I am writing to commend the Council on its aims to provide “new schools with a high quality teaching and learning environment with modern resources “ and to ensure that “new buildings are energy efficient and the number of places is matched with the projected rolls”.
I am writing as a concerned citizen in regard to the Council's Proposal to build new schools on a shared site at the old Harris Academy Annexe and replacing Park Place Primary, Park Place Nursery and St Joseph's Primary Schools.
Is the proposed site suitable for two primary schools and a nursery?
- I have concerns that the site is too small and does not meet minimum statutory requirements.
- I have concerns that there will not be any suitable playing fields in close proximity to the new schools.
- I have concerns in regard to access, parking and drop-off for over 625 pupils.
- I have concerns that the primary schools may be at least 3 storeys high.
- I have concerns that the nursery school may be on multiple levels.
- I have concerns in regard to the increased risks of prolonged exposure to the electric and magnetic fields emanating from the nearby electricity sub-station.
- I have concerns in regard to an environmental noise impact of the new development.
- I have concerns that the proposed site is overlooked by adjacent tenement apartments.
- I have concerns that, despite an existing and approved planning application (January 2006), there has been no activity on the site in regard to a scheme to check and remove any contamination in the land, apart from an initial ground inspection.
- I have concerns that a detailed option appraisal has not been done, or if it has, that it is not available for public inspection.
- I have concerns that I am unable to make an informed decision in regard to the proposal as there is insufficient detail available.
- I have concerns that the presented Net Present Values cannot be determined on the basis of costs supplied in the proposal and that detailed costings are not available.
- I have concerns that the option to refurbish St Joseph's and Park Place sites to extend their life by 25 years was rejected using criteria that have not been defined, namely that the option does not satisfy long-term demand (capacities and property).
- I have concerns that the option to merge Park Place and Blackness Primary Schools was not fully explored.
- I have concerns that the option to develop St Joseph's site was not even included in the council's proposal.
- I have concerns that there was no consultation during the option appraisal, despite Scottish Government official guidance on Option Appraisal.
- I have concerns that the presence of a number of teachers during the consultation meetings was intimidating and discouraged open debate.
- I have concerns that there had been no indication to parents prior to the consultation meetings that there would be a "vote" to gauge the level of support for the proposal.
- I have concerns that non-attendance at the consultation meetings will be taken as an indication of support for the proposal when there are no grounds on which to base this assumption.
- I have concerns that information about the discussion during the consultation meetings, including the list of questions raised, will not be made available until after the deadline for written representation has passed.
- I have concerns that no details on the basis for School Parent Council support have been made available.
- I have concerns that pupils from St Joseph's Primary school came home the day after the consultation meeting reporting that they would be getting a new school with ensuite toilets, huge play areas complete with swings, slides and playframes, and saying they had been told how good this would be.
- I have concerns that as the consultation process is not finished and there is no detailed plan for the schools, the setting up of these expectations in the pupils' minds is entirely inappropriate.
The electricity sub station is a difficult one. My children are already in an envoirnment which is absent of such a station....yet they well be moved to an area with potential for harm. Reseach is uncertain of the long term or if any effect on individuals however mothers instinct shouts loudly to me not to put harm where it need not be. I do not want my children next to a sub station.
ReplyDeleteMy wife and I are so pleased we heard about this site today. As a result of work, and childcare we couldn't get to any of the meetings.
ReplyDeleteFrom both being strongly in favour of the kids getting a new school, we are now exactley the opposite, until we have answers to the questions asked of the Council.
Why were we not told any this by the Council?
SHAME ON YOU ALL FOR HIDING THIS FROM US!!!!!!!!!
I think there should be a demand for another Public Consultation Meeting where a plan for the proposed new school on the Harris Annex site can be viewed. In addition, maybe this time they can properly answer some of the concerns over drop off/parking, outdoor play areas and saftey - to name but a few.
ReplyDeleteWE ARE BEING RAILROADED INTO MAKING A DECISION BASED ON THIN AIR!
Thank you for sharing this information. It will certainly assist parents in deciding objectively about the proposal from Dundee City Council. A new school is exciting however, the facts presented are very much concering.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how much of a back hander someone is getting to push this deal with the Al-Maktoum through. The Joeys site handed on a plate,they must be laughing their heads off.
ReplyDeleteEvery man and his dog knows its a done deal.I just hope the numpties in the city chambers and the education department who are going to benefit from this deal,get their just reward from the big man upstairs when their time comes!!!
As the council is now in the control of SNP, perhaps this is the best time to demand answers to all the questions that require to be answered. I'm sure if anything untoward has been going on with Labour/LibDem adminstration it will come to light now.
ReplyDeleteI just got hold of this document yesterday and was very surprised as I thought that it was already a done deal. Why have we not been informed by the school or parent council about this? Why is there so much lack of information about this whole process? Who is making decisions in behalf of the parents?
ReplyDeleteYou should check the schoolbags - letters about the meetings were sent out from the council and Parent council giving everyone a chance to have their say. I went to the meeting at St Josephs and it was a poor turnout given this strong feeling as for Park Place they had 2 parents turn up. This campaign is going to spoil it for the majority of parents who support the plans despite what this group thinks.There are other Catholic schools available if you cannot go with the majority.
ReplyDeleteHmmmm....not sure where the Catholic piece comes in - This is not about religion but about the suitability of the site. How many parents support the plans? Where is this documented?
ReplyDeleteAnonymus said at 10.26am
ReplyDelete.....there are other Catholic schools avialable, if you cannot go with the majority
1. This is not a religious issue, this is about the correct provision of suitable facilities for all of our children,Protestant,Catholic, Muslim or any other faith.
2.You are assuming that because there was a poor turn out for meetings everyone who didn't attend must be in favour. Are you for real?
Who ever is behind this, has provided me with more information than I had before. They should be getting thanked.
I don't remember reading that they are against the proposal are?
I think everyone will find this has not been kept a secret and there has been nothing hidden from the parents, the public meeting was poorly attended and it appears to be that the schools themselves are being scapegoated by cowardly people who are not campaigning openly to the council. Anonymous websites are a poor way to protest.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said at 5:52pm
ReplyDelete...Anonymous websites are a poor way to protest.
The West End Group are campagining openly directly to the Council and have had little response. The group is maintaining anonymity on the website for the sake of the children!
It is sad to think that the children would be persecuted for the actions of their parents. Do you feel that there would be such negative treatment if you were to go public?
ReplyDeleteI have read the last several entries with interest - anonymous or not I do not think that is the point. The point is that there is information that is being made avaialable - no one is being scapegoated - and it is up to parents to do what they wish with this - whether they wish to take it up with the council or not is up to them.
ReplyDeleteIf the proposal is sound and the details contributing to this well thought through, then Dundee Council should be able to justify all the information in it and how they arrived at the proposal. If this is the case, then there should be nothing to worry about and you can look forward to having your new school.
Hi, I’ve just came home to see the letter and thought I should attempt a response… here goes!
ReplyDeleteIs the proposed site suitable for two primary schools and a nursery?
• I have concerns that the site is too small and does not meet minimum statutory requirements.
A - I don’t actually think it is. I’ve just read the Health Week blogs and did what someone there suggested. I made up a ‘snazzy’ picture by copying the overheads of the 2 schools onto the new site and it looks like there is a lot of room.
• I have concerns that there will not be any suitable playing fields in close proximity to the new schools.
A - Well we don’t know that so it’s not a good idea to throw this out in the open. Yes I’m sure we’re all concerned but let’s face it, there’s very little room at the Joeys just now. The kids can only use the pitch when the teachers are there and it’s not actually part of the school, so it’s unfair to lump this in with the school.
• I have concerns in regard to access, parking and drop-off for over 625 pupils.
A - This is ‘probably’ something that the council HAVE to think of. There must be suitable access as it’s a legal requirement, so no concerns on that one from me.
• I have concerns that the primary schools may be at least 3 storeys high.
A - Again, we don’t know that and if it were would it be a big problem? The school will be built to the latest legal requirements and access will have to good.
• I have concerns that the nursery school may be on multiple levels.
A - Again, I’m not sure what the big deal is on this – sorry.
• I have concerns in regard to the increased risks of prolonged exposure to the electric and magnetic fields emanating from the nearby electricity sub-station.
A - Was this not discussed at the meeting and taken on board. This is a valid concern and one that needs to be looked into, I agree.
• I have concerns in regard to an environmental noise impact of the new development.
A - Sorry, I’m not sure where this one is going
• I have concerns that the proposed site is overlooked by adjacent tenement apartments.
A - Sorry but I sort of take offence at this one. A lot of honest, hard working people live in ‘tenements’. I can’t see what problem this would be. If the point you’re trying to make is about ‘certain’ people overlooking the school, then you can get that anywhere. They don’t have to live in tenements!!
• I have concerns that, despite an existing and approved planning application (January 2006), there has been no activity on the site in regard to a scheme to check and remove any contamination in the land, apart from an initial ground inspection.
A - Fair point – it should be checked out.
Were the options fully and fairly appraised?
• I have concerns that a detailed option appraisal has not been done, or if it has, that it is not available for public inspection.
A - I think we have to trust the people in the ‘know’ – the people that are experts on our children’s education. No-one knows the details of every decision made but we have to trust people to do their jobs. It would be interesting to hear the pupils’ views of new schools around the city. I can’t remember hearing anything bad.
• I have concerns that I am unable to make an informed decision in regard to the proposal as there is insufficient detail available.
A - I think the crux of it here is it’s a cracking opportunity for all our children to be educated in a brand new, state of the art, purpose built school. The teachers will be the same, the ethos will be the same and the school grounds as I mentioned above are actually bigger that what we have right now.
• I have concerns that the presented Net Present Values cannot be determined on the basis of costs supplied in the proposal and that detailed costings are not available.
A - Sorry, can’t comment on this one!
• I have concerns that the option to refurbish St Joseph's and Park Place sites to extend their life by 25 years was rejected using criteria that have not been defined, namely that the option does not satisfy long-term demand (capacities and property).
A - I think the bottom line is the school is so old it would cost too much to keep going. I was in at Parent’s Night the other week and I heard teachers saying simple things like they couldn’t turn the heating off in the summer and they couldn’t turn it up in the Winter! It’s just basics really… in my mind anyway.
• I have concerns that the option to merge Park Place and Blackness Primary Schools was not fully explored.
A - I think as I mentioned above it’s just a no go.
• I have concerns that the option to develop St Joseph's site was not even included in the council's proposal.
A - Again, most certainly too expensive. And I’m not too sure what we would have ended up with any, even if £10M was spent on it. The space would stay the same, the classes would stay the same – there is very little they can do with it.
Is the consultation process being conducted properly?
• I have concerns that there was no consultation during the option appraisal, despite Scottish Government official guidance on Option Appraisal.
• I have concerns that the presence of a number of teachers during the consultation meetings was intimidating and discouraged open debate.
A – I’m not too sure why this is intimidating really. Do you mean parents that were teachers or teachers from the school itself? I personally think they are in the best position to speak as they have experience on a day to day basis of working and ‘living’ in a school.
• I have concerns that there had been no indication to parents prior to the consultation meetings that there would be a "vote" to gauge the level of support for the proposal.
A - It wasn’t really a ‘vote’. I think it was more a show of hands.
• I have concerns that non-attendance at the consultation meetings will be taken as an indication of support for the proposal when there are no grounds on which to base this assumption.
A - I’m sure all the parents got the letter and if they were concerned I’m sure they would have turned up and said their piece. Apathy is always a sign that it’s not as big as deal as some of us are trying to make out – admittedly there are exceptions on non attendance on both sides.
• I have concerns that information about the discussion during the consultation meetings, including the list of questions raised, will not be made available until after the deadline for written representation has passed.
A – I think you could push for this one.
• I have concerns that no details on the basis for School Parent Council support have been made available.
Reps from the council spoke and summarized their meeting. I guess they would have been told the same as us.
• I have concerns that pupils from St Joseph's Primary school came home the day after the consultation meeting reporting that they would be getting a new school with ensuite toilets, huge play areas complete with swings, slides and playframes, and saying they had been told how good this would be.
A - Maybe they will – and if they do, great!! And if they don’t then they don’t lose anything as the Joeys have no swings !
• I have concerns that as the consultation process is not finished and there is no detailed plan for the schools, the setting up of these expectations in the pupils' minds is entirely inappropriate.
A - They’ll be basing it on what other new schools have.
Please, let’s not spoil it for our kids. It’s a fantastic opportunity for them to be educated in a brand new school with brand new equipment by the teachers we all know are fantastic. It would be so sad if we deprived our children of that opportunity. I really can’t see any problems with the move. Let’s get facts before we go on the offensive. No more ‘is it trues’ and the like. Please!!!
The point being......give me answers to the questions posed in that document. I really dont care who wrote them or for whatever motive, the point is the children and only them...answer the questions and surely those who sought out the information should be thanked for caring enough to do something on their behalf. If there is nothing to worry about then answer the questions posed.
ReplyDeleteActually the meeting had a great turnout. I spoke to the members of the committee afterwards who were pleased with such a turnout and in their experience its normally alot less! The show of hands looked evenly spread, so where are the numbers being plucked from, can someone show me some proof of majority instead of hearsay!
ReplyDeleteOh my goodness. I've just read the letter and thought I'd have a wee peek at the website. I think its important that everyone is entitled to voice their opinion. That is everyone's right. Bottom line is, those who have issues should take them forward. I'm not really in favour of letters being given to my kid's granny in the playground which raised stress levels about the proposals. If people feel that strongly about the proposals or have concerns surely they should have acted on them before now? Attended the meetings? Written to the relevant people? Its important to work on the facts here. I trust the school and the catholic church that this is the best move for my child. These are the people dealing with things on a day to day basis. Please don't scare people with comments about drugs and paedophiles. Stick to the facts and let people make up their own minds. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteI echo the sentiments of one of the parents who commented above - don't spoil it for the majority! Jobs will be created, Dundee will get another new school! Think about it... take your children somewhere else if you're not happy... Is it the teachers you like? If so, they'll still be there. Seriously all this talk is just frightening people. It's all hearsay. Go to the council - talk to them. Don't canvas people in the street with your half baked ideas. Personally, I'm excited about the prospect of my son going to a new school - and so is he! And that's what counts!
ReplyDeleteIf the people above who think that the document is not based on facts, please read it again and look at the links to where this information has been taken from. All the 'half baked ideas' are actually from official Government Websites. Did the proposal mention any of these issues and how they were going to address these? On drug users and Sexual Offenders - again, fact and not hearsay. How can people stick to the facts if the only information availabe are from the proposal and this is limited. When asked for more information, Dundee City Council cannot offer more or if they do, each piece of information contradicts the other.
ReplyDeleteIf there really are sexual offenders and drug users I certainly do not wish for my children to be in that area. Would you put your child near a fire with the knowledge that he/she may get burned?
Not adverse to having a new school, or a combined site - that is not an issue. I just want to make sure that the site is suitable, compliant and functional for parents - which from the information available have no basis for folk to make a good decision.
• I have concerns that the site is too small and does not meet minimum statutory requirements.
ReplyDeleteA - I don’t actually think it is. I’ve just read the Health Week blogs and did what someone there suggested. I made up a ‘snazzy’ picture by copying the overheads of the 2 schools onto the new site and it looks like there is a lot of room.
RESPONSE: If you want to measure the sites for yourself a little more accurately, try using Google Planimeter. The calculations showing that the proposed site is less than regulation size were based on the council’s estimate of 1.27 hectares. Please read the Questions and Concerns document again.
• I have concerns that there will not be any suitable playing fields in close proximity to the new schools.
A - Well we don’t know that so it’s not a good idea to throw this out in the open. Yes I’m sure we’re all concerned but let’s face it, there’s very little room at the Joeys just now. The kids can only use the pitch when the teachers are there and it’s not actually part of the school, so it’s unfair to lump this in with the school.
RESPONSE: The council has confirmed that there will be no playing field at the new site. The new site will have less room per pupil than St Josephs since it will have to also accommodate a second school and a nursery. Please read the SportsScotland guidance and the Scottish Government regulations as cited in the Questions and Concerns document.
• I have concerns in regard to access, parking and drop-off for over 625 pupils.
A - This is ‘probably’ something that the council HAVE to think of. There must be suitable access as it’s a legal requirement, so no concerns on that one from me.
RESPONSE: It is certainly something the council has to think of. Since you know of the legal requirements, please can you share these with us.
• I have concerns that the primary schools may be at least 3 storeys high.
A - Again, we don’t know that and if it were would it be a big problem? The school will be built to the latest legal requirements and access will have to good.
RESPONSE: Gillian Ross Pond has stated that the schools are likely to be 3 storeys. Jim Collins implied it might be more. It might be legal but it’s not ideal is it?
• I have concerns in regard to an environmental noise impact of the new development.
?A - Sorry, I’m not sure where this one is going
RESPONSE: The point here was that there is a noise impact from the substation.
• I have concerns that the proposed site is overlooked by adjacent tenement apartments.
A - Sorry but I sort of take offence at this one. A lot of honest, hard working people live in ‘tenements’. I can’t see what problem this would be. If the point you’re trying to make is about ‘certain’ people overlooking the school, then you can get that anywhere. They don’t have to live in tenements!!
RESPONSE: You miss the point. They could be millionaires’ penthouses and the concern would be the same. The point is that there are multiple residences overlooking the play areas. St Josephs on the other hand is not overlooked.
• I have concerns that a detailed option appraisal has not been done, or if it has, that it is not available for public inspection.
A - I think we have to trust the people in the ‘know’ – the people that are experts on our children’s education. No-one knows the details of every decision made but we have to trust people to do their jobs. It would be interesting to hear the pupils’ views of new schools around the city. I can’t remember hearing anything bad.
RESPONSE: What then is a consultation process for?
• I have concerns that I am unable to make an informed decision in regard to the proposal as there is insufficient detail available.
A - I think the crux of it here is it’s a cracking opportunity for all our children to be educated in a brand new, state of the art, purpose built school. The teachers will be the same, the ethos will be the same and the school grounds as I mentioned above are actually bigger that what we have right now.
RESPONSE: You mean purpose built schools (plural). We would all like a brand new, state of the art, purpose built environment for the children. We would all like the same teachers (perhaps more of them). The grounds per school will definitely be smaller. The new site is 1.27 hectares (including a listed building, protected trees and steep slope to the north). The St Joseph’s site is similar in size and is occupied by a single school.
• I have concerns that the option to refurbish St Joseph's and Park Place sites to extend their life by 25 years was rejected using criteria that have not been defined, namely that the option does not satisfy long-term demand (capacities and property).
A - I think the bottom line is the school is so old it would cost too much to keep going. I was in at Parent’s Night the other week and I heard teachers saying simple things like they couldn’t turn the heating off in the summer and they couldn’t turn it up in the Winter! It’s just basics really… in my mind anyway.
RESPONSE: The option to refurbish is considerably cheaper by the council’s own calculations (see the Report to the Education Committtee). Presumably that costing included maintaining a functioning heating system.
• I have concerns that the option to merge Park Place and Blackness Primary Schools was not fully explored.
A - I think as I mentioned above it’s just a no go.
RESPONSE: Where above?
• I have concerns that the option to develop St Joseph's site was not even included in the council's proposal.
A - Again, most certainly too expensive. And I’m not too sure what we would have ended up with any, even if £10M was spent on it. The space would stay the same, the classes would stay the same – there is very little they can do with it.
RESPONSE: No costs have been made available by the council for developing the St Joseph’s site (if they were ever calculated). Please refer us to the costing you have! What could be done on the proposed site that couldn’t be done on the St Joseph’s site?
• I have concerns that there was no consultation during the option appraisal, despite Scottish Government official guidance on Option Appraisal.
• I have concerns that the presence of a number of teachers during the consultation meetings was intimidating and discouraged open debate.
A – I’m not too sure why this is intimidating really. Do you mean parents that were teachers or teachers from the school itself? I personally think they are in the best position to speak as they have experience on a day to day basis of working and ‘living’ in a school.
RESPONSE: Teachers from the school itself. We’d love to hear teachers give their reasons and persuade us this proposal should be supported. Only the head teacher and deputy head spoke at the meeting.
• I have concerns that there had been no indication to parents prior to the consultation meetings that there would be a "vote" to gauge the level of support for the proposal.
A - It wasn’t really a ‘vote’. I think it was more a show of hands.
RESPONSE: Yes, it was not a genuine vote since no count was taken. Nevertheless it is being used by some to argue that there is majority support, despite the fact that the show of hands was very mixed when people were asked whether they supported the proposal.
• I have concerns that non-attendance at the consultation meetings will be taken as an indication of support for the proposal when there are no grounds on which to base this assumption.
A - I’m sure all the parents got the letter and if they were concerned I’m sure they would have turned up and said their piece. Apathy is always a sign that it’s not as big as deal as some of us are trying to make out – admittedly there are exceptions on non attendance on both sides.
RESPONSE: There are many reasons why parents of young children cannot attend 7pm meetings! Your answer reinforces the concern that absence is taken to mean support. All would agree that the schools we build for future generations are a very big deal.
• I have concerns that information about the discussion during the consultation meetings, including the list of questions raised, will not be made available until after the deadline for written representation has passed.
A – I think you could push for this one.
RESPONSE: This has been raised at the highest level in the council and so far no record of the meetings has been made available.
• I have concerns that no details on the basis for School Parent Council support have been made available.
Reps from the council spoke and summarized their meeting. I guess they would have been told the same as us.
RESPONSE: Apparently there is no written record of this statutory meeting with the Parent Council, nor was there a written agenda, nor were some members present (and their representatives were not allowed to attend). Presumably this is why you are left to “guess”.
• I have concerns that pupils from St Joseph's Primary school came home the day after the consultation meeting reporting that they would be getting a new school with ensuite toilets, huge play areas complete with swings, slides and playframes, and saying they had been told how good this would be.
!?A - Maybe they will – and if they do, great!! And if they don’t then they don’t lose anything as the Joeys have no swings
• I have concerns that as the consultation process is not finished and there is no detailed plan for the schools, the setting up of these expectations in the pupils' minds is entirely inappropriate.
A - They’ll be basing it on what other new schools have.
RESPONSE: Do you think it is ethical to set up such expectations in young children’s minds when there is a consultation process ongoing and there are no detailed plans (certainly none that specify swings), and without checking or at least telling parents first? Of course you are right that it would be great to have such things.
Please, let’s not spoil it for our kids. It’s a fantastic opportunity for them to be educated in a brand new school with brand new equipment by the teachers we all know are fantastic. It would be so sad if we deprived our children of that opportunity. I really can’t see any problems with the move. Let’s get facts before we go on the offensive. No more ‘is it trues’ and the like. Please!!
RESPONSE: All would dearly love a new school with brand new equipment and the same teachers. The intent is not to deprive anyone of that. This is not an offensive. The parents are doing what you suggest in your answer: getting the facts. So few facts were made available that we are duty bound as parents to engage with this consultation, and ask questions in order to establish the facts. “Is it true?” is one way to pose such a question of the council. We hope to get answers sometime soon. Please read the Questions and Concerns document. Please elaborate on why this is a fantastic opportunity in the light of the questions and concerns therein. It would be a relief if you could alleviate our concerns.
I think all of us parents from st.Josephs need to get together and talk.The document does seem tight with sound arguements and evidence given to proove statements and this is why is am taking the drug users (if its true) seriously.So it is all up to them to proove if such people would be overlooking a new site? I feel as I am a 'mummy' it is my job to take responsibility for my kiddies and this means checking all aspects of their welfare carefully, it is nice to feel we can trust the folk in the jobs to do the best by the littleones. But that does not always mean that the best happens. I have lived long enough to know that when it comes to looking after my intersts no one is going to be more concerned or careful than myself-particularly when it comes to my kiddies. Again lets all pull together for the love of our kids and lets get the information that quite rightly we should all have. Can the parent council organise this or something the like and let us know when where etc. Please lets speak kindly to and of eachother too. I read the document and I did not feel it was out to 'scaremonger'. I saw it was there to let me know some things. For that am grateful. I would have been very upset getting that document when all would have been taken out of my hands and decided for me. I did not manage to make the meeting at St. Josephs because the kiddies grandparents were away on hols and I did not push hard enough to arrange for a sitter after that. I see that error now. I feel isolated and would like to talk to parents about the pros and cons. Actually has anyone got a list of the pros for me to consider too. Let us all unite for the kiddies.
ReplyDeleteI would like to echo the sentiments of the above comment - we all, as parents want what's best for our children.
ReplyDeleteIf difficult questions need to be asked then I'm glad they are being asked before it's too late. I want my child to have all that a new school environment has to offer but I want it to be better than what she has now. I did manage to attend one of the meetings and one of the main things that stuck me was that there wasn't even a sketch available to help get a feel for what this new school would look like on the proposed site. Maybe this is something that could be addressed by the council to alleviate some concerns and help us move forward.
I read the thread and say the mention of Google Planimeter, so hear goes :-
ReplyDeleteLogie (MINUS the slope where the trees are) - 1.101e+4 m²
St josephs (without pitch and car park) - 4177 m²
Park Place - 5238 m²
Nursery - 418.8 m²
pitch - 914.7 m²
Car Park @ St Josephs - 1390 m²
So adding all this up:
+ the 2 schools and nursery: 9833 m² (1177 m² LESS than Logie)
+ the 2 schools, nursery plus the pitch at St Josephs: 1.074e+4 m² (270 m² LESS than Logie)
+ the 2 schools, nursery, pitch and cark park: 1.213e+4 m² (112 m² more than Logie)
Taking into account massive car parking space and the all weather pitch, the new site is around 100 m² smaller if we discount the 'tree-ed' area, but the kids can't use the pitch - my son is in P2 and has used it 3 or 4 times during school time in 2 years! It is outside the school grounds and not even part of the school! Stop suggesting the Joeys has more space than it does. The site is not too small. Design considerations will utilize the space even better than these calculation.
If you have any issues please go to the council with them. Don't start drumming up a vigilante movement based on your views. For all we know all these anonymous views could be from the same person (I commented on my son being excited earlier just to clarify!) - not sure this approach is the most bullet proof.
One point: I live in one of those 'tenements' you loathe and I found your comments deeply offensive.
I find the comments about the sex offenders and the tenements deeply offensive too and agree that this MINORITY should go to the council and not intimidate in the school playground.
ReplyDeleteAll the comments about the size of the whole Joeys site versus the Logie are daft.
ReplyDeleteI think the point is that both appear to be way too small for all 3 schools car parks, play areas etc etc.
I don't know about it being a minority but the chap who handed me the document was not in the school playground.He was also very polite, and only asked me to take the time to read it.
Hi there, this is for the 11.39 individual. You sound so angry. Are you feeling 'deeply offensive' that sex offenders might be overlooking the new playground or that they are housed in tenements? Itis not clear that these individuals are near the site and it would appear that it will be investigated. It upsets me that you felt intimidated in the school playground! Please let us all know what happened to allow you to feel so upset in the yard.
ReplyDeleteThere are 4 people who are intimidating and badgering parents in the playground... most of the parents know who you are too... you should be ashamed of yourselves for organising such a campaign and upsetting a lot of parents.
ReplyDeleteSeriously, get a grip - please, please, choose another school. This nonsense is not needed. The teachers will be the same for heaven's sake. Do you have some emotional attachment with the school? With the church? I go to the Joey's almost every week and could count on 2 hands how many parents take their children. If that's the issue St. Ninians is just up the road - the church is right beside it! It's soooo hypocritical)...
(BTW, I don't think the '11.39' person didn't sound angry in the slightest.)
Oh, how grammatically incorrect of me - I meant to say "I don't think the 11.39 person sounded angry in the slightest". Sorry for any confusion caused :) !
ReplyDeleteAnd to clarify not all 4 are badgering people!! But at least one is and is beginning to scare a few people.... good campaign guys. You should be proud of yourselves.
I bring my daughter to school every morning and pick her up in the afternoon and I must say have not seen anyone badgering or scaremongering? Last Tuesday there were a couple of parents handing out leaflets and they were both forcing people to take them. I am not sure why it is being seen as a campaign as I do like knowing what is out there and if this is one way of knowing, then I am happy to receive any information available.
ReplyDeleteIf a document that provides all the positives of a new school is handed out in the school playground, will this be also considered as badgering?
I personally will go with whatever the decision is so it does not matter to me if there is a new school built or not. I will handle whatever the outcome will be. I see both sides of the coin and people should just respect the views that are being shared from both sides.
From what I see, the document does pose some questions and there could be a lot of debate if these are true or not, factual or made up - however, to these parents, these are genuine concerns that they wanted to share - so if it does not concern you, then you do not need to comment at all.
My error - I just read through what I posted and what I meant is that the 2 parents that were handing out the leaflets and they were both NOT forcing people to take them.
ReplyDeleteIt most certainly does concern me. I too am of the opinion that these views need to aired, but the individuals in question are not taking their concerns to the council. They are asking people to write to their councillors and to the education department to protest without knowing the facts. It's a case of putting the horse before the cart here and drumming up panic, talking about sex offenders and power stations and lack of space (a point touched on above). I have had the badgering first hand and know of others that have had the same. It's a shocking way to go about things. That's my point - I'm up for free speech 'n' all, but don't confuse this with propaganda.
ReplyDeleteFor Anonymous 5:09 - can you kindly describe or define what badgering is? Badgering to me is forcing an opinion down ones throat? And if you have a problem with this then why don't you tell the person to stop?
ReplyDeleteI am very intereseted in having a conversation with Anonymous 5:09 - I hope you do not mind? If you have a problem with people approaching the council without knowing the facts (although the facts are all in the links provided), is it not the same accepting things as they are presented without knowing the facts too? Until we have proper facts and information - then how can we make an informed decision. Putting the horse befoer the cart is what the council has done - we have a site and we will put three schools - but we still do not know how we will do it. We will bring in a traffic assessment officer but do not know what the report will be on making the streets accessible. But as Jim Collins mentioned, the acquisition will happen. We will have a consultation period but the acquisition will happen. Is this not putting the horse before the cart too? Interested in knowing your thoughts.
ReplyDeleteWhat I found amusing about the Evening Telegraph article is the assertion that your members were not scaremongering about paedophiles and drug addict. Someone needs to! Last year I caught 4 scab-ridden junkies stopping a young child in Milnbank Rd for her pennies. The Housing Associations have filled this area with drug-addicts and those with severe mental health and social problems then turned their backs on the consequences to our community. As you know there is an asbo hostel and a homeless unit within a stones-throw of the annexe site. I wrote to the then incumbent labour first minister (who lived in a leafy suburb) asking him to act for the sake of local children. Apparently I did not grasp his higher purpose which was to promote equality though not in his back-yard, obviously. I have been told that paedophiles from all over Scotland are rehoused in Dundee. I'd like a truthful statement from the council on this matter.
ReplyDeleteIs badgering and the such really going to be the focus. Please blog in about-facts. Lets not get off the track here and lets too keep personal opinion of individuals out of the issue. This is usually done as a clouding tactic. Discuss the topics raised and give rational and where possible objective arguements and with at little emotional opinion as one can. Even when and I do have varied oponion to others I do not feel the right to put them down for it. It is a free country and one of the freedoms is the freedom of thought and speech. Let these parents be in peace. They have brought issues to light. Debate on them and not the persons. I believe this is how a society like ours is supposed to function.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to echo the opinion of the person above that yes, everyone is entitled to an opinion. I was at the meeting and made my feelings known. I am all for the new school and recognise that although it would be nice to remain on the present site, its just not going to happen. My worry is if this falls through and a merger with Park place/Blackness happens instead then St. Josephs could be moved into the Blackness Site and this would be a disaster. I'm not commenting on the school or staff at Blackness but the size of the playground. If the council has to sell St. Josephs to make money for a new school, I'd want my child to get a new school.... not a different one. I took the liberty of doing a bit of looking around St. Josephs at parents night and honestly the toilets, the gym hall. They are ok but I'd far rather my child had state of the art facilities. I have a friend who works in one of the new schools and although they were apprehensive before moving - now they don't look back. The gym hall is huge, with electric basketball nets and a facility for splitting the hall into sections so two classes can be in at one time and still have masses of space. Also, security is tight with staff having to swipe into areas of the school and internal doors being locked down during class time ensuring only those who should be, are allowed in. I'm presuming the new school would be built to such a spec.Although the school is on levels it has posed no problems as the staff have worked together well to organise movement around the school safely. We know we have a good school in St. Josephs. What makes it good are the staff and the care and guidance they give my kids. What makes it great are the staff and great facilities.Everyone seems to be supporting a new school and if the only way we can have that is by moving up the road then so be it in my opinion. The comment about drug addicts and sex offenders I think was a little unnecessary. We all know that Dundee is rife with this problem and its across all areas/social background. Of course its a concern but I think its a different issue.
ReplyDeleteSorry, I did the last comment but I meant to say that its important the council get all views. I think parents who are in favour also need to contact Gillian Ross Pond. Don't presume that only people who are concerned should get in touch. We all have a responsibility to make our views known to the council. If you don't act - you can't moan. Thats the motto I always give my kids!
ReplyDeleteI thought the option to put Blackness and Park Place school and nursery was discounted because they couldn't find a site big enough to accomodate them all. I assume Blackness must have a higher pupil number compared to St. Joseph's. So how can this be an real option if this proposal falls through?
ReplyDeleteI was under the impression both school have similar roles. I could be wrong. Its just a personal opinion. I'll save them for Miss Ross Pond in future.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 6.55 is spot on.
ReplyDeleteI have lived in Rosefield Street for 5 years. This area has gone "doon the bog" in recent times.
Crackheads, coke heads, pill poperz, methheads, skitzos, freaks, theives and minkz, but it's no diffrent to other areas in the town.
The kids will be safer on the joeys site or at Park Place, coz it not on a main drag, where these welfare grabbing gadgies wonder about. And believe me, the locals are well aware of this as are the Housing Associations and probation officers, etc,etc. Scaremongering my a-se, the TULLY WAS SPOT ON.
As for the school great idea, not sure the LOGIE SITE is big enough, pretty convincing argument in the handout.
Can anybody shoot holes in there figures, coz if you can, the Westenders arguments a-se goes" oot the windee" as we say in Dundee, but mibee no the Westend!!!!!!!!
1 0 Scotland, one of the best posts on here,
ReplyDeleteoh and Smelling of Roses.
Quality post too
Anonymous 2.24pm
ReplyDeleteI'm one of two people who have handed out leaflets, not ONE OF FOUR, and as for badgering and intimadating parents in the playground.... you bend the truth. Not one single leaflet was handed out within the school playground, and no-one was forced, and only one person a (teacher) did not want to take one.
As for the "atleast one is begining to scare people" ...that's out of order and you know it.
I'm not too worried if people see me, talk about me, or dislike my opinion or me for that matter.Choosing to do this was difficult,IT WAS NOT DONE ON THE SPUR OF THE MOMENT.
I am not doing this for a laugh. "This nonsense is not needed" you say.
If you think parents trying to establish the facts, and get THE BEST POSSIBLE SCHOOL for all of our children is not needed, then that's up to you. Don't make things up, especially if it's regarding individuals.
As you seem to know who I am,maybe you would like to introduce yourself to me tommorow if you see me, and you can expand on who if anyone I have scared, and I will only be too happy to apologise.
For anonymous 7:28 I am curious about your statment that the topic of drug addicts is a different issue. Why? If you had the money to buy a brand new house with a garden that backed into an area that was known to house drug users will you seriously but this house? Will you be comfortable for your 2 little children to play out in the back garden alone? The point is that if this is true and parents know that this is the case for the Logie site - then why not look for another site? Where there are drug users, there are drug pushers. Will the council invest in a state of the art system that will prevent used needles from being thrown into the yard?
ReplyDeleteIf the new school does push through in the Logie Site, the Council should commit to providing the security system you have described above and more.
Imagine feeling like a prisoner in your own school because Dundee City Council will have to make sure of the safety of the children at the Logies site. This is not an issue today at Park Place and St. Joseph's because of where they are located.
ReplyDeleteI have read the documents on the proposals for 2 new schools and a nursey in grounds that are near a electricity substation, this is factual information as reported in the evening telegraph on 31 march 2009. This concerns me greatly as the welfare of children should be uppermost in all parents agenda. I truelly believe that until all the FACTS are established no schools or nursery no matter how new and state of the art should be built. A meeting should be set up urgently to discuss all matters and taken extremly seriously before any decisions are made. As a parent this deeply upsets me that all that seems to matter is having a brand new school. what about the information supplied that there is not enough space, as the document states the requirements needed per child (see scottish goverment website) and this new site does not meet these requirements. would anyone looking to buy a lovely new home want theyre children playing in the garden near a housing estate where ex-prisoners and drug addicts live I certainly wouldn't. I ask myself what is going on in the world today when no-ones seems to care anymore, our children are the future and we as the parents are responsible for providing them with the very very best we can. lets build a wonderful new school oh shit i forgot there was a substation next door, who would you feel if you,re child became sick, oh i never thought about that when putting my child in a 10.3 million school silly me. we all have a right to free speech and should fight and never give up on what we believe in.
ReplyDeleteThis is utter bonkers. You are all starting to sound like fanatics! Every street in every town may or may not have 'junkies' and 'sex offenders' - you arguments are based on unfounded prejudices and do nothing to further your 'cause'. All this is doing is making you look less and less credible. It's an inner city school for heaven's sake!! if you want to be certain of no minkz or gadgies as you so eloquently put it, move your children out to a rural village school.
ReplyDeleteOne final point - be careful what you wish for... Blackness Primary may well be the next stop for St. Joseph's if it's not Logie. The Joeys will be sold and schools will be relocated - school numbers and running costs dictate this - it's undeniable. You are not going to stop this happening. But what you may do is force the staff and pupils of St. Josephs into a smaller school with even less outdoor play area...
Maybe someone should have thought this one through first...
RE the Sub Station - has anyone spoken to Hydro Electric re the future of this? Also, i understood that there are new student flats between the Logie site and the sub station. Dont want to be negative but dont want you wasting time by putting forward an argument that can easily be shot down.
ReplyDeleteTo anonynous 1:17 and 1:20. There is no cause or no arguments as you are making it out to be - just simple questions posed to Dundee City Council. Again, the questions are based on regulations and information that has been provided from the web and other sources (the links which have all been outlined in the document to ensure that this is backed up). If Dundee City Council comes back with responses to these and can address these, then so be it and all should go well and the proposal accepted. There is no problem with this at all.
ReplyDeletePeople are entitled to information - you have to trust them to make the right judgement. If they find it is bonkers then we have to respect that. If it is something close to their heart and wish to bring this up then it should be the same.
No camps, no arguments, no causes - just simple questions.
On Blackness, do you more information about this or facts behind this statement? Please do share this so that clarity may also be requested from the Council about this.
hi casey here in reply to 1.20pm message interesting about the block of flats will the flats get sick first then do u know about the sub station would be interesting to find out. flats being in front of a substation dont stop it doing damage. do you think the school will have a state of the art hospital to go with the fancy school if my child gets leukamia or will the council sign a document saying they will give out compensation.in response to 1.17pm no idea what a minkz is and not prejudice at all. does not being prejudice mean i want to hang about with them.
ReplyDeleteAt one of the consultation meetings Jim Collins (Director of Education)was asked very specifically - what would happen if for some reason this proposal fell thro? His answer was VERY clear - He said that they would have to start looking for another site. There was NO mention of St. Joseph's or any other school being shuffled around.
ReplyDeleteThis is not hersay or rumour.
You don't need to be a rocket scientist to work out what will happen if Logie doesn't go through. The council CANNOT afford to buy land AND build a new school. They can only afford this because they are doing a deal with the Joeys land. If they need to get their budgets under control and look to improve the schooling stock in the city then they will go ahead with Logie and can only do that if they don't have to pay for the land. The Joeys will go and Blackness will be the next port of call. It's honestly not that difficult to understand!
ReplyDeleteThe only real thing that I can see here which might be an issue would be the sub station. Looking through the threads it looks like space wise it's no worse than what is available at the moment (it was suggested it might even be better - but I'm no expert on this!), the sex offenders, drug addicts pushers, ex-prisoners etc etc etc is just silly and not worth commenting on. So really it's the sub station which is the only area, I agree and most others would too, that has to be addressed. But this can easily be checked out and must have been checked out if, as an earlier poster said, a student residents is nearby.
The arguments you are going public with are very lightweight and can be check out easily by the council and could have been gleemed by going directly to them in a diplomatic manner. I'm fearful that if the same sledge hammer tactics are employed with the council they COULD turn round and say, "You know what? We can't be bothered." If that happened, best case for Dundee, the school still goes ahead, jobs are created, the community gets a new school that can be used by the west end and 2 schools (Park Place and Blackness) get a new home. Worst case, they abandon everything and 5 years down the line we've got 2 ageing schools and one hugely under capacity school bleeding the council dry of money. You can say goodbye to your SportsScotland guidelines on outdoor space if that happens.
Just be careful you don't mess it up for everyone...
Apologies "will happen if Logie doesn't go through" should have read "will happen if the Joeys move doesn't go through".
ReplyDeleteFor anynymous 5:16 - if Dundee Council wishes to go ahead because they have think that the posted ocument has no bearing then that is their decision.
ReplyDeleteOn the messing it up for everyone statement - the decision will not be made by the parents but by 34 individuals in the Council.
Their job is to look at the the process used in putting the proposal together, the thouroughness of this, the options explored and if they adhere to all the regulations of the Scottish Government.
The document is questioning whether the proposal is compliant with all of these. If yes, again, nothing to worry about. If not, then the politicians will have to take a step back and put in another proposal that will have to be compliant with Scottish Law.
You are entitled to your own opinions about all the items listed in the document. You have to acknowledge and respect that what may not be important to you as a parent may be for somebody else, and vice-versa. That is waht is great about a democratic society. Have faith in it because those 34 people will make the right decision, whatever this may be.
Annon 3.41
ReplyDeleteIf you listened to Jim Collins(don't know if you have), he has said that the deal to exchange LOGIE for the land at Bellfield WILL HAPPEN, AND NOTHING WILL STOP IT.
The Joeys site is not in the equation in relation to this deal, apart from adding to the 3million extra that the council needs to complete the 3 schools if they sell to AMI.
Has nobody thought, that this gives the council two sites to develop all 4 schools in the West end, if they don't flog the Joeys.
If PP and the Blackness sites were sold, how much would they raise?
They need 10 million for 3 schools, so say 14 tops for 4 schools.
It's not a huge gap in funding to fill is it ?
They keep saying we don't have the land, we need to sell the Joeys, blah blah.
It's not rocket science, 4 schools needed, two sites available.
Logie could have two new schools, joeys could have 2 new schools.
Everybody benefits, everyone get the facilities they and the West End deserve, no-one is denied anything.
Problem solved.
hi it is casey here i am shocked and stunned u dont regard drug pushers , sex offenders important and just silly , what is important then?
ReplyDeletecasey - I don't think that was the point that was trying to be made. Drug pushers and sex offenders are not silly. I think it's the ramblings on this page are silly. Having said that, this is my first look and it's very entertaining. Everyone started off talking about drug addicts and ex-prisoners. Now it's moved on to pushers (I might add that unfortunately pushers would more likely live in big houses) and sex offenders. Here's a thought, maybe the Bogie Man lives in Peddie Street... you should suggest that one to the council!
ReplyDeleteto instant karma... sorry but I'm not getting the maths. Gillian Ross Pond said that with out the sale of St. Josephs it was a non starter. If it costs over £10m to build 2 schools and a nursery, it will not cost a mere £4M extra to build another. Economies of scale. Jim Collins also said that they could not build on the Joeys site while the original school was there. It was just unfeasable. So there is no alternative to the selling of the land. And to your point about a huge gap in funding. £4m is a heck of a lot of money in any time, especially in a credit crunch.
ReplyDeleteI hope there's not some kind of hidden agenda with the possibility of the school moving 550 metres away from the church (I've measured it). Or sharing with Park Place. I'll wait to be swifty knocked down on this one, even though both were brought up at the meeting.
I'm a parent of 3 children who attend Blackness.
ReplyDeleteThought I'd check this out for a nosey, after the Tele articles plus the letters page tonight.
I have read all the posts,and the people who are bleeting with stuff like "we'll get moved to Blackness" make my blood boil.
I thought you Catholics were supposed to be caring etc etc. Selfish is not the word, hypocrits more like.
We want a new school, we want a new school, screw the rest of the West end, coz we're ok ta very much.
Judging by most of you, you want it no matter what issues there might be with Logie.
Have you never thought about the greater good, rather than yourselfs?
You're only agreeing to a merger out of self intrest too. You're sh-tting it, incase you get closed down, and you don't have a catholic school atall.
Panic sets in, and you sell yourselfs.
Did Judas not do the same?
Unlike him, you are probably so shallow, you'll be congratulating yourselfs on how wonderfull you are, instead of not beeing able to live with yourselfs.
Anon.
ReplyDeleteInstant Karma here.
I'll ask you then. How much do you think 1 school and a nusery on one site, and 1 large school (pp and blackie) on another would cost?
GRP,said they have to sell the Joeys to finance this project.
Not if they sell PP and Blackie, and keep the Joeys.They already have Logie, as confirmed by JC
JC said they can't build on the Joeys site while the original school is there.
JC is a teacher not a construction professional. I can't think why not,similair things has been done at Grove and Forthill. Have they even looked at this? He did not explain why not at the meeting did he? If he did please tell me what he said.
You mention a credit crunch, and economies of scale.
The price of steel worldwide has dropped as has the price of oil. Both are key drivers to the cost of building materials. Skilled labour is not so difficult to obtain,construction companies,architechts, cost consultants, sub contractors, engineers etc etc everyone's order books are very very low. This is seriously driving down tender prices.
Anway what I was trying to say was that all of the West end could benefit in the long term, if this were possible.Only the rush to sell the Joeys to AMI is preventing the council from looking at this.
It got nothing to do with funding gaps IMO
To the Blackness parent - St. Joseph's is 50-50 Catholic and non-Catholic. I do not think that religion should be brought into the discussion because the person who is bleating about Blackness may or may not be one - we don't know. If all contributors stick to the document and the purpose of this - it is not to speculate or to put each other down, it is to get clarity and answers to questions about the proposal so that people know what they are or are not getting.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said at 5.16pm:
ReplyDelete"The arguments you are going public with are very lightweight and can be check out easily by the council and could have been gleemed by going directly to them in a diplomatic manner."
Questions WERE asked at all THREE consultation meetings. However, the responses from the panel raised more questions than answers.
The Council was asked additional questions and were sent the Questions and Concerns document before it was posted to the website, but we are still waiting for a response from Mr Collins.
We felt it was necessary to share this information as widely as possible so that IF the questions could be answered, they would be, and IF the concerns are unfounded, they would be refuted.
If they remain unanswered, then it is important that parents and carers make written representation to the Council BEFORE the end of the consultation period.
The panel made it very clear at the consultation meetings that if parents don't write to Ms Ross Pond, the Council will assume that they support the proposal as it stands.
Can I ask where does the idea that pupils from St. Josephs will get moved into Blackness?
ReplyDeleteIf the proposal is "do able" then PP and Joeys go to Logie, and those in favour get there wish. The Westenders MAY get answers which over come their objections, and they give it their support.
If it is not"do able"(for some reason) do they not then go back to the drawing board?
If they can't build three schools at Logie, do you really think they will say "lets build two, one of which will NOW be Blackness"
If they do that then surely they still have two schools which need re-built?
What do the council do then?
Please don't tell me the parents of St.Josephs will just shrug their shoulders and say "oh well we have to move"
You won't. You'll fight tooth and nail, to be one of the two who go to Logie, and bollocks to Blackness and PP. The so called "special relashionship" that the two heads of the Joeys and PP have will dissapear quicker than YOU CAN BLINK.
If the new school is about improving childrens education and delivering the "Curriculum for Excellence" then why the indecent haste to move from the current St Jo's P1 intake of 2 smaller classes to a future P1 intake of 1 class which will deliver...yes...you guessed it...a BIGGER class size.
ReplyDeleteIs Homer Simpson running this project?
Anon 10.57
ReplyDeleteWhat are you worried about bigger class sizes for, we will have a new state of the art school with much bigger classrooms.
Q. Does anyone actually know the minimum area of a primary classroom ?
Is it bigger than what is currentley on offer at PP or Joeys?
I could have swore, there are where no drawings and no detail of this at the meetings.
Hey no matter, aslong as we get our new school,any size, any shape,at any cost to our kids and those not born yet.
So what if it might be to small it's not an issue.
IT WILL BE NEW, and thats all that matters right?
For a school that trades on it's supportive ethos it is a real shame how the St Joseph's Church, Head Teacher and Parent Council appear to be so worried about honest open debate.
ReplyDeleteWe expected better from a Catholic run school.
I dont actually see why it shouldn't be a valid concern over the childrens' religious education. I am a parent who chose St Jospehs because I want my childern to have a catholic education - not just beacause it has a good reputation etc. You may argue against denominational schools but this is not the forum for that. Whilst we have catholic schools, catholic families should be entitled to ensure their childrens' religious education is looked after - which should include being able to attend mass without having to walk down a busy road. Is everyone being too politically correct by avoiding saying this? Is there anyhting in the regulations which state this is not a valid concern? Would be helpful to know before submitting any letter to DCC. No doubt this will be controversial but hey this is an open forum. Is this the real bogie man and not the one in Peddie Street!
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Mary, but the powers that be seem to think this is a minor issue and their response to this very question was that other schools have a similar distance to walk to attend mass and/or mass can be performed at the school. Although it's a concern - I'm not sure it's a DCC concern as far as the proposal goes. However, as it is a RC school, the council have to consult with the Church Representative to the Education Committee. My understanding is that religious education issues should be directed to the church rather than the council.
ReplyDeleteThanks for that Simon. That's helpful.
ReplyDeleteMary
ReplyDeleteI am also very concerned about the children walking to the Church. The distance is not a factor, but the widths of footpaths are. Unlike when the ‘school’ has walked down to the DCA, the Rep and at Christmas to the Cathedral, the classes went via the University campus part of the way which is pretty pedestrian friendly. My concern is that the Blackness Road route is not. One of the questions that I shall be asking is if the walking route to the Church will be risk assessed, and if it is will parents have access to this assessment. Given how risk adverse local authorities are I am sure that there will be a risk assessment of this. However, the assessment may conclude that it would be safer to have mass at the school, which happens at many schools and at the end of the day it is about celebrating mass and not the venue. But, I think everyone’s first preference would be to have mass in a church; however, safety comes first. One final thing about the kids going to the Church, I think it is important for the kids who are preparing for their Sacraments to be able to go to the Church to prepare with their teachers during the week.
Mary: I haven’t given you an answer, but hopefully, in your letter to Gillian Ross-Pond you can ask about this. I suppose one slight consolation to you is that you know now that you are not alone in being concerned about this.
Anonymous 12:23 - you're spot on when you say it's about celebrating mass and not the venue. I think this is a situation unique to primary schools as secondary schools are not located adjacent to churches. When I was at school we frequently had mass in the hall and it did not retract from the event. I also agree that a risk assessment by the council on the movement between the school and the church will probably conclude that it will be safer to have mass at the school on occasions. I think if this is a real concern for parents (personally I'm OK with it) then something that could be brought up would be perhaps setting aside some cash for a mini bus or 2 to ferry the kids back and forth to the school.
ReplyDeleteNot to the school - to the church I meant at the end there :)
ReplyDeleteThanks - this is good healthy dialogue unlike some of the sniping back and forwards earlier on the site. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. I think it is more important for the children to attend mass at Church in primary school because that's when and where they take their sacraments - secondary school not so important (as far as that's concerned). Personally I would love a new state of the art school for the children and teachers alike but the current St Josephs site is such a good one (not just because of it being adjacent to the Church!) it seems a shame the Council seem so willing to get shot of it. Perhaps if they had had the foresight not to sell Logie in the first place we might be in a different position.
ReplyDeleteScot,
ReplyDeleteDo you think the non Catholics would be into funds being diverted to a "pope mobeel" so the Papes can go to mass.
Dream on....it aint happening.
This PROPOSAL is about land, money and finance.
They say they don't have the finance, they want the money and the land is the answer to their prayers and not the Catholics.
As an aside, what school did you go to that frequently had mass in the hall?There are no Cathoilc primary schools in the city that have a church further away than we will be.
Oh I no it's not PC, but if the "building" is not important, why do our Muslim freinds get to leave school to go to the mosque if they want to.
Don't offend the muslim's, don't draw cartoons or anything sinister like that.
But hey there only Papes, they pose no threat to law and order.
You know what, it doesn't matter if we move them away from their place of worship, it's only a building.
When I was at primary most of my school went to mass every morning before school during Lent.
We also did the Nine Fridays.
FAT CHANCE OUR KIDS HAVE OF EVEN SAYING A PRAYER BEFORE SCHOOL IN CHURCH
Can anyone remember the rumpus up in Aberdeen a few years back when the Council sold off land without putting these to proper tender. Not sure what the outcome of that was. The Council should be reminded of that and what i presume would be their legal obligations to put the (Joey's) site out for tender if they were selling it otherwise the Scottish Executive would have to be involved? Just another thought.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI am really intereeted in what the views are of Dunkeld Diocese about this. Does anyone know what their reasons are for supporting the proposal considering the concerns of moving the school away from the church? Does anybody know?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHi Mary M. I seem to recall that there was an initiative before to do a crocodile walk to school with the children. I seem to remember that this did not go ahead due the the health and safety aspect of the Blackness Road. I cannot say for sure but when you mentioend road safety, I think that this is what stopped it from happening. May be worth checking with one of the teachers at school.
ReplyDeleteTo Sheik Yersoapbox said...
ReplyDeleteUntil the start of this school year, St Columba's had a greater distance from the school to the Church.
Curious George.
ReplyDeleteWon't say you're wrong......yet.
I do however promise to find out if you are infact correct.
1 possible out of how many? It's HARDLY BLEW my case out the water has it?
Annon 2.46
ReplyDeleteStick to the facts
The current Priest could get moved tommorow, but once this proposed school is built, you can't move it,closer to the church.
And where are all the "Blackness going to Logie instead of the Joeys" stories coming from?
If the sites not big enough for PP,Joeys and PP nursery, will it be any more suitable for 2xPP and the Blackie?
Of course it won't!!!
May I remind you, that JC and GRP have been very clever with their veiled threats of moving there attention elsewhere in the city.
Bottom line is, if the sites not suitable and they look elsewhere,the issue of building new schools in the Westend has to be addressed.
Are you going to do anything about it if that is what they try to do? Are our Councillors? Our Church?
No, everyone will sit back and say,"shame we can't have some new schools in the Westend"
There would be blew murder if that was proposed.
Two schools would get built somewhere, they have over 7.5million in the kity to do it.
Live in the real world.
Or are you one of the " we want a new school, any new school" brigade?
Sheik Yersoapbox
ReplyDeleteOf course they could put the Joeys into Blackness.
Who's gonna stop them?
Not the Joeys parents.
They are mostly a shower of gutless and spineless fools.Scared stiff to stand up for the rights of there children.They don't have the B-LLS to demand what their children deserve and are entightled too.
Of course it's possible.
To Sheik Yersoapbox
ReplyDeleteActually, I measured the distances and surprisingly, it's only about 350 metres from school to church for St Columbas, which about 150 metres less than the current proposal. Those 350 metres seemed longer when I had shorter legs!
RE statement from previous post -
ReplyDelete""If St. Joe's school dont go, then what will happen is either Blackness will move to new school at Logie with PP and we will be moved to Blackness (less playground, less parking, tenements overlooking and away from church...)""
Has this actually been said by the Council or is this speculation? (This is a genuine question - not a sarcastic comment for the avoidance of doubt).
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anonymous 5:31. We have a lovely school with a great atmosphere. My biggest disappointment in all of this is the way it's been handled. It's starting to become unsavoury. Most of the people on this post seem to be fairly level headed when it comes to a discussion but the we have individuals (or an individual under the guise of multiple personalities) like Instant Karma and Shiek Yersoapbox attacking the parent council and head teacher and coming out with racist, bigoted rants that really don't help matters at all. If only it could have been handled in a more civilized way...
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 5.31pm said:
ReplyDelete"HI - Re the question about the Church's view on the proposals - I was told by a 'westend parent' that they are having a meeting with the Bishop [date removed] so hopefully they will put up an official statement from the Bishop on this website after their meeting.
I find all this speculation is only damaging what, I believe, most of us think (otherwise we wouldnt send our children there) and that is that St Joseph's is a good, happy school and this is just dividing parents - how long will it take to recover as, whatever way it goes, some parents are going to be unhappy with the outcome."
Apologies to Anonymous 5.31pm but please do not post personal, location or date/time information on this public website.
There really should not be any division if parents, teachers, and everyone alike just respected each other's views. I think that there is no doubt that everyone wants a new school but some think the site is not suitable for various reasons - whereas these various reasons do not make a difference to other parents. If people wish to see the councillors or anyone in Dundee City council - then fine. If some wish to see the Bishop - fine too. Some have approached the Head Teacher or Parent Council - all fine. And at the end - whatever the decision is - then all should accept this, support it and make the most out of it. The decision is really now in the hands of Dundee City Council. One good thing that may come out of this is that if the new school goes ahead that the Council will have a list of concerns and issues that they can address in the design of the school and they deisgn it so that it will be built according to all the government guidelines.
ReplyDeleteAnnon 5.52pm
ReplyDeletePlease tell me when I attacked the Parent Council, or headteacher.
I'm really looking forward to you pointing me towards my comments about them.
Please do, i'm on the edge of my seat.
Racist,bigoted ? Again go for your life.
Your'e full of s-it
Go-on I'm waiting
Anon,
ReplyDeleteI want the Coucil to come out and blow the Westenders arguments into a thousand little bits.
Then we can get the new school we all want and deserve.
The fact they have not,is a sign the Westenders may be onto something.
Articles in the Tele, letters aswell, and no comment from the Council.
I thought a carefully "prepared leak" would have been enough to put this to bed.
Why the silence from them?
Instant Karma said, "Annon 5.52pm..."
ReplyDeleteI think you mean "Anonymous 5.45pm..." and if there are racist, bigoted remarks on this website, please identify them so they can be removed or censored.
Curious George,
ReplyDeleteTop man. We disagree on a few things, but your'e a gent.
You admitted you were wrong. Respect
As for the Anon 5.52.......well I think Instant's sorted you out.
To anon 7:35 - you have this really all wrong. There is so much hate and anger in your message using language like blowing to bits, arguments and the like. Why is this? How can one document with what I think are valid questions about the proposal make you conclude that people are out to 'get someone' and that it is a win or lose competition. Sorry to say it is not. If the council clarifies all the questions, then fine. There will be no hatred about a new school being built if all is compliant and all adds up. If you are so sure with the proposal and trust that all is well then just stay at peace becacuse then there is nothing to worry about.
ReplyDeleteOh my gosh - I was told by another parent about this website. I can only summarise my feelings about it by saying when did raising concerns and asking questions in this country become a crime? Why are people opposed to a group of what I think are diligent individuals who are just doing their homework. Why are people trying to silence these?
ReplyDeleteHello - An earlier commentor asked about the 'crocodile walk' or 'walking bus' as it was known, which was planned a few years ago to safely walk children to school. This was NOT cancelled due to Health and Safety but due to a lack of support from Parents - only a very few showed interest.
ReplyDeleteThis is maybe due to the fact that 50% or so of the schools population come from outwith the catchment area.
I see this as a big concern for many people who are against the proposal although they would not admit to it. If the new school is smaller it might not be able to accommodate ALL the children from outwith the catchment or indeed outwith the city who currently attend. No children who are currently there would be 'chucked out' but if they have younger siblings then they might not get in??? The Council are not obliged to accommodate everyone outwith the catchment area.
Thank you for clarifying about the crocodile walk or walking bus. As you were involved in organising this - can you please share if there were any issues about health and safety or was this not an issue at all in Blackness Road?
ReplyDelete"Concerned Parents" - was this website set up to encourage the likes of Instant Karma/Sheik Yersoapbox to become aggressive and abusive towards people trying to make valid points? I'm sure it wasn't and you don't condone such language and views. Maybe this one (oops two) is just trying to stir up a bit of trouble when it seems the rest of the posts are fairly amiable. When sensible discussion is engaged, it looks like it's getting somewhere. Reading through this when Scott made the point about the mini buses why, for example, was this such a bad idea? You just get the feeling that certain individuals just don't want solutions.
ReplyDelete8:05 - I think some people are taking issue about HOW it's being done, not why they are doing it and are very concerned with their motives. You only have to look at some of the racists slurs on the Muslim community or the generalisation that all people who live in tenements are drug dealers or paedophiles to see what I mean. I've seen this forum jump from the issue being the size of the land (that appears to have been answered by someone) to the Sub Station (again, it has been suggested that since there are flats in the proximity this one may be OK too) to sex offenders and ex prisoners (oh and the bogie man!) and now it's muslims and the 500 metre walk to the church! There is just simply no cohesive argument being made.
Personally I have nothing against people expressive their views, as long as it's well thought out and half truths and hearsay are not used as ammunition to rally the troops, be it in the playground or on web forums.
Hoping that doesn't sound too controversial (no doubt at least one person will think it does!!)
One final point on 8:21, regarding the placements, great question and something that the council will most definitely be able to answer for you I reckon. In fact I think the school would do that for you. Probably would just take a quick call...
Anonymous 9.20pm said:
ReplyDelete"There is simply no cohesive argument being made."
Are you referring to the range of comments being posted on the blog, or do you mean our Questions and Concerns document?
Anonymous 8.21pm said:
"If the new school is smaller..."
Do you have evidence to support this supposition? Is there something in the Council's proposal (69-2009) that indicates the new 2 x stream primary schools may be smaller than the two existing schools?
Anonymous 9.20pm said:
"...great question and something that the council will most definitely be able to answer for you..."
Can you clarify which question you refer to? As for the council, Mr Collins confirmed at the consultation meetings that his department's remit is to provide school accommodation for children within the catchment area, and that the proposed site is more central to the West End catchment than either St Joseph's or Park Place.
If you can clarify what question you consider needs to be addressed to the council or the schools, we can see it was already discussed at consultation meetings or from our subsequent research.
Apologies, there are a couple of omissions in the last comment:
ReplyDelete1. "...new 2 x stream primary..." should be "...new 2 x 1 stream primary..."
2. "...we can see it was already discussed..." should be "...we can see IF it was already discussed..."
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe previous 4 comments have been removed because they focesed on discussion about an individual (for and against).
ReplyDeletePlease do not post personal, location or date/time information on this public website.
Also please try to keep the discussion about the council's proposal.
Apologies to Mary M 2.51pm.
ReplyDeleteYour comment was removed as it was deemed to be too personal. If you wish, please repost but remember to avoid personal, location or date/time information on this public website.
Anonymous 2.46pm said:
ReplyDelete"As it stands the kids only get to go to church once every 6 weeks or so and from having been at a school mass recently it was dire.
[personal comments removed]
Really how many kids at present 'pop' into church before school now and if they want to in future, thier parents can take them on the way to/from the new school - 5 min diversion. As the Diocese has said 'parents are the first (catholic)educators of our children'.How many children from the school actually go to St Joe's on a Sunday? - not many.
It would be really nice to have a lovely,new, stand alone school on the same site as at present - but this IS NOT going to happen. If St. Joe's school dont go, then what will happen is either Blackness will move to new school at Logie with PP and we will be moved to Blackness (less playground, less parking, tenements overlooking and away from church...)or as I recall the Director of Education saying they will look elsewhere in the city for other new school sites(not for St Joe's) for other schools who are desperate to move (Broughty Eastern etc)."
Personal comments have been removed.
Instant Karma,
ReplyDeleteTommorow is D-day, we have all had our say the no's and the aye's.
Open and HONEST debate never hurt anyone.
We may disagree, but we should never become divided into two camps. Whatever the outcome, we move forward, as a parish and as a school community.
In the words of my man,
You say you got a real soloution
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
We are doing what we can
Don't you know it's gonna be alright.