Rants

Rebuilding Gordonbrock School

We’ve not really established any one theme for the AW blog, besides writing about things that are of interest to us; broadly speaking areas that include visual aesthetics & sound, motion, interaction and communication. So I may be straying a little off-piste with this post, but I’ve just returned from a local meeting and I’m hopping mad about it.

Our local school, Gordonbrock Primary (which my two daughters attend), was due to be rebuilt this year. The Edwardian buildings date to 1905 but have become completely unfit for purpose (a fact identified some 21 years ago apparently – these things take time). The parents, local community, even the kids themselves, have been involved in years of planning and consultation with the school and Lewisham Council about the new building and the decant, and everything was set to go in Easter this year. However, just ten days before the build was due to begin, we received a letter saying a last minute legal objection from The Brockley Society had put a stop to it all (the Council had failed to conduct an environmental impact assessment, which unfortunately left the door open).

The Brockley Society aim to preserve the character and architectural integrity of the conservation areas in the local community. This evening they made their arguments and we listened. Lewisham Council’s approved scheme retained two of the four original buildings. The Brockley Society wanted to keep at least three. They pulled together two feasibility studies for alternatives at the last minute, the first retaining all four buildings, the second retaining three. Neither met the needs of the school, neither were properly costed or planned and neither were actually any better.

An uprising of local anger then ensued against the BS (as I’d now like to refer to them) from local parents, governors, councillors and residents. The main root of their anger was the fact that at the end of this calendar year, it is very likely that if the build hasn’t commenced the funding will be lost and the rebuild will be cancelled. Not only that, viable solutions were put forward to their two main objections (completely understandable objections I might add) – first that a new entrance would obscure one of the original buildings, and second that the quality and durability of the buildings’ exterior render was insufficient. Neither solution on offer was even mentioned in the BS presentation, let alone considered.

I’m all for preservation in the right context, and I’m usually the first to grumble if an old building is coming down, but sometimes its necessary; often the only solution to preserving an old building is to sacrifice some parts in order to breath new life into others. If its not fit for purpose its simply not fit to preserve.

What irked me most though, was that for a society who’s activities revolve around architectural integrity, The Brockley Society’s alternative scheme (above) – albeit retaining more of the original fabric – is actually less sympathetic. Just plonk some new buildings in between the old ones, and attempt to blend different eras by using like for like materials (century old red brick meet spanking new red brick). Like them or not, the approved plans at least attempt to create an honest building to reflect the era from which it comes, and most importantly they are the only plans likely to see the light of day. Unfortunately, The Brockley Society have now jeopardised the future education of hundreds of local children for goodness knows how long.

Rant over, thank you.