1 THE ISSUE

1.1 The Council have embarked on a programme of area reviews of primary school provision in order to ensure that the service is delivered in the most effective manner in terms of standards, resources, access to good facilities for children, staff and local communities and promotion of community cohesion by the making of local schools the natural and easy choice for parents and carers. The Keynsham area was the first to be reviewed in this programme.

1.2 In December 2003 the Executive agreed, in principle, to close the two schools named above and open a single school. A decision regarding the publication of the necessary legal notices was deferred until further public discussion could take place regarding the location of the new school. A decision is now required on whether to publish the necessary notices and, in so doing, identify the proposed site for the new school.

2 RECOMMENDATION

The Council Executive is asked to:

2.1 Note and welcome the responses to the discussion paper.

2.2 Agree that Keynsham Primary School and Temple Primary School should be closed on the day immediately preceding the beginning of the 2007/08 academic year, and that the necessary legal notices be published in September 2004.

2.3 Agree that the Kelston Road site represents the most suitable location for a new primary school and that the necessary notice to establish a school for 210 pupils be published in September 2004 with the new school to open on the first day of the academic year 2007/08.

2.4 Agree that a robust costed plan be prepared in order to assess the cost of a new school on the Kelston Road site.

2.5 That all necessary arrangements be made to dispose of the sites and buildings currently occupied by Temple Primary School and that the estimated proceeds of disposal be used to fund, in part, the construction of the new school.

2.6 Note the very small number of unfilled places likely to be available in the Keynsham area immediately following the implementation of this scheme and acknowledge the potential requirement to provide additional capacity on a temporary basis at another school or schools.

3 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

3.1 The costs of publishing the necessary notices can be met from within existing resources.

3.2 It is difficult to be precise about the costs of building a new school as the building industry is exceptionally buoyant at present and no design or feasibility work has been undertaken. However, recent experience suggests that a total allocation of £2,700,000 will be required. The cost plan (see 2.4) will more accurately predict the expected cost prior to publishing statutory notices. N.B. It is only necessary to confirm the availability of the necessary capital at the point at which decisions are taken by the School Organisation Committee (SOC) / Council

3.3 Should additional capacity be required at another school or schools this will be a further call on the Capital Programme.

3.4 The estimated proceeds of the disposal of the two sites and buildings occupied by Temple Primary School are £800,000 leaving the balance of the costs of the new school to be supported from the Education Capital Programme.

3.5 The Education Capital Programme can accommodate the likely expenditure, assuming that the allocation of capital resources for Education within the current Financial Plan is not reduced, but this will seriously limit the resources available for other projects.

3.6 A Targeted Capital Fund (TCF) bid cannot be made for the 2005/06 financial year. DfES advise that no new bids are being sought for this year. If TCF support is required for this scheme, it cannot be obtained at the earliest until Spring 2006.

3.7 The closure of the two schools and creation of one new school would provide revenue savings estimated at approx. £145,000 per annum, with a part year saving of £86,000 in the year of closure. This value cannot be calculated exactly until the precise formula allocation for the new school is known and pupil numbers are certain.

4 THE REPORT

4.1 Between September and December 2003 the Council undertook a review of primary schools in the Keynsham area. At its meeting on December 10 2003, the Council Executive instructed the Education Director to undertake statutory consultation regarding the closure of Keynsham Primary School and Temple Primary School and the possibility of creating a new school.

4.2 The consultation document included five potential sites for the new school as an aid to the debate. Property & Legal Services had been asked to identify sites which were suitable in size for a 210 place primary school. Sites which offered the opportunity for providing additional facilities, or to act as the base for other activities in the context of the Extended Schools Programme, were particularly favoured.

4.3 On April 7 2004 the Council Executive received the results of the consultation exercise. The Executive noted and welcomed the support for the option of creating a new school and also noted that stakeholders had been willing to countenance school closures in view of this possibility. The Executive agreed, in principle, that the two schools should close and be replaced by a single new school.

4.4 The Executive recognised the sharp division in consultation responses regarding the preferred location for the new school and decided that further public discussion was desirable focussing solely on the merits and disadvantages of the two sites most favoured by consultees. These sites are the existing site of Keynsham Primary School at Kelston Road and land to the rear of the High Street in Keynsham commonly known as St John's Court. Both sites are suitable in size for the creation of a 210 place primary school and present, to one degree or another, some potential for the creation of extended provision.

4.5 Members are asked to note that there are a number of complex issues at play in this debate and it is a matter of necessity that these be examined in considerable detail.

4.6 The first key issue to consider is whether closure of 453 places at the two schools and replacement with 210 places (a net removal of 243 places) will ensure sufficient school places in Keynsham.

4.7 At present there are 1673 places available in primary schools in the Keynsham area (including Saltford). At January 2004 there were 1547 pupils on roll (plus 43 part-time pupils in the Nursery class at Keynsham Primary School). Using the DfES method of calculating surplus places there are 192 unfilled places which is approximately 11% of capacity. This number and proportion of unfilled places is unacceptable. Keynsham and Temple together represent 86% of current unfilled capacity.

4.8 Forecasts for the area indicate a fall to approximately 1400 primary age pupils by 2007. This figure is slightly lower than anticipated in September 2003 during the initial consultation exercise and serves to emphasise the need to address the problem of unfilled places. Taking no action will result in there being 273 unfilled places in the area by 2007. This equates to approximately 16% of capacity. This is an unacceptable number and proportion of unfilled places.

4.9 Members are reminded that the School Organisation Plan 2003-2008 identified the desirability of removing 100 places in the area. This would leave reasonable flexibility in the area and eliminate a substantial number of surplus places. The further fall in forecast numbers makes the removal of a larger number of places possible.

4.10 If Members principal aim is to remove unfilled places this can most easily be achieved by the closure of Keynsham Primary School and the transfer of pupils to another school or schools in the area. This option formed part of the original consultation but was rejected by Members on December 10 2003. Members are invited, but not recommended, to reconsider this option.

4.11 Members are also invited, but not recommended, to reconsider the option of closing Temple Primary School and transferring pupils to other schools in the area. Given that the school has far fewer unfilled places and has a rising number on roll Officers consider closure of this school, in order to remove surplus places, to be irrational. The key problem at Temple is not surplus capacity but the quality of the accommodation.

4.12 Members are asked to agree that the maintenance of very high numbers of unfilled places at Keynsham Primary School for at least a further four years is not sustainable and that it remains necessary to take some action now in order to eliminate surplus capacity and improve the quality of facilities available to children, staff and the wider community.

4.13 Members are asked to note that some consultees have expressed the view that taking no action would simply leave the schools destabilised to no purpose and leave the problem to be resolved within a few years. Officers agree with this view.

4.14 Members are asked to note that the net removal of 243 places will result in there being a very small number and proportion of unfilled places in 2007 and, in all likelihood, the following few years. However, the only means by which the necessity of removing unfilled places, and the desirability of creating new school buildings can be achieved, within a reasonable timescale, is through the implementation of this scheme. This does not come without risk. It may be the case that some temporary additional accommodation is required at one or more schools in the area in order to ensure the maintenance of some necessary unfilled places.

4.15 However it is important to recognise that the falling birth rate and the absence of any significant housing development in Keynsham mean that the number of places potentially surplus towards the end of this decade is likely to rise and in the medium term this will create sufficient headroom to allow flexibility.

4.16 Having established that the elimination of such a high number of places is a calculated risk in the short term but offers the best opportunity of resolving the two main problems in a reasonable timescale it is now necessary to examine the advantages and disadvantages of each site in order to explain the rationale behind the choice of Kelston Road.

4.17 In relation to St John's Court Members are asked to note that the consultation and discussion exercise as a whole strongly favoured this site. Those associated with Temple Primary School very strongly backed this site and several of those with no apparent links with either school also supported this site. The principal reasons for supporting this site are its location close to the town centre (with the benefit of it being closer to other facilities in the town) and the fact that it offers the opportunity to start a new school on a new site.

4.18 The advantages of St John's Court are

· It is owned by the Council.

· It is large enough to accommodate a 210 place school with some additional provision for extended school activities / community service provision.

· It is closer to other facilities valuable to a school such as the Leisure Centre / swimming pool, Memorial Park and public library.

· It will be easier to maintain the Kookaburra After School Club (currently operating from Temple Primary School) if it is still located close to the town centre.

· It is easily reached by public transport.

· It is sufficiently close to residents in the north of the town as to make a school on this site very convenient for children living in that area.

· It is favoured by a very large number of consultees and is therefore likely to attract fewer objections to any statutory proposal.

· Use of this site would release the Kelston Road site as a development opportunity. Obtaining planning permission to develop the previously developed part of the site is likely and more far-reaching developments may also be possible with the permission of the Secretary of State.

4.19 The disadvantages of St John's Court are:

· Planning permission may be more difficult to achieve than would otherwise be the case as permission exists for the construction of a food store and community hall on the site.

· Any proposal to build a school on the site that was published prior to November 2006 may leave the Council liable to legal action for breach of contract as the Council is committed to promotion of this site as a site for a food store until October 2006. NB - It was incorrectly stated during public discussion that our commitment to such a promotion expired in mid 2005.

· In order to make best use of the site it will almost certainly be necessary to acquire a small area of land which is not owned by the Council. Acquisition of this land is likely to be resisted and may require the use of compulsory purchase powers, This will add to the capital requirements of the scheme and may delay the process for as much as two years.

· Use of this site would prevent its disposal for retail purposes and thus eliminate the opportunity of achieving a capital receipt likely to be in the region of £1.5 million.

· Use of this site would impede the regeneration of Keynsham town centre as a shopping centre.

· It is of insufficient size to allow for the development of anything other than a limited range of extended school activities / community service provision.

· It is of insufficient size to allow for expansion that may become necessary in the longer term.

· It is a greater distance from the home addresses of most pupils on the roll of the two schools at present.

· Given that the site has now become closely associated with Temple Primary School, use of this site may give the impression that the Council is creating a replacement for Temple Primary School.

4.20 Members are asked to note the very strong support from those associated with Keynsham Primary School for the use of Kelston Road.

4.21 The advantages of Kelston Road are:

· It is owned by the Council

· It is currently in use as a school and has accommodated the proposed number of pupils in the recent past. This has benefits in terms of establishing the traffic impact of any new development on the site.

· It is considerably in excess of the size required for a 210 place school and this allows the development at a later date of a wide range of extended school activities / community service provision.

· The newly built Neighbourhood Nursery (known as Groovy Monsters) is based at Kelston Road.

· Most children currently on roll at the two schools live nearer the Kelston Road site and although locating a school on this site will mean a longer distance to school for some children the great majority will be within walking distance.

· There are no alternative developments proposed for the site.

· There is a significant degree of support for this site in the local area.

· Use of this site allows St John's Court to be maintained as a development opportunity for the foreseeable future.

4.22 The disadvantages of Kelston Road are:

· It is closely associated with Keynsham Primary School and the Council may be perceived as simply replacing the existing school.

· Some consultees have expressed concern that there is a stigma associated with the area surrounding the Kelston Road site. The area is perceived as having a number of social problems which may persuade parents not to send children to the new school if it were located on this site.

· It is located further away from valuable facilities such as the Leisure Centre / swimming pool, public library and Memorial Park.

· Removal of a school from the town centre (through the closure of Temple) will mean there is a reduced likelihood of parents / carers using shops in the High Street, after or before drop-off and pick-up times, thus damaging trade.

5 RISK MANAGEMENT

A risk assessment related to the issue and recommendations has been undertaken, in compliance with the Council's decision making risk management guidance.

6 RATIONALE

6.1 The opportunity to remove unfilled places and simultaneously create a high quality school environment meets two Council priorities.

6.2 The Kelston Road site is readily available for development.

6.3 The value of the St John's Court site for other uses is such that its use as a school site cannot be justified.

6.4 Kelston Road is located closer to the homes of most children.

6.5 A substantial investment in community facilities such as a school can only serve to improve the perception of, and reality in, the area. The potential and actual regenerative benefits of a school in more deprived areas are well documented.

7 OTHER OPTIONS CONSIDERED

7.1 Taking no action has been considered but rejected as it will fail to remove surplus places.

7.2 The closure of Keynsham Primary School has been considered but rejected as this will not lead to the creation of a new school and would also not address the split-site nature of Temple Primary School.

7.3 The closure of Temple Primary School has been considered but rejected as there is no pressing need to remove unfilled places at this school.

7.4 The closure of Keynsham Primary School and the replacement of Temple Primary School on the Kelston Road site has been considered. This option formed part of the original review exercise in December 2003 and was rejected by the Executive at that time. It should also be noted that there is no discernible support for this option.

8 CONSULTATION

8.1 650 copies of the initial consultation document were issued to Temple Primary School, Keynsham Primary School, surrounding schools within the Keynsham area including both secondary schools, Heads of Service, Recognised Trades Unions, Bristol City Council and South Gloucestershire Council. Copies were also sent to Keynsham Town Council, Saltford Parish Council and a copy was also placed in Keynsham Library.

8.2 Approximately 2200 copies of the further discussion document were distributed to Temple Primary School, Keynsham Primary School, surrounding schools within the Keynsham area including both secondary schools, Heads of Service, senior officers of the Education Service, Ward Councillors in Keynsham and Saltford, Saltford Parish Council, Keynsham Town Council, Keynsham Civic Society, all pre-schools and childminders in the area (via the Early Years Team), the Secretary to the Pupil Council at Temple Primary School, businesses in the High Street and in the area surrounding St John's Court and Kelston Road, local dental practices, GP surgeries and opticians, seven churches within Keynsham, the British Legion, all homes and businesses in the roads surrounding Kelston Road namely Arundel Walk, Ashcroft Avenue, Barnard Walk, Caernarvon Road, Caroline Close (inc Lays Farm)Charlton Park, Charlton Road (from the High Street up to Long Meadow Rd)Chepstow Walk, Cleeve Grove, Donnington Walk, Heathfield Close, Holcombe Grove, Kelston Road, Lays Drive, Lockingwell Road, Ludlow Close, Mendip Close, Monmouth Road, Orchard Close, Park Close, Queens Road, Raglan Walk, Selworthy Close, St Georges Road, St Ladoc Road, Staple Grove, Tintagel Close, Warwick Road, Westfield Close and Wheathill Close

8.3 In addition all homes and businesses in the area surrounding St John's Court, namely Ashton Way, Cranmore Avenue, Culvers Road, Handel Road, High Street, Mayfields, Milward Road, Rock Road, St Johns Court, St Kenya Road, St Marks Close, St Patrick's Court, West View Road and Westbourne Avenue received a copy of the document

8.4 A meeting was held with the Ward Councillors for all wards in Keynsham and Saltford on 27 October 2003 and a further meeting was held for Councillors in the wards most affected on 1 April 2004.

8.5 Consultation meetings were held to discuss the original proposal on 8 March 2004 at Temple Primary School and 11 March 2004 at Keynsham Primary School. Further meetings took place at Keynsham on 8 June 2004 and at Temple on 9 June 2004 to discuss the published assessment of the sites.