Result of Feasibility Study on Stanford in the Vale Primary School

Hadyn Wood made this Freedom of Information request to Oxfordshire County Council

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was partially successful.

Dear Oxfordshire County Council,

1. Please explain the relationship between Capita, Carillion and OCC, described by OCC as "One Team delivering integrated solutions."

2. Please make available all information held relating to the recent 2015/2016 Feasibility Study, carried out by Capita, Carillion and OCC, relating to the possible expansion of Stanford in the Vale Primary school, including but not limited to any advice, recommendations and reports drafted and or submitted by Chris Dyer.

3. Please make available copies of all correspondence held, between, to and from Capita, Carillion and OCC, relating to the possible acquisition and disposal of land and property in Stanford in the Vale.

Yours faithfully,

Mr. H R Wood

FOI - E&E, Oxfordshire County Council

Our reference:    10242 FOI

 

 

Dear Mr Wood,

 

Thank you for your request of 19 June 2016 in which you asked for
information regarding the feasibility study on Stanford in the Vale
Primary School.

 

Your request is being considered and Oxfordshire County Council will
respond within 20 working days in compliance with the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.  This means that the council will send a response to
you by 18 July 2016.

 

There may be a fee payable for this information.  You will be informed if
this is the case and you can decide if you wish to proceed with your
request.

 

If appropriate, the information requested can be made available in
alternative formats, including other languages, Braille, large print, and
audiocassette.  If you require any of these formats then please let us
know.

 

Please contact us if you have any have further enquiries about your
request.  We would be grateful if you could quote the reference number
given at the top of this email.

 

Kind regards

 

E&E FOI/EIR Co-ordinators

 

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and
delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of
Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

FOI - E&E, Oxfordshire County Council

9 Attachments

Dear Mr Wood,

 

Please find attached our response to your Freedom of Information Request.

 

Kind Regards

 

E&E FOI/EIR Co-ordinators

 

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and
delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of
Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

Dear Oxfordshire County Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Oxfordshire County Council's handling of my FOI request 'Result of Feasibility Study on Stanford in the Vale Primary School'.

The Public Interest Test

Arguments in favour of disclosure
1. The Council notes that there is a presumption in favour of
disclosure under the FOI Act. The Council recognises the public
interest in being open and transparent when it comes to the
spending of public money. This will encourage accountability
and appropriate financial governance.
2. The Council notes that this information concerns a matter in
which there is a high level of public interest in the locality.

In relation to Item (1) above;

The missing reports could easily be addressed by blacking out the names and identity of any individuals and any sensitive material.

There is no report of Traffic Surveys or any indication as to where parking may be provided for additional staff and visitors - if the school were to be expanded as proposed.

Please supply ALL available information and Reports held as requested and black out any sensitive items.

In relation to Item (2) above;

In addition to the high level of public interest, the emerging Neighbourhood Plan is being drafted and the outcome of the Feasibility Study and other information requested will inform the NPSC and enable them to produce a Draft Plan which will benefit the whole of the community.

With-holding the information requested, and OCCs failure to report properly on the findings of the feasibility study, is causing unnecessary delay in the delivery of the Neighbourhood Plan.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/r...

Yours faithfully,

Hadyn Wood

Joint Commissioning FOI, Oxfordshire County Council

Our reference: 10411 FOI

Dear Haydn Wood

Thank you for your request of 19/7/16 in which you asked for information about result of feasibility Study on Stanford in the Vale Primary School.

Your request is being considered and Oxfordshire County Council will respond within 20 working days in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000. This means that the council will send a response to you by 17/8/16.

If appropriate, the information requested can be made available in alternative formats, including other languages, Braille, large print, and audiocassette. If you require any of these formats then please let me know.

Please contact the team if you have any have further enquiries about your request. I would be grateful if you could quote the reference number given at the top of this email.

Kind regards

Helen Steel
Complaints and Information Team
Joint Commissioning.
Oxfordshire County Council.
Email: jointcommissioning[Oxfordshire County Council request email]

show quoted sections

Dear Joint Commissioning FOI,

Thank you

I can find no correspondence to or from Sport England in the papers disclosed ? This is clearly an important aspect of the Feasibility Study and should have been included.

No submissions have been made by OCC as to why this has been withheld.

Could you please ensure I receive copies of all information held in relation to correspondence to and from Sport England, particularly with reference to Paragraph 2, Page 10 of the Initial Business Case disclosed, which states;

"Sport England will need to be consulted immediately the feasibility commences with regards to any amendments to the existing playing field provision and the suitability of the various sites. (SS2 Project Lead Architect)

and further;

Any and all comments and reports submitted by Sports England in relation to all the Options detailed in the Concept Design Report - Feb 2016, including but not limited to satisfying OCC and Sport England requirements for MUGA and reduction in Grass Area, referred to in the Executive Summary.

Yours sincerely,

Hadyn Wood

Dear Oxfordshire County Council,

I can find no correspondence to or from Sport England in the papers disclosed ? This is clearly an important aspect of the Feasibility Study and should have been included.

No submissions have been made by OCC as to why this has been withheld.

Could you please ensure I receive copies of all information held in relation to correspondence to and from Sport England, particularly with reference to Paragraph 2, Page 10 of the Initial Business Case disclosed, which states;

"Sport England will need to be consulted immediately the feasibility commences with regards to any amendments to the existing playing field provision and the suitability of the various sites". (SS2 Project Lead Architect)

and further;

Any and all comments and reports submitted by Sports England in relation to all the Options detailed in the Concept Design Report - Feb 2016, including but not limited to satisfying OCC and Sport England requirements for MUGA and reduction in Grass Area, referred to in the Executive Summary.

Yours faithfully,

Hadyn Wood

FOI - E&E, Oxfordshire County Council

Our reference:  10242 FOI Internal Review

 

Dear Mr Wood,

 

In accordance with the council's Freedom of Information policy, I will
arrange for an internal review of your request to be undertaken.

 

The review will be undertaken by Adrian Rowlands, Service Manager Property
Procurement, a manager not involved in the original handling of your
request. In line with guidance from the Information Commissioner’s Office,
we will aim to provide a full response within 20 working days beginning
the day following receipt of your complaint. This means you will receive a
response by 16 August 2016.

 

Kind regards

 

E&E FOI/EIR Co-ordinators

 

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and
delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of
Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

To: FOI - E&E,
Adrian Rowlands, Service Manager Property Procurement

Dear Adrian

Just to clarify, the outstanding issues are as follows;

1. Commercial Interests and Personal Data of 3rd Parties could easily be protected by covering up the names of any individuals and any commercially sensitive material.

This should NOT permit OCC to withhold information, including but not limited to correspondence, recommendations, directions, instructions, guidance and advice between relevant parties, particularly that given by OCC, VoWHDC, Sport England and other Consultees, in response to enquiries and direct requests from CAPITA.

Please provide OCC Replies to the following emails from CAPITA, as follows;

20 Nov 2015 - from AAS Manager - Subject: Stanford in the Vale Drainage (inc ref to Sport England)
"I would be grateful if you could let me know whether we should pursue this Stage 1 design further. I am waiting for pre-app feedback from Sport England as well, so should know soon whether they will object or support the proposals" (REPLY MISSING)

23 Nov 2015 - from Team Leader - Subject: Stanford in the Vale - Project Concerns
"I would be grateful for your advice and instruction as to how you now wish to proceed......I would therefore be grateful if you could come back to me in the first instance to let me know if you wish any further avenues to be investigated before taking any strategic decisions." (REPLY MISSING)

16 Dec 2015 - from Team Leader - Subject: Urgent Planning Enquiry - Stanford In The Vale School (1040hrs)
"I would be grateful if you could respond as swiftly as possible to allow strategic decisions to be made regarding the future Statutory Basic Need of school places in the village." (REPLY MISSING)

16 Dec 2015 - from Team Leader - Subject: Stanford in the Vale - Project Concerns (1105hrs)
" I would re-iterate that the conclusion to our Stage 1 feasibility process is likely to be that this project is not currently feasible on the existing site. I confirm that my design team currently remain on hold and we await direction from you........." (REPLY MISSING)

16 Dec 2015 - from Team Leader - Subject: Stanford in the Vale - Project Concerns (1440hrs)
"We await your formal direction" (REPLY MISSING)

No submissions have been made by OCC as to why the replies to these emails have been withheld.

2. There is no report of Traffic Surveys or any indication as to where parking may be provided for additional staff and visitors - if the school were to be expanded as proposed.

3. I can find no correspondence to or from Sport England in the papers disclosed ? This is clearly an important aspect of the Feasibility Study and should have been included.

No submissions have been made by OCC as to why this has been withheld.

Could you please ensure I receive copies of all information held in relation to correspondence to and from Sport England, particularly with reference to Paragraph 2, Page 10 of the Initial Business Case disclosed, which states;

"Sport England will need to be consulted immediately the feasibility commences with regards to any amendments to the existing playing field provision and the suitability of the various sites. (SS2 Project Lead Architect)

and further;

Any and all comments and reports submitted by Sport England in relation to all the Options detailed in the Concept Design Report - Feb 2016, including but not limited to satisfying OCC and Sport England requirements for MUGA and reduction in Grass Area, referred to in the Executive Summary.

The email from AAS Manager on 20 Nov 2015 states "I would be grateful if you could let me know whether we should pursue this Stage 1 design further. I am waiting for pre-app feedback from Sport England as well, so should know soon whether they will object or support the proposals"

4. On 31 July 2016, OCC Responded to Kemp & Kemp Planning Application P16/V1589/O
Proposal: Residential development of up to 100 dwellings with associated access Location: Land west of Faringdon Road, Stanford-in-the-Vale FARINGDON SN7 8HQ

Some of these responses contradict the findings of the Feasibility Study as follows;

CONCEPT DESIGN REPORT - FEB 2016 - Introduction

" This report details those negotiations and concludes that NO land is currently available to facilitate the required expansion of the school site"

OCC RESPONSE to Kemp & Kemp Planning Application (Education - PAGE 11 of 20), states as follows;

"There is a reasonable prospect of the additional land, necessary to expand the school, being secured within the time-limit for commencement of the development"

CONCEPT DESIGN REPORT - FEB 2016 - Conclusions and recommendations

" This report has detailed the exhaustive investigations into the options for expanding the school site, including the joint use, lease or purchase of adjoining parcels of land. None of the options available to the County will be without risk. None of the options available to the county will allow the project to be practically complete on site in time to satisfy the Statutory Basic Need requirements for additional pupil places.

This feasibility report concludes that while the expansion of the school is possible; all of the options available require significant additional work and legal/statutory concessions to facilitate. Due to the additional legal work required, none of the options available will be able to be completed on site in time to meet the Statutory Basic Need deadline of September 2017."

DRAFT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

In addition to the high level of public interest, the emerging Neighbourhood Plan is being drafted and the outcome of the Feasibility Study and other information requested will inform the NPSC and enable them to produce a Draft Plan which will benefit the whole of the community.

With-holding the information requested, and OCCs failure to report properly on the findings of the feasibility study, is causing unnecessary delay in the delivery of the Neighbourhood Plan.

I'd be grateful if you would please supply ALL available information held, as requested and without further delay, and black out any sensitive numbers and names - only if the FOIA allows.

Yours sincerely,

Hadyn Wood

Oxfordshire County Council

3 Attachments

  • Attachment

    Undeliverable Re 10242 FOI IR Acknowledgement.html

    11K Download

  • Attachment

    Undeliverable Re 10242 FOI IR Acknowledgement.delivery status

    0K Download

  • Attachment

    Re 10242 FOI IR Acknowledgement.txt

    7K Download View as HTML

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

Dear Joint Commissioning FOI,

To: FOI - E&E, 
Adrian Rowlands, Service Manager Property Procurement

Dear Adrian

Just to clarify, the outstanding issues are as follows;

1. Commercial Interests and Personal Data of 3rd Parties could easily be protected by covering up the names of any individuals and any commercially sensitive material.

This should NOT permit OCC to withhold information, including but not limited to correspondence, recommendations, directions, instructions, guidance and advice between relevant parties, particularly that given by OCC, VoWHDC, Sport England and other Consultees, in response to enquiries and direct requests from CAPITA.

Please provide OCC Replies to the following emails from CAPITA, as follows;

20 Nov 2015 - from AAS Manager - Subject: Stanford in the Vale Drainage (inc ref to Sport England) 
"I would be grateful if you could let me know whether we should pursue this Stage 1 design further. I am waiting for pre-app feedback from Sport England as well, so should know soon whether they will object or support the proposals" (REPLY MISSING)

23 Nov 2015 - from Team Leader - Subject: Stanford in the Vale - Project Concerns 
"I would be grateful for your advice and instruction as to how you now wish to proceed......I would therefore be grateful if you could come back to me in the first instance to let me know if you wish any further avenues to be investigated before taking any strategic decisions." (REPLY MISSING)

16 Dec 2015 - from Team Leader - Subject: Urgent Planning Enquiry - Stanford In The Vale School (1040hrs) 
"I would be grateful if you could respond as swiftly as possible to allow strategic decisions to be made regarding the future Statutory Basic Need of school places in the village." (REPLY MISSING)

16 Dec 2015 - from Team Leader - Subject: Stanford in the Vale - Project Concerns (1105hrs) 
" I would re-iterate that the conclusion to our Stage 1 feasibility process is likely to be that this project is not currently feasible on the existing site. I confirm that my design team currently remain on hold and we await direction from you........." (REPLY MISSING)

16 Dec 2015 - from Team Leader - Subject: Stanford in the Vale - Project Concerns (1440hrs) 
"We await your formal direction" (REPLY MISSING)

No submissions have been made by OCC as to why the replies to these emails have been withheld.

2. There is no report of Traffic Surveys or any indication as to where parking may be provided for additional staff and visitors - if the school were to be expanded as proposed.

3. I can find no correspondence to or from Sport England in the papers disclosed ? This is clearly an important aspect of the Feasibility Study and should have been included.

No submissions have been made by OCC as to why this has been withheld.

Could you please ensure I receive copies of all information held in relation to correspondence to and from Sport England, particularly with reference to Paragraph 2, Page 10 of the Initial Business Case disclosed, which states;

"Sport England will need to be consulted immediately the feasibility commences with regards to any amendments to the existing playing field provision and the suitability of the various sites. (SS2 Project Lead Architect)

and further;

Any and all comments and reports submitted by Sport England in relation to all the Options detailed in the Concept Design Report - Feb 2016, including but not limited to satisfying OCC and Sport England requirements for MUGA and reduction in Grass Area, referred to in the Executive Summary.

The email from AAS Manager on 20 Nov 2015 states "I would be grateful if you could let me know whether we should pursue this Stage 1 design further. I am waiting for pre-app feedback from Sport England as well, so should know soon whether they will object or support the proposals"

4. On 31 July 2016, OCC Responded to Kemp & Kemp Planning Application P16/V1589/O 
Proposal: Residential development of up to 100 dwellings with associated access Location: Land west of Faringdon Road, Stanford-in-the-Vale FARINGDON SN7 8HQ

Some of these responses contradict the findings of the Feasibility Study as follows;

CONCEPT DESIGN REPORT - FEB 2016 - Introduction

" This report details those negotiations and concludes that NO land is currently available to facilitate the required expansion of the school site"

OCC RESPONSE to Kemp & Kemp Planning Application (Education - PAGE 11 of 20), states as follows;

"There is a reasonable prospect of the additional land, necessary to expand the school, being secured within the time-limit for commencement of the development"

CONCEPT DESIGN REPORT - FEB 2016 - Conclusions and recommendations

" This report has detailed the exhaustive investigations into the options for expanding the school site, including the joint use, lease or purchase of adjoining parcels of land. None of the options available to the County will be without risk. None of the options available to the county will allow the project to be practically complete on site in time to satisfy the Statutory Basic Need requirements for additional pupil places.

This feasibility report concludes that while the expansion of the school is possible; all of the options available require significant additional work and legal/statutory concessions to facilitate. Due to the additional legal work required, none of the options available will be able to be completed on site in time to meet the Statutory Basic Need deadline of September 2017."

DRAFT NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

In addition to the high level of public interest, the emerging Neighbourhood Plan is being drafted and the outcome of the Feasibility Study and other information requested will inform the NPSC and enable them to produce a Draft Plan which will benefit the whole of the community.

With-holding the information requested, and OCCs failure to report properly on the findings of the feasibility study, is causing unnecessary delay in the delivery of the Neighbourhood Plan.

I'd be grateful if you would please supply ALL available information held, as requested and without further delay, and black out any sensitive numbers and names - only if the FOIA allows.

Yours sincerely,

Hadyn Wood

FOI Team, Oxfordshire County Council

43 Attachments

Dear Mr Wood

I now attach the Council's final response on this matter. I trust that this is self-explanatory.

Regards

Wesley Blackburn
Access & Disclosure Officer
Oxfordshire County Council
County Hall
New Road
Oxford, OX1 1XD

01865 815 906
[email address]

show quoted sections

FOI - E&E, Oxfordshire County Council

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Wood

 

Please find attached our response to the internal review of your Freedom
of Information Request 10242 and follow up requests numbers 10411 FOI and
10493 EIR.

 

Kind Regards

 

E&E FOI/EIR Co-ordinators

 

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and
delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of
Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

Dear FOI - E&E,

In addition to my email of 18 August 2016 shown below, please can I remind you that my original FOI request (dated 19 June 2016 above) asked for "all information held relating to the recent 2015/2016 Feasibility Study" as follows;

2. Please make available all information held relating to the recent 2015/2016 Feasibility Study, carried out by Capita, Carillion and OCC, relating to the possible expansion of Stanford in the Vale Primary school, including but not limited to any advice, recommendations and reports drafted and or submitted by Chris Dyer.

Dear Wesley

Thanks for your time on the phone earlier today.

As I explained, we have had a good working relationship with certain members of OCC over the past months but recently all updates, communications and consultations promised to the NPSC, regarding the Feasibility Study, appear to have ceased.

I’m sorry your officers are having to spend so many man hours answering these queries but I’m afraid it is of their own making and all we have ever expected is their ongoing co-operation as we undertake the difficult task of drafting a Neighbourhood Plan for our Parish.

The biggest obstacle to delivering a half decent NP, is knowing what is going to happen with the school.

We made this clear as long ago as February 2014 and have updated OCC regularly since this time, with all our work and consultations, the results of which are available on our own website - www.sitvnp.com

The Feasibility Study was commenced in 2015 and Chris Dyer was requested to submit his Final Report to OCC on Friday 22 January 2016. If he did, this appears to be missing?

All this Feasibility Study appears to have achieved, (after months of work, officer’s time and £90k of tax payers money), is to discover that what the NPSC communicated to OCC in February 2014 is in fact true and the budget of £1.65m would need to be substantially increased to cover legal costs and land acquisition, to expand the school on the current site. Not to mention the destruction of an historic wall, possible compulsory purchase and the havoc additional parking and congestion will cause in the High Street.

MISSING ITEMS

The last email disclosed is dated 18 January 2016 (09:37), from Team Leader, Project Management CAPITA in reply to an email from Property & Facilities (09:06) the same date.

As discussed, it is beyond belief that nothing has happened between 22 January 2016 and 17 August 2016.

There is also nothing disclosed which covers the period between 28 October 2014 and 14 April 2015.

As discussed, can you please provide me with the following items which are missing or illegible and/or a reasonable explanation as to why they are missing or being so heavily redacted or withheld.

I believe I have provided sufficient information for the individuals concerned to provide the missing items but feel free to contact me any time if you require more information.

1. All related correspondence, emails and reports between 28 October 2014 and 14 April 2015 - MISSING

2. All related correspondence, emails and reports between 22 January 2016 and 17 August 2016 - MISSING

3. A clear and legible copy of 'Annex 3 Stanford in the Vale Land options.pdf’ - ILLEGIBLE

Please can you supply this with less redactions so it actually makes sense. The Other information/assumptions and Issues can hardly be considered worthy of redaction, based on the criteria you have explained in your letters of 16 August 2016. I can understand that costs and names of parties may need to be redacted but not whole sections ?

This applies to other emails and reports submitted.

4. Email dated 28/10/14 from Senior Surveyor is heavily redacted. Please supply a revised copy of this email without removal of complete paragraphs.

5. Email to the Senior Surveyor which prompted (4.) and response - MISSING

6. The Risks Register is referred in various documents - MISSING

7. A draft Options Appraisal has been supplied. The Final Options Appraisal is MISSING

8. A PAMP is referred in various documents - MISSING

9. Email dated 14 April 2015 (13:59) from Principal Strategy Officer, Property & Facilities asks “How is the area going to be provided?” The reply is MISSING

10. Email dated 21 April 2015 (11:55) from Principal Strategy Officer, Property & Facilities asks “Please could you review Stanford in the Vale option appraisal and advise me of any comments you may have” The replies are MISSING

11. Email dated 07 May 2015 (08:52) from Major Capital Projects Programme Manager asks “How are you getting on with the Ob?” The reply is MISSING

12. Please confirm date OB was produced/finished ?

13. Email dated 11 May 2015 (11:05) from Principal Strategy Officer to Hadyn Wood states “This (feasibility) study is due to be undertaken shortly following the completion of the necessary paperwork to get this piece of work instructed. Once an Architect, Project Manager and Estates Surveyor has been appointed to the project, I will advise you of their contact names and they will be able to advise on any further questions that you may have”.

Please can these be supplied now

14. Email 10 July 2015 (09:31) from Chris Dyer Senior Project Manager CAPITA to Hadyn Wood, states “ Specifically, we discussed the matter of congestion, parking and future increased pressure on the centre of the village. As a matter of course, a full transport assessment will form part of our study…..”

This 'Full Transport Assessment' is MISSING

15. All related correspondence, emails and reports between 22 July 2015 and 9 September 2015 – MISSING

16. Email dated 22 September 2015 (11:28) from Assistant Head of Estates - Reply MISSING

17. Email dated 05 November 2015 (14:57) from Principal Solicitor – Request and Reply – MISSING

Is it possible to have this without complete redaction of whole paragraph please?

18. Email dated 13 November, 2015 (11:19) from Senior Transport Planner - Request and Reply – MISSING

19. Email dated 24 November 2015 (08:52) to Property & Facilities states “ I agree, a meeting is required. We will need representation from SS3, Estates and Strategy, PMO and possibly CEF (client side) to enable a decision to be taken. I would be keen to hear any initial thoughts/direction from (redacted) in advance of confirming a meeting”

What were the thoughts/direction and was the meeting held?

If so, what was the outcome please and where is the Report or Minutes of this meeting?

20. Email dated 07 January 2016 (12:32) from Property & facilities to Team Leader CAPITA states “In addition an indication of the land value for the existing school site would be useful to understand if moving the school to a new site is a viable option as this should be considered as an option."

Email dated 8 January 2016 (15:13) from PMO Property & Facilities to Team Leader CAPITA asks “Please can you aim to have the final report issued by Fri 22nd Jan…”

Email dated 15 January 2016 (17:10) from Team Leader CAPITA reply states “I am aiming to have this issue to you by the end of next week *(Friday 22nd).”

Where is this Final Report please?

Does this Final Report include "an indication of the land value for the existing school site would be useful to understand if moving the school to a new site is a viable option as this should be considered as an option.” as requested by Property & Facilities (in the email of 7 January 2016 above)?

21. Email dated 18 January 2016 (09:37) from Team Leader states “ I will add (redacted) email notes into the report as an addendum regarding potential further options to explore”

Where are these please?

I think that’s it for now

Please pass on my thanks to all your team for their kind assistance in this matter. I’m sorry it has come to this but a bit more co-operation, consultation and common sense may have avoided all this additional work for all concerned.

Yours sincerely,

Hadyn Wood

Oxfordshire County Council

3 Attachments

  • Attachment

    Undeliverable Re 10242 FOI IR Stanford in the Vale.html

    11K Download

  • Attachment

    Undeliverable Re 10242 FOI IR Stanford in the Vale.delivery status

    0K Download

  • Attachment

    Re 10242 FOI IR Stanford in the Vale.txt

    9K Download View as HTML

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

Dear Oxfordshire County Council,

Dear FOI - E&E,

In addition to my email of 18 August 2016 shown below, please can I remind you that my original FOI request (dated 19 June 2016 above) asked for "all information held relating to the recent 2015/2016 Feasibility Study" as follows;

2. Please make available all information held relating to the recent 2015/2016 Feasibility Study, carried out by Capita, Carillion and OCC, relating to the possible expansion of Stanford in the Vale Primary school, including but not limited to any advice, recommendations and reports drafted and or submitted by Chris Dyer.

Dear Wesley

Thanks for your time on the phone earlier today.

As I explained, we have had a good working relationship with certain members of OCC over the past months but recently all updates, communications and consultations promised to the NPSC, regarding the Feasibility Study, appear to have ceased.

I’m sorry your officers are having to spend so many man hours answering these queries but I’m afraid it is of their own making and all we have ever expected is their ongoing co-operation as we undertake the difficult task of drafting a Neighbourhood Plan for our Parish.

The biggest obstacle to delivering a half decent NP, is knowing what is going to happen with the school.

We made this clear as long ago as February 2014 and have updated OCC regularly since this time, with all our work and consultations, the results of which are available on our own website - www.sitvnp.com

The Feasibility Study was commenced in 2015 and Chris Dyer was requested to submit his Final Report to OCC on Friday 22 January 2016. If he did, this appears to be missing?

All this Feasibility Study appears to have achieved, (after months of work, officer’s time and £90k of tax payers money), is to discover that what the NPSC communicated to OCC in February 2014 is in fact true and the budget of £1.65m would need to be substantially increased to cover legal costs and land acquisition, to expand the school on the current site. Not to mention the destruction of an historic wall, possible compulsory purchase and the havoc additional parking and congestion will cause in the High Street.

MISSING ITEMS

The last email disclosed is dated 18 January 2016 (09:37), from Team Leader, Project Management CAPITA in reply to an email from Property & Facilities (09:06) the same date.

As discussed, it is beyond belief that nothing has happened between 22 January 2016 and 17 August 2016.

There is also nothing disclosed which covers the period between 28 October 2014 and 14 April 2015.

As discussed, can you please provide me with the following items which are missing or illegible and/or a reasonable explanation as to why they are missing or being so heavily redacted or withheld.

I believe I have provided sufficient information for the individuals concerned to provide the missing items but feel free to contact me any time if you require more information.

1. All related correspondence, emails and reports between 28 October 2014 and 14 April 2015 - MISSING

2. All related correspondence, emails and reports between 22 January 2016 and 17 August 2016 - MISSING

3. A clear and legible copy of 'Annex 3 Stanford in the Vale Land options.pdf’ - ILLEGIBLE

Please can you supply this with less redactions so it actually makes sense. The Other information/assumptions and Issues can hardly be considered worthy of redaction, based on the criteria you have explained in your letters of 16 August 2016. I can understand that costs and names of parties may need to be redacted but not whole sections ?

This applies to other emails and reports submitted.

4. Email dated 28/10/14 from Senior Surveyor is heavily redacted. Please supply a revised copy of this email without removal of complete paragraphs.

5. Email to the Senior Surveyor which prompted (4.) and response - MISSING

6. The Risks Register is referred in various documents - MISSING

7. A draft Options Appraisal has been supplied. The Final Options Appraisal is MISSING

8. A PAMP is referred in various documents - MISSING

9. Email dated 14 April 2015 (13:59) from Principal Strategy Officer, Property & Facilities asks “How is the area going to be provided?” The reply is MISSING

10. Email dated 21 April 2015 (11:55) from Principal Strategy Officer, Property & Facilities asks “Please could you review Stanford in the Vale option appraisal and advise me of any comments you may have” The replies are MISSING

11. Email dated 07 May 2015 (08:52) from Major Capital Projects Programme Manager asks “How are you getting on with the Ob?” The reply is MISSING

12. Please confirm date OB was produced/finished ?

13. Email dated 11 May 2015 (11:05) from Principal Strategy Officer to Hadyn Wood states “This (feasibility) study is due to be undertaken shortly following the completion of the necessary paperwork to get this piece of work instructed. Once an Architect, Project Manager and Estates Surveyor has been appointed to the project, I will advise you of their contact names and they will be able to advise on any further questions that you may have”.

Please can these be supplied now

14. Email 10 July 2015 (09:31) from Chris Dyer Senior Project Manager CAPITA to Hadyn Wood, states “ Specifically, we discussed the matter of congestion, parking and future increased pressure on the centre of the village. As a matter of course, a full transport assessment will form part of our study…..”

This 'Full Transport Assessment' is MISSING

15. All related correspondence, emails and reports between 22 July 2015 and 9 September 2015 – MISSING

16. Email dated 22 September 2015 (11:28) from Assistant Head of Estates - Reply MISSING

17. Email dated 05 November 2015 (14:57) from Principal Solicitor – Request and Reply – MISSING

Is it possible to have this without complete redaction of whole paragraph please?

18. Email dated 13 November, 2015 (11:19) from Senior Transport Planner - Request and Reply – MISSING

19. Email dated 24 November 2015 (08:52) to Property & Facilities states “ I agree, a meeting is required. We will need representation from SS3, Estates and Strategy, PMO and possibly CEF (client side) to enable a decision to be taken. I would be keen to hear any initial thoughts/direction from (redacted) in advance of confirming a meeting”

What were the thoughts/direction and was the meeting held?

If so, what was the outcome please and where is the Report or Minutes of this meeting?

20. Email dated 07 January 2016 (12:32) from Property & facilities to Team Leader CAPITA states “In addition an indication of the land value for the existing school site would be useful to understand if moving the school to a new site is a viable option as this should be considered as an option."

Email dated 8 January 2016 (15:13) from PMO Property & Facilities to Team Leader CAPITA asks “Please can you aim to have the final report issued by Fri 22nd Jan…”

Email dated 15 January 2016 (17:10) from Team Leader CAPITA reply states “I am aiming to have this issue to you by the end of next week *(Friday 22nd).”

Where is this Final Report please?

Does this Final Report include "an indication of the land value for the existing school site would be useful to understand if moving the school to a new site is a viable option as this should be considered as an option.” as requested by Property & Facilities (in the email of 7 January 2016 above)?

21. Email dated 18 January 2016 (09:37) from Team Leader states “ I will add (redacted) email notes into the report as an addendum regarding potential further options to explore”

Where are these please?

I think that’s it for now

Please pass on my thanks to all your team for their kind assistance in this matter. I’m sorry it has come to this but a bit more co-operation, consultation and common sense may have avoided all this additional work for all concerned.

Yours sincerely,

Hadyn Wood

FOI Team, Oxfordshire County Council

Thank you, Haydn

I received your last email and I'm in the process of working through it with our team here. There doesn't appear to be anything new added in your latest, unless I have missed something (please correct me if so)

Thanks

Wesley Blackburn
Access & Disclosure Officer
Oxfordshire County Council
County Hall
New Road
Oxford, OX1 1XD

01865 815 906
[email address]

show quoted sections

Dear FOI Team,

Please can I have an update

Yours sincerely,

Hadyn Wood

Dear FOI Team,

I have left messages with your office and sent emails requesting an update and as yet have had no reply.

I'm sorry but if haven't had a satisfactory response to my requests before Friday 14 October I will be referring this matter to the Information Commission.

Yours sincerely,

Hadyn Wood

FOI - E&E, Oxfordshire County Council

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Wood,

 

Please find attached our response to your Environmental Information
Request number 10242.

 

Kind Regards

 

E&E FOI/EIR & Complaints Co-Ordinators

 

 

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and
delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of
Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

Dear FOI - E&E,

When will the Attachments referred to above on 13 October be on-line and available to view and download please?

Yours sincerely,

Hadyn Wood

Oxfordshire County Council

3 Attachments

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

FOI - E&E, Oxfordshire County Council

16 Attachments

Dear Mr Wood,

 

Further to our response of 13^th of October to your request number 10242. 
Please find response again, along with attachments that have already been
sent within the response, but in a different format for ease of reference.

 

Kind Regards

 

E&E FOI/EIR & Complaints Co-Ordinators

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and
delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of
Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

FOI - E&E, Oxfordshire County Council

16 Attachments

Dear Mr Wood,

 

Please find relevant attachments. This is email number 2 of 2.

 

Kind Regards

 

E&E FOI/EIR & Complaints Co-Ordinators

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and
delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of
Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

FOI - E&E, Oxfordshire County Council

10 Attachments

Dear Mr Wood,

 

Please find relevant attachments in relation to your request number 10242.
This is email number 2 of 3 emails.

 

Kind Regards

 

 

E&E FOI/EIR & Complaints Co-Ordinators

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and
delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of
Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

FOI - E&E, Oxfordshire County Council

6 Attachments

Dear Mr Wood,

 

Please find relevant attachments in regards to response to 10242.

 

This is email 3 of 3.

 

Kind Regards

 

E&E FOI/EIR & Complaints Co-Ordinators

This email, including attachments, may contain confidential information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender by reply and
delete it immediately. Views expressed by the sender may not be those of
Oxfordshire County Council. Council emails are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/emaildiscl....

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org