New Portobello High School- Where and how?

[Maria]

[Porty]

[Mate of Marya]

[Epykat]

[Bob Jefferson]

[Epykat]

[Maria]

[Bob Jefferson]

[Poppy]

[seanie]

[Bob Jefferson]

[seanie]

Well I'd want to look at more detail before a firm conclusion, but I'm an architect with a little experience of education work, new-build and refurbishment, PPP etc, and the basic idea strikes me as about the only realistic option.

Continual refurbishment and maintenence isn't sustainable. Buildings, generally, have life spans. Ones built in the 60's rather short ones. Maintenence and energy costs will be huge compared to a (decent) modern building. After a point you're throwing good money after bad. It's actually more sustainable to build a good, energy efficient, adaptable building that will hopefully serve the needs of the community well into the future. At some point you'll have to build a new building.

Unfortunately the existing site isn't physically big enough to redevelop in-situ. It's just not. So you need to look elsewhere. If you go further afield you might be able to find a prime undeveloped site but that may raise its own considerations of sustainability. It's probably more energy efficient for pupils to walk to school rather than go by bus.

And if you're looking for an easily developable bit of land close to the existing school then your search pretty much begins and ends with the golf course.

And at the end of the day, without wishing to devalue the enjoyment of it's merits in anyway, a golfcourse is a bit of grass with some holes in.

I'm just round the corner. They can come and play in my backgarden.

My green fees will be very reasonable.

[Mate of Marya]

[Bob Jefferson]

[Gemini]

[Mate of Marya]

[Epykat]

[dccairns]

[Porty]

[seanie]

I confess I know absolutely nothing about the condition of PHS.

But I'll make some observations from my experience elsewhere.

Most of the schools in the building wave of the 60's were poorly constructed, to standards unacceptable today; they're expensive to maintain, extortionate in energy terms, unpleasant and ineffective environments, too hot in summer, too cold in winter, with poor ventilation, terrible acoustics, they lack flexibility and are difficult to adapt. In non-technical language they're crap.

And most have reached they're useful lifespan unless subject to a major overhaul. But refurbishment, of the sort required, is actually very expensive. Once you start stripping things out you usually find more and more problems. You're quite likely talking about stripping the building back to it's most basic structure and starting again.

And even if you can get away with less you still have the problem of what to do with the pupils. Children and building sites are not a good combination. So you need to decant the pupils. You need to find the space to put a whole lot of Portakabins you've hired for the duration. And that in itself is expensive as well as inconvenient.

In many instances proposals for refurbishment turn out at a cost not too far short of new-build, at higher risk and with a less satisfactory outcome.

So new build is frequently preffered. Done right you'll have a better outcome and the costs are easier to predict. But to do new build on an existing site you need space. The usual pattern is to build the new school on the playing fields, wait till it's finished, then demolish the old school and turn it into playing fields. That way children are kept separate from a building site and decanting costs are obviated. But you need the space to do it.

And whilst I know nothing about the state of PHS it's blindingly obvious that they do not have an abundance of space. I think it would be extremely difficult to develop a new school in-situ. And when it comes to construction the extremely difficult translates into the extremely expensive. Even if possible it's likely to be cost prohibitive.

At any given time there's a going rate for constructing a school. I don't know the figure for secondary schools but it might be in the £1600 to £1800 per square metre range. Any proposal that falls outwith the currently accepted band is extremely unlikely to get off the ground.

So if PHS really is in a state, and I'm in no position to judge, you face a real problem. Given the limitations of the site the prospects of either refurbishment or new development in-situ face huge obstacles. Even if possible they're probably financially unviable.

But even a scheme that could work within such constraints faces another problem. Developing in-situ has no self-financing element. And without a cash injection from somewhere any such project could only be realistically funded via PPP.

And PPP is an all but unmitigated disaster. Billions have been thrown away replacing old crap schools with new crap schools. But given the political sensitivities about admitting such a monumental waste of public money it'll take a few years for the true awfulness of the situation to percolate into the general conciousness.

If a way can be found to avoid PPP grab it.

[Porty]

[Mate of Marya]

[Gemini]

[Gemini]

[Bob Jefferson]

[seanie]

[Porty]

[Bob Jefferson]

[Maria]

[Poppy]

[seanie]

Historic Scotland's database might be incomplete.

Because they have the listed buildings on Portobello High Street but appear to have missed out No 1.

[wangi]

[bellybabe]

[bellybabe]

[teddygirl]

I really don't know but when my two were at PHS they used to get bussed to Meadowbank so perhaps they will go there again. It's future is in jeopardy too though, so what then?