Decision details

Exemption to procurement: appointment of Real PM Limited to develop a construction logistics mapping and visualisation tool to plan and manage construction activity in the Tottenham Hale regeneration area.

Decision Maker: Assistant Director for Area Regeneration

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Decision:

Approval to waive Contract Standing Order (CSO) 8.03 (requirement to obtain at least three competitive quotations) as allowed under CSO 10.01.2 D and in accordance with CSO 9.06.1 C to award the contract for the development of a construction logistics mapping and visualisation tool for Tottenham Hale to Real PM Limited (RPM Ltd).

Reasons for the decision:

The request is to waive the requirement for three quotations for the following reasons:

• This is a unique tool which not only produces technical analysis but uses a tailored mix of software to illustrate this complex information in a user-friendly way. This will be important in communicating complex information quickly and easily to a range of technical and non-technical audiences including members of the public.

• RPM has been commissioned by Argent Related to undertake work on the SDP sites at Tottenham Hale. Given that these make up a large part of the overall development area at Tottenham Hale, there are economies of scale, value added benefits and synergies to be achieved from appointing them to develop the visualisation tool for the wider DCF area. RPM have a strong track record of developing mapping and visualisation tools for large scale construction projects including at the Argent Kings Cross development which involved comparable requirements for detailed and complex construction logistics planning support.

Alternative options considered:

Option 1 – waive the requirement for three competitive quotations and directly appoint RPM to undertake the CLP visualisation mapping
Option 1 has been identified as the preferred option due to the bespoke nature of the product offered by RPM which directly meets the requirements for Tottenham Hale, as well as the cost and time benefits of this consultancy already being appointed to undertake similar works for Argent Related in Tottenham Hale.

Option 2 – not to appoint RPM to develop the construction logistics mapping and visualisation tool.
Given the scale of construction activity that is set to commence in Tottenham Hale over the next twelve months there is a need for the council to be proactive in developing the tools necessary to manage and coordinate this activity. This includes a need for close and detailed coordination between schemes to plan for and mitigate potential conflicts and manage the impact on the surrounding area. The RPM tool will enable this work to be undertaken rapidly and effectively, providing an accurate forecast of on-site activity across the Tottenham Hale area which will enable detailed discussion between the council and landowners to mitigate any issues highlighted by the tool. The current information contained within site CLPs is not sufficient in itself to build up a cumulative picture of all the works taking place and illustrate, for example, all the HGV traffic flows resulting from the multiple schemes being delivered in one single visually compelling overview. For this reason, the option of not procuring this piece of work has been rejected.


Option 3 – the council obtain three quotes for this commission prior to making an appointment
Due to the dual requirement for this piece of work to produce technical information, yet ensure that this is in a highly accessible, refined and user-friendly format, the project team has determined that it would not be possible to obtain three comparable quotes for the services required as RPM provide a unique and bespoke offer which combines technical detail with well-illustrated, user-friendly outputs. In addition the appointment of RPM represents best value for money for the council given the economies of scale highlighted in section 4. As a result this option has been rejected.


Publication date: 17/06/2019

Date of decision: 06/06/2019

Accompanying Documents: