Archived decisions

Hampshire County Council

Executive Member for Policy & Resources Item 1

17 July 2006

Proposed Whiteley Primary School

Report by the Director of Property, Business and Regulatory Services

How the conclusion in this report fits in with the Corporate Strategy

This scheme will impact on the delivery of the following Corporate Aims:

Aim 1 - Maximising life opportunities by developing proposals for the most appropriate education provision

Aim 4 - Building strong and safe communities by taking full account of community issues when deciding how best to meet the demand for additional school places

Aim 5 - Improving services by providing schools closer to locations with poor access to existing facilities

1

Introduction

1.1

This report presents the latest position in respect of the proposal to build a new primary school to serve Whiteley. It would be normal to seek approval to progress detailed negotiations with Winchester City Council regarding a land exchange, and to the latest proposals for the design and procurement of the new school. The County Council has been advised, however, that Winchester City Council do not propose to sell the land.

2

Background

2.1

At a meeting of its Cabinet on 31 May 2006, Winchester City Council indicated its support for the principle of disposing of land at the Meadowside Recreation Ground for the provision of a new school, subject to the consideration of any objections received following statutory advertisements concerning its intentions to dispose of this open space land, and also subject to a number of conditions.

2.2

The City Council took account of the County Council's concern that an alternative site north of Whiteley was not viable, together also with confirmation from the Portsmouth Church of England Diocese that it would not pursue a school development on this alternative site.

2.3

Because of the delay in securing Winchester City Council's support for the proposed location, the timetable for the design and procurement of the new school is now extremely tight. A copy of the formal response to the original offer is attached as Appendix 1.

2.4

While formal confirmation of Winchester City Council's decision not to dispose of the land to allow the school to proceed is awaited, it will be necessary to advise the DfES of the outcome and the Diocesan Authority, who would have provided the school. Significant abortive costs for design and procurement will have been incurred and will require to be written off. The Director of Children's Services will also require to consider how admissions to the local schools in the area is managed.

3

Finance

3.1

The sum of £4m offered by DfES will now be redirected by DfES and therefore effectively lost to Hampshire and the people of Whiteley

Recommendations

It is recommended that:

1

That, given Winchester City Council's refusal to dispose of the land for a school, the proposed Whiteley Primary School project be aborted.

1

Winchester City Council land transfer conditions - Hampshire County Council response

1.1

Winchester City Council had asked the County Council to confirm that a number of conditions can be met before any transfer of land takes place. These conditions are reported below, together with a comment in each case.

i)

That the County Council obtains planning consent for the school and its ancillary facilities.

This condition is acceptable, provided the City Council is willing to enter into a conditional contract which requires it to transfer the land if planning consent is granted. The County Council will need to design the new school and negotiate contracts prior to planning consent being granted, and it is entirely reasonable to seek a guarantee that if planning approval is given, the City Council will then transfer the land.

ii)

That the County Council obtains planning consent for the replacement of all the recreational facilities which are affected by the proposal.

This is acceptable.

iii)

The mitigation land be provided at the County Council's Leafy Lane site over and above the open space standard required for any residential development subsequently approved for that site.

It is proposed that the County Council provide mitigation land by transferring to the City Council three parcels of land in County Council ownership within the Leafy Lane area of Whiteley. Two of these will represent additional Public Open Space over and above that already planned. These comprise 0.35 ha to the west of Gibson Close, together with 0.5 ha immediately adjacent to the proposed Neighbourhood Green within the Leafy Lane residential development site. The third area comprises the Neighbourhood Green itself. These proposals are shown on drawing no. A/10/626/G.

The 0.5 ha site forms part of the larger area allocated for residential development in the Local Plan and its transfer to the City Council at nil consideration represents a lost capital receipt to the County Council. To mitigate this to some extent, it has been agreed that the City Council would reduce its off-site open space contributions in respect of the remaining residential development land (in return for the excess provision of open space at the Neighbourhood Green). Nevertheless, it should be noted that the value of this 0.5 ha site is approximately £1.5m. The land retained by the County Council has a potential value of £3m, and the loss of the receipt should be viewed in the context of the importance of finding a suitable site for the new primary school.

iv)

That the County Council agrees to purchase the land at best consideration (taking into account the reprovision and improvement of the open space and other facilities) as determined by the Chief Estates Officer.

This is acceptable in principle, and will need to have regard to an existing restrictive covenant on the recreation land that prohibits any use other than recreation purposes.

v)

That the County Council provides a full indemnity against all costs and compensation arising from the breach of covenants on the recreational land and all of the City Council's costs arising from the project including all legal work, temporary relocation of team sports, and any loss of income at the Meadowside Centre caused by the construction process.

The County Council has already indicated that it will indemnify the City Council against any claims relating to the breach of covenant on the recreation land. It is also reasonable to indemnify against all the City Council's direct costs such as advertising, legal expenses, etc. Issues concerning the temporary relocation of team sports, and the loss of income at the Meadowside Centre could also be acceptable, but a methodology will need to be agreed as this appears a very open ended liability.

vi)

That the County Council obtains all other necessary consents and confirms that these are in place.

This is acceptable. Consents needed include planning approval, School Organisation Committee approval and access rights from USS Limited.

vii)

The funding for the provision and operation of the new school is confirmed as being available immediately prior to transfer and the Transfer contains suitable provisions to be determined by the Chief Estates Officer to protect its position if the school is not built by a certain date.

This is acceptable.

viii)

That the County Council enters into a legal agreement with the City council which guarantees the provision of replacement facilities to the appropriate standard and on a schedule to be settled by the Director of Communities having regard to the needs of the facility users.

This is acceptable, subject to the normal provisions in respect of contract delays.

ix)

That the Diocese of Portsmouth/County Council be required to bring forward their proposals to secure effective arrangements for community use of the school premises.

This will require further discussion as this is a governing body decision. In practice there is an agreement with the promoters to support community use, and the County Council will need to work with the Diocese and the temporary governing body, once established, to draw up a protocol with the County Council. Work to secure this is in hand.

2

Access rights over USS owned land

2.1

USS Limited (the owner of the District Centre) has indicated that in principle it is prepared to make access available, subject to the County Council's satisfying it in respect of certain conditions. These conditions are also reported below, together with a comment in each case.

i)

An assessment of the traffic generated by the new school, and if necessary measures to ensure that the access road does not become blocked by overspill parking causing congestion, circulation and safety issues.

Transportation consultants have been engaged to advise on the planning application for the new school, and their brief extended to cover this issue, and others raised by USS. Peak vehicular traffic generated by the school will be early morning and mid-afternoon, and these are not peak periods for either the Meadowside Centre or the District Centre. It may therefore be possible to use the USS car park under licence to overcome any concerns about parent parking.

ii)

Confirmation of what additional parent parking in addition to staff car parking is to be provided within the school site.

No parent parking is proposed within the school site but this point will be covered by the Transportation Consultant's brief.

iii)

What likely maintenance and public safety liability USS may be exposed to as a result of additional pedestrian movement, particularly school children, mixing with vehicular traffic.

Because of the disposition of housing in Whiteley, it is most likely that the majority of children walking or cycling to the school will approach the school via the recreation land. Again, this matter can be considered by the Transportation Consultants.

iv)

What infrastructure improvements may be necessary to meet the increased demand of the access road

The access road, although not adopted, appears satisfactory for access to the school. It is possible that an existing pavement may need to be extended, and this will be covered in the planning application.

3

Design and procurement of the new school

3.1

The Director of Property, Business and Regulatory Services has provided the design, cost and project management advice to date for the proposed site and building works. In addition to a new primary school building, the project comprises the following works; relocation of existing recreational facilities, formation of the proposed school site, provision of site infrastructure and access, provision of school playing fields and provision of a separate worship space and Church facilities.

3.2

The estimated cost for the construction work is £4,327,000 excluding fees, VAT, F&E, any land acquisition and highways costs. The project is being promoted by the Diocese of Portsmouth, the Methodist Church and the United Reformed Church and is funded jointly by the various stakeholders, including significant grant from the DfES and a contribution from the Children's Services Capital Programme, which is currently a provision of £1.240m excluding fees. The work is to be negotiated with Brazier Construction through the Major Projects Framework, with the County Council named as employer on the building contract, as reported in the Procurement Initiatives Report to Buildings Land and Procurement Panel on 11 July, and subject to agreement with other stakeholder groups.

3.3

These procurement arrangements are to ensure that the interfaces between the works are appropriately managed, and to optimise the construction programme to secure delivery by the target opening date. This procurement route offers the benefits of early engagement of a proven contractor to work in partnership with to jointly plan the works in detail and to identify and mitigate any associated risks. It also facilitates early procurement of key subcontractors and supply chains, through a best value tender process, to assist with completion of the detailed design and to achieve an appropriate level of cost certainty prior to commencement of the works on site.

3.4

The project will follow County Council procedures for project appraisal, project design and management, best value procurement, through to hand over of the site and building upon completion of the works. The County Council will need to secure the agreement of the various funding parties to this principle and ensure that any necessary legal agreements are put in place.

3.5

The timescale of a September 2007 opening for the school is very tight and it will necessitate overlapping the design development, procurement and advanced order phases of the project with the necessary planning and approvals processes. It is anticipated that a planning application will be submitted this summer and, subject to approvals, a start of construction on site before the end of 2006. In looking forward to the project planning stages, and given the risk and potential impact of any delay in these processes, the implications of a January 2008 opening of the school will also be considered.

3.6

The proposals for the location of the school site and the relocation to the existing recreational facilities are illustrated on the attached drawing P6325-03. The design for the primary school including the church element of the building is shown on the attached drawing P6325-04. It should be noted that currently the drawing does not make reference to a synthetic turf pitch for the primary school but this may be an option for future consideration as the proposals are taken forward.