
Brian,
Firstly thank you for responding to my email surrounding concern at your “astronomical
comments” in June's Going Out. You have now clarified some of the “mystique” around
the figures that have been banded about as in some cases these are being inflated
or deflated depending on what the person making the statement wants you to believe.
Before I make comment on some of your points I think the first thing to say is that
everyone I have spoken to wants the best educational and sporting environment for
the present and future pupils of Marr College so in relation to the people of Troon
and SAC we are together in this. The debate centres around what the best environment
actually is. As you know we firmly believe (until such time it is proven unfeasible)
that a refurbishment with no loss of playing field acreage is the preferred option
and at the last public consultation meeting on Tuesday 22nd both SAC and the present
Head Teacher were left in no doubt about the feelings of the local population as
the vast majority of nearly 300 people (young and old) voiced their support of a
refurbishment.
Let me take your points in turn:
- Regards the refurbishment costs we now have a degree of clarity on this although
I don't think that there is any talk of SAC buying both the school building and playing
fields if this option goes ahead. So, the refurbishment costs would sit at between
£26-£32 million. In addition to the Mott Macdonald report we need an alternative
opinion in order that these costs can be ratified
- You state that the layout of the accommodation is not considered by professionals
as suitable for modern teaching. This is just one opinion and this appears to differ
from the view of a number of present teachers who rate that the old building is “fit
for purpose” and just needs some TLC. The “new” extension is a different matter and
needs replaced. You can understand why many people are suspicious of new builds when
we see the state of the extension at Marr and when all around the country, flats
and buildings that were constructed as “state of the art” at the time in the 60's
and 70's are being pulled down, whilst buildings over 100 years old are now being
lovingly restored. Many academic institutions are continuing to operate out of buildings
over 100 years old without a drop in the standards and results - its the quality
of the teacher that counts although I do agree they should be given a decent environment.
I did my teacher training myself and have been involved in corporate training for
over 25 years so I know it is the quality of teacher above everything else.
- I agree with you that the listed building status is a challenge and we will be making
representation to Historic Scotland on this matter. However, it is only a challenge
and one which I believe can be overcome. At present there are too many voices of
authority saying “you can't do this” or “you can't do that” which I find unhelpful
and quite pathetic and it worries me that we have some people in public service with
this attitude. I firmly believe there are ways to overcome the supposed shortfalls
of the present College site and which can be done at less cost to the tax payer.
- The pupil decant will depend on exactly what refurbishment goes ahead and when and
there are apparently a number of situations where buildings have been renovated whilst
it “has been business as usual”. Again another situation which with some good planning
and pragmatism can be potentially resolved.
- My research tells me that £30m for a rebuild is fair and as you point out this does
not include the cost of buying the playing fields to build on. Also you fail to include
the costs of SAC buying their way out the 28 years of the lease from the Marr Trust
so unless SAC continue to pay the rent for an empty building (don’t think they can
change the use) then there are some other hidden costs to consider before totally
up the true cost of a new build on the playing fields.
- Regards the playing fields whilst the attraction of new surfaces is appealing we
intend to go down this route anyhow with the present site and there is still a huge
question mark over being able to realign the required number of pitches (with correct
dimensions) within the remaining 60% of playing surface. With exciting plans from
both Hockey and Rugby clubs to grow the numbers playing these sports any loss of
surface will be detrimental to these plans. It is my opinion that we would need to
find another site(s) to ensure that lost pitches are replaced. lf we are talking
about “not fit for purpose” buildings then the present pavilion would have to be
replaced as it is not of the standard required for 21st century sporting education.
So, lots to think about.
- Finally the Marr Trust hold all the aces at present because they could hold SAC to
their present lease thereby ensuring that their income is assured for the next 28
years at the very least - provided SAC pay up!. However, my fear is that SAC will
just go down the ‘we've no money' route and once again fail in their legal obligation
to bring the present site up to standard. Although this whole situation is a complete
mess of both the Marr Trust's and SAC's doing I do believe that with some proper
consultation, proper planning and analysis together with a “can do” attitude things
can be turned around.
The people have voiced that the preferred option is refurbishment so let's all work
together to check whether this is truly a viable option. If not, then lets work together
to ensure Plan B works (whatever that is) and that moving forward we ensure that
the incompetence involved never happens again. Perhaps there really needs to be a
legal investigation as to why the neglect and dereliction has been allowed to happen
in the first place.
Thanks for interest and whilst your view seems to differ from the majority of your
Troon and District constituents I am sure we can work together to get the best for
the people of the area.
Yours Aye,
Allan
Allan Mackintosh
20 Hunter Crescent
Troon KA10 7AH
0776 416 8989