|
|
 |
| |
Repulsive to turn college into flats for privileged few
• I WOULD like to support the idea of the council acquiring the St Martin’s site in Holborn for a secondary school that parents could be proud of (College would make a magnificent school, April 12).
As any artist who has ever worked there knows, the splendid, Grade II-listed building is the only purpose-built art school in the capital. There is a very real threat of the St Martin’s site being delivered into the hands of the speculators and converted into flats for the privileged few. This is a repulsive idea.
This building was conceived for educational purposes. That should continue to be its function: a place for the nourishment of future generations. Not as an opportunity to swell the pockets of the greedy speculators.
AMANDA MALPASS
Mornington Terrace, NW1
• I WAS disappointed that your report and related comment piece failed to include my written comment that “we are, however, open to considering any other alternative sites which offer realistic options” for the new secondary school (Town Hall says No, No, No to school site, April 12) .
You may wish to argue that Camden Council should find the many millions of pounds required to acquire the college site and the further expense of adapting a Grade II-listed building to become a suitable place of learning for the 21st century. But, with the best will in the world, the St Martin’s College site in Southampton Row is only a quarter of the size needed for a new secondary school.
The previous administration was not prepared to build a case for any new secondary school in Camden. We have been prepared to construct such a case and actually find a viable site.
We continue to look at all potentially viable options which are raised with us. So, please do not raise false hopes among the many people who would dearly love to have a secondary school south of the Euston Road by suggesting this site is adequate when it clearly is not.
CLLR ANDREW MENNEAR
(Conservative) Executive Member for Schools
Camden Council
• COUNCILLORS Andrew Mennear and John Bryant should come clean about the criteria and remit of the review into possible secondary school sites.
Cllr Bryant said he would asked officers to look into the potential of the St Martin’s site but suspected that the first stumbling block would be affordability. Cllr Mennear, on the other hand, claimed the site had been included in Camden’s original comprehensive review.
Since they are both members of the committee that made the current decision based on that review, it seems odd that one seems unaware that the site had already been considered.
The Eastman Dental Hospital site was deemed too small until proved otherwise by the Where is my School? campaign. So what were the size requirements in the criteria for the review – a 120-pupil intake school or 180, 210 or 240?
ALBIE FIORE
Bedford Place, WC1
• IT is simply not good enough for the Lib Dem-Tory administration to say it is drawing a line under the fight for a secondary school south of the Euston Road.
The need of parents and children in this part of the borough is not going away and neither are those campaigning for a new school.
Over the last year, a variety of reasons has been given for the lack of a school. These have ranged from an unknown level of need to sites being declared too small or unsuitable.
Each time the Where is my School? campaign produces an answer to a problem, the council puts a new obstacle in its way.
Cllr GEETHIKA JAYATILAKA
Labour, King’s Cross
Camden Council
|
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
