Brighton & Hove council must postpone Stanford Infant school expansion until our local community's concerns are addressed

Signatures 288 total

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 › »

1. 151
   Name: Wendy Daykin on Dec 6, 2012

   Comments: This would have an enormous impact on communal areas in both the Infants and Juniors, research shows a happy child is one with space in its school environment. A school that is ofsted one is so for very good reasons, this does not mean cramming more children would make it retain it reputation and levels of teaching possibly the complete opposite.

   Flag
2. 152
   Name: Debbie Clifton on Dec 6, 2012

   Comments: I would have thought the Council had learnt from previous experience regarding a due process for consultation. This cannot be put forward at present for all the reasons stated above. Having had children at the infant school, I am unable to see how the playground could comfortably, let alone safely, accommodate a further 90 children and there is no room for expansion at the Junior School. I understand the requirement for further school places, and as this is an ongoing problem, which has been known about for some time, I believe the council should be looking at building new schools to accomodate this, not squeezing children in other schools for a quick fix solution.

   Flag
3. 153
   Name: Martin Dunleavy on Dec 6, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
4. 154
   Name: Anonymous on Dec 6, 2012

   Comments: Not happy with the lack of information the council is providing on the practicalities of expansion both at the infants and juniors. Disgraceful 'rushing through' of plans and no real information for locals/school.

   Flag
5. 155
   Name: Alexander Lewis on Dec 6, 2012

   Comments: The consultation has not been conducted satisfactorily

   Flag
6. 156
   Name: Vicky Zucker on Dec 6, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
7. 157
   Name: Emily Delgado on Dec 6, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
8. 158
   Name: Anonymous on Dec 6, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
9. 159
   Name: Lucy Atkinson on Dec 6, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
10. 160
    Name: Susan Hutter on Dec 6, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
11. 161
    Name: Anja on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments: I oppose the extension since there isn't enough space.

    Flag
12. 162
    Name: Rachel Paget on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
13. 163
    Name: Mark Paget on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
14. 164
    Name: Eva Field on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
15. 165
    Name: Shamik Dasgupta on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
16. 166
    Name: Martin Farmer on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments: The School site is too small to expand

    Flag
17. 167
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 7, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
18. 168
    Name: Caspar Field on Dec 8, 2012

    Comments: The school's physical site is not big enough for another 90 kids. It's as simple as that.

    Flag
19. 169
    Name: Nik Black on Dec 8, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
20. 170
    Name: Lisa Wood on Dec 8, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
21. 171
    Name: Jessica Fisher on Dec 9, 2012

    Comments: Most importantly I had no idea this was happening although I live in the local community and my child is at the junior school so I do not feel properly informed or consulted in order to be able to make a decision either way

    Flag
22. 172
    Name: Kate Lewis on Dec 9, 2012

    Comments: As a parent there has been a lack of information for me to form a proper view.

    Flag
23. 173
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 9, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
24. 174
    Name: Stuart Eatock on Dec 9, 2012

    Comments: As a parent of a child at Stanford Infants School I currently DO NOT SUPPORT the proposed expansion. I am unable to support the proposed expansion because of many concerns, but two stand out. 1. LACK OF PROPOSALS I cannot support what I cannot see. The fact that this school is on an extremely small and inaccessible site cannot reasonably be denied. Without feasibility proposals I cannot be sure that the school can be successfully expanded. Can a scheme provide adequate halls, library, class base accommodation? Can the circulation be improved? Can the playground cope with the additional pupils? How can the council ensure there will be no impact on learning either during construction or in use when access is so poor? I would need to see proposals before I could support expansion. 2. EXPANSION COMBINED WITH THE JUNIOR SCHOOL Expanding the Infants School without an equal expansion of the Junior School AT THE SAME TIME is putting children’s education and wellbeing at risk. This is a risk that could be avoided. Tandem proposals, both with PLANNING APPROVAL is the only route that would get my support. Construction could be phased so the Junior School buildings are completed at a later date. The council would need to progress the Junior School expansion at the same time as the Infants School to gain my support.

    Flag
25. 175
    Name: Susan Barton on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
26. 176
    Name: Carol Major on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments: I do not support the proposal as it stands. There is no room for an extra 90 children on the site as it stands; hallways and corridors are already overcrowded, lunchtimes already too short ( how will an extra sitting be squeezed in?), and the playground is not large enough even now to allow adequate outdoor exercise and play. Unless the council can show how extra buildings/children will be accommodated without exacerbating this situation ( I feel this is impossible to do unless extra land is purchased), I am opposed. The problem will be even more acute at juniors, which will ultimately have to accommodate an additional 120 children. That building is listed, so alterations are constrained, and playground facilities are even more hemmed in by housing etc, giving no opportunity for expansion.

    Flag
27. 177
    Name: Adele Yaron on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
28. 178
    Name: Zena Yaron on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
29. 179
    Name: Kay Stephan on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments: The play area in this school is already too small - in an area where very few children have gardens. Reducing this space further and putting more of a squeeze on the small school buildings is very wrong and short-sighted.

    Flag
30. 180
    Name: Paul Basu on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments: All children should be entitled to high quality education and access to a high quality educational environment within a reasonable distance from their home. Normally I would object to 'NIMBY-ism', but, in this case, it is clear that this is an inappropriate and short-term proposal that will jeopardize the quality of educational provision and welfare of pupils. Stanford Infants school occupies a very small and already over-crowded space. Expansion is not a viable solution.

    Flag
31. 181
    Name: Bert Sandstrom on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
32. 182
    Name: Ingrid Hammer on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
33. 183
    Name: Malin Fasth on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments: Sounds like a very bad idea!

    Flag
34. 184
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
35. 185
    Name: Frida Björkelid on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
36. 186
    Name: Annika Morgan on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
37. 187
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
38. 188
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
39. 189
    Name: Alan Green on Dec 10, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
40. 190
    Name: Clare Eddison on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
41. 191
    Name: Alex Donaldson on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments: The whole process has been poorly communicated and not involved the local community

    Flag
42. 192
    Name: Emma Maywood on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments: I am very concerned about the expansion of Stanford school, i live on Highcroft Villas and don't know how the road will cope with the large amounts of extra traffic. There will not be enough outdoor space for our children to play.

    Flag
43. 193
    Name: Faye Bennett on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
44. 194
    Name: Melissa Perkins on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments: I am against the proposed expansion of Stanford Infant School. My daughter frequently comes home with bangs and bruises where children have collided with each other in the playground. There is simply not enough space to accomodate more children. Even walking up the ramp to school in the mornings is a crush - for small children it can be extremely overwhelming. I live on Park View Terrace, and there is already a large amount of traffic at school pick up and drop off times - I would not like to see this increased.

    Flag
45. 195
    Name: Anonymous on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
46. 196
    Name: David Gray on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments: The council needs to build another primary school to serve the growing number of children in Brighton. Trying to fit more children into the Stanford schools will never work and result in a poorer situation for everyone at these schools.

    Flag
47. 197
    Name: Ian Powell on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments: This is the desire to fulfil statistics instead of adding value to a community.

    Flag
48. 198
    Name: Rosie Dewick on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments: I am a resident in Coventry Street and I do not think that there would be any advantage to both the area and pupils at present in school for this expansion there are other much better areas around

    Flag
49. 199
    Name: Claire Brejcha on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
50. 200
    Name: Leni Donaldson on Dec 11, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 › »