david croft-smith says

I understood that the deal between S.A.C. and the Marr trust was that S.A.C maintained and respected Marr Collage.

David Croft-Smith,

IAN SMITH says

GET A GRIP TROON...!!!!!!!!

Is the so called head teacher a former pupil of Marr... ??? Only a former pupil or teacher from Marr would know what the history of Marr ment to the people of Troon.. Get a grip Troon, support the college, Troon would not be Troon with out the green dome of Marr College shining from a distance...

shaun mcgonigale says

I say its time for a new era in schools , ye s i think therer should be a new marr college , you could use the old one as a museum of some sorts

IAN SMITH says

Yeh yeh yeh build a new Marr, just like they did  a scottish parliament, yeh coming in at just over 400 million of tax payer money..  ugly building..!!!!! There loads of run down building i'd like to stick the MP's..  There is nothing wrong with Marr building that a good building company could'nt fix.

shaun mcgonigale says

marr college lovely building but its an accident just waiting to happen there im sure, im not saying nock the building down , but get the kids out of there before something does happens , like i said before the building could be kept as a museum of some sorts

Christopher Crawford says

I am really pleased at the commitment being shown by South Ayrshire Council to finding a resolution to the long term problems of secondary provision in Troon, but I believe that this problem is largely if not completely of the council’s own making given its long term neglect of Marr College and facilities which has been complained about for a long number of years by the local community.

When Marr was built it was constructed to a standard far beyond that required to provide a functional school. The copper dome, wood panelling, stained glass, ornate stonework, hall with full stage and pipe organ, intricate plasterwork and so on. None of this was necessary to provide a working school. This creates an environment that inspires. Its individuality promotes loyalty to its identity and the community, (and doesn't this site show this has worked), and shows that it is possible in life to achieve more than mere function. Would an all new school really achieve this? No is the answer as it would look like all the others, be built for functionality and have a lifetime of 30 years and then require demolition once again.

The existing building is an iconic structure and has lasted 80 years so far. The new one would be just like all the others and would require to be replaced in a short time. It would also destroy around half of the existing playing fields with the possibility that when the next new school is required the other half would go too. Signs of damp in the new Prestwick Academy after a few years also do not bode well for a new build.

SAC have stated that the fact that the Marr old building is listed would make the refurbishment impossible. Quote from Hywel Davies of SAC; "Historic Scotland has made it impossible to modernise the existing building to the extent that we cannot even replace the seats in the theatre". Historic Scotland have indicated they would do everything possible to support local councils / building owners to ensure refurbishment of existing listed buildings in order that they met the requirements of their intended use. They expressed surprise about the comments made above in respect to HS making it 'impossible to modernise the existing building'. HS concentrate on the exterior of the old building the entrance vestibule and main hall little or nothing is said about the rest of the interior, which strongly suggests that providing the integrity of the building is maintained suitable alterations would be permitted. Of-course many internal areas of the old school have been altered substantially already strongly indicating that this is the case. This also scotches quite clearly some assertions that there will be there will be severe and potentially very expensive limitations on internal and external adaptations.

The local MP Brian H Donahoe is of the opinion that the refurbishment option is 'unaffordable'. I believe the new build option is unaffordable both in financial and human terms.

The new school would probably be built using private finance costing the council and the local community more money in the long term while also losing control over the building.

There isn't really any factual evidence in terms of 'improved results' to support new builds from what I can see that South Ayrshire Council constantly mention.

One of the points raised by the Council at the consultation meetings is the fact that the games fields are located across the other side of a golf course and this reduces the time available for games. This is a characteristic of the existing school that has been present since it was built. If this is now such an issue given that a new school being built on part of the golf course has been considered, why could the playing fields not be moved to the part of adjacent to the existing school? Compared to Prestwick Academy pupils who have to make use of the Caledonian FC pitches which require pupils to cross a busy road to use a rented facility I cannot see how the location of the playing fields in relation to the school can really be considered to be a problem.

There is also the problem of the security of existing buildings. This could be vastly improved with enhanced security arrangements by South Ayrshire Council in agreement with Marr Trust. However this could all ready have been done if the Council had wanted to do it. Instead it is being used as a reason to close the school when they have in their hands the means by which the security problem could be reduced.

It is stated by SAC and Mr Donahoe MP that that temporary hutted classroom accommodation would be extremely damaging to the education of pupils affected by this added disruption whilst also be very costly. The pupils affected by the previous refurbishment and building do not think so.

I am also reminded of one of the participants in the Marr campaign who works as a Senior Project Manager in construction. He has refurbished major department stores in London and kept them open to the public, plus a Corporate HQ with over 3,000 staff in it without major disruption to the client or staff although some had to move around whilst works went on, so this astronomical cost regarding the decant of pupils is an exaggeration, as a good project management would easily plan the works around the College population and timetables.

I therefore cannot see that any of the arguments in favour of the new build option do not equally apply to the refurbishment of the existing school. I do see however that the drawbacks of the new build option are answered by the refurbishment of the existing school.

On additional question: Why have they not replaced the tennis courts as promised when the present extension took these away thirty years ago?

Given the results of public 'consultations' in the past carried out by Governments I do hope this is a real one and not just a pretend one like they tend to be i.e. everyone is entitled to have an opinion as long as it the one that the Council/ Government wants you to have!

shaun mcgonigale says

yes i agree the marr builing is an iconic building which not should be brought down , but we do need to be brought into the 21 st century , the builing is now an antique , and should be treated as such , like i said before , the builing could be used as a museum  showing prevoius students going back years , showing off relics  of a by gone age , this could be a  good idea , and probably , could charge a fee for tourists , just think about it , we could  be making money out of this building ,