Decision
Weymouth Harbour
are seeking approval to spend in excess of £500k on
replacement pontoons at Customs House Quay, Weymouth Harbour.
The existing pontoon sections installation occurred
between 1993 and 2006, meaning that some of the sections are 30 years old. This
project is a planned replacement of the infrastructure which is required to
ensure business continuity of the Harbour with regard to
accommodating visiting recreational and commercial vessels in line with the
Open Port Duty.
The Harbour has
a programme of pontoon replacement through its Committee and Full Council
approved Asset Management Plan. This year, it is planned to replace 300 metres
of pontoon which has reached the end of its design life at Customs House Quay.
The replacement pontoon is to be rated higher than that currently in place to
accommodate larger motor yachts, greater footfall from for example cruise ship
tenders, and to allow year-round use of the pontoon during more inclement
weather conditions. This should generate additional income to the harbour,
provide safer facilities and allow for more flexible harbour berthing
operations.
A procurement
tender process has been carried out seeking prices for two options. These have
been scored on the basis of quality, social value and
price and the preferred contractor from this process has been selected. The
options were as follows:
Option 1:
replace all but one pontoon section - £488,000 – one pontoon is only 5
years old so it was considered that if costs were too high this pontoon could
be left in place although this would be at the lower specification
Option 2:
replace all pontoons at the higher specification - £554,000 – the 5-year-old
pontoon would then be used to replace another pontoon that has reached the end
of its design life in the harbour or used in a different location in the
harbour for additional berthing space.
The difference
in cost between the options is £66k. However, to remobilise contractors and
manufacture a pontoon in the future would be a more expensive option to replace
the remaining lower specification section of pontoon. In addition, a run of
pontoons with the same specification would be easier to manage operationally
during busy periods of berthing. For these reasons, it is considered that the
preferred option would be option 2, but this brings the cost above the
threshold permitted without Cabinet approval. However, as Harbours are a
non-executive function of Dorset Council this decision falls either to Full
Council, or in the case of an urgent request can be delegated to a Chief Officer:-
In any
cases which s/he considers to be urgent, to discharge any function and deliver
any
service
within the Chief Officers responsibility, other than those functions which can
only be
discharged
by the Council or a specific Committee. This delegation is subject to the
following
conditions :
(a)
prior consultation with the Monitoring Officer and the Section 151 Officer;
(b)
consultation with the appropriate Executive Member or the Chairman of the
appropriate
Committee; and,
(c) to
the extent it will incur expenditure from working balances and/or reserves, the
prior
approval
of the s151 Officer.
An urgent
decision is required because of the potential for increased costs and the
delayed timing of delivery. The contractor has been contacted and asked if they
had to wait for a decision until October (when the next Full Council meeting is
to be held) would this have any effect on the delivery schedule or cost. It
potentially would on both counts and the schedule for replacement could run
into the new season (next May 2023) which would be unworkable. An urgent
decision is therefore required.
Funding for the
pontoon replacement has already been approved through the Harbours Committee
and Full Council and will be covered by the harbour reserve.
Tenderers were required to price for two scenarios:
·
Scenario 1 -
Replacement of sections A, B and C
·
Scenario 2 -
Replacement of sections A and B, with the redeployment and extension of the
existing pontoon at section A, to section C
Awarding Scenario 1 was the preferred choice however
due to uncertainty of costs and affordability,
Scenario 2 was formed as this would be lower in cost.
Within each scenario, tenderers were also invited to
price for different options in relation to the material of the pontoons to be
installed – galvanised steel or concrete.
Several tender ‘Lots’ were created to allow for these price
options. Concrete pontoons typically
have a longer life but are higher in cost.
It was unknown if suppliers would be able to offer concrete or if the
costs would even be affordable, however the Council did not want to rule the
option out hence allowing tenderers to offer what they could.
Clear evaluation methodology was developed in
advance which would allow the Council to compare offers for different options
against each other fairly. This methodology was provided to tenderers within
the tender documents for transparency (see Pricing Methodology below).
It was also detailed to tenderers that Scenario 1
tenders would be evaluated in the first instance, and then if the lowest
tendered prices offered under this scenario exceeded the Council's allocated
budget, then Scenario 2 would be evaluated.
Pricing methodology
Tenderers were required to submit a price for each
section of pontoon along with a breakdown of costs for each section, for each
Lot they tendered for. They were also required to state the longevity for each
section, as this would vary with the material.
The total price was divided by the expected lifespan
of the pontoon to give a Price Per Annum for each section. A maintenance cost
per annum was stated, based upon the current maintenance costs to the Harbour
Team on steel and concrete pontoons, which was then added to the Price Per
Annum for each section. This
gave a Price Per Annum + Maintenance (PPAM) figure.
The PPAM figure was used for the purpose of price
evaluation to allow the prices for different materials and longevities to be
evaluated comparatively.
Three offers were received. However, one tenderer
failed the pass/fail criteria.
The lowest offer for Scenario 1 (the Councils
preferred choice) was £554,270 and this was also the preferred contractor.
Decision type: Key
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Notice of proposed decision first published: 30/09/2022
Decision due: 30 Oct 2022 by Executive Director, Place
Lead member: Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment
Lead director: Executive Director, Place
Contact: Ken Buchan, Head of Environment and Wellbeing Email: ken.buchan@dorsetcouncil.gov.uk.