Learning Estate Investment Programme (Leip) - Mull Campus - Preferred Site Recommendation
Argyll and Bute Council · 27 February 2025
Back to Argyll and Bute Council — 27 February 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Classification: OFFICIAL# Criteria Category Category Individual Factors to consider Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Notes/ rationale 3 Utility infrastructure - capacity and need for any diversions 7 21 5 15 2 6 5 15 Existing utilities considered, minimal diversions, opportunities for future heat network connections. Distance of running utilities. 3 Ground conditions 6 18 5 15 5 15 7 21 Potential for contamination at Site 1. Poorer ground conditions at Site 2/Site 3 marine deposits etc. 2 Topography 3 6 8 16 9 18 5 10 Existing school site constrained. Site 2/3 both more devleopable level wise 2 Flood risk & Drainage Assessment 4 8 6 12 5 10 9 18 Next steps would involve flood modelling/assessment. SEPA engagement key 3 Site abnormals 3 9 8 24 7 21 5 15 2 Habitat constraints 8 16 9 18 5 10 7 14 Impact 53 10 Is the site capable of accommodating the brief in full? 4 40 9 90 9 90 5 50 South tob can be used better than existing, due to constraints. More space in Craignure/Garmony sites. 5 Quality of external environment to support outside learning, sports activities etc 3 15 9 45 10 50 6 30 2 Does the site provide capacity for future expansion? 4 8 9 18 9 18 5 10 8 Travel times for ELC and primary school pupils 9 72 4 32 4 32 8 64 Systra report 2 Travel times for staff and secondary school pupils 9 18 4 8 5 10 8 16 Systra report 5 Access and connectivity to good community facilities and services 9 45 4 20 1 5 8 40 Ryder place report 2 Impact on family life 4 8 5 10 5 10 4 8 Refer to Stantec report. Impact on families if their child is away from home during the week was felt to be the greatest (sites 1 & 4). Increased travel time affects a greater number of families (sites 2 & 3).Travel time increase has a bigger impact for families with young children compared to older children 2 Equitable - unites north & south of island 4 8 7 14 6 12 4 8 Criteria re-defined to be around uniting north/south island, as it was felt that better reflects community feedback 2 Sustain and support local economy 7 14 4 8 3 6 7 14 Stantec report 2 Impact of construction activities on existing school/ residential areas 3 6 7 14 6 12 7 14 1 Good public transport links to site and location 5 5 7 7 4 4 6 6 Existing public transport links. Craignure slightly higher score due to ferry terminal and better links to north & south 2 Existing safe active travel links to site 4 8 3 6 2 4 6 12 Improvements in scoring could be seen as a result of future development at sites 1 Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/ staff mode split) 8 8 5 5 3 3 7 7 1 Potential impact on public transport network 9 9 7 7 7 7 8 8 Scoring for sites 2 & 3 assumes school bus from Dervaig would travel via Tobermory 2 Ability of existing (wider) roads infrastructure to service site 3 6 4 8 3 6 7 14 New access roads required for both Craignure/Garmony. Tob South limitations. Existing site challenging/constrained, not much space for adjustment - one way in/out. Single track roads on Mull have an impact 1 Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 No material difference between site options 2 Potential for re-use of existing infrastructure and buildings (embodied carbon) 4 8 3 6 1 2 3 6 3 Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) 8 24 3 9 4 12 8 24 Personal decisions to drive could impact actual carbon impact 15 Costs associated with construction abnormals 9 135 8 120 5 75 7 105 Thomson Gray report. Assume demolition included in scope regardless Based on assumptions and known information, site investigations not completed at this early stage 5 Potential acquisition/ disposal costs 4 20 7 35 10 50 3 15 Market value of each site. Updated 28/1/25 to reflect existing site value excluding common good land, and cumulative value of Tobermory South site (2 separate land transactions) Site 3 Garmony (005) MULL CAMPUS SITE SELECTION CRITERIA (v5) Site 4 Tobermory South (013) Accessibility & Transport 15 32 8 8 Deliverability Education Community and Place Weighting Site 1 Existing Tobermory site Site 2 Craignure (001) Affordability Sustainability 5 25
Page 2
Classification: OFFICIAL# Criteria Category Category Individual Factors to consider Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Notes/ rationale Site 3 Garmony (005) MULL CAMPUS SITE SELECTION CRITERIA (v5) Site 4 Tobermory South (013)Weighting Site 1 Existing Tobermory site Site 2 Craignure (001) 5 Other (revenue) cost implications e.g. pupil transport 9 45 2 10 2 10 9 45 4 additional buses for site 2 & 3 (£1,385 per week for 40 weeks = £222k per annum) plus additional cost for staff travel for change of base (over 4 years). Any hostel savings, assuming catchment area change, negigible as staff shortages already. Main difference would be cost of food 3 Wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risk 6 18 7 21 7 21 7 21 Common good land risk on site 1 Sites 2-4 have site acquisition risk 2 Construction Programme risk 3 6 8 16 5 10 7 14 Likely to be a prolonged programme on site 1 due to need for staged construction and decant. Greater enabling works required for site 3 2 Planning designation and sensitive receptors 8 16 7 14 6 12 8 16 Site 2 - consider risk with housing development next door. Countryside zone, but already some development. Site 3 - also countryside zone, flooding considerations, cat 1 peat land. Site 4 - Housing allocation, amendment needed to LDP. TOTAL 100 625 628 546 645 Impact 53 Deliverability 15 Affordability 25 Risk 7 7Risk Affordability 25