An extra £7.4m needed to rebuild two city schools
AN extra £7.4 million will have to be ploughed into rebuilding two city schools.
Stoke-on-Trent City Council has gone back to the drawing board on plans for Holden Lane High School and Abbey Hill Special School.
-
VISION: How Holden Lane might look.
Instead of refurbishment, both schools will now be rebuilt, with an asbestos-ridden 1960s building at Holden Lane being replaced with a new complex with room for 900 pupils.
They are among 18 schools in the city being transformed under the Government's £261 million Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme.
Councillor Debra Gratton, cabinet member for children's services and chairman of governors at Holden Lane, said: "We need to provide the very best educational facilities for every child in the city. Refurbishing the 1960s building would not have provided value for money as it would only have lasted 10-15 years.
"This will be a brand new facility that will last longer and be fit for purpose."
The council agreed in July to invest up to £55 million of the BSF funding itself, loaning £35 million and raising some of the remaining cash by selling property.
But contractors and BSF managers raised concerns that the original plans for both Holden Lane and Abbey Hill would not provide long-term value for money.
Now the council's cabinet is being asked to approve the spending of another £4.5 million to improve the designs.
A further £2.9 million will be taken from BSF cash reserves. More than £10.6 million is held by the council in reserve to cover unforeseen cost pressures during the BSF scheme, all of which has to be paid back to the Government if it is not spent.
Cabinet members are being asked to spend up to £2.9 million of the reserves on Holden Lane and Abbey Hill, taking the total additional spending to £7.4 million.
A council spokesman confirmed: "A further £4.5 million will need to be spent on top of the £55 million to support BSF."
The investments are part of the council's capital programme for infrastructure and building projects.
Capital spending is separate to day-to-day revenue spending, which is funded through income, Government grants and council tax and which is being cut by another £24 million in 2012/13.
Nobody at the schools were available to comment on the plans.
More stories related to the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme:
Students put stamp on new high school building in Stoke-on-Trent
Pupils welcome £11m makeover of high school
Pupils excited by £21m plans for Discovery Academy in Bentilee
Builders to bid for £90m school work
10 Comments
by Nicky_Davis_
Monday, January 30 2012, 1:26AM
“The new plans for Holden Lane provide only 900 pupil places compared with the previously planned 1050. Holden Lane currently has 970 pupils on roll. At SOT City Council cabinet meeting 26th January Assistant Director City Regeneration, said the numbers had been checked against total school capacity across the city and there is no problem. Well – I would like to see the proof of that! (Commenting in purely personal capacity.)
http://tinyurl.com/6t59elo”
by papalazaroo
Thursday, January 26 2012, 7:39AM
“"The council agreed in July to invest up to £55 million of the BSF funding itself, loaning £35 million and raising some of the remaining cash by selling property."
Doesn't look great for our heritage and other facilities does it? What will be left after the vanity of this vampire Labour group has been satisfied?”
by stevenweiss
Wednesday, January 25 2012, 7:36PM
“The whole BSF programme should be scrapped. We will not be able to afford it when time comes to pay the bills for these schools, by which time these cast-concrete edifices will need renewing again! When I was a lad, I was taught to not buy anything unless I could afford it. We can't afford the lavish rebuilding of all these schools. Why did Labour instigate the programme? Because they knew the rebuilding would impress the electorate just long enough to get them re-elected and then when the time came to actually pay the bills, they'd be long gone. I think there's another 20-25 years' worth of high-APR repayments on BSF to go, aren't there?”
by Dizzy1960
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 4:38PM
“Isn't it strange that everytime someone makes a comment against Stoke-on-Trent City Council or the way this country is run by this manipulative government, they get a negative mark. I suppose the manipulators are at it again, trying to keep them quite? lol”
by epsom1
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 4:08PM
“"Yesamwargames"can I say you are a bigoted oaf.
And your comments are totally irrelevant.”
by yesamwargames
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 1:39PM
“Charge the migrants extra tax it is they that need the extra school places, OH! I forgot most of them don't pay tax, just claim benefits.”
by Dizzy1960
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 1:25PM
“@button1001
You're obviously an intelligent person, but I'm finding it hard to comprehend that you and others don't understand that it's a continued plan for decedents in this city. Whatever party they belong too!”
by button1001
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 12:19PM
“Dizzy1960
The BSF funding to rebuild our High schools was agreed under the Labour Government. When the ConDems took over Government, Mr Gove mp, substantially reduced the national BSF spend. Indeed, they totally cancelled some councils total BSF projects. Because we were so far into the project,Mr Gove announced that Stoke-on((((rent City council along with some others, was to keep theirs. A short while later, as the media let this go, Tory Mr Gove then took some of our BSF funds back!
Me and you as council tax payers have had to fill the gap, or leave our children in crumbling schools. That's why towards the end of the project, its the council picking up the bill.
Blame mr Gove, not the council.”
by PotterMous
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 11:59AM
“So yet another Government infrastructure over-runs. What a surprise?”
by Dizzy1960
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 11:35AM
“This should have been high-lighted earlier, which wouldn't have resulted in an extra expense on the tax-payer. But these representatives have never been concerned about the tax-payer or any other members of society, which is demonstrated through their mismanagement, spend thrift attitude, wasteful manner and their tendancy to be more concerned about bonuses than developing this city with our future generations in mind. Otherwise, they would have demonstrated it earlier.
A plan for decadents? Of cause there is. With the additional pressure they are putting on the decadents to keep them low, will discourage them from standing united for democracy and allow them to manipulate the situation.
I agree that some people are manipulating the benfits system and a more discouraging system for benefit claims needs to be installed. But the wage structure also needs amending, because minimum wage is to low and doesn't encourage people to come off benefits, but to stay on. Because benefits is a finacially better option than working.
Or do you think my theory is a fairytale?
Apark@Stoke4LUZ
honi soit qui mal y pense”