Towerbank Primary School - refurbishment and extension

[Mark Cameron]

I never let journalists lead me to conclusions but unfortunatel some people treat what they read as gospel.

I'd far prefer to understand a situation by asking the people involved. Forums aren't always the best way to do that as unfortunately it can be difficult to ensure the messages are written in a way that come across the way they were intended.

I guess if I lived on Wilson Park I'd want to understand the benefits to the school so I could weigh that up against my own personal interests. Some people can be reasonable when it comes to development for the greater good of the community (although I accept not all!). With the nursery it strikes me that there may possibly be alternatives. These alternatives have likely been considered, discussed with immediate local residents and ruled out for perfectly valid reasons. Perhaps if it where possible to get that message out to as many interested parties as possible it may help the wider community better understand the decision and who knows even help change the opinion of one or two of the objectors (ok I know I may be living in cloud cuckoo land with that last bit).

[wangi]

From a historical perspective the corner where the nursery is proposed was formerly housing of a similar scale (I'd imagine) to those on Wilson's Park; see the map at http://forum.talkporty.org/viewtopic.php?p=86874#p86874

Looks like it was closer too. Just an observation that that the current open aspect is actually a result of the school being there, and its expansion over the years.

L/

[seanie]

These alternatives have likely been considered, discussed with immediate local residents and ruled out for perfectly valid reasons.

The first local residents would've known about the proposals would've been the notification for the planning application.

[Mark Cameron]

Did the objections start then? Did the residents engage in the process? Do they understand the reasons for siting it there? Who would say they'd be happy with this - would you be? I wouldn't be but if there was a clear benefit to the school demonstrated I would in all likelihood be more accepting of the proposal (being the decent community spirited individual that I am). I accept some people just wouldn't like it either way.

[seanie]

I've seen one joint letter of objection but I don't how many there are in total. As for the process, there's not much of one to engage in. Once the application's in you've got 21 days to comment, support or object and that's about it. On larger scale projects there are requirements for pre-application consultation but from what I've seen that doesn't neccessarily add much to the process.

[Puerto bella]

Annoying wee note through the door asking us to go to a meeting on Wed and give our views on the proposal but the tone of it was assuming you would want to object to it ........seemed to be from the Wilsons Park Action Group (?) but was for all intents and purposes anon - anyone else get one? Do they not realise that its more likely to generate support or non-involvement?

[seanie]

There was a meeting last night arranged at very short notice; I only found out about it by accident.

Mix of concerns, some perfectly understandable, some less so. I think it was more to at least let people voice their concerns and see if there was any scope for making the proposals more palatable without compromising what's required for the school. To be honest I think that scope is pretty limited, but there might be some changes possible.

Due for committee 6th July so it may in part depend on what the planners think.

[seanie]

Revised drawings have gone up on the Planning Portal. They've reversed the pitch of the nursery roof so the low side is to Wilson's Park. It may not placate everyone but it goes some way to addressing concerns.

[seanie]

School finally set for extension

Marion Williams, director of heritage watchdog the Cockburn Association, said: “We are very concerned by the lack of architectural ambition and poor quality of this application for additions to what is the most important and impressive building in this part of the Portobello Conservation Area.

“It is important that a scheme is devised which contributes positively to the local urban environment and enhances the existing infrastructure so as to ensure its long-term future. We therefore reluctantly wish to object to this application in the strongest terms as the community simply deserves better.”

Touching concern for the local community from the Cockburn Association.

Although their concern didn't extend to actually bothering to find out anything about why the extension was needed, the project brief, or the rationale for the design.

[seanie]

I think it's worth highlighting the sheer incompetence of whoever it was from The Cockburn Association that "studied the plans". From their letter of objection.

"The duplication of stairs is also wasteful and they make a weak gable feature."

They've completely failed to notice that the stairs in the extension provide two different functions so are not a duplication. The stairs on the gable serve vertical circulation, up and down, within the extension itself and are an absolute necessity. The other stairs, on the first and second floor, are there to overcome the differences in level between the old building and the new and are also a necessity.

Without the gable stairs, to get from the second floor of the extension to the first, you'd have to go up a flight of stairs, through the upper hall, through a door, down a flight of stairs, through a door, through the middle hall, through a door, down another flight of stairs and through another door. Quite apart from that being ridiculous, it wouldn't comply with Building Regulations.

[seanie]

Approved!

[Makaveli]

Good news.

[Porty]

Very good news.