AMH - vicious rumour or the truth?

[Malcolm]

Hi,

People have been spreading some rumour that apparently AMH is due to be demolished in the next couple of years.

That can't be right, can it? Although my friend's had a leaky roof due to its lack of guttering, and apparently the place has subsided 3ft since being built. The rumours also say that the whole place has failed some kind of Health&Safety inspection.

I find this hard to believe, but it could be true, I guess.

If it is true, what's going to happen? Surely they can't demolish the place without something new built, where will all the people go?

Please clarify, if you know.

[Haunted]

I heard that it's a listed building and I'm not sure they're allowed to knock them down

[flarewearer]

The list of goddam ugly affronts to architecture?

[hr]

image:www.magnificentoctopus.com/x/elgar.png

[__Sam__]

Well we had a load of inspector people coming round although we weren't told of their capacity - thinking about it they were almost certainly health and safety inspectors. The building is definitely listed and is it won the Stirling award for architecture or something. Granted some rooms are a bit grotty especially those beneath the ground floor but I don't see it being unsafe, unless as you say its been subsiding.
They better not knock is down as its a great hall with a great atmosphere. Long live melville!

[__Sam__]

With regards to where to house students in the future something else will have to be built especially with Hamilton being sold and the consistently tenuous nature of Fife park (although that may be a fuss over nothing). They're constantly extending DRA though aren't they?

[Dave the Explosive Newt]

Quoting __Sam__ from 09:44, 7th Jan 2006
With regards to where to house students in the future something else will have to be built especially with Hamilton being sold and the consistently tenuous nature of Fife park (although that may be a fuss over nothing). They're constantly extending DRA though aren't they?

That doesn't really help with low-cost accomodation though...

[hr]

This Sinner account is not affiliated with Will Watson.

[Fozzy Bear]

the university doesn't seem to care about low cost accomidation. hall fees have risen a ridiculous amount since i came here, DRA is no more, Fife park has always been a liability.

If Melville was to be knocked down, anything that was built in its place would be expensive. although they don't have to do this, just wait until Melville has sank into the ground fully then build on top of it.[img]littleicons/yellowtounge.gif[/img]

whoever said Melville was a listed building was right though. the architect one some award for it and it can never be demolished.

it seems as though the university doesn't want any students who haven't got stinking rich parents and who didn't go to a private school anymore. private landlords are a rip off, and the uni is going the same way.

[hr]

I like to know what's around the corner. That's why i always carry a mirror.

[White Knight]

If you read the SRC minutes specifically DoRep's report on it you may find it of interest namely that the University now believes as a result of the Buildings Survey revue (those people who had a look around earlier in the semester)

Fife Park apparently has another 15 yr's life since it was not in as bad condition as they thought with some renovation...
Also that it is likely as it was bandied around at the court away day that another three halls are likely to be built, specifically not DRA type since that experiment has now been concluded and at least one will be low cost.

There was no mention from my memory that this will result in AMH being sold off.

This is aimed so that by 2010 the university can expand its intake numbers up to 10,000. With it being capped at 7000 (or thereabouts) until 2010.

Hope this helps.

Anyway, end post of an extremely tired, SRC University Accommodation Memeber.

But I expect that DoRep himself will reply to this thread soon to confirm this.

[Dave the Explosive Newt]

Quoting White Knight from 10:24, 7th Jan 2006
If you read the SRC minutes specifically DoRep's report on it you may find it of interest namely that the University now believes as a result of the Buildings Survey revue (those people who had a look around earlier in the semester)

...believes what?

I remember hearing that the university's long-term stratergy is to move things out to the North Haugh - is that right?

[hr]

This Sinner account is not affiliated with Will Watson.

[flarewearer]

Actually, a quick whizz through the listed buildings directory and Andrew Melville is not a listed building;

http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/wwd ... lBack=TRUE

Bring on Dibnah!

[hr]

image:www.magnificentoctopus.com/x/elgar.png

[Fozzy Bear]

Quoting flarewearer from 13:14, 7th Jan 2006
Actually, a quick whizz through the listed buildings directory and Andrew Melville is not a listed building;

http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/wwd ... lBack=TRUE

Bring on Dibnah!

[hr]

image:www.magnificentoctopus.com/x/elgar.png

either way, it can't be demolished. the architect is famous and you sometimes get dutch people (or foreigners from somewhere) coming over to see it and take pictures, im not sure why.

they'll just wait till it sinks underground then build AMA on top of it. [img]littleicons/yellowtounge.gif[/img]
quite amusing that the buildings in the quad aren't listed buildings though and neither is sallies or any of the really posh, fancy buildings all the yahs like.

[hr]

I like to know what's around the corner. That's why i always carry a mirror.

[flarewearer]

Quoting fozzy bear from 13:19, 7th Jan 2006
either way, it can't be demolished.

Why on earth can't it? It's not listed, it structurally unsound and may, it seems, have failed some sort of inspection. The problem seems not to be whether to knock down melville, is what to replace it with, highly unlikley that it is the benevolent and altruistic university management will replace Melville I with a similarly priced but structurally more sound and visually more pleasing Melville II

[hr]

image:www.magnificentoctopus.com/x/elgar.png

[Thackary]

It's not structurally unsound. If it were, people wouldn't be allowed in it.

[Fionnlagh]

Quoting thackary from 13:29, 7th Jan 2006
It's not structurally unsound. If it were, people wouldn't be allowed in it.

I tend to agree, if Melville had failed a health and safety check, it would surely be empty?

I can't see it going anytime soon. There is the listed building issue, and I can't see them even trying to get rid of it until they've started on whatever is going to replace Hamilton in terms of numbers

But that's just what I would see as being common sense, I suppose you never know with this uni at times

[__Sam__]

I'm looking up at the ceiling and hoping it won't fall down on me - seriously, although I'm no architect, the building can't be structurally unsound, surely all the old plaster would be cracked and the building would shake if someone dropped something heavy! The only thing wrong here is the damp in the 'basement' rooms, dunno if thats indicative of structural instability.

[macgamer]

It is Fife Park that they are going to demolish, in 2007 I believe. What a shame that will be, no more affordable student accommodation for those students who need it the most.

They'll just extend DRA over it.

[Guest]

Quoting White Knight from 10:24, 7th Jan 2006


This is aimed so that by 2010 the university can expand its intake numbers up to 10,000. With it being capped at 7000 (or thereabouts) until 2010.

the town is just not big enough for this many students and is unlikely to grow sufficiently. It isn't even big enough now as can be seen by the ludicrous rent levels. the university needs the extra accommodation to provide for the existing amount of students, not for any more. as for how the university departments will cope with all these extra students is another matter. the same story applies though: the new buildings are only bringing the university up to the standard it needs to be for the student population that it has. they can't start letting in more students without 1st providing space for them to learn. think about the library: its ridiculously small for us and can't fit all the books we have in it as it is, never mind enough for 3000 extra students.

[Dave the Explosive Newt]

Quoting from 10:43, 7th Jan 2006
the town is just not big enough for this many students and is unlikely to grow sufficiently.

Hence, as I mentioned earlier, I believe the long-term plan is to move more and more of the university out in the direction of the North Haugh and DRA.

[hr]

This Sinner account is not affiliated with Will Watson.

[flarewearer]

Quoting Fionnlagh from 13:42, 7th Jan 2006
There is the listed building issue,

There is NO listed building issue, it would have to be a listed building for that to be an issue, would it not?


[hr]

image:www.magnificentoctopus.com/x/elgar.png

[flarewearer]

Quoting thackary from 13:29, 7th Jan 2006
It's not structurally unsound. If it were, people wouldn't be allowed in it.

Structurally sound buildings dont tend to sink.

[hr]

image:www.magnificentoctopus.com/x/elgar.png