A community campaigner has warned he will “fight to the end” over the future of hotly-disputed greenbelt land at the site of the former Kingspark School.
Graham Low, 41, and fellow residents living close to the site have been involved in a feud with Dundee City Council over the future of the site since it was revealed the administration intended for private housing to be built on the land.
This, according to locals, was a clear contradiction of promises made in a 2003 report produced by the council’s development quality committee.
As part of the historic publication, it is stated: “Although it can be argued that development of the school will lead to a loss of visual amenity for the wider area, this will be compensated in the longer term by the return of the existing Kingspark School site to greenspace associated with the new school.”
Long-term campaigner Mr Low insists he and others have made the council aware of this, but claims they were told the publication had “confused them”.
Mr Low said: “It’s there in black and white.
“The new St Pauls school was built on two playing fields, with the condition that the former Kingspark site was returned to greenspace to compensate for the loss of the two playing fields.
“You can see this quite clearly written twice in the planning application.
“But now they are ignoring this and are voting to build on it.
“I think the council just hoped we would go ahead with their plans and forget about what they promised us.
“Why are they so adamant to force this through? There are lots of other sites they could build on.
“I don’t understand why they have such a bee in their bonnet over Kingspark.
“We will fight until the end. This is the best park in the area.”
Graham’s fellow critic, Lynn Watson, has launched a complaint with the Scottish ombudsman over the council’s handling of the saga.
In response to Mr Low’s assertions, a spokesman for Dundee City Council said: “As part of the consultation process on the draft site planning brief last year an invitation to comment was posted to 86 residents who share a boundary with the site.
“During the six-week consultation, 27 responses were received.
“Further discussions between the community and council officers took place as well as internal discussions on the size, shape, extent and location of open space that would be required to produce the optimum area of open space to meet the community’s needs.”