THINKING MORE ON 154 – DEBATE CONTINUES ABOUT McDONALD ROAD SCHOOL 'ANNEXE'

Last week we published correspondence about the future of 154 McDonald Road between local resident and former Broughton Primary School parent David Sterratt and City of Edinburgh Council's Director of Children and Families Gillian Tee (Breaking news, 18.7.13).

The letters touch upon practical matters concerning whether the planning application should be approved, but focus more on the context and advisability of selling-off parts of the school estate. 

Today we return to this closely argued Wiff-Waff, in part because we find the debate important and interesting; in part because we have much sympathy for Sterratt’s case (and that of his fellow campaigners); and, in part, simply because we enjoy the measured, courteous reasonableness of his tone. 

It seems, at times, like having one's brain massaged by a forensic pathologist ... shortly before its extraction.

Are you as persuaded as we are? Tell us by email spurtle@hotmail.co.uk on Facebook Broughton Spurtle or Twitter @theSpurtle  

*****

Dear Gillian Tee,

Thank-you for taking the time to reply to my letter – it is very much appreciated. I am encouraged to hear that use of 154 McDonald Road (the former Broughton High School) has not been discounted should the planning application fall through.

The question of the building's designation and history is interesting. According to the current Broughton High School website, it was occupied until 1972, and according to former Broughton PS pupils it was used as overspill accommodation for the primary school in the late 1970s, though I don't know if it was referred to as an annexe.

On the substantive issues, we are both clear that the space within 154 McDonald Road "exceeds the additional accommodation which is expected to be required at Broughton Primary School", and I have great sympathy for you and your colleagues as you address ‘the considerable budgetary pressures which the Council faces’. However, I am very concerned that disposal of 154 McDonald Road is a fix for the ‘short to medium term’ rather than the long term. I fear that selling off a corner of a site will is not be ‘part of a strategy to rationalise the physical estate held by the Council’ and may in the longer term make the Council's estate harder to deal with. 

Furthermore, once part of the site is sold off, I think there will be pressure to sell off the rest of the Broughton site, as was proposed in 2008. Had Drummond High been closed & Broughton PS & St Mary's been decanted to the Drummond building, there would have been capacity issues in the coming years as the current population bulge works its way though the school system. It seems highly likely that once a city-centre site is sold by the council, it will never be possible to get it back.

I note that you didn't address my proposals for finding ways of using 154 McDonald Road to free up capacity in other schools, or for business start-up units. Were the planning permission not to be granted, would you be receptive to this proposal? In my view, it would be a better long-term strategy. I do think that in the light of the current capacity squeeze, this should be considered seriously.

Anent overlooking, I take the point that other primary schools in Edinburgh are overlooked, though I'm not sure how closely they are, or if any issues arise out of it. I'm not sure that a precedent necessarily means that it is desirable. However, my concern wasn't specifically overlooking, but more unforeseen consequences of having residential accommodation right above a playground. For example, what will happen if residents complain about noise from the playground? Might there be problems with anti-social residents?

Finally, I am interested to hear about the idea of building a permanent structure on the car park space. However, this does beg the question of where staff will park their cars, with parking at Bellevue Road already being at a premium, and likely to be more so with the two new groups of buildings in Bellevue Road and McDonald Place. Also, how much would a permanent structure cost compared to renovating 154 McDonald Road? These are the sorts of issue that ought to be settled before the building is sold off irrevocably.

Best wishes,

David Sterratt

----------

Update

Gillian Tee responded to the above on 24 July. We reproduce her email (typos and all) unedited. To previous correspondence it adds:

• an assurance that Broughton Primary School is not under threat (at least, says Sterratt, until the next dip in primary school rolls)
• an assertion that it would be difficult to use the extra space at No. 154 and would require consultation beyond Children & Families (not rocket science, though)
• any problem with residents becomes the problem of the school
• the extension may not be built on the car park and could be built on the current playground
• at present there is an overprovision of car-parking space for school staff.

Dear Mr Sterratt

Thank you for your email of 21 July 2013 in which you have raised a few further questions which I am happy to address.

Regarding the suggestion that there may be pressure to sell off the Broughton Primary School site I can assure you that there are no plans to do so; the fact that the Council is seeking to make a significant additional capital investment in expanding the capacity which is available at Broughton Primary School on this site should provide further reassurance on this question if that was required.

You have suggested finding ways of using 154 McDonald Road to free up capacity in other schools, or for business start-up units. As I said before, given that the development proposals for MacDonald [sic] Road are still ongoing, it was agreed that this should not be discounted at this stage and that the position would be reviewed once the outcome of the planning application is known; that would include full consideration of costs and any solution would however need to be assessed against both available budget and the required timescale for delivery. One of the main challenges in considering this would be to what use could be made of the significant amount of surplus space which would remain. Using this to free up capacity in other would require [sic] significant catchment review to be undertaken; the priority is to provide sufficient accommodation within each primary school to meet catchment demand. Regarding non-school use, the Council is currently seeking to rationalise it’s [sic] property portfolio, not expand it. The building at 154 McDonald Road is not part of the Children and Families Estate therefore consideration of the use of part of the building would have to be undertaken in consultation with colleagues elsewhere within the Council.   

You expressed some concerns regarding unforeseen consequences of having residential accommodation right above a playground. Dealing with complaints regarding noise or other issues would, as is the case in all schools in the city, be a school management issue.     

The possibility of using part of the car parking space would not, necessarily, mean that the new extension would be build on that space; it is more likely to be the change of use of that space from being for car parking to being play ground thus compensating for the area of playground on which the new extension would be built. The existing car parking provision is generous and far exceeds that which would be permissible under the current planning guidance were an entirely new school of that size to be built in this area. This would be an option which may be available and in the new academic we will work [sic] with the school to consider how the new build accommodation could be best located on the primary school site and what measures can be taken to mitigate any impact on playground space.
 
Yours sincerely

Gillian