This text has been reproduced from the original document to enable non-english speaking residents to read it using the translate function on the right ->
|Decision maker(s) at each authority and date of Cabinet meeting, Cabinet Member meeting or (in the case of individual Cabinet Member decisions) the earliest date the decision will be taken||Cllr Rock Feilding-Mellen
Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Housing, Property and Regeneration.
|Date entered on to the Forward Plan:
18 November 2015
Forward Plan reference:
|Report title (decision subject)||APPOINTMENT OF CONSULTANCY SERVICE FOR HOUSING FEASIBILITY WORK, SILCHESTER EAST AND WEST
|Reporting officer||Laura Johnson, Director of Housing|
|Access to information classification||Public with Private Appendix
- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- This report seeks approval to appoint CBRE Ltd as Lead Property Consultant to provide a range of consultancy services, incorporating an architectural practice, to carry out an initial Options Appraisal to understand if there are viable options for redeveloping Silchester East and West.
1.2 A report was taken to Cabinet on 16 July 2015 which agreed that the options appraisal be undertaken, that a budget of £200,000 be set aside and that approval to incur expenditure against this budget be delegated to the Cabinet Member for Housing, Property and Regeneration.
2.1 That CBRE be appointed to carry out the Options Appraisal for Silchester East and West for the fee proposal outlined in their submission, totalling a maximum of £200,000.
- REASONS FOR DECISION
- The Council’s procurement rules state that any contract award of a value of between £172,515 and £499,999 requires a Key Decision.
4.1 The Council has made an in principle commitment to a programme of redeveloping selected low-density Council estates. The Silchester Estate, as defined in the site plan shown in Appendix One, is one of the areas the Council now proposes to consider for redevelopment.
4.2 The purpose of the initial Options Appraisal is to better understand whether there is capacity to redevelop the estate in order to optimise on the following Council objectives:
- To provide additional affordable housing, thereby preserving our mixed communities.
- To tackle the underlying causes of deprivation by improving health outcomes, employment opportunities, educational attainment and aspiration, and by reducing crime and the fear of crime.
- To build the “conservation areas of the future” by reflecting and matching the high quality urban design in the rest of the borough.
4.3 The Options Appraisal exercise for Silchester Estates will establish:
- The capacity for additional new homes;
- The opportunity for improvement to the built environment;
- The opportunity to provide decanting for existing homes;
- Improvements to any remaining council housing stock;
- The replacement of out-dated existing housing stock, such as studios or bedsits;
- An acceptable offer to leaseholders and the impact of this on financial viability;
- Overall financial viability in terms of the ability to be “self-funding” and inform the potential procurement/delivery option(s).
4.4 A number of potential design based scenarios will be considered through the options appraisal. There are at least six scenarios:
- RBKC owned land/stock – optimum redevelopment of all medium and low rise residential accommodation, but retaining the four tower blocks;
- RBKC owned land/stock – optimum redevelopment of all medium and low rise residential accommodation, together with the demolition and redevelopment of the four tower blocks, but not including any new tower blocks within the proposals;
- RBKC owned land/stock – as per (2) above but providing for a number of replacement tower blocks, although not necessarily on the current sites/footprints of the existing towers;
- All land/stock (RBKC and other ownership) otherwise as per (1) above;
- All land/stock (RBKC and other ownership) otherwise as per (2) above;
- All land/stock (RBKC and other ownership) otherwise as per (3) above.
- PROPOSAL AND ISSUES
5.1 It is proposed that CBRE be appointed to carry out the required work in line with their fee proposal shown below:
|Element of work||Estimated total fee||Days per months
|Architect (Sub-consultant: Porphyrios)||£78,000|
|Client Design Advisor – Residential||£16,000||4|
|Client Design Advisor –master planning review||£8,000||2|
|Cost consultancy (Arcadis) – feasibility stage||£20,000||5|
|Programme Management (CBRE)||£8,000|
|Programme Management (Arcadis)||£2,000|
|Project Total including Contingency||£200,000|
- OPTIONS AND ANALYSIS
6.1 The appointment of CBRE is recommended following a procurement process which has identified that their bid is the most economically advantageous tender. The options are therefore either to appoint CBRE or recommence a new procurement process.
7.1 Ward Councillors, local residents and other stakeholders directly affected by the proposals were informed in July 2015 that the Council is to undertake the Options Appraisal. Consultation is continuing throughout the options appraisal process.
- EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS
8.1 There are no equalities implications for this report.
- LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
9.1 The procurement process described in this report complies with public procurement law and the Council’s Contract Regulations. The recommended decision is lawful and within the decision maker’s delegated powers.
- FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS
10.1 The cost of appointing CBRE can be met from within the provision agreed by Cabinet in July 2015.
11.1 The recommendation to appoint CBRE follows on from a procurement process which is outlined below.
11.2 The Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) Property Panels Framework was used which allows a ‘Further Competition tender process’ in accordance with the Public Contract Regulations then in force and the Council’s Contract Regulations.
11.3 The procurement process commenced on the 23rd April 2015 when a Contract Notice and Sifting documents (Further Competition stage 1) were uploaded onto capitalEsourcing, the Council’s secure e-procurement portal.
11.4 All 14 Suppliers who are members of the framework were informed of the opportunity. Sifting responses were requested to be submitted prior to the deadline of 12 noon on Thursday the 30th April 2015.
11.5 The seven sifting responses were evaluated on the capitalEsourcing portal by the Evaluation Team consisting of the RBKC Director of Property, the Head of Investment and Development and the Head of Strategy and Regeneration. The evaluation process was carried out in accordance with the scoring criteria as stated in the sifting document with the following four top scoring Consultancy Practices instructed to proceed to the next stage of the process (Further Competition Part 2). Four Practices were asked to submit a bid prior to the return deadline of 12 noon on Monday the 22nd June 2015.
11.6 The Invitation to submit a bid was released to the four Practices on Thursday the 21st May 2015 for return prior to 12 noon on Monday the 22nd June 2015. The basis for the award of contract was for the best Quality / Cost ratio with the specific weightings as follows:-
Quality Assessment (Technical Envelope)80%
Financial Assessment (Commercial Envelope)20%
11.7 The bidders were asked to provide detailed answers to the Technical / Quality questions shown below (weightings in brackets):
Set out how you will manage the project(s) and communicate with the Council given the need to work alongside not only the Council but also its external design consultant(s), legal adviser(s) and potentially the other client side consultancy team. Responses should include:-
a. Company Profile
b. Your approach to project management and/or how you intend to work collaboratively with other consultants to enable client’s objectives to be achieved. Capacity to undertake the project and details of the proposed personnel who would have overall responsibility and those involved on a day to day basis.
c. Your ability to resource the delivery of two or more schemes and how you would manage this.
d. Details of how you ensure appropriate quality management measures are applied in the delivery of your services.
e. Outline your methodology for obtaining planning consent for the site(s) including key stages and de-risking the process.
f. Demonstrate 5 relevant case studies of comparable projects (preferably within a London context and including listed buildings) that clearly show evidence of your capability in relation to all questions in this section.
(Score 30% of 80%)
Outline your methodology for undertaking the initial and ongoing viability, finance and business case analysis including:-
a. How you will model the viability of the schemes ensuring the appraisal assumptions are robust and deliverable.
b. The key issues and considerations that you will feed into the formulation of the scheme design and the interaction you will have with the design teams.
c. Describe the methodology you will use to appraise the case for a single vehicle as opposed to two or more separate vehicles.
d. Set out what you see as the key issues and risks for the council in deciding to procure one or more joint venture delivery vehicles; and how you will assist the Council in addressing them.
e. Set out what you think the key issues and concerns would be for a private sector partner in considering a joint venture with the council; and what the Council could do to address these.
(Score 25% of 80%)
Set out how you would work alongside the Council to conduct the procurement of a joint venture partner using a relevant (within the last 3 years) example, including:-
a. Your understanding of the relevant compliant procurement processes available to the council and the strengths and weaknesses of each.
b. How you will conduct and conclude commercial negotiations to safeguard the council’s position and satisfy regulatory issues.
c. Your approach to enabling the Council’s key objective to control design of the scheme(s) to be incorporated.
d. An overview of your firms capability to advise on finance and funding matters and details of your strategy for arranging financing and detail the risk mitigation procedures you will put in place.
(Score 15% of 80%)
Post selection of the development partner(s) outline how you can assist in the procurement of a contractor to build out the schemes and undertake management of the construction process including:-
a. Your proposed contractor procurement strategy assuming that the procuring authority (the JV) is not categorised as a public sector entity.
b. How you will manage construction and the project budget ensuring that the scheme is delivered on time, on budget and to the JV’s required specification.
c. The issue escalation procedures you will put in place.
d. Any other key issues that will need to be considered.
(Score 15% of 80%)
Please outline your approach to the branding, marketing and sales of the residential units including:-
a. A consideration on the strengths and weaknesses of the sites from a residential sales perspective.
b. Your views on the optimum marketing and sales strategy for achieving best value.
(Score 10% of 80%)
Provide an indicative programme plan for delivering the project up to and including the selection of a joint venture partner. This should also include advice on the potential ways to de-risk the programme and/or reduce timescales.
(Score 5% of 80%)
11.8 All four companies returned bids. The evaluation of the bids commenced on the 22nd June 2015 via the capitalEsourcing portal by the evaluation team, consisting of the RBKC Director for Property, Head of Property, Head of Investment and Development and the Head of Housing Strategy and Regeneration. The evaluation process was modulated by the Corporate Property Construction Procurement Specialist.
11.9 Detailed information regarding the identification of bidders, the results of the procurement process and the evaluation process are shown in the confidential Part B Appendix.
Director of Housing
|Cleared by Finance (officer’s initials)
|Cleared by Legal (officer’s initials)
Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) – Background papers used in the preparation of this report
[Note: Please list only those that are not already in the public domain, i.e. you do not need to include Government publications, previous public reports etc.]
Contact officer(s): Ruth Angel, Head of Strategy and Regeneration, Housing Department, Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea.
Download the document: KD04690R appointment of consultancy services