Agenda item

RESOLVED (as amended):

1.         That the financial support Cabinet gave to this scheme in 2014 be re-affirmed.

2.         That the award of the tender for construction works for the Runnymede Roundabout scheme, on the basis set out in the Part 2 report to be considered later in the agenda, be approved.

3.         That Cabinet confirms that recommendations 1 and 2 are subject to the provisional Local Government Settlement providing a significant response to the fundamental financial challenges facing the County Council.

4.         That the Leader will decide by 16 December 2016 whether the condition in recommendation 3 has been met, in consultation with Director of Finance and Chief Executive.

Reasons for Decisions:

This report recommends approval to let a contract to construct an improvement scheme for Runnymede Roundabout (part of the combined Runnymede Roundabout and Egham STP package), one of the county’s most serious congestion hot spots, near to Staines and Egham, supported by 75% government funding through the Enterprise M3 Local Enterprise Partnership and a contribution from Runnymede Borough Council.

A mini-tender process for the Runnymede Roundabout scheme, in compliance with the requirements of the GEN3 Regional Highways Framework has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process. Funding for this scheme has been secured from the Local Enterprise Partnership £4.950m plus a direct contribution of £1.525m from Surrey County Council (approved by Cabinet at its meeting on 23 September 2014) and a partner contribution of £0.250m from Runnymede Borough Council. An additional £0.500m has also been allocated from the Flood Resilience capital budget to complete required priority drainage maintenance scheme at the same time as the LEP scheme works in order to minimise disruption and cost, and this is a more efficient way to deliver this associated scheme. The Runnymede Roundabout and drainage scheme has a combined total budget of £7.225m.

There is demonstrable public benefit to these proposals and strong value for money arguments. Nevertheless the County Council is facing unprecedented financial pressures therefore it would not be sensible to agree to additional expenditure without understanding the implications of the provisional local government settlement.

[The decision on this item may be called in by the Economic Prosperity, Environment and Highways Scrutiny Board]

Mr Furey, Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding declared a personal interest in the reports relating to the Runnymede Roundabout Scheme (items 11 and 26) because he was also a member of Runnymede Borough Council.

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding began his introduction by stating that this item had been deferred from the previous Cabinet meeting. He said that he understood and acknowledged the financial situation that the County Council was facing. However, unlike other items, the requested money for this roundabout would provide a high return on investment because the required investment of £2.025m would return a sum of £5.2m, due to the successful Local Enterprise Bid (LEP). He said that within the contract, there had been included works to the drainage system which had been achieved at a lower cost price - these works would need to be delivered irrespective of this outcome.

Without a decision this week, he considered that it was highly likely that the scheme would be cancelled, for the following reasons:

·         The contract award would fall outside the period which process were fixed, with consequent risk that prices could change.

·         The construction programme for the scheme, if delayed would be outside the funding window required and agreed with Enterprise M3 LEP.

·         Without the Runnymede Roundabout project, the County Council would still need to address the highway drainage system at some point and carry out re-surfacing works to the carriageway at the roundabout junction which requires repair. These works would be subject to the Council’s consideration of priorities and are estimated to cost in excess of £1.5m.

·         Currently the County Council had carried out approximately £800,000 of LEP funding related work which would need to be funded by the County Council.

He said that he had considered the benefits and drawbacks of the decision being made this week and agreed with the proposed additional recommendations and reason for recommendation, which were:

3. Cabinet confirms that recommendations 1 and 2 are subject to the provisional Local Government Settlement providing a significant response to the fundamental financial challenges facing the County Council.

4. That the Leader will decide by Friday 16 December 2016 whether the condition in recommendation 3 has been met, in consultation with Director of Finance and Chief Executive.

Reason:

There is demonstrable public benefit to these proposals and strong value for money arguments. Nevertheless the County Council is facing unprecedented financial pressures, therefore it would not be sensible to agree to additional expenditure without understanding the implications of the provisional local government settlement.

Finally, he requested that, once the provisional Local Government settlement had been received, that the Leader re-considered the request to proceed with the scheme because he thought that the benefit /cost savings were quite marginal.

Other Cabinet Members agreed that they wished to support the scheme and that the Council did not want to lose LEP funding. However, they acknowledged that the County Council’s finances were under severe pressure and agreed to support the amendments to the recommendations and reasons for decision.

The Leader confirmed that he would take advice from the Chief Executive and the Director of Finance before making a decision, which would be in the best interests of Surrey residents.

RESOLVED (as amended):

1.         That the financial support Cabinet gave to this scheme in 2014 be re-affirmed.

2.         That the award of the tender for construction works for the Runnymede Roundabout scheme, on the basis set out in the Part 2 report to be considered later in the agenda, be approved.

3.         Cabinet confirms that recommendations 1 and 2 are subject to the provisional Local Government Settlement providing a significant response to the fundamental financial challenges facing the County Council.

4.         That the Leader will decide by Friday 16 December 2016 whether the condition in recommendation 3 has been met, in consultation with Director of Finance and Chief Executive.

Reasons for Decisions:

This report recommends approval to let a contract to construct an improvement scheme for Runnymede Roundabout (part of the combined Runnymede Roundabout and Egham STP package), one of the county’s most serious congestion hot spots, near to Staines and Egham, supported by 75% government funding through the Enterprise M3 Local Enterprise Partnership and a contribution from Runnymede Borough Council.

A mini-tender process for the Runnymede Roundabout scheme, in compliance with the requirements of the GEN3 Regional Highways Framework has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process. Funding for this scheme has been secured from the Local Enterprise Partnership £4.950m plus a direct contribution of £1.525m from Surrey County Council (approved by Cabinet at its meeting on 23 September 2014) and a partner contribution of £0.250m from Runnymede Borough Council. An additional £0.500m has also been allocated from the Flood Resilience capital budget to complete required priority drainage maintenance scheme at the same time as the LEP scheme works in order to minimise disruption and cost, and this is a more efficient way to deliver this associated scheme. The Runnymede Roundabout and drainage scheme has a combined total budget of £7.225m.

There is demonstrable public benefit to these proposals and strong value for money arguments. Nevertheless the County Council is facing unprecedented financial pressures, therefore it would not be sensible to agree to additional expenditure without understanding the implications of the provisional local government settlement.