DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS

1. The March 2001 paper focused on four development options:
   
   

1. to continue with the three-site structure, but tackle some of the operational handicaps by investing in such a way that each site becomes more self sufficient;
2. to develop the school on a model akin to Lord Williams’s School, Thame, i.e. a KS3 site, self-contained, with a separate KS4/Sixth Form site. Pupil migration is accordingly not required, and staff travel can be timetabled so that interruptions to the working day are kept to a minimum;
3. to develop two schools in the area, one for Grove, one for Wantage;
4. to create a single-site new school, serving the whole of the Wantage/Grove/ surrounding villages area.
   
   

In the light of research undertaken, it may be timely to summarise the position on each of these four options.

COSTINGS

2. The February 2002 report costed development on a £ per pupil basis. During the preparation of the City Reorganisation scheme, pupil based figures were used at the initial planning stages, but as work progressed, costings based on the actual area of new build, and of adaptations, were used. In many instances – but not all – these were higher than the DfES per pupil figure. Clearly accurate costs can only derive from detailed plans (and in the final analysis, contract procurement). The costs in the following paragraphs are based on an analysis of teaching and other spaces required, from which derives total areas, which, in turn, produce costs. Four options, based on the 2001 options, have been researched.
3. In each case, the quoted net estimate cost is now made up of:

• Square metres to be provided @ £x per sq metre (£x varies with the type of spaces to be built). This includes both teaching and non-teaching spaces
• Abnormals’ allowances
• Allowance for adaptations/refurbishment. These can be substantial.
• Allowance for resultant mechanical and electrical engineering work
• Fees
• Site acquisitions
• Capital receipts (where appropriate)
• Developer contributions (if judged likely).

Return to TOP