Why Moray Council officials are recommending AGAINST upgrade works to Buckie High School
This is despite council officers admitting the school has 'further deteriorated' and is close to becoming part of the lowest rated schools in Scotland.
Councillors have been given a number of options to decide the future of the school, but have decided to delay the decision until after a public meeting in June.
The council will also wait until after a decision to move ahead with Elgin High School's extension has been made in the autumn.
While guaranteeing 'complete transparency,' Deputy Chief Executive for education Denise Whitworth warned upgrade works could impact any future funding bids for improvements.
Officials are hesitant because if school standards improve, it risks the Scottish Government diverting funding to a different school in need of a new build.
It means any future works to Buckie High School will likely be dictated by the Scottish Government's school standards grading system.
Currently, on a scale from A to D, Buckie High is rated a 'C' in condition and 'B' in suitability. The minimum standards for both is 'B'.
This puts the school in the worst 8% of both primaries and secondaries in Scotland.
Moray Council's learning estate programme manager Andy Hall admitted there is a 'necessity' for 'substantial' investment into Buckie High School.
He told councillors 'mechanical and electrical' areas of the school have 'further deteriorated.'
He also noted issues with the school's roof and windows.
However, as a result of Moray Council's ongoing budget issues, officers admitted finding funds for school improvements is a 'significant concern.'
The council is currently unable to fund a new school for Buckie and would need financial support from the Scottish Government.
However, the government are yet to commit any more funding for new school projects.
This conundrum means officers presented several alternatives to councillors, including transferring funding from other projects such as Elgin High School's extension.
Buckie councillor Sonya Warren said the school and its additional role as a community centre has always been 'the heart of the community.'
She wants the school to remain 'top of the priority list' for a new build to afford Buckie students the same learning opportunities as 'all other upgraded schools in Moray.'
Fochabers Lhanbryde councillor Marc Macrae said it was 'disappointing' the recent Programme for Government announcement did not make any further funding available.
Meanwhile, SNP group leader Scott Lawrence said it was important to 'maximise the funding opportunities' and said any extra money the council could source for Buckie High School would be welcome.
The council has agreed to postpone any decision until after a public meeting on the 17th June and once final research into Elgin High's extension is complete.
However, councillors did agree to work together to prepare a cross-party letter to be sent to the Scottish Government, asking for a clearer picture on future school funding.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
a day ago
- Daily Record
Couple claim they shouldn't be forced to return 'priceless' bells to historic Scots church
Mark Huitson and Rachel Bonde believe they removed from Holywood Church near Dumfries are linked to the Knights Templar and had to be taken away 'as a matter of security'. A couple claim they shouldn't be forced to return 'priceless' bells to an historic church as they are among the 'most significant and valuable medieval discoveries in Scotland'. Mark Huitson and Rachel Bonde believe the bells and plaques they removed from Holywood Church near Dumfries are linked to the Knights Templar and had to be taken away 'as a matter of security'. They claim they intend to return them once the category B listed building is sold – but the council wants them put back sooner. The couple, who bought the church in 2019, lost a previous appeal to the Scottish Government against the move earlier this year. But have now made a fresh plea to Holyrood after being hit with a listed building enforcement notice as the bells still haven't been put back. Their response to the council's enforcement notice, lodged with the Scottish Government, states: 'The sole basis of the owners' removal of the bells from Holywood Church and any associated archaeology was in context of the owners' discovery of the bells' evidenced, unique, extraordinary and priceless Knights Templar attribution. 'The owners' assert their re-discovery of the bells' 12th century provenance, attached to a Templar preceptory, and its sponsor's Templar attribution is one of the most significant and valuable medieval discoveries in Scotland, the only significant provenanced Knights Templar artefacts in the world, and as such the bells should be judged and treated as artefacts of national importance.' They say the previous decisions by the council and Scottish Government were based on Historic Environment Scotland's listed building description, which only mentions 'two church bells of medieval date' which have 'special interest' to the site's history. The response adds: 'Without authoritative disavowal of the owners' attestation, and the public having access to interrogate the evidence of the bells' extraordinary and priceless Knight Templar attribution, and with no supportable counter to that discovery from those deemed the most appropriate 'experts'; returning the bells to a dilapidated property without appropriate robust security measures in keeping with the bells' historic and fiscal value would be catastrophic, in terms of protection and safety.' The couple are looking to sell the building – which they bought with planning permission to convert into a three building house – and do not plan to remove the bells permanently. However, they believe returning them before the building is sold would put the bells 'under needless and unacceptable risk'. And the response states they are looking for 'authoritative authentication of the discovery to facilitate a sale without the further misrepresentation of the historical building record'. This would also help provide an 'honest valuation' for the property. As a result, the bells 'will remain offsite as a matter of security while new owners are procured'. In their response to the appeal, the council states that 'no supporting evidence, method statement has been provided by the appellants to support the removal on health and safety grounds, with no location of the relocation of the bellsprovided'. They add: 'The serving of the enforcement notice was deemed necessary to return the bells and plaques to the church in order to preserve the features and historic interest in the category B listed church.'
Daily Record
2 days ago
- Daily Record
Scots couple win bitter row with neighbours over hedge that made lives 'misery'
Keith Smith and wife Julie were left frustrated by a row of cypress trees belonging to David Hunter and Niena Hunter Mistry in the city suburb of Prestonfield. A couple have won a bitter row with their neighbours over a hedge between their properties in Edinburgh. Keith Smith, 71, and wife Julie, 68, were left frustrated by a row of cypress trees belonging to David Hunter and Niena Hunter Mistry in the city suburb of Prestonfield. The Smiths claimed the trees were making their lives a misery and turned to the City of Edinburgh Council in a bid to have them lopped. They were left stunned when the council rejected the move but later successfully appealed to the government and the trees had to be cut to 8.5ft. But one tree remained which the Smiths insisted towered over their garden and left it in darkness. Mr Hunter turned to the Scottish Government in a bid to save his tree but that has been rejected and it will have to be lopped to 8.5ft. The row had grown increasingly bitter since 2020 with police even being involved after a disturbance was reported. In his appeal letter, Mr Hunter insisted the tree was not part of the hedge and begged for it to be kept. He said: "The individual tree identified in the varied notice cannot reasonably be said to be part of the boundary hedge. It appears as a separate individual tree and has never been trimmed. "We would be very grateful if you would take all our points and concerns into account and request that you quash the revised high hedge notice." Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. In a document to the government, the Smiths said: "The cost to the public purse must be considerable in terms of government, council and police resources. "We, the Smiths, have suffered hugely financially, emotionally and physically by this process and sincerely hope this will now lead to resolution." Mrs Smith had earlier said she was constantly 'anxious, stressed and scared' to enter her garden and claimed the conflict had impacted on her marriage. Government reporter Amanda Chisholm said: "During one period of sunshine, I observed that the disputed tree casts shadow over a significant proportion of the neighbouring property's rear garden. "In any case, the varied high hedge notice applies to the hedge as a whole, which has already been found to adversely affect this property's reasonable enjoyment. In my view the part of the hedge that has not been reduced in height continues to do so."
Glasgow Times
3 days ago
- Glasgow Times
Glasgow homeowner ordered to remove sun room from property
Glasgow City Council served two enforcement notices on a flat at 1 Seton Terrace as officials said the structures, installed without permission, were out of character and affecting neighbours. The owner, Gerard Caughey, appealed to the Scottish Government in a bid to overturn the rulings, but they have now been upheld. A sun room, or orangery, was built in 2018 as an extension to the mid-19th century two-storey flat while the two flues – for a wood-burning stove within a workshop in the garden – were installed in a lane to the back of the property. Council officials said both the flues and the sun room require planning permission while listed building consent is needed for the extension. They ordered their removal in November last year following 'various' public complaints, as the flues have 'a direct impact on the amenity of the neighbouring properties' due to smoke. Officials also said the sun room does not 'protect the listed building's appearance' or 'complement the… period, style and character'. (Image: Appeal documents) But Mr Caughey, who claimed he was only aware of one complaint, appealed. A reporter was appointed by the Scottish Government to investigate the case. A representative for the owner said he had reinstated a single-storey extension at the same 'height and scale' as an original orangery, which had been part of the property when it was purchased in the 1990s but was removed as it was in 'a dangerous condition'. The appeal argued the extension had been completed six years before the enforcement notice was issued and that it protected the listed building 'due to its similarity to what was there originally'. It added 'quality' Spanish hardwood had been used and a 'sympathetic approach' was taken. The owner's appeal also claimed the council had failed to respond to a query about retrospective planning applications, and a prior enforcement notice relating to the flues had been dismissed. A letter of support for the extension was provided by Brian Johnston, planning convener on Dennistoun Community Council. It stated the work had been 'carried out with a sympathetic regard for the original building' and the 'workmanship, design and materials' were of 'high quality'. In response, the council said the previous notice was not withdrawn and the flues are not 'a sufficient distance' from neighbouring properties, so a planning application would be refused. READ MORE: Call to keep 'distinctive' building facade in plan for new Radisson hotel It added permission for the extension also wouldn't be granted, as it is 'incongruous with the listed building and contributes to overdevelopment of the rear area'. The council believes removing the 'unauthorised structure would restore the character of the listed building by restoring the rear wall of the building to its original unobscured state'. The reporter, Simon Bonsall, found permission was required in both cases and that breaches of planning control had occurred. He upheld the enforcement notices. Mr Bonsall also refused to grant listed building consent for the extension. He concluded: 'While the effect of the orangery on the setting would not be harmful, I consider that the orangery through its design, location and materials would… not be in keeping with the character of the listed building. 'I consider that the removal of the orangery… would restore the character of the listed building to its state prior to the orangery having been built.' The owner can challenge the rulings at the Court of Session, but only on a point of law.
