West End Parents

Education report uncertainty over nursery school independence

2011-12-08T22:21:00.003Z

The latest report to Education Committee (report 539-2011) hints at the prospect of future integration of Park Place Nursery into the school building of Park Place Primary school. It states that the nursery's move to the new West End campus will reduce the number of nursery schools in the city (§ 4.2.8) and later (§ 4.3.2) proposes:

"There may be scope to integrate such schools into primary schools where it is practical to do so."

Does this imply that the nursery school might in future be relegated to a nursery class within the primary school?

Additionally, the report states that the Primary School Working Capacity of the new West End campus is 618, and with a combined pupil roll for Sep 2011 (the campus is not due to open until 2012) at 434, claims this is 70.2% of the Sufficiency on Working Capacity.

However, the previous Director of Education had assured parents that the maximum roll of the West End campus would be capped at 450, which would mean the Sufficiency on Working Capacity percentage should be quoted as 96.4%.

In other words, from the start, the new campus will be operating almost at full capacity.

If the current director of education now claims the Primary School Working Capacity of the campus is indeed 618, then he must find an additional 0.4 ha, that is 4000 sq. m., if the campus is to comply with the government's requirements stipulated in the School Premises (General Standards and Requirements) (Scotland) 1967 and as amended.

What are the director's plans for Park Place Nursery, and where will he find the additional space necessary for a campus with capacity for 618 pupils?

DCC Education Convener claims size issue was a myth

2011-09-01T22:32:00.003+01:00

During a ceremony at the new west end school campus on 31/08/11 (11 mins into the broadcast), DCC education convener, Liz Fordyce, made this statement (transcribed from the video footage):

"It was built to house 1000 young adults, because that's what teenagers are, it was secondary pupils, and if it held a thousand secondary pupils, going from department to department, then it would be big enough to hold two primary schools that are not going to have anything like a thousand pupils between them, so it wasn't ever going to be too small to house two smaller primary schools, so it was a myth.

And the people who complained about it they had all sorts of different reasons for not wanting it, and they tried their best but now they realise that, yeah, this is a good idea, this is a good thing for the young people."

If the education convener had read the School Premises (General Standards and Requirements) (Scotland) 1967 and as amended, she would have noticed:

(2) Every secondary school shall have a site of not less than the area specified in Table II according to the number of pupils for which the school is designed except where the provisions of regulation 7(6) apply.

For a site with 751-1000 pupils, this equates to a site size of 2.4 hectares - the new school site is 1.27 hectares, almost half the minimum requirement. Note that each additional 100 (pupils) over 1000 would require an additional 0.1 hectares.

And that's not including provision for playing fields....

So either the former Harris Academy Annexe failed to comply with the government regulations - by a significant margin - or the regulations did not apply when the building was erected.

Or the city council of the time had also applied to government for dispensation from said regulations, just as the current city council did to get special permission for this proposal to proceed. The council's application and the decision from Scottish Ministers may be found here: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/91982/0091412.pdf and in it, the former director of education confirms:

1.5 The consent of the Scottish Ministers is required because the area of the site proposed for the joint campus does not meet the requirements in Regulation 7(1) in respect of two separate schools.

So which is it, and precisely which "people who complained about it" now 'realise' that it's a good idea?

Deputation to Development Management Committee - Monday 20 September 2010

2011-02-12T09:17:00.004Z

Thanks go to all the elected members who asked a number of probing questions of the council officers. The planning application was approved and the project board has convened several times since to progress these plans.

We thought it might be of interest to share the text of the deputation presented by Mr Kiran Oza to the Development Management Committee on 20 September 2010.

Note that the first point raised by this deputation didn't need to be raised as the director of city development, Mr Mike Galloway, stood up first to apologise for an oversight in recording the application as 'local' rather than 'major', but claimed that in all other respects the application has been processed as if it were a major planning application....

"Lord Provost, Depute Lord Provost, Convener, Councillors: thank you for the opportunity to address the committee today. I have 7 points to make, each of which addresses a material consideration in respect to planning.

1. First of all, there is a 'Major' flaw in the report by the director of city development.

This planning application (10/00406/FULL) has been classed as a 'Local' planning application, which is contrary to The Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009. Regulation 2(1) states in paragraph 9 of the description of development that where "The gross floor space of any building, structure or erection constructed as a result of such development is or exceeds 5,000 square metres", shall be categorised as a "major development". Circular 5 2009 Hierarchy of Developments advises that education developments of projects fall under paragraph 9 of the regulation and also stipulates "there is no scope for local interpretation of what constitutes a major development or a local development either by planning authorities...individuals...or other stakeholders in the planning system."

The planning application before you states that the proposed floor space for this non-residential development for School Education is 5,600 sq.m., which exceeds the 5,000 sq.m. stipulated in the regulations and therefore should be classed as a 'Major development'.

What is the impact of this error? My second point...

2. As a result of this error, the objection that "pre-application consultation was not carried out appropriately" could not have been given due consideration since the director's report incorrectly claims, "As this is not a defined major application there is no statutory requirement for preapplication consultation." Similarly, the case officer may not have fully scrutinised the statutory requirements, such as the Design and Access Statement, since the report also claims, "There was not a mandatory requirement to submit a Design and Access Statement for this development."

3. From the early days of this project, including the previous director of education's proposal to the Education Committee in January 2009 (report 69-2009), through subsequent consultations and meetings, to both versions of the planning application form (the one with the council owning the land, and the 'corrected' version stating that Foxmead Ltd is the current owner), the site size has been 1.27 hectares, in other words 12,700 sq.m.

Miraculously, in the Design and Access Statements (again there were two variants of this), the site has grown to 1.35 hectares, in other words 13,500 sq.m., and this is repeated in the report before you today.

From where has this additional 800 sq.m. appeared? If it is indeed the correct area, then it has a material impact on this acknowledged "tight site" and makes a difference to the range of possible designs. For example, if it is adjacent to the proposed 600 sq.m. multi-surface outdoor playing area, adding 800 sq.m. makes this a much more viable proposition to parents and others who wish for good outdoor provision for the children of this new school.

4. The inclusion of a formal consultation with Sportscotland is not material to this development and should not be included in the director's report. Sportscotland are a statutory consultee only if there is will be a loss of playing field provision in excess of 0.2 hectares (2000 sq.m.). In written correspondence with Sportscotland on 21 April 2010, the council states, "the former blaes pitch adjacent to St Joseph's Primary has not actually been used as a sports pitch for at least 20 years."

If this is the case, then there is not a loss of playing field of 0.2 hectares or more, and Sportscotland should not have been consulted not should their views have been included in the director's report today.

If the area has indeed been used as a sports pitch in more recent times, as attested to by:
the fact that satellite imagery (Google Earth, DD1 5HX, historical imagery for Dec 2001) over the last 10 years shows football goalposts at either end of this 'car park',
the fact that the school has until very recently held its annual Sports Day on this pitch,
the fact that the children of St Joseph's enjoy both football training and cross country training on this pitch,
then Sportscotland may well revert to their previous intimation of 16 March 2010 that they would be likely to object to planning. In the same correspondence, Sportscotland proposed that a 60m x 40m Synthetic Turf Pitch on the St Joseph's blaes pitch "may be a better alternative to Victoria Park. The site is enclosed therefore it would be easier to monitor the children."

Consider also that the proposal by the Council for a 600 sq m synthetic pitch for 430 pupils is a mere 25% of the minimum size synthetic pitch that is recommended by SportScotland for schools of this size.

In case you are wondering that is 1.4 sq m per child.

5. Regarding the potential noise from the proposed buildings, the director's report notes the Noise Impact Assessment, which considers the potential impact any noise from any mechanical plant serving the schools may have on residents in the vicinity. This NIA concludes that any noise would fall within the NR25 and NR35 requirements. However, it is clear from the report submitted that the plant proposed can not satisfy this condition. How could the report come to the conclusion it has on the basis of the information provided. Does the noise condition (9) not contradict the conclusion in the report, if not then the condition would not be required!

In addition, this completely fails to take into account the noise impact of children playing in the playground and the multi-surface 5-a-side pitch. Some 430 primary children and upwards of 70 nursery children will be outdoors during playtimes and lunch breaks. Even if these are staggered to accommodate pupil numbers in the outdoor space and dining hall facilities, the noise level, though less, will be for a longer duration. It may surprise those present to consider how modern legislation can curtail the ability of children to play boisterously outside as was recently reported in Barlby Primary School.

Also, the recent planning application by the High School of Dundee, 10/00397/FULL, was refused on the premise that it would have:

"an adverse impact upon the level of environmental quality afforded to neighbouring residents by virtue of noise disturbance from the use of the all weather pitches, road safety from increased traffic, light pollution from the proposed flood lights and visual amenity due to the appearance of the proposed flood lighting columns and fencing."

The proposals were therefore deemed "contrary to the requirements of Policy 1 (Vibrant and Sustainable Communities) of the Dundee Local Plan Review 2005."

It is presumed that the same material consideration will be given to the planning application before you today.

6. The report compiled by Scottish and Southern Electricity found that the site is not currently affected by electro-magnetic fields. However is it not the case that EMF can be attracted and thus the danger here is that the building and internal electrical equipment will attract and even amplify the EMF from the adjacent electricity substation?

7. The conditions attached provide for an investigation of the contamination present on the site. This is an acknowledgement that the site is contaminated. Is it therefore wise of to approve a school on the site prior to knowing what contamination is present on the site? If this application is moved for approval, the decision should state that a condition of the approval is that the excambion must not proceed until conditions 2 and 3 are satisfied."

Planning application to be decided 20 Sep 2010

2010-09-15T19:37:00.001+01:00

The proposed West End schools' planning application is finally to come before Development Management Committee on Monday 20 September 2010.

The report, which recommends the planning application for approval, can be read on the council website at: http://www.dundeecity.gov.uk/reports/agendas/dm200910.pdf

If the application is approved by our elected members, then the St Joseph's car park and green spaces could be transferred to Al-Maktoum Foundation ownership soon after.

Where will parents, teachers and church parishioners park and where will the children play, during and after school?

Janny's folly?

2010-08-17T22:44:00.003+01:00

As reported on this blog, the council's deadline for comments on its planning application for the new west end school was extended to 16 August 2010, perhaps in part because the application was updated to admit that the land is owned by Foxmead Ltd (Jersey) rather than by the council, as originally claimed.

It seems that a related application to demolish the janitor's hut on the Logie site was also incorrectly completed. It has also been updated (06 August) indicating that Foxmead Ltd (Jersey) own this land; the application had previously claimed that the council was the only owner of the land.

Was this another administrative error?

Why has the deadline for comments not been similarly extended for this application?

If this application is to be determined by 23 August, why did it not appear in the agenda/reports for Development Quality Committee yesterday (16 August)?

Why does this renewed application state there will be no car parking spaces after development, when the corresponding application for the new school clearly states there will be 49 car parking spaces - is this yet another administrative error?

Expiry date for planning application 10/00406/FULL extended to 16/08/2010

2010-07-30T07:22:00.006+01:00

Due to submission of a modified planning application (10/00406/FULL) on 26/07/2010 with an amendment to the Land Ownership Certificate, the overall expiry date of the application has been extended to 16 August 2010, with a target determination date now set at 25 September 2010. The original application was completed with Certificate A, claiming:

"no person other than *myself/the applicant was an owner (Note 2) of any part of the land to which the application relates, at the beginning of the period of 21 days ending with the date of this application..."

The modified application has been completed with Certificate B, stating:

"The applicant has served notice on every person other than the applicant who, at the beginning of the period of 21 days ending with the date of the accompanying application was owner (Note B) of any part of the land to which the application relates."

The persons to whom this notice was served are stated to be 'Foxmead Ltd'.

Why was the original application completed using Certificate A, which should be done

"...where the applicant is the only owner and the land is not an agricultural holding" (Note 1)?

Was this an administrative error?

Was it in response to public scrutiny using objections lodged based on our proforma letter?

Why did Dundee City Council claim to be "the only owner" of land it sold to the Al-Maktoum Foundation in 2004?

The details of the excambion of land are being withheld from the public, and the "urgent" council meeting held on 22 February 2010 excluded members of the public and the press. Isn't it about time that the full facts surrounding these negotiations were disclosed so that the public can be assured this is in the best interest of the public purse?

Proforma objection to the planning application 10/00406/FULL

2010-07-08T21:57:00.003+01:00

We have drafted a proforma letter of objection for anyone wishing to use some or all of this information. If you wish to use this, you can download in Word or PDF format and submit to the Director of City Development by 15 July 2010. Remember to include your name, address and signature.

Proforma objection to planning application 10/00406/FULL

Electronic survey field test results for Logie site

2010-07-07T22:47:00.006+01:00

The city council's planning application (10/00406/FULL) includes an Electronic Survey Document regarding field tests conducted by Scottish and Southern Energy (Report-285685.PDF), and which reports readings of 0 (zero) microtesla at various points on the Logie site.

We asked Alasdair Philips, from EMFields and Powerwatch, to comment on this report:

The "0" microtesla is a nonsense. There is no way it can be zero. It may well be low, but on a 0.00 resolution scale (the usual one measuring to 0.01 microtesla) I would expect between 0.01 to 0.10 at least. I suspect the site is fine for the school, but they should not get away with such a document.

Also, the 50 microtesla "natural fields" level statement is inexcusable - that is a static (permanent magnet) field and cannot be compared with a 50 Hz oscillating field. I thought the industry had got away from such stupid statements - apparently not Scottish and Southern. I will send this report to some senior electricity industry people for comment. The background ELF oscillating field is actually less than 0.0001 microtesla - compare that with 50!

The SSE report is presumed to be the council's response to the HMIe recommendation: "The council should also seek to reassure parents about the levels of contamination of soil at the proposed site and the level of danger from the nearby electricity sub-station", as quoted in section 6.2 of HMIE report dated November 2009.

Unfortunately, if the report is as inaccurate as suggested by Mr Philips' comments, it gives parents no such assurance.

Playtime at the new West End school?

2010-07-07T10:44:00.009+01:00

We were wondering what playtime at the new West End school might be like, so we took one of the sketches from the council's planning application 10/00406/FULL, as viewed from the south-east corner, and added 400 children using the council's sketch of 4 children playing as a stamping tool.

Here's what we discovered, before and after modification. What do you think? What will the noise levels be for residents and nearby businesses? Will the children have enough space to play - or even move?

Full planning application 10/00406/FULL now online

2010-06-24T22:00:00.001+01:00

The full planning application for the West End Schools project is now available on the city council's Public Access website:

http://bwarrant.dundeecity.gov.uk/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?caseno=L4IOIMGC03500&searchtype=WEEKLY

Comments and objections should be registered using the Submit Comments link online or in writing to the city council by 15 July 2010. According to the Applications for Planning Guidance Leaflet (p7), the address to send written objections is:

Director of City Development,
Dundee City Council,
Floor 15,
Tayside House,
Dundee, DD1 3RB.

Please note: The formal Planning Register which contains all planning application details is available for public inspection from 8.30am to 5pm Monday to Friday at City Developments Department reception, Floor 2, Tayside House, Crichton Street, Dundee DD1 3RB (information obtained from:http://bwarrant.dundeecity.gov.uk/publicaccess/tdc/tdc_home.aspx)

Proforma objections available to download

2010-04-21T21:29:00.005+01:00

Following the public exhibitions on 1st and 3rd April 2010, the council has invited comments and objections from members of the public, to be sent to Gillian Ross Pond. The deadline for these is:

Monday 26 April 2010

Comments can be posted, telephoned or emailed:

Gillian Ross Pond
Floor 8 City House
Overgate
Dundee
DD1 1UH
Telephone: 01382 435161 or
email: gillian.rosspond@dundeecity.gov.uk

We have prepared a list of suggestions that you may wish to send or select items where you share our objections.

Note that if you are sending a letter by post, this should be posted by Friday 23 April to ensure delivery by Monday. We understand that comments by email will also be accepted but to ensure that these are valid, we advise including your full name and address so that the council can check that your submission can be authenticated.

You can download a copy of our proforma (shown on the left hand side of this website) or you can select from the following list of objections:

With regard to the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) Regulations 2008, I wish to state my objections to the approval of any plans for the proposed development of a new West End of Dundee primary School in Blackness Road, on the following grounds:
I object to this proposal due to the noise impact on the area.
I object to this proposal due to the traffic congestion that it will create
I object to this proposal due to the risks to child safety that the traffic congestion will create
I object to this proposal due to the lack of adequate car drop-off areas
I object to this proposal due to it failing to comply with Regulation 8 Playing Fields of the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 1967 and as amended
I object to this proposal due to the lack of a synthetic pitch which meets sportscotland minimum requirements as per School Playing Fields Planning and Design Guidance document ISBN: 978 1 85060 497 6
I object to this proposal due to it failing to provide children with the opportunity to reach their potential in external sports
I object to this proposal due to the impact on specialist PE curriculum if children have to travel to/from Victoria Park
I object to this proposal due to the loss of playing field provision already present at St Joseph’s (and recognised by council documents and by sportscotland)
I object to this proposal due to concerns over how Victoria Park could be utilised for playing fields if there is no dedicated provision of park land
I object to this proposal due to concerns over the safety of children walking to/from Victoria Park
I object to this proposal due to the risks of having a gym and kitchen on the top floor
I object to this proposal due to the gym space of 324 sq.m. needing to be divided by a curtain and thus being a smaller space than for St Joseph’s school at present
I object to this proposal due to the inadequate internal gym facility, which fails to meet government targets of a minimum 2 hours specialist PE per child per week
I object to this proposal due to the increased noise impact in the classrooms of having a gym above the classrooms
I object to this proposal due to the classroom sizes being smaller on average than the existing classrooms at St Joseph’s
I object to this proposal due to the contamination on the site, especially since the lack of a basement facility confirms council concerns about using underground space
I object to this proposal due to the nearby "very large electricity sub-station" as quoted from a report from the director of planning and transportation in 2006 (06/00103/FUL)
I object to this proposal due to the loss of school buildings at St Joseph’s and Park Place constituting a loss of provision for schools in the West End when space should be preserved for future generations
I object to this proposal due to the rising cost estimates (was £10.3m now £11.5m and will rise further) in a time of financial crisis where the money would be better spent refurbishing existing schools and saving jobs
I object to this proposal due to the choice of site failing to provide an open aspect for the children
I object to this proposal due to the site use being contrary to the Council Local Plan showing the site (H21) marked for housing
I object to this proposal as it fails to achieve the maximum market price for Council Taxpayers in the sale of the St Joseph’s School site and surrounding land
I object to this proposal due it failing to meet the unconditional provisos laid down by the Catholic Church "The Diocese sets out the unconditional provisos and conditions ..., that the joint site enjoys the acknowledged agreement of the school communities concerned...", as quoted in section 4.3 of HMIE report dated November 2009
I object to this proposal due it having failed to meet the recommendations "The council should also seek to reassure parents about the levels of contamination of soil at the proposed site and the level of danger from the nearby electricity sub-station", as quoted in section 6.2 of HMIE report dated November 2009
I object to this proposal due it having failed to accommodate the clearly stated wishes of the St Joseph’s parents in the recent Parent Council Questionnaire
I object to this proposal because it discriminates against disabled children by discouraging participation by disabled children in activities in a public building due to the multi storey nature of the building

St Joseph's playing field "may be a better alternative to Victoria Park"

2010-04-15T22:57:00.007+01:00

We advised on 25 March 2010 that sportscotland would be liable to object to the council's planning application for the proposed new West End schools, and can reveal their further objections to the council's claim to use Victoria Park for playing fields. sportscotland wrote to the council on 16 March 2010 to:

"... raise concerns that the level of potential sports provision would be limited. The park's surface is primarily sloped so there is not great scope for formal pitch sports, although it may offer the potential to host races during a school sports day. There are no pitch markings or enclosures of any kind, which are operational. The park, although maintained well by the council will be subject to dog fouling as well. The wide open nature of the park would also make if difficult to monitor the children who would use the park. In its current form Victoria Park is not well suited for the schools' external pitch provision."

"Blackness Road is a fairly busy road and if any children were to go from the school to the Park they would have to be accompanied by at least 3 members of staff, stopping at each of the four road junctions. For a group of children travelling time could stretch beyond 10 minutes per journey, taking 20 minutes away from a PE lesson. The alternative route further north through the quieter streets of Logie Avenue, although safer would still require about 10 minutes walking time each way. Although Victoria Park seems to be the preferred option for the council, the limited sports offer makes it less than ideal."

There is a final irony in Sportscotland's advice, given that the council has agreed to transfer ownership of St Joseph's grounds to the Al-Maktoum Foundation on 16 August 2010, if planning is approved on that date:

"I am aware that St Joseph's primary school has a blaes pitch nearby, which is partially used for a car park. This site is also approximately 500m from the proposed site. If a 60m x 40m Synthetic Grass pitch was provided here this may be a better alternative to Victoria Park. The site is enclosed therefore it would be easier to monitor the children [our emphasis]. Has this site been considered?"

Their letter to the council ends:

"Overall, given that the application does not provide sufficient playing fields in accordance with sportscotland's 'School Playing Fields' - Planning and Design Guidance, sportscotland would be liable to object to this application. I would encourage the council to consider upgrading sports pitches in the local vicinity in order to address this underprovision."

The council received qualified approval from Scottish Ministers to proceed with the schools project, on the understanding that:

"Playing fields of the requisite size for two primary schools (0.6ha) will be carved out of Victoria Park, approximately a quarter of a mile away"

but given sportscotland's expert opinion that Victoria Park is "less than ideal", will the council now go back to Scottish Ministers to ask for further permission to proceed with this proposal?

Having already asked for unprecedented permission to proceed even though the site does not meet the minimum government regulations governing site size, will the council now ask for permission to proceed even though the proposal will not provide for playing fields as required by the School Premises regulations?

What does 'dedicated' mean?

2010-04-14T23:15:00.004+01:00

In December 2009, Scottish Ministers granted qualified approval to Dundee City Council to proceed with the schools project, making special reference to the HMIe recommendations to:

"... clarify its proposals for use of Victoria Park by giving a commitment to how it would dedicate part of the park [our emphasis] for use of the two primary schools and a firmer indication of what pitches or sports areas might be laid out for their use at various times of the year."

The specific request from Schools Directorate to the director of education was to:

"... [make] clearer its plans and commitment for dedicated use [our emphasis] of part of Victoria Park as playing fields by the two schools."

There followed a series of council comments in the local press which failed to conclude with any clarity over the council's plans, so at the 1st Project Board meeting on 27 January 2010, West End councillors asked the council to clarify said proposals and were told that this would need to be referred back to HMIe and Scottish Government to establish what was meant by the use of the word 'dedicated'.

At the 2nd Project Board meeting on 25 March 2010, the council was still unclear, despite several conversations between the director of education and HMIe, while councillors and the EIS union representative felt the meaning of 'dedicated' was quite obvious.

For reference, the Compact OED defines the meaning of 'dedicated' as:

adjective 1 devoted to a task or purpose. 2 exclusively assigned or allocated to a particular purpose.

We have obtained, under Freedom of Information, evidence that the director of education wrote to Schools Directorate on 15 September 2009 to state:

"... I am proposing that playing fields will be available in Victoria Park, approximately quarter of a mile distant from the proposed location of the school. This is a large public park, and so the area available will easily exceed 0.6ha."

Schools Directorate in turn wrote to HMIe on 24 September 2009, as part of requesting HMIe advice for the Application for Ministerial Approval, to advise:

"Playing fields of the requisite size for two primary schools (0.6ha) will be carved out of Victoria Park [our emphasis], approximately a quarter of a mile away"

The council appears to be unable to determine its own understanding of the word, therefore they have invited HMIe to attend the 3rd Project Board meeting on 27 May 2010.

Let's hope that Her Majesty's Inspectors for Education understand the meaning of this word.

Posters from public exhibition 1/3 April

2010-04-13T23:32:00.003+01:00

Although well-attended, the public exhibition was held on the last day of school term and over the Easter weekend, so there may be a number or people who were unable to visit Blackness Library. The council officers were asked for permission to photograph the posters to share with others and they have also been asked if the posters could be made available on the council website. The council officers agreed to both requests.

Since comments on the planning application are to be submitted by Monday 26 April 2010, we are sharing the photos taken - apologies for the poor quality of these images, but hopefully they give a flavour of the exhibition.

The pictures may be viewed here: Public Exhibition

Public Exhibition 1st and 3rd April 2010 in Blackness Library

2010-03-27T14:57:00.005Z

Dundee City Council have announced that there will be a public exhibition of plans for the proposed new West End schools in Blackness Community Library (225 Perth Road, Dundee DD2 1EJ) on:

Thursday 1st April 2010, 2pm - 7pm
Saturday 3rd April 2010, 10am - 1pm

Comments must be submitted to Gillian Ross Pond by Monday 26 April 2010 at the latest. Further information may also be obtained from Ms Ross Pond:

postal: Floor 8, City House, Overgate, Dundee DD1 1UH
phone: 01382 435161
email: gillian.rosspond@dundeecity.gov.uk

The Director of Education has written to all parents/carers of children attending Park Place Nursery, Park Place Primary, St Joseph's Primary and all staff at the three schools to:

"... strongly encourage you to take this opportunity to view the Council's plans. Council officers from the design team will be present to listen to your comments and answer any questions you might have."

"The planning timescale has been finalised, and it is hoped that the project will go to the Development Quality Committee for approval on 16 August 2010."

"... assuming the planning application is approved, work is scheduled to begin on site in January 2011 and be completed by March 2012. This would allow us to plan for pupil entry in mid April 2012."

Note that the latest set of plans shared with the Project Board are the same as the ones we obtained from Scottish Government under Freedom of Information and can be viewed on our website here.

Sportscotland liable to object to the West End School proposal

2010-03-25T09:58:00.002Z

Sportscotland are the national agency for sport in Scotland.

After considering the latest plans from DCC for the West End School, their opinion of the facilities was clearly communicated to DCC and contained the following comments on external provision.

"it does not provide sufficient playing fields"

"There does not appear to be any pitch provision proposed within the ground of the school, which is contrary to sportscotland guidelines. For a school of this size sportscotland recommends a minimum provision of a single synthetic pitch (60m x 40m)"

"the external pitch provision is contrary to sportscotland's 'School Playing Fields - Planning and Design Guidance' and is therefore insufficient for the needs of the school"

Shona Robison and Scotland's "Obesity time bomb"

2010-02-27T09:01:00.012Z

Shona Robison is the SNP Minister for Public Health and Sport in the Scottish Government.

She has just launched the strategy document, "Preventing Overweight and Obesity in Scotland - A Route Map Towards Healthy Weight" to tackle Scotland's “obesity time bomb” which specifically includes:

...working with schools to continue encouraging young people to take up healthy habits.

What hypocrisy!

Is this the same Minister for Public Health and Sport who supports the Dundee SNP administration in building an £11.5m new local West End Primary School for 450 children that:

Has no playing fields (in contravention of Government Regulations)?
Has no outdoor sporting facilities and thus requires all exercise to be undertaken in a planned top floor Gym?
Is on a site that is too small (which has been confirmed by the Scottish Government)?
May even fail to meet the minimum playing area per child for school playgrounds?

We asked MSPs, on behalf of those least able to speak up for themselves, to question Shona Robson on why she and her SNP party are specifically preventing adequate playing space from being allocated for young primary children to play and exercise in in the West End of Dundee.

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con) has kindly done so, in a debate on Preventing Obesity, 24 February 2010:

"I understand that new schools in Scotland are still being planned with no playing fields or outdoor sporting facilities and on sites that might fail to meet the requirement on the minimum playing area per child. I hope that the partnership with COSLA will ensure that, in future, there are adequate facilities for children."

Will Ms Robison please decide which camp she is really in?

"Excambion [exchange] of property at Blackness Road"

2010-02-25T22:58:00.009Z

On Monday 22 February 2010, the City Development Committee were asked to meet "as a matter of urgency" to discuss in private, excluding the press and public, "Excambion of property at Blackness Road". We understand this refers to the city council's discussions with the Al-Maktoum Foundation to exchange part of the grounds (stages 1 and 2) of St Joseph's for the Logie site (which the council originally owned and sold to Al-Maktoum in 2004), as well as the sale of the remainder (stage 3) of St Joseph's grounds once the school building is vacated.

Papers circulated earlier last week had cancelled the Committee meeting stating, "there is no outstanding business which cannot be dealt with at a later date", and we could not understand the urgency, so we asked the city council the following questions. The response from Roger Mennie, Legal Manager, and Patricia McIlquham, Depute Chief Executive (Support Services) are included below, and West End councillors have confirmed that these may be shared with the public.

Q1. Why does this item needs to be "considered as a matter or urgency...in view of the timescales involved"?

A. The proposed terms for the excambion have only just been concluded and the parties wish to proceed as soon as possible. The report could not have been drafted in time for the usual notice to be given for the meeting [on Monday] - hence the Convener agreed that the item be considered as a matter of urgency in terms of Standing Order 17(b).

Q2. What is the nature of the "exempt information" that will be involved?

A. The exempt information is as defined in paragraph 6 (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (other than the authority) and paragraph 9 (any terms proposed or to be proposed by or to the authority in the course of negotiation for a contract for the acquisition or disposal of property) of Part 1 of Schedule 7A to the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973.

Q3. What would be the specific reasons under which the Committee "may resolve...that the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the undernoted item"?

A. The reasons are as identified in paragraphs 6 and 9 aforementioned.

Q4. Why is this excambion being tabled before planning consent has been sought and how can it proceed when there is a school using the facilities?

A. The excambion will be conditional on planning permission being obtained. The legal documentation to be entered into will ensure that the new school is built before the transfer of ownership takes place.

Q5. What assurance can be given that the city council actually owns the land at St Joseph's and is entitled to complete the excambion? Was any part of the land gifted by people through bequests and are there any conditions that restrict the terms of its disposal?
A. The Title Deeds have been examined and there is nothing in the way of conditions or burdens which would prevent the intended sale and use of either piece of ground.

Q6. Why is the land not being offered to the open market, to ensure best value for public funds?

A. The two areas of land have been valued independently by the District Valuer having regard to open market value to ensure that the Council is receiving value for money.

We would like to take this opportunity to thank the West End councillors who took these questions forward on our behalf, and to the council officers for their prompt reply. Let's hope this is the beginning of more open dialogue with the council.

Notes from the West End Local Community Planning Partnership - 18th February 2010

2010-02-23T22:31:00.005Z

Following our request inviting the public to attend last week's West End Local Community Planning Partnership meeting, we're pleased that there was a good turn out. We report below some notes from this meeting:

It seems that the council do not intend to comply with the recommendations from HMIE regarding provision of playing fields, as Dundee City Council have nothing in their budget for playing fields at Victoria Park despite telling the Scottish Government that this was their intention. When asked why they were ignoring HMIe’s recommendations, the Project Director said that it was not her department, but that the Education Department could answer this query.

One of the West End councillors stated that when this point was raised at the Project Board meeting (27th January) a representative from the council indicated that they would contact the Scottish Government to state clearly what the council would have to provide in Victoria Park.

They are still awaiting this response.

A member of the public pointed out that if the council do not provide playing fields then they are in breach of the Schools Premises (Scotland) Regulations and they cannot therefore proceed with the project. A member of the St Joseph’s Parent Council brought up the fact that in a questionnaire completed by parents (soon to be issued to the Parent Forum of St Joseph's school), more than 90% of the parents want outdoor space and outdoor activities for the children on the new site.

Parents are still very concerned about the road safety aspects of the site, yet the police remain to see the plans so could not offer an opinion on the safe pick up and drop off of children.

Members of the public raised concerns about the consultation process by the Council and Diocese. They were told that it was the committee's understanding that both the parish, and school had been consulted, and not only was the Diocese in favour, but so were the parish and majority of parents.

A member of the St Joseph's Parent Council refuted this information based upon their own survey of parents and a parishioner of St Joseph's Church added that the parish were not consulted on support for the proposal.

The Project Director referred to the report to Education Committee on 11 May 2009 when the consultation ended and was then passed by the Education Committee, with no objections.

It was then pointed out by a member of the public that the report she referred to, did not include the fact that 81% of respondents with comments about the proposal were firmly against the proposal, yet this information was not mentioned in the report.

Another member of the public said they were very concerned that the land deal was still proceeding even although planning permission had not been granted. What if it was refused? St Joseph’s school grounds would be seriously diminished.

The Project Director gave a timetable of milestone dates re planning and tendering, which appear to be optimistic based on current EU regulations.

The topic of contamination was also raised and it was asked if any study was done to date. The answer was that is has not and the council was questioned why the land swap process was taking place even before a study was made.

New school design obtained from Freedom of Information

2010-02-13T23:29:00.008Z

On 26 January 2010, the West End Parents Committee received material from Scottish Government as a response to a Freedom of Information request. This material included early stage designs for the Logie site (June 2009) as well as detailed designs submitted by Dundee City Council to Scottish Government as a follow up to their application for dispensation in August 2009.

We confirmed with Scottish Government on 10 February 2010 that this material is now deemed to be in the public domain, and specifically that we are permitted to print/publish the site designs, which we have done below.

Note that the city council have shared the same design with the new Project Board, which convened on 27 January 2010.

Please consider these designs and make an effort to attend the West End Local Community Planning Partnership meeting on 18 February 2010, 7pm, at the Tartan Cafe

(53 Perth Road, Dundee) where the project director will give a presentation of the schools project.

West End Schools Project presentation 18 February at 7pm, Tartan Cafe

2010-02-10T23:15:00.003Z

The West End Schools Project is now in the pre-planning application stage (under the new planning regulations) and the local community has an opportunity to comment on this initial stage of planning. Brief details of the application (10/00048/PAN) are available from the city council's website at:

http://bwarrant.dundeecity.gov.uk/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?caseno=KX64KMGC03500

Note that the detailed site plans, which show the allocation of space for the building, playgrounds, green space, access road, car parking and areas of unused land, along with internal classroom layouts, are not included on this website. Hopefully the city council will share these soon.

As a statutory consultee, the West End Community Council was served with the Proposal of Application Notice and has a period of 21 days (which started on 1 February 2010) to comment.

Also, the next meeting of the West End Local Community Planning Partnership will include a presentation on the West End Schools Project from the Project Director, Ms Gillian Ross Pond.

18 February 2010 at 7pm
in the Tartan Cafe, 53 Perth Road, DD1 4HY (Google Map)

This is an opportunity for all members of the public to ask about the council's plans for these new schools and the use of Victoria Park for the provision of school playing fields.

Please come along if you can.

More confusion over DCC plans for Victoria Park

2009-12-18T22:03:00.020Z

This week's press has highlighted a number of worrying concerns raised by local councillors, as well as further confusing statements from the city council. To set the scene, the School Premises (General Standards and Requirements) (Scotland) Regulations 1967, and amended, state:

8(1) Every primary school shall have available and in close proximity to it playing fields not less than the area specified in Table IV according to the number of pupils for which the school is designed except where the provisions of regulation 8(4) apply.

Depending on the extent to which playing fields are shared between the two schools, Table IV indicates that the West End Schools proposal requires between 4000-6000 square metres (1-1.5 acres) dedicated for playing fields.

We have learned from Freedom of Information requests that the Director of Education wrote to Schools Division of Scottish Government in April and May 2009 as follows:

"With regard to the matter of playing fields, we are committed to providing facilities at this site for outdoor education."

"It will not have a playing field, although there will be one in close proximity."

Also, the Convener of Education stated on STV in May 2009:

"..there is no absolute need for them, for us to provide them with a playing field as part of the facilities of the school"

The Scottish Government decision notice, available from their website, grants dispensation to DCC for the size of site being less than that required by regulation 7, and states:

5.6 The provision of a hall, gymnasium and outdoor play area, along with the proposal for both schools to be able to use the nearby Victoria Park for outdoor activities and games, offer good potential for each school to ensure that all children receive the appropriate allocation of time for good quality physical education. As yet the council has not formally dedicated any space in the park for use by the schools, nor indicated what, if any, games pitches might be laid out for their sole or shared use. The draft plans for the proposed shared campus include the possibility of a small shared all-weather area which could be used for games and other outdoor activities. It is not clear at the moment whether or not this pitch will actually be built if the proposal goes ahead.

6.2 HMIE recommends that the council be asked to clarify its proposals for use of Victoria Park by giving a commitment to how it would dedicate part of the park for use of the two primary schools and a firmer indication of what pitches or sports areas might be laid out for their use at various times of the year.

Note the need for "appropriate allocation of time for good quality physical education" rather than occasional use of a public park, which any school at any time is fully entitled to do, in addition to its playing fields. Also, the city council is asked to give "a commitment to how it would dedicate part of the park" (emphasis added).

Now, read on and let us know if you can make sense of the council's plans ...

1. Plans for £10m shared campus get green light (The Courier, 11 Dec 2009)

The council said it will be "addressing" the Victoria Park issue - a draft proposal includes the possibility of a small, shared all-weather but no space has been dedicated in the park for schools use.

2. £10m schools plan to be discussed (Evening Telegraph, 11 Dec 2009)

The joint campus is expected to be three storeys high and include playing fields at Victoria Park for use by both schools.

3. Row over plans to use Victoria Park (The Courier, 12 Dec 2009)

... elected members, parents and teachers were not consulted about plans to use Victoria Park as playing fields for schools use. It was also claimed last night that PE sessions in the park could "change the nature" of a popular west end green space.

... Ministers were told that Victoria Park could be used for playing fields, perhaps with an all-weather surface installed, but Councillor Bidwell said a "detailed proposal" was not previously shared.

... a claim which Councillor Fordyce denied last night. "I can't say off the top of my head when it was first raised," she said. "It wasn't just tagged on at the end - it was raised."

4. City official not consulted on plan for Victoria Park (The Courier, 14 Dec 2009)

Director of leisure and communities Stewart Murdoch was not aware that education bosses had told ministers the park could be used for playing fields, perhaps with an all-weather surface installed.

... The plan, in particular the Victoria Park proposal, has caused much controversy locally and last night Mr McCready said it must be examined "in great detail" before being rubber-stamped.

... "Victoria Park is popular with local people in the west end and is well used," Mr McCready added. "Using it exclusively for educational purposes may impact on local people's use of the park and I want to be sure that their views are taken on board as well as the views of the education stakeholders."

5. School's park plan will not mean fence (The Courier, 15 Dec 2009)

Dundee City Council has stepped in to try to reassure west end residents that parts of Victoria Park are not to be fenced off for the exclusive use of pupils. The park has become central to the row over future primary school provision in the area.

... Attempting to answer the criticism, the council pointed to other schools in the city that use public parks and said there would also be outside space available on the shared campus itself.

"There will be playground areas, including a grassed area, located within the proposed shared campus," a council spokesman said.

"There is also the possibility of including an all-weather area in the draft plans for the former Harris Academy annexe site.

... the spokesman added, "The use of Victoria Park for sporting activity will form part of our plans but it is not our intention to erect any fencing around a dedicated area or to construct an all-weather surface at the park."

6. Worries over Victoria Park (Evening Telegraph, 15 Dec 2009)

Doubts have been expressed about the use of Victoria Park for playing fields, and west end councillor Fraser Macpherson revealed today many west end residents had contacted him with concerns.

One Blackness Road resident had written, "I find it unbelievable that a decision such as this appears to have been made with no public consultation. The park has been in use as open public space for over 100 years and a change of use of even part of it would be seriously detrimental to its use and to the west end as a whole. I would like to know why this is the only option being looked at, and what other options are available."

7. Concern at St Joseph's proposal (Letters, Evening Telegraph, 15 Dec 2009)

I feel the new school, with its wifi, and hopefully no leaks, is a double blow to the many St Joseph’s pupils who live in the west end tenements, as not only will they be robbed of the vital opportunity to explore the outdoors while at school, those whose parents take them to play at Victoria Park will have their space to play constrained as sections will be cordoned off for the new school’s facilities.

8. Council pressed on park proposal (The Courier, 16 Dec 2009)

The city council has pointed out that other city schools use public parks, and also said there would be outside space on the shared campus itself.

... (Councillor) McCready pointed out that the school inspectors' report issued last week talked about there being a "dedicated" part of the park for the schools to use.

9. Victoria Park talk "most unhelpful" (Evening Telegraph, 16 Dec 2009)

West End SNP Councillor Jim Barrie spoke out over "rumours" associated with the proposal after talks with the director and convener of education.

... Councillor Barrie said, "It is important the public are aware and assured there will be no area 'cordoned off' for dedicated school use and full access for members of the public will continue."

... Mr Barrie said, "... I remember as a five-year-old pupil the excitement of the rare visits to Victoria Park for summer sports day, and being introduced to the many varieties of trees in Balgay Park. That is what Balgay Park is there for, and the occasional use of its facilities should be encouraged. I am sure the regular users of the park would love to see more children playing, not only in Victoria Park, but exploring the trails up Balgay Hill and visiting the Observatory."

10. Don't despoil Victoria Park (Letters, The Courier, 18 Dec 2009)

The Friends of Balgay heard a brief hint of this plan a few weeks ago and immediately protested.

Victoria Park is very well used by families and young people who gather together there, picnic when the weather is fine and enjoy the friendly atmosphere.

If football is played there, the ground will be churned up and lying on the grass will no longer be comfortable or even possible.

... To get to Victoria Park from the planned school site, children would have to walk quite a distance up Blackness Road, negotiate what is quite a dangerous crossroads and make their way round the flower beds. It would seem that a simpler solution would be to bus the children to Lochee Park and allow them to use the facilities available there.

11. Pledge to consult Victoria Park users (Evening Telegraph, 18 Dec 2009)

In an email to Cllr MacPherson, Mr Collins pointed out that new regulations now give easier opportunity for anyone who wishes to make comment on a planning issue and emphasised no major takeover of any of the park space is envisaged.

He added there are “no proposals to erect fences and the statement I have read in the Press about a possible all-weather facility is quite simply wrong — no such facility is proposed.

12. Victoria Park concerns - feedback from the Director of Education (Councillor Fraser Macpherson's blog, www.dundeewestend.com, 18 Dec 2009)

... the City Council's Director of Education has responded to me about the department's proposals for use of Victoria Park by the schools on the proposed shared campus on the former Logie Secondary School site as follows :

"I want to emphasise that no major take over of any of the park space is envisaged. Primary schools in Dundee who do not have dedicated playing fields occasionally make use of park space for events such as sports days and football matches, but their use tends to be rare. I do not envisage the new West End campus requiring anything more frequent in Victoria Park."

If you can decipher the council's plans and align these with the Scottish Government and HMIe decision notice, please leave a comment and help us understand.

STV coverage of the decision on the council's application for dispensation

2009-12-12T23:50:00.003Z

A spokesperson for the West End Parents Committee was interviewed by STV yesterday for a reaction to the Scottish Government's decision to approve Dundee City Council's application for dispensation. See here for the STV footage: http://news.stv.tv/video/dundee-tayside/stv-news-local-tayside-20091211/ (1m45s into the video).

Note that although the council submitted an application on 4 August 2009 for dispensation on size of site and provision of playing fields, they later amended the application on 15 September 2009 by promising to use Victoria Park for playing fields and retracted their application for dispensation under Regulation 8 of the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 1967 and as amended.

Scottish Government confirms Logie site is too small for regulations

2009-12-10T21:07:00.003Z

We've received confirmation that the proposals for new schools in the West End will not meet minimum government regulations governing size of site. Scottish Ministers have approved the city council's application for dispensation from the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 1967 and as amended, on the basis that:

"Scottish Ministers are content to approve, in terms of regulation 7(6), the area of the west end site for the proposed two schools and nursery. They take the view that, in all the circumstances, it would be unreasonable to apply the standards prescribed in the regulation."

The city council has also been instructed to follow HMIe recommendations:

"...to clarify its proposals for use of Victoria Park by giving a commitment to how it would dedicate part of the park for use of the two primary schools and a firmer indication of what pitches or sports areas might be laid out for their use at various times of the year. The council should also seek to reassure parents about the levels of contamination of soil at the proposed site and the level of danger from the nearby electricity sub-station. HMIE also recommends that the council shares and discusses the detailed plans for the joint campus with parents."

We look forward to receiving the council's detailed plans and glad to see that the council has been made aware that the provision of playing fields is a requirement, not a guideline, nor as the Education Convener stated in May 2009,

"there is no absolute need for them...for us to provide them with a playing field"

Some confusion at DCC regarding use of Victoria Park

2009-11-21T20:58:00.003Z

Following our previous blog entry regarding the response from the Director of Leisure and Communities to Cllr Richard McCready, stating they have "no such plans" to use Victoria Park for school playing fields, we have obtained information under FOISA that suggests some confusion between departments in the city council. We asked:

(3a). Is DCC intending to use any of the following spaces - Victoria Park, Lochee Park, Magdalen Green, - for the purpose of sport and recreational activities by the proposed new West End Primary Schools (the shared campus for Park Place and St Joseph's)?

The response given under FOISA was:

"DCC is intending that Victoria Park will be used as necessary by the proposed West End Campus"

Please can someone enlighten us regarding the city council's plans for Victoria Park with respect to the proposed new West End schools?

Update on DCC application to Scottish Government

2009-11-19T22:40:00.003Z

Cllr Fraser Macpherson has posted an update on his website (www.dundeewestend.com) advising that the city council's application for dispensation should soon result in a decision from Scottish Ministers. The Director of Education is quoted to be looking forward, "with somewhat bated breath", to a decision being made soon.

Remember that the application was made on 4 August 2009, over 4 months ago, but the council has not kept parents or residents updated with developments. It has made no statement about the inclusion of Victoria Park in its application, although Schools Division in Edinburgh have confirmed that the application intends for this public park to provide playing fields for the new schools.

When a West End councillor recently asked the Director of Leisure and Communities about "a briefing on any plans to use Victoria Park in the West End Ward for school playing fields for the proposed West End school located at the former Logie site", his official and confirmed reply was:

"We have no such plans"

What is going on in Tayside House?

Declining non-staff expenditure on St Joseph's school

2009-11-18T06:34:00.004Z

We have received data under FOISA from Dundee City Council relating to non-staff costs, which shows a concerning year-on-year downward trend in such expenditure; this may explain the visible deterioration of the school building.

If the 2004/05 level of expenditure had continued in the following four years, St Joseph's would have received a further £170,630 of investment, which could have been spent on improving the school building. for comparison, non-staff costs for Park Place PS are also shown in the figure. This comparison is striking because St Joseph's PS is an older and larger building with 46% more pupils than Park Place PS.

Victoria Park to be used for new schools playing fields

2009-11-14T12:14:00.002Z

We have received confirmation from Schools Division of Scottish Government that the City Council's application for dispensation also includes an intention that Victoria Park, 700m west of the proposed Logie site, would be used to provide playing fields for the new schools.

As we highlighted previously, this was not part of the original proposal that went to public consultation, and neither parents, elected councillors, church representatives, residents or the general public are aware of this recently addition.

What do you think of this plan? Should this undulating public park be given over, either in part or in total, for use by primary-age schoolchildren? What do teachers think about the logistics of taking large numbers of children from school to a public park that has no changing facilities, no toilets or other amenities, no enclosed area for safe play away from members of the public, dogs etc.?

Parents seek assurance that Council will maintain £20m investment in Primary and Nursery school improvements in the West End and Lochee

2009-10-17T22:11:00.004+01:00

The West End Parents Committee would like to congratulate Dundee City Council on its successful application for Harris Academy to be included in the first tranche of funding from the Scottish Futures Trust and will receive two-thirds of the funding required for refurbishment.

However, we seek assurance that the city council will not redirect funds from primary and nursery schools projects to the secondary school estate. Under the terms of SFT funding, local councils need to pay for the remaining one-third of the required funds (rumoured to be at least £8m). Cllr Laurie Bidwell has asked on his website whether "other planned capital improvements may have to be delayed to make way for the refurbishment of Harris Academy" and if the planned projects in Whitfield, the West End and Lochee may "all need to go back down the queue".

The city council has identified a need to improve primary and nursery schools in these areas and has been given approval by Dundee councillors to invest £20m in the West End and Lochee projects. The projects are currently awaiting a decision from Fiona Hyslop MSP regarding the council's application for permission to dispense with the School Premises (Scotland) Regulations, which govern the minimum site areas and provision of playing fields.

If Scottish Ministers give their approval, the city council will be given special permission to proceed with the projects; if Scottish Ministers reject the application, then the council should make new proposals that comply with the regulations.

We sincerely hope that they will maintain their promise to the primary and nursery schools, particularly given that their own Asset Management Plan for 2008 identified St Joseph's Primary School as being in the most urgent need to improve its physical condition, since it was classed as Poor (rating 2) under the council's Condition, Suitability and Sufficiency criteria, whereas Park Place Primary and Nursery, as well as Harris Academy, were all classed as being in Satisfactory Condition (rating 3).

DCC application for dispensation from School Premises Regulations obtained under Freedom of Information

2009-09-26T17:50:00.006+01:00

Regarding the West End Schools Project and the council's application to Scottish Ministers for dispensation from the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations 1967 and as amended, the West End Parents Committee have obtained documents under Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 which the local authority have refused to publish, have refused sight of to elected councillors of the council's Education Committee, and which the Education Convener, Cllr Liz Fordyce, has claimed she considers to be a "confidential letter". The council has also refused to make the information available in response to an FOISA request. The council's formal position on this is that they are withholding the documents because:

"...it has been widely reported in the media that parents of children affected by the proposed West End schools merger are considering taking legal action against the Council, presumably by way of Judicial Review in the Court of Session. Accordingly Officers are not at liberty to disclose documents that will form part of the Council's defence to such an action, including the application made to the Scottish Government under the 1967 Regulations, at this time."

We would question what is so confidential in the application that it cannot be made public. The documents we have received under Freedom of Information suggest that the council's application includes: derogation to be granted since the regulations do not define how to interpret them with regard to a shared campus - however it is clear that other Scottish authorities have managed to deliver new shared campuses without recourse to Scottish Ministers for dispensation.

The documents we have obtained also include maps showing Victoria Park and the distance between this public space and the Logie site. We would ask if the council intends to use Victoria Park to provide playing fields in close proximity to the Logie site, as it is clear that there will be none on the site itself. We would also ask:

What is so secret that the Education Convener wrote in an email that she considers it to be a "confidential" letter? It has not been made available to other councillors so we would assume the council would not have given any elected member access to the documents?
What do parents think of the children using Victoria Park for the provision of playing fields for the new schools?
What do the Friends of Balgay Park think about this information?
What does the West End Community Council think about this?
What do local residents on Blackness Road and surrounding areas think about this?
What do teachers think about this, as they will be the ones that have to make time in the PE curriculum to walk with the children and supervise them in a public park which members of the public are entitled to visit and exercise their dogs?
What will the council do to ensure the provision of suitable facilities with running water, changing facilities, first aid, telephones, marked sports pitches, fenced off areas for safe play, protection from dogs, enclosed all-weather pitches?
What does Colin Rennie from Fields in Trust make of this, having previously cautioned the Director of Education against "seeking a waiver to obtain a level of provision less than is required by the regulations"?
What is the view of Sportscotland regarding the loss of the existing St Joseph's playing field when the grounds are sold to the Al-Maktoum Foundation?

Victoria Park is not zoned for this in the Dundee Local Plan and council officers stated during public consultation, when asked, that they could not site the new schools in Victoria Park for this reason. What has changed between March and now?

Council's "confidential letter" to Scottish Government

2009-09-19T09:50:00.002+01:00

The Education Convener, Councillor Liz Fordyce, has declined to divulge what she considers to be a "confidential letter" between Dundee City Council and Scottish Government. The letter she refers to is the Council's application to Scottish Government, dated 4 August 2009, for dispensation from the minimum government regulations regarding the size of site and provision of playing fields, and relates to the Council's £10.3m project to build new schools in the West End of the city, on the site of the former Harris Academy Annexe on Blackness Road.

Councillor Fordyce had previously said in May 2009 that "there is no absolute need...to provide them with a playing field as part of the facilities of the school." She has today advised that she does not feel it is a good thing to "waste people's time or council resources."

It is unfortunate, then, that the Council has spent 6 months of public funds and Council resources repeatedly assuring parents, elected members and church representatives that the proposed site for the new schools was big enough and there would be adequate recreational/outdoor space, and that this had been "confirmed by Scottish Government" (Report 274-2009 to the Education Committee, 11 May 2009), but has now determined that it is no longer certain of this.

Some might consider that to be a waste of people's time and council resources!

Let's hope that the Chief Executive Designate will review this decision to withhold the letter and in the spirit of openness and transparency, offer up the Council's application for dispensation to public scrutiny.

Council U-turn - WEPC response

2009-08-18T18:06:00.005+01:00

Education Committee was Misled

In a press release issued yesterday, Dundee City Council has finally admitted that it does not know if the site for new schools in the West End will comply with the School Premises (Scotland) Regulations. It is now seeking special dispensation from the Scottish Government.

The council's "extensive consultation" left key questions unanswered and parents misrepresented: 81% of written representations were against the proposal, yet this was not mentioned in the post-consultation report! More importantly, report 274-2009 to the Education Committee, on the basis of which the councillors "agreed to move forward with the plans", included this answer to a “Frequently Asked Question”:

Q: "Is the site big enough and will there be adequate recreational/outdoor space?'
A. "Yes. This has been confirmed by the Scottish Government."

The Scottish Government has since verified that no such confirmation had been given - nor could it have been! Clearly that confirmation is only now being sought. Thus the Education Committee, as well as parents and church representatives, were deliberately misled on this very important matter. Indeed, the Director of Education was questioned on this matter in City Chambers and gave his assurance that the site met the regulations. He was in no position to give any such assurance as yesterday's press release now makes clear.

Clearly this brings into question the validity of the Education Committee's decision on 11 May 2009 to approve the proposal.

We have learned through Freedom of Information requests that only one school project in the entire country has needed dispensation in recent years. Indeed, Dundee primary schools built under the PPP initiative all have considerably more site area per pupil than the proposed new West End schools. Obviously the proposed shared campus with two schools and a nursery will need more space than a single school and nursery with the same total rolls. Furthermore, the regulations require a playing field on site or in close proximity, and Colin Rennie from Fields in Trust has already cautioned the Director of Education "not to treat these regulations lightly", and especially so given "the appalling levels of childhood obesity" in Scotland.

SNP administration seeks to Limit Parental Involvement in Planning of New Schools

The SNP administration, including the Convener of Education, recently voted against an amendment to widen parental involvement in the project boards created to take these proposals forward. It is therefore clear that it wants to limit the involvement of parents in the planning of these new schools.

Valuable School Site may be Lost for Future Generations

The council argues that "Dundee contains only a limited number of available spaces where schools could be located", yet this makes it all the more incredible that it is prepared to lose the site that currently accommodates St Joseph's Primary School (and until recently Bellfield Nursery). This site is sheltered, well-situated and until recently had a single large playing field, which the council turned mostly into a school/church car park (of sorts) a few years ago. The council plans to sell all of this to the Al-Maktoum Foundation without even putting it on the open market, part-exchanging some of this land for the proposed site for new schools - the so-called Logie site of the former Harris Academy Annexe on Blackness Road.

Decision awaited from Scottish Ministers

The School Premises (Scotland) Regulations are quite clear, and we have long argued that the plan cannot meet them. We are confident that Fiona Hyslop and her colleagues will safeguard our children and uphold the regulations.

Council U-turn - press release 17 August 2009

2009-08-18T18:02:00.005+01:00

Dundee City Council issued the following press release yesterday (17 August 2009). The Evening Telegraph published an article about this on p7 titled "School sites choice check":

SITES FOR NEW SCHOOLS

Dundee City Council is to meet with Scottish Government officials to finalise arrangements over the proposed sites for the new Lochee and West End primary schools, so that the near £20 million investment can proceed.

The city council believes that its plans represent the best possible options to improve educational facilities for primary pupils in the two areas, but it wants to ensure that there are no doubts remaining over the status of the sites under School Premises regulations.

Dundee City Council is to confirm if dispensation is required from the Scottish Government so that the projects can go ahead. The regulations were issued at a time when shared sites were not being actively pursued by local authorities. Since the regulations were issued a number of shared sites have been developed in Scotland.

A number of parents have raised questions around the regulations and it is hoped that once these have been clarified everyone can then concentrate on the development of the new schools.

The design process for the four new schools has now started. The new schools are intended to replace the current Lochee/Charleston and St Clement's primaries, along with new facilities for Park Place Primary and nursery and St Joseph's Primary.

A Dundee City Council education department spokesman said: "Since the original reports were unanimously approved by the education committee in January, extensive consultation followed and the committee then agreed to move forward with the plans.

"The committee also passed a report to create of a series of project boards that would develop the proposals for the new schools with input from as wide a range of the relevant people as possible.

"Now, as this process gets underway, the city council is looking to ensure that the situation on the size of the sites is clarified at a national level.

"Dundee contains only a limited number of available spaces where schools could be located."

"We have tried to ensure that the sites are relevant to population trends and would give us the best value for education for many years into the future.

"The investment of nearly £20 million in these new buildings would represent a significant improvement in educational facilities for many generations to come.

"To this end, we have been in correspondence with Scottish Government officials and are now looking to meet with representatives over these issues."

Courier article: "Parents to join schools project"

2009-06-02T19:24:00.003+01:00

As reported on p5 of The Courier, 1 June 2009 (not available online):

A well-attended public meeting yesterday gave a mandate to the West End Parents group to pursue their concerns over the planned merger of St Joseph's and Park Place Primary schools on the site of the former Harris Academy annexe.

Chairman Kiran Oza said their next step will be to meet officials of Dundee City Council education department as soon as possible to become involved in the planning process and ensure their concerns are addressed.

He said, "The council is proceeding with their plans and it is important we engage with that. At the education committee on May 11 (when councillors voted to combine the two schools and the Park Place Nursery) it was said they were setting up a number of groups, including a project group and an implementation group, and we would look to get involved with those groups."

Mr Oza said the principal issues raised from the floor of the meeting, held at Club Romano, included whether the council conformed to existing legislation in trying to do all they want at the site, and questions on parking and traffic.

"There was also concern that officials have said they would look at tarmac or concreting over the area as a solution to possible contamination at the site. People were unhappy about this as both are porous and we will need to get some advice on that", Mr Oza said.

Parents have complained the site has insufficient space for playing fields.

"National body concerned at shared school ground"

2009-05-27T23:41:00.003+01:00

An article in The Courier on 21 May 2009 reported on the correspondence between Fields in Trust and Dundee City Council. The article is not available on The Courier's website, so it has been transcribed here:

A national organisation dedicated to protecting and improving outdoor sports and play areas has sought assurances from Dundee City Council about a shared campus for two primary schools, writes Brian Allison, local Government reporter.

The council has agreed to go ahead with controversial plans to create a shared campus for St Joseph's primary school and Park Place primary and nursery on the site of the former Harris Academy annexe in Blackness Road.

The views of parents on the scheme are sharply divided, with those of pupils at Park Place generally in favour while many of the St Joseph's parents are against it.

There were angry scenes at last week's meeting of the education committee, which endorsed the plan, with opponents shouting that they had been lied to by the council.

Now the matter has been raised with Fields in Trust (FIT), which was formerly the National Playing Fields Association.

Scottish manager of FIT, Colin Rennie, said they had been contacted by a number of parents concerned that the new site might be too small to allow proper play and outdoor sports provision.

Mr Rennie has written to director of education Jim Collins asking for details of how the council intends to meet the requirements of the school premises regulations in relation to outdoor sports and play provision at the site.

"Our organisation would caution against seeking a waiver to obtain a level of provision less than is required by the regulations," he said.

"Our message to the council is not to take this matter lightly," he said.

"Given the appalling levels of childhood obesity throughout the country it is something all councils should take seriously."

He said taking part in sports and exercise provided not just physical benefits for children but also social and psychological ones as well.

FIT is the only independent UK-wide organisation with a mission to protect and improve outdoor spaces and facilities for sports and play.

Its intention is to ensure that people of all ages have somewhere nearby to go for healthy, outdoor activities.

"No absolute need for them ... for us to provide them with a playing field"

2009-05-13T12:49:00.005+01:00

Speaking on STV last night, Cllr Liz Fordyce (Education Convener of the Education Committee) had this to say:

“It is tight, but … where we’ve had room we’ve built out the way and schools are only one storey high. This one we could build up the way and they’ll still have all the facilities. It is an inner city school so there is no absolute need for them ... for us to provide them with a playing field as part of the facilities of the school.”

"It's a tight site"

2009-05-13T00:01:00.007+01:00

The Director of Education and the new Education Convener have both independently admitted that the Logie site is "a tight site" but maintain that it is big enough to accommodate 450 primary school pupils in two schools, plus up to 110 pupils in the new nursery, as well as the ancillary accommodation and other facilities required by the School Premises (Scotland) Regulations 1967, and as amended.

The council's proposal (report 69-2009) states that they will build:

..."2 x 1 stream primary schools with 6 additional classrooms, a nursery and full ancillary accommodation ... within the overall 4595m² footprint of the building"

The claimed area of the site is 1.27 hectares (12,700 m²).

How much land does 4595m² consume? We had a go, using Google Planimeter and got the following for 4597m²:

You'll have to zoom into the Logie site area and find the site: it's bounded by Glenagnes Road to the west, Blackness Road to the south and Rosefield Street to the east.

Try it yourself and see how creative you can be with building shapes that come to the same total.

How much room is left for other facilities?

Outcome of Education Committee Meeting 11 May 2009

2009-05-12T23:30:00.004+01:00

Last night, the Education Committee of Dundee City Council approved the proposal to build new schools on the Logie site and relocate St Joseph's Primary, Park Place Primary and Park Place Nursery schools to that site.

Actually, they voted on this proposal in January 2009 and last night was simply a confirmation of this following public consultation and the Director of Education's report (274-2009) on the outcome of the consultation exercise.

They listened to our deputation and that of the St Joseph's Parent Council, but they didn't ask any questions, so they must have agreed with the speakers, and still they approved the proposal.

Plus ça change.

We issued statements to The Courier and Radio Tay. The Evening Telegraph has expanded (and misinterpreted) the words in our statement, the BBC website asked for a statement for a story they were running, and we've been interviewed and broadcast on GMTV and STV.

We are committed to working to ensure that the Director of Education keeps to his promise to cap the pupil intake for the new schools at 450 (combined) and to ensure that the Council delivers genuine improvements to the schools estate for the West End.

Three storeys (or more)?

2009-05-05T22:50:00.002+01:00

We contacted the Director of Education about the council's proposal and have obtained his permission to quote his responses.

Director of Education: “There is no information to suggest that a three-storey primary school is not ideal, and it is certainly not unusual - there are several examples in Dundee, including Forthill, Hillside and Sidlaw View.”

The schools you refer to are all quite old (1940’s-1960’s) and not indicative of best practice for the 21st century. Many new primary schools in Scotland are single storey and nearly all are no more than two storeys.

In Dundee, it has been stated that Craigowl is three-storey. Since it is built on a slope, it is two storeys at the front. As a result, occupants are never more than one storey away from the ground.

Confirmation that there will be no playing field

2009-05-04T22:10:00.004+01:00

We contacted the Director of Education about the council's proposal and have obtained his permission to quote his responses.

Director of Education: “With regard to the matter of playing fields, we are committed to providing facilities at this site for outdoor education. Many inner city schools, including St Joseph's and Park Place, do not have playing fields in close proximity, and the regulations acknowledge that there will be occasions when enforcement of this regulation is "impracticable or would be unreasonable". The reference to SportScotland is for guidance only, and is generally to be taken into account when building on a new greenfield site.”

We take this as further evidence, if any was needed, that there would be no playing fields, should the proposal go ahead. This does not meet the minimum standards in the regulations. Furthermore, the SportScotland guidance makes no reference to any distinction between greenfield and brownfield sites.

Confirmation that the Logie site is too small

2009-05-03T12:30:00.005+01:00

The Scottish Executive Education Department Circular 3/2004 “Guidance on Determining School Capacities” states that: “Authorities will want to ensure that their system for determining school capacities is open, transparent, fair and rigorous. They will also want to ensure that this system is applied consistently to schools across their area.”

We contacted the Director of Education about the council's proposal and have obtained his permission to quote his responses.

Director of Education: “In Dundee we take account of the number of children that can be taught in a classroom by one teacher, and we have regard to both local and national guidelines and regulations regarding class size. Therefore, in a one-stream primary school, in Dundee the capacity is likely to be 217 (25, 30,30, 33, 33, 33, 33 respectively in each of the 7 classes). This takes account of Circular 1/2007, issued by the Scottish Executive on 2 April 2007, which contains formal guidance on class sizes in P1, the Education (Lower Primary Class Sizes (Scotland) Regulations 1999 and the Scheme of Salaries and Conditions of Service for Teaching Staff in School Education. As you are aware, our proposals for the West End allow for 6 additional classrooms to be used as needed by the two schools, so in theory the capacity of each school could increase by up to 198 (i.e. if all 6 classrooms were used by one of the schools, with up to 33 pupils in each room).”

 In other words the combined capacity for the primary pupils is 217+217+198 = 632. Even if the proposal was for ONE primary school with this capacity, the regulations state that the site area for this school should be at least 12,000 sq. metres. Of course, the proposal is not to build one primary school, but to build TWO with shared facilities. And then there is the nursery which it has been stated will have a capacity of at least 90 a.m. and 90 p.m. Any reasonable interpretation of the regulations leads to the same conclusion:

Minimum statutory requirements on site size cannot be met by this proposal

The size of the proposed site is 12,700 sq. m. according to the report to the Education Committee (although see comments below on usable area of the site). Even if the schools were merged, nursery capacity was only 90, and the entire site was usable, this would be 1,800 sq. m. short.

ONE primary school with capacity of 632:        12,000 sq. m.
Nursery with capacity of 90:                     2,500 sq. m.
Total area for minimum statutory requirements:  14,500 sq. m.

In addition, there should be a playing field available on site or in close proximity of 6,000 sq. m.

Director of Education: “Any proposed demolition of the listed janitor's house would have to be included in the development proposals, and any request for tree removal would go through normal planning approval processes.”

We infer from this response that no assumption can be made at this stage about the demolition of the janitor’s house. Therefore, the area of site that can be assumed to be available for new build is considerably reduced, by our estimate to no more than 11,000 sq metres (taking into account also the steep slope at the north of the site). The current St. Joseph’s site (including car park and pitch) is approximately 11,000 sq. metres and accommodates one school, not two schools plus a nursery!

Paused, reflected and re-opened!

2009-05-02T09:09:00.003+01:00

So, we've all paused for over a week now. All visitors have had an opportunity to reflect on the comments that were being posted and we can hopefully look forward to more constructive comments in future.

We're going to re-open the website to allow comments to blog entries, but these will be checked before publishing to the website. The comments may have to be edited and in extreme cases may not be allowed at all.

Guidance is as before: keep your comments on topic and avoid making unkind references to private individuals or groups. For further content guidance, please see Google's Blogger Content Policy.

For those people who were able to attend the Club Romano meeting a couple of weeks ago, thanks again for your time and contributions. We hope that the information presented was of interest and has encouraged you to consider the council's proposal and the way in which the consultation process has been conducted.

Pausing for reflection

2009-04-22T18:27:00.004+01:00

Due to some unpleasant comments that have been posted earlier today, this website will not accept comments for the time being to give everyone a chance to reflect on what has been said and whether it is in the spirit of open and honest dialogue.

We hope that this action can be revoked in the near future.

The £10.3m question

2009-04-21T20:13:00.002+01:00

During the course of some reasoned debate within the Meeting at Club Romano comments, an interesting question has been posed:

Anonymous said...: To everyone who is against the proposed move to a new site I have one question. The council have stated that they need to sell the land St. Joseph's is currenly on to fund the building of a new school. If you want the school to remain on the exisiting site where is the money coming from to do this? The teachers have stated that the school is now not suitable for modern day teaching. I have read lots of views and concerns about why the school should not be moved. Do our children not deserve to be taught in suitable surroundings?; April 21, 2009 6:48 PM

To initiate discussion, the council's proposal 69-2009 states in section 3.1:

"The estimated cost of building 2 x 1 stream primary schools with 6 additional
classrooms, a nursery and full ancillary accommodation totalling approximately
4595m2 is £10.3m based on a start date of Q1 2010 and a completion date during Q2
2011. This project can be funded from capital receipts (£2.05m) and prudential
borrowing from revenue savings £0.6m) and the balance (£7.65m) will have to be
funded from capital receipts from the sale of school sites vacated as part of the PPP
project."

Note that the term "PPP project" does not refer to this proposal because it is not PPP. At the St Joseph's consultation meeting it was confirmed that the £7.65m is already available.

Meeting at Club Romano

2009-04-19T23:33:00.003+01:00

Today's meeting at Club Romano was a great success! It was well-attended with over 50 parents, parishioners, residents, councillors, press and other interested parties. The presentations were well received and everyone participated in an open, fair, informative and reasoned debate.

We are delighted that so many people came to listen and ask questions, despite the lure of the sunny weather outside the club - thank you.

We hope that the handouts at the meeting will provide you with information to help you write to your local Councillor, who is an elected member of the Education Committee. This information will be published on the website in the near future. The Director's report is anticipated imminently and we look forward to reading this.

We have added a proforma letter to the website and you can print it or download and modify it if you wish to share your concerns with your local Councillor, or to one of the 5 non-elected members.

The consultation period ended on 6 April, but we anticipate that the Committee will vote on the proposal at the next meeting, which is scheduled for 27 April. Therefore it is very important that you write to your Councillor urgently. We have already sent them the handouts but please let them know of any specific or additional concerns that you may have.

The list of all 29 Councillors and their contact details (phone, address, email, surgery dates/times) is available on the Dundee Council website.

Please also continue to raise awareness of the concerns about the size and suitability of the site by sharing this information with your friends and neighbours.

Anonymous posts allowed again

2009-04-17T00:50:00.004+01:00

Following feedback from visitors, we've decided to allow Anonymous comments once more. Please be sensible with this: use the Name/URL option rather than posting completely Anonymous comments, and be consistent so that others can follow the trail of comments that you leave.

Also, comments are permitted without moderation, but if this is abused, all comments will have to be moderated before being published, which will delay adding your comment to the website.

Note: if you're having trouble locating the comments, just click on the Title of the blog post. This will show you the entry followed by comments, as well as a text box to post your own comment.

St Joseph's Primary School Proposed Move - Open meeting

2009-04-15T15:05:00.005+01:00

An Open Discussion Meeting for all Stake Holders including Parents and Carers of Current and Future Pupils, Parishioners and Local Residents.

New Urgent Information has become available regarding the City Council’s Proposal for New Schools in West End.

Time to Reflect and Question, at:

3 p.m.,
SUNDAY APRIL 19
CLUB ROMANO
16 West Wynd, Dundee (Off Perth Road)

Website reopened for discussion

2009-04-15T14:49:00.004+01:00

The Council's public consulation period ended last week on 6 April 2009. We hope that you were able to make written representation to the Project Director, Gillian Ross Pond, in time for the deadline.

We have been advised that the Director of Education will now review all the representations and write a report to go before the Education Committee to consider whether to accept or reject the proposal. All 29 local Councillors will be involved in this decision so it is important that you let your local councillor know your views and if you have any concerns.

We are advised that the date of this event has yet to be confirmed, but it may be near the end of this month. We are therefore reopening this website for comments and open discussion.

In order to ensure clarity in the discussion, comments can only be posted if you have signed up to one of several online systems. Although you can no longer post Anonymous comments, you can sign up to one of these systems using whichever nom-de-plume you wish (as long as it complies with the system's terms and conditions). This should make it easier to follow discussions.

No more comments

2009-04-05T23:22:00.003+01:00

The end of the public consultation is almost upon us and we have decided that no further comments should be posted to the blog.

Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to the debate thus far. We hope that you have found the information and discussion useful and interesting.

Please remember to submit your written representation to Gillian Ross Pond by 6 April 2009, whether you are in favour of the proposal as it is, or if you have questions and concerns.

Press coverage and access to our document

2009-04-02T16:52:00.004+01:00

The Evening Telegraph has published articles in recent days covering the Council's proposal to build new schools on the Logie site and has today printed a letter from Will K. Laing.

The original article from 31 Mar doesn't appear to be online but our response is here:

http://www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/output/2009/04/01/story12868751t0.shtm

They have also printed a letter from Will K. Laing in favour of the proposal as it stands:

http://www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/output/2009/04/02/letters.shtm

Note: if you know anyone who is interested in reading the document but doesn't have internet access and did not collect one of the handouts, perhaps you could print a copy for them or direct them to a public library?

Write to Gillian Ross Pond by 6 April 2009

2009-04-02T12:22:00.005+01:00

This blog site was started with the aims of:

distributing information gathered by parents
encouraging open debate and questioning of the proposal
countering some misleading arguments that were being put forward
and leading hopefully to a better informed outcome

We hope it is achieving these aims.

We hope that as many stakeholders as possible will write to Gillian Ross Pond, irrespective of their views on the proposal. We believe that the Council can only be helped in its decision-making by more people contributing to the consultation process. Whatever the Council decides, let's urge them to ensure that St Joseph's, Park Place and Park Place Nursery get the investment they deserve.

Article in the Evening Telegraph 31 March 2009

2009-04-01T06:51:00.005+01:00

The Dundee Evening Telegraph has published an article in yesterday's edition (31 March 2009, p10) with quotes from the website and comment from representatives of Dundee City Council, the Bishop of Dunkeld and Councillor Fraser Macpherson.

The West End Parents group did not contact the Evening Telegraph to request this publication.

Whilst we acknowledge the additional publicity this article generates, it would appear that our aims may have been misunderstood. The article states:

1. "Parents opposed to a new shared primary school campus in Dundee's West End..."

The West End Parents are not opposed to a new school, nor to a shared campus: we simply have some serious concerns about the size and suitability of the proposed site for bring two primary and one nursery school together.

2. "Claimed that sex offenders and drug addicts could pose a danger to pupils"

Nowhere on the website do we make this claim. The statement, as written by the Tele, is self-evident but our Questions and Concerns document does not make any "danger claims", we are simply asking the Council to check whether sex offenders and drug addicts are in the vicinity of the proposed site. This is not intended to be scaremongering: the question was posed to the Director of Education at one of the consultation meetings and he has promised to investigate this with the Police.

3. "No evidence has been produced in support of these allegations"

No allegations have been made. We have only posed the question, asking for information regarding the truth from the Council. Our sources have asked to remain anonymous (for obvious reasons) and we have asked the Council to check. Time is running out for the consultation process and we felt there was no alternative choice but to include these questions on the public website. If the claims are untrue, please let us know. What do local residents think?

4. "The website states, 'The proposed site is overlooked by tenement housing'"

Yes, this is a fact. However, we did not intend this to be social commentary on the type of residents of tenement housing. Many of us, like the concerned commenter last night, live or have lived in tenement housing. The point is there are multiple residences overlooking the play areas of the new site. The current site for St Joseph's does not have this concern and Park Place is only partially overlooked.

5. "...does not meet minimum statutory requirements, and questions the availability of nearby playing fields...clearly too small and would deny [the children] the space to which they are entitled according to Scottish Government regulations."

Please, please read the cited references and make up your own mind. If there are other relevant documents, please provide citations for these in the related blog post. We have made these claims based on the regulations that we have identified, either within the group or following discussion with the appropriate Council or Government body.
When asked about this at consultation meetings, the Director of Education responded that there are "special privileges" that can be dispensed by the Government for sites such as this in an "inner site environment".
The School Premises Regulations (Scotland) 1967 as amended in 1973 and 79 do indeed include clauses such as 7(6):

Where the Secretary of State is satisfied that it is impracticable or would be unreasonable to apply the standards prescribed in this regulation to a particular school building. the area of the site for that school building shall be such as may be approved.

However, is this what we aspire to for the children in a new build?

6. "Bishop open to discussions"

Our Questions and Concerns document is not a religious document. While we anticipate that some parents from St Joseph's school and parishioners from the adjacent church may have concerns in regard to the proposals, we represent the views of a group that have questions and concerns about the size and suitability of the new site.

7. "The Diocese is aware school rolls are shrinking..."

This is untrue in the case of Park Place Primary, Park Place Nursery and St Joseph's Primary schools: the Council's roll projections (section 4.3) indicate anticipated growth - 436 pupils for 2008/09, 445 for 2011/12.
At consultation meetings, the Director of Education also stated that there is an expectation that rolls for Park Place Nursery will rise by 20-40 places.

8. "Parents...are being urged to write to the council's project director Gillian Ross Pond by the start of next week"

Yes, please do make your views known to the Council, but only after you have been able to make an informed decision. If you have any questions, contribute to the discussion on this website, or call Ms Ross Pond on 01382 435161.

Contact your local Councillor

2009-03-31T23:51:00.006+01:00

In response to an email sent from West End Parents to Ward Councillors, Cllr Fraser Macpherson has requested that members of the anonymous group contact him directly in order to validate that this is a website constructed by parents and carers.

Cllr Macpherson has offered the following statement:

"I am very happy to speak at any time to any constituent; something I have practised throughout 8 years representing the West End on Dundee City Council. I will ensure that the questions you have raised are brought to the attention of the Director [of Education]."

He also assures that, "It goes without saying that the contact by any constituent to me is treated as confidential between myself and the constituent concerned."

Other ward councillors would no doubt be as happy to speak with constituents directly, whether they have concerns or are in favour of the proposal as it stands.

Please contact Cllr Fraser Macpherson directly, but remember to make your written representation to the Council by 6th April 2009.

Health Week

2009-03-30T08:40:00.000+01:00

It seems that this week is Health Week at one of the primary schools and the pupils "will be taking part in various activities from Monday to Friday. This will include rugby, football, dance, athletics, cross country, karate, yoga, and healthy living talks".

Where will such activities take place if the schools are moved to the new Logie site?

Suggested text to include in written representation

2009-03-29T09:03:00.016+01:00

If you wish to send written representation to the Project Director, but don't know what to write, here are some suggestions based on our Questions and Concerns document:

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.

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.
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.

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.
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.

Questions and Concerns about the Proposal

2009-03-29T08:10:00.007+01:00

Using the freely-available material identified in our recent post, we have produced a summary document outlining our main questions and concerns regarding the Council's proposal.

Questions_and_Concerns_69-2009.pdf

Please read this and if you agree with any of these questions and concerns, please send written representation to the Project Director by 6 April 2009.

Regulations, Legislation and Planning Applications related to the Proposal

2009-03-29T07:50:00.006+01:00

We have identified the following material related to the council's proposal:

(1) Report to the Education Committee on School Estate Improvements in the West End of the City, 26 January 2009. http://www.dundeecity.gov.uk/reports/reports/69-2009.pdf

(2) Dundee City Council Planning Application No. 05/00780/FUL Cultural Centre Proposed in Blackness Road, 2006. http://www.dundeecity.gov.uk/reports/plan_apps/05-00780-FUL.pdf

(3) School Premises Regulations (Scotland) 1967 as amended in 1973 & 79

(4) School Playing Fields: Planning & Design Guidance, SportScotland, 2007. http://www.sportscotland.org.uk

(5) Report of the Review Group on Physical Education, Scottish Executive, 2004. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/06/19466/38538

(6) Dundee City Council Planning Application No. 06/00103/FUL, 2006. http://www.dundeecity.gov.uk/reports/plan_apps/06-00103-FUL.pdf

(7) Ahlborn A et al., Review of the Epidemiologic Literature on EMF and Health, Environmental Health Perspectives 109, Supplement 6, 911-933, December 2001. http://www.icnirp.de/documents/EPIreview1.pdf

(8) Option Appraisal – building our future: Scotland’s School Estate, Scottish Government, May 26, 2004. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/05/19436/38226

Dundee Council's Proposal

2009-03-27T03:48:00.013Z

View Larger Map Note: If you wish to view a Google Street View of the new site, click on the Powered by Google logo to get the map full screen and then drag the yellow man icon to the street of interest

In a report to the Education Committee, the Director of Education put forward a proposal:

To build 2 x 1 stream primary schools with 6 additional classrooms on a shared site of the former Harris Academy Annexe to replace Park Place Primary School, Park Place Nursery and St Joseph's Primary School

The council is currently undergoing formal consultation with parents and teachers of all three establishments and finished its last meeting yesterday evening at Park Place Nursery.

Please read the document as some of the details (and omissions) may raise questions that you would like answered. Written representation must be submitted by 6th April, 2009, to:

Gillian Ross-Pond
Project Director
Dundee City Council
Floor 8
City House
Overgate
DUNDEE
DD1 1UH
Telephone: 01382 435161
Email: Gillian.Rosspond@dundeecity.gov.uk

Park Place Primary School

View Larger Map

Park Place Nursery

View Larger Map

St Joseph's RC Primary School

View Larger Map