Decision details

Burchatts Farm Barn car park, Stoke Park

Decision Maker: Executive

Decision status: For Determination

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Purpose:

To agree the transfer from provisional to approved capital programme for the surfacing of Burchatt's Farm Barn car park.

Decision:

Decision:

To defer the decision until a later date.

 

Reason(s):

The parking assessment will be redone and so this was not an urgent piece of work to be undertaken at this point in time.

 

Options considered and rejected by the Leader of the Council:

To proceed with the project by transferring monies from the provisional to approved capital programme.

 

Details of any conflict of interest declared by the Leader and any dispensation granted:

None

 

Details of any written submissions received and considered by the Leader from other members of the Executive, councillors or public:

 

Cllr Patrick Sheard (non-Exec member):

Given the latest strictures from HMG over the last few days, I feel we should postpone this decision until the HMG has made it decision regarding infrastructure developments /building workers clearer.

 

Cllr Deborah Seabrook (non-Exec member):

Agreed in principle. However, I have 3 points:

1.     Should we re-prioritise the capital programme in view of current unprecedented circumstances?

2.     If/ when the works go ahead, priority should be given to maintaining spaces for use by Disability challengers during the works. Others can walk.

3.     Only 3 cycle stands are mentioned in section 3.10. Given we are trying to increase sustainable travel, we should be making it easier for people to cycle, especially urban saints, Guildfordians etc.  

 

Leader’s response:

We will review the whole proposal because officers have informed us the parking assessment will have to be redone before we are able to start the work. Cycling can be reviewed then.

 

Cllr John Redpath (non-Exec member):

I am concerned about the charges for surfacing Burchatts car park. This is a huge amount of money for this area.  Has it been properly tendered and is it for all the currently unsurfaced areas such as Challengers, the Barn demise etc?

Even then it’s excessive.

 

Leader’s response:

  • It is an estimate to allow the formal tendering process to be undertaken.  We cannot go through a tendering process without first getting authority to spend the money. Our engineers have allowed for a generous contingency of 15%, so there is a good chance the final cost will be less. We do not want to under-estimate the final cost in case we do not have enough funds and end up having to go back to the Executive.
  • Our engineers have based the cost on current contractor rates and these rates are from contractors on the cheaper end of the scale. The cost includes the following:

 

·       Preliminaries, restrictive working, traffic management

 

·       SUDS drainage works

·       Earthworks

·       Block paving construction

·       Tarmac construction

·       Kerbs, edgings

·       Consultants: CDM, QS and Engineering design time

·       Contingencies, 15% of works.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Report author: Sally Astles

Publication date: 26/03/2020

Date of decision: 24/03/2020

Decided at meeting: 24/03/2020 - Executive

Accompanying Documents: