Signatures 289 total
Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 › »
-
101
Name: Justine Hawkins on Dec 4, 2012Comments:Flag
-
102
Name: Nicola Miles on Dec 4, 2012Comments:Flag
-
103
Name: Roland Miles on Dec 4, 2012Comments:Flag
-
104
Name: YILSHANE ALI on Dec 4, 2012Comments: I am against the expansion at stanford as it would disrupt my child's learning.Flag
-
105
Name: Lorraine Flude on Dec 4, 2012Comments: I AGREE WITH THE CONCERNS NOTED WITHIN THE PETITION AND ALSO HAVE CONCERNS REGARDING THE CONSULTATION PROCESS IN GENERAL.IT IS NOT TRANSPARENT ENOUGH AND DOES NOT FOLLOW DUE PROCESS IN GOOD FAITH. ADDITIONALLY,HAS THE DfE AGREED TO THE PROJECT,SIGNING OFF THE MONEY REQUIRED RE NEW BUILDING/MONEY PER EACH EXTRA PUPIL/TEACHER?Flag
-
106
Name: Robert Mettler on Dec 4, 2012Comments:Flag
-
107
Name: Martin Cross on Dec 4, 2012Comments: the Council need an overall strategic review of school places rather than the current piecemeal approach.Flag
-
108
Name: Åsa Hammar-Porobija on Dec 4, 2012Comments:Flag
-
109
Name: Anonymous on Dec 4, 2012Comments:Flag
-
110
Name: Anonymous on Dec 4, 2012Comments:Flag
-
111
Name: Rachel Williams on Dec 4, 2012Comments:Flag
-
112
Name: Clive Williams on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
113
Name: Sarah Bishop on Dec 5, 2012Comments: We do not want expansion at our school !Flag
-
114
Name: Hannah McIntyre on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
115
Name: Anonymous on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
116
Name: John Hoole on Dec 5, 2012Comments: We are the most local estate agent in this area and we strongly object to the expansion proposals for the above reasons. There is also a lot of pressure on the roads locally at drop off and pick-up which will become worse if this goes ahead. Safety has to be paramount here. I would be happy to discuss this further at a meeting shouls this be required.Flag
-
117
Name: Mrs Nicola Pattison on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
118
Name: Charlotte Figg on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
119
Name: Soreh Levy on Dec 5, 2012Comments: As a parent with a child at Stanford Juniors, I do not feel that parents have been given adequate time or information by Brighton Council to be able to make an informed decision on the proposed expansion for both the Infant and Junior Schools. It is imperative that the council adhere to their agreed consultation time-scale.Flag
-
120
Name: Catherine Grylls on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
121
Name: Soreh Levy on Dec 5, 2012Comments: As a parent with a child at Stanford Juniors, I do not feel that parents have been given adequate time or information by Brighton Council to be able to make an informed decision on the proposed expansion for both the Infant and Junior Schools. It is imperative that the council adhere to their agreed consultation time-scale.Flag
-
122
Name: Juliet Doyle on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
123
Name: Gemma Crutchfield on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
124
Name: Sarah Dowling on Dec 5, 2012Comments: A new school is needed, not an expansion of these 2 existing sites. The demographics and geography of the city need to be considered in an in depth manner. For example, there are currently areas of the city that do not have a non-religious school. This puts pressure on other schools to take in children from a wider area and forces parents to drive children to school.Flag
-
125
Name: Amanda Welby-Everard on Dec 5, 2012Comments: Why can't the council look at Cottesmore Primary School that has a vast amount of space compared to Stanford Infants and juniors. The church has been persuaded to expand St Andrew's in Hove and I feel more pressure should be applied to a school that is minutes away and has vast grounds for expansion.Flag
-
126
Name: Zoe Ealey on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
127
Name: Judi Sheffield on Dec 5, 2012Comments: I feel that the process has been very rushed, with not enough info to make an informed decision either way.Flag
-
128
Name: Elizabeth Carnochan on Dec 5, 2012Comments: too rushed without sufficient consultation.Flag
-
129
Name: Paula Dyer on Dec 5, 2012Comments: I agree with all the reasons to oppose the planned current expansion, what the city needs are new schools to accommodate the growing population.Flag
-
130
Name: Lucy Dunleavy on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
131
Name: Basim Mohamad Hasan on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
132
Name: Chloe Trenchard on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
133
Name: Melissa Lucas on Dec 5, 2012Comments: This is not the solution to the problem. It is a very rushed approach from the council with little engagment with the local community. Tere solution would be like a 'plaster' approach (bursting at the seems) it will not solve the ongoing problem of the black spots in the prestonville and preston park areas of brighton where children are unable to get into a local school. The stanford schools are far to small to expand to four form entry.Flag
-
134
Name: Neil Slater on Dec 5, 2012Comments: I believe further consultation is required with the local community before any final decisions are made on the Stanford School expansion.Flag
-
135
Name: Susana M Grice on Dec 5, 2012Comments: My main concern is around lack of information re: impacts to pupils and community during and post expansion.Flag
-
136
Name: Belinda Gannaway on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
137
Name: Simon Hudson on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
138
Name: Simon Hudson on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
139
Name: Michael Fox on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
140
Name: Margaret McEvoy on Dec 5, 2012Comments: without full details of the implementation plans I find it impossible to understand how we can fully access the impact if the proposal.Flag
-
141
Name: Anonymous on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
142
Name: Jane Lucas on Dec 5, 2012Comments: I am completely against the expansion for many reasons. My issues are with health and safety due to too many children in such a small place, heavy traffic flow on already unsafe roads due to double parking and volume. Also ongoing building work which will follow my son who is due to start infants Sept 2013 every year.Flag
-
143
Name: Sam Lucas on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
144
Name: Sophie Clary on Dec 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
145
Name: Evanthe Blandy on Dec 5, 2012Comments: I am particularly concerned for my grand-daughter who has just entered the school, that she may feel swamped by the addition of yet more children in her school. There needs to be clear consultation process in the local community before such potentially disruptive changes are decided on for the school.Flag
-
146
Name: Kath Black on Dec 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
147
Name: Anonymous on Dec 6, 2012Comments: With all the money you're spending adding cycle lanes to roads that are barely ever getting used, and changing childrens' playgrounds in parks to make them worse (e.g. moving swings in Dyke Road Park to behind a hill in the corner of a park so that you can't see or hear your other children anywhere else in the park) you could have built a new school. The Green Party seem to be clueless about how to spend their money, and I regret voting for them.Flag
-
148
Name: Gavin & Sue Barrett on Dec 6, 2012Comments: Please defer consideration of the potential additional entry class at Stamford School until such time as the overall capacity of the school and the concerns of the community are fully explored and debated in public. A quart into the proverbial pint pot is taking an unacceptable risk.Flag
-
149
Name: Emily Barrett on Dec 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
150
Name: Karolina Zarzycka on Dec 6, 2012Comments:Flag