Hello everyone, Newbie to the site, and loving all the old pics of yesteryear. Born in `62, grew up and lived in Newbury until about `96 when I moved to Cornwall. I`m trying to get some of my old `photos together and post them for the record. I had an idyllic childhood in Newbury and feel very nostalgic when I trawl this site, BUT will never return permanently. When I left, the abiding memory was TRAFFIC, I`d just had enough of it. Much preferred the days of early closing on Wednesday afternoons, nothing happening on Sundays, and mooching about all day on the K & A canal. Happy times for me. Keep up the good work, and keep on posting those old pics! Minky xx
Any pictures you have of Newbury would be more than welcome, we can't have too many. It is my hope to get an internet Historic Newbury or Vrtual Museum site going as the Newbury museum seem as if they are going to be helpful in that direction. There is some work to be done up front but it should be interesting. What part of Newbury did you live in and what schools did you attend.
Hi Brian, Primary School was Winchcombe, then St. Barts when it was a Grammar School. Lived at Cromwell Rd (too young to remember), Cresswell Rd (do remember), Gaywood Drive, Craven Rd, London Rd opposite Wheelers, Kimbers Close, bought a house in St Johns Rd, then off to The Sunny Southwest. Lived in Newbury when it was Good. Planning on coming back later this year just to see family and spend a day or two walking the streets, see what`s happened to me old home town. Minky xx
Hi Brian, Primary School was Winchcombe, then St. Barts when it was a Grammar School. Lived at Cromwell Rd (too young to remember), Cresswell Rd (do remember), Gaywood Drive, Craven Rd, London Rd opposite Wheelers, Kimbers Close, bought a house in St Johns Rd, then off to The Sunny Southwest. Lived in Newbury when it was Good. Planning on coming back later this year just to see family and spend a day or two walking the streets, see what`s happened to me old home town. Minky xx
I am sorry to say, you will not like what you see.. it has been destroyed! I have lived here since 1949(Year I was born) and seen many changes..None to the good unfortunately.
Hi Brian, Primary School was Winchcombe, then St. Barts when it was a Grammar School. Lived at Cromwell Rd (too young to remember), Cresswell Rd (do remember), Gaywood Drive, Craven Rd, London Rd opposite Wheelers, Kimbers Close, bought a house in St Johns Rd, then off to The Sunny Southwest. Lived in Newbury when it was Good. Planning on coming back later this year just to see family and spend a day or two walking the streets, see what`s happened to me old home town. Minky xx
I think you will see some difference by the end of the year with the St Bart's complex. The old girls grammar and the boys grammar heve been put together as a rather disconnected Co-ed secondary school. Both of these old buildings will close for redevelopment and the whole lot will move into a new school on the greenfield between the schools at the end of the Autumn term. This rather unusual building is almost complete and to my mind has to be one of the worst buildings I have ever seen. But I suppose it will be considered as modern and functional. I'll see if I can get a picture on so that you can brace yourself for your visit of discovery.
Parkway is running late by the way so you may be in time for the grand opening if they can find more than four tenants. (Oh hang on a minute that's 2011 so all you will see is a huge building site with great lumps of concrete and steel pointing skywards).
This rather unusual building is almost complete and to my mind has to be one of the worst buildings I have ever seen. But I suppose it will be considered as modern and functional. I'll see if I can get a picture on so that you can brace yourself for your visit of discovery.
Let's focus in on one of the buildings our unmedicated Brians would, no doubt, love to see preserved. Here's the existing science block. (Thank goodness, you may well think, that neither of them has any influence on anything that happens out in the real world and that they can blabber harmlessly away here.)
The new building is pretty horrible looking. The two main buildings of the existing school are very attractive buildings and for that reason are being conserved. Furthermore, the new school was an example of the gross financial negligence of the previous government for which we are all now having to pay.
And after all this waste, the Schools rebuilding programme has been cancelled, so the schools in the district that really do need new premises can go swing! I just hope those responsible for maintaining and operating this building aren't going to be the same as the ones that let the previous premises fall into such disrepair.
That bears very little resemblance to what is actually there as far as I can see. The artist's impression does not show the mass of coloured panels on the sides and there are two inverted funnels that have been hauled up a couple of poles. Perhaps they are just temporary.
Noobree, what happened to your pictures. I didn't say that the existing schools were anything to shout about but what actually makes them so naff is that the core buildings as originally built have had an assortment of junk buildings tacked on. That sort of piecemeal development and the lack of investment is why the whole school needed replacing. Great stuff but I'm afraid I don't need any pills to know that visually the replacement is not going to go the hundred years that the other buildings did.
Brian - I deleted the original posts because I took another look at the new building yesterday and decided that I had to agree with you. The new building a. is ugly and b. is nothing like the artist's impressions. It's worth mentioning that there was a change in the planning permission related to the two-pole roof (which is probably the best feature of the scheme in my view), but the various-tones-of beige panels are nothing like the artist's impressions. My apologies.
It's worth nothing that artist's impressions of new buildings are never like the actual thing and also that it's 10/1 on (based on experience of new buildings in Newbury (Vodafone and Newbury College) that the roof will leak.
Let's see what it actually looks like when the hoardings etc. are removed. My overall feeling is that the new St Bart's is a good thing and will benefit the children who go to school there enormously. Overall, it's a tremendous asset for the town.
Re. Niceguyeddie's point: I'd like to see the full cost benefit analysis before jumping to any conclusions. I'm sure he has and can fill us in on the details.
As a former governor, I'm surprised that you haven't.
But anyway, these things are normally put togethert by those seeking the money for the project and are unreliable.
Leaving that aside, I might be able to show a cost benefit to installing solar panels, but if I haven't got the cash for the panels it's pretty academic.
There was much celebration at the time that it wasn't costing locals any money at all. Well hello! This scheme and all the others have cost us all a great deal.
There was much celebration at the time that it wasn't costing locals any money at all. Well hello! This scheme and all the others have cost us all a great deal.
I have to say that I was amazed that they chose to build a school that would cost so much more than the money allocated from central government (£35 million?). Which resulted in the ill feeling over the proposed demolition of Luker as well as the development of the Wormstall site.
Not a thing of great beauty is it. Judging by the artist's impression it is one of those buildings that is best viewed from above - perhaps WBC should put up a tower like the millenium wotsit in Portsmouth so we can appreciate the architect's genius better.
................... My overall feeling is that the new St Bart's is a good thing and will benefit the children who go to school there enormously. Overall, it's a tremendous asset for the town.........
I'd very much appreciate knowing exactly what benefits from the new building the children going to the School will actually get. I can't see any that wouldn't also be realised from a straightforward refurbishment. Similarly, over and above its present reputation; how is it a tremendous asset for the town. I think I'd be justifiably angry if my children were at any of the schools in the area not now being replaced and still in a poor state.
I'd very much appreciate knowing exactly what benefits from the new building the children going to the School will actually get. I can't see any that wouldn't also be realised from a straightforward refurbishment. Similarly, over and above its present reputation; how is it a tremendous asset for the town. I think I'd be justifiably angry if my children were at any of the schools in the area not now being replaced and still in a poor state.
These are all excellent points Mr Goat. But I'm afraid I've got some bad news for you.
You aren't going to find answers to any of them here. (You knew that, right?)
When you say that you'd 'very much appreciate' some information what, exactly, are you prepared to do about it?
Have you taken the time to talk to your district councillor? If you have and they didn't (as you will, no doubt, have fully anticipated!) tell you what you wanted to hear, did you try submitting a Freedom of Information request (they really can be very effective you know).
Tell you what. If you've done neither of those things, why don't you just do them and report back here on what you find out? If you don't get any sensible answers that in itself will be useful to know. If you do we can have a discussion about this based on some actual facts.
noobree, while you accused someone of peddling simple opinion, to be fair, that is all you seemed to do in your recent posts. I think it is quite reasonable to wonder if this has been an appropriate use of money. Especially as the project was started without all the money secured to finish it as planned.
I am also uncomfortable with the idea that a headmaster resigns to project manage the build. That leaves me with a poor taste in my mouth.
No. It's a school. It's not supposed to be 'beautiful', is it? Hopefully (and I have no inside information about this) it will be a good place to learn.
What it looks like is completely irrelevant, surely? The Vodafone HQ doesn't look particularly wonderful but I'm sure it's a good place from which to generate lots of profits for Vodafone's shareholders. Ditto Tesco Extra. Looks like shit but it's (in my opinion and that of its shareholders, I'm sure) a good place to shop.
noobree, while you accused someone of peddling simple opinion,.
I didn't 'accuse' anyone of anything. And it was you who said he was 'peddling opinons', not me. I just said that he was expressing an opinion but that doesn't get us anywhere.
I said that if Goat wanted actual answers to the questions which were implicit in his post he wouldn't get answers to them here. I'm sure you agree with that. I, and I'm sure many others, would be interested to have some data on this. We can all express opinions until the cows come home but it doesn't get us anywhere does it?
One of the ideas that David Cameron put forward during his election campaign was the idea of 'armchair auditors'. I really liked that idea. I'm sure that many of the posters here would be ideally qualified as armchair auditors, but we need some data, don't we Greenham? Data - not opinions. Auditors, armchair or otherwise, can't audit opinions.
The point is, he posted some points of view, as did you, but NONE of if substantiated. If you think he should go seek some data; I have to ask: when do you start?
Ah, there's another example of a post that's uniformed by the facts. Yes, there is a fives court in the new shool. I'm really keen on facts. Opinions are worthless without them. Absolutely worthless. That's a fact.
Ah, there's another example of a post that's uniformed by the facts. Yes, there is a fives court in the new shool. I'm really keen on facts. Opinions are worthless without them. Absolutely worthless. That's a fact.
Did you not see the question marks?
Your rather defensive and patronising display suggests to me you have an affinity with this development.
It explains very fully 'whatever they put on a green roof' actually is. Easy, isn't it? I have no idea whether it makes any sense whatsoever to make a roof like that. Maybe it's just a sop to tree huggers? Who knows? I'm sure that a bit more googling would reveal the answers.
But come on chaps: no more lazy 'peddled' opinions around here: let's do the research!
Your rather defensive and patronising display suggests to me you have an affinity with this development.
Well, if you're suggesting that I had any part to play in the decision about the spend or that I'm connected with West Berks Council or the school's governors you're completely wrong. Direct message me your phone number and I'll call you to discuss this.
Both my children attended the school and I have a close affinity with it but that's not why I joined in with this thread.
I joined in because I really do hate - I mean hate - opinion that has no basis in fact. When we talk I'll explain why.
Well, if you're suggesting that I had any part to play in the decision about the spend or that I'm connected with West Berks Council or the school's governors you're completely wrong. Direct message me your phone number and I'll call you to discuss this.
Both my children attended the school and I have a close affinity with it but that's not why I joined in with this thread.
I joined in because I really do hate - I mean hate - opinion that has no basis in fact. When we talk I'll explain why.
People post for various reasons, and an opinion is a legitimate reason to post. It might not fit your criteria, but in my view that is tough. At the end of the day it will be hard for you to persuade people if you continue to act in this condescending tone.
The word opinion is by definition unsubstantiated. Opinion and fact are mutually exclusive.
BTW - I am not in the habit of disclosing my phone number to strangers. I also accused you of nothing, it is only that your actions suggested you are sensitive to something about this project. It seems, however, it is actually that you are intolerant of peoples opinions.
If you think he should go seek some data; I have to ask: when do you start?
I haven't started. I'm just like you: I have no data. (Psst: just between you and me, we can go on like this for ever but I think you know we're wasting our time.)
It seems, however, it is actually that you are intolerant of peoples opinions.
We agree on something at least! As I I think I mentioned before, opinions alone are worthless. Would you like me to DM you my phone number? (Incidentally, I'll only DM you my phone number if you PROMISE that you're not any kind of councillor: OK?)
Re. the 'you're joking'. If my opinion is that I have fairies at the bottom of my garden is correct it's correct regardless of whether I actually have fairies at the bottom of my garden, right? We must talk! In fact, better than that, I'll buy you a pint. You name the place/time (preferably via a DM).
No. It's a school. It's not supposed to be 'beautiful', is it? Hopefully (and I have no inside information about this) it will be a good place to learn.
I hope so too - of not it will have been a collosal waste of money.
However, I do wonder if anyone really knows what makes a good place to learn. If they did surely we would be building lots of school to a pattern. As it is we seem to spend loads on architects and building expensive new designs in the hope they will work.
Re. the 'you're joking'. If my opinion is that I have fairies at the bottom of my garden is correct it's correct regardless of whether I actually have fairies at the bottom of my garden, right? We must talk! In fact, better than that, I'll buy you a pint. You name the place/time (preferably via a DM).
I wasn't being that deep.
In simplest terms: an opinion is something unsubstantiated, subjective if you like. A fact is a discreet piece of information, usually verifiable.
In other words, it is a fact Saturday follows Friday, but it is an opinion that Saturday is the best day of the week.
I hope so too - of not it will have been a collosal waste of money. However, I do wonder if anyone really knows what makes a good place to learn. If they did surely we would be building lots of school to a pattern. As it is we seem to spend loads on architects and building expensive new designs in the hope they will work.
Oxbridge must be a crap place(s) to get an education.
However, I do wonder if anyone really knows what makes a good place to learn. If they did surely we would be building lots of school to a pattern. As it is we seem to spend loads on architects and building expensive new designs in the hope they will work.
Very good points, I'd like to see answers to both of them. But as Greenham has reminded us all but until someone gets off their backsides and asks a few people other than forum members we won't know the answers to either of them. You'll only get subjective opinions here. Generally, like all web forums, you'll only get negative opinions.
"Building Schools for the Future" featured some notorious disasters (I'm not going to do all the work for you: you can type a few relevant search terms into Google as easily as I can). I'm sure we all fervently hope that St Barts won't be one of them.*
Does anyone else here listen to The Bugle podcast? It's often very funny, although that's obviously a subjective point and I can't back it up with any facts. I completely agree with the point in the most recent edition about the 'comments' sections on newspaper websites. Excellent stuff although it's fair to warn you that it's probably not to the taste of many of those who contribute to Newbury.net.
These are all excellent points Mr Goat. But I'm afraid I've got some bad news for you.
You aren't going to find answers to any of them here. (You knew that, right?)
When you say that you'd 'very much appreciate' some information what, exactly, are you prepared to do about it?
Have you taken the time to talk to your district councillor? If you have and they didn't (as you will, no doubt, have fully anticipated!) tell you what you wanted to hear, did you try submitting a Freedom of Information request (they really can be very effective you know).
Tell you what. If you've done neither of those things, why don't you just do them and report back here on what you find out? If you don't get any sensible answers that in itself will be useful to know. If you do we can have a discussion about this based on some actual facts.
Sorry old son, but I have taken the trouble to make sure my local councillors know exactly how I feel. I've also taken the trouble to disuss what was happening with a colleague of mine who works at the DoE. That was BEFORE the last election. So I for one was very pleased indeed when the Labour scheme throwing money at rebuilding schools was stopped in its tracks. Considered opinion is that no additional benefits will accrue to students studying at the schools so refurbished and they aren't ever likely to be beacon assets to a community.
A School's value in that regard depends on its reputation; that's more in the gift of the staff. However, just as the supermarket concentration on vouchers for schools - the Labour party hit upon what they felt would be an vote winner; hence the original very wasteful scheme.
I firmly believe it is the Governor's responsibility to properly care for the assets under their control so no state school should have been in the shocking state of decay some were. And yes, thats as an ex governor and yes thats as someone who made himself very unpopular with an LEA about this very subject
However, I was surprised by your comments - which you hadn't grounded or explained. I can't stand people who simply pump sunshine without any consideration or basis in fact.
Some have asked what would make a good environment for learning. The key requirement is presentation. In other words the tutor. We all remember teachers who inspired; it was part of their character. Second, another key need is the want on the part of the pupil - if that's absent forget it. So then, the physical environment comes down the list. However, just as well architected stations, shops etc, can assist with the inspiration, so can any well designed premise. A straightforward view is put by Bill Bryson in 'The Thunderbolt Kid' - where he mentions the high victorian architecture of his primary school was inspirational. Ironically, just the style we've just pulled down!
Have some respect you lot...Saint Bartholomews please! That's where we have gone wrong..loosing the Grammar school.. we used to have uniforms you know..now look at em! The start of the decline of discipline when the Education scheme was changed..mixed schools...next mixed toilets..Still I 'spose it would teach you that girls sit down to do it! I'm sorry...don't know where all this came from... Although I did not excell at the 'Grubbery', it taught me a few things that now sadly seem to be neglected. I think we all know what I mean..
Oxbridge must be a crap place(s) to get an education.
Eton & Harrow are clearly for society's dregs. The wealthy all send their children to Turnpike. 'Course it's going to have serious competition when St Barts opens 2 month's late in November. I expect the project manager will get a gong.
Eton & Harrow are clearly for society's dregs. The wealthy all send their children to Turnpike. 'Course it's going to have serious competition when St Barts opens 2 month's late in November. I expect the project manager will get a gong.
Bit out of date, Turnpike school closed sometime ago even though it was, at the time, one of the newest school buildings in the area.
I suppose as I sort of started this, then I might restate what were and are my personal thoughts on the new school. My views are subjective but, whatever else, it is the worst looking building I have ever had the misfortune to cast my eyes upon. I believe it will be a maintenance disaster and that the costs will be punitive twenty or so years from now when the inverted funnels need replacing and the roof starts leaking. Removing several tons of gravel and plant bedding will be no mean feat. The added cost of the 'green' roof to allow a carbon target to be acheived and to, as somebody else said, placate the tree huggers cannot be justified even if the kids use the roof statistics as part of the school curriculum.
If the building generates a pride throughout the school's pupils and this creates a better learning environment for them then it may all be worthwhile. I hope so. It may be that the younger generation will look at this and think that it is the best looking building they have ever seen. One man's meat.... etc.
The thing about Oxbridge is that there is considerable tradition involved, unlike the glass and aluminium so called modern universities that peddle tissue paper degrees. This tradition is reflected in the quality of both the tuition and the quality of the students. An Oxbridge degree is worth the vellum it is written on.
Will the new St Bart's be worth it in the end or will it just peddle a whole raft of mediocre students only intent on skiving off, being disruptive or will we see quality pupils who are proud to say twenty or thirty years on, "I went to St Batholomew's school and it gave me a great start in life".?
We're still a bit light on facts (i.e. there aren't any) and heavy on vague unsubstantiated assertions (yes, yes: including mine!) in this discussion, but I was only kidding when I suggested that citing any actual information would result in a more useful discussion.
'In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.'
The problem with facts is that you don't necessarily see the whole picture. Facts can be drawn to support any argument; for or against. You pick a fact, I'll pick a fact, and on it goes.
It is not necessarily the facts that hold the power to persuade, it is most often how the facts are delivered. For example noobree, the way you came bouncing in on this thread just immediately put my backup and I become defensive, despite having no real view ion the topic, other than I thought the project rather esoteric in concept. noobree, if you want people to play ball, you need to play nice, being sarcastic and condescending doesn't improve matters. I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I do disagree with the way you do it.
What would be useful for the current discussion, would be a rationalé for the current move/development. My view is, the best education is supplied by the best teachers, not a 'gimmick' slapped in the middle of a sports field. Although I'm sure some accountant could demonstrate how cost effective moving was.
noobree, the way you came bouncing in on this thread just immediately put my backup and I become defensive, despite having no real view ion the topic, other than I thought the project rather esoteric in concept.
Yes, it was completely uncalled for. I'm just frustrated with the relentless negativity of forums like this and the often sloppy thinking of contributors. I guess that's why so few people participate these days. Hey ho. I'll look out for you all scowling over the hoardings at the new St Bart's. Have a nice weekend.
The thing about Oxbridge is that there is considerable tradition involved, unlike the glass and aluminium so called modern universities that peddle tissue paper degrees. This tradition is reflected in the quality of both the tuition and the quality of the students. An Oxbridge degree is worth the vellum it is written on.
There is plenty of glass & aluminium at both Oxford & Cambridge. Look at the fuss the Saïd Business School building in Oxford caused.
As noobree pointed out: is this based on fact, or customary forum cynicism?
I do know that every resident facing the new town houses that are going in on Buckingham Road objected on the grounds of lost on street parking. There are lots of facts on this thread. Perhaps Noobree should have chosen the name Gradgrind?
As noobree pointed out: is this based on fact, or customary forum cynicism?
No, its fact. Indeed, its not particularly difficult to dig out the facts. However, some contributors tend to get upset when facts disturb their views. Where their sloppy thinking means they can't rebut the argument, they'll resort to calling foul and critics cynics. This particular project was indeed what is known as a 'pet' or 'vanity' project - let's accept that but learn from the error. Something we don't often do - after all Hans Andersen wrote 'The Emperor's New Clothes' many years ago!
No, its fact. Indeed, its not particularly difficult to dig out the facts.
Indeed! Oh dear Goat, I have some sympathy for you. It must be terribly discouraging to be constantly railing against people who simply ignore you.
Anyway, I'm sure that the one thing that we can agree on is that, good or bad, a new school has been built and I suppose now that it's there we'd better make the most of it. (Although that isn't necessarily true, of course. If we could find a more cost effective alternative we could treat it as a sunk cost and demolish it tomorrow. Go to it Goat: the world has changed completely since the original decision was made!). http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=define:sunk+cost
Otherwise it's time for us all to move on and fight battles that might actually make a difference in the future. Against which windmills are you currently tilting?
I must admit that one question that crosses my mind in these austere times is why we have three completely separate secondary schools and an FE college in a town of 30,000 people. Perhaps you could apply some of your extensive experience in the education sector to that. Is it time to merge them all into one Newbury High under one Super Head, for example?
The estimable Mr Dick seems to be making a good fist of running Trinity and Kennet: why not give him the lot?
Anyway, I'm sure that the one thing that we can agree on is that, good or bad, a new school has been built and I suppose now that it's there we'd better make the most of it. (Although that isn't necessarily true, of course. If we could find a more cost effective alternative we could treat it as a sunk cost and demolish it tomorrow. Go to it Goat: the world has changed completely since the original decision was made!). http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=define:sunk+cost ...
I must admit that one question that crosses my mind in these austere times is why we have three completely separate secondary schools and an FE college in a town of 30,000 people. Perhaps you could apply some of your extensive experience in the education sector to that. Is it time to merge them all into one Newbury High under one Super Head, for example?
Newbury may have three secondary schools for 30,000, but Newbury and Thatcham have four for 60,000 - which makes it look a litte better.
If there was only one school then life would be so much easier for parents trying to get their kids into the best local school.
In the old days schools were built to service their local area (great idea, kids could even walk to school) now most kids are driven to school so a more convenient location should be car friendly. How about alongside Chieveley services? Combine all four somewhere like that, perhaps you've found the reason to demolish the new St Barts.
Indeed! Oh dear Goat, I have some sympathy for you. It must be terribly discouraging to be constantly railing against people who simply ignore you.
Anyway, I'm sure that the one thing that we can agree on is that, good or bad, a new school has been built and I suppose now that it's there we'd better make the most of it. (Although that isn't necessarily true, of course. If we could find a more cost effective alternative we could treat it as a sunk cost and demolish it tomorrow. Go to it Goat: the world has changed completely since the original decision was made!). http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=define:sunk+cost
Otherwise it's time for us all to move on and fight battles that might actually make a difference in the future. Against which windmills are you currently tilting?
I must admit that one question that crosses my mind in these austere times is why we have three completely separate secondary schools and an FE college in a town of 30,000 people. Perhaps you could apply some of your extensive experience in the education sector to that. Is it time to merge them all into one Newbury High under one Super Head, for example?
The estimable Mr Dick seems to be making a good fist of running Trinity and Kennet: why not give him the lot?
I've always been surprised at the number of people who do take notice - often a fair time later. I think its rather sad that you have clearly misunderstood (deliberate or otherwise) everything I've been trying to tell you. I am certainly not against investment in community assets - simply against those responsible doing it without any real justification and for their own personal glory. No one is suggesting pulling down what's already been built. We simply need to learn lessons.
However, I for one will be very disturbed if when other schools in the area apply to have maintenance done and are told 'all the money has been spent on St Barts'. Similarly, I'll be expecting St. Barts to the 'top of the league' locally next year when the A level results are announced - as will you, because and according to the original concepts, that will demonstrate that the money has been well spent.
It wouldn't surprise you to know that I do indeed have a plan - which would address exactly the issue you mention; whilst at the same time achieve some degree parity of esteem between schools. However, I'd rather not outline that here because it would very much disturb established thinking - which some can't cope with and it would be wrong to upset them too soon.
There is an interesting publication called Bartholonews which is available on line and has amongst the various reports and stories, some pictures and information about the new building which I think is to be called Wormstalls.
No one is suggesting pulling down what's already been built.
I know that isn't going to happen, but logically it could. For example, the St Bart's site includes a very modern Lifelong Learning Centre (i.e. library, IT suites, meeting rooms) which was expensive to build and was funded by external sponsors (Vodafone, Greenham Common Trust etc) as well as WBC. It's going to be demolished as part of the new scheme. Sunk costs would be the justification, I assume. (Anyone actually know? I mean 'actually know'?)
However, I for one will be very disturbed if when other schools in the area apply to have maintenance done and are told 'all the money has been spent on St Barts'.
Presumably no one has actually said this yet? If they actually do I'll be as outraged as anyone else.
I suppose the general problem is that most, if not all, assets have a finite economic life. The 'bathtub curve' tells us all we need to know:
This is why, I guess, we tend to make our minds up about what we think and then look for facts which back up our views. Life is too short and the world is too complex to do otherwise. Seems to me that if those who make decisions on our behalf admitted that this is how things are - that they are fallible, that the world is enormously complex and unpredictable, they might be wrong and so on - we'd all trust them a lot more. To err, as they say, is human.
Seems to me that if those who make decisions on our behalf admitted that this is how things are - that they are fallible, that the world is enormously complex and unpredictable, they might be wrong and so on - we'd all trust them a lot more. To err, as they say, is human.
Is it not simpler than that? Maybe a statement like: We need so much square metres of tutorial space; we would need to spend so much on expanding and maintaining the current building, over so many years; we could build all this new somewhere else for so much.
Is it not simpler than that? Maybe a statement like: We need so much square metres of tutorial space; we would need to spend so much on expanding and maintaining the current building, over so many years; we could build all this new somewhere else for so much.
That wouldn't work as if it was laid out in such a plain and straightforward way the justification wouldn't be there to build a new school. As Noobree said earlier, people tend to decide something then look for the evidence to support it. So one weird method was to calculate how many hours in a year are spent walking between Luker & Wormestall and hold up these hours as a financial saving.
Yes, pure logic says it is. But as Noobree says - life ain't like that. Hence the challenges; nothing wrong with that; its exactly how we learn. We learn by our mistakes - so lets admit them!
Yes, pure logic says it is. But as Noobree says - life ain't like that. Hence the challenges; nothing wrong with that; its exactly how we learn. We learn by our mistakes - so lets admit them!
Sorry, you've lost me. I see bringing 'two sites together' as a logically sound reason for the argument to build a new school. What is the error?
When I was at the school, sometimes being between buildings was a problem for punctuality, including teachers. This now will not be such an issue, viz, longer tutorial time.
When I was at the school, sometimes being between buildings was a problem for punctuality, including teachers. This now will not be such an issue, viz, longer tutorial time.
When I was at school going from one end of the building to the other caused similar. So what? It's just a fact of living in a physical world.
When I was at the school, sometimes being between buildings was a problem for punctuality, including teachers. This now will not be such an issue, viz, longer tutorial time.
It is long overdue that the two schools should have been brought together as a single unit. I use Buckingham Rd/Fifth Rd sometimes three or four times a day driving between Kingsbridge Rd and builders merchants or home and have to say that the droves of young people I see ambling between the two current schools is an accident waiting to happen. They are usually very well behaved but seem to be totally unaware of cars and trucks, especially as they cross the road at the junction of Buckingham and fifth roads. But the amount of time lost must be very high. The other point of course is that the young people are leaving the confines of the school which means that the teaching staff must loose contact with the students which in todays climate must be an area for concern.
I'm sure the new building will solve all these problems but I would be interested, although I can't seem to find the facts, as to how much was budgeted for the school and where the money was coming from and if it has over-run by how much and why.
Given the premise that the original plan was to demolish one or both the existing buildings for housing development, has the fact that the historical building frameworks must be retained, impacted the overall budget.
From what I recall the government put up £35 million for a new school. St Barts Foundation decided to spend considerably more (£45 million?) with the extra to be raised from the sale of the entire Wormstall site plus part of the Luker site. There was never any intention to demolish Wormstall, but the opposition to the demolition of Luker is probably one reason they haven't raised all the cash yet. The general economic climate can't have helped either - the value of the Wormstall site must have fallen a bit and it is unlikely that many developers will be wanting to build a housing estate at present.
Is this board not entitled Old Photographs? Is this thread not entitled Great Photos and Memories? Where are they? Someone's gone off on a tangent somewhere.....
Is this board not entitled Old Photographs? Is this thread not entitled Great Photos and Memories? Where are they? Someone's gone off on a tangent somewhere.....
You are right of course and I'm afraid that it was me that started the spin off in reply to Minky Moo. (nice name) who is no longer a local resident but might be coming back for a lookround. I suggested that as he had gone to St Barts, he should prepare for the sight of the new creation.
From then on it snowballed and everybody must have been busting to discuss the subject. An early move to a more relevant section with a new title would have been good but here we are and I guess it's where it will stay unless Admin decides to move it Lock Stock and Barrel. Talking about pubs.........
Is this board not entitled Old Photographs? Is this thread not entitled Great Photos and Memories? Where are they? Someone's gone off on a tangent somewhere.....
You are right of course and I'm afraid that it was me that started the spin off in reply to Minky Moo. (nice name) who is no longer a local resident but might be coming back for a lookround. I suggested that as he had gone to St Barts, he should prepare for the sight of the new creation.
From then on it snowballed and everybody must have been busting to discuss the subject. An early move to a more relevant section with a new title would have been good but here we are and I guess it's where it will stay unless Admin decides to move it Lock Stock and Barrel. Talking about pubs.........
I did think about splitting the thread once St Barts became the dominant issue. I couldn't think of a suitable title.
I was talking to a couple of youngsters the other day and I asked them about the new school. Now I promise I didn't prompt them but they both said that they didn't like how it looked, the glass panels with all the different browns and oranges was horrible and it looked like a circus tent. So, that's the younger version. No doubt they will get used to it and let's hope that inside it is more to their liking.
The pallisades around the building are now down so the school building is in full view. They are also tarmacing the entrance and exits (almost done). I believe the whole project has slightly over-run but it is a complicated construction so I think that is excusable. I can't say I'm keen on the two funnels, especially as they seem to be off centre but that's nit picking. I will wait to talk to my grandchildren and their friends to get the pupils perspective after they've moved in and settled down. (and I won't prompt them with negative suggestions).
Should the new buiding be called Saint Bartholemews? after all it was the almalgamation of two buildings -Luker and Wormstall-so Lukewarm would seem ideal given the general response to it.
I seem to have the same view as Finlay from a year ago. It would have been nice to have had old snaps.
Still, to continue the vitriol against developers etc...The primary school my children attended in the 80s has sold off the playground. A monstrous multi-coloured block of flats has appeared. I am cynical I admit. The school will become unpopular, lower intake,sell the whole thing off. Clerkenwell. Cool place to live.
Sorry about this post as I am plodding through old stories. hexem
Male
Logged
