Committee: Date: Classification: Report No: Agenda Item Cabinet 1st October Unrestricted No: 2003

Report of: Title: Service Head (Property & Facilities Office Accommodation Strategy – Management) Development of New Civic Headquarters – Selection of Tenderers Originating Officer(s): Graeme Peacock Wards Affected: All

1. SUMMARY

1.1 This report deals with the selection process for tenderers to be invited to submit detailed proposals for the development of the New Civic Headquarters at the LEB site in Bethnal Green.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 That the following consortia be invited to submit detailed proposals for the construction of the new Civic Headquarters:

(1) Countryside / Skanska / Alsop Architects

(2) Mapeley / Delancy / Barratt / MacCormack Jamieson Prichard Architects

(3) Urban Catalyst / Costain / Penorye and Prasad Architects

(4) Taylor Woodrow / Broadway Malyan Architects

2.2 That the evaluation of bids submitted be based on:

- Technical Evaluation - Financial Evaluation - Architectural Evaluation - Public Consultation

and that the Service Head (Property & Facilities Management) be authorised to agree with RIBA arrangements for the architectural evaluation element.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT, 2000 (SECTION 97) LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS USED IN PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT

Brief description of background paper Name and telephone number of holder and address where open to inspection

New Civic Headquarters / Office Accommodation Strategy Graeme Peacock ext. 4240

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

3. BACKGROUND

3.1 Cabinet on 30th April 2003 agreed plans for implementing the Council’s Office Accommodation Strategy, including the development of a new Civic Headquarters on the LEB site and a timetable and procurement route to achieve this.

3.2 C B Richard Ellis and Dearle & Henderson have been appointed as advisers to the authority to assist in this process, with particular reference to the invitation of tenders under the selected Design and Build procurement route.

3.3 Formal notice of the Council’s intention to proceed with the development of the new Civic Headquarters was placed in OJEC in accordance with European Community procurement requirements. This was supplemented by a full-page advertisement in the Estates Gazette. These documents emphasised the Council’s desire for a high quality landmark building and the importance of high quality architectural elements of the scheme. To provide information to prospective bidders, a project brochure and expression of interest questionnaire were produced. Interested bidders were asked to submit details of the proposed structure of their development team, including architects and project managers and development funding, together with information on their teams’ track record and experience of similar projects. In total 125 brochures and questionnaires were requested and issued, and a number were also circulated direct to targeted developers.

4. THE SELECTION PROCESS

4.1 By the closing date of 1st September 2003, some 15 expressions of interest had been received (details are set out in Appendix A).

4.2 A pare-tender evaluation of the expressions of interest identified that for various reasons five of the submissions were weaker than the competition. The other 10 firms were invited to present their proposals in interviews on 8th and 9th September.

4.3 The interviews comprised a 30 minute presentation and 15 minutes of questions by the interviewing panel. Each consortium was scored on a range of criteria, with particular emphasis on quality of architectural ideas, project management skills and relevant experience.

4.4 The quality of the presentations was very high, and it was encouraging to see the calibre of architects, developers and consultants expressing an interest in this proposal.

4.5 The interview panels’ impressions and scoring of the consortium is set out at Appendix B. On the basis of these evaluations there were five bidding teams who clearly outscored the other five. The five bidders who were left in the running at this stage were:-

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

- Countryside / Skanska / Alsop Architects - Mapeley / Delancy / Barratt / MacCormack Jamieson Pritchard Architects - Taylor Woodrow / Broadway Malyan Architects - Urban Catalyst / Costain / Penorye & Prasad Architects - Wates / Bisset Adams Architects

4.6 A draft development brief was issued to all five of these consortia and they were asked to confirm that they were happy to proceed on the basis of that brief. At that stage Wates/Bisset Adams Architects withdrew on the grounds that uncertainty about values of the sites for disposal would not enable them to prepare an appropriate bid. All the other firms agreed they were happy to proceed on the basis of the draft development brief.

4.7 A maximum of four developers proceeding to the next stage is considered ideal, and it is therefore proposed to proceed with the four highest rated consortia. However, it is felt desirable to have a reserve consortium in case one of the four, for any reason, decided to withdraw at a later stage. It is therefore proposed that the next highest rated consortium, led by Dawnay Day Group be regarded as such a reserve consortium.

5. EVALUATION OF TENDERS

5.1 The tender evaluation process is scheduled for early 2004. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for the Council to secure a high quality civic building which reflects the vigour and diversity of the local community. It is therefore, proposed that the evaluation process have four elements within it.

5.1.1 Technical Evaluation – an evaluation to ensure that the proposals meet the Council’s requirements for its democratic and corporate functions, that the proposed design is flexible, workable, economic and effective. This evaluation would be undertaken by officers of the Council and its technical advisors C B Richard Ellis and Dearle & Henderson.

5.1.2 Financial Evaluation – an evaluation of the capital cost of the proposals for the new building; values generated by the disposal of the surplus sites; the likely running costs of the proposed building; and its impact on other corporate costs. This evaluation would be undertaken by officers of the Council and its specialist advisors C B Richard Ellis and Dearle & Henderson.

5.1.3 Architectural Evaluation – an evaluation of the architectural merits of the particular schemes, how effectively each scheme acts as a landmark as a reflection of the vigour and diversity of the local community, and as a democratic space that engages the citizens of Tower Hamlets. It is proposed to consult with the Royal Institute of British Architects on how best to manage this element of the evaluation.

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

5.1.4 Public Consultation – an invitation to the public via LAP’s, via East End Life, via public consultation meetings with developers presenting their proposals, via public exhibitions of the proposals to express a view on the particular merits of each scheme proposed.

6. OBSERVATIONS OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

6.1 No specific financial implications emanate from this report, which seeks Cabinet approval for consortia to be invited to submit proposals and tenders for the construction of new Civic Headquarters. The selection process to determine the consortia was undertaken in accordance with Financial Regulations.

6.2 Comments regarding the funding package for the new Civic Headquarters were contained in the report outlining plans for the Council’s Accommodation Strategy considered and approved by Cabinet in April 2003.

7. CONCURRENT REPORT OF THE CHIEF LEGAL OFFICER

7.1 This report seeks Cabinet’s approval to invite the four consortia identified in para 2.1 to submit detailed bids as part of the tendering process for the development of a new Civic Headquarters at the LEB site at Cambridge Heath Road, Bethnal Green.

7.2 The contract is being tendered in accordance with EU Public Regulations for Works contract as the estimated value of the proposed contract exceeds the EU threshold of £3.86 million. A notice was accordingly placed in the OJEC and also the Estates Gazette in compliance with the Council’s Financial Regulations.

7.3 The contract is being tendered using the negotiated procedure under the EU Regulations for Works as this will allow for more flexibility during negotiations of a complex procurement.

7.4 The four consortia have been selected following pre-tender evaluation of submission of expressions of interest and following interviews and submissions.

7.5 Cabinet is also asked to agree the evaluation criteria set out in para 5.1, which will be applied to the next stage of the tendering process.

7.6 There are no other legal implications arising out of this report.

8. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES IMPLICATIONS

8.1 The new Civic Headquarters will be designed to be accessible to all sections of the community and that will form a key element of the evaluation to be conducted early in 2004.

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

9. ANTI POVERTY IMPLICATIONS

9.1 There are no anti-poverty implications contained within this report.

10. RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

10.1 There are no significant risks associated with this phase of the programme, which relates only the to invitation of tenders.

11. SUSTAINABLE ACTION FOR A GREENER ENVIRONMENT

11.1 A key element of the evaluation process will be how sustainable the new building can be, and how both its construction and operation will deliver a green environment.

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc Appendix A

Interested Tender Bidders

15 formal expressions of interest were received, from:

• AWG Construction Services Limited, formerly Morrison plc and Anglian Water

• Ballast plc, working with GMW Architects and Laing Homes

• Bellway Homes and Bamfords Trust plc, with Pierce Hill as quantity surveyors and Hamilton Associates as architects

• Bisset Adams and Wates Construction

• Costain Construction, with Penorye & Prasad Architects, Urban Catalyst, and Burro Happold

• Countryside Properties plc, with Alsop and Jestico Whiles architects, and Skanska providing technical advice

• Dawnay Day Group, in partnership with Aukett architects, Dunlop Heywood Lorenz and Atkins

• DSDHA Architects, working with Arup and Davis Langdon & Everest

• George Wimpey, RTKL architects and Martin Associates

• Laing O’Rourke, Bignell Associates, Sheppard Robson and Hoare Lea

• Mapeley, Delancy, Barratt Homes, and MacCormack Jamieson Prichard architects

• Parkridge Developments, with ABK Architects and SISK Building Contractors

• Taylor Woodrow, Broadway Malyan and the New Islington & Hackney Housing Association

• William Verry Limited

• Wrenbridge, Wilson Bowden Developments and Child Graddon Lewis

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc Appendix B

This section sets out a summary of the panel’s impressions of each of the ten developers, in the order in which they were interviewed.

1. Ballast plc With: GMW Architects Laing Homes

Ballast has a good track record of working with the public sector on asset realisation projects, including land transfer and enabling development schemes such as Parrs Wood High School in and Stratford upon Avon High School. The firm is strong on project management and on public sector work, but the panel felt that the management and leadership of the proposed team did not benefit from the level of experience or enthusiasm necessary to take on a project of this magnitude and importance. Laing Homes are a large and well-respected firm with relevant experience, and they demonstrated a real enthusiasm for this project, but were let down by the team structure.

GMW Architects are a sound, long-established firm with a good track record in corporate offices, but presented little experience of civic/local authority work. There was no evidence of a historical relationship with Ballast, and only one project for Tower Hamlets. The panel felt them to be businesslike and reliable, but lacking in enthusiasm and the creativity necessary to make Tower Hamlets’ new civic facility an innovative and unique landmark building.

Total Score: 219/350

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

2. Bellway Homes/Bamfords Trust plc With: Pierce Hill Hamilton Associates

Bellway Homes is a large, national housebuilder, with extensive experience of residential development and a good track record of working locally, and with Tower Hamlets. They are the preferred developer for the Bow Lock redevelopment. Bamfords Trust is a less well-known developer, but was able to demonstrate experience of prestigious projects such as County Court and the Muslim Centre. Together they were able to present a combination of an expert and reliable housebuilder with a specialist developer in landmark buildings, both of whom were able to demonstrate local knowledge. Pierce Hill appeared to be a reliable firm of technical advisors.

Hamilton Associates are a large architectural practice with good commercial experience. They were able to demonstrate recent residential work and were knowledgeable about issues of affordable housing and shared equity. They were, however, lacking in civic centre experience, and did not appear to have worked extensively with this consortium previously. The panel felt that although Hamilton Associates have a good background, there was little demonstration of relevant experience, and little evidence of having considered Tower Hamlets’ particular requirements. There were no real initial architectural ideas, and it was considered that the level of personal experience might not be sufficient for this project.

Total Score: 218/350

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

3. Costain Construction With: Penorye & Prasad Architects Urban Catalyst Burro Happold

Costain is one of the country’s largest development, engineering and construction companies. It has extensive experience of public sector partnering projects and PFI schemes, including King’s College Hospital and the Met. Office. Urban Catalyst is a younger development company, specialising in gap funding and urban regeneration. These companies’ combination of expertise was impressive, though the panel felt that there was a slight element of misunderstanding in relation to the source of funding of the development as Urban Catalyst appeared to focus on grant funding rather than private sector-led enabling development. During the interview Urban Catalyst indicated will review their approach to the selection of a residential developer. They were very well served by Burro Happold and Penorye and Prasad, both of whom are good firms with relevant experience in this area.

Penoyre and Prasad gave a very impressive presentation that demonstrated excellent understanding of the issues surrounding town hall development in general and the challenges for Tower Hamlets in particular. The practice was established in 1988 and has very impressive architectural credentials, winning over 25 awards for previous projects including The Charter School (£17m), the Pulross and Rushton health centres, the Rollercoaster Young People’s Centre, and the Belmarsh Prison Visitors Centre. In addition, they are working for Tower Hamlet’s College in Poplar on projects totalling £7m, and were runners-up in the Bradford City Hall competition that formed part of the recent IPPR’s Designs on Democracy competition. The panel agreed that the combination of Penorye and Prasad’s flair and experience plus their previous experience of sustainable design, and Burro Happold’s sustainability expertise would make for an excellent design team.

Total Score: 265/350

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

4. Countryside Properties plc With: Alsop Architects Jestico Whiles Skanska

Countryside Properties is one of the country’s leading housebuilders, with experience of partnership working and of high-profile, quality bespoke projects, such as Sunlight Square and the Chronos Building, both in Tower Hamlets. It was able to demonstrate involvement in a number of high-density and sustainable mixed-use, residential and commercial schemes, such as Greenwich’s Millennium Village and Chatham Maritime, and has a history of working with the other partners in the consortium. Skanska demonstrated a similar level of quality experience in terms of project delivery and construction expertise, with involvement in, among others, the Swiss Re Building.

Alsop is a well-known, high profile, and very impressive architectural practice, with credits such as Peckham Library, Liverpool’s Fourth Grace and Marseilles Town Hall. The Fourth Grace (working with Countryside Properties) is particularly relevant with a mix of civic, commercial and residential uses and a vision to draw visitors to the Liverpool waterfront. A current commission for The Hall at Hemel Hempstead also demonstrated an exciting new concept for the Town Hall. The presentation demonstrated an excellent level of relevant experience and understanding of Tower Hamlets’ objectives. Jestico Whiles, who would be involved in the design of the residential element, has considerable experience in this field, having completed substantial residential schemes at Ocean Wharf and Burrell’s Wharf on the Isle of Dogs, Hermitage Basin near Tower Bridge, and Camden Gardens. They are also skilled in sustainability issues, having designed a ‘zero-energy’ office and council chamber complex for Hyndburn Borough Council. The feeling amongst the panel was that this consortium offered an excellent combination of expertise, and that the team was well structured, with extensive relevant experience.

Total Score: 276/350

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

5. Dawnay Day Group With: Atkins Aukett Dunlop Heywood Lorenz

Dawnay Day has its roots in the banking and investment sector, but is developing an involvement in property development, and is seeking to develop bespoke, quality schemes, such as that at Swiss Cottage. It is confident in its ability to fund, deliver, and create the vision, using its in-house resources and those of the consortium. Although there is no residential expertise in the team, this was a deliberate measure to avoid the negative influences of a housebuilder seeking to influence budgets and design in the early stages. Dunlop Heywood Lorenz is a well-respected property consultancy firm, with a history of working with Dawnay Day.

Aukett architects are a large practice with a good design track record, albeit mainly in the commercial sector. They were able to demonstrate experience of some local authority work with South Cambridgeshire DC, but had little residential experience. The presentation offered a good analysis of the LEB site, and suggested understanding of the issues and challenges, but the panel felt that there could have been more flair and creativity in terms of the initial architectural and design ideas.

Total Score: 236/350

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

6. Bisset Adams With: Wates Construction

Bisset Adams are a small firm of design consultants and architects, with additional expertise in interior design and brand identity. They were able to point to relevant experience of smaller civic projects, such as Tower Hamlets’ Idea Store. Although there is evidence of Bisset Adams’ involvement in larger-scale projects, most of these are still at the initial feasibility stage. The architects were able to demonstrate a good understanding of the relevant issues, and a keenness on collaborative working with the public sector. Their broad base of expertise was felt to be an advantage, and it was considered that the firm would be keen to deliver a radical and adventurous building. Some concern was expressed about their lack of experience of projects of this magnitude.

Wates Construction are a large, well-known engineering, construction and development company. They have a good level of experience of working with the public sector, and have been involved in the past with large urban regeneration and renewal projects.

Total Score: 267/350

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

7. George Wimpey With: RTKL Martin Associates

George Wimpey is one of the country’s largest housebuilders, with extensive residential experience. While much of the firm’s experience comes from traditional suburban housing development, this project would be run by the newly- created George Wimpey Special Projects division, which specialises in bespoke projects such as this one. There was evidence of successful public sector projects, but much of this was somewhat historic, notably the Essex County Council building. Although Wimpey does specialise in residential development, the proposed method of dealing with this project would be to appoint a specialist contractor by tender, who would develop the town hall and residential element on behalf of Wimpey. This was felt by the panel to be an unnecessary additional tier of contractual responsibility, and one whose detail was not confirmed at this stage.

RTKL are a very large multi-national, US-based practice with substantial experience of large scale urban planning. While the site analysis provided at interview was very thorough, there was a general feeling of concern amongst the panel of the ability of this firm to connect with the local cultural issues of Tower Hamlets and Bethnal Green. It was felt that the scale on which the practice is used to working was not necessarily appropriate to a project such as this.

Total Score: 213/350

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

8. Laing O’Rourke With: Bignell & Associates Sheppard Robson Hoare Lea

Laing O’Rourke demonstrated a very good level of experience of PFI-related projects and regeneration schemes, including some high profile projects such as work for County Council and the Duke of York’s Barracks in Chelsea. Hoare Lea, the cost consultants and project managers, appeared very competent in their area, with a particular emphasis on sustainable building design. The consortium did, however, lack any specialist residential expertise.

Sheppard Robson are a well-established practice with a lot of experience in the commercial and residential fields. While the practice has little experience of civic and local authority work, it was able to refer to work on the Heart of Slough regeneration scheme, as well as an involvement in Brighton Library and the Hackney Media Centre. The presentation demonstrated a good site analysis, and some good initial ideas for the LEB site, but the relevance of the practice’s background was questioned.

Total Score: 229/350

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

9. Mapeley With Delancy Barratt Homes MacCormack Jamieson Pritchard

Mapeley gave a strong presentation, and were able to demonstrate evidence of thorough consideration of this project. They claim to be both a property company and a services company, with access to equity funds capable of financing a project such as this one internally. Mapeley proposed an alternative method of procuring the new town hall, based on a PFI-style arrangement, whereby Mapeley would retain the interest over the long term and look at the scheme as a whole-life delivery project. The project team was impressive, and Barratt demonstrated local expertise and an enthusiasm for the project.

MacCormack Jamieson Pritchard were founded in 1972 have built an excellent design reputation with award-winning projects such as for Cable & Wireless at Coventry (£24m), the Wellcome Wing at the Science Museum (£21m) and offices at Clifton Street London (£8m) and a variety of office and residential experience in Tower Hamlets including the current project Indescon Court in Tower Hamlets(£100m). Considerable residential experience included Selby Road, Tottenham and Sandmere Road Lambeth. They provided a good site analysis, and demonstrated a good understanding of the issues with a range of initial ideas for the site.

Total Score: 269/350

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc

10. Taylor Woodrow With Broadway Malyan New Islington & Hackney Housing Association

Taylor Woodrow are a large and well-known construction and housebuilding company with extensive experience in the sector and significant financial standing. They understand the need for sustainability on all the sites and are content to have virtually car free developments. An innovative idea was the use of pool cars for residents, thus incentivising residents not to own a car. Taylor Woodrow own land to the south of the LEB site which they believe could be redeveloped in conjunction with the LEB site to stimulate the regeneration of Bethnal Green.

Broadway Malyan is a substantial architectural design practice with offices throughout Great Britain and Europe, with considerable experience of large mixed- use developments. They have expertise in office developments such as BP Sunbury, BASF< and BT Cellnet, residential projects such as St George Wharf Vauxhall, Imperial Wharf Fulham, and Woolwich Arsenal. They presented a clear understanding of the issues involved with the design of a new Civic HQ and impressed with their approach to the site. They believed strongly in public consultation and involvement thus allowing the public to take an element of ownership in the design. They also understood the need for the premises to be flexible to allow for changes in local government, (such as e government), over the next 10-15 years.

Total Score: 259/350

D:\modernGov\Data\Committ\Intranet\Cabinet\20031001\Minutes\Office Accommodation Strategy devpt of new civic HQ selection of tenderers Final_CAB_011003_AT0.doc