Learning Estate Strategy Update – Longlist Options
Renfrewshire Council · 30 October 2025
Back to Education and Children's Services Policy Board — 30 October 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
1 To: Education and Children’s Services Policy Board On: 30 October 2025 Report by: Director of Children’s Services __________________________________________________________________ Heading: Learning Estate Strategy Update – Longlist Options 1. Summary 1.1 In 2024, Renfrewshire Council agreed a new learning estate strategy with the overall aim of initiating a strategic programme of investment in schools through detailed assessment of the entire learning estate. The ambition of the investment programme is to ‘create the best possible learning estate to allow children and young people to thrive’ 1.2 A key output of the assessment was identification of a cohort of 14 priority schools highlighted as requiring investment to ensure they meet the ambition of the strategy. 1.3 A decision to review provision at those schools resulted in commencement of a business case process, setting out the Strategic Case for Change for the Johnstone primary estate, Johnstone High School and Trinity High School. These were presented to the Education and Children’s Services Policy Board in August 2025. 1.4 This paper notes the progress of the reviews, presenting the current long list of routes forward for future investment in respect of the above areas. Members should note that this paper is not the formal OBC document and is simply an interim communication update on the considerations of options that will form part of the OBC. Officers are working to compile the detailed analysis supporting each option in the background, and as agreed, this will be presented back to the March 2026 Policy Board for Members to decide on the shortlist of options to proceed with.
Page 2
2 2. Recommendations 2.1 It is recommended that members of the Education and Children’s Services Policy Board: a. Note the updates detailed within this report and consider the routes forward for the future provision of primary education in Johnstone, at Johnstone High School and at Trinity High School. b. Note that these routes forward will be further developed and assessed in anticipation of submission of Outline Business Cases (OBC), identifying the recommended way forward for each project and presenting a shortlist of options for consideration. c. Note that informal stakeholder engagement on options for Johnstone primary and secondary learning estate and Trinity High School will continue and will inform development of the business cases. 3. Background 3.1 Renfrewshire Council published a new Learning Estate Strategy in 2024 setting out plans to improve its education infrastructure through a structured approach to assessment of school buildings. 3.2 Schools were assessed against numerous criteria including condition, suitability for delivery of the curriculum, capacity and demand. 3.3 Using a prioritisation framework, the strategy assessed the entire school estate, identifying those areas most in need of consideration as part of long- term investment planning, to ensure that the Council is best placed to: • Secure best value from strategic learning estate decisions around investment • Meet the expected long-term demand for education provision across Renfrewshire whilst delivering improvements in school buildings and learning environments • Ensure that the delivery of any new infrastructure complements other key strategic objectives being progressed by the Council to optimise the use of assets for communities and support wider redesign of services that better meet the needs of communities. 3.4 At the Education and Children’s Services Policy Board of March 2025, 14 priority schools were agreed. As this included four schools in Johnstone (Auchenlodment, St Margaret’s and Thorn Primaries, and Johnstone High School), it was agreed officers would consider the school estate across the town when developing and considering options for future investment and change. This approach will ensure a holistic perspective is taken to the review
Page 3
3 and option development, securing best use of existing capacity and that future investment from the Council has the potential to benefit the whole Johnstone community. 3.5 As part of the Learning Estate Strategy, it was agreed that neighbouring schools to those listed in the priorities could be considered as part of a project to invest in the priority school, however, this should only be progressed if there is a clear business, education, and social impact evidenced through a detailed business case process. As a reminder, the agreed 14 priority schools for investment were as follows: Priority Ranking Property Score Establishment Condition Suitability Capacity Quartile 1 2.2 Paisley Grammar School 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.4 2 2.4 Trinity High School 0.9 0.8 0.1 0.6 3= 2.5 Auchenlodment Primary School 0.6 1.2 0.3 0.4 3= 2.5 Heriot Primary School 0.9 1.2 0.2 0.2 3= 2.5 Johnstone High School 0.6 1.2 0.3 0.4 3= 2.5 St Peter's Primary School 0.6 1.2 0.3 0.4 4= 2.6 Bridge of Weir Primary School 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.8 4= 2.6 Thorn Primary School 0.9 0.8 0.3 0.6 4= 2.6 West Primary School 0.9 1.2 0.3 0.2 4= 2.6 Castlehead High School 0.9 1.2 0.3 0.2 4= 2.6 St Margaret's Primary School 0.9 1.2 0.3 0.2 4= 2.6 Gallowhill Primary School 0.9 1.2 0.3 0.2 4= 2.6 Brediland Primary School 0.9 1.2 0.3 0.2 5= 2.7 St Catherine's Primary School 0.9 1.2 0.4 0.2 3.6 Following the agreement of the priority school lists, in May 2025, members agreed a standardised four-stage business process and outline timeline for the priority schools. It was agreed the first projects to move through this process would be the Johnstone primary estate, Johnstone High School and Trinity High School. 4. Business Case Development 4.1 In August 2025 an update to the Learning Estate Strategy was presented at the Education and Children’s Services Policy Board. This included a Strategic Case for Change document for each of the Johnstone primary estate, Johnstone High School and Trinity High School. 4.2 The documents set out the factual operating context at the schools and articulated the strategic need for change. These documents set out the principal challenges faced by each of the schools, confirming the mandate for a strategic justification for change, summarising key elements that need to be addressed at each school/location, and why, which informs and supports progressing future option development for consideration as part of the overall business case process.
Page 4
4 4.3 Members of the Policy Board agreed that the next stage in the process for these projects would be development of the Outline Business Case (OBC) stage which will focus on the development of proposed options for change, supported by a robust analysis of whether such options are beneficial and viable. The expectation is that the OBC’s will be presented back to this Policy Board in March 2026 with a preferred route forward, and a short list of associated options that can achieve this and which would form part of a more detailed assessment through the Full Business Case stage. 4.4 To assist with this, officers committed to returning to this Board in October 2025 with an interim update on the OBC options process in respect of each priority project area. These documents are presented as appendices A, B, and C, as follows: • Johnstone Primary School Estate – Routes Forward • Johnstone High School – Routes Forward • Trinity High School – Routes Forward 4.5 At this stage officers have considered a range of broad options that are typically involved in a best practice school option appraisal investment programme to inform viable routes forward for the OBC process. This has been informed through an understanding of the operating context of each school set against the business needs, objectives and scope articulated in critical success factors in the Strategic Case for Change. 4.6 The critical success factors express criteria which act as a tool for providing an initial triage assessment of the practicality, adaptability and desirability of the longlist options. The critical success factors are included below in Appendix D. 4.7 As officers work to progress and develop the detail of the OBC stage, the key routes forward identified in this interim report will be developed into a longlist of associated options aligned with each potential route, and stakeholder engagement is expected to play a part in this stage of business case development. 4.8 The broad options that are presented at this stage have been assessed with initial triage level of analysis. The Board should note that at this stage, the high-level triage analysis is principally supporting the identification of options that cannot meet the critical success factors and have been noted as not non- viable and will therefore not be subject to any further in-depth detailed work. All other options will remain under consideration through the development of the OBC process until March 2026 when the detailed findings will be presented back.
Page 5
5 5. Initial Triage Considerations 5.1 Officers continue to undertake detailed assessments to develop a longlist of options in the development of the OBC, however, an initial triage assessment of the list of potential routes forward has supported an early determination that some options can be ruled out at this initial stage. 5.2 This initial triage process has been used to identify option(s)/routes forward that would fundamentally fail to meet key aspects of the desired outcome being targeted by the Council. 5.3 In this context, consideration has been given at this early stage to the critical success factors included in Appendix D, such as strategic fit, value for money, and achievability of an option. By way of illustration initial broad options in relation to Johnstone primary learning estate that promote investment in buildings that would fail to support the strategic objective of moving school capacities towards being more efficient and sustainable, have been triaged as non-viable on the grounds of the evidence presented in the Strategic Case for Change (presented to the Board in August 2025). The Strategic Case for Change outlined that the clear and substantial over provision of primary school capacity in Johnstone, with that excess capacity expected to deteriorate further over future years as school rolls fall further, with school capacity anticipated to operate close to 50% in the next 10 years. On that basis, options that would fail to address this overcapacity would not align with the agreed Learning Estate Strategy strategic planning objective of striving to move the Council’s learning estate to have schools operating in an efficient manner between 80-95% capacity. In this context options that would not achieve this have been deemed as strategically non-viable at this stage. 5.4 In addition to the critical success factors outlined at Appendix D, consideration has also been given to the extent an option or route forward is likely to support the Council to meet specific space standards that are expected to be met as part of a modern school provision. given to an option is whether the proposed development would be acceptable to modern space requirements of the particular site. 5.5 In this context there are two core metrics considered as part of this process. The mandatory minimum site size which must align with the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Act 1967. A clear space metric is outlined in this legislation for what is the minimum size a site must meet, depending on the intended number of pupils. It is however also recognised that these mandatory minimum sizes, fall significantly short of modern-day requirements and expectations in relation to modern learning estates. For that reason, BB103 area guidelines for mainstream schools has also been adopted as the optimal sizing metric when assessing the adequacy of a site to meet current and future requirements. Use of the BB103 guidance has provided the opportunity to assess options reflecting contemporary expectations in respect to modern learning estate site deliverables which are of particular importance when a local authority is potentially investing at scale
Page 6
6 to deliver a modern facility that will support community needs for generations to come. 5.6 By way of illustration in respect to the application of these key space metrics in the assessment process, this is clearly evidenced in Appendix C for Trinity High School. The existing school site is significantly short of both the minimum legislative requirements, and the BB103 metrics. On this basis alone, it cannot be justified to rebuild or refurbish a building on the existing site where legislation and best practice guidance suggests this is not appropriate for current standards. This factor, along with key elements of the triage assessment, has supported the early discounting of the existing school or school site as being option that merit detailed development. 5.7 According to the 1967 Regulations, a school of the capacity of Trinity High School (1,032 pupils) shall require a minimum area of 56,656m2 of space to account for the school and sports provision. The current extent of Trinity High School site is just 19,516m2, falling significantly short of this metric. As a comparison, the current Paisley Grammar School Community Campus is being constructed on a site of over 60,000m2. 5.8 A link to the School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Act 1967 can be found as follows: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1967/1199/pdfs/uksi_19671199_en.pdf 6. Value for Money and Affordability 6.1 Throughout the business case development process, the value for money of different options will be assessed as part of the overall appraisal criteria to support the Council to achieve a decision that is best value informed. A value for money assessment process provides the ability to financially assess different options over the whole life period of a school, recognising that different options can present quite different financial requirements both in scale of initial and longer-term investment, the timing of that investment over the whole life period as well as wider costs to operate and run the learning facility. The value for money appraisal process creates a single comparable measurement of overall cost between different options taking account of initial investment, major lifecycle and reactive maintenance as well as operational running costs over the whole life period, adjusting appropriately for the impact of the time value of money on when those costs are expected to be incurred. 6.2 It is however important to note that a value for money appraisal and affordability assessment represent quite distinct financial considerations for decision making purposes. For example, a particular option may present the optimal value for money when assessed over the whole life period of a school but could present challenges in respect to immediate financially affordability and sustainability. In such circumstances the Council could take an informed decision to select an alternative option which delivers similar education, social
Page 7
7 and community outcomes but which has lower but acceptable whole life value for money, on the basis it is a more financially deliverable or affordable option within the context of the Council’s financial planning and when set against the very significant further investment needs in other schools over the long term. 6.3 During this stage of the business case development process, viable options will have relatively broad cost estimates applied to provide a contextual assessment of how the option aligns with the Council’s affordability envelope. As outlined as part of the initial Learning Estate Strategy, over a 20 - 25 year strategic planning time horizon, it is likely that the Council will identify long term investment need running into billions of pounds. To inform initial cost projections, analysis has been undertaken of two current live Renfrewshire Council projects (Paisley Grammar School – PGS - and Thistle Primary School - TPS), to provide live market tested cost metrics that can be used to inform forecast build rates for future. This process takes account of when projects are broadly anticipated to reach on-site construction coupled with published medium term construction market inflation projections. 6.4 Assuming a mid-point construction in the 1st quarter of 2031 using published inflation calculations and the projected costs of current projects, it has been estimated that in a secondary school project of similar site conditions and design parameters to PGS Campus, the cost metric per secondary pupil is projected to be circa £76,000. 6.5 Similarly for a primary school and utilising TPS, it is estimated that in a primary school project of similar site conditions and design parameters, the cost metric per primary pupil is projected to be circa £69,000. 6.6 Whilst no project is the same, and bespoke costings require to be worked up for each of the options included in the OBC, this information provides general insight into future cost associated with the construction market and likely affordability considerations and constraints for the Council when developing and appraising business case options. To illustrate this point, the Council has earmarked a further £170 million of investment capacity to support further investment in the learning estate. Depending upon the mix of future projects that are agreed, in terms of new build projects, £170m would support new learning estate facilities of similar specification to PGS/TPS in broad terms for between 2,200 – 2,450 pupils. That could for example be represented by 2 medium sized secondary schools, or one secondary and three medium sized primary schools. This demonstrates the relative constraints of £170 million and therefore the business case process will consider as part of option development if there are opportunities within options to deliver efficiencies that will support both economies of scale in cost and or where the project drives out revenue efficiencies that could be diverted to support addition borrowing and expand the Council’s overall investment capacity.
Page 8
8 7. Further Considerations 7.1 All of the above information has allowed a first pass triage process to assess the broad viability of potential routes forward, to allow officers to place full focus on only viable options. For options that are considered viable, these have been noted in the appendices of this document as requiring further investigation and analysis. Officers will continue to assess these options and will bring in more detailed assessments to inform the production of the OBC prior to it being presented in March 2026. Examples of the data and further assessments that will inform these options to allow a short list to be identified are: • Cost estimates of the options • Disruption and operational assessments (such as decant strategies, and school operations during construction) • Travel considerations (such as school transport implications and figures) • Detailed site assessments for options with alternative sites • Planning policy considerations • Roll projections and potential class configurations/school rolls for options that consider merged schools • Environmental sustainability • Wider community benefit, placemaking, and ability for options to consider partner services 7.2 The above information will be compiled to create more detailed assessments of potential options and will supplement the summarised concise analysis of options included in the appendices of this report. 8. Land Identification and Assessment 8.1 It is important to consider that whilst a list of options for routes forward are presented in this report, there may be several associated sub options that make up the longlist of options that will be assessed for viable routes forward. This will include for example a range of alternative possible sites that could locate a new build school where this has been identified as a viable option for appraisal. 8.2 Officers are currently working through a detailed process to identify and appraise suitable land for relevant options that require it. This process is considering many factors, and will focus on: • Ownership • Site area/size • Active travel • Planning policy • Placemaking
Page 9
9 • Flood risk, topography, and history • Budget considerations • Utilities connections and viability • Roads and transport connections and viability 8.3 To support this process, this exercise is seeking to identify potential land availability options within the overall catchment of the school or schools in question and for High Schools in particular, which have much larger catchments, this may include options which involve sites outwith the town or immediate location the existing school is located. 9. Communications & Engagement 9.1 Since August, officers have started initial informal community and stakeholder engagement and communication on the business case process. This has included meetings with head teachers, ward members and parent councils in the Johnstone and Trinity areas. 9.2 A survey was also issued to all parents and staff of the agreed priority schools progressing through the business case process currently (Johnstone Learning Estate and Trinity High School). This invited their views on what they like about the school’s condition, facilities and location now, what they would improve, and what they think should be important to us as we move forward with future school investment. 9.3 Findings from this engagement will help to shape the final analysis of options, and any further options that should be considered. As responses from initial stakeholder engagement are analysed and understood, officers will carry out further engagement to ensure awareness and understanding of the processes the Council are undertaking and to fully capture the views and perspective of the community and key stakeholders. 10. Next Steps 10.1 Officers will continue to develop the OBC for consideration at the Education and Children’s Services Policy Board in March 2026, in keeping with the indicative high-level timeline previously presented to Policy Board in May 2025. 10.2 It is expected at this point the longlisted options will be appraised and assessed against the critical success factors and the analysis of those options will be published for members as part of the OBC. Based on that analysis, the OBC will recommend a preferred way forward and associated shortlisted options linked to this would progress into the Full Business Case (FBC) stage for detailed development and appraisal.
Page 10
10 10.3 As part of the FBC there will be in-depth analysis of the preferred way forward and the shortlisted options, including a whole life cost model and ongoing engagement with relevant stakeholders. Each will be rigorously assessed in terms of scope, solution, service delivery, implementation and funding. The FBC are expected to be presented to Policy Board in January 2027. 10.4 Throughout development of the FBC in 2026, the shortlisted options will begin their initial design process. This will consider the first draft of building outputs, including size and scale, as well as the more detailed requirements needed as part of the development. Implications of the Report 1. Financial Council has agreed to make provision of £2.5m of revenue resource in 2025/26, with similar amounts being committed to on an annual basis each year over the remaining years of the current Administration. The financial model underpinning the strategy continues to be developed, along with the framework and analysis required in the business case process. This financial provision will fund the programme of work as it progresses through business case development. 2. HR & Organisational Development None 3. Community/Council Planning - Our Renfrewshire is thriving New and improved learning estate assets will allow our children and young people to thrive with the best possible infrastructure to support their school experience. Staff and community users will benefit from modern and inclusive environments - Reshaping our place, our economy and our future The learning estate shall be appropriately scaled and equipped to meet curriculum expectations and deliver an appropriate learning and teaching experience for all. 4. Legal None 5. Property/Assets These projects will deliver significant improvements to the learning estate, extending the life of assets and improving the experience of young people, staff and the wider community.
Page 11
11 6. Information Technology Digital improvements will be delivered through the learning estate strategy, where access to technology for all will be a key priority for projects. 7. Equality & Human Rights The recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. No negative impacts on equality groups or potential for infringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified arising from the recommendations contained in the report. If required following implementation, the actual impact of the recommendations and the mitigating actions will be reviewed and monitored, and the results of the assessment will be published on the Council’s website. 8. Health & Safety None 9. Procurement Any procurement work required will be conducted in collaboration with the Council’s Procurement team and adhere to appropriate regulations. By developing the business case framework outlined in this report, procurement and commercial considerations will be conducted throughout. 10. Risk All projects are bound by rigorous governance and supported by detailed risk registers. Risk is reported and managed at various levels with scrutiny applied to ensure mitigations and contingency plans are in place. The business case framework set out in Learning Estate Strategy updates will directly work to identify, manage and reduce risk. 11. Privacy Impact None 12. Children’s Rights When considering any future school provision, the impact this will have on children is key consideration and any work will be based around the direct needs of children to allow their education experience to thrive. Whilst children have a right to choose where they wish to attend school in collaboration with their parents, the Council’s admission policy applies, to ensure that schools that are oversubscribed can be managed. 13. Climate Risk New and improved learning estate assets will directly contribute to the Council’s journey towards net zero. Sustainability is a key concept of all projects. 14. COSLA Policy Position None
Page 12
12 List of Background Papers - None Author: Jack Lochans, Strategic Learning Estate Manager – jack.lochans@renfrewshire.gov.uk
Page 13
13 Appendix A – Johnstone Primary School Estate Routes Forward Option 1: Do nothing Continue to operate all primary schools in Johnstone as they currently are. This includes: Auchenlodment, St Margaret’s and Thorn Primary Schools which have been identified as priorities for investment, as well St Anthony’s, St David’s, Cochrane Castle, and Fordbank Primary Schools. Main Advantages Value for money • No capital outlay required, however significant future capital outlay will be required on building maintenance with no improvement to configuration or suitability for delivering the curriculum. Main Disadvantages Strategic Fit • Does not achieve ambition of Learning Estate Strategy with regards to condition or suitability of schools. • Underestimates the challenges posed by the current condition and layout of the school buildings and the challenge of improving the learning environments. • Although St Margaret’s predates minimum space requirements under School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Act 1967, and BB103 Area Guidelines for Mainstream Schools, it should be stressed that the site is severely constrained, with little usable outdoor space and the school would not be built to its current size and extent if planned now. • No benefit to the wider community can be derived from this option. Value for Money • Will create an additional burden on the ongoing maintenance required of these buildings. • Schools in Johnstone will continue to operate below optimal occupancy offering poor value for money in the long term. • This option would continue to see a very high standard of PPP school estate in Johnstone continue to be underutilised with significant financial outgoings associated with the ongoing operation of these schools.
Page 14
14 Conclusions With the disadvantages outlined above, this is not a viable option and will be discounted as a route forward. This option would bring no benefit to the school or wider community and would not serve to improve the education experience of anyone involved. The primary school estate in Johnstone would continue to operate at inefficient levels, with roll projections showing a further decline is to be expected across the area. With regards to the PPP estate (Fordbank, Cochrane Caste, and St David’s – significant financial outlay is required each year to operate these, and this option would not work to make best use of these very high standard buildings.
Page 15
15 Option 2: Retrofit of all Priority Schools Identified Carry out a comprehensive retrofit of the current buildings of Auchenlodment, St Margaret’s and Thorn primary schools to bring them up to Net Zero Public Sector Building Standards (NZPSBS) or better, whilst improving the overall condition and suitability of the environments. Main Advantages Strategic Fit • Contributes towards net zero ambitions through retention of embodied carbon and significant improvements in energy consumption. • Will allow buildings to be fully reconsidered to improve both condition and suitability. Value for Money • Subject to detailed costing it is likely to involve a lower capital outlay • Lower operating costs from a more energy efficient building Main Disadvantages Strategic Fit • Improvements to the site and external learning will be limited as any improvements need to work with and around the existing site. • This option to retrofit would not address the over-provision of school capacity in Johnstone and would result in the school capacity in operation with a declining population. • Although St Margaret’s predates minimum space requirements under School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Act 1967, and BB103 Area Guidelines for Mainstream Schools, it should be stressed that the site is severely constrained, with little usable outdoor space and the school would not be built to its current size and extent if planned now. Value for Money • A deep retrofit is a complex and demanding project requiring careful planning and execution. Although capital costs would be less in comparison to an equivalent new build, the costs will still be significant, and will carry significant inherent risk associated with refurbishing an existing building and it would have to be evidenced through whole life cost modelling that a retrofit was better overall value than new build. Affordability • The full extent of work required, and therefore cost, may only become fully apparent as areas of the internal fabric of the building are exposed and a full understanding of the buildings condition is apparent. This could result in the
Page 16
16 divergence between refurbishment cost and new build cost being marginal and ultimately impacting negatively on the whole life value for money appraisal. Achievability • This option would involve significant disruption to the Johnstone primary school estate with decants required for all schools during the extent of the works, or for a very elongated and costly route to construction by working around current building users. Conclusions Whilst this option is more attractive in terms of retaining embodied carbon through the reprovision of current assets, the overall cost and challenges associated may represent poor value for money, particularly when considered over a whole life basis. The scale of school capacity in Johnstone would remain broadly unaffected, and this option would therefore see significant excess school capacity continue to be provided across Johnstone, delivering poor long term value for money. It is not proposed that the option of retrofitting these three priority schools, in their current context, is a viable option on the grounds of strategic fit whereby it would not address the clear over provision of school capacity in the area. Further, it is noted that St Margaret’s Primary School does not meet current minimum space requirements as per legislation and would therefore be questionable as to why a significant investment in such a school would be taken forward given it is too small for modern standards..
Page 17
17 Option 3: New Build Schools for all Priority Schools Identified Rebuild Thorn, Auchenlodment and St Margaret’s primary schools on their current sites, to a reduced capacity, to continue as standalone primary schools. Retain St David’s, Cochrane Castle, Fordbank and St Anthony’s primary schools as they are now. Main Advantages Strategic Fit • Ensures that all pupils in Johnstone will be educated in modern, good condition schools, capable of meeting the aspirations of the Learning Estate Strategy with regards to the condition and suitability. • Main Disadvantages Strategic Fit • Provision of 3 new schools and disposal of their predecessors may not be as sustainable as retrofitting current structures. However, it is recognised that new buildings would be designed and constructed in a manner that significantly contributes to the net zero plan with energy efficiency at the forefront. It is also possible that material from demolished buildings could be used on new sites as in fill or for levelling land. • Constructing three new schools would not address the ongoing over provision of school places in Johnstone. To be able to deliver schools to ‘optimal capacity’ would require all three new build schools to be smaller than a single stream primary school (i.e. a school with 1 class from primary 1 to primary 7 which equals a capacity of 217 places). Roll projections show that all three schools are expected to fall well below this figure of 217 therefore to build these schools at an ‘optimal’ capacity would require very small schools with combined year groups in less than 7 classes. This would be a significantly limiting factor for schools in such a tight urban geography. • A new build project on the existing St. Margaret’s site would not meet minimum space requirements under School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Act 1967, or BB103 Area Guidelines for Mainstream Schools, and is therefore not a viable option – a new site would be required. Value for Money • Existing high-quality facilities at the West Johnstone Joint Campus, and Fordbank, would remain underutilised, operating below optimal capacity, therefore presenting poor value for money from the significant financial outlay on PPP contracts.
Page 18
18 Affordability • This option would require considerable capital investment for single-stream schools and would not offer best value for money given current and projected demand across Johnstone as a whole and the wider commitments of the Learning Estate Strategy. • The investment required would limit council’s readiness to address other priority schools identified through the learning estate strategy Achievability • This option would involve significant disruption to the Johnstone primary school estate with decants required for all schools during the extent of the works. Conclusions Providing a new build property for each of the schools would require a significant capital cost and would leave existing high-quality facilities underutilised and operating below optimal capacity and would still leave excess capacity across the whole Johnstone Primary School Estate. Committing to the replacement of three existing primary schools in like-for-like fashion may impact Renfrewshire Council’s ability to maintain the necessary pace of investment in the Learning Estate Strategy. It is proposed that this option is not considered further as part of the preferred way forward on the basis that this would see the delivery of brand new very small schools which cannot evidence any form of best value with such close proximities of schools. Further, with St Margaret’s site not meeting modern minimum space requirements, it would require a new site to be identified for a new build school.
Page 19
19 Option 4: Redesign of the Primary School Estate in Johnstone This option would see the development of a wider master plan review and associated proposals that would deliver a reduced number of establishments and right-sized overall school capacity across Johnstone This masterplan approach would secure the ambition of accommodating all primary school children in Johnstone in a good quality school accommodation, with high suitability for delivering the curriculum, that will sustainably meet the educational needs across Johnstone over the long term and support wider community needs. This option must consider the priority establishments that require intervention as part of the Learning Estate Strategy prioritisation matrix. These schools are Thorn, Auchenlodment, and St Margaret’s and options will consider: • Making best use of capacity of existing high-quality buildings including St Anthony’s, West Johnstone Joint Campus, and Fordbank. • Consider the location of any proposed new build school facility that would look to combine more than one existing school on the same site • Consider the most appropriate catchment area configurations to support overall efficiency and capacity to support the delivery of the best educational outcomes. Main Advantages Strategic Fit • Ensures that every pupil in Johnstone will be educated in modern, high-quality condition schools. • Meets the requirements of Renfrewshire Council’s vision for education and the objectives of the Learning Estate Strategy • Contributes towards net zero ambitions through provision of a new school built to NZPBS standard or better, with significant improvements in energy consumption to the existing schools. • Ensures all schools can work at optimal occupancy, reflecting changing school rolls and demand. • The sale of disused sites could bring capital receipts to the council. Value for Money • Makes the most of existing high condition facilities including PPP estate which attracts a high financial output each year to operate, offering better value for money from the learning estate in Johnstone • Offers opportunities to improve Early Years and additional support needs provision in Johnstone through better use of existing space. • Increased value for money through a reduction in operating costs associated with the operation of combined schools, and a school built to modern standards.
Page 20
20 Affordability • Appropriate levels of capital spend required through the provision of a whole area master planned new build option(s), and making better use of existing high-quality assets provides the best opportunity to strategically develop and identify the most effective solution to meet the long term needs of Johnstone in a manner that consider need across the whole geography and will minimise unnecessary spend. Main Disadvantages Achievability • Potential need to decant pupils during new build element if a current school site was selected, could bring disruption during this period, albeit the scale of disruption of this option is significantly lower than alternative options presented. • Proposals to merge schools and or catchments areas present concerns linked to the expectations and aspirations of parts of the school community. Conclusions This holistic master planned option provides the opportunity to identify a more efficient use of existing quality learning environments, whilst addressing overprovision of capacity in Johnstone as a whole. The implementation of a new build school option to accommodate more than one existing school will also directly support addressing all objectives of the Learning Estate Strategy and works to significantly improve the experience of all users of current poor condition buildings. This option would see current high-quality buildings utilised in an efficient way, making best use of the assets, and ultimately will work to ensure that every primary pupil in Johnstone is educated in a high-quality building, suitable for delivering the modern curriculum. This option and specific configurations within it should be further considered in the OBC process as part of the preferred way forward.
Page 21
21 Summary of Options for Johnstone Primary School Estate Option Description Viable 1 Do nothing Continue to operate all primary schools in Johnstone as they currently are. This includes: Auchenlodment, St Margaret’s and Thorn Primary Schools which have been identified as priorities for investment, as well St Anthony’s, St David’s, Cochrane Castle, and Fordbank Primary Schools. NO 2 Retrofit of all Priority Schools Identified. Carry out a comprehensive retrofit of Auchenlodment, St Margaret’s and Thorn primary schools to bring them up to Net Zero Public Sector Building Standards (NZPBS) or better, whilst improving the overall condition and suitability of the environments. NO 3 New Build Schools for all Priority Schools Identified Rebuild Thorn, Auchenlodment and St Margaret’s primary schools on their current sites, to a reduced capacity, to continue as standalone primary schools. Retain St David’s, Cochrane Castle, Fordbank and St Anthony’s primary schools as they are now. NO 4 Redesign of the Primary School Estate in Johnstone This option would deliver the implementation of a wider master plan review resulting in a reduced number of establishments across Johnstone, with the ultimate ambition of accommodating all primary school children in Johnstone into a good quality school, with high suitability for delivering the curriculum and supporting wider community needs. This option must consider the priority establishments that require intervention as part of the Learning Estate Strategy prioritisation matrix. These schools are Thorn, Auchenlodment, and St Margaret’s. This option will consider the following: YES
Page 22
22 • Making best use of capacity of existing high-quality buildings including St Anthony’s, West Johnstone Joint Campus, and Fordbank. • The location of any new build school facility that would look to combine more than one existing school on the same site • Consider the most appropriate catchment area configurations to support efficiency and capacity.
Page 23
23 Appendix B – Johnstone High School Routes Forward Option 1: Do nothing Retain the building as-is and continue to operate the high school in its current format Main Advantages Value for money • No capital outlay required, however significant future capital outlay will be required on building maintenance with no improvement to configuration or suitability for delivering the curriculum. Main Disadvantages Strategic Fit • Maintaining the current building will not help ensure delivery of the best possible learning environments for all users, nor would it meet the objectives of the Learning Estate Strategy or help future proof against further developments in technology or curriculum. Value for Money • The most recent condition report in 2022 assessed the buildings a ‘C- Poor’ (exhibiting major defects/not operating efficiently) with a maintenance cost of £10.5m over the next 18 years to maintain the building as it is now at a poor standard. • The building is, and would remain in future, too big for its current and projected roll, making operation less efficient and more expensive Conclusions With the disadvantages outlined above, this is not a viable option and will be discounted as a route forward. This option would bring no benefit to the school or wider community and would not serve to improve the education experience of anyone involved. Johnstone High School would continue to operate at inefficient levels.
Page 24
24 Option 2: Retrofit of Johnstone High School Carry out a comprehensive retrofit of Johnstone High School in order to bring it up to Net Zero Public Sector Building Standards (NZPSBS) or better, whilst improving the overall condition and suitability of the environments. Main Advantages Strategic Fit • Contributes towards net zero ambitions through retention of embodied carbon and significant improvements in energy consumption. • Spaces within the building can be redesigned to reduce overall capacity of school to meet decline in demand, making better use of the asset in a layout reconfiguration. Value for Money • Lower operating costs from a more energy efficient building of a size that allows for optimal occupancy • Subject to detailed costing it is likely to involve a lower capital outlay Affordability • Continued use of existing sports facilities at the adjacent sports hub and therefore fewer design considerations Main Disadvantages Strategic Fit • The most appropriate location and provision within the asset could be compromised by being constrained with current configuration and location of building on site. Value for Money • A deep retrofit is a complex and demanding project requiring careful planning and execution. Although capital costs would be less in comparison to an equivalent new- build, the costs will still be significant, and will carry significant inherent risk associated with refurbishing an existing building and it would have to be evidenced through whole life cost modelling that a retrofit was better overall value than new build. • Due to the design of current building and inefficient layout, large portions of the building may require to be demolished and rebuilt as part of a retrofit, leading to the question of whether better overall value would be gained in a new build. Affordability • The full extent of work required, and therefore cost and timeline, may only become fully apparent as areas of the internal fabric of the building are exposed and a full understanding of the buildings condition is apparent. This could result in the divergence between refurbishment cost
Page 25
25 and new build cost being marginal and ultimately impacting negatively on the whole life value for money appraisal. Achievability • A decant would be required for pupils of the school over a long spanning construction period. In a secondary school this would pose significant challenge in terms of maintaining curriculum delivery and retaining access to specialist equipment or workshops. This would add a level of complexity and cost to the project. Conclusions This option is more attractive in terms of making the most of existing assets, retaining embodied carbon and addressing Council commitments on net zero. The overall cost and challenges associated may represent poorer whole life value for money if the building cannot meet critical success factors and the ambition of the Learning Estate Strategy around longevity, for example, if the super structure even with a deep retrofit, would have a limited lifespan. This option could simply delay the inevitable requirement of a new build school being required when considered over a whole lifetime period. Although the option can facilitate layout and configuration changes which would deliver improved suitability and capacity in line with the Learning Estate Strategy, it would unlikely offer an optimal outcome as the existing building would provide a level of constraint on flexibility. Whilst challenges exist with this option, it is proposed to be retained and investigated further, particularly around potential decant logistics, and associated costings of the project. This can then be compared against alternative options to determine the options with overall best value.
Page 26
26 Option 3: New Build Johnstone High School on Current Site Rebuild Johnstone High School at the current site, with the potential for decanting current pupils during building works, depending on school placement on site. Main Advantages Strategic Fit • This would deliver a new school built to modern educational and building standards, of a size that allows for optimal occupancy. • Meets the requirements of Renfrewshire Council’s vision for education and the objectives of the Learning Estate Strategy • Contributes towards net zero ambitions through provision of a new school built to NZPBS standard or better, with significant improvements in energy consumption to the existing school. Affordability • Continued use of existing sports facilities at the adjacent sports hub meaning lower design and build costs Main Disadvantages Strategic Fit • Strategic Fit - the short-term disruption associated with a decant may outweigh longer term gain for all stakeholders. • Affordability – Decanting pupils and staff may not align with resourcing constraints especially around available space or demand for modular classrooms and could therefore attract significant costs to provide a suitable decant facility. Achievability • A decant could be required depending where new build was located on the existing site and if the continued operation of the existing school could not be accommodated over the full construction period. In a secondary school this would pose significant challenge in terms of maintaining curriculum delivery and retaining access to specialist equipment or workshops. This would add a level of complexity and cost to the project. Conclusions This option would be able to deliver on all objectives associated with the Learning Estate Strategy with the ability to offer an enhanced education experience and much improved asset with reduced operating costs in a more sustainable fashion. However, as this option could involve decanting of the school community to
Page 27
27 facilitate a rebuild of the school, careful consideration of the decant strategy would have to be undertaken to determine overall impact of this option on the learning and teaching experience for the period of the decant. The viability of this option will become clearer in the investigation of a decant strategy, which will inform costs and disruption. This option should continue to be assessed further and can then be compared against alternative options to determine the options with overall best value.
Page 28
28 Option 4: New Build Johnstone High School on Alternative Site Build a new Johnstone High School elsewhere in the catchment on a suitable site; on completion, demolish the current building and sell or develop the land. Main Advantages Strategic Fit • This would deliver a new school built to modern educational and building standards, of a size that allows for optimal occupancy. • Meets the requirements of Renfrewshire Council’s vision for education and the objectives of the Learning Estate Strategy • Contributes towards net zero ambitions through provision of a new school built to NZPBS standard or better, with significant improvements in energy consumption to the existing school. • Would allow repurposing of the existing site for Council use or sale. Achievability • Flexibility of timescale through the continued operation of the existing school during the design and build process • Avoids decanting of the school community with all associated cost and upheaval Main Disadvantages Value for Money • The cost of buying suitable land for the new school if suitable Council-owned land cannot be identified. • The potential for increased school transport budgets due to increased travel distances for pupils Achievability • The challenge of finding a suitable site for a new school. Conclusions This option would address condition, sufficiency and suitability and would be able to meet most of the objectives of the Learning Estate Strategy. The current unknown of this option is whether the objective could meet active travel objectives if appropriate land cannot be sourced in an appropriate location of the catchment area, which would transition too many young people into requiring home to school transport. This will become clearer through specific site assessments. However, this option should continue to be assessed further and can then be compared against alternative options to determine the options with overall best value.
Page 29
29 Summary of Options for Johnstone High School Option Description Viable 1 Do nothing Retain the building as-is and continue to operate the high school in its current format NO 2 Retrofit of Johnstone High School Carry out a comprehensive retrofit of Johnstone High School in order to bring it up to Net Zero Public Sector Building Standards (NZPSBS) or better, whilst improving the overall condition and suitability of the environments. YES 3 New Build Johnstone High School on Current Site Rebuild Johnstone High School at the current site, with the potential for decanting current pupils during building works, depending on school placement on site. YES 4 New Build Johnstone High School on Alternative Site Build a new Johnstone High School elsewhere in the catchment on a suitable site; on completion, demolish the current building and sell or develop the land. YES
Page 30
30 Appendix C – Trinity High School Routes Forward Option 1: Do nothing Retain the building as-is and continue to operate the high school in its current format Main Advantages Value for money • No capital outlay required, however significant future capital outlay will be required on building maintenance with no improvement to configuration or suitability for delivering the curriculum. • Demand on places for Trinity could be managed through strict application of Renfrewshire Council admissions policy for schools. Main Disadvantages Strategic Fit • Maintaining the current building will not help ensure delivery of the best possible learning environments for all users, nor would it meet the objectives of the Learning Estate Strategy or help future proof against further developments in technology or curriculum. • Although Trinity predates minimum space requirements under School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Act 1967, and Area Guidelines for Mainstream Schools (BB103) it should be stressed that the site is severely constrained, with little usable outdoor space and the school would not be built to its current size and extent if planned now. • School capacity is not sufficient for demand, making operation less efficient and more expensive • The current building does not meet the ambition of the Learning Estate Strategy in that it will not help ensure delivery of the best possible learning environments for all users or help future proof against further developments in technology and curriculum. • Does not contribute to Renfrewshire Council ambitions for sustainability and energy efficiency. Value for Money • The most recent condition report shows that remedial maintenance cost of at least £10m over the next 20 years will be required to simply maintain the building as it is now. This would not bring any improvement to the overall suitability and layout of the building or its grounds to support curriculum delivery.
Page 31
31 • The building is, and would remain in future, too big for its current and projected roll, making operation less efficient and more expensive Conclusions With the disadvantages outlined above, this is not a viable option and will be discounted as a route forward. This option would bring no benefit to the school or wider community and would not serve to improve the education experience of anyone involved.
Page 32
32 Option 2: Retrofit of Trinity High School Carry out a comprehensive retrofit of Trinity High School in order to bring it up to Net Zero Public Sector Building Standards (NZPSBS) or better, whilst improving the overall condition and suitability of the environments. Main Advantages Strategic Fit • Contributes towards net zero ambitions through retention of embodied carbon and significant improvements in energy consumption. • Spaces within the building can be redesigned to reduce overall capacity of school to meet decline in demand, making better use of the asset in a layout reconfiguration. Value for Money • Lower operating costs from a more energy efficient building. • Potentially, less capital outlay required than for a new-build option. Main Disadvantages Strategic Fit • Although Trinity predates minimum space requirements under School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Act 1967, and Area Guidelines for Mainstream Schools (BB103) it should be stressed that the site is severely constrained, with little usable outdoor space and the school would not be built to its current size and extent if planned now. • The site constrains would limit the design in being able to deliver the full ambition of the Learning Estate Strategy. Value for Money • A deep retrofit is a complex and demanding project requiring careful planning and execution. Although capital costs would be less in comparison to an equivalent new- build, the costs will still be significant. • Due to the design of current building and inefficient layout, large portions of the building may require to be demolished and rebuilt as part of a retrofit, leading to the question of whether better overall value would be gained in a new build. Affordability • The full extent of work required, and therefore cost and timeline, may only become fully apparent as areas of the internal fabric of the building are exposed and a full understanding of the buildings condition is apparent. Achievability • A decant would be required for pupils of the school over a long spanning construction period. In a secondary school
Page 33
33 this would pose significant challenge in terms of maintaining curriculum delivery and retaining access to specialist equipment or workshops. This would add a level of complexity and cost to the project. Conclusions This option is more attractive in terms of making the most of existing assets, retaining embodied carbon and addressing Council commitments on net zero. However, the option would fail to address challenges around suitability and sufficiency, with the footprint of the current site falling significantly short of current required space metrics for a secondary school of this size. This option should therefore not be considered as part of the preferred way forward.
Page 34
34 Option 3: New Build Trinity High School at Current Site Rebuild Trinity High School at the current site on its existing footprint with consideration for partner/community facilities, while decanting pupils elsewhere for the duration of the demolition and building works. Main Advantages Strategic Fit • This would deliver a new school built to modern educational and building standards, of a size that allows for optimal occupancy. • Contributes towards net zero ambitions through provision of a new school built to NZPBS standard or better, with significant improvements in energy consumption to the existing school. • Spaces within the building can be redesigned to reduce overall capacity of school to meet decline in demand, making better use of the asset in a layout reconfiguration. Value for Money • Lower operating costs from a more energy efficient building. Main Disadvantages Strategic Fit • Although Trinity predates minimum space requirements under School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Act 1967, and Area Guidelines for Mainstream Schools (BB103) it should be stressed that the site is severely constrained, with little usable outdoor space and the school would not be built to its current size and extent if planned now. • The site constrains would limit the design in being able to deliver the full ambition of the Learning Estate Strategy. Achievability • A decant would be required for pupils of the school over a long spanning construction period. In a secondary school this would pose significant challenge in terms of maintaining curriculum delivery and retaining access to specialist equipment or workshops. This would add a level of complexity and cost to the project. • Finding suitable premises in which to base the school during decant may be an onerous task, whilst the option of decanting the school community throughout other secondary schools in Renfrewshire risks additional upheaval for other school communities
Page 35
35 Conclusions The current site of Trinity High School is unsuitable for construction of a modern school due to the footprint of the current site falling significantly short of required space metrics for a secondary school of this size. Any option involving decanting of the school community to facilitate a rebuild or refurbishment of the school would bring considerable challenges and disbenefits. This option would fail to achieve improvements to the suitability of the school environment due to constrained space. This option should not be considered as part of the preferred way forward.
Page 36
36 Option 4: New Build Trinity High School at Alternative Site a) Build a new High School elsewhere in the catchment on a suitable site with consideration for partner/community facilities; on completion, demolish the current building and sell or develop the land. While each individual option will be assessed on its own merits, particular attention will be given to those that offer the most advantageous and cost- effective solutions for the wider Learning Estate, maximising opportunities and delivering benefits for the broader community and estate. b) One specific option that will be brought back as part of the OBC, is that in the consideration of sites, King George V Playing Fields will be explored. Given the proximity of this site to Renfrew High School, this will warrant as part of this specific site option appraisal the consideration and implications for the long-term requirements associated with Renfrew High School and the potential of a joint campus solution. Main Advantages Strategic Fit • This would deliver a new school built to modern educational and building standards, of a size that allows for optimal occupancy. • Contributes towards net zero ambitions through provision of a new school built to NZPBS standard or better, with significant improvements in energy consumption to the existing school. • Spaces within the building can be redesigned to reduce overall capacity of school to meet decline in demand, making better use of the asset in a layout reconfiguration. Value for Money • Lower operating costs from a more energy efficient building. Achievability • Flexibility of timescale through the continued operation of the existing school during the design and build process • Avoids decanting the school community with all associated cost and complication. • A secondary school building project on a new site would prove attractive to the market. Main Disadvantages Achievability • The challenge of finding a suitable site for a new school. • The cost of buying suitable land to house the new school if suitable Council-owned land cannot be identified.
Page 37
37 Conclusions This option would address condition, sufficiency and suitability and would be able to meet most of the objectives of the Learning Estate Strategy. The current unknown of this option is whether the objective could meet active travel objectives if appropriate land cannot be sourced in an appropriate location of the catchment area, which would push too many young people into requiring home to school transport. This will become clearer through specific site assessments. However, this option should continue to be assessed further and can then be compared against alternative options to determine the options with overall best value.
Page 38
38 Option Description Viable 1 Do nothing Retain the building as-is and continue to operate the high school in its current format NO 2 Retrofit of Trinity High School Carry out a comprehensive retrofit of Trinity High School in order to bring it up to Net Zero Public Sector Building Standards (NZPSBS) or better, whilst improving the overall condition and suitability of the environments. NO 3 New Build Trinity High School at Current Site Rebuild Trinity High School at the current site on its existing footprint with consideration for partner/community facilities, while decanting pupils elsewhere for the duration of the demolition and building works. NO 4 New Build Trinity High School at Alternative Site c) Build a new High School elsewhere in the catchment on a suitable site with consideration for partner/community facilities; on completion, demolish the current building and sell or develop the land. While each individual option will be assessed on its own merits, particular attention will be given to those that offer the most advantageous and cost-effective solutions for the wider Learning Estate, maximising opportunities and delivering benefits for the broader community and estate. d) One specific option that will be brought back as part of the OBC, is that in the consideration of sites, King George V Playing Fields will be explored. Given the proximity of this site to Renfrew High School, this will warrant as part of this specific site option appraisal the YES
Page 39
39 consideration and implications for the long-term requirements associated with Renfrew High School and the potential of a joint campus solution.
Page 40
40 Appendix D – Critical Success Factors Critical Success Factors for Learning Estate Projects The following factors will be considered when assessing the detail of all options. Strategic fit and business needs • That options meet the objective of providing proposed investment priorities to complement and enhance the quality of school provision. • That options overcome the strategic challenges identified of operating schools which are in poor condition with excess capacity and high operational costs. • That options fit Renfrewshire Council’s Learning Estate Strategy and other Council and Scottish Government policies and ambitions for education. Potential Value for Money • That options optimise the social, economic and environmental value to the community in terms of potential costs, benefits and risks. Supplier capacity and capability • That options match the ability of providers to deliver any required design and construction services. • That options are attractive to potential suppliers of design and construction services. Potential affordability • That options can be funded from available sources of finance. • That options will align with resourcing constraints recognising the Council will continue to face affordability constraints over the long term in relation to the scale of investment that is both affordable in the short term but also financially sustainable in the long term. Potential achievability • That options will match Renfrewshire Council’s ability to respond to and facilitate the required changes. • That options match the skills of Council Officers, Consultants and Contractors required for successful delivery. • That options seek to address the aspiration, need and ambition of the school and wider community.