Return to Agenda

Executive – 14 January 2004

ADDENDA

Item

4. Petitions and Public Address

Item	Speaker
8. Development of a Countywide Special Schools Provision, including Woodeaton Manor and Iffley Mead Schools	Mr Steve Whatmore, Chair of Governors, Woodeaton Manor School Mr Peter Simmonds on behalf of Oxford Special Schools Protection League

5. Revenue Budget and Capital Programme

8. Development of Countywide Special Schools Provision, including Woodeaton Manor and Iffley Mead Schools

• the Acting Headteacher of Woodeaton Manor School
• the Chairman of Woodeaton Parish Meeting

11. Secondary Education in the Wantage/Grove Area: Call In of Executive Decision

The Learning & Culture Scrutiny Committee on 7 January 2004 agreed to accept the Executive’s decision made on 9 December 2003. The decision accordingly took effect immediately, and no decision is required at today’s meeting.

13. Forward Plan and Future Business

Regional Management Boards for Fire Authorities To consider arrangements under consideration among fire authorities in the south east for the introduction of joint arrangements in response to the Government’s White Paper "Our Fire and Rescue Service"	Community Safety	17 February 2004
Personnel Policies and Procedures To consider reviews of the model disciplinary and grievance procedures and arrangements for similar policy and procedure reviews in future	Deputy Leader of the Council	2 March 2004

Ref/Topic	Date	Change
2003/187: Disposal of Abandoned Vehicles	11 November 2003	Now ready to report by 17 February
2003/112 & 151: Performance Management: Progress against Priorities and Targets	16 March 2004 1 June 2004	Progress on Raising Our Performance 2 now to be reported separately

WOODEATON PARISH MEETING

EXECUTIVE - 14 JANUARY 2004

Agenda Item 8

DEVELOPMENT OF COUNTYWIDE SPECIAL SCHOOL PROVISION

INCLUDING WOODEATON MANOR AND IFFLEY MEAD SCHOOLS

Woodeaton Parish Meeting asks that the following proposals be considered at the above meeting:

1. Before any formal consultations on the future of Woodeaton Manor School take place, a full feasibility assessment be conducted into its suitability as a site for children with behavioural difficulties, taking into account the Grade II* listing of the building;

2. When any formal consultations take place, officers are asked to consult on a proposal to amalgamate Woodeaton Manor and Iffley Mead Schools to provide for children with moderate learning difficulties/complex needs; to be achieved by transferring pupils with moderate learning difficulties from Iffley School to Woodeaton Manor.

1.1 The unsuitability of Woodeaton Manor was recognized by OCC in March 2000.

At its meeting on 1 March 2000 (Agenda item 12, Special school funding - planned places and integration 2000/01), the County Council’s Education Management sub- committee resolved "to note the unsuitability of Woodeaton Manor as a site and ask officers to continue to explore other possibilities for the relocation of Northfield School". This decision was reached after a discussion of the architectural and historical significance of Woodeaton Manor and the attendant obstacles to getting planning permission and listed building consent for the changes needed to make the buildings and grounds suitable for children with emotional and behavioural difficulties.

1.2 Grade II* listing implies an onerous duty of care and severe restrictions on alterations.

Woodeaton Manor was built in 1775. In 1791 Sir John Soane, one of England’s greatest architects, responsible for Dulwich Picture Gallery and the interiors of the original Bank of England, added a new wing and the Ionic porch of Coade stone. The main house was redecorated at the same time, with elegant, characteristic Soane cornices, chimney pieces and decorations. The importance of the interior is reflected in the Grade II* listing of the Manor House. The II* listing ("particularly important buildings of more than special interest") puts a building in the top 6% of all listed buildings and places an onerous duty of care on the owner; there is a strong presumption in PPG15 against any intervention to the existing fabric internally and externally. The remainder of the site, the stable block, water tower, workshops, boundary walls, walled garden and folly is all Grade II listed. According to English Heritage, "Listing ensures that the architectural and historic interest of the building is carefully considered before any alterations, either outside or inside, are agreed." There is likely to be a serious conflict between the listed status and the need to adapt the present accommodation. The DfEE’s Building Bulletin 77 notes the need for "a robust and resilient environment" in EBD schools. The Manor is situated within the Woodeaton Conservation Area in an Area of High Landscape Value.

1.3 OCC and SODC officers have previously expressed serious concerns over the suitability of the site.

In a letter to Mr D. Brown, Principal Premises Development Officer, OCC, dated 15 February 2000, Mr P. Mills, Assistant Conservation Officer, South Oxfordshire District Council, described his "grave concerns" over the possible relocation of Northfield School to Woodeaton Manor. His letter includes the paragraph:

This was followed by:

Mr J. Griffin, Principal Planning and Development Officer, OCC voiced his concern at the meeting on 1 March 2000 at the possibility of damage to the fabric of the building. He also remarked on the severe wear and tear arising from its present use. At the same meeting the Oxford Preservation Trust tabled a letter requesting that if there are plans to relocate pupils from Northfield School in the future "they will include a full conservation assessment in advance of any decision being made".

1.4 The need for a feasibility assessment.

In the light of all the above, it is at the very least regrettable that Education Officers have not conducted a detailed feasibility assessment into the suitability of the Grade II* listed building for Northfield’s pupils. There is no evidence in the report EX8 that the Conservation Officers of either OCC or SODC have been consulted, even informally, about these proposals, or that English Heritage has been approached, or that an access audit has been considered in the light of the new Disabled Discrimination Act. No arguments are advanced to justify the reversal of the Education Management sub-committee’s resolution on 1 March 2000: what, if anything, has changed over the last four years? There is no evidence that officers have continued to "explore other possibilities for the relocation of Northfield School" as requested by the Education Management sub-committee in March 2000. There is no mention of a risk assessment of the large, deep, steep-sided and potentially dangerous quarry on very edge of the Manor grounds. Nor is it evident that the head of the Emergency Planning centre at Woodeaton Manor has been consulted. That these matters have been omitted from the report is frankly alarming in its implications.

It is clearly premature and a notable waste of time and resources to embark on a period of formal consultation that might lead to a change of use of Woodeaton Manor when it has not even been established that the buildings and their surroundings might be suitable. A full assessment must be carried out before any further consultation with parents, teachers, governors, educational bodies, local residents, etc. takes place.

2.1 The justification for closing Woodeaton Manor School is flawed.

In its present form Woodeaton Manor School is an outstandingly successful school, yet the proposal is to close it. The only justification given (EX8 #34(a)) for choosing Iffley Mead rather than Woodeaton Manor as the County’s sole special school for children with moderate learning difficulties is that it would minimise the disruption to children by transferring 14 pupils (EX8 #13) from Woodeaton Manor rather than 71 (EX8 #14) from Iffley Mead. This is a little quaint in that it ignores the disruption of transferring 40-60 pupils (EX8 #34(b)) from Northfield to Woodeaton. It is also a remarkably weak argument for destroying a highly successful school that has the capacity, experience and ability substantially to improve the lives of MLD children in Oxfordshire for the foreseeable future. It is impossible to imagine that the remarkable ethos of Woodeaton Manor School would persist were the proposals to be implemented. Some of the staff would choose to move to Iffley Mead, others would no doubt resign.

2.2 Woodeaton Manor School is an important part of our community.

Geographically, it is in the heart of the village, with a population, taking staff and pupils together, not much smaller than the village itself. There are strong links between the School and local residents and we see ourselves as stakeholders in the present and future success of the School in its current form. We are proud of its achievements and its excellent Ofsted reports, which owe so much to the outstanding skill, dedication and professionalism of the former Headteacher, the current Acting Headteacher and the staff. We enjoy the many contacts we have with the School and are strongly supportive of its work. For years the village has been represented on the Governing Body. Members of the staff worship in the church, the former Headteacher was married there and the School holds its carol services and harvest festivals there. We are proud of the positive way in which the staff has used the beautiful buildings and grounds of the Manor to give something extra to the children, at the same time preserving the fine architectural heritage. However, if the residential facility were to be used throughout the year, the twenty or so children in the village and their parents would no longer have recreational access to the school grounds at weekends and during school holidays. It might no longer be possible to hold our Parish Meetings in the School. And without these regular contacts, it is difficult to see that we would feel the same sense of pride and trust that we do at present, or that the School and its staff would enjoy the same level of support from the village.

2.3 Number of pupils currently at Woodeaton Manor School.

The numbers of pupils at Woodeaton Manor School have been gradually reduced over the last five years, from more than 70 in the late 1990s to 24 at present, apparently because of reduced demand from Headteachers. As a governor, I have a copy of a letter from the Education Officer, Schools Branch (North), OCC to the then Headteacher of Northfield School, Mr R. Howarth, dated 29 May 2001. The Education Officer writes in relation to one of Mr Howarth’s pupils (whose name has been obliterated on my copy of the letter) that a referral to the Woodeaton Admissions Panel had not been agreed. He goes on to say:

The letter was written at a time when the number of planned places at the School was shrinking year after year. It is not clear how one should reconcile these figures with the number of new pupils on the roll of Woodeaton Manor in September 2001, i.e. 3. Had the pupils whose names were put forward actually been admitted, Woodeaton would not now have a mere 24 pupils and the argument for closing Woodeaton Manor School would be even weaker.

3.1 Conclusion.

For all these reasons, the residents of Woodeaton have very serious misgivings about this matter and if the proposals go forward to consultation, Oxfordshire County Council can expect extremely strong opposition from the village.

This letter represents the unanimous views of a meeting of the Parish of Woodeaton at which two-thirds of the households in the village were represented. Although many residents were keen to write in a similar vein, it was felt that a single document on behalf of the village as a whole would be more welcome to the Executive.

P. J. Hore
Chairman, Woodeaton Parish Meeting

12 January 2004

Return to TOP