Well according to PCEGs latest newsletter it looks like they're generally accepting the school expansion, albeit with some concerns. I would have hoped they'd have had more brains and balls.
Given the way the money-grabbing council has behaved over this matter and given the fact that the school doesn't need expansion, I'm really disappointed in PCEG.
www.pceg.org.uk/news/07/News_17_2.pdfTHE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT
PLUMSTEAD MANOR SCHOOL
In the absence of the architect, Jo Harding, the
Headmistress, stepped into the breach and outlined
the plans to us. The plans will involve Plumstead
Manor becomig a beacon school and give it’s pupils
facilities across a wide curriculum that are second to
none.
Essentially, in addition to a wholesale refurbishment
of the existing buildings, there will be three main areas
of new build.
There will be a new 6th Form centre at the North end
of the site and development of that portion of the site
will involve the permanent enclosure of the pedestrianised
section of Heavitree Road and the creation of a
new right of way at the Northern margin of the site.
The unused water reservoir behind Waverley Terrace
is to be developed for sports facilities.
Following a compulsory purchase order, the Vicarage
and the Prince Albert are to be demolished for the
creation of a new Performing Arts Centre which will
face the common.
It is this last element of the development which is of
most interest to the PCEG. The loss of the buildings,
particularly the Prince Albert, causes grave concernin some members. The final spec for the cladding of
the proposed replacement building has not been finalised
yet but we are promised full consultation.
During construction it is thought it will be necessary
to securely fence off a section of the common opposite
the school (most likely in the area of the Rugby
Club) for the storage of materials and equipment.
This would minimise disruption to pupils in continuing
education, but be a serious eyesore while it is in
place. Nick made a suggestion, , unanimously backed
by the meeting, that if a sacrifice of part of the common
were to be needed for the duration of the work,
then we would expect the developers to make some
positive and compensatory gesture once the common
is restored.
The PCEG’s response, articulated by Roger Keyse
and others, was broadly that we could all end up with
a legacy that really does justify any sacrifices. The
meeting agreed that the prospect of local theatre and
sports facilties etc with good local community access
is exciting. So we look forward to a continuing and a
genuine consultation process that engages the whole
community in the area who use and appreciate the
Common.
Our members agree that consultation should take
place at every key stage, especially when the specific
architectural proposals for the new frontages are being
considered and chosen.
A potential side-effect of the consultation so far is
that of more involvement of the school community
in the environmental care taken by the wider community
outside.
