The Council is planning to complete Sighthill and the new East Edinburgh local sports centre, before Meadowbank closes. The Council is consulting local people on what sports facilities they want at their new East Edinburgh Centre. The rest of the site will be re-developed with a new public square, shops, workplaces and homes – including affordable homes for rent. The Council is also consulting local people about this development. The proceeds from the new development will help pay for Sighthill Stadium and the Royal Commonwealth Pool. The Council has already set aside at least £4 million to build the new East Edinburgh sports facility, which will obviously be very important to us.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 27 Mar 2007, 19:29

Bob Jefferson wrote:... my point is that these are examples of a politically-motivated deliberate distortion of the truth leading up to an election and a classic case of a cause being hijacked for political ends.
.

Looks as if you are not the only one who feels like this Bob as this "Scotsman" article shows :

Top coach accuses socialists of 'hijacking' stadium campaign

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 27 Mar 2007, 20:09

Thanks, here's an article from the EN Opinion section of the same day, which pretty much sums up how I feel:

'Edinburgh is crying out for new facilities'

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 09 Apr 2007, 12:19

From today's EN:

Stadium campaigners hit out at council response

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 23 Apr 2007, 11:59

Poppy wrote:This is a bit scary - they've put "Potential Future Redevelopment" over our office!!

I see that the RoS are holding their own hustings Tuesday lunchtime in Meadowbank.

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 23 Apr 2007, 17:34

Marya wrote:
Poppy wrote:This is a bit scary - they've put "Potential Future Redevelopment" over our office!!
I see that the RoS are holding their own hustings Tuesday lunchtime in Meadowbank.

To be pedantic - it is being organised by our union branch, the PCS, not the Registers of Scotland itself. Although the main thrust of it is to do with us, the questions being raised are relevant to the Civil Service in general e.g. pay, moving departments, etc.