@P'PlannedIt
Yes, I've just read the newsletter too. This would definitely count as evidence to the contrary for a September 2015 completion, but with January 2016 being giving instead, just one term on though.
What it also says however is that the delay seems to be over suggestions made at the pre-planning stage by the Islington Council themselves, through their 'design review panel' in what looks like an effort to improve the new building in terms of better orientation and use of space, it sound quite sensible to me & from the same newsletter you quote from, WPS tells us:
" [The] new design provides, in our opinion, a more efficient and effective building…increasing still further the size of the playground and maximises the rooftop playground"
It's reassuring, despite the resulting delay, to see that all efforts are being made to provide as much play space as possible for the children.
To answer your specific question, as to whether this is still achievable. The estimated timetable for the actual building work itself, does not appear to have changed so very much as the timing itself, with everything having being shunted approximately one school term down the line. A January completion, as opposed to a September one, very similar in fact to the situation mentioned upthread with Rutherford House School in Balham.
But I do not think it would be very wise to say too much in the way of opinion until we see the new drawings, as one cannot really arrive at accurate or even credible decisions based on unknown information. I am however quite eager to see these new drawings. I think a school that looks into a 'green site' would be much more appealing than one looking onto a road.
@nl'dad
I'm not sure I agree with your rather bleak assessment of the post election landscape, and in the absence of knowing the outcome of future events I will try to contain my thoughts to the present. The BBC news today alerted us to the imminent crisis concerning the shortage of school places, with these shortages being "most acute" in urban centres, places like, for instance - London.
In light of this, do you really think whoever forms the next government, is going to effectively close down an existing school, that to all extent and purpose seems to be performing as it should, by denying it funding?
This scenario you paint does seem to be rather opportunistic, and while it may suit your cause in opposing the school you cannot possibly consider it a proper argument? Its basis seems to be little more than pure speculation.
As I understand it a 7 year funding agreement has already been approved and signed by the DfE for a two form entry primary school, this school has now been established and will provide an eventual full capacity for 216 pupils. The government is committed to fulfilling this agreement, including the provision of a new school building.
Labour, should they gain an overall majority, have already confirmed their continuing support for all free schools that are currently established, as well as those 'in the pipeline', this would include, as I believe, a commitment to fund any proposed building programmes that were necessary for these schools. Whitehall Park School falls comfortably into the above category; it is an established school with proposed building requirements.
So whatever the outcome of the election both of the two main parties, at least one of which will almost certainly be involved in the next government, look set to honouring the commitments already made to Whitehall Park School, amongst others.
Relatedly there is politics at the local level to consider, as it seems unlikely that Islington Council, who are committed to not developing 'their half' of the site until a new school building is provided, will be happy to wait six more years before they can begin to free up the site to build much needed social housing for families who, Islington tells us, are desperate for accommodation in the here and now.