Agenda item

The Leader and Cabinet Member for Strategic Growth presented a report regarding the Prestwich Village Regeneration Project which will deliver a comprehensive redevelopment of the Prestwich Village site including the Longfield Centre.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Accepted the tender process that was undertaken via a Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015) was a compliant process and approved the appointment of VINCI Construction UK Limited (company number 02295904) to supply PCSA provision for Phases 1B and 2 for a fee of £0, subject to the agreement of the contract terms and conditions and final scope of services.

2.    Approved a delegation of authority to the Executive Director of Place in consultation with the Director of Law and Governance to finalise contractual arrangements. To note that the Director of Law and Governance will execute the contract in accordance with the Constitution, noting that the contract will need to be executed as a Deed under seal to ensure it is binding as there is no consideration/fee.

3.    Approved the Prestwich Regeneration LLP (the JV) to enter into negotiations with VINCI Construction UK Limited (company number 02295904) for the delivery of the main contract works through an open-book collaborative tender process.

Reasons for the decision:

Approval of the PCSA will enable the full completion of one of the three GMCA milestones (“The JV to have selected a main contractor, agreeing the relevant PCSA”) to be met before the end March 2026. This will allow the Council to secure funding to deliver the next phase of the Prestwich Village Regeneration Project.

Delegating authority to the Executive Director of Place in consultation with the Director of Law and Governance to finalise contractual arrangements will enable the contract to be executed without delay and within the required timeframes.

A PCSA utilises a two-stage procurement route where the same contractor who has been appointed to develop the design and price is usually (subject to an open-book negotiation) the appointed contractor to undertake the main works. Reasons include buildability and programme certainty, better cost certainty and risk management, faster mobilisation, single point continuity and is better value for money

Alternative options considered and rejected

No alternative option of selecting the PCSA contractor has been considered as the tender process was via a framework ensuring procurement was competitive and conducted in a fair, transparent and open manner.

Delegation to key senior officers ensures expedient appointment of the PCSA contractor to meet GMCA timescales. As there is currently no clear alternative route to external funding for the project, other than that which is on offer from the GMCA, meeting their timescales is essential to the success of the project to secure full project delivery.

A new and separate tender process was considered to appoint the main works contractor, but this would likely result in less buildability due to not having had the input during design, higher risk of bids including a larger risk allowance, longer programme and weaker cost certainty. Pre-contract negotiations will also be significant that will add time onto the process and affect the wider delivery programme.