New Portobello High School - PPAG win legal appeal

[seashell]

[Betty Windsor]

[seanie]

There's no obvious good one.

[Betty Windsor]

[seanie]

There are no quick or easy alternatives, and nothing that looks line it works for everyone. Any alternative would take 4-5 years at least. So whilst it's reasonable to look into possible alternatives, the legal options for proceeding with the school on the park should also be explored.

[wangi]

[wangi]

[seanie]

Any alternative plan would take at least 4-5 years. That's just the nature of the process.

[portygeoff]

[Porty]

Plan A will suffice.

[David Robertson]

[Makaveli]

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2972357

Just shows that someone who isn't affected by a planning decision can still try and block it just for the sake of it.

[lg1726]

Even when in Aberdeen he was not directly affected by the proposals, but lodged the challenge as a protest to the planning processes!

[Makaveli]

Yeah he is one of those people with too much time on their hands that like to mess things up for other people around them for no other reason than 'they can'.

I pity their sort and the people that are affected by their actions.

[Betty Windsor]

I have just read the small print on the recent PFANS leaflet and was very surprised to read that these were issued on behalf of the PHS parent council. I have attended the last two parent council meetings and at no time was there any mention of their involvement in this propaganda exercise. Indeed when someone did ask about them at the last meeting nobody seemed to know, either what was going in them or who they were aimed at.
Is this another example of democracy a la PFANS?

As Seanie would say "not in my name!"

[Porty]

[Betty Windsor]

[Betty Windsor]

I wouldn't mind so much if it weren't so full of lies and inaccuracies.

[portygeoff]

[Porty]

[portygeoff]

[Betty Windsor]

[portygeoff]

Betty, again you said lies, again what lies?

You and your Pal were the only people against, everybody, yes everybody, voted in favour. That seems pretty convincing about the direction that the Parents Council wants to travel. (Probably reflective of the school body).

That direction was to pursue the legal direction; that's what the leaflet does.

It was also to argue against a decant; that's what the leaflet does.

One definition of a legal loophole is, 'a loophole is an ambiguity in a system, such as a law , which can be used to circumvent or otherwise avoid the intent, implied or explicitly stated, of the system'. In this case Common Good for the benefit of the people but the people not having a say on what that benefit is because of a legal clause. (Although I am not sure that is necessarily what the authors meant).

Sorry you didn't see me there.

[little miss moffat]

Received this email this afternoon:

Thank you for your recent email concerning the future of Portobello High School.

I would first like to reassure you that this Council remains totally committed to replacing the existing Portobello High School as soon as possible. We recognise that a new school is vital for the community and, after closely considering recent events, we believe that to deliver a school for the 21st Century a new build on Portobello Park must remain as our preferred option.

A report is being taken to the Council on Thursday, 25 October and this will be available online on Friday 19 October at http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/newportobelloschool This report will set out the legal options that might secure Portobello Park as the site for the new school. A change in the relevant legislation is one course of action which is potentially available and the Council has already written to Scottish Ministers to seek their support and assistance.

Whilst all available options to remove the existing legal impediment are being pursued, it is also important that we consider what alternative site options could be available in the event that the option of building the new Portobello High School on Portobello Park does not, ultimately, prove to be possible. The report to Council in October will also include information on any such options, to ensure we have an alternative plan for the school if we are unable to build the school on Portobello Park. However, I accept that any of these would inevitably represent a significant compromise by comparison and would very much only be considered as a fall-back position.


Yours sincerely


Councillor Paul Godzik
Convener of Education, Children and Families

[David Robertson]

Thanks for posting that !

[Epykat]

"There is no quick or easy option. The council is the lead agency on this matter. I think it essential that they explore every option including ones previously rejected. Its complex and technical whether on the legal or architectural side. However, they need to do a full appraisal and consider all options detailing the pros and cons to each. Its certainly looking problematic for the legal route and hence other and alternative options need investigated.
Kenny MacAskill "

This email was from Kenny MacAskill the other day.

[seanie]

Yes, there are no quick or easy options. Any alternative would take 4-5 years at a minimum to deliver, and what alternatives there are, appear to have severe shortcomings in many ways. At the same time, pursuing the school on the park has an element of uncertainty, although it could be quicker than any alternatives. But in the short term it's not an either/or choice. It perfectly possible to pursue legal options to continue as planned, attempting to deliver the school on the best site, and at the same time develop a fall back plan if that should be necessary.

[Porty]

I'd call it a prudential and proper way to proceed.

[wangi]

[wangi]

And the report is attached.

[little miss moffat]

[seashell]

What possible reason could they have for objecting?

[Pal of Porty]

The new park is not on their doorstep for one but the school will be! When has this ever been about green space for PPAG?

[David Robertson]

[David Robertson]