Archived decisions

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Executive Decision Record

1. The decision:

a) That approval be given to tender framework contracts to supply civil engineering professional services to Hampshire County Council and be available for other regional authorities through Improvement and Efficiency South East, to operate between 2010 and 2014.

2. Reasons for the decision:

2.1. The Council has a duty to maintain and improve highway infrastructure within Hampshire in a safe and effective manner. The execution of this duty is discharged by effective and careful design of improvement and maintenance projects.

2.2. The existing term contract for civil engineering professional services with Mott Gifford expires on 31 March 2010.

2.3. The decision will allow procurement of flexible and effective resources to assist with the delivery of highway infrastructure and other projects within Hampshire and the wider South-East region by providing design services and management of construction projects.

2.4. The Executive Member for Environment supports this recommendation.

3. Other options considered and rejected:

3.1. Option 1:

Single framework for design with multiple suppliers

A restricted example of the preferred approach, this option combines all design requirements within a single framework applying to the South East regional requirements. This option reduces the number of commissions and suppliers overall thereby reducing management costs. A significant disadvantage, however, is the lack of ability to distinguish between Local Transport Plan related services and the design of major projects. The preferred option allows subtle differences in design objectives to be separated from those required by a major project. In addition the preferred option allows selection of suppliers that are more suited to each service (although it is possible that some suppliers may be able to deliver both).

3.2. Option 2:

Term contract with single supplier

This option does allow a long term relationship to be developed because the term can exceed four years. It does, however, rely upon a guaranteed level of annual expenditure to enable the supplier to allocate resources. Although performance mechanisms can be developed which assist with satisfactory delivery, the use of a single supplier may not provide a flexible and consistent resource in a regional situation.

4. Conflicts of interest:

4.1. Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker: None.

4.2. Conflicts of interest declared by other Executive Members consulted: None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee: none.

6. Reason(s) for the matter being dealt with if urgent: not applicable.

7. Statement from the Decision Maker: