Archived decisions
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Decision Report
Decision Maker: |
Executive Lead Member for Children's Services | ||||
Date of Decision: |
22 July 2009 | ||||
Decision Title: |
School Places Plan 2009 | ||||
Decision Reference: |
740 | ||||
Report From: |
The Director of Children's Services | ||||
Contact name: |
Ian Lawson, School Organisation Officer | ||||
Tel: |
01962 946350 |
Email: |
|||
1. Executive Summary
1.1. The purpose of this paper is to approve the School Places Plan 2009 for publication.
1.2. This paper seeks to report comments received from consultees and suggested amendments to the plan.
2. Contextual information
2.1. The County Council has a statutory duty to plan the provision of school places and to secure an appropriate balance locally between supply and demand. The need for school places changes in response to population movements and birth rate variations. In many areas of the county the child population is declining; in other areas new housing developments are creating a need for additional school accommodation. Population changes mean that schools may go through periods when there is pressure on places and others when there is a surplus.
2.2. Each year a School Places Plan is prepared as a planning tool to respond to new developments and to respond to the need to review surplus places. This supplements the County Council's Children and Young People's Plan (CYPP).
2.3. The 2008 revision of the School Places Plan (SPP) was approved by the Executive Lead Member for Children's Services (Education) on 24 July 2008, following consultation with schools and other interested parties.
2.4. A revised plan has been prepared with January 2009 data, to cover the period 2009/10 to 2012/13.
3. Consultation
3.1. Before the draft plan was published, all district and borough councils were invited to comment on references to their local area, so that the plan contains the most up to date information available. All responses received were incorporated into the consultation draft.
3.2. The draft 2009 SPP was published on Hantsnet in mid-May 2009. Details were sent to all county councillors, other county council departments, all district and borough councils in Hampshire, adjoining local authorities and other interested organisations. A communication was also sent to all headteachers and chairs of governors inviting comments. A closing date of 3 July was given for responses to be submitted.
3.3. Twelve responses were received during the consultation period. Details are given in Appendix A, along with suggested amendments where appropriate.
3.4. The revised text is available at http://www3.hants.gov.uk/education/schools/school-places. All changes made following consultation are shaded.
3.5. The approved plan will be published on Hantsnet and all those originally consulted will be notified that it is available, along with other interested bodies, including parish councils.
4. Conclusions
4.1. As no fundamental issues were raised in the course of consultation on the draft, it is recommended that the School Places Plan 2009 be approved and published.
5. Recommendation
5.1. That the revised School Places Plan 2009 be approved for publication
CORPORATE OR LEGAL INFORMATION:
Links to the Corporate Strategy
Hampshire safer and more secure for all: |
no |
Corporate Business plan link number (if appropriate): | |
Maximising well-being: |
yes |
Corporate Business plan link number (if appropriate): | |
Enhancing our quality of place: |
yes |
Corporate Business plan link number (if appropriate): | |
Other Significant Links
Links to previous Member decisions: |
|||
Title |
Reference |
Date | |
School Places Plan 2008 |
24 July 2008 | ||
Direct links to specific legislation or Government Directives |
|||
Title |
Date | ||
none |
|||
Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background documents | |
The following documents discuss facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and have been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report. (NB: the list excludes published works and any documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.) | |
Document |
Location |
Responses from consultees, as listed in Appendix C |
Children's Services Department file |
IMPACT ASSESSMENTS:
1. Equalities Impact Assessment:
1.1. No adverse impact has been identified
2. Impact on Crime and Disorder:
2.1. No issues have been identified
3. Climate Change:
a) How does what is being proposed impact on our carbon footprint / energy consumption?
b) How does what is being proposed consider the need to adapt to climate change, and be resilient to its longer term impacts?
Both factors will be taken into account in the development of proposals to meet the needs identified in the plan.
Appendix A
Draft School Places Plan 2009
Responses to consultation
Summary of comment |
Suggested response |
Planning Policy Officer, New Forest National Park Authority Suggested amendment to text referring to the National Park, following approval of the South East Plan |
Text on page 46 amended as suggested |
Principal Policy Planner, East Hampshire District Council Suggested amendment to text referring to development in the district |
Text on page 32 amended as suggested |
Head of Planning Policy, Gosport Borough Council References to the Structure Plan and South East Plan should be amended now that the South East Plan has been approved. |
Text on pages 40 updated |
Head Teacher, Henry Tyndale School Need for additional special school places in north east Hampshire, to reduce the need for out-county placements, should be addressed |
No change to the 2009 plan. This issue will be considered alongside emerging strategies for the area, including BSF. |
(Former) Councillor Keith Gill Are there plans to balance admissions between the three secondary schools in Gosport, or to amalgamate any infant and junior schools that share a site |
No change to the plan. Secondary school numbers will be a factor in the BSF strategy for Gosport. There are no current plans to amalgamate infant and junior schools in the area. |
St Jude's RC Primary School, Fareham Voluntary aided schools can attract children from wider area because parents choose to send their children to a faith school. Numbers have not reduced along with the demographic trends as the school is able to offer extended services and target resources to vulnerable children. |
Comments noted but no changes to the plan needed. |
Planning Officer, Test Valley Borough Council Suggested update to text relating to revised South East Plan housing targets. |
Text on page 50 amended as suggested |
Manor Infant School, Cove Queried Net Capacity quoted in Table 1 |
Net Capacity checked and confirmed correct as at January 2009. Subsequent changes will be taken into account when 2010 plan is prepared |
Head of Strategic Planning, Winchester City Council a. objects to presentation of aggregated figures as this disguises local shortfalls. b. Disappointed that there are no specific proposals to deal with issues such as shortfalls at several Winchester schools. c. References to future provision in association with new development not sufficiently strong to identify requirements to cater for proposals in LDF Core Strategy. d. Now that proposals for North Whiteley are becoming firmer, the County Council should revisit opportunity to build a new primary school on land immediately adjoining the present developed area of Whiteley. |
a. We agree, Figures for individual schools are given in Table 1. b. Text on page 52 now refers to specific provision at two schools in the city. c. The Core strategy had not been published when the consultation draft was prepared. Discussion can now take place with City planners to agree a schedule of infrastructure requirements so that details can be included in next year's SPP. d. Even if the site was available, it will still lack infrastructure, and capital will not be available through developers contributions, until development is approved and commences. |
Head of Regeneration and Planning Policy, Eastleigh Borough Council References to SHLAA and the proposed Strategic Development Area should reflect the need for additional studies before proposals can be firmed up |
Agreed. Text on page 34 amended accordingly. |
Principal Planning Officer, Environment Department Suggested updates to text to reflect the approval of the South East Plan. |
All references to the South East Plan updated. |
Senior Planner Havant Borough Council Suggested update to text to reflect current LDF position. |
Text on page 44 amended accordingly |
Minor amendments suggested by officers |
Incorporated into revised text. New section A6 added relating to Building Schools for the Future. |