Travel Plan

This comment has been left by a reader...

I've read the 50 odd page travel plan on the council site re the survey that was completed in October - all the bus routes mentioned come in and out of this terminus.

Also the Council reckon only 74 children will be disadvantaged by the move to TM. The bus routes they quote almost all come in and out of GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL areas- not East Dunbartonshire.

They dismiss Meadowburn and Balmuidy in one sentence and Kenmure in two, in a whole report of 50 pages! Guess it's just tough if you live in Meadowburn.

It looks like the school is going to be used in future by people from Glasgow area. so much for EDC council taxpayers!

I don't think the Council are building a school to benefit Glasgow - they have stopped almost all secondary placing requests.

As I said at the meeting...

"I wonder if the plan will be carried out after the pupils have ALL moved to the High School site and the Thomas Muir site is unoccupied?"

That's exactly what happened, in October - possibly in the school holidays.

Still undecided if this decision was made for the 'educational' benefit of the children?

2007 here we come...

Janitor's houses

If you have read other posts on this site you would remember the council saying that the janitor's house on the Bishopbriggs High School site restricted their building plot. There was no money available to purchase it.

Same with the child care centre on the same site.

© Google Earth

Several months on we're expected to forget that, as they decide a valuable strip of land at Thomas Muir is 'surplus' and should be sold off for housing.

© Google Earth


Wait a minute, doesn't that land include a Janitor's house, they don't own, and a bus terminus?

Surly they can't find money to buy them out when they had none for the same purpose at the Bishopbriggs High site?

Not content with gaining the entire site at Bishopbriggs High they want to claw back land from Turnbull and Thomas Muir.

The will be building the biggest school ever in Bishopbriggs on what remains of the Thomas Muir site. This will require having to share sports facilities with surrounding primaries.

Use of old Bishopbriggs High site

Lots of prime land at the High School site - just no good for a school - if you believe the Lib Dems



Let's hope the Council can make a success of developing the land they acquired when they closed Bishopbriggs High School.

I have lived here all my life and the town centre has changed. Churchill Way was built and had several great shops - that didn't survive and is now retirement flats. Cross Court was built and housed the Post Office - now shuffled up to a sub post office in a card shop! Several units are still empty in the present town centre.

Here's a list of the shop that I can remember having opened, then closed in Bishopbriggs.

Several Supermarkets
Butchers
Bakers
Grocers
Off Sales
Newsagents
Fruit Shops
Chemists
Gift Shops
Carpet Shop
Book Shop
Party Shop
Video Shops
Barbers
Fish Shop
Clothes Shop
Banks
Post Office
Pet Shop
Hairdressers
TV Rental
Electronic, White Goods Shop
Hardware Shop
Furniture Shop
Doctors
Dentists
Haberdashery
Restaurants
Flower Shop
Record Shop

Now the Council have decided to move 1,200 pupils and support staff from the town centre area.

This alone will remove a large income source from several of the remaining businesses.

Anyone considering investing in 'another' new town centre should do their homework - find out why the above businesses opened and closed. Check out what's happening in Kirkintilloch.

What's left in Bishopbriggs?

Cafes, Restaurants, Charity Shops, Pubs, Betting shops, Travel Agents, Banks and one supermarket.

There should be a fantastic new school - but read this site to find out how the Liberal Democrats stopped that happening...

Look back over the last year

It's this time of year when people look back...

This time last year we had the prospect of a super new school on the location the public wanted.

But things changed when the developers suggested the new school should be built on the Thomas Muir site.

Here's what they both said in an East Dunbartonshire Council communication "Staff guidance note".

Just a small change...

Both bidders have tabled an alternative solution... this may involve changes to the site, timing, decant arrangements or design of the new school.

Remember this vital sentence...

We are unable to show you the plans for the variant... considered commercially confidential whilst the bidders are competing.

So both builders suggested , independently, an alternative proposal to build on a different plot that would change decant arrangements etc. What reasons did each give?

Below are the reason from Bidder A variant scenario...



and the reason given by Bidder B variant scenario...



Again both independent, rival bidders, scenarios.

Can you spot the difference?

Here's some clues - most letters are the same, most words are the same, they're in the same order. In fact they are almost identical.

Another amazing coincidence, no doubt!

And why could you not see the alternate plans?

We are unable to show you the plans for the variant at this stage as they have not been developed beyond a sketch site layout to prove the site has adequate land to support a new school.

You can now! The 'variant' school - at the planning office. A school proposed by the preferred bidder, it was almost identical to the school proposed on the High School site, and rejected by the Council. Could that have been the reason you were not allowed to see it?

After all, you could see the other designs, by both developers, at that time, not confidential then.

You never did see the new proposal, well not until after the Council had decided to accept it.

The public were NOT consulted - I understand this is a requirement under the Scottish Office rules on PPP.

P.S. The Interim School Board never saw the variant design - but they did agree to the Council decision - before they made it!

Access to sport facilities

When it was pointed out to the Council that the High School site could use the pitch at the Lees (see 'shared sports facilities pitch 4' post), the Council said closing the Edinburgh to Glasgow line was NOT an option. This would allow a bridge or tunnel to be used for access to the pitch area - it could be done anytime over the next two years. Under the present arrangement the pitches on the Thomas Muir site will NOT be ready when the new Academy building is occupied.

This week Scot Rail have closed the main line over Christmas and New Year - yes, the main Glasgow to Edinburgh rail line. If the Council had agreed to the use of pitch 4, this option would NOT have caused any further delay to any rail service.

Yet another excuse that has proved unfounded....

More from Evening Times

New Academy School badge

Does it look familiar?

Here's the Bishopbriggs Community Council badge...

Community Council Badge

Merry Christmas

Have a great one Bishopbriggs...

Plans lodged for Bishopbriggs town centre

The developers have lodged plans for the area including the old Bishopbriggs High School, Triangle Centre, St. Matthew's Church and Bishopbriggs Library (the old school).

If you're looking for it online here's a hint...
You won't find under 'Applications of Particular Interest' - wonder why?

The plans are TP/ED/06/1320 you cannot view them online as I write this.

Let's hope it's more successful that Churchill Way (now demolished) or Cross Court (empty units). With a number of outlets lying empty already in Bishopbriggs is their a great need for another shopping centre? We only have to look as far as Kirkintilloch to see what has happen to their centre!

The developers now have the entire Bishopbriggs High School site and land they decided was 'surplus' on both the Thomas Muir site, where the new school will have to share sports facilities with adjacent primaries.

Quote from Council 'Consulative Document' - The Thomas Muir site...
"They consider that this in turn will offer the Council improved educational facilities in the new school, particularly playing fields.

Having survived the bombings during the Second World War it took a single council meeting on 26th June to close the school.

Slowly, slowly...

I see that after last week's meeting at Bishopbriggs Academy where I pointed out the school has had a web site since August.

The web site has been updated to include the 'Interim' board members. No longer just Kenneth Low as parent member of the, non existent, Bishopbriggs Academy board (see post below).

No contact details or minutes have been updated....

Unfortunately the council web site, list of schools, doesn't include Bishopbriggs Academy.

This screen capture (below) was taken on 18th December as shown on the top left.

Slowly, slowly....

Click for larger image

The Secondary 5 and 6 modern studies homework links need updating - they expired on 15/10/2006.

More soon...

Work started?

Work has started on a new entrance to the Thomas Muir site from Wester Cleddens Road.

No planning permission for the building of the new school has been passed as far as I am aware.

The current access is on the 'surplus' land.

What does that suggest?



View plan here on the council website

As you can see from the plans submitted to the council - site access should be opposite the existing Pentland Drive.

The School access remains as exists.

Strange the entrance has moved....

Number One on Google

Type 'Bishopbriggs Academy' into Google, the world largest search engine, and this site is No1.



Maybe that's because people learn more about what's going on at the academy here than from the Interim Board or the Council?

A big thank you to all the visitors who care about what happens in Bishopbriggs.

Google are no fools!

Shared sports facilities...

The council now want to share sports facilities at the new Academy.

One of the reasons they put forward 'against' the High School site was it's lack of sports facilities.

Consultative Document 2006
3.0 REASON FOR THE PROPOSAL
3.1 The consortia....
...They consider that this in turn will offer the Council improved educational facilities in the new school, particularly playing fields.

Take a look at how the two sites match up...

First the Thomas Muir site - cross Wester Cleddens road to share St Helen's facility also share the small sports facility at Woodhill Primary (now included in the councils site area).

Also indicated is the 'Surplus' land designated by the developers.



Click here for a larger version

Here's the same view of the Bishopbriggs High site and it's surrounding facilities.

I didn't bother indicating the 'surplus' land as the entire site is 'surplus'.

A reader has contacted me to ask why the Allan Glens area is included. Quite simply that was an option the council used when the Academy was to be built on the High School site while the High School was still in use. Yes, that was an option - sadly rejected by East Dunbartonshire Council.


Click here for a larger image.

It was suggested, at last night's meeting, by John Simmons, Head of Education, that the High School site was NOT worth more that the Thomas Muir site. I'll let you consider that comment.

In this third view you can see that a Pitch the same size as Pitch 2 can be fitted onto the 'surplus' land and a turning circle could also be accommodated. This may be a safer option.

This would also free up land where the present turning circle is located - directly in front of the school.

Summary of first Academy meeting with the Parent Forum

For all those unable to attend last night's meeting.

The low turnout could have been due to the very short notice period, bad weather, middle of the Christmas season or a number of other reasons.

The meeting started with a motion on the legality of the boards position to negotiate with the council. This was noted and the meeting continued.

In the first public meeting in the five months since the amalgamation Ken Low went over the plans for the new Academy. The same plans that have, and are, available at the council offices, online and displayed at the school last month.

The original 14 days time scale to lodge objects, which has gone, is now available again due to the traffic assessment being lodged this week with planning. This plan is available to view at the council offices. As far as I am aware nobody, at the meeting, had seen this traffic plan.

The position of the school, on the site, was questioned and it was asked if this had been a compromise as the old Thomas Muir School had to remain for the pupils of a Kirkintilloch School. It was noted that to achieve the time scale the developers plan required this situation.

Access to the school was debated and parents were not happy with the present plan. This may have been addressed in the 'unseen' traffic plan.

To counter suggestions about the 'surplus land' the council have suggested that another 'shared' outdoor sports facility with St Helens (across Wester Cleddens Road) be considered. This would give the school TWO 'shared' facilities with neighbouring primary schools. The first being the pitch the council now count as part of the Thomas Muir site, the Woodhill Primary pitch.

On the internal layout of the school the width of corridors was raised. It was suggested that a 'one way' system may have to be implemented for pupils to move around the school.

These discussions took up the bulk of the meeting, which last over two and a half hours, during which time several people left. This left little time for discussion on why the Board had not held election for a new Academy board five months ago as laid out in the legislation.

One member of the School Forum questioned the lack of information given to parent by the board since the amalgamation, a requirement under the School Board Scotland Act. Ken responded that the board considered that this information should come from the head teacher. More information has been available on this site than has come for the School Board or Council.

I suggested they use the, councils, Bishopbriggs Academy web space. It has been available since August, to keep parents informed, nobody was aware it existed. At the time of the meeting it shows Ken Low as a parent member of the Bishopbriggs Academy board (see screen shot below). This position is an elected office, I don't remember the election - do you?

Eventually a vote was held, and the motion (below) carried, by the majority of parents in attendance, this requires the council to hold elections for a new Bishopbriggs Academy Board, with immediate effect.

The meeting then closed.

If anyone has anything to add please use the comment option below.

Motion carried from meeting 12th December 2006

I would therefore move that the interim Board continue to negotiate on behalf of the parent body of Bishopbriggs Academy whilst the election process for a new School Board For Bishopbriggs Academy is put into operation and I would call for the Authority to call said election with immediate effect.

Boot out the board....

This comment was sent by a reader...

The letter detailing the 'disadvantages' of holding an election for the School Board makes interesting reading....if you support lawbreaking and dictatorship that is.

One disadvantage is that for the Academy Board to continue would mean that they are breaking the law.
I’m not sure that they are setting a very good example to pupils?

Costly? The PPP team have been posting out regular newsletters, four pages and in colour. The council has found the money for this so why not for giving parents a lawful and democratic say in the running of their school. After all they pay for the school through their taxes.

If not them – who? Sandy McGarvey? John Morrison? Margaret McNaughton?

Could take up to 12 weeks to complete? This is only a problem because the Board are doing this now rather than 12 weeks ago.

Places an administrative burden on the school? Well sorry I don't think that ‘it’s too much hassle to hold an election’ is a good reason not to hold an election. Updating the electoral register...shouldn't that be a pre-requisite for the school to know who the pupils’ parents are?

Postage costs? Well the interim Board saved a lot of money by not canvassing parents’ opinions in the lead up to the decision where the school should be built, so the school really owes them one. And was the school not being given extra resources because of the amalgamation...I seem to remember Sandy McGarvey saying that, wish I had got that in writing I suppose.

Finally and I quote...'Research shows parental involvement is not encouraged by elections’. This is being said by the people who presumably put themselves forward for election to get on the High School and Thomas Muir Boards. With low turnouts at election time not even Tony Blair would give that as a reason for stopping holding elections….maybe Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe should be looking to the Academy Board for some fresh ideas!

(You might have noticed that there is nowhere on the ballot paper for the voter to put their name to ensure that only parents with children at the school vote and that those who vote do so only once. This brings to mind the old saying about elections in Northern Ireland, ‘vote early and vote often’. Not that I’d condone parents photocopying the ballot papers and handing in lots of votes for their chosen option during the Christmas holidays.)

And what about the ‘Advantages’ of just keeping things the same until next year? It would minimise disruption to the education and welfare of pupils. How can this possibly be true? The election process does not involve pupils. Communication is via the post and how can an election affect pupils Health and Happiness? No the real advantage of this option is that it allows for continuity. But how much of an advantage this is, is open to question.

The current Board have never communicated with parents at any point in the amalgamation process.
They have never sought the views of parents regarding their preference for where the school should be built and now that the PPP team is turning them over they suddenly come running to the parents looking for help.

They deserve to be booted out. At Tuesday’s meeting, assuming enough people turn up, given the short notice and the enticement of hearing about ‘minor’ problems with the school design, parents need to stand up and be counted. We have the prospect of a great new school (albeit one where children will be in danger of being run over leaving school at 3.30 pm)…now we need a Board that can match the aspirations of the school…something the current Board are clearly unable to do.

Strong stuff

thanks for your opinion

How many letters?

Did you get one letter or two from the Interim School Board?

I only got one, the one without the contact details and election slip!

I know two were sent out as this site has received copies of both letters.

Saying no more....

Letter from Ken Low acting chair of Academy School Board?

I have taken the liberty of letting you know what happened at the Bishopbriggs Academy Board meeting on Tuesday night re the PPP planning application.

Basically we said to Sandy McGarvey:

There was no transport statement - how could we assess traffic impacts etc. without it?

The sports full-size pitch provision for
Douglas (roll of 1,021) is 4
Bearsden (1,174) is 3
Kirkintilloch (652) is 3
Bishopbriggs (1,146) is 2

- absolutely not was our core message over this;

It also turns out one of the documents supporting pitch provision is for the first proposal of basing the school at BBHS site and selling off TMHS site completely - not even planning had picked this up;

Education (through John Simmons) insist that the PE curriculum can be delivered - our SMT say that delivery will be extremely tight and almost impossible if we lost the use of the shared area with Woodhill Primary

We want them to investigate the land opposite us to see if we can purchase/lease a strip to put a new pitch on it

We also want to move the all weather pitch up to allow us to slightly lengthen the existing natural turf pitch and to move the athletics facilities onto the grass nearer Torr Road - at the moment the long-jump is on asphalt - surely this cannot be safe (in Douglas and Bearsden the long jump is surrounded by grass)

Overall car parking spaces etc. Bishopbriggs Academy is being short-changed e.g. the Games Hall is 594m2 (33m x 18m) whereas in Douglas it is 628m2 (34 x 18.5m) - I am not too fussed about a metre either side but when the Bishopbriggs High School Games Hall was built it was either (1.4m or 4m) short with the result non of the indoor pitches met the required standards for competition so EDC spent £1 million on a hall that could not take national competitions in football, badminton etc. What a waste and I don't want that repeated again

Many of the facilities are close to the minimum standard required and the SportScotland representative stated that they would challenge councils to provide better facilities - we did however accept that the quality of the facilities were better

Sandy has been tasked with maximising the facilities but also to maximise land receipts re Council meeting of June 2006 (well if two pitches can deliver the PE curriculum then he simply is failing in his second objective with regard to Douglas, Bearsden and Kirkintilloch - he should reduce them to two large pitches and increase the land receipts on these sites but he has not done that) - we as a Board don't want that to happen to any of these sites - we should maximise the facilities on all sites and we realise that both Douglas and Bearsden have already had a net loss of one pitch due to housing development however I don't think Sandy sees us as only having two pitches as a problem and

Fnally to fundamentally disagree that any of the land at the TMHS site was surplus (we are losing a 37m x 18m small rugby pitch (7-a-side pitch) and two Multi Use Games Areas although the shared arrangement would give us back the small pitch on a shared basis).

The meeting went on from 6.30 pm for Board members only and from 7 pm for invited participant and did not close until 10.30 pm

It was at times heated but we hope we presented a balanced but forceful case.

The next steps are to:

Prepare a response to Sandy McGarvey

Meet with associated primary school board chairs (or their whole boards and PTAs if they want)

Meet with Bishopbriggs parents on the 12th December at 7 pm in Bishopbriggs Academy

Start drafting our representation to the planning department with respect to
a) the school and
b) the surplus land outline application for housing

To prepare a media campaign to keep this in the public eye over the festive season right up to the planning application hearing and to meet with councillors over this to give them our views directly.

I am supplying this information to keep primary school board chairs appraised of what is happening and to the PPP reps of Douglas, Bearsden and Kirkintilloch secondaries as we had compared Bishopbriggs Academy to these school in our presentation.

We already appreciate the help we have had from other secondary PPP reps.

We fully support all of these schools in their efforts to get better facilities for their kids in their areas - we just want to be treated equitably by EDC in terms of sports provision.

I am grateful to Susan Murray for her attendance and input - at times what she said was very telling and was not lost on Sandy McGarvey.

I would also say that we would welcome your support if possible and we will be happy to answer any queries or questions by e-mail or phone.

Thanks.

Ken Low Acting Chair Bishopbriggs Academy School Board

I have written to Ken asking who the new Academy board members are and when they were elected. The Interim School Board has, since August, time to arrange elections.

Did anyone get an information on the Bishopbriggs Academy School Board elections?

Here is how a School Board should be elected School Board Act

I spoke to the Scottish Executive this afternoon, Ken has NO right to call himself acting chair of the Bishopbriggs Academy Board.

Good to see that Ken visited the site on the 8th of December at 4.05 pm.

The power of the Internet....

Interim School Board meeting...

There's another meeting of the Interim School Board tomorrow night (5th December) when I understand a letter to parents regarding the new Parents Councils will be discussed.

If that's true then we have progress. The letter to the council, that was used by them to indicate support for their decision - before it was made, was never shown to the board before it was sent.

FROM SEPTEMBER 12th, 2006 'ALL' PARENTS, WITH A CHILD AT THE SCHOOL, HAVE BEEN MEMBERS OF THE PARENTS FORUM FOR BISHOPBRIGGS ACADEMY.

The Interim School Board should have been replaced in August under the current School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988 when a new board for the Academy should have been elected.

This information is from the Scottish Executive in a letter sent to me last week.

Academy web site

As I mentioned in my post in August, Bishopbriggs academy has a new web site.

I know it's not listed on the council web site under secondary schools but it does exist...

And it lives here.

It's being updated as you will find views of the new school here

Pictures of the huts on the High School site here.

And all about the school board and minutes of the meetings here except it's blank!

As is the contact information - the site is run by an English company e4schools in Peterborough.

Be aware that the council privacy statement includes

Information Automatically Logged

We may use your IP address to gather broad demographic information