NOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of
Paragraph 10 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A
of the Local Government Act 1972
EXECUTIVE DECISION RECORDING SYSTEM :
REFERENCE NUMBER 03080029
CABINET
28 AUGUST 2003
WILLOW HOUSE REPLACEMENT, HUNT LANE, CHADDERTON;
SELECT LIST OF TENDERERS
REPORT OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1.0
PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1
To gain the Cabinet’s approval to the select list of tenderers for the
construction of a respite care centre for people with learning difficulties.
This new facility will replace the previously demolished Willow House at
Hunt Lane, Chadderton.
2.0
RECOMMENDATION
2.1
The Executive is recommended to approve the select list of tenderers
included in paragraph 3.5 of the report, for the design and construction of
the new respite care facility at Willow House.
g:\common\LB>C\0122
Page No 1
WILLOW HOUSE REPLACEMENT, HUNT LANE, CHADDERTON
SELECT LIST OF TENDERERS
3.0
INTRODUCTION
3.1
The former Willow House facility was demolished in 2001 due to the
presence of asbestos and the prohibitively high cost of removal.
3.2
It is proposed to design and construct a replacement facility on the same
site and comprising three self-contained flats, nine bedsitting rooms and
communal facilities including Lounge and Dining Room, Kitchen and
Laundry.
3.3
The total estimated cost of the works inclusive of fees and equipment
£1,096,950. Provision has been made within the Council’s capital
programme for a call on OMBC’s resources of £400,000 in 2003/04 and
further monies will be sourced from Learning Disability Development
Fund monies. The initial proposals were reported to the Executive on 11
March 2003 under item no. 3030009.
3.4
The scheme is to be the subject of a design and build contract and, in
accordance with the NJCC Code of Procedure for Selective Tendering for
Design and Build the tender list is limited to three contractors.
3.5
The select list of tenderers is as follows:BAAS Construction Ltd. ....................................................... Burnley
Greenbooth Construction Co. Ltd. ........................................ Oldham
J Greenwood (Builders) Ltd. ................................................. Oldham
4.0
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1
The breakdown of costs identified in paragraph 3.3 is as follows:-
Construction costs
Professional fees for Contract and Supervision
Planning Fees
Building Regulations Fees
Site Investigation
Total:
g:\common\LB>C\0122
£
950,500
142,000
3,950
500
1,096,950
Page No 2
The expenditure will be phased as follows:03/04
04/05
05/06
186,177
895,515
15,258
No planning fee is shown in the breakdown of costs above because
planning permission has already been applied for and granted by external
consultants working for Selhal.
5.0
LEGAL SERVICES’ COMMENTS
None at this stage.
6.0
TREASURER’S COMMENTS
6.1
Capital Implications
The scheme represents capital expenditure and will be a charge against
the Social Services Capital Programme.
Provision in the programme is £775,000, of which £400,000 was to be
from the Council’s own resources in 2003/04.
It now appears that the scheme will be phased and financed as follows :2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 Total
£’000
£’000
£’000 £’000
Single Capital Pot Funding
Loan, Capital Receipts or Revenue
Other Funding
Contribution from the Health
Authority - SSAP Grant
Social Service Performance Fund
Grant
Virement from Social Services
Revenue Budget
Funding to be identified
g:\common\LB>C\0122
0.0
484.7
15.3
500.0
150.0
0.0
0.0
150.0
36.2
13.8
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
186.2
75.0
322.0
895.5
0.0
75.0
0.0 322.0
15.3 1097.0
Page No 3
This raises two issues:In total there is a shortfall in resources of £321,950 (£1,096,950 £775,000). When the tenders are received this figure will be more
accurately known and resources will need to be identified by the
Executive Director of Social Services and/or the tender revised to reduce
the anticipated total cost to within the resources available.
In 2003/04 the £400,000 call on Council resources will not be required.
Members have been advised of the acute pressures on the capital
programme in this year and the risk that some resources (eg capital
receipts) may be less than budgeted. This slippage will offset any such
reduction in resources.
6.2
Revenue Implications
There are no additional revenue implications as the costs of the new
centre are currently provided for in the Social Services revenue budget.
7.0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS
7.1
Energy - Increase in energy consumption due to new building.
7.2
Transport - No change.
7.3
Pollution - Negligible.
7.4
Consumption and Use of Resources - Use of new building materials.
7.5
Built Environment - Replacement building on site of previous building;
redevelopment of currently derelict site.
7.6
Natural Environment - as above.
8.0
HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPLICATIONS
8.1
Residents will benefit from a safe environment which in itself will
contribute to improved health.
g:\common\LB>C\0122
Page No 4
9.0
COMMUNITY COHESION IMPLICATIONS (INCLUDING
CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS IN ACCORDANCE
WITH SECTION 17 OF THE ACT)
9.1
All sections of the community could potentially benefit from this
replacement facility.
10.0 SUPPORTING PAPERS
10.1 Files relating to this work can be viewed by contacting Mr D K Mycock
at Henshaw House, Cheapside, Oldham, telephone number
0161 911 4130.
The following is a list of the background papers on which this report is based in accordance
with the requirements of Section 100(1) of the Local Government Act 1972. It does not
include documents which would disclose exempt or confidential information as defined by
that Act.
FileRef - records held in Department
Any Person wishing to inspect copies of the above background papers should contact:Mr D K Mycock - telephone 0161 911 4130
g:\common\LB>C\0122
Page No 5