Le Rocquier School, St.Clement - redevelopment PhaseII - construction of new school - approval of drawings

STATES OF JERSEY

r

LE ROCQUIER SCHOOL, ST.  CLEMENT: REDEVELOPMENT PHASE  2 – CONSTRUCTION OF NEW SCHOOL – APPROVAL OF DRAWINGS

Lodged au Greffe on 7th October 2003

by the Education, Sport and Culture Committee

STATES GREFFE

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

(a ) to approve the architects' drawings listed in the Appendix to the report of the Education, Sport and

Culture Committee dated 7th October 2003 showing the proposed new school building to be constructed within the grounds of Le Rocquier School, St.  Clement; and

(b ) to authorise the Greffier of the States to sign the said drawings on behalf of the States.

EDUCATION, SPORT AND CULTURE COMMITTEE

Notes: 1. T h e Environment and Public Services Committee approved these drawings under Development

Permit No.  B/2003/0651, dated 16th September 2003.

2 .  T h e Finance and Economics Committee supports the proposal subject to the total cost of works to

out-turn, including inflation, being within the maximum budget of £23 million.

REPORT

In February 1999, following a detailed feasibility study, the Education Committee agreed that the redevelopment of Le Rocquier School should progress as a new build construction. This rebuild was costed at £27.5 million at December 1998 prices and, consequently, out-turn costs of £33.5 million were identified in the 1999 States Resource Plan.

The 2000 States Resource Plan noted that, whilst the Finance and Economics Committee supported the project and accepted the case for a new build, it was concerned over the costs and how funding could be provided.

In October 2001, mindful of concerns regarding the funding of the project and the economic climate generally, the Education Committee again considered the overall strategy for the redevelopment of the school. This review confirmed that the new build option was still the most cost effective solution, but that lower building costs should be achieved through design, the procurement process and maintaining a focus on curriculum requirements.

In April 2002, the Presidents of Education and Finance and Economics Committees met to discuss funding and agreed that a maximum of £23 million would be made available for the project. The final tranche of this money was included in the 2003 States Resource Plan.

There is no question that this budget constitutes an aggressive target for the redevelopment of the school, which includes four phases –

Enabling: C r e ation of a block of 13 temporary classrooms (completed in 1999). Phase 1: D e v elopment of new playing fields (to be completed Oct. 2003).

Phase 2: D e v elopment of the new school (2003 – 2005).

Phase 3: D e m olition of existing school and creation of external space (2005 – 2006).

The Committee and its officers, supported by the School, the Design Team, and officers of the Treasury, have worked hard to achieve this target through a number of means, including –

1. fo c using  the briefentirelyon the delivery ofteaching and learning;
2. si m plifying the overall design and methodsof construction toachieve best value;
3. im  plementing a procurementapproachwhichhasincluded the early involvementof a preferred contractor (to bring in their expertise toachieve value), collaborative development of the design and commencing construction as early aspossible, thus reducing the effectsof inflation.

The scheme has also been subject to ongoing value-engineering, a process which culminated in a formal 2-day validation exercise at which the Department, School, Design Team and preferred contractor undertook a review of every aspect of the scheme with value in mind.

Throughout the above process, the Committee has remained steadfast in its commitment that the new school should be fit for purpose, both in terms of the accommodation provided and the quality of construction. There is no wish to replicate the problems of the past through the development of a building with a limited life-span.

This report deals specifically with Phase  2, the construction of the new school, which received Planning Approval on 12th March 2003 and permission in respect of the Buildings Bye-Laws (Jersey) Law 1997 under permit No.  B/2003/0651 on 16th September 2003.

The school, as now approved, will be of simple design and construction. The design is based on a cruciform plan, with a central street' linking 3 wings to the entrance concourse. The north wing is a 2 storey element, the south and west wings are 3 storey and the hall is a single volume. The building construction comprises concrete piled foundations, steel frame superstructure, painted render blockwork and low pitched aluminium standing seam roofs.

The school will include the key facilities required for an 8-form entry 11-16 school accommodating up to 940 students, including science laboratories and preparation rooms, general classrooms, art and design classrooms, music suite, learning resource centre (library), special needs suite, information technology rooms, drama spaces, hall, dining facilities and administrative spaces, such as staff room, departmental offices and storage. The building will also provide appropriate amenity space through external courtyards' and hard and soft play areas.

Given the need to seek value for money, the project has been driven by a brief which reflects both the standards provided by the U.K. Department for Education and Skills (DfES) and local requirements. To maximise usage, many of the spaces within the school are multi-functional and will be available for use by the community. The Committee believes that the final design compares well with recognised educational standards and is appropriate in terms of the spaces provided.

As part of Phase  3, the proposed new site entrance leading to the main entrance to the school will significantly improve both vehicle circulation and pedestrian access. In addition, the traffic management arrangements will see school buses removed from the main road entirely with dedicated pick up and drop-off areas within the site.

The capital funding allocated to the Committee within vote EXSLR0 (C2590) is expected to be sufficient to complete all phases of the project.

This proposition has no additional manpower implications for the States.

The Committee therefore asks the States to approve these drawings and to permit the project to proceed as planned.

7th October 2003

List of Stamped Approved Drawings

Architect Nos.

1898F/201 1898F/202 (Rev A) 1898F/203 (Rev F) 1898F/204 (Rev G) 1898F/205 (Rev G) 1898F/206 1898F/208 (Rev A) 1898F/209 1898F/210 1898F/211

1898F/212 1898F/220 1898F/250 1898F/251 1898F/252 1898F/253 1898F/300 (Rev A) 1898F/301 (Rev A) 1898F/302 (Rev A) 1898F/303 1898F/304 (Rev B) 1898F/305 (Rev C) 1898F/306 (Rev C) 1898F/307 1898F/308 1898F/309 1898F/310 1898F/311 1898F/400 1898F/406 1898F/408 1898F/409 1898F/422 1898F/424 1898F/468 (Rev A) 1898F/475 (Rev A) 1898F/476 (Rev B)

1898F/700 (Rev A) 10215/01

10215/02

10215/03

10215/05

10215/06

10215/07 10215/200 10215/201 (Rev B3) 10215/205 (Rev B2) 10215/206 (Rev B3)