Decision details

Councillor Lucy Smith, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, presented the report which requested Cabinet approval of the project sum for works in relation to the Pupil Referral Unit, following conclusion of the tender exercise, and specifically in relation to the PRU’s Whitefield Centre building. These are phase 2 of works following the relocation of the main PRU building from Spring Lane to the New Kershaw Centre.

A member requested that there is ongoing consultation with residents in the local area throughout the process and highlighted a known query in relation to the site entrance which is currently being looked into.

Decision:

Cabinet:

• Approved the project sum value, the extent of works and programme detailed within part B of this report.
• Delegate authority to the Executive Director of Education in consultation with the Director of Law and Governance to negotiate and execute the building contract.

Reasons for recommendation(s):

• Approval of the works is required in order for the Whitefield Centre project to progress to manufacture and construction phase. Key considerations within this document have informed both the scope and the methodology for carrying out the works as proposed.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

• Delay instructing the contract: This would delay overall Whitefield Centre completion date by two months as Cabinet approval cannot be sourced in the August cycle. This would prevent the school from receiving the additional intake of pupils in and they would have to be housed in alternative provision outside the Borough of Bury. This would also push the works into the winter months, potentially extending the duration on site and associated costs of construction.
• Seek an alternative solution for the contract: The Council have considered alternative options to deliver the additional accommodation within the timescales provided. This included use of other Council owned property, and the use of modular accommodation on the existing site, partial reconfiguration only. No other Council owned property could meet the needs of the school within the available timescale. Partial reconfiguration would not provide the classroom accommodation the school requires and there was insufficient space within the school to site modular accommodation or extend. A split site was also discounted as the school would not have the staffing and safeguarding arrangement available to accommodate this. None of alternative options explored where able to deliver the additional accommodation with the available timescales.