Decision details

The Cabinet member:

1.    Authorised the council to enter into a contract with PIP (Fletton Quays) Limited  relating to the delivery of highway and associated works for the price set out in the exempt annex;

2.    Authorised the council to award the delivery of the highway and associated works, mentioned in recommendation 1, to Skanska (Construction) UK Limited under its existing highway services contract for the price set out in the exempt annex; and

3.    Authorised the Assistant Director for Legal and Governance or delegated officers to enter into any legal documentation on behalf of the council in relation to this matter.

This recommendation will enable to the council to enter into a contract with the Peterborough Investment Partnership to deliver the highway works required as part of the Fletton Quays development site. This offers some benefits to both parties:

Peterborough Investment Partnership:

Awarding a contract directly to the council means that the Peterborough Investment Partnership is effectively minimising the potential risk that, upon completion, the council will refuse to adopt the scheme because the works do not meet the required standard.

Peterborough City Council:

When any local development scheme is undertaken the council is legally required to adopt the associated highways infrastructure and undertake future maintenance, subject to the correct statutory process being completed by the developer. Part of the adoption process means the council requires that the works have been built and maintained in line with the initial approved technical design. Any uncertainty around this can result in lengthy discussion between the council and the developer, delaying adoption and taking up officer time, which in this case would be mitigated. The delays to adoption can have a negative impact on residents and businesses in the area, as it can create uncertainty as to who should be maintaining the road, and quite often people do not appreciate why it might not be the council. 

By delivering the construction of the road itself through its own highways services contract, the council can be certain of the quality of the product being delivered for adoption, and also has an opportunity to benefit from a degree of commercial return on the contract with PIP. 

The alternative option would be for the council to refuse to enter into a contract with the Peterborough Investment Partnership. This option would mean that the council would fail to capitalise on the potential benefits detailed above. 

This decision would ordinarily be made by the Cabinet Member for Growth, Planning, Housing and Economic Development, Cllr Peter Hiller, or the Leader of the Council, Councillor John Holdich. However as both are PIP Board Members a conflict of interest arises.  Consequently the Deputy Leader, Councillor Wayne Fitzgerald, is recommended to take the decision.

This decision would ordinarily seek Director’s approval from Simon Machen, Corporate Director Growth and Regeneration. However as Simon is a managing partner of the Peterborough Investment Partnership a conflict of interest arises. Consequently the Corporate Director Resources, John Harrison, is recommended to approve the decision prior to consideration by the Cabinet Member.

None