Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And why is it financially feasible for Stokes and LAMB to be smaller but not MV?
Capital for the new building.
Doesn't IT have half the size and doing new building as well? It seems possible.
Not a LEED building. Have you seen the plans.
I would love to build a dream mansion with solar panels, but if it means me having boarders and renting out the basement, I'll pass.
Interesting that you think having more students to educate at a school is the equivalent of taking on boarders and renting out the basement.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And why is it financially feasible for Stokes and LAMB to be smaller but not MV?
Capital for the new building.
Doesn't IT have half the size and doing new building as well? It seems possible.
Not a LEED building. Have you seen the plans.
I would love to build a dream mansion with solar panels, but if it means me having boarders and renting out the basement, I'll pass.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And why is it financially feasible for Stokes and LAMB to be smaller but not MV?
Capital for the new building.
Doesn't IT have half the size and doing new building as well? It seems possible.
Not a LEED building. Have you seen the plans.
I would love to build a dream mansion with solar panels, but if it means me having boarders and renting out the basement, I'll pass.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And why is it financially feasible for Stokes and LAMB to be smaller but not MV?
Capital for the new building.
Doesn't IT have half the size and doing new building as well? It seems possible.
Not a LEED building. Have you seen the plans.
I would love to build a dream mansion with solar panels, but if it means me having boarders and renting out the basement, I'll pass.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And why is it financially feasible for Stokes and LAMB to be smaller but not MV?
Capital for the new building.
Doesn't IT have half the size and doing new building as well? It seems possible.
Not a LEED building. Have you seen the plans.
I would love to build a dream mansion with solar panels, but if it means me having boarders and renting out the basement, I'll pass.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And why is it financially feasible for Stokes and LAMB to be smaller but not MV?
Capital for the new building.
Doesn't IT have half the size and doing new building as well? It seems possible.
Not a LEED building. Have you seen the plans.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And why is it financially feasible for Stokes and LAMB to be smaller but not MV?
Capital for the new building.
Doesn't IT have half the size and doing new building as well? It seems possible.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And why is it financially feasible for Stokes and LAMB to be smaller but not MV?
Capital for the new building.
Anonymous wrote:And why is it financially feasible for Stokes and LAMB to be smaller but not MV?
Anonymous wrote:But on the wait list there are kids who applied for grade 4 listed?