School E-mail March 8, 1996

Return to School e-mail archive directory

Subj: The Debate over BMS
Date: 96-03-08 11:11:39 EST
From: James.C.Klagge@bev.net (James C. Klagge)
To: SchoolLists@vt.edu

Dear Voters,

First of all a RT reporter WAS at the last meeting, though he didn't sit at the press table, and he was a substitute that I didn't know. So now, in addition to stealth candidates, we have stealth reporters. Fortunately I didn't say anything at the meeting I regretted!

I've gotten dozens of responses about BMS, very evenly split, as I predicted. It was striking to me how often one person would confidently assert something as though all would agree, yet another would assert precisely the opposite, with equal confidence! (Usually this had to do with the acceptability or unacceptability of disruption that would come with expansion/remodeling.) It is probably worth elaborating (2) a bit, though there is still no plan for renovation/expansion that anyone has deemed adequate: The expansion part would be quite extensive, and it might be possible to move nearly all classes out of the old building before renovation was begun on it. Furthermore the expansion would constitute a new wing, so that it could be largely isolated from the current building. The idea of "jackhammers next door" is probably an exaggeration. The issue of location also generated diverse views: Some see the current location as ideal, and yet others see the current location as a major drawback! The response I appreciated the most said that any of these options could be made to work, and that we school board members should gather the facts as best we could, and make a judgement based on common sense. I will say that I am not planning to vote based simply on the "winner" of my poll, but rather on the reasons that seem most persuasive.

I'm still happy to receive more responses, but I thought it would further the debate to share with you 3 fairly extensive comments representing each point of view:

Comments on Option (1) [new building on new site] come from Glen Earthman:

From: earthman@vt.edu (Glen I. Earthman)
Subject: Blacksburg Middle School

I appreciate your concern for what will happen at the BMS in the future. The [original] FUSS committee [report] was absolutely correct in their recommendation of a new middle school building on a new site. This without any question is the best solution for the students, maybe not for architects, Board of Supervisors, and others like that, but if the powers that be want to provide the best for these students, then follow the [original] recommendation of the FUSS.

I have seen some of the ideas the VT architects are proposing having viewed the study in Cogill and read about it in Current. The thinking of this group that the middle school should be in "downtown Blacksburg" has no relevance for education. In fact, the position of the current school is detrimental to the well being of the students because of heavy concentrations of traffic. There is no educational or safety reason for BMS to be on Main Street near the commercial section. I would hope you will be very cautious about accepting the arguments of architects who say the school needs to be near the downtown area.

The idea of renovating existing buildings is very attractive, especially to those who have very little knowledge of such projects. There are many reasons why BMS should not be renovated, but the two largest are cost and the end product. BMS is an old building that will not lend itself well to a renovation project and provide the types of spaces a modern middle school program needs. The load bearing walls simply will not permit changing the interior of the building sufficiently to provide these spaces. The building is not attractive and of very little historical value to preserve. The end product, however, needs to be the prime motivator in the decision to renovate or build new. The second main reason is the cost factor. Everyone believes renovation is less costly than new construction, unless that person has been associated with such a project. The probability of costs above new construction are well documented in previous projects. A prime example is Squires.

My caution is that the school board not be taken in by simple answers to extremely complex questions because of either costs or a "statement" a building supposedly could make to the community.

{Klagge's comments: I will just add that someone pointed out that asbestos we KNOW exists in BMS could be as much of a delay and cost factor as it was in Squires. We can't afford to run into those kinds of problems, which simply can't be forseen or planned for. Does anyone know anything about how extensive the delays and costs were from dealing with asbestos in Squires? I'd like to know.}

Comments on Option (2) [renovate/expand on present site] come from Jack Davis:

From: davisa@vt.edu (Jack Davis)
Subject: Re: Blacksburg Middle School

5 December 1995

To Members of Blacksburg Planning Commission,

I apologize for not being able to address the public forum but I'm walking to the Middle School Band Concert. I would like to address briefly some critical points in support of keeping the Middle School at its current location.

Blacksburg is very much like a neighborhood in the larger community of Montgomery County. As any neighborhood, it needs to look after the welfare of its business', housing, municipal support and schools. We've done well on our municipal support, weak in our business and continue to struggle with our housing issues. I feel it is important that we don't support fragmenting our environment by expelling our school(s), and consequently our children, to the agricultural extreme of the town. Our children need to see that we don't have to run away from our problems and isolate the school from otherwise compatible and educational concerns. We have enough shopping excuses that take the children to other places than downtown, we don't need to add another major reason for the students not to feel that the downtown isn't worth saving.

At the middle school meeting last week, mention was made of 'a middle school philosophy'. It was completely unclear what that was and was echoed in conflicting sides of the same issues at times. I would recommend a 'Kipps School philosophy.' That appears to reinforce the presence of a school, in the midst of housing, recreational facilities, municipal functions, offices and business'. It reinforces the presence of diversity in a human and environmental context.

Mention was also made at that meeting that many do not walk to the school, so that is another reason for extending bus travel times for all of Blacksburg's students. Maybe only 20 or so walk to school in the morning. But many more walk at the end of school. They go to the Library, and often wait for after school activities to begin and then go back. This is very common for sports functions. They go to the Hobby shop, to eating establishments. They walk on field trips to Va. Tech and the school becomes a walking destination (as open space) for neighborhood residents.

Traffic congestion in the morning was suggested as a reason to move the school. A renovated school with new facilities would necessitate a complete reworking of the circulation system that could be more compatible for the 45 minutes of disruption in the morning.

By far the most vocal of arguments was made in reference to the negative presence of construction on the same site as ongoing school. I find this argument naive. Construction can certainly occur in phases and does not have to impact directly any one sensitive class. Construction companies are bound by strict insurance regulations that protect their workers and the public from hazards and accidents and this would certainly be the case here. Construction has an educational benefit as well, because it exposes the students to different trades and processes that they might otherwise not be aware of. Construction is not another of the many aspects of our environment that the students need to be protected from exposure too. Pristine packaging of every experience the student has does not yield to knowledge or maturity.

Finally, phasing construction will allow the schools to concentrate its high-tech support labs in new construction while improving the existing facility for low-impact lecture classrooms that need only better lighting, communication wiring and finishes. The stadium, by seemingly all accounts, needs to be moved anyway. This frees up the 25 acres for improved circulation and expansion. Let the stadium, with new baseball and soccer fields, go to the agricultural edge of town. They both are compatible to the open space nature of that realm.

Thank you for your time.

Jack Davis, AIA
Chairman, Professional Program
Department of Architecture
Va. Tech

{Klagge's comments: Apparently the choice was made to renovate and expand the town library in its current location at least partly because of its proximity to the middle school. In fact that might be one reason the supervisors were advocating option (2) over (1). Others have pointed to the rebirth of the Lyric and the upcoming demise of Grand Piano downtown as reasons to "keep things there". On the other hand someone has questioned whether high schoolers were harmed by being moved out of town.}

Comments on Option (3) [new building on current site] come from Chris Wakely:

From: (CVMCAW@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU)
Subject: Blacksburg Middle School

As a member of the Blacksburg FUSS committee I would like to give you some more historical information and tell you a little of what this committee has discussed in the past 18 months. Our initial charge was to make a proposal which was best "academically" for the students in the Blacksburg area. During our initial meetings we were told not to base our decision on money. We held two public meetings to get input from citizens and then had three committee meetings to come up with the initial proposal to purchase enough land to build a new middle school, with the foresight that eventually a new high school would be built on the same sight. This proposal was based on 1) the minimal citizen input that wanted a new middle school due to the overcrowding and 2) the "academics" from the aspect of building a school which incorporated the "middle school" concept and in the hopes that once a new high school was built on the same site facilities and teachers could be shared between the two schools. There was discussion about having two small middle schools but eventually the committee thought two schools would divide the community and would be more expensive( even though we weren't to consider cost). In the original report giving us information on the state of all facilities throughout the county it stated that the site acreage for the middle school was below state standards so we thought about a new site. We even discussed the posssible sale of the present middle school site to Va. Tech or the Town/County. It could make a nice Community Center. In our initial discussions renovation may have been mentioned but since the acreage was below standards we agreed on the new site plan. After presenting this to the school board and to the B.O.S. it bounced back to the Blacksburg FUSS committee to look at the possibility of renovating the school where it stands now. We had 2 or 3 public sessions and there were strong "community" feelings expressed about keeping the school where it is now. We all wondered where these people were during the first round of public hearings but.... There was also strong sentiment about the disruption which would be caused by the renovation. After two more committe meetings the FUSS group came to a compromise, which is the plan you have just heard about, that we had hoped would be agreeable to the greatest number of people. We have discussed the money side of this issue as far as looking at many options. Apparently it would have been less expensive to build a new school than to renovate the present school( according to Larry Schouf). This doesn't take into account the purchase price of buying a piece of property. If a new school was built on the same site (but at the back of property) as the present middle school, then the money that would have been used for land purchase could be used to tear down the old school. When we considered building a new school on another site we felt that the money from the sale of the present site would offset a little of the cost of purchasing a new piece of property. In reference to the "actual evidence" concerning disruption I have lived through one major renovation but I had the luxury of completely vacating the building. I was relocated to the building next door and the construction was still very disruptive. The committee heard from some of the teachers at the middle school and they didn't want to go through another renovation especially if it was going to last three years. The committee could see no possible way that the heating, electrical, plumbing and other mechanical services could be upgraded without disprution. This academic concern, for three years, plus the safety aspect led us to the possibility of building a new school on the back of the property (which would be less expensive) and getting rid of the old school. Whew!!!!! I've said enough for now but if you'd like any more information I'd be glad to help. Feel free to pass this on to anyone else. Thanks for your concern.

Klagge, again: Of course I don't want these people to become targets of attacks, though I have included their e-mail addresses with the idea that that might ask them questions or further discussion of the issues. But I'd be just as happy if you sent your responses to me, or sent me a copy of your responses. I hope this discussion will lead people to the point that any of the options could be made to work, so that the need and chance to do SOMETHING about BMS isn't undermined by differences over WHAT to do. One person said she might not vote for a bond referendum if it included a certain one of these options as the plan for BMS. That's the kind of divisiveness I really hope can be avoided. On the other hand it is clear that some people feel that important values are at stake in this decision. I don't want to make people care less about their values (after all, I teach ethics!), but in a political context we have to acknowledge and respect values while allowing space for finding common ground. I hope the common ground here is: fixing things somehow at BMS, for the good of the students.

-Jim Klagge.

email: admin@gisone.com