Issue - meetings

Councillor Peter Butlin (Portfolio Holder for Finance and Property) moved the recommendation as set out in the report.  In doing so, he noted that a main contractor (Wilmott Dixon) had been appointed and a reserved matters planning application had been approved by Warwick District Council.  The allocated budget was subject to the results of further required site

surveys and the continued development of the detailed design which, at the

time of allocation, had still to be completed. Understanding from these processes had been included in the tender process and the results of the tender exercise had increased the cost estimate by an additional £4.311m. 

The most significant element of the increase related to ground works, with inflation and a range of mechanical and electrical requirements together with the additional costs of the highways works to improve traffic management also being a factor. It was critical that the Council entered into a contract with the main contractor prior to Christmas so that the project could progress, prices be fixed, and completion dates were not put at risk

Councillor Jan Matecki seconded the recommendation and reserved the right to speak.

Debate

Councillor John Holland noted that the funding needed to be agreed for the project to go ahead and school places to be provided on time.  He briefly reflected on the availability of an alternative site for development.

Councillor Tracey Drew noted the proposed expenditure as set out in paragraph 1.6 of the report and sought assurances that the building design would be fit for the future without any need for costly retrofitting at the time of opening. 

Councillor Matecki noted that the costs outlined in the report compared favourably to the percentage increases on construction costs that he had seen reported elsewhere.  He further noted that the ground stabilisation at the site was not due to its topography and it was not possible to know what ground work may have been required at alternative sites.  He also noted that funding was required for traffic management and the work with the developer that had taken place to reduce the need for lengthy road closures.  He pointed out that the alternative to approving the funding was that the school would not be built which was a risk to the education of those children who would attend.

Councillor Butlin drew attention to paragraph 3.2 of the report which set out that the additional £4.311m funding would be allocated from existing unallocated Basic Need grant.  In response to Councillor Drew, he asserted that he was confident the building would not require any retrofitting.

Vote

Upon being put to the vote, the motion was carried with unanimous support.

Resolved

That Council approves the allocation of an additional £4.311 million to the Oakley School project to be funded from unallocated Education Capital Resources, and its addition to the Capital Programme.