1. New Buildings Proposal
Hurst Park School
New Buildings Proposal
Chris Johnson
Chair of Governing Body

2. Why is additional school capacity required?
Births in Surrey
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
% Change 2002 to 2010
Elmbridge
1,466
1,520
1,550
1,629
1,732
1,773
1,783
1,760
1,890
28.9%
Surrey
11,626
12,304
12,283
12,303
13,085
13,628
13,710
13,626
14,018
20.6%
Elmbridge shows the third highest increase in births in Surrey since 2002 at 28.9%.
The number of pupils entering into the Reception Year in Elmbridge schools has risen from 1209 in 2006 to 1434 in 2011, 7.5 additional forms.

3. Surrey’s Projections
Surrey’s projections suggest that in the primary sector there is a need for 7 additional forms of entry (1470 places, 210 places per year-group) up to 2021 across Surrey as a whole.
Across the Moleseys, Dittons, Weston Green, Esher and Claygate, Surrey projects a need for 4 new forms of entry by 2021.

4. Surrey’s Proposal
One additional form of entry will be provided in Molesey.
The proposal is for the expansion of the Hurst Park School on a new site.
Schools that have already taken the excess.
Oatlands in 2007 and 2010
Ashley in 2007,2008, 2009
The Orchard in 2009 and 2010
Thames Ditton Infants in 2009, 2010 and 2012
Thames Ditton Juniors in 2012
Cranmere in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012
Manby Lodge in 2009, 2010 and 2012
Grovelands in 2008, 2009 and 2011
Hinchley Wood in 2011 and 2012
Claygate in 2009
Burhill in 2011 and 2012
Hurst Park in 2012
St James (Junior class) in 2012

5. Why move ?
The current site is not large enough to accommodate a two form of entry school.
It is not designed to be a two form school and the delivery of education would become compromised. (e.g. The hall is not big enough for the whole school).

6. Move where ? Hurst Park School 11,382 m2
John Nightingale is 62% bigger than current site.
John Nightingale (Proposed site) 18,138 m2

7. What would the new school have ?

8. Are there any advantages?
1. Brand new purpose built school with new improved facilities that the school can help design.
2. More children would be able to benefit the culture of Hurst Park school.
3. Educational benefits by moving from one form of entry to two forms of entry. Bigger and more diverse mix of children. An opportunity for children to work in ability groups. An ability to more evenly distribute children according to need. A positive impact on pupil data. Easier planning and differentiation within year groups. Teachers able to plan together.
4. Staff Retention. Opportunity for staff to work together. Increased opportunities for recruitment and staff development. School more appealing to candidates.
5. School budget. Bigger budget with lower running costs and economies of scale. More resources for the school.
6. Avoid potential closure as the only single form entry school in the area.
7. An opportunity to become more ecologically sustainable – green travel etc.

9. Are there any disadvantages ?
8. Loss of community feel and ethos to the school. Possible loss of close staff and community bonds with increased difficulty in knowing children and families as well as currently. Loss of small school feeling.
9. Loss of site advantages. Good unique location, riverside views which aid learning,
10. Negative impact on staff. Possible staff demotivation during the change process. Possible recruitment problems for the new classes.
11. Disruption of school. Surrey County Council’s last building activity at the school was not good. Can SCC do better with this proposal? The ability to handle change may cause disruption.
12. Transport and Movement. Longer walk to the swimming pool, possibly fewer children able to walk to school, possible traffic issues at the new site.

10. What might the new school look like ?
Hurst Road

11. When ?
September 2015