Even more important than commemorating a piece of the past is the supposed recycling component of the much vaunted LEED (to me, the four letters stand for
'crock of fecal matter') Energy efficiency is hardly addressed when you demolish an existing structure that could have been extensively renovated, expanded, and upgraded to the latest, most efficient heating and cooling systems, to make way for a new, "more efficient" building.
LEED is the latest politically correct bandwagon to jump on. There certainly positive things to say about LEED as well, but I think that in many cases, such as this beautiful new school, it is too much expense for too little benefit to the taxpayers.
metalman.

The promises made during the tender evaluation period for a design build project are only for the sake of getting the job. Did anyone really expect the promises to be followed through with?

Metalman, LEED is about as politically correct as is calling an old piece of crap building a "heritage" building. KGV and the Old Duchess school were draining your wallet and mine dry through such inefficiency.

I'm glad they tore them down. Good riddance.

That big wood door looks kinda "churchy" in my opinion.

It would have been even more energy efficient if the school, that wasn't needed, wasn't built. The property would have made a great park for the cresents and the students could have gone to PGSS, DP Tood, or Kelly Road, etc.

What ya want to do, invest five million dollars renovating a space, which you can build for 3 million.

Spend five million and still have crap, or 3 million and have it good for 30 years.

Right decision was made, If the heritage society wanted the building, they should have bought it for a buck, and moved it off of the site. But no, they wanted to spend our school tax dollars.

In one hand they say spend money ineffiecently, and in the next breath they say no to HST.

I hope the HST goes thru, and the NDP gets in, than I will buy up the cheap property in four years, when the money runs out, and the average Joe who has his head up his @$$ looses his house.

Actually, my comments above do not refer to any desire for ressurecting or maintaining any building as a 'heritage' structure' KGV was too old to do anything with anyway. If a city is going to have heritage buildings, they should all be together in one area, not scattered. If you read what I posted, you will see that I stated that the existing DPSS could have been renovated and modernized for probably less money than the total cost of the new building, and still have efficient lighting and hvac like the new school does. This means less cost in the long run. You are right, the old schools required a lot of maintenance, and were far from being energy efficient.
I still maintain that LEED is costing us more than it can possibly return.
metalman.

The Romans used concrete in their buildings and municipal service structures.

In my opinion, the concrete in the new school commemorates the use of concrete in buildings by the Romans more than the wood commemorates the use of wood in KGV by the early settlers of Prince George.

We still have functioning aquaducts built some 2,000 years ago by the Romans. I am relatively certain that the new school is unlikely to make it past the next 100 years and will suffer the same fate as KGV and Lord Byng have.

We have a long way to go.