New Portobello High School - Big W site redux

[Paxetamor]

admin: this thread has been split from New Portobello High School - PPAG Judicial Review.

The Big W suggestion sounds ideal. If PPAG do appeal and work is held up for 2 years, what then? Is everybody just going to wait and see what the outcome to that is going to be? Nobody is disagreeing with the fact that a new school needs to be built sooner rather than later. Maybe it's time to abandon the park idea and get behind the Big W one.

[Porty]

The Big W suggestion sounds ideal..

Maybe to a moron?

[Pal of Porty]

The Big W suggestion sounds ideal......

PPAG would never allow this. They are concerned enough about the traffic and the Big W site would mean 80% of the children having to cross the busy road instead of just 20%.

[Paxetamor]

POP,that's the beauty of it. Nobody would have to cross a road, there's an underpass connecting to the other side of the road. I do think it's worth serious consideration, and I don't appreciate being called a moron for agreeing with an alternative suggestion. That's what I mean by name-calling.

[Porty]

You are mistaken, I wasn't calling you a moron. It may help if you check out the meaning of "ideaL"

I say that someone who thinks it is "ideal" to have site that is too small, not in council ownership, at the edge of catchment, on one of the busiest junctions in the city and on the wrong side of the A1 is likely to be moronic.


Edit; for the record, Portobello park isn't an idyllic site, it is the least worst option.

[Paxetamor]

Porty, maybe if you weren't so focussed on building on the park you too could see that the Big W site is ideal. I thought that the suggestion was to keep the park as playing fields. Would that still mean that the area for the school is too small? As I said before, the area is served well with underpasses and there would be no need for anyone to cross the road.If they did have to cross over, there are plenty of traffic lights at the Milton Junction.

[wangi]

Porty, maybe if you weren't so focussed on building on the park you too could see that the Big W site is ideal. I thought that the suggestion was to keep the park as playing fields. Would that still mean that the area for the school is too small? As I said before, the area is served well with underpasses and there would be no need for anyone to cross the road.If they did have to cross over, there are plenty of traffic lights at the Milton Junction.

Your criteria for determining an ideal site leave much to be desired. You couldn't get a worse possible site in the catchment area than the former Big W site.

The site selection process was long ago - have you consulted it? The park is the best option there was.

L/

[Porty]

Paxetamar -are you deliberately trying to bait me into calling you a moron?

[joeshmoe]

Porty, maybe if you weren't so focussed on building on the park you too could see that the Big W site is ideal. I thought that the suggestion was to keep the park as playing fields. Would that still mean that the area for the school is too small? As I said before, the area is served well with underpasses and there would be no need for anyone to cross the road.If they did have to cross over, there are plenty of traffic lights at the Milton Junction.

Blimey, why are we raising points that were debated 3 years ago? This has been done (and gone over and over and over..). There was a proper site selection and planning process

[Lashylass]

...but the Big W site wasn't available then - it is now

[SoupDragon]

Would the Big W site even be suitable for putting a large heavy building full of kids on?

As I remember there was a very large hole appeared in the car park, something to do with a mineshaft?

[Porty]

...but the Big W site wasn't available then - it is now

The consultation covered quite a few sites that were "unavailable". The Big W site is not available, it is privately owned.

[Makaveli]

As suggestions go the Big W is one of the more barmy I have heard - I mean it is on the side of a motorway for christ's sake!!!

[Porty]

Makavelli if you weren't so focussed on building the school on the park, you would see how ideal the Big W site actually is.

It is such a crap site that PPAG failed to put it forward at the time of the consultation. Bear in mind they scoured the catchment and outwith the catchment, even proposing a school in the sea.

[Lashylass]

Last time I drove past Big W it was on the A1 - same road as Portobello Park!

[Makaveli]

I want to hear more about the school in the sea - did PPAG propose to use the hovercraft to fetch the kids back and forth to school?

[Makaveli]

Last time I drove past Big W it was on the A1 - same road as Portobello Park!

Except one has two lanes of cars and the other has one car lane and one bus lane!!!!

[Porty]

I want to hear more about the school in the sea - did PPAG propose to use the hovercraft to fetch the kids back and forth to school?

The idea was to reclaim land from the sea and build a school outwith catchment, it never made the long-list in the consultation. Just like the Big W site-too bonkers.

[wangi]

Last time I drove past Big W it was on the A1 - same road as Portobello Park!

But you know... there's this thing known as a junction... Milton Link splits, with most traffic either going straight onto the Harry Lauder Road A199; or left (as in turning) onto Milton Rd A1; with a smaller portion going right onto Milton Rd E A199. The volume of the traffic on Milton Rd A1 is a portion of what is on Milton Link A1. It is also a different class of road (minor A road vs a primary/trunk A road). Check out the traffic survey in the planning application.

The Big W site is an island. It is surrounded by major roads and a railway line. No pupils could access the site without crossing one of these. Plus it is far too small.

It's idiotic to even suggest it.

[Chas]

The Big W site is an island. It is surrounded by major roads and a railway line. No pupils could access the site without crossing one of these. Plus it is far too small.

It's idiotic to even suggest it.

I wouldn't go as far as to say its 'idiotic to even suggest it'; not all of us are as steeped in the history of this as others. But when you point it out, it is clearly unsuitable.

Although it has been said that even PPAG didn't support the BigW idea, I'm sure that at one point some of their members were in favour of building on the Freightliner site; that too is surrounded by railway lines and busy routes. Nuts or what?

[Porty]

Its certainly idiotic to suggest it is "ideal".

[wangi]

I wouldn't go as far as to say its 'idiotic to even suggest it'; not all of us are as steeped in the history of this as others. But when you point it out, it is clearly unsuitable.

Yup, my apologies.

Although it has been said that even PPAG didn't support the BigW idea, I'm sure that at one point some of their members were in favour of building on the Freightliner site; that too is surrounded by railway lines and busy routes. Nuts or what?

Way back in the mists of these threads you'll find me suggesting that It could only ever be acceptable with massive engineering (= massive cost); effectively bridging over the Railway / HLR...

But that's many years back.

[Porty]

Paxetamar - I'm not calling you an idiot. I assume you were well intentioned. Personally, I'm a little battle weary. Apologies if I offended you.

[Epykat]

Last time I drove past Big W it was on the A1 - same road as Portobello Park!

Except one has two lanes of cars and the other has one car lane and one bus lane!!!!

which still equals two lanes of traffic..........

[Chas]

I wouldn't go as far as to say its 'idiotic to even suggest it'; not all of us are as steeped in the history of this as others. But when you point it out, it is clearly unsuitable.

Yup, my apologies.

Although it has been said that even PPAG didn't support the BigW idea, I'm sure that at one point some of their members were in favour of building on the Freightliner site; that too is surrounded by railway lines and busy routes. Nuts or what?

Way back in the mists of these threads you'll find me suggesting that It could only ever be acceptable with massive engineering (= massive cost); effectively bridging over the Railway / HLR...

But that's many years back.

No apology necessary, but thanks anyway. As to massive engineering/cost to make use of the Frieghtliner site, even with a bridge it would still never be suitable. As was pointed out earlier re the BigW site, kids are kids and will look for 'shortcuts' and the like. Almost inevitably someone would stray on to the railway or run across Sir Harry (the road!); unless of course you put up a fence modelled on the one around HMP Saughton - what does that tell our kids?

[Paxetamor]

Looking forward to the personal attacks as I doubt you can think of intelligent answers to the facts.
tufty

Tufty, I think you'll have more chance of personal attacks if you disagree with the boys. You don't seem to be doing that so I'm sure you'll be fine. Fact

[Porty]

Tufty, I think you'll have more chance of personal attacks if you disagree with the boys. You don't seem to be doing that so I'm sure you'll be fine. Fact

Have you endured any personal attacks?

Why not lay out why Big W is an ideal site for the new school. It would be helpful and perhaps persuasive to use stuff like the desired standards for space per pupil and so on. What size is the site BTW?

[Paxetamor]

Have you endured any personal attacks?

Why not lay out why Big W is an ideal site for the new school. It would be helpful and perhaps persuasive to use stuff like the desired standards for space per pupil and so on. What size is the site BTW?

Porty

It was actually Tufty that mentioned personal attacks. I've only had to "endure" my posts being called moronic and idiotic. How could I take that personally?

Wangi, if the Big W is such an island how did people get there without cars? Oh I know. Through the THREE underpasses that lead to it.

[Porty]

What size is the Big W site paxe?

Could help dispelled my moronic/idiotic chat.

[Bob Jefferson]

Boring and irrelevant. Site already chosen. Appeal is a purely vindictive action by PPAG, designed to further delay and jeapordise the new school. We've wasted enough time. Send in the bulldozers!

[Makaveli]

Last time I drove past Big W it was on the A1 - same road as Portobello Park!

Except one has two lanes of cars and the other has one car lane and one bus lane!!!!

which still equals two lanes of traffic..........

True but one is traffic calmed at peak times by a bus lane one is not.

And as Wangi pointed out one is right next to Milton crossroads and the other is not. And the one next to Big W doesn't even have a pavement!!!!! If you think the two roads are the same then I am sure you were not in the Tufty club as a child!!!

[Lashylass]

I think you'll find there is a safe footpath beside Big W which is separated from the roadside by a hedge and this also links the underpasses and crossings.

[Makaveli]

Oh in that case count me in!!! Big W it is.

A train line on one side and a dual carriagway on the other side - how could I have been so stupid to not think of this before?

[storky]

This Big W discussion is becoming boring. It has been discussed on a different thread.
It is also not relevant to this thread.

Admin request; could this subject please be moved to a different thread?

[Porty]

I think Paxe and lashy should call 01316692324 and ask for the Head Teacher.

Tell her you have found an ideal location for the school. Make sure you emphasise the site is too small, not in council ownership and unavailable, located at one of the busiest junctions in the city, at the edge of catchment and kids will still be bussed to PE. Oh and it may cost an additional £10m-£20M and could be available by 2020. Its effing idyllic.

Ask her for an honest appraisal of your idea. Don't forget to mention the safe footpath, it could swing it.