'Massive opposition' to expansion of schools could see plan scrapped

“Schools and amenity's should have been built as part of the house building contract but with no foresight by the Council it did not happen so where did they think all these kids would go to school?”

“The extra school places are needed for the children of the Village Quarter, this is likely to be the case for the indefinite future. If North Somerset Council possessed a scrap of strategic thinking their deliberations on creating extra school places would start and finish in the Village Quarter. North Somerset Council found £9.7million to upgrade the Town Hall in Weston and £15million for their Castlewood Offices in Clevedon, but cannot find a penny to provide 210 primary school places in or near the Village Quarter.
The Working Group are quoted as saying "We now need to work hard to look at alternative sites and work with school head, councillors and parents to stitch together alternative proposals." Stitch-up being the operative word. St Peter's is now in the firing line despite it suffering the same impediments as the High Downs proposal.
Is Harbour Road and the High Street ready for the twice daily gridlock that will result from Village Quarter children being delivered and collected across town to St Peter's?”

“I understand that part of the traffic problem around schools in Portishead is that as places became shorter and shorter in supply resdients moving into the area had to accept whatever school was offered. I am aware of a resident near Bristol Rd who could have, and would have liked to, walk to St Peter's but was offered Highdown. Another who could walk to Highdown but being offered Trinity and so on, merely because of ages of their children and available places.
I wonder how many parents, are crossing paths, or rather roads, when they would prefer to walk their children to a more local school?
However, these are the lucky ones I guess, compared to those who are being sent to school outside of their town and subsequently away from friends and community. This can only further contribute to traffic congestion already a major issue, as well.”

“The meeting was positive in many ways. Firstly, NSC finally acknowledged that it had underestimated the school places needed in Portishead and for whatever reason these mistakes occurred (and we were reminded it was not an easy task ), the message was given loud and clear by residents that it cannot happen again.

Secondly a solution will be found because it has got to be found. If that solution is the "sensitive" site in Portishead that was mentioned but not disclosed last night that may involve Section 106 money, then I imagine the town will get another school, albeit a Free School (which is what I feel will happen). Residents gave valid suggestions of possible land, even the site put aside for the railway station which was not a bad idea. Get a railway on Portbury land instead and build a new school on Portishead land. This may not be ideal but as the lady who mentioned said, children must be first priority. Another possible site is near the railway location but every time I mention it, something strange happens to my comment.

In the interim, school places have to be provided, albeit temporarily, and that was partly what last night was to discuss. What this report has neglected to mention is the Red (no go), Amber (possible) and Green (go) coding given to the current proposals. What some residents could not understand is that St Peter's was given amber for possible expansion, yet other schools were given red and certainly these were not explained fully. One lady rightly questioned the strategy behind these codes and after last night's contribution from residents, these codes may change. So red may turn to amber and possibly green even.

So the local authority, children's services etc., listened and they took a lot of flak. Cllr Gregor who chaired the meeting did a good job in keeping things running. But the questions that residents raised need to be answered. Using commercial premises in the interim seemed a no go area because conversion costs would be more than building a new school. However, the Children's Centre staff who currently occupy St Barnabas, employed by North Somerset, could surely be moved into a commercial unit leaving a purpose built school, just for now, to provide school places needed now while a permanent solution is found. At least parents would not need to leave the town.

What is clear, is that all our primary schools are in locations which experience huge traffic problems. That is not going to go away, in fact as the residential developments are concluded, the situation may well worsen. It was also clear that previous consultations have not worked - let's hope last night made an impression on those with the decision making powers and parents views will be fully taken on board.

ps Those in authority who accepted the bizarre notion given them by goodness knows who, that only older parents with older children would purchase three, four and five bedroomed houses, please do your homework next time.”

“Bernadine, Trinity are already suffering with the expansion they have already undertaken (executed years before it was supposed to have been done). Results have fallen from 90% to 70% to 56% in the most recent year.

They need to sort that problem out - it's not just about having a place for your child, it's about giving them a good education, and in that respect Trinity need to step their game up. I don't have a child at that school, but support their stance of no further expansion until they get their current house in order.”

“Well, where do we go from here? I'm pleased the High Down proposal isn't being progressed at this stage as I have two children there and it is not suitable for expansion.

However, where does that leave the children who need school places desperately? It seems to me that St Peters are next in the firing line, and no doubt parents and interested parties there are already planning their response in order to rebut any attempt to expand there (and who can blame them - they have many of the same concerns that High Down people have).

Firstly, let's blame the people responsible for this mess. The council knew when they granted permission for the village quarter how many houses would be built and have not provided sufficient infrastructure to support this new part of our community. This is a scandal.

However, blame will not help fix this mess. If money were no object, the popular view would seem to be in favour of a new school in the village quarter or the expansion of Trinity. There is no money for a new school.

Trinity, in my view, have the space to expand to meet some demand, but choose not to. Being out of the control of the local authority, the governors and diocese controlling do not want to expand and the council can't compel them. This raises some interesting questions around who should be in charge of our schools, the church or the state, but I won't go into that here! I would simply ask that those at Trinity who can make a difference to this terrible situation look at ways of accommodating the children closest to you. They are your immediate community and neighbours and they need you. All other schools in town have taken extra pupils over the last few months/years in recognition of their responsibility, now how about Trinity do the same?

Remember, they haven't expanded to meet this crisis, it was always intended that they should double in size from 210 to 420 places.”

“How can so much of the planning be carried out by people who couldn't hold down a job in the prvate sector.

All the schools referred to were built in the knowledge that they were already far too small and housing development plundered on in spite of these shortcomings. The planners couldn't even allow for expansion in their plans and now seek vast sums of our money to paper over the cracks.

How do they sleep at night or do they get their 8-hours sleep at work?”