“With forecast cuts in public spending it is likely that the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme will need to consider more refurbishment and less new builds.”
With this quote, Roger Hawkins begins to argue the case for positive refurbishment of existing structures for schools in the Architects’ Journal.
Some buildings are obviously better pulled down, but many can be modernised effectively and gradually, and using funds that are realistically available. Ambitious plans can be made, but if funds disappear, they can be modified or cancelled.
These options aren’t available if school system change occurs. Pupils have to be housed somewhere; they need classrooms.
Nobody knows if funding will still be there after a change of government. Nobody knows where the lower-primary funding is coming from at all.
So why are we planning a revolution rather than an evolution?