Hampshire County Council

Executive Member for Education Item

23 May 2002

Proposed Winchester Early Years Centre - Feasibility Studies

Report by the Director of Property, Business and Regulatory Services

1

Summary

1.1

The following decisions are sought:

To note the analysis of the options available to the County Council for the development of Winchester Early Years Centre as set out in the report

1.2

To recommend to the Executive Member for Education that:

(i) the detached Westgate School site at Bereweeke Road be selected as the preferred option

(ii) detailed design, development and operational proposals be prepared to form the basis for application for statutory approvals and funding from the DfES and

(iii) authority be given for further discussions with the temporary governing body of the Early Years Centre, The Westgate School, Winnall Primary School, local residents, Winchester City Council and the submission of the necessary planning application.

2

Reason(s)

2.1

A suitably located site of sufficient area is required to enable the proposed Early Years Centre to be provided. Whilst the use of Bereweeke Road has planning uncertainties attached to it, it represents the only feasible site available to the County Council.

3

Other options considered and rejected

3.1

Alternative sites owned by the County Council and Winchester City Council but these were rejected as they were technically and/or financially non-viable.

4

Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker or a member or officer consulted

4.1

Not applicable

5

Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee

5.1

Not applicable

6

Reason(s) for the matter being dealt with if urgent

6.1

Not applicable

Approved by:

..........................

Date of decision:

.........................

Councillor .........?

Hampshire County Council

Executive Member for Education Item

23 May 2002

Proposed Winchester Early Years Centre - Feasibility Studies

Report by the Director of Property, Business and Regulatory Services

and the County Education Officer

Ian Parker

Ext: 7269

Steve Clow

Ext: 7858

George Heller

Ext: 6518

1

Introduction

1.1

This report examines the feasibility of the development options available to the County Council to provide an Early Years Centre in Winchester by combining the Medecroft Opportunity Centre with the St Bede nursery unit in Winchester and recommends that the option of developing on the detached Westgate School site in Bereweeke Road should be pursued.

2

Background

2.1

At the meeting of the Panel on 11 December 2001, Members considered a report on the feasibility of developing the Early Years Centre on County Council owned land in the following locations:

· Greenacres Special School

· Henry Beaufort Secondary School

· Oliver`s Battery Primary School

· Stanmore Primary School

· Westgate Secondary School (Rotherly House).

2.2

Whilst the report favoured the use of the Oliver`s Battery School site on land that had originally been purchased for the construction of an additional school, there were strong expressions in favour of identifying an alternative site closer to the centre of Winchester. The Panel resolved to advise the Executive Member for Education that similar feasibility studies be carried out on two additional city centre sites owned by Winchester City Council which the Council had recently indicated could be made available for sale to the County Council. Additionally the Panel called for a re-examination of any other County Council owned site opportunities within the city. Accordingly, this further report sets out site appraisals of the following sites:

· Land at the Durngate

· St Peter`s Car Park, North Walls

· The detached Westgate School site at Bereweeke Road (site of the temporary St Bede Primary School).

The sites previously examined listed in 2.1 above were re-appraised and found to offer no further viable alternatives to those already presented.

3

Winchester City Council Land Ownership

3.1

The City Council has co-operated in exploring the possibility of making either its Durngate or St Peter`s sites available through direct purchase or exchange of land. However, both sites possess a number of physical constraints that will impact severely on the design requirements of the Early Years Centre, and the location of the sites in the city centre also establishes very high land values.

3.2

Whilst considerable effort was applied by both Councils to find an affordable scheme, including the possible co-location of facilities from the Friarsgate Surgery, the cost of land acquisition would have been uneconomic. Significantly, the City Council considered that its financial regulations meant that it did not have any latitude to enable it to lower the land value to assist with the financial viability of developing the Early Years Centre on either of the city centre sites.

4

Proposed Nursery Provision at Winnall Primary School

4.1

The Durngate and St Peter's sites are well located close to the mainstream catchment of the Winchester Nursery at St Bede Primary School. However, if the Early Years Centre is not to be provided on either of the city centre sites, the specific requirements of the Winnall and Highcliffe areas of Winchester could equally be met with new pre-school provision at Winnall Primary School as identified in the County Education Officer's wider review of the provision of nursery facilities in Winchester. Initial proposals have been discussed with the school`s head teacher and it is suggested that further discussion takes place with the school's governors and staff with a view to a site feasibility study being undertaken.

5

Analysis of Alternative Development Options

5.1

Detailed appraisals of the three additional sites are set out in the Appendix and may be summarised as follows:

5.2

Land at the Durngate -

This option would provide a good location for the mainstream catchment and although part owned by the County Council it faced a number of significant difficulties and doubts as to its deliverability:

· Planning permission would be highly unlikely due to the size of the development proposed in this critical flood plain location, with a key objection from the Environment Agency

· Significant cost risks associated with the technical issues arising from the flood plain location

· High land costs

· High construction costs

· Operational drawbacks for early years activities from a two-storey building and restricted external play areas, with no potential for future expansion.

5.3

St Peter`s Car Park -

This option was also explored in depth due to its good city centre location showing two principal advantages over the Durngate site:

· Adjoining the St Bede Primary School site, it offered the opportunity for a single educational `campus` with operational and education benefits

· The site is just beyond the extent of the flood plain designation, thereby avoiding some of the technical issues of the Durngate site.

Unfortunately the study also revealed a number of significant constraints which collectively meant that the site could not be recommended:

· Availability of the site from Winchester City Council is uncertain due to planning delays in the development of additional Park and Ride facilities for the City

· Very high land costs, requiring the proposal to take up the least area possible

· As with Durngate, operational drawbacks for early years activities from a two-storey building and restricted external play areas with no potential for future expansion

· Very limited potential for private parking facilities presenting real difficulties for parents of SEN children and visiting therapists

· Significant cost risks associated with technical issues arising from the low-lying, city centre location.

Near to the conclusion of the feasibility study, it was also finally confirmed by the Environment Agency that they would not grant consent to build over the existing culvert running under the site. With no workable alternative position for the building, this effectively precludes this site as a viable option.

The possibility of joint provision on the St Peter`s site with healthcare facilities which are due to be relocated from Friarsgate, was explored but was assessed as unworkable given the physical and constructional constraints affecting the site.

5.4

Land at Bereweeke Road -

This land is owned by the County Council and held as a detached playing field for The Westgate School, though in practice it is rarely used as such. It had previously been excluded from consideration on the basis of its planning designation as `recreational open space` notwithstanding its current temporary use for the St Bede Primary School, and the fact that it has been in educational use since 1920. The County Council has commented on this designation in response to Winchester City Council's latest Local Plan Review, and has said any such policy should not restrict educational developments on existing education sites. In the absence of any viable alternative, the possible use of the Bereweeke Road site for the Early Years Centre was discussed at a meeting of the governors of the Westgate School on the 24 April as part of their long-term plans for future improvements at the school. The governors, in agreeing unanimously to give up their use of the detached playing field, have indicated that it would be helpful to have various landlord`s work carried out and other educational improvements to their main site.

In the context of the difficulties and constraints evident with the City centre sites in 5.2 and 5.3 above and those affecting the Oliver's Battery site, the possible use of the Bereweeke Road site has been reappraised as follows:

· The site is owned by Hampshire County Council and is already in educational use

· Its location is very close to the original proposal for the Early Years Centre on the Greenacres site

· The site area is large enough to enable a single-storey building with good external play area, generous landscaping around the site and to the Bereweeke Road frontage and scope for possible future expansion of the Centre

· This site is significantly more accessible than the Oliver's Battery option

· It is an independent self-contained site

· It avoids technical issues of low-lying, city centre sites.

The use of the site would be a departure from the provisions of the Winchester District Local Plan and so members are asked to note that some uncertainty exists over the grant of the required planning consent. However, the proposed use offers major educational and healthcare benefits to the City and the opportunity exists for these benefits to be realised within the existing planning framework.

6

Financial Considerations

6.1

The costs of constructing the Early Years Centre on the Bereweeke Road site would be broadly comparable with those previously identified for the Oliver`s Battery School site and would be significantly less than the costs of construction on either of the Durngate or St Peter`s sites.

6.2

The cost of acquiring the St Peter`s site has been set at £1.4-£1.7m by the City Council depending on the details of the design scheme.

6. 3

The cost of acquiring the Durngate site from the City Council is estimated to be in the region of £600,000 to which the opportunity cost of the County Council`s land estimated at £400,000 would need to be added.

6.4

As all of the Bereweeke Road site is already in County Council ownership, there would be no purchase costs and the opportunity cost of the land reflecting the limited hope value for alternative use is estimated at £200,000.

6.5

It is proposed to meet the total cost of the core scheme from the sale of land and buildings in the County Council`s ownership since there is currently no provision from within the capital programme. The sale of the Greenacres School site should generate a substantial contribution to the overall cost of the core scheme.

6.6

Since it is proposed to fund the project from available capital receipts allocated only to this scheme, the approach to future development and scope will need to be tailored to projected funds available. The County Education Officer has been in consultation with the DfES about potential additional funds which, if successful, would allow enhancements over and above the core scheme towards the establishment of an Early Excellence Centre. These enhancements would be added on the basis of the additional funding available.

7

Early Excellence Centre Bid

7.1

A decision by the Executive Member on 23 May 2002 on the location of the Early Years Centre will be within the timescale required for the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) to decide on the County Council's bid for the Centre to be designated an Early Excellence Centre. A successful outcome to the bid would generate capital as well as revenue funding.

8

Conclusion

8.1

Of the three additional sites under consideration, the Durngate and St Peter`s sites are better located to meet the travel patterns of the mainstream nursery users. But both sites are more restricted in terms of the land available compared to Bereweeke Road (due to their City centre location). They also have very high land costs and have been found to be technically non-viable due to constraints imposed by the Environment Agency.

8.2

The local demand for nursery accommodation in the east and centre of Winchester could be met by the proposed pre-school provision at Winnall Primary School.

8.3

Whilst there are still some planning uncertainties affecting the Bereweeke Road site, it is already in educational use, has the benefit of having sufficient space to enable a single-storey building to be provided and offers the opportunity for generous recreational space to be provided for the Centre within a landscaped setting.

8.4

The use of the Bereweeke Road site is the only one amongst the three additional sites considered which offers the prospect of assembling a financially viable scheme given the funding available.

8.5

In comparison with the Oliver`s Battery site the Bereweeke Road land offers locational advantages, its development would be supported by the governors of the Westgate School and would be comparable in terms of the cost of construction. It is therefore concluded that the use of the Bereweeke Road site for the development of the Early Years Centre for Winchester should be pursued.

Members are invited to:

(1) note the analysis of the options available to the County Council for the development of Winchester Early Years Centre as set out in the report.

(2) Recommend to the Executive Member for Education that:

(i) the detached Westgate School site at Bereweeke Road be selected as the preferred option

(ii) detailed design, development and operational proposals be prepared to form the basis for applications for statutory approvals and funding from the DfES, and

(iii) authority be given for further discussions with the temporary governing body of the Early Years Centre, The Westgate School, Winnall Primary School, local residents, Winchester City Council and the submission of the necessary planning application.

1.0

Detailed Site Appraisal

Durngate

2.0

Detailed Site Appraisal

St Peter`s Car Park

3.0

Detailed Site Appraisal

Bereweeke Road

P4178:

01

Durngate

Location Plan

02

Durngate

Site Plan

03

St Peter`s

Location Plan

04

St Peter`s

Site Plan

05

Bereweeke Road

Location Plan

06

Berweeke Road

Site Plan

1

Site

DURNGATE

1.1

Location

· Within Environment Agency Indicative Flood Plain for River Itchen

· Central Winchester adjacent to Durngate bridge

· Good location in terms of proximity to areas of need for mainstream children.

1.2

Access

· Within easy walking distance of Winnall, Highcliffe and other central city residential areas

· Winchester City Council Local Plan (Adopted 1998 and Deposit 2001) proposes new riverside footpath around north side of College of Art, connecting site with River Park Leisure Centre, children's playground and walking routes to Hyde and Abbotts Barton.

· Walking distance of city centre for parent shopping during sessional day-care

· Well located for access by bicycle

· Close to Park and Ride bus route

· Close to central bus station, facilitating access from all areas

· Easy access from M3 Junction via Easton Lane for wider SEN catchment, avoiding city centre one-way system

· Central location supports Hampshire County Council sustainable transport policies.

1.3

Ownership

· Car park site 0.23 hectares, owned by Hampshire County Council, leased to Winchester City Council. `Break clause' in lease requires notice by May for repossession on annual renewal date in November, unless agreed otherwise

· Red Cross House site 0.23 hectares, owned by Winchester City Council.

· Riparian ownership to centre line of flow of adjacent watercourses with maintenance responsibilities.

1.4

Existing Land Use

· 67 no. place public car park, maintained by Winchester City Council

· two-storey brick `Red Cross House', 290m², now disused

· Remainder of site grassed with trees.

1.5

Previous Land Use / Archaeology

· Tenements, small buildings and workshops on both parts of the site recorded since the thirteenth century

· Significant archaeological remains not anticipated, but likely that archaeological watching brief will be required.

1.6

Planning

· Flood risk/flood plain zoning will be material planning consideration. Objections from Environment Agency likely to prevent granting of planning permission

· Car park and southern end of Red Cross House site within Winchester City Local Plan policy boundary

· Remainder of site `countryside' designation as part of Winnall Moors, although Winchester City Council Planning Officer has stated that no objections in principle to development as could be considered an `exception' on grounds of educational needs

· No planning requirement to retain existing building

· Will be a requirement to retain as many trees as possible; may be some tree preservation orders

· There would be a loss of public parking spaces although accords with Winchester City Council Local Plan to reduce public city centre parking and encourage use of Park and Ride.

1.7

Ground Conditions

· Riverbed location would require piled foundations

· Proximity of water table would add complexity/cost to ground works operations.

1.8

Flood Risk

· Flood plain location will raise strong objection from Environment Agency, as development in `functional' flood plain directly contrary to policy. As such, planning permission highly unlikely with conventional arrangements of building and external areas.

· County Council would normally expect to adopt best practice in the design of its buildings but attempts to develop here would be considered `worst practice' by EA

· Proposals would need to show building is safe from flooding and that development does not exacerbate flooding for surrounding area in order to comply with policy. Unlikely that the case for the latter could ever be sufficiently proven technically to be accepted by the EA.

· Appointment of specialist consultant would be required to advise on level/frequency of flood risk and mitigation measures necessary. Hydraulic modelling and analysis necessary at considerable expense, with outcome uncertain.

· May be feasible to construct building above flood level on raised platform, thereby permitting flood water to pass beneath. Internal floor level AOD could be same as now proposed for refurbished St Bede. New channels/culverts across site may be required to improve flow of flood water beneath building. EA consider this approach to be bad practice as still at risk of blockage and obstructions and could be expected to object.

· Although at December 2000 water levels (rainfall estimated to be 1 in 400 year event), entrance to car park would just flood, pedestrian access to building could be maintained from Durngate Bridge.

· December 2000, Red Cross House site flooded as far as building, including garage. Check required on flood levels and implications, if any, of more frequent return period (say, 1 in 10 years)

Winchester City Engineer `not opposed to principle of development on site', provided technical issues overcome.

1.9

Services

· Availability and capacity not checked at this stage

· Possible that pumped foul may be required due to low level of site

1.10

Health and Safety

· Building design can eliminate risk to occupants (and building) from flooding, although difficult to prove that development does not exacerbate theoretical risk to others elsewhere in floodplain

· Design of access and external play areas would need to address risk of proximity of surrounding watercourses for infants

· Tree canopies and water table will be constraints on construction operations, although existing car park provides good site compound

· Roof design would need to reduce/eliminate high level maintenance of gutters due to heavy seasonal leaf fall from surrounding deciduous trees.

1.11

Development Proposal

· Two-storey building reduces impact of footprint on floodplain and existing trees, but presents operational constraints on early years use. May be difficult to achieve direct access to therapy suite from playrooms; likely some playrooms will be on first floor

· External play areas could be combination of raised timber decking and ground level hard and soft surfacing (1100m² -20m²/child)

· Consider timber frame construction on suspended precast concrete slab on piled foundations

· Higher construction could be offset by reduced costs from existing car park infrastructure

· Existing building not suited for adaption as part of scheme

· 30 no. parking spaces provided within barrier-controlled area of car park, together with 5 no. drop off spaces

· 20 no. spaces remain available for public use

· No scope for future expansion of EYC, due to floodplain restrictions.

1.12

Land Valuation

· Since half of site already owned by Hampshire County Council, require transfer of 0.23 hectares of Winchester City Council land

· Valuation subject to negotiation with Winchester City Council

· Opportunity cost from loss of development potential of part of Hampshire County Council car park site.

1.13

Alternative Development Potential

· Floodplain location and `countryside' designation limits potential for sale of Winchester City Council land to private developer, thereby reducing land value

· Possible alternative uses of Hampshire County Council car park land, subject to development of Park and Ride, with potential capital receipt.

1.14

EYC Development Costs

Site abnormals affecting development cost:

· Site purchase cost or exchange of equivalent land value

· Floodplain location and proximity of water table presents high uncertainty over potential construction costs at this stage

· Piled foundations

· Suspended slab construction

· Mitigation measures for floodwater (channels/culverts)

· Provision of footpath/drop-off in car park with adjustments to drainage and lighting

· Car park barriers and bollards

· Two storey construction, requires lift and three sets of stairs

· Allow for additional 75m² floor area due to the above

· Services connections (allow for pumped foul surface water straight to adjacent streams; electrical, telecom, gas)

· Demolition of existing building

· Raised timber decks for external play, allow 275m²

· Higher preliminaries due to location

· Tree surgery

· Access bridge, together with means of escape footbridge from north of site

· Additional fees for floodwater engineering

· Archaeological watching brief.

1.15

Summary

The principal issues for this site are as follows:

· Floodplain location will raise a key objection from the Environment Agency to a planning application and would involve a number of high risk technical issues

· Significant land acquisition costs (or equivalent opportunity cost) for land exchange required with Winchester City Council

· Use of existing Hampshire County Council car park reduces infrastructure costs, but represents opportunity cost from loss of potential capital receipt

· Two-storey building required, with operational implications

· External play area required to be mostly on raised decking, as suitability of natural ground conditions uncertain due to proximity of water table

· High construction costs from site conditions and city centre location

· Good location for early years catchment.

2.0

Site

ST PETER'S CAR PARK

2.1

Location

· Central Winchester adjacent south boundary of St Bede Primary close to North Walls

· Good location in terms of proximity to areas of need for mainstream children

· Just outside boundary of Environment Agency Indicative Flood Plain for River Itchen.

2.2

Access

· Within walking distance of Winnall, Highcliffe and other central city residential areas

· Walking distance of city centre for parent shopping during sessional day-care

· Well located for access by bicycle

· Close to Park and Ride bus route, with bus stop on North Walls

· Close to central bus station, facilitating access by public transport from all areas

· Car access for wider SEN catchment hindered by city centre traffic congestion

· Central location supports Hampshire County Council sustainable transport policies

· Very high land values requires that only bare minimum no. of parking spaces provided, with operational implications for EYC and parents.

2.3

Ownership

· Car park site 0.46 hectares total, owned by Winchester City Council

· Riparian ownership/responsibilities for existing culverted watercourse below car park would transfer with land ownership. Maintenance liability and uncertainty

· Access to rear of North Walls residential properties currently granted by WCC under annual licence. Rear access to Nos.25 to 32 would be denied by EYC proposals.

2.4

Existing Land Use

· 191 no. place public car park, owned and maintained by Winchester City Council.

2.5

Previous Land Use / Archaeology

· Historical floodplain of River Itchen, comprising fields/pasture beyond the Medieval city wall and ditch (line of North Walls), traversed by open watercourse of Upper Brook and subsidiary channels

· Site of St Peter's RC Primary School from late C19. School demolished circa 1980

· Area fronting North Walls comprised terraced houses/pub during C19.

· Significant archaeological remains not anticipated, but likely that archaeological watching brief will be required. Advance field evaluation may be required.

2.6

Planning

· Availability of site from Winchester City Council linked to development of additional Bar End Park and Ride facilities, which are currently delayed in planning stage. Availability timescale uncertain and does not suit EYC development needs nor funding deadlines

· Environment Agency have indicated that an objection would be made due to problems associated with culvert of Upper Brook

· Main area of car park within Winchester District Local Plan policy boundary

· Southern portion of site adjacent North Walls within central Conservation Area

· Likely position for EYC in main north area of car park would avoid Conservation Area designation

· Loss of public parking spaces in central Winchester is likely to lead to strong public objections, although accords with Winchester City Council Local Plan to reduce public city centre parking and encourage use of Park and Ride

· Winchester City Engineer has confirmed minimum of 50 parking spaces should remain for public use

· Flood risk unlikely to be material planning consideration

· Adjoining residents of North Walls would lose rear access and on-site parking for their properties.

2.7

Ground Conditions

· From ground investigation report for St Bede, likely that site overlies soft alluvial deposits at shallow depth; piled foundations will be necessary

· Proximity of water table may add complexity/cost to ground works operations, although existing car park surface provides sound construction site base.

2.8

Flood Risk

· Environment Agency Indicative Floodplain map currently shows site lies just beyond edge of floodplain; initial consultation with EA has confirmed that they would not require a Flood Risk Assessment and do not object in principle to a development on the site in terms of floodplain issues

· Site did not flood during December 2000 floods as approximately 0.5m higher than St Bede external areas

· Internal floor level AOD could be 100mm higher than that now proposed for refurbished St Bede

· Existing culvert of Upper Brook below car park has rising inverts, causing deposition of silt, impeding flow.` Proposals could include opening up of culvert to create linear pool beside building, facilitating future maintenance

· Only viable position of building requires bridging over part of culvert. EA have stated that they would object to such a proposal unless the whole culvert were to be opened up and the building split into two separate buildings either side - this would be operationally untenable for the EYC. Despite considerable discussions, EA would not accept building over part of the culvert and opening up the remainder.

· Even if planning permission were to be granted, despite objection from the EA, separate consent would be required from the EA to bridge over the culvert under the Land Drainage Act 1991. This would be withheld by the EA unless the culvert was avoided and/or wholly opened up.

2.9

Services

· Availability and capacity not checked at this stage

· Possible that pumped foul may be required due to low level of site and below ground proximity of culvert

· Position of building would need to avoid existing main foul sewer traversing car park.

2.10

Health and Safety

· Pedestrian access from north passes through busy public car park; proposals would need to consider creating separate footpath

· Inner city site impedes construction access

· Whole car park may require closure during construction phase due to potential conflict of construction vehicles and public

· Watercourse passing beneath site requires special construction precautions.

2.11

Development Proposal

· Two storey building proposed, to reduce site area required (since high land value), with some operational implications

· Location towards north-east corner of site would optimise use of `backland' area for secure external play area, but requires bridging over culvert Alternative of positioning to the west of the culvert requires significantly greater land take at very high land values

· Position of building could enable windows/access onto St Bede garden, as part of an enlarged educational campus, with potential for integrated working

· 9 no. car park spaces proposed for EYC use, based on staffing numbers and County Surveyor`s parking standards for a site of `high accessibility,` in order to take up least area. Further spaces within remaining public car park area could be subject to possible leasing arrangements with Winchester City Council

· External play areas could be shielded from noise of car park and roads by new building and surrounding gardens and properties. May be limited in area, depending on amount of land acquired

· Higher construction costs due to inner city location would be partially offset by reduced costs from existing car park infrastructure

· Very limited scope for future expansion of EYC, dependant on size of land acquired

· Site development plan proposed for whole car park to ensure continuity of potential long term strategy.

2.12

Land Valuation

· Valuation subject to negotiation with Winchester City Council

· Very high land value due to prime inner city location.

2.13

Alternative Development Potential

· City centre site suggests residential and/or commercial development.

2.14

EYC Development Costs

Site abnormals affecting development cost:

· Site purchase cost or exchange of equivalent land value

· Piled foundations and proximity of water table

· Possible reconstruction of Upper Brook culvert with open water feature

· Provision of footpath/drop-off in car park with adjustments to existing drainage and lighting

· Car park barriers and bollards

· Two storey construction, requires lift and 3 sets of stairs with 2 storey covered loggia

· Allow for additional 75m² floor area due to the above

· Services connections (allow for pumped foul; surface water straight to Upper Brook; electrical, telecom, gas)

· Higher contractors overheads due to location

· Archaeological watching brief

· Removal of existing car park surface from 50% of external play area.

2.15

Summary

The principal issues for this site are as follows:

· Very high land acquisition costs or opportunity cost of land exchange required with Winchester City Council

· Availability of car park site uncertain, as linked to the timing of the development of Park and Ride at Bar End

· Tight site requires two-storey building with operational implications

· Site beyond floodplain boundary, but Environment Agency's objection to building over culvert presents fundamental constraint on building location, leading to even greater land acquisition costs

· Parking provision severely constrained by land costs

· Ideal location for early years catchment

· Limited external play area

· Potentially higher construction costs from city centre location and site abnormals/ technical issues from ground conditions

· Some strong planning objections likely, but development would fall within local plan framework.

3.0

Site

BEREWEEKE ROAD

3.1

Location

· Detached site of the Westgate School

· Temporarily used as site of St Bede Primary pending the rebuilding of the school

· Location close to original proposal for EYC on Greenacres site off Andover Road

· Closer to city centre than other sites previously considered.

3.2

Access

· Beyond reasonable walking distance of Winnall and Highcliffe but close to other central residential areas.

· Good access by car for SEN children coming from wider catchment

· Reasonably accessible by bus from city centre.

3.3

Ownership

· 1.46 hectares total, owned by Hampshire County Council and held for Education purposes.

3.4

Existing Land Use

· Prior to current temporary use for relocated St Bede, comprised playing fields for Westgate Secondary School with low levels of use

· Westgate Governors resolved that the site could be made available

· The DfES will require to be consulted on the proposed changes in educational use of the Westgate School land

· Site only available once St Bede returned to original school - likely to be April 2003.

3.5

Previous Land Use / Archaeology

· Archaeological potential of site remains uncertain. Although no obvious features were noted during ground works for temporary school. Further advanced site investigation required.

3.6

Planning

· Current Planning Permission for temporary school expires 31 August 2002

· Current planning permission requires that site is completely returned to previous playing field status, including removal of access road, etc

· Designated EN.2/RT.2 in Winchester City Council Local Plan 1998 (RT.1/RT.2 in Deposit 2001), relating to retention of recreational value of the land

· Application to be referred to Secretary of State as a departure from the Local Plan, possibly leading to programme delays

· Travel assessment/plan likely to be required in advance of planning application.

3.7

Ground Conditions

· Footings/hard standing for temporary St Bede buildings would require removal

· Soil reports not yet obtained. Hill top location would tend to indicate `normal' ground conditions likely for foundations.

3.8

Services

· Availability and capacity not checked at this stage

· Presumption that existing services for temporary St Bede could be retained with modifications.

3.9

Health and Safety

· Proposals should include for on-site drop-off areas to avoid parking on main road, with direct access onto pedestrian approaches to EYC

· Construction access difficulties not foreseen as site area large and road access relatively easy, although there will be significant H&S issues to consider if the site were to be developed with elements of the existing temporary buildings still in use ie. nursery unit

· Orientation of building could create external play area on south side to optimise sun aspect - although design of enclosure would need to ensure privacy and security of infants from car park.

3.10

Development Proposal

· South-facing single storey building presents good configuration for SEN early years use

· 30 no. parking places plus drop-off spaces to be provided, to ensure drop-off of infants on Bereweeke Road can be avoided for H&S reasons

· Scope for future expansion

· Opportunity for generous landscaping around site and in particular to the Bereweeke Road frontage.

3.11

Alternative Development Potential

· No realistic commercial development potential in current Plan period to 2011.

3.12

EYC Development Costs

Site abnormals affecting development cost:

· Removal of part of existing surfacing/hard standing

· Formation of new drop-off road over existing sub base for temporary car parking

· Services connections

· Archaeological watching brief

· Possible minor cut and fill below footprint of EYC building and some external play areas

· Enhanced soft landscaping to screen development from road and adjoining owners.

3.13

Summary

The principal issues for this site are as follows:

· Location close to original proposal for Greenacres site

· Site easily accessible for SEN children from wider area catchment

· Site area is more than adequate, enabling sufficient space for single storey building, parking, drop-off and external play with scope for future growth and extensive recreational/landscape use

· Planning issues would need to be resolved, including possible `call in` by Secretary of State, with consequent delays

· Land owned by Hampshire County Council, already used for educational purposes and confirmed as available by Westgate School governors

· Site not vacated by St Bede Primary until April 2003 - Early Excellence Centre funding criteria would need to be addressed if site not available for a start-on-site by end of March 2003

· Infrastructure costs of new on-site drop-off and enhanced soft landscape screening.