published notice and prescribed information notice and prescribed information published notice...

Published notice and prescribed information

Published notice

EXPANSION OF ALL SAINTS’ CE PRIMARY SCHOOL, CRANMER PRIMARY SCHOOL, ST.MARY’S RC PRIMARY SCHOOL AND WIMBLEDON PARK PRIMARY SCHOOL

Notice is given in accordance with section 19(1) of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 thatLondon Borough of Merton intends to make prescribed alterations to the following from September2012:

All Saints’ CE Primary School (voluntary aided), East Road, London, SW19 1ARCranmer Primary School (community), Cranmer Road, Mitcham, Surrey, CR4 4XUSt. Mary’s RC Primary School (voluntary aided), Russell Road, London, SW19 1QLWimbledon Park Primary School (community), Havana Road, London, SW19 8EJ

All Saints’ CE Primary School

The London Borough of Merton intends to expand the school from one form of entry to two forms ofentry through the use of an additional site at 74 Haydons Road, SW19 1HL for 180 of the 210additional places.

Excluding the nursery class the current permanent capacity of the school is 210 and the proposedcapacity will be 420. The current number of pupils registered at the school is 228. The currentpublished admission number for the school is 30 and the proposed admission number will be 60.

The school will occupy a split site with 180 pupils based at 74 Haydons Road and 240 pupils(excluding the nursery class) based at the current site at East Road.

Cranmer Primary School

The London Borough of Merton intends to expand the school from two forms of entry to three forms ofentry.


St. Mary’s RC Primary School

The London Borough of Merton intends to expand the school from one form of entry to two forms ofentry.


Wimbledon Park Primary School

The London Borough of Merton intends to expand the school from two forms of entry to three forms ofentry.


This Notice is an extract from the complete proposals. Copies of the complete proposals can beobtained from: Contracts and School Organisation, London Borough of Merton, Civic Centre MordenSM4 5DX or accessed at http://www.merton.gov.uk/schoolsconsultations.htm

2

Within four weeks from the date of publication of these proposals, any person may object to or makecomments on any of the proposals by sending them to Director of Children Schools and Families,London Borough of Merton, Civic Centre, Morden, SM4 5DX.

Signed: Yvette Stanley, Director of Children, Schools and Families

Publication Date: 10th May 2012

Explanatory NotesThe council is making separate (unrelated) proposals to expand All Saints’ CE Primary School,Cranmer Primary School, St. Mary’s RC Primary School and Wimbledon Park Primary School.

Representations can be made on any of the proposals and each proposal will be consideredseparately for approval by the council.

The expansions of the schools would be implemented gradually by an increase in the size of thereception year. As an exception all the schools provided an extra class in reception year in September2011. Cranmer Primary School also provided an extra class in reception year in September 2010.

3

PROPOSALS FOR PRESCRIBED ALTERATIONS OTHER THANFOUNDATION PROPOSALS: Information to be included in orprovided in relation to proposals

Insert the information asked for in the expandable box below each section.

In respect of an LEA Proposal: School and local education authority details

1. The name, address and category of the school and a contact address for the local educationauthority that is publishing the proposals.

School: St. Mary’s RC Primary School (Volunrary Aided), Russell Road, London, SW19 1QL

Local Authority: Contracts and School Organisation, Children Schools and FamiliesDepartment, London Borough of Merton, Civic Centre, Morden, SM4 5DX

Implementation and any proposed stages for implementation

2. The date on which the proposals are planned to be implemented, and if they are to beimplemented in stages, a description of what is planned for each stage, and the number of stagesintended and the dates of each stage.

1 September 2012

Objections and comments

3. A statement explaining the procedure for making representations, including—

(a) the date by which objections or comments should be sent to the local education authority;and

(b) the address of the authority to which objections or comments should be sent.

Objections or comments should be sent by 7 June 2012 to Director of Children Schoolsand Families, London Borough of Merton, Civic Centre, Morden, SM4 5DX or by e-mail [email protected]

Alteration description

4. A description of the proposed alteration and in the case of special school proposals, adescription of the current special needs provision.

The London Borough of Merton intends to expand the school from one form of entry to twoforms of entry.

Excluding the nursery class the current permanent capacity of the school is 210 and theproposed capacity will be 420. The current number of pupils registered at the school is237. The current published admission number for the school is 30 and the proposedadmission number will be 60.

The expansion of St Mary’s RC Primary School would be implemented gradually by anincrease in the size of the reception year. As an exception the school has made 60

4

pupil places available in reception year in September 2011 to help to meet theincreased demand for places in the Wimbledon area. The council is proposing toincrease the admission number permanently to 60 from September 2012.

School capacity

5.—(1) Where the alteration is an alteration falling within any of paragraphs 1 to 4, 8, 9 and 12-14 of Schedule 2 or paragraphs 1-4, 7, 8, 18, 19 and 21 of Schedule 4 to The SchoolOrganisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2007, theproposals must also include—

(a) details of the current capacity of the school and where the proposals will alter thecapacity of the school, the proposed capacity of the school after the alteration;

Excluding the nursery class the current capacity of the school is 210 and the proposedcapacity after the alteration will be 420.

(b) details of the current number of pupils admitted to the school in each relevant age group,and where this number is to change, the proposed number of pupils to be admitted ineach relevant age group in the first school year in which the proposals will have beenimplemented;

Until September 2010 the school admitted 30 pupils per year group. As an exception theschool has made 60 pupil places available in reception year in September 2011 to help tomeet the increased demand for places in the Wimbledon area. The council is proposingto increase the admission number permanently to 60 as part of this proposal fromSeptember 2012.

(c) where it is intended that proposals should be implemented in stages, the number ofpupils to be admitted to the school in the first school year in which each stage will havebeen implemented;

Not applicable

(d) where the number of pupils in any relevant age group is lower than the indicatedadmission number for that relevant age group a statement to this effect and details of theindicated admission number in question.

Not applicable

(2) Where the alteration is an alteration falling within any of paragraphs 1, 2, 9, 12 and 13 to 4,and 7 and 8 of Schedule 2 or paragraphs 1, 2, 8, 18 ands 19 of Schedule 4 to The SchoolOrganisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2007 astatement of the number of pupils at the school at the time of the publication of the proposals.

The expansion falls within paragraphs 1 and 2 of Schedule 4. (increase in capacity andincrease in numbers).

5

The current number of pupils registered at the school is 237 according to the latest officialPLASC return in January 2012. This excludes the nursery class.

Additional Site

6.—(1) A statement as to whether any new or additional site will be required if proposals areimplemented and if so the location of the site if the school is to occupy a split site.

The school is taking over the ownership of an adjacent council site previously used ascouncil offices. The school is already in occupation of the site which will become apermanent arrangement with the permanent expansion of the school.

Objectives

7. The objectives of the proposals.

The objective of the proposal is to provide additional ‘basic need’ primary school places in thelocal area to meet rising demand, expanding schools that will facilitate the overall strategy ofcontinuing to raise education standards.

The proposed expansion of St Mary’s RC Primary School is part of an overall programme ofschool expansion in Merton. From 2008 to 2011 nineteen schools, including St Mary’s, haveprovided additional reception classes to ensure sufficient places are provided. A further six toeight forms of entry will be required to meet further need up to 2014/15.

Consultation

8. Evidence of the consultation before the proposals were published including—

(a) a list of persons who were consulted;

Staff, parents and governors of St. Mary’s RC Primary, all Merton primary schoolsand other primary schools within 2 miles of St. Mary’s RC School, all MertonSecondary Schools, local nurseries and mother and toddler groups, Director ofChildren Services and the London Boroughs of Wandsworth and Kingston (Royal),Southwark Diocese, Archdiocese of Southwark, Merton Councillors, Trade UnionRepresentatives, and the two LB Merton MPs. Copies were also distributed to publiclibraries in Merton. The consultation document was also distributed to local residentswithin close proximity to the school and was available on the LB Merton website.

(b) minutes of all public consultation meetings; Appendix 2

(c) the views of the persons consulted; Appendix 1

(d) a statement to the effect that all applicable statutory requirements in relation tothe proposals to consult were complied with; and

The council’s legal services team has been consulted and confirm that all applicablestatutory requirements in relation to the proposals to consult were complied with.

(e) copies of all consultation documents and a statement on how these documentswere made available; Appendix 3

A hard copy of the document was sent to all the parties listed above, as well asmaking the document available on the council’s website. The document was sent toparents via the school pupils and residents were informed through a direct leaflet

6

drop. Other parties were posted the document.

The appendices also include the council report that followed the consultation.

Project costs

9. A statement of the estimated total capital cost of the proposals and the breakdown of thecosts that are to be met by the governing body, the local education authority, and any other party.

All the finance will be provided by the local authority, as part of the Children, Schools andFamilies capital programme, aided in part by Department for Education capital grant.

The specific costs of an individual project is kept confidential until the council reachescontract stage but the total cost is in the region of £4.5 million and is contained within theoverall capital programme described above.

10. A copy of confirmation from the Secretary of State, local education authority and theLearning and Skills Council for England (as the case may be) that funds will be made available(including costs to cover any necessary site purchase).

Appendix 4 – contains the relevant extract from the council’s capital programme agreedby the council on 7 March 2012. The St Mary’s scheme will be contained within thebudgeted allocation for “primary school places – additional growth.”

Need or demand for additional places

11. If the proposals involve adding places—

(a) a statement and supporting evidence of the need or demand for the particular places inthe area;

There is a significant increase in demand for school places in Merton, with more childrenreaching school age, fuelled by a birth rate that has risen by 39% in the last eight yearsand exacerbated by other factors. Our population forecasts indicate that much of this risewill be sustained.

The planning of school places is more sophisticated in taking account more than just birthrate but this is the main factor. The table below shows how the birth rate has increasedover the past years, which is now leading into primary school age.

Yr enterreception Birth Year Birth figure

Increase in birthssince 02/03

(07/08 receptionyear cohort)

2007/08 2002/03 2612 -2008/09 2003/04 2785 1732009/10 2004/05 2893 2812010/11 2005/06 2972 3602011/12 2006/07 3250 6382012/13 2007/08 3320 7082013/14 2008/09 3419 8072014/15 2009/10 3502 890

7

The proposed expansion of St Mary’s Primary School is part of an overall programme ofschool expansion in Merton. From 2008 to 2011 nineteen schools, including St Mary’s,have provided additional reception classes to ensure sufficient places are provided. Afurther six to eight forms of entry will be required to meet further need up to 2014/15.

St Mary’s Primary School was an oversubscribed school prior to taking the additionalreception class in September 2011. With demand for places forecast to further increase overthe next few years the expansion of the school is considered essential for the council toprovide sufficient local school places.

Merton uses the following factors to determine school expansions:

Educational standards – achievement, attainment and capacity to improve.This would be based on performance data, the most recent Ofsted inspection, self-evaluation, and internal inspections. Through the School Improvement Programme,including the validation of school self-evaluation, the LA will identify at least annuallythose schools where standards need to be improved.Parental preference - This would be based on the most recent relevant information onparental preference through the admissions procedure, and numbers on roll.Location and issues of pupil transport (home to school) – this would take intoconsideration the need to provide the most local schooling feasible for environmental andconvenience reasons, taking into account the other factors.Physical constraints of existing school sitesThe ability of a school to expand needs to take into consideration the physical constraintsof a site.Value for money – the capital cost or opportunities of any proposal need to beconsidered against the other factors. For example, when rationalising provision thecapital cost to bring a school to modern 21st Century standards needs to be considered.Educational efficiency – Proposals need to take into account the revenue costs to boththe individual school and the Dedicated School Grant (the overall grant to the council forschools) to provide education. Inefficient roll numbers tie up resources that mightotherwise be used by other schools to improve the quality of education, and can result inschools that have difficulty in maintaining a satisfactory range of teaching expertise andfacilities.

Through its school expansion programme it also seeks to ensure a balance of faithschools.

St Mary’s has in particular been chosen as a school to expand because: It is in an area of demand and the school is over subscribed for its current permanent

admission number It is an ‘outstanding’ school as recognised by Ofsted at their last inspection in

November 2007, and their Interim Assessment in January 2011There is a demand for local Catholic places in the area as evidenced in the 2011 and

2012 admissions applications

(b) where the school adheres to a particular philosophy, evidence of the demand foreducation in accordance with the philosophy in question and any associated change tothe admission arrangements for the school.

All Saints’ Primary School is a Roman Catholic Voluntary Aided School. It thereforeadheres to the philosophy of the Roman Catholic Church, and its admissionsarrangements gives priority to Roman Catholic families.

The admissions policy will not change as a result of the expansion and there is a demand

8

for local Catholic places in the area as evidenced in the 2011 and 2012 admissionsapplications.

The school is increasingly oversubscribed with 197 preferences in 2012, of which 68were first preferences, compared to 175 preferences in 2011, of which 53 were firstpreferences.

Expansion of successful and popular schools

25A. (1) Proposals must include a statement of whether the proposer considers that thepresumption for the expansion of successful and popular schools should apply, and where thegoverning body consider the presumption applies, evidence to support this.

(2) Sub-paragraph (1) applies to expansion proposals in respect of primary and secondaryschools, (except for grammar schools), i.e. falling within:

(a) (for proposals published by the governing body) paragraphs 1 and 2 of Part 1 toSchedule 2 and paragraphs 12 and 13 of Part 2 to Schedule 2; ;

(b) (for proposals published by the LA) paragraphs 1 and 2 of Part 1 to Schedule 4.

of the Prescribed Alteration regulations.

The Local Authority feels that St Mary’s Primary School would be considered under thepresumption for the expansion of successful and popular schools. It is rated by Ofsted asan ‘outstanding’ school and is oversubscribed on its current permanent admissionnumber.

In 2012, 197 pupils applied to St Mary’s Primary School. 68 of these applications put theschool as a first preference, 46 put it as second preference and 34 put it as thirdpreference.

Ofsted inspected the school on 8th

November 2007 and judged it to be “outstanding”. Theinspectors concluded that St Mary’s ‘succeeds exceptionally well… Very effectiveorganisation and very careful assessments enable pupils to make excellent progressimmediately… By the time they leave, standards are consistently exceptionally high becausethe teaching is excellent’.

The Interim Assessment dated 7th

January 2011 stated that performance has been sustained.

List of Appendices

Appendix 1 - Summary of the views of the persons consulted;

Appendix 2 - Minutes of all public consultation meetings;

Appendix 3 - Copies of consultation document and council decision report

Appendix 4 – Council report 7 March 2012 – inclusion of school expansion capital finance

Appendix 1St Mary’s RC Primary School Proposed Expansion

Consultation Responses

Parents

1. Concerned that there will not be enough money to complete Option1, to demolish the Social Services building, lack of communication& information and inadequate outdoor play area.

2. In favour of proposed changes as increases number of children whocan benefit from such an excellent school. As a teacher, believe itis an advantage to be 2FE with two teachers per year group.

3. Key concerns are child safety when moving between buildings(would like a covered walkway); quality of temporary classrooms,adequate funding and adequate communicationmechanisms/website detailing progress.

4. Considerations to include adequate funding, guarantee SocialServices building is not permanent, affect of building work onchildren and number of children on footpaths.

5. Concerns include inadequate funding to complete the project,Social Services building will be used permanently, increasedvolume of traffic and impact of building work on children. Would likecommunication process to parents to be introduced.

6. Concerns include inadequate funding to complete the project,Social Services building will be used permanently, if admissionspolicy is not changed it will not alleviate the problem for localchildren, increased traffic and improved communication betweenthe council, school and parents. Parents to be involved in all stages.

7. Main concern is inadequate funding to complete the project, SocialServices building will be used permanently. In the short term, SocialServices building to be refurbished to a high standard with acovered walkway to the main building. Would like informationincluding plans on a regular basis and possible input from parents.

8. Concerned about increased traffic, size of hall for September 2011,IT facilities, and adequate funding for completion of the project.

9. Believes vast majority of parents have concerns regarding currentproposal and use of the Social Services building. Suggests smallstructural works to change ICT room to additional reception class.A temporary ICT room to be accommodated elsewhere.

10. Supportive of expansion, along with most other parents. Howevercouncil should ensure adequate two-way communication vianewsletters, website etc informing of all stages of the process.Happy with plans, but request playground space & facilities areprotected or improved. Main concern is that funding is guaranteedto complete the project.

11. Concerned regarding disruption during the building works. Wouldprefer children to go straight into the new buildings rather thantemporary accommodation.

Pre-school Parents

1. Happy with proposal but concerned regarding ring-fencing offunding to ensure the Social Services building is replaced. Wouldlike improved communication to parents.

2. Very good idea and an investment for the future.

3. Supports expansion but believes current admissions criteria isunfair.

4. Fully agree with proposal – it is essential. However should relaxadmissions criteria

Staff

1. Expansion will have a positive outcome for the school andneighbourhood. However, imperative the hall is expanded toaccommodate the whole school and a new building built on theSocial Services site. Have reservations regarding safety, securityand facilities of adapting the Social Services building for receptionchildren. Also ensure building work causes limited disruption tocurrent pupils.

2. Ensure contractors do not overcharge and adhere to timescale.

3. What will happen to the children if the project is delayed?Concerned about drain on current resources and facilities, loss ofschool ethos, quality of buildings and adequate budget.

Resident

1. Questions use of the Social Services car park and where will theadditional parents park?

2. No concerns – great use of the disused site.

3. Delighted with proposal – especially glad that Social Servicesbuilding will be put to good use.

4. In favour of expansion, but are concerned about increased noise,rubbish and dust from the building works and increased traffic.Suggest participation in the Considerate Contractors scheme, moreregular street cleaning etc, additional trees/shrubs to providescreening and improved paving (along the whole road).

5. Concerned about parents illegal parking. If you have a solution,then we would be delighted.

6. Concerned about extra traffic.

7. Fully support proposal but concerned about increased traffic andillegal parking. Will there be an option of a designated drop offcollection area in car park area in Pelham Road or the theatre carpark? Any incentive to encourage parents to use other means oftransport?

8. Support the expansion.

9. Recognise need and happy for this excellent school to expand.

10. Oppose expansion as new double storey building will block light toour garden, increased noise and the intrusion by staff and students.

11. Makes sense to promote high performing schools. However, mustensure adequate resources to maintain the quality of education;special efforts taken to reduce car journeys (smaller catchment?);and Social Services site is used for the school. May be helpful toseparate the larger school into primary (ages 5-7) and middle (ages8-11).

12. If expanded prefer Social Services building to remain as offices asdo not wish children overlooking private garden and into bedroomwindows. Allow driving parents to park in the car park to limitdisturbance to neighbours. Only allow parents to pick up from theplayground not the pavement as too narrow.

13. Same resident as no. 12 – same response.

14. Taxpayer should not be funding sectarian schools. The Councilshould withdraw funding from all these schools – if not allowed, donot expand this school and put the resources into non-sectarianschools.

15. Expanding school is not an issue, but concerned about increasedtraffic and parking.

16. In excess of 10 pages of concerns, questions and considerations tobe addressed by the council. These include:operational/management considerations; communications strategy;physical infrastructure of bulge class; school management;admissions policy; borough-wide expansion information; decisionmaking; timescales; designs; facilities; budget implications; worksschedule; planning applications; impact on Diocese; legal rights andresponsibilities of the school; and maintenance/enhancement ofschool ‘spirit’.

17. No objection to expansion however very concerned about trafficcongestion. Requests that any building work undertaken is done asquietly as possible and no rubbish, skips etc are left on the road.Also ensure building is kept secure at all times.

Other

1. Archdiocese - Fully supports the proposal – St Mary’s is popularand oversubscribed school. It is the only 1FE Catholic school in theborough. Need to maintain the proportion of Catholic places in theborough in line with the increased demand for school places.

St Mary’s RC Primary School Proposed Expansion

Consultation Meeting

5 April 2011

Summary of the meeting

The meeting was chaired by Paul Ballat, Head of Strategy, Commissioningand Performance in LB Merton Children, Schools and Families Departmentand attended by approximately 90 parents, staff, governors, local councillorsand residents.

Paul introduced presentations that followed from Councillor Peter Walker(Cabinet Member for Education), Tom Procter (Manager of Contracts andSchool Organisation) and Sarah Crouch (Headteacher of St. Mary’s School).These covered the strategic background to school expansion, clarity on thelegal process on St. Mary’s school expansion, the vision for the school, andthe building expansion strategy. Copies of the presentation are available onhttp://www.merton.gov.uk/council/getinvolved/consultation/schoolsconsultations.htm

Paul then invited questions and comments from the audience. These wererecorded as follows (note some of the answers are refined from the meetingto provide clear answers):

Q. If the decision is not to progress, what will happen with new September2011 intake?

A. One group of 30 will go through the school. The school will be left withsufficient accommodation for this

Q. When will the decision be made to permanently expand?

A. The Autumn at the latest.

Q. How robust is the demographic information on pupil growth. Don’tnumbers go down later in school?

A. There is generally a peak in Year 1 and Year 2 in Merton schoolsbefore some drop later in primary school but there are no area basedschool organisation means to solve this in all through primary school aschildren should not be displaced once in a school – there just tend tobe slightly lower class sizes in the later years of primary school.

Our projections for reception year up to 2014 are based on birth figuresso are robust and continue to rise to this date. After this we rely onGLA population projections not based on actual birth rates whichcannot be so reliable – the projections are for a minor drop over many

years. The council therefore feels that the schools expanding from2011 should progress to a permanent solution - it is not practical tohave an alternative of relying on temporary classroom for many years,especially in tight sites such as St. Mary’s.

Q. Will it be the same admission criteria for 2 forms of entry?

A. The Admissions policy is agreed for 2012. School will review for 2013.As a VA school, the admissions criteria is a governors decision.

Q. What is catchment area?

A. In summary the admission criteria is (in addition to special needs etc.)Catholics in local parishes, then Catholics nearest the school, thensiblings nearest the school, then others nearest the school.

Q. If money is tight, why do we not retail the Social Services building as apermanent solution?

A. This was considered as part of the feasibility study and to bring it up toa good quality would be almost as expensive as the new build schemein the presentation – the scheme would also would also make thescheme less cohesive with a split school.

Comment: Good to see that feedback received and included in theproposed layout for a new building.

Q. What criteria will be used to decide if the permanent expansion will goahead?

A. The criteria outlined in the presentation will be reviewed, along with thesustainability of the school expanding, and practical issues arising fromprogressing the building scheme

Q. Who is the decision maker?

A. The Council, normally through its Cabinet. In certain circumstances thedecision can go to the office of the Schools Adjudicator.

Q. Will the Council have funding for the entire expansion (capital andrevenue)?

A. Revenue funding is pupil based with special allocation to cover theperiod before the start of the financial year. Sufficient priority is givenwithin the Dedicated Schools Grant. Economies of scales areachieved with larger schools so expanded schools tend to be morestable financially

With regard to capital, we expect further grant funding from thegovernment to assist funding but the Council is committed to see the

school expansion through by providing the required budget, includingusing its borrowers powers as required. The Council has a statutoryobligation to provide sufficient school places hence it is a high councilpriority.

Q. Is there a risk that the Social Services building will become permanentif the funding dries up?

A. We don’t feel so.

Q. The timing of the consultation is inconvenient.

A. It is impossible to have a time that is convenient to everyone but thehall is full and there are also other opportunities to provide comments,and materials are being placed on the website for those that cannotattend.

Q. What is the budget for the building works? Is it ringfenced?

A. There is an overall budge for the school expansion and the schemepresented is reasonable and affordable within this budget

Q. What is the programme for the building works?

A. Phase 1 (refurbishment for two classrooms in the community servicesbuilding and reverting the staff car park to playground space) is fromearly May to end of August.Phase 2 will allow for a modular building consisting of 2 classrooms tobe completed by summer 2012. Phase 3 to provide the majority of theclassrooms and the extra hall space has to be completed by summer2014, though it could be possible to do it earlier. The Headteacherwas very happy with the quality of a modular building she visited at StThomas of Canterbury. The Social Services building will bedemolished in the final phase and become a playground.

Q. Is there going to be continuous consultation for all the phases?

A. We are committed to consultation and will discuss with the schoolwhether there could be drop- in sessions and information givingthrough the school’s website

Q. What is the ultimate height of the building (main phase)?

A. Same as a standard double storey – building should be slightly lowerthan the existing school which has mezzanine floors.

Q. Will there be secure fencing around the site?

A. Yes, it will all be one site. This will be undertaken before September,with hording up in May.

Q. Not everyone was aware of this consultation. Some residents inPalmerstone Road did not receive a leaflet.

A. We commissioned a leaflet company to leaflet to each house in thearea which covers all the surrounding roads.

Q. The last phase of the school is a stand alone building. Will this tomake it VAT exempt?

A. The reason for stand alone is not to achieve VAT exemption. LBMerton can claim VAT back if it is paid for by the council. It is standalone due to issues of level and connecting to existing building beingvery complex and therefore expensive, though some form of coveredlink could be considered.

Q. A lot of learning time will be lost as small children will take time to getto the hall in the first phase when the social services building is used.

A The Headteacher explained that she had looked at three options forusage of this space. This will be manageable. They will have anoutdoor play space.

Q. We have known for a long time that we needed to expand? Why arewe going for a temporary situation and not start with phase 2?

A. The decision on the extra class was only made in late December. It isnecessary for any early phase to be part of a longer term strategy andLB Merton has worked quickly to now to get to this point. However,getting such a building ready for the autumn is just not feasible.

Q. What guarantees can you give that we would have the same qualitybuild as Holy Trinity?

A. The council is committed to high quality schemes from its investmentthat will ensure a valued legacy. We also need to be mindful of valuefor money but we are confident that the intended scheme will providegood quality buildings for the school.

Q. Is the school confident that during the construction period the playspace will be sufficient?

A. The school will have the advantage of an increased site space throughthe staff car park reverting to the playground. LB Merton is experiencedin working with schools, design consultants and constructors to ensureschemes are undertaken with minimum disruption and best use ismade of school holiday periods.

Q. Which contractors and architects will be used? Do they have sufficientexperience?

A. The council is using its tried and tested contractors and architects forthe first two phases. The Council may also go down the route ofcompetition for the last phase but will ensure successful experience ofworking in an operating school is a key criteria in any selection

Q. What lessons have been learnt from previous projects?

A. The most important aspects is the importance of a team workingtogether involving the school at all points and discussing solutions toensure levels of disruption are reduced. Also general consultation andawareness raising. The general awareness of rising demand forprimary school places helps understanding..

Q. Which classes are going into the Social Services building in 2011 and2012?

A. For 2011 the 2 reception classes will be in the building. This is the onlymeans to ensure they have direct outside play which is an essentialpart of the curriculum.

For 2012 older children will go into the Social Services building.Reception will go to the new build.

Q. Would we have sufficient accommodation?

A. Yes – the scheme ensures the school receives building space to thestandards the government previously set, which is sufficient. A schooldoes not need double the playground size for double the pupils as playtimes are staggered. The headteacher is confident that there will beenough playground space.

Q. The school is expanding. How can the community benefit from this?

A. The school will work closely with the community. Some residents preferquiet weekends but there may be more opportunities if there is morespace.

Q. Will the project definitely be finished by September 2014? If not, whatthen?

A. September 2014 is an end date and an appropriate contingency periodwill be provided to ensure this is met to ensure the school has therequired classrooms.

Q. Do you take environmental factors into account?

A. We look at environmental criteria. Our schemes comply with BREEAMcriteria which is an environmental management system in designingthe building.

Q. How do we deal with increased traffic?

A. A traffic impact assessment will be undertaken including a traffic audit.As part of this we will look to see what we can do to mitigate anydemand for extra traffic or any extra safety measures. All schools alsohave to implement their own green travel plan. .

Comment: Quality of presenters are applauded.

Q Will the planning application be phased? Will there be one applicationfor all?

A. Unfortunately due to timing there will need to be separate planningapplications, the first of which is being made now for the social servicesbuilding. There will certainly be a pre-planning consultation withparents and residents for the main phase.

Q. When will expansions for secondary schools take place?

A. This is in the council’s plans – the increase will gradually flow intosecondary schools from 2015 so there is time to plan for thisappropriately as further demographic information is known nearer thetime.

St Mary’s RCPrimary School

Consultation on proposedpermanent expansion from1FE to 2FE (30 to 60 pupilplaces per year)

Responses to be returned byWednesday 11 May 2011

MERTON COUNCIL

Summary of the proposal

St. Mary’s RC Primary School is currently a one-form entry (1FE) school, admitting upto 30 pupils in one class per year, 210 pupils across the school excluding the nursery.Following a request from the council the school is taking an extra class in receptionyear in September 2011.

The council wishes to permanently expand the school from September 2012 to be atwo-form entry (2FE) school, admitting up to 60 pupils per year in two classes. This willmean it would eventually have up to 420 pupils on roll excluding the nursery, butexpansion of the school places would be gradual until reaching all year groups in2017/18.

Purpose of the consultation and the next stage

The council is following the process defined by statute for the significant enlargement ofa school. This is the statutory consultation, to close on 11 May 2011. Following thisconsultation the council will decide whether to submit a formal statutory proposal. Thiswould be a further four-week period for anyone to comment or raise an objection. Thecouncil would then make the decision on whether this proposal should proceed, subjectto planning permission for the building.

A consultation evening will be held at St. Mary’s RC Primary School on Tuesday 5April at 6.30pm. Parents and other interested parties are invited to attend to discussthe educational merits of the school’s expansion and to see initial outline building plans.Local residents without a direct interest in the school’s education are also invited to themeeting to raise any issues from this perspective.

Wider background to expansion plans for St. Mary’s RC Primary School

There is a significant increase in demand for school places in Merton, with morechildren entering school age, fuelled by a birth rate that has risen by over 30% in thelast six years. Our population forecasts indicate that much of this rise will be sustained.

The expansion of St. Mary’s RC is part of an overall programme of school expansion inMerton. From 2008 to 2010 nine schools provided additional reception classes. In theautumn Merton consulted on nine further school expansions required in reception yearfor 2011/12 and 2012/13, including St. Mary’s RC School. The consultation and thedecision document from the Council’s Cabinet is available on the council’s websitehttp://www.merton.gov.uk/council/getinvolved/consultation/schoolsconsultations.htmor can be requested from the address for this consultation.

As illustrated by their most recent Ofsted inspection, St. Mary’s RC is an “outstanding”school. The school has been over subscribed for its 30 permanent places. St. Mary’sRC is therefore a popular and successful school.

The school is currently on a restricted site but the land associated with the neighboringcouncil office building provides the opportunity for the school to expand withappropriate play space for children. The intention is to adapt the office building forschool use prior to a permanent solution which will incorporate the larger site. Outlineplans will be available at the public meeting.

Please provide comments in the box below or a separate sheet by Wednesday 11May 2011 to:Contracts and School Organisation, Children, Schools and Families Department,London Borough of Merton, Merton Civic Centre, London Road, Morden SM4 5DXE-mail: [email protected].

Alternatively they can be given by hand to the office at St. Mary’s RC PrimarySchool, who will forward them to the council

Please provide comments on the proposed expansion of St. Mary’s RC Primary Schoolto 2 forms of entry (60 pupils per year), including any specific concerns you may havethat the Local Authority and school could address

Are you:A parent with a pupil currently at St. Mary’s RC Primary School __A parent with pre-school children __A member of staff __A local resident without a direct interest in the school’s education __Other e.g. representing an institution please state ________________

…………………….…………………………………….…………….Signed

KEY DECISION TAKEN BY AN OFFICER UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY

Title of report and reason for exemption (if any)

Expansion of St. Mary’s RC Primary School – approval to publish statutory notice

Forward Plan reference number

1047

Decision maker

Yvette Stanley, Director Children, Schools and Families Department

Date of Decision

10 October 2011

Date report made available to decision maker

6 October 2011

Date report made available to the Chairs of the Overview and Scrutiny Commission and of any relevant scrutiny panel

Decision

To publish a statutory notice to make a prescribed alteration to expand St. Mary’s RC Primary School from 210 places plus nursery to 420 places plus nursery from September 2012.

Reason for decision To agree to the next stage of the expansion of the school as required under Education Acts and related statutory guidance.

Alternative options considered and why rejected

There is a statutory requirement to provide school places but this could be undertaken by expanding alternative schools or a new school. However, for the reason described in this report, expanding St. Mary’s RC Primary Schools offers the best value for money.

Documents relied on in addition to officer report

Cabinet papers “Primary School expansion”, 21 March 2011 (Ref. 1006), and and 6 December 2010 (ref: 983)

Declarations of Interest

None

This page is intentionally blank

Chief Officer Key decision Date: 6 October 2011 Agenda item:

Subject: Expansion of St. Mary’s RC Primary School – approval to publish statutory notice Lead officer: Yvette Stanley Lead member: Peter Walker Forward Plan reference number: 1047 Contact officer: Tom Procter

Recommendations: A. To publish a statutory notice to make a prescribed alteration to permanently expand

St. Mary’s RC Primary School from 210 places plus nursery to 420 places plus nursery from September 2012

1 PURPOSE OF REPORT AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1. This report seeks approval to publish statutory notice of intention to expand St.

Mary’s RC Primary School to help meet additional demand for primary school places in the Wimbledon area.

1.2. It reports on the results of the statutory consultation which is the legal stage required prior to submitting a statutory proposal.

2 DETAILS 2.1. The London Borough of Merton has a legal obligation to provide school places

for all the children needing education. There is a significant increase in demand for school places in Merton, with more children entering school age, fuelled by a birth rate that has risen by 39% in the years from 2002 to 2010.

2.2. Following a request from the council the school provided an extra class in reception year September 2011 and there is a requirement for it to be a permanent arrangement from September 2012.

2.3. The expansion of St. Mary’s RC is part of an overall programme of school expansion in Merton. From 2008 to 2010 nine schools have provided additional reception classes, and a further 10 forms of entry including St. Mary’s RC has been provided in September 2011. Further expansion is required to meet demand until at least until 2014

2.4. As illustrated by their most recent Ofsted inspection, St. Mary’s RC is an “outstanding” school. The school has been over subscribed for its 30 permanent places and was still oversubscribed in September 2011 even with its temporary additional places. St. Mary’s RC is therefore a popular and successful school.

. 2.5. The school is currently on a restricted site but the land associated with the

neighboring council office building (42-44 Russell Road) provides the opportunity for the school to expand with appropriate play space for children. The ground floor of the office building has been adapted to temporarily provide the places for September 2012 prior to a phased permanent solution, which will incorporate the larger site. To continue the gradual move up to be 2 forms of entry in all year groups it is necessary to go through a statutory process for the significant enlargement of the school, the first process of which is a statutory consultation.

2.6. On 21 March 2011 Cabinet agreed to commence the statutory consultation for expanding St. Mary’s School and that in expanding the school, LB Merton’s adjacent 42-44 Russell Road will initially be used for school purposes and should permanent expansion be legally agreed the site associated with the building will be incorporated to be part of St. Mary’s RC School.

2.7. This report provides feedback on the statutory consultation stage before the council decides whether to publish a statutory proposal.

2.8. The consultation section below establishes the results of the consultation.

3 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 3.1. There is a statutory requirement to provide school places but this could be

undertaken by expanding alternative schools or a new school. However, for the reason described in this report, expanding St. Mary’s RC primary Schools offers the best value for money.

4 CONSULTATION UNDERTAKEN OR PROPOSED 4.1. The consultation commenced on 26 March with a closing date of 11 May 2011.

The following bodies were consulted, consistent with the requirement for statutory expansions: Staff, parents and governors of St. Mary’s RC Primary, all Merton primary schools and other primary schools within 2 miles of St. Mary’s RC School, all Merton Secondary Schools, local nurseries and mother and toddler groups, Director of Children Services and the London Boroughs of Wandsworth and Kingston (Royal), Southwark Diocese, Archdiocese of Southwark, Merton Councillors, Trade Union Representatives, and the two LB Merton MPs. Copies were also distributed to public libraries in Merton. The consultation document was also distributed to local residents within close proximity to the school and was available on the LB Merton website.

4.2. A consultation meeting was held on 5 April 2011. Local residents were also invited to discuss issues related to the impact on the neighbourhood. To advertise the pre-planning application consultation meeting the council distributed the consultation leaflet to dwellings in the immediate local neighbourhood. Although it is not expected under the statutory guidance that local residents without a specific interest in the school are consulted, it allowed the Local Authority to obtain views on development control related issues prior to a planning application.

4.3. The following responded to the consultation:

Existing parents 11 Parents with pre-school children 4 Staff 3 Local residents 16 Other (Archdiocese) 1 ----- Total 25 ------

4.4. Summaries of the 25 individual responses are provided in appendix 1 to this report. An overall summary from the above four categories is as follows:

4.5. Existing parents – Of the 11 existing parents that responded none appeared to have an outright objection to the expansion of the school, but raised concerns on the detail of how it would work. This also reflected the views presented at the public meeting. Concerns raised were as follows: Sufficient money to complete the expansion, and on going (revenue)

funding for the school Appropriate outdoor play area Child safety moving between buildings under temporary arrangements Adequate communication mechanisms Increased traffic volume Unchanged admissions policy will not alleviate the problem for local children Size of hall Disruption from building works

4.6. Parents with pre-school children – All were supportive of the expansion, with

one person raising concern on funding for the project 4.7. Staff – None raised a specific objection, but concerns raised by at least one

person were: Use of the social services building on a temporary basis Management of the building project Ongoing resources for the school Loss of school ethos

4.8. Residents – Only a small proportion of the 16 residents specifically expressed

support or opposition, with the majority raising specific concerns, as follows: Traffic and parking Noise and disruption from building works, Noise and disruption from additional pupils New double storey building will block light to garden/overlook into private

garden Taxpayer should not be funding sectarian schools e.g. with their

admissions policy

4.9. Archdiocese – The Archdiocese fully supports the proposal, stating that St. Mary’s is a popular and over subscribed school and the only 1 form entry catholic school in the borough. They stated a need to maintain the proportion of Catholic places in the borough in line with the increased demand for school places.

4.10. The consultation responses and public meeting illustrates strong support from pre-school parents and the diocese, general support from parents but with some concerns on implementation, and some detailed concerns from residents, most of which are common to school expansion projects. Comments from officers on the most common concerns are as follows: Sufficient money to complete the expansion, and on going (revenue)

funding for the school – There is sufficient finance in the council’s capital programme to undertake the permanent expansion of the school. The formula funding for schools means that there are more economies of scale for a larger school, and the on going financial impact for the school should be positive.

Appropriate outdoor play area – the school will receive more site area as part of the expansion, and the new building layout provides the opportunity to re-configure external play space to be more suitable

Use of the social services building on a temporary basis with child safety moving between buildings– this is intended to be a temporary arrangement, which has been in place successfully at the school since the start of term

Adequate communication mechanisms – the council has agreed to ensure the school can keep parents and residents updated through their website and, in the case of parents, coffee mornings. The council will advise residents of an works that may impact on them

Unchanged admissions policy will not alleviate the problem for local children – this proposal is part of a range of school expansions to provide local places in the area. Although as an RC school distance will not be the most significant admissions policy, it is still expected the vast majority of pupils will reside in the local area.

Size of hall – the planned building scheme will include a second hall that can link to the existing, thus providing improved hall facilities, especially important for a Roman Catholic school

Noise and Disruption from building works/Management of the building project – LB Merton will manage the building scheme and is now experienced at reducing disruption as far as possible, working in close partnership with the school. The considerate constructors scheme should be operated to reduce the impact on the neighbourhood.

Loss of school ethos – St. Mary’s is a school with strong leadership and the headteacher has outlined a vision that will ensure the expanded school can build on its current strengths and improve further, with the advantages of a two-form entry school

Traffic and parking – this is a concern with all school expansions. The intention of the project is to provide local Catholic places thus reducing travel to Catholic schools that are a further distance, but a traffic assessment and impact will be undertaken as part of the planning application

New double storey building will block light to garden/overlook into private garden – These consideration will be part of a detailed building design prior to a planning application, which will need to ensure no substantive loss of amenity to residents

Taxpayer should not be funding sectarian schools e.g. with their admissions policy – the country has a mixture of category of schools which

is expected to continue, and LB Merton’s expansion programme reflects this.

4.11. Officers’ view therefore remains that the expansion of St. Mary’s RC School

should proceed to provide ‘basic need’ local school places that are value for money at a successful and popular school, and the concerns raised on the detail of the proposal should be managed as the scheme is progressed in more detail.

5 TIMETABLE 5.1. Subject to approval of the recommendation to this report a statutory notice

would be published which then has a further 4 weeks representation period. A decision on statutory proposals must be made within 2 months of the end of the representation period for the proposals, or the proposals referred to the schools adjudicator.

5.2. A planning application for the first phase of the permanent building works at St. Mary’s RC Primary School is due to be submitted by the end of 2011 with works required to be completed for September 2012. A second phase would then follow for completion by September 2014.

6 FINANCIAL, RESOURCE AND PROPERTY IMPLICATIONS 6.1. The capital cost of the scheme and funding was agreed by council as part of

the capital programme in March 2011 which provided sufficient funding for 18 schools taking extra classes from 2008 to be permanently expanded.

6.2 The revenue impact will be funded through the Dedicated Schools Grant, which increases on the basis of additional pupils, although there is a delay in receiving the funding for the additional pupils and it is not retrospective. This is the position whichever school is expanded

6.2. The reports to Cabinet on primary school places on 11 October, 6 December 2010 and 21 March 2011 confirmed that the expansion of St. Mary’s school was dependent on the use of council owned land in 42-44 Russell Road, which is an office building adjacent to the school site that until December 2010 was used by the community services department but is now vacant. The school is now using this building on a temporary basis and the permanent expansion will require the additional area to become permanently and formally part of the school. The specific property transaction will depend on whether the additional land will be used for playing field or not.

7 LEGAL AND STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS 7.1. The council has a duty under section 14 of the education act 1996 to secure

that sufficient schools are available for its area 7.2. Proposals for prescribed alterations to schools must be made in accordance

with statutory procedures set out in the Education and Inspections Act 2006, and associated regulations and having regard to statutory guidance published by the Secretary of State. Prescribed alterations include any enlargement of

the premises of a school which would increase the physical capacity of the school by more than 30 pupils and by 25% or 200 pupils (whichever is the lesser).

7.3. Therefore for the permanent expansion of the school by 210 places statutory procedure will need to be followed. Either the local authority or the governing body may promote and publish proposals.

7.4. Before deciding to publish notice of proposals, there must be consultation with interested parties, including the school concerned, other schools which may be affected, parents and families of pupils and prospective pupils, school staff and trade unions, other local authorities, and members of Parliament. If, having considered the response to the consultation, the council decides to proceed with the proposals, a formal statutory notice is published which would invite representations and objections within a four-week period. The published notice contains a summary of the proposals and fuller details of the proposals are to be made available on request. At the end of the representation period, the council would need to decide whether or not to approve the proposals. A decision must be made within two months, or the proposals must be referred to the schools adjudicator. There is a duty to implement approved proposals. The decision maker is now the council but the governors of the schools and the diocesan authorities have a right to require referral of the proposals to the schools adjudicator

7.5. In making decisions on proposals, the decision maker must have regard to the statutory guidance which requires that consideration is given to, amongst other things, the effect on standards, the need for places, whether the proposals represent a cost-effective use of public funds and the views of interested parties.

7.6. There is a presumption that proposals for the expansion of popular and successful schools will be approved. There is no single definition of a successful and popular school; this is for the decision maker to decide having regard to the school’s performance and the number of applications for places and any other relevant evidence. The recommendation of officers is that St. Mary’s RC Primary School should be regarded as popular and successful due to its results, latest Ofsted rating, and because it is oversubscribed i.e. there are more first preference applications than places available.

7.7. Before approving proposals, the decision maker must be satisfied that the capital resources will be available to implement the proposals. Proposals may be approved subject to the condition that planning permission is granted by a specified date

7.8. Approved proposals for voluntary aided schools must be implemented by the local authority so far as relating to the provision of playing fields, and otherwise by the governing body. The local authority can give such assistance as it thinks fit to the governing body in implementing the proposals. If the local authority assists by providing premises for the school, the local authority is required to transfer its interest in the premises to the trustees of the school.

8 HUMAN RIGHTS, EQUALITIES AND COMMUNITY COHESION IMPLICATIONS

8.1. The expansion of St. Mary’s RC Primary Schools will contribute to the Authority providing access to a local primary school place for all its residents who want one. The school’s admissions policy provides priority to Catholic children, and the school is one of a range of primary school expansion to provide sufficient school places, with the proportion of Catholic places in the borough broadly in line with the increased demand for school places.

9 CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS 9.1. There are no specific crime and disorder implications 10 RISK MANAGEMENT AND HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPLICATIONS 10.1. All capital schemes have a financial risk. The schemes are working to

affordable capital budgets set on the basis of an estimate from a quantity surveyor. It is therefore expected that the building works will be completed within the described budget

10.2. Health and safety will be considered carefully to ensure there will be a clear separation between pupils, teachers and parents and construction works.

11 APPENDICES – THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS ARE TO BE PUBLISHED

WITH THIS REPORT AND FORM PART OF THE REPORT Appendix 1 - Summary of consultation responses and minutes of public meetings Appendix 2 - Copy of consultation document

12 BACKGROUND PAPERS 12.1. Cabinet papers on school places dated 6 December 2010 and March 2011

Appendix 1 St Mary’s RC Primary School Proposed Expansion

Consultation Responses

Parents

1. Concerned that there will not be enough money to complete Option 1, to demolish the Social Services building, lack of communication & information and inadequate outdoor play area.

2. In favour of proposed changes as increases number of children who can benefit from such an excellent school. As a teacher, believe it is an advantage to be 2FE with two teachers per year group.

3. Key concerns are child safety when moving between buildings (would like a covered walkway); quality of temporary classrooms, adequate funding and adequate communication mechanisms/website detailing progress.

4. Considerations to include adequate funding, guarantee Social Services building is not permanent, affect of building work on children and number of children on footpaths.

5. Concerns include inadequate funding to complete the project, Social Services building will be used permanently, increased volume of traffic and impact of building work on children. Would like communication process to parents to be introduced.

6. Concerns include inadequate funding to complete the project, Social Services building will be used permanently, if admissions policy is not changed it will not alleviate the problem for local children, increased traffic and improved communication between the council, school and parents. Parents to be involved in all stages.

7. Main concern is inadequate funding to complete the project, Social Services building will be used permanently. In the short term, Social Services building to be refurbished to a high standard with a covered walkway to the main building. Would like information including plans on a regular basis and possible input from parents.

8. Concerned about increased traffic, size of hall for September 2011, IT facilities, and adequate funding for completion of the project.

9. Believes vast majority of parents have concerns regarding current proposal and use of the Social Services building. Suggests small structural works to change ICT room to additional reception class. A temporary ICT room to be accommodated elsewhere.

10. Supportive of expansion, along with most other parents. However council should ensure adequate two-way communication via newsletters, website etc informing of all stages of the process. Happy with plans, but request playground space & facilities are protected or improved. Main concern is that funding is guaranteed to complete the project.

11. Concerned regarding disruption during the building works. Would prefer children to go straight into the new buildings rather than temporary accommodation.

Pre-school Parents

1. Happy with proposal but concerned regarding ring-fencing of funding to ensure the Social Services building is replaced. Would like improved communication to parents.

2. Very good idea and an investment for the future.

3. Supports expansion but believes current admissions criteria is unfair.

4. Fully agree with proposal – it is essential. However should relax admissions criteria

Staff

1. Expansion will have a positive outcome for the school and neighbourhood. However, imperative the hall is expanded to accommodate the whole school and a new building built on the Social Services site. Have reservations regarding safety, security and facilities of adapting the Social Services building for reception children. Also ensure building work causes limited disruption to current pupils.

2. Ensure contractors do not overcharge and adhere to timescale.

3. What will happen to the children if the project is delayed? Concerned about drain on current resources and facilities, loss of school ethos, quality of buildings and adequate budget.

Resident

1. Questions use of the Social Services car park and where will the additional parents park?

2. No concerns – great use of the disused site.

3. Delighted with proposal – especially glad that Social Services building will be put to good use.

4. In favour of expansion, but are concerned about increased noise, rubbish and dust from the building works and increased traffic. Suggest participation in the Considerate Contractors scheme, more regular street cleaning etc, additional trees/shrubs to provide screening and improved paving (along the whole road).

5. Concerned about parents illegal parking. If you have a solution, then we would be delighted.

6. Concerned about extra traffic.

7. Fully support proposal but concerned about increased traffic and illegal parking. Will there be an option of a designated drop off collection area in car park area in Pelham Road or the theatre car park? Any incentive to encourage parents to use other means of transport?

8. Support the expansion.

9. Recognise need and happy for this excellent school to expand.

10. Oppose expansion as new double storey building will block light to our garden, increased noise and the intrusion by staff and students.

11. Makes sense to promote high performing schools. However, must ensure adequate resources to maintain the quality of education; special efforts taken to reduce car journeys (smaller catchment?); and Social Services site is used for the school. May be helpful to separate the larger school into primary (ages 5-7) and middle (ages 8-11).

12. If expanded prefer Social Services building to remain as offices as do not wish children overlooking private garden and into bedroom windows. Allow driving parents to park in the car park to limit disturbance to neighbours. Only allow parents to pick up from the playground not the pavement as too narrow.

13. Same resident as no. 12 – same response.

14. Taxpayer should not be funding sectarian schools. The Council should withdraw funding from all these schools – if not allowed, do not expand this school and put the resources into non-sectarian schools.

15. Expanding school is not an issue, but concerned about increased traffic and parking.

16. In excess of 10 pages of concerns, questions and considerations to be addressed by the council. These include: operational/management considerations; communications strategy; physical infrastructure of bulge class; school management; admissions policy; borough-wide expansion information; decision making; timescales; designs; facilities; budget implications; works schedule; planning applications; impact on Diocese; legal rights and responsibilities of the school; and maintenance/enhancement of school ‘spirit’.

17. No objection to expansion however very concerned about traffic congestion. Requests that any building work undertaken is done as quietly as possible and no rubbish, skips etc are left on the road. Also ensure building is kept secure at all times.

Other

1. Archdiocese - Fully supports the proposal – St Mary’s is popular and oversubscribed school. It is the only 1FE Catholic school in the borough. Need to maintain the proportion of Catholic places in the borough in line with the increased demand for school places.