PART 1
(OPEN TO THE PUBLIC)
ITEM NO.
REPORT OF THE LEAD MEMBER FOR HOUSING SERVICES
TO THE CABINET
ON 6 February 2001
TITLE : Proposed Renewal Areas in Broughton – Appointment of consultants
RECOMMENDATIONS : That members approve the appointment of consultants
other then those submitting the lowest tender price for the work.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY : Consideration is being given to the declaration of one or
more Renewal Areas within the Higher Broughton area under the provisions of the
Local Government and Housing Act 1989.
The Act requires the City Council to carry out a detailed assessment of the area and
extensive consultation of residents and other stakeholders before it can declare
such Renewal Areas.
The contract to carry out this work on the Council’s behalf was put out to tender in
compliance with the provisions of Standing Orders and a shortlist of three firms of
consultants were invited to make presentations to a panel of senior officers chaired
by the Director of Housing Services.
The bids were as follows
Consultant A - Penningtons FMCS Ltd - £49,400
Consultant B – David Adamson and Partners - £68,250
Consultant C – Rodney Dykes Housing Services Ltd - £107,000
Following these presentations it was felt that the bid by Consultant B, although not
the lowest priced, represented best value to the City Council.
D:\219513310.DOC
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS : Tender Brief for the appointment of consultants to
carry out a Neighbourhood Renewal Assessment within Higher Broughton.
(Available for public inspection)
CONTACT OFFICER : John Wooderson, Head of Private Sector Housing
WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S) Broughton, Kersal.
KEY COUNCIL POLICIES Housing Strategy, Regeneration Strategy, SRB II
DETAILS (Continued Overleaf)
Consideration is being given to the declaration of 2 Renewal Areas in Broughton, subject to the
outcome of neighbourhood renewal assessments to be carried out by consultants.
These assessments are a pre-requisite and are carried out to identify the circumstances and needs
of the areas, in order to establish whether the declaration of a Renewal Area would be
appropriate.
The declaration of one or more Renewal Areas would allow the Local Authority greater
flexibility to spend money from the Private Sector Housing Capital program, including the ability
to offer more attractive terms to participants in Group Repair Schemes. It would also allow the
Authority to make use of additional Compulsory Purchase and Clearance powers under the
Local Government and Housing Act 1989.
Although the declaration of a Renewal Area does not automatically result in additional
Government funding, such a declaration does clearly identify an area as a strategic priority for
the Authority and would act as a focus for corporate working and investment.
In addition, it is anticipated that Renewal Area status would attract private investment to the area
and serve as a focus for a corporate response to the relevant issues.
The extent of the work involved in carrying out the statutory process leading to the declaration
of a Renewal Area is lengthy, complex and staff intensive. In order to facilitate the completion of
the work within a reasonable timescale it was felt that the appointment of consultants was
appropriate.
Therefore, the contract for carrying out the required work was put out to tender in accordance
with the provisions of the City Council’s Standing Orders. As part of the selection process
resulted in three firms of consultants being invited to make presentations to a panel of senior
officers chaired by the Director of Housing Services. The panel included officers from
Development Services, Social Services and Education directorates in addition to the Housing
D:\219513310.DOC
Staff present.
Each company was given the opportunity to make a short presentation followed by a number of
questions from the panel, they were then assessed against the following criteria: 





price/value
completeness of bid
experience
quality of bid
deliverability
technical ability.
Consultant A was the most expensive by a considerable margin, this resulted in a very poor score
for price/value which precluded their appointment despite an otherwise good quality
submission.
Consultant C, although the least expensive, performed poorly both in terms of their presentation
and responses to questions from the panel. This lead in poor scores being achieved for
completeness of bid, quality of bid and deliverability. These reflected the concerns of members
of the panel that, although strong on technical and physical issues, the consultant to had failed to
fully address the wide range of social and economic challenges facing Broughton.
It was felt that Consultant B’s written submission, presentation and responses to questions from
the panel demonstrated an understanding of the challenges facing the area as well as the
technical ability to complete the necessary processes together with a cost that was acceptable.
The members of the panel therefore recommended the appointment of consultant B on the
ground that although their tender is not the lowest it does represent best value to the City
Council.
Members should be aware that consultant B has recently been awarded the contract to carry out
a citywide survey of house conditions in private sector.
There are areas of potential savings due to overlaps between the two pieces of work which
would be the subject of negotiations should the recommendations of this report be approved.
Officers would seek to secure either a reduction in costs to the City Council of the Renewal Area
study or additional value, such as the preparation of limited urban design proposals for parts of
the area, within the current tender price.
D:\219513310.DOC