On 20 December 2024, Cabinet accepted the Community Regeneration Partnership funding and commenced delivery. Prior to this, the programme was accepted into the Policy Framework by Full Council on 8 June 2024 and the principle of entering the Partnership approved by Cabinet on 26 July 2024. Subsequently, the funding has been received and a Memorandum of Understanding entered with MHCLG which includes TDC as the Accountable Body. The funding period lasts until 31 March 2026.
The appointment of the required services are necessary to progress the project through to delivery, including achieving defrayment in line with the MOU.
The Council has conducted a procurement process in line with the constitution to procure a competent consultant with a comprehensive skill set including engineering, cost consultancy and contract administration.
The appointment includes roles relevant to health and safety and the Building Regulations required by legislation, ensuring the Council complies with its client duties for the works.
In parallel to the above, officers have conducted Requests for Quotation exercises for the site investigations, in line with the relevant clauses of the Council’s Procurement Procedure Rules, subject to the value of the specific surveys. Site investigations are important to enable risk and cost management.

To enter contract with Ingleton Wood LLP (company number OC306572) for the provision of consultancy services, incorporating mechanical
as required for the proper delivery of the project, including for cost and risk management, statutory consents and health

Option 1 – Not to appoint this company: In line with the Procurement Procedure Rules for this value level, a minimum of three quotations were sought electronically on the basis of a written specification. Two compliant quotations were received. The proposed appointment was evaluated by a panel of officers as meeting the Council’s requirements and providing value for money.
Option 2 – Not to appoint at this time: Due to the limited funding envelope, delaying appointing to this key role in the project team could negatively impact on the feasibility of the project and risk the funding secured.
Option 3 – Not to appoint an external consultant: this approach was not selected due to there not being sufficient capacity from sufficiently qualified and experienced engineers within Council teams to be resourced to the project.
Option 4 – Not to progress the project: this would forfeit significant government funding and the opportunity to address important local issues, and could impact on the Council’s access to central government regeneration funding in the future.