Scope and Content
Report of Damage to Property by Vehicles; Brickhill Infants School, Dove Road, Bedford; damage to brick pillar of gateway - entrance to car park; 'The driver himself came into the School kitchen and notified the Cook of the damage'; vehicle was a trailer of Walter Clarke Ltd, Luton; 'There was a container lorry parked outside a house opposite the entrance and the driver had great difficulty in backing into the parking space, in order to deliver to School kitchen; 10am, 13 May 1974
Memo from County Architect to County Secretary; 'The cost of repairing the damage caused apparently by Walter Clarke Limited lorry is estimated to be £150. The reason for the high cost is that the pier which was knocked down had to be removed urgently as it was dangerous and a further 14' to 15' run of wall was cracked and will have to be replaced as this too will be dangerous to be left in this condition'; 4 June 1974
Further memo; 'The work involved in the repairs to the boundary wall is underway and has reached the stage where the Builder is now waiting for the supply of the special soft bricks which are needed to rebuild this wall. These bricks have a long delivery date and must be used to match the existing ones. The work will be carried out immediately these bricks become available and a member of my staff is in constant contact with the builder concerned'; 30 August 1974
Memo from Chief Education Officer to County Architect; 'Further to my memorandum of 30th April 1974 about shelving in the main stock room at Brickhill Junior School, I have now received a request from the Headmaster for shelving in the stock room and also in the science prep. room to be hastened. The lack of storage was noted and urged as a result of a previous H.M.I. inspection, and as another visit is expected on Monday 24th June 1974, the Headmaster would be grateful if he could report that the Area Building Surveyor has arranged for the outstanding conversion work to be completed'; 19 June 1974
Further memo; 'I shall be grateful if you will investigate the feasibility of providing an access from the footpath on the northern boundary of Brickhill Infants School site and let me have an estimate of the cost which will be involved'; 26 June 1974
Reply; 'The cost of providing an access gate on the footpath on the northern boundary of the school would cost approximately £200. It would require the permission of the Bedford District Council to provide a linking footpath to the new gate from the existing footpath which runs across the park area at the moment. The fence would have to be modified to take the gate which would have to be kept locked at all times except during school hours and a path would have to be provided by us to link the gate to the playground area'; 10 July 1974
Letter from Chief Education Officer to 'certain parents of children at Brickhill Infants School'; 'I am sorry to have to tell you that there have been delays in the delivery and erection of temporary classroooms and it now seems most unlikely that the complement of temporary buildings required at the school will be available from 3rd September 1974. It has been decided, therefore, that in the interests of the children, it will be necessary to use the "Transition Hall" as a classbase until the temporary classrooms arrive'; 28 August 1974
Memo from J A Claydon, Architects Department, to Area Building Surveyor; 'The temporary classrooms - Elliotts type 6T (rented) unit has been transferred from Bedford - Amy Johnson School, and is in need of internal decoration which I suggest should be: 1 coat emulsion to ceilings and 2 coats to walls. There are a few minor repairs needed such as broken door furniture and some missing hat and coat pegs. The school are hard pressed for accommodation and this job is included on a priority list, your early attention will help a lot'; with note; 'The slab foundations are in clay and water at the moment, will you please ask your Area Building Surveyor to keep an eye on this from time to time'; 11 October 1974
Comments from Chief Fire Officer following recent inspection; 6 December 1974
Certificate relating to Extension to Brickhill Primary School; contractor was Contracts (VH) Ltd, Langley Mill, Nottingham; total amount £56,840.58; 17 October 1974
Report from Fire Service Department regarding Brickhill Lower School - Gladys Aylward School; 17 January 1975
Memo from Chief Education Officer to County Architect; 'I have received a letter from Mrs M D Bigg, the Head of Gladys Aylward/Brickhill Infants School concerning the lighting in the school hall which she claims is inadequate'; 19 February 1975
Reply; 'My Assistant has visited the premises and checked the lighting in the hall and agrees with the Headmistress's comments that the lighting is inadequate. The cost of improving the lighting will be in the region of £400'; 6 March 1975
Reply; 'Unfortunately we will have no money available for this work during the next financial year. I shall be grateful, therefore, if you will let me know if there will be any money available in next year's Revenue Estimates or whether this project will have to be carried over to the following year'; 18 March 1975
Reply; 'I am sorry to inform you that no provision has been made for improving the hall lighting in the 75/76 Revenue Estimates. I shall be grateful if you would inform me if you wish me to include monies in the following years Revenue Estimates'; 24 March 1975
Memo from Chief Education Officer to County Architect; 'The Headmistress has requested that two locker units and two coat rails attached to the wall of the cloakroom, which was used as a temporary classroom until the class was moved into a mobile, should be removed so that the room can be converted into the school library'; 3 April 1975
Letter from Sportsmark Limited, Sportsmark House, Lionel Road, Brentford (Court Marking Specialists), to Mr A G Britton, Architect's Department; 'We have visited Brickhill Junior School to carry out remedial work. We were most disturbed to find that although there was a breakdown of the tape adhesion, this was only approximately 10% of the whole of the court markings. These again were broken down to one particular area, near the front of the hall (stage area), which was almost 35/40%. On investigating this breakdown, it was discovered that in fact it was not our tape, but the children who had been picking at the tapes during assemblies etc., We do not feel that this is our liability, and I feel sure that if you question the staff, they will confirm our findings. We then removed all the remaining tape and carried out the marking in paint ...However, unfortunately because of this extra work ...we must charge you £35 ...and not £25, as stated in our letter of 5th March'; 10 March 1975
Letter from Madeleine Bigg, Headmistress, to Mr Proctor; 'My School Association is willing to build a brick external P.E. store. The store would be built onto one wall of the school building, would probably require electricity instead of a window, and a concrete ramp to connect it to the existing path. It would measure approximately 7' x 6' x 8'. The proposed site is on the corridor wall leading from the hall to the external doors. Would you please advise me on the suitability of the site, the approximate cost and the assistance that is available from the Architect's Department under the Auhtority's new self-help scheme. This project will be discussed at a meeting of the Association on September 22nd, when I hope to put forward your observations'; 20 August 1975
Further letter to County Architect; 'Following the County Education Officer's approval for the Brickhill School Association's proposal to build a P.E. store, we now submit the plans for this construction. I understand from Mr Proctor of the Education Department that the Area Building Surveyor will supervise the construction. Please will you confirm'; 5 March 1976
Memo from Chief Fire Officer to Chief Education Officer regarding the provision of fire extinguishers for the temporary classrooms; 30 January 1976
Tender received from D Jones, 35 Thornton Street, Kempston, for Alterations to Boys Toilets, was unsuccessful; tender from Spencer & Giggle, 172 London Road, Bedford, for the above, for £562, was accepted; 17 March 1976
Letter from Headmistress to Chief Education Officer; 'Earlier this term I requested blinds for the mobile classrooms situated on the Middle School playing field. Owing to the exposed nature of the site, these rooms have almost constant sunlight. This has necessitated moving children to work on one side of the room during the morning and moving them back again to avoid the afternoon sun, and even moving them out of one room to work in the school entrance hall. Not only is the direct sunlight uncomfortable, but the rooms are airless and cause further discomfort. As the term has progressed it has become apparent that the morning sun is just as intolerable as the afternoon sun. Consequently I have requested blinds to be provided for the windows on both sides of the claasrooms. I would appreciate the provision of blinds as soon as possible as the children are unable to work in such conditions'; 22 June 1976
Memo from County Architect to Chief Education Officer; 'The Head Teacher is aware that when the contractor comes to measure the blinds for this temporary classroom, she has the opportunity to have these placed at the windows which she feels they will be most effective. The number of windows which is being done is eight, which is all that can be afforded at this time'; 29 June 1976
Memo from Chief Education Officer to County Architect; 'Mrs Cooksey visited Brickhill Lower School on 13th September to inspect the roof of the oldest mobile hut. A complaint was made at the end of the Summer Term that rain was coming through, but no repair was effected and the water is being collected in a bucket. Elliots [hut manufacturer] have been pressed to repair the roof but, owing to a reduction in their labour force, have not done anything yet. I shall be grateful if you will kindly arrange to repair the ceiling as soon as possible'; 15 October 1976
Memo from Chief Fire Officer to Chief Education Officer regarding the siting of a kiln in the P.E. store at Castle Lower School, Goldington Road, Bedford; 15 November 1976
Memo from Chief Education Officer to County Architect; 'I have received a request from the Head Teacher of Brickhill Lower School for some heating to be provided in the store which is now the audio visual area where the ancillary help has to work'; 22 November 1976
Reply; 'The school has been visited and the area in question is part of the store at the end of the hall. This store is open up to the roof and contains the cold water storage tanks. Under these conditions to heat the whole of this area would be extremely difficult and costly. The following recommendations are therefore made: 1) Install a false ceiling and partition wall (no door in partition). The cost including decoration would be approximately £235; 2) Cutting into existing heating pipes and provide a radiator of adequate size cost approximately £100; 3) Install fluorescent lighting and switch cost approximately £65; The total cost to change the store area into working area would therefore be in the region of £400'; 10 December 1976
Memo from County Architect to Chief Education Officer; 'My Engineers report that the low temperatures are in the hall and corridors which are being used as teaching areas. The hall heating has a fault and is receiving attention to bring it back to the required standard. Unfortunately, the standard of corridor heating is lower than the teaching areas and will require additional heating appliances if the area is to be made suitable for teaching'; 25 March 1977
Letter from Correspondent to the Managers to Chief Education Officer; 'At a meeting of the Managers of Brickhill Lower School held on 31st October 1977, the Managers were informed of the unsatisfactory condition of the playground. The matter was brought to the attention of the Education Department some time ago and repair was authorised. The contractor reported that repair was not possible and that resurfacing was the only solution. Nothing has been heard since!! The present state of the playground is such that, since removal of temporary classrooms in September 1976, there are pot-holes which make it dangerous for the children and also preclude marking out of pitches for games. The Managers are very concerned about the situation and would value your early attention to this matter'; 28 November 1977
Letter from Chairman of Brickhill Lower School Managers; 'The Managers duly considered the contents of your letter dated 16th December 1977, to the effect that, owing to the financial constraints then obtaining [sic], it was not possible for the re-surfacing of the playground to proceed at that time. Considerable concern was expressed at the delay in carrying out this work as, in its exisiting state, the playground is, in the Managers' view, incapable of being marked out to provide appropriate games facilities; moreover, because of the pot-holes which exist, it constitutes a positive danger to the children. As it is understood that the financial climate has improved somewhat since December last, when the issue was last raised, the Managers ask that urgent consideration be given to the inclusion of this work in the Authority's 1978/79 Minor Building Works Programme or, alternatively, that appropriate financial provision be made in the 1978/79 Revenue Estimates. Accordingly, I should be grateful if you would arrange for further consideration to be given to this matter'; February 1978
Memo from Chief Education Officer regarding the above; with pencil note (? from County Architect); 'On highly desirable list'; 17 February 1978
Memo from Chief Education Officer to County Architect; 'The Headmistress has written to me concerning the surface water on the edge of the playground. I understand that you have recommended the installation of a safety kerb prior to the re-surfacing of the playground in order to deal with the problem of surface water and mud. I should be grateful if you would kindly let me know whether or not you intend to provide this'; 25 October 1978
Further memo; 'I have received a letter from the Correspondent to the Managers ...concerning the proposed resurfacing of the playground. I should be glad to learn when this is programmed for as soon as possible. The question of the proposed safety kerb has also been raised and perhaps you would care to comment on this also'; 4 December 1978
Memo from County Architect to County Secretary; 'The Playground and Car Park has recently been resurfaced under Contract by Mixed Concrete Contracting Limited, Roads Surfacing Contractor, Weedon Road, Northampton. On Friday afternoon of June 1st 1979, one of the machines used in carrying out this work badly damaged a 12' section of the boundary wall adjacent to the Main Car Park entrance on Dove Road. The driver of this machine reported the accident to Mr Bradbury, the Caretaker, also saying he would report it into his main office. It has been confirmed that he did this. On Tuesday 5th June, the County Architect's Area Building Surveyor, Mr Britton, contacted Mr Tornberg, the Contracts Manager for Mixed Concrete, regarding this matter. He informed Mr Britton that he had already contacted the Mixed Concrete Company's insurance company and the normal procedure is that Mixed Concrete get the repair work done. In view of this, I would suggest that it would be advisable if a letter is sent referring to this conversation between Mr Britton and Mr Tornberg and that when the damaged wall is built, it must be to the standard acceptable to the County Architect's Department'; 8 June 1979
Memo from Chief Fire Officer to County Architect; 'There is no objection to the positioning of the proposed electric kiln in the passageway adjacent to the North East external door. It is understood that the area will be guarded by a heavy duty metal mesh guard. The kiln should not be sited within a distance of 300mm from adjacent walls. Electric wiring circuits should conform to the British Standard Code of Practice; also mentions; 'Fire fighting equipment should be hung on securely fixed wall brackets at a convenient height, bearing in mind the physical capabilities of the occupants'; 1 February 1978
Memo from Chief Education Officer to County Architect; 'The kiln has now arrived at the school, and I should be grateful if you would arrange for its installation'; 5 October 1978
Tenders received from Patching & Lowe, 215 Goldington Road, Bedford; and C & S Decorators, 35 Stancliffe Road, Putnoe; for Internal Decorations to Brickhill Lower School; Scott Lower School; Parkwood A & B School Canteens; Pilgrim A,B,C,D School Canteens (all Bedford), were unsuccessful; tender accepted for the sum of £2,940.50 [no further details]; 15 May 1978
Tender received from F G Mathers, 25 Bower Street, Bedford, for External Painting to Swimming Pools (Area 1) at Brickhill Lower School; Carlton "Moor Site" School; (both Bedford); Odell School; Stevington School; and Wymington School, was unsuccessful; tender from B and B Joinery Company, 16 Molivers Lane, Bromham, for £2,940.50 was accepted; 18 May 1978
Memo from Chief Education Officer to County Architect; 'A meeting on site to view and discuss possible ways of solving the flow of mud onto the school hard play area was arranged by my colleague Mr Rice with you and Mr Britton on site at 10 o'clock on the 11th April 1979. My colleague Mr Rice advised the Head Teacher, who in turn invited the Chairman and Parent Representative of the Managers to be present, since the Managing Body had recently passed a resolution requesting that the County Architect investigate this matter. I must therefore convey to you the displeasure taken by the Chairman of the Managers and the Parent Manager, that Mr Mathers of your Department did not attend the meeting which he had personally arranged with Mr Rice and Mr Britton of your Department. The absence of Mr Mathers also made it difficult for my colleague Mr Rice to formulate an appropriate follw up course of action'; 12 April 1979
Memo from County Architect to Chief Education Officer; 'It was suggested at this Meeting that consideration be given to building a low wall - approximately five courses of brickwork high - along the Playground edge adjacent to the sloping grass bank and returning approximately three metres each end of the Playground. The object of this wall would be to attempt to reduce mud that gets onto the playground in the winter months during periods of wet weather. The cost of building this low wall as suggested will be in excess of £750 and it should be noted that access to this site is extremely difficult as we have no authority to use the gate on the playing field for access of the builders vehicles. The Head Teacher, Mrs Bigg, has since this Meeting asked that the centre section of this wall, which is the area between the two sets of steps leading up to the grass slope, be built to a height of approximately 1.75 metres'; 9 August 1979
Reply; 'This wall is needed for the safety of the children at School and I should be grateful if you would kindly make arrangements for about five courses of brickwork to be provided. The height suggested by the Head Teacher could create safety problems and would obviously be somewhat more expensive. I should be grateful if you would kindly proceed with the provision of a low wall with a view to the work beign completed as soon as possible'; with pen note; 'Ask where the money is coming from'; 30 August 1979
Further memo from Chief Education Officer; 'I should be grateful if you would let me know if arrangements are in hand to provide a small wall to stop surface water and mud from flowing onto the playground'; 3 December 1979
Further memo; 'I understand from a telephone conversation with the Headmistress that the original proposal to build a small wall to stop surface water and mud flowing onto the playground, as discussed at the site meeting, has been shelved. A suggestion for using paving slabs and a gravel filled trench has been proposed to alleviate the problem'; 11 January 1980
Memo from County Architect to County Secretary; 'During early July a lorry belonging to Ideal Fencing of Frant Station, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, knocked down a section of the wall at the entrance to Brickhill Middle School which is adjacent to the Lower School. The Middle School were told to report this on the correct form to the Education Department, this is normal procedure. The Ideal Fencing Company were at that time completing a fencing contract around both School boundaries on the playing field sides. Some weeks later than this, the actual date cannot be ascertained but most certainly was late July/early August, the Builders employed by Mixconcrete came along to repair the boundary wall at the Lower School, reported in the original memorandum dated 8th June 1979. They did not ask the Caretaker for any site information and mistakenly rebuilt the section knocked down by the lorry from Ideal Fencing. Immediately Mr Britton of the Architect's Department, Area Building Surveyor, noticed the mistake, he contacted Mr Tornberg of Mixconcrete and at his request the address, telephone number and the name of the Area Manager of the Ideal Fencing Company was given to him and I understand that discussions have taken place between these two gentlemen in order to rectify the mistake by the Builders. To date nothing has happened. The Brickhill Lower School reported that on 12th November 1979, Walter Clarke's delivery lorry hit the already cracked and damaged section of wall caused by Mixconcrete, previously reported in memorandum dated 8th June, to such an extent that the Area Building Surveyor had to instruct a local Builder to demolish this section of wall and adjacent pier for safety reasons. The cost of doing this was £41.09 plus £6.16 VAT. The Lower School were told to report this further incident on the official report form to the Education Department. I would be grateful for your advice and instructions on this now extremely complicated situation. The estimated cost of all this repair work is: 1) The section originally damaged by Mixconcrete - £750; 2) The section damaged by Ideal Fencing lorry - £350; 3) The section damaged by Walter Clarke which involved the necessity for further repair work to be carried out - £200'; with layout plan of the schools showing the areas affected; scale 1:500; 8 January 1980
Reply; 'Thank you for your memorandum ...concerning the complications arising from the damage caused to the Lower and Middle Schools in three separate incidents. My advice is that you write to Messrs Mixconcrete and inform them that the wall at the Middle School has not yet been repaired and, in fact, has suffered additional damage. Inform them that your estimate for repairing the damage which was in fact caused by them was £750 and ask them if they are interested in quoting for carrying out the repairs or if they wish you to carruy on with the repairs and send them an account in due course. In the same letter you could ask them for their invoice for repairing the boundary wall at the Lower School. You should then write to Ideal Fencing holding them responsible for the damage caused to the boundary wall of the Lower School, pointing out that the damage has been repaired by Mixconcrete whose invoice will be passed to them in due course. I then suggest that you write to Walter Clark Ltd holding them responsible for the further damage to the wall of the Middle School, informing them that the wall had to be demolished at a cost of £47.25 and stating that your estimate of the cost of repairs is £200 and that you are obtaining an estimate for the reinstatement of the wall and will be sending them an account in due course. If you experience any further difficulty, please refer the whole matter to me ...and I will pursue it'; 30 January 1980
Letter from County Architect to Ideal Fencing; 'I am writing to you with reference to the accident in which your lorry knocked down a part of the wall adjacent to the entrance to Brickhill Middle School during early July 1979. I understand that the bricklayers employed by Mix Concrete Contracting Limited mistakenly built this section of the wall up although they did not complete the job. Could you please inform me whether you have in effect paid the Mix Concrete Contracting firm for doing this work and will you also please arrange with them to complete the work'; 25 March 1980
Letter from County Architect to Walter Clarke, Unit 1 Ashville Trading Estate, Royston Road, Baldock; 'I am writing with reference to an accident on the 12th November 1979 when your delivery lorry hit the already damaged section of the entrance wall to such an extent that this particular wall had to be demolished and cleared away at the cost of £47.25. It is my intention to obtain an estimate for completely rebuilding this section of the wall when a proportion of the repair works will be sent to you in due course'; 25 March 1980
Letter from County Architect to Mix Concrete Contracting Limited, Road Surfacing Contractors, Weedon Road Industrial Estate, Northampton; 'I am writing to you with reference to the damage done by one of your machines at the end of the contract of resurfacing at Brickhill Lower School on the Friday afternoon of June 1st 1979. As you are aware, another Contractor, Ideal Fencing Company, some few weeks later knocked a section of the wall down on the school adjacent to the Brickhill Lower School. Your builders when they arrived to repair the wall you had damaged, inadvertently rebuilt the section knocked down by Ideal Fencing. The area of wall damaged by you has since had to be demolished for safety reasons and I will be grateful if you would inform me when you intend ot carry out the work of rebuilding this wall to its original state. However, if you so wish, I will get the necessary repair work done and send the account to you in due course. Will you plesse inform me whether you wish me to carry out this work. With reference to the other section of the wall damaged by Ideal Fencing, could you please inform me if this Company has paid you for the work that they did to repair this wall. At this stage I would like to point out to you the rebuilding of this section of wall has not been completed yet'; 25 March 1980
Further letter to Mixconcrete; 'To date I have not received a reply, nor has any work been carried out on re-building the boundary wall adjacent to the Brickhill Lower School and the Caretaker's house which are in Dove Road, Bedford. I now regard the re-building of this wall as a matter of considerable urgency and I will be grateful to be informed when you intend to carry out this work. Alternatively, if you wish my Department to carry out this work and send the account to you in due course, would you please inform me in writing'; 12 August 1980
Memo from County Architect to County Secretary; 'Letters were sent to Mixconcrete on the 25th March 1980 and 12th August 1980, and neither were replied to. The Head Teachers of both Schools are extremely concerned and are demanding to have these damaged sections of wall repaired urgently. I will be grateful if you will write to Mixconcrete in an effort to finalise this situation'; 20 November 1980
Further memo; '3 quotations were received for the re-building of the damaged boundary wall. An order has already been placed on B & B Joinery Ltd, the lowest quotation [£266], to carry out the work'; 10 December 1980 [other quotations were from James Parkins & Son Ltd; and Kevin Martin]
Letter from Ideal Fencing Ltd; 'We must point out that when we received your invoice in the sum of £297 we forwarded this to our Insurers and informed them that originally we received an estimate from a firm - Church & Ayres of Elstow, for £152.50 only, and at that time we requested our Insurance Brokers to advise the Underwriters concerned of the difference in the £297 invoiced by you and the quotation for £152.50 from Church & Ayres, and suggested to them that before any payment whatsoever was made to you, they had every reasonable justification for querying same'; 22 July 1981
Memo from County Secretary to County Architect; 'You will recall that in February 1981 Mr Britton informed me that the bill from Mixed Concrete amounting to £270 plus VAT for repairing the wall at Brickhill Middle School was most reasonable. This bill was set against the bill from Bland & Backhouse for £266 plus VAT, their charges for repairing the wall at Brickhill Lower School which had been damaged by Mixed Concrete. In practice it is Bedfordshire County Council who must now recover from Ideal Fencing Mixed Concrete's charges for mending the wall. It would be most helpful if you are able to give me any information regarding the estimate from Church & Ayres and I would also be grateful to have any other observations from you which might help in the recovery of the charges from Ideal Fencing'; 25 August 1981
Reply; 'Would you please note that the repair work done by Bland and Backhouse Builders for £266 was for repairing the wall knocked down by Mixed Concrete Company whilst working at the Lower School. This wall is on the entrance into the Lower School kitchen area. It appears that the dispute wth Ideal Fencing concerns the cost charged by Mixed Concrete Limited for rebuilding the wall which had been knocked down by Ideal Fencing. The firm employed by Mixed Concrete Limited inadvertently rebuilt the wall on the Middle School which had been knocked down by the Ideal Fencing lorry instead of the wall which was eventually rebuilt by Bland and Backhouse as mentioned above. I was not aware that the Ideal Fencing Company were taking any steps to get estimates for rebuilding the wall which they had knocked down and a charge made of £297 by Mixed Concrete was not at any time within my control'; 4 September 1981
Property Damage Report regarding incident with Walter Clarke lorry (Brickhill Lower School); 'Lorry hit wall at gateway; Boundary wall moved by impact of lorry'; 21 November 1979
Letter from Chief Education Officer to Headmistress regarding heating in the school; 'As Mr Inskipp has already told you, he has reported the problem to the County Architect's Heating Engineers, and Mr Fitzjohn is now investigating the matter. As there are always a number of factors which have to be taken into account, it is best for all concerned if the defect is reported by the school, on the telephone, to the County Architect's Heating Engineers, at the first sign of a failure in the heating system to reach the Statutory temperatures which, it should be noted, are based on an outside temperature of 0oC or 32oF. The time of switching on the boilers is also of great importance, especially on a Monday morning, and it is also necessary to ensure that the boiler is being run to the correct temperature as recommended by the Engineers. If all the requirements are being met, and the Statutory temperatures are not reached by the specified time, then the Heating Engineer should be notified.'; 28 January 1980
Memo from County Architect to Chief Education Officer regarding flooding of the playground at a lower level; 'The existing storm water drainage on the Lower Playground is being altered to improve the general drainage of surplus water from this area, now that the first stage of the playground improvement has been completed. This work is due to start during the October half-term holiday and will continue after this period subject to agreement with the Headmistress'; 15 September 1980
Reply; 'The acting Headmistress, Mrs Rushton, has asked if you will please call at the school to discuss the matter in greater detail as she is anxious to ensure that adequate arrangements are made for alternative playground areas if there is likely to be a need to close any of the Lower School play areas during term time'; 3 October 1980
Tenders received from Pace Heating Company Ltd, 6 Park Road, Sandy; and P Chester and Son (Bedford) Ltd, 31 Howard Avenue, Bedford; for Removal of Heating Units at Brickhill Lower School, were unsuccessful; tender from Smyth (Heating Engineers ) Ltd, 81a Ampthill Road, Shefford, for the above for £410, was accepted; 8 June 1981
Letter from Correspondent to the Managers of Brickhill Lower School; 'At the last meeting of the Governors, the Energy Conservation plans for 1981/82 were discussed. The School is already very conscious of conserving energy in whatever way possible, actively encouraging pupils and staff to be diligent in eliminating draughts and putting out lights etc., However, the Governors feel that all efforts are being nullified by the gap between the main doors which causes a considerable loss of heat. They would be obliged if immediate action could be taken to remedy this problem. They are of the opinion that a little early action will contribute a great deal to the savings required'; 25 September 1981
Reply from County Architect to Chief Education Officer; 'The problem of gaps in the entrance doors is widespread and investigations are being carried out to find a suitable material which will stop the gaps and still give security, prevent finger trapping and is robust enough to minimise vandalism. However, I do not agree that "all efforts" are being nullified by this problem because there are many other areas of energy conservation in the field of good housekeeping where effective savings can be made'; 15 October 1981
Report from Chief Fire Officer following inspection of 7 October 1981; 27 October 1981
Tenders received from Patching and Lowe Ltd, 215 Goldington Road, Bedford; M D Page, 2 Hawk Drive, Brickhill; and Walsh & Richards, 79 Stagsden Road, Bromham; for Partial Redecorations at Brickhill Middle and Lower Schools, were unsuccessful; Tender received from E S & P G Stevenson, 40a Bedford Road, Wootton, for Partial Redecorations at Brickhill Lower School, for £2,649, was accepted; 15 September 1982
Tenders received from Ace Electric Limited, 44 London Road, Wembley; and Moorlite Electrical Limited, Burlington Street, Ashton-under-Lyne; for Replacement Luminaires at Grange School, Kempston, and Brickhill School, were unsuccessful; tender from Fluorel Limited, 312 Broadmead Road, Woodford Green, for the above, for £3,886.35, was accepted; 1 March 1983
Tenders received from B Goldington Electrical Ltd, 73 Bower Street, Bedford; M & D Electrical, 41 Manor Road, Rushden; R Clark (Electrical Contractors Ltd, 4 Bedford Road, Barton-le-Clay; for Electrical Engineering at Brickhill Lower School, were unsuccessful; tender from R French, 81 King Street, Kempston, for the above, for £896, was accepted; 7 March 1983
Certificate of Analysis and Insulation Report from Thomson Laboratories, The Stocks, Cosgrove, Milton Keynes; small traces of Amosite (brown asbestos) and Chrysotile (white asbestos) were detected; 'The boiler house measures approximately 4m x 10m and contains one large metal clad boiler, one small metal clad boiler (both with metal flues), one lagged calorifier and associated pipework. The oil tank is in an adjacent area separated by a 4" brick wall. The Calorifier lagging is in good condition but the seal is damaged in several places by impact. The pipework lagging is generally in fair condition except where it has been damaged for repairs near the calorifier. The seal is cracked and has deteriorated with impact damage throughout. There is loose insulation material on the floor of the entrance to the duct; with recommendations; '1) It is recommended that the Calorifier should be resealed; 2) The pipework lagging should be repaired where necessary and resealed; 3) The entrance to the duct should be cleaned with suitable vacuum equipment; 4) Specification B applies; 5) Care should be taken that the insulation is not further damaged by impact'; Inspected 30 March 1983
Tenders received from R L Insulation, 12 Starre Road, Bury St Edmunds; Kitson's Insulation Contractors Ltd, 1 Curzon Road, Luton; and Harry Shaw Insulations Ltd, 27 Woodbridge Close, Luton; for Asbestos Removal at Brickhill Lower School, were unsuccessful; tender from RMWS Asbestos Removal Ltd, Oliver Road Trading Estate, Oliver Road, West Thurrock, for the above, for £400, was accepted; 2 June 1983
Letter from Headmistress to Chief Education Officer; 'I write to request the re-siting of the learner pool from the Middle to the Lower School site. This school has always had the use of the learner pool and since 1976, the full responsibility for the pool. It would appear to be an appropriate time for re-siting for the following reasons: 1) A replacement filter plant and liner are ready for installation; 2) An area previously occupied by the double mobile classroom unit has water and drainage and access for the children; 3) The school is keen to purchase a cover for the pool but parents have expressed a reluctance to contribute to a pool on the Middle School site because of the threat of closure; I understand that the installations will not be undertaken until a new fence is erected and this work is being delayed because Castle Lower School cannot release their old fencing for this school until their replacement is erected. If the pool was re-sited then the permanent "vandal-proof" fencing could be installed straight away instead of the temporary second hand fencing. May I ask you to give this request your urgent attention. The position of the pool on the Falcon Avenue side of the Middle School has always made it difficult to provide adequate tuition without considerable disruption to our school organisation, and the threat of closure of the Middle School appears to have affected the maintenance of the pool and consequently the provision of lessons over the last two summers'; 6 June 1983
Reply from County Architect to Chief Education Officer; 'The proposal initially seems quite sensible but the reality is in fact more difficult. It is not easy to move pools of this type and from the information available it would seem that there is little if anything that can be moved. A new liner is required, a new filter, new fencing, the basic structural supports are more expensive to remove and recondition than they are to purchase new, and the same applies to the timber panels. It can be seen that we would actually be considering a new pool, and these currently cost in the order of £17,000. This in itself is not a fair comparison as it allows for a complete pool to a slightly more satisfactory standard than some of the older installations. The cost of essential work to the pool in its current position could also be deducted from this sum. It can be seen that any provision in a new position would be expensive but if it is decided that at some stage it is essential that the pool facility is available on the Lower School site, then it would obviously be sensible to do it as soon as possible to avoid spending, and therefore wasting, money on the existing provision. A decision must therefore be made on whether to move the pool at a fairly high cost or continue to use the existing pool for the foreseeable future'; 20 June 1983
Reply from Chief Education Officer to Headmistress; 'Apparently it is not easy to move the type of pool which is at your school, and according to the County Architect, it would not be very easy to move much of the equipment. To give an example; the pool's basic structural supports would be more expensive to remove and recondition (prior to reinstallation at a new site), than they would be to purchase new, and the same situation would apply with the timber panels. It would therefore appear that any provision in a new position would be very expensive, and does not therefore appear to be a viable proposition'; 24 June 1983
Certificate of Analysis from Thomson Laboratories; minimal traces of asbestos found in boiler house; 1) There was no warning notice but the area had been well sheeted off; 2) The area was visually clean except for some pieces of wet asbestos material at the opening of the side duct to the left hand side of the entrance. When the sheeting is removed, this side duct should be cleaned up; 3) The floor of the boiler house was wet at the time of the visit'; samples collected 19 August 1983
Tender from Harry Shaw Insulations Limited, 27 Woodbridge Close, Luton, for Insualtion at Brickhill Lower School, was unsuccessful; Tender from R L Insulation, 8a Northgate Avenue, Bury St Edmunds, for the above, for £563.48 was accepted; 20 September 1983
Letter from J B Hargreaves to Inspector of Physical Education; Further to the meeting held at the Lower School on 17th January 1984, I have been asked by the Committee of the Lower School Association to formally submit the scheme for a proposed adventure playground I have prepared for approval. I have taken into account the comments made at the meeting and I trust the proposals are now acceptable'; with drawing of layout (sketch scheme); scale 1:100; 8 February 1984
Memo from Chief Education Officer to County Architect; 'Mrs Thompson, the Inspector of Physical Education, has already met the Parent Teacher Association on site, but it may be necessary to hold another site meeting between our Departments, after you have commented on the structure of materials and spacing etc.,'; 23 February 1984
Reply from County Architect; 'I have looked through the self help application and sketches, which seems to be pretty well worked out. I have only two comments: 1) What is to be your Department's policy with regard to the danger of falling from considerable heights from adventure play equipment? How does this compare with the recent discussions about safety surfaces under climbing frames? I note for instance, that the ladder and rope hang from a bar 3.6 metres high, the tyre climb is 2.2 metres high, and the totem poles are 2.4 metres high; 2) I think you should ask your colleague Mr D Cornell his opinion on maintenence of the grass in and around the equipment'; 5 March 1984