phase one memorandum of information - architecture

Phase OneMemorandum of Information

16 March 2018

Competition

Invited Design

‘LB Bexley’ or ‘LBB’ or ‘the Council’ means the London Borough of Bexley.

‘BexleyCo’ means the arm’s length development company established by the London Borough of Bexley as a vehicle for securing much-needed quality housing within the Borough.

‘Peabody Group’ means Peabody Trust and any successor body including any body corporate in which all or substantially all of Peabody Trust’s business and assets is vested for the time being, and any subsidiary or associate of Peabody Trust for the time being (in each case as such terms are defined in s.271 of the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008).

‘The Partnership’ or ‘the Client’ means the Joint Venture agreement between the Peabody Group, the London Borough of Bexley and its development company BexleyCo. Within this Memorandum of Information, ‘the Partnership’ or ‘the Client’ has the same meaning and is used in an equivalent manner to the term ‘Contracting Authority’ or ‘Authority’ within the accompanying Selection Questionnaire document;

‘AWST HZ’ means Abbey Wood and South Thamesmead Housing Zone.

‘MoI’ means Memorandum of Information and refers to this document, providing background to the proposed Felixstowe Road Development, and the procurement process to select an architect firm(s) for the contract opportunity.

‘Candidate’ means the architect firm wishing to be considered for the tender phase (with design competition) and contract opportunity. Within this MoI ‘Candidate’ has the same meaning and is used in an equivalent manner to the term ‘Potential Supplier’ within the accompanying SQ document.

‘SQ’ means the Selection Questionnaire that must be completed and submitted by candidates wishing to be considered for the tender phase (with design competition) and contract opportunity.

‘URN’ means the Unique Reference Number issued to Candidates by RIBA Competitions on completion and submission of the online request form.

‘ITT’ means Invitation to Tender.

‘Tenderer’ or ‘Bidder’ or ‘Bid Team’ means a shortlisted Architect firm selected to participate in the tender phase (with design competition) of the procurement process.

Summary of Abbreviations

The capitalised words and expressions in this Memorandum of Information (“MoI”) document have the meanings set out below unless the context specifically requires otherwise. References to the singular include the plural and vice versa.

This Memorandum of Information document sets out the background to the procurement by the Partnership for the selection of an architect firm(s) to design a high-density housing development on a site at Felixstowe Road in Abbey Wood, London. In the first instance, Expressions of Interest are invited in accordance with the requirements set out in this MoI together with the accompanying Selection Questionnaire.

Contents

1. Introduction 4

2. Background to Abbey Wood & Thamesmead 5

3. Abbey Wood, Crossrail and the Elizabeth Line 5

4. The Felixstowe Road Development Site 6

5. Policy Context 9

6. Performance Standards & Sustainability 9

7. Development Cost Envelope 10

8. Overview of the Procurement Procedure 10

9. Procurement Timetable 11

10. General Notes 12

11. Approach to Evaluation of SQ Returns 15

12. Invitation To Tender Phase 20

13. Award Criteria 21

14. ITT Evaluation Panel 22

15. Honoraria 22

16. Post-Procurement Commitment 23

17. Publicity 23

18. Enquiries 24

Felixstowe Road Development Abbey WoodMemorandum of Information

4

The masterplan for the AWST HZ envisages development of a series of Quarters with different identities along the Harrow Manorway. Southmere

Lane will be a meandering quiet boulevard which will offer cyclists and pedestrians a safe and logical route from Abbey Wood station to

Southmere Lake. The Felixstowe Road site is located at the south of the ‘Gateway Quarter’ to the north-east of the new Crossrail station.

1. Introduction

In 2017 the London Borough of Bexley established an arm’s length development company - BexleyCo - as a vehicle for securing much-needed quality housing in the Borough, with aims to deliver around 500 new homes within its first few years of operation. In partnership with the Peabody Group, BexleyCo is seeking to select an architect firm(s) to design a high-density residential development on a prominent site opposite Abbey Wood railway station and adjacent to the elevated Harrow Manorway flyover. The appointed architect firm(s) will have the expertise and design skills necessary to deliver high quality accommodation for affordable housing and private sale at an affordable cost, to meet existing and future regulatory requirements. The package of design work is also expected to include architectural landscaping within the immediate vicinity of the development. It is anticipated that Consultants from all other required design disciplines in respect of the project will be appointed via LBB’s or the Peabody Group’s existing framework agreements. An overall construction cost envelope of GBP £3,600/m2 (GBP £40m total construction value) has been established for the project, and BexleyCo has a funding strategy in place for the realisation of the development.

The proposed Felixstowe Road development is located within the Abbey Wood and South Thamesmead Housing Zone, which will see the additional delivery of 1,622 planned new homes over the next 10 years by the Peabody Group.

Approximate location of the Felixstowe Road development site within the London Borough of Bexley to the south of the River Thames.

Aerial photograph showing the Abbey Wood and South Thamesmead Housing Zone (AWST HZ) prior to construction of a mixed-use supermarket development on the cleared site to left-hand middle of the frame, and new Crossrail station to the immediate south of it.

Crossrail station site

Felixstowe Road site

Lakeside Quarter

Civic Quarter

Lesnes Quarter

Gateway Quarter

Abbey Wood Station

General location of Abbey Wood and South Thamesmead


5

2. Background to Abbey Wood & Thamesmead

Abbey Wood and Thamesmead are located to the south of the River Thames within the London Borough of Bexley and the Royal Borough of Greenwich. Abbey Wood takes its name from a tract of extensive and picturesque ancient woodland to the south, and the remains of Lesnes Abbey to the east. The population increased dramatically in the 1950s with London County Council’s construction of around 3,000 new homes on the Abbey Wood Estate. This was a remote part of London prior to the successor organisation’s (Greater London Council) development of Thamemead as a new town in the 1960’s, with construction on the Erith and Plumstead Marshes to the north and east of Abbey Wood continuing into the 1970’s.

3. Abbey Wood, Crossrail and the Elizabeth Line

Prior to construction of the recently opened Crossrail station and its associated public realm improvement works, the local environment was dominated by the railway line and the Harrow Manorway flyover, dividing Abbey Wood and making it difficult for pedestrians to get from one side of the railway to the other. Abbey Wood station will mark the easternmost terminus of the new Elizabeth Line (due for completion in December 2018), with existing Southeastern lines continuing through the station. The new station has been constructed over two-storeys to integrate into the flyover and transport nodes. The Elizabeth Line will dramatically improve transport links from Abbey Wood to Canary Wharf, Central London and Paddington. When the route is fully open from December 2019, there will be a direct link to Heathrow and Reading in the west. The imminent arrival of Crossrail is helping to transform Abbey Wood attracting new business and driving inward investment.

Situated along the Harrow Manorway, the Abbey Wood and South Thamesmead Housing Zone (AWST HZ) will establish an important route through the area from Abbey Wood Crossrail station to Southmere Lake. Harrow Manorway is undergoing highways improvements and will be complemented by the introduction of a quiet boulevard (Southmere Lane) which will offer cyclists and pedestrians a safe and logical route from Abbey Wood Crossrail station to Southmere Lake. A previous design competition for a new civic library building on the south shore of Southmere Lake at the heart of the first phase of the South Thamesmead redevelopment was organised on behalf of Peabody and LBB by RIBA Competitions in late 2017.

A3436.1m²B

1560.8m²

C448.7m²


6

4. The Felixstowe Road Development Site

The Felixstowe Road development site lies to the north-east of the Abbey Wood Crossrail station and adjacent to the elevated Harrow Manorway flyover. Most recently, the development site accommodated the Crossrail construction compound and prior to that served as a municipal car park.

Clockwise from Top Left:

Constraints diagram showing location of the Felixstowe Road development to the north-east of the Abbey Wood Crossrail station and adjacent to the Harrow Manorway flyover. The flyover delimits the boundary with the Royal Borough of Greenwich to the west and within which a small part of the site is located. There is an existing 10-storey building adjacent to the supermarket, with consent for a 23-storey (approved height of 72.2m above datum) tower to its west.

As per the visualisations, the developable land on the site is constrained by the elevated carriageway, together with the proposed station square and drop-off. The site most recently accommodated the Crossrail construction compound and prior to that a municipal car park. The bronze clad residential tower visible above the flyover was constructed as part of the Sainsbury’s supermarket development, which transformed a derelict industrial estate.

© Crossrail


7

4.1. Strategic Brief

The Masterplan for the Abbey Wood and South Thamesmead Housing Zone (whose constituent parts received outline planning consent in December 2016) established the principle of a tall building(s) on the Felixstowe Road development site, with a maximum building height of between +51.4m and +58.0m. The developable land on the site is constrained by the elevated carriageway, together with a proposed new square and drop-off for the Crossrail station. Owing to the space constraints and the desire to deliver the maximum number of affordable homes, it is likely that only apartments will be built on the site. The development will also need to re-provide the municipal parking from the former site use, accommodate residents’ parking, together with other potential amenities and commercial opportunities which could include retail and/or office accommodation.

The strategic brief for the development is:

• A high density residential development with accommodation to be compliant with theLondon Plan Housing Standards;

• To provide a residential tenure that reflects the needs of the area and opportunities providedby improved commuting links;

• To provide accommodation for affordable housing and private sale, with an aspiration for35% affordable minimum. Buildability and viability will be fundamental to the success of thescheme;

• A landmark development of high quality homes at the apex of the Masterplan’s GatewayQuarter, that will serve as an exemplar and reference for future developments in Bexley;

• To integrate the development with existing and proposed public spaces in the vicinity of thesite, recognising the importance of place-making;

• To re-provide 120 municipal parking spaces on-site;

• Provide parking for c.40% of the residential units;

• Potential for other amenities, retail and/or commercial units. Any such proposed provisionwill however need to be appropriate in terms of quantum and marketability and dueconsideration given to existing opportunities within the area.

A massing study and capacity exercise commissioned by LBB established the feasibility for in the region of 150 dwellings to be potentially accommodated on the site, with an indicative mix of one- and two-bedrooms units as shown below:

FLAT TYPE NUMBER OF UNITS GIA PER UNIT

One-bed, Two-person (1B2P) 42 50m2

Two-bed, Three-person (2B3P) 52 61m2

Two-bed, Four Person (2B4P) 56 70m2

TOTAL 150 9,192m2


8

4.2. Development Opportunities and Constraints

The following Opportunities and Constraints have been identified for the Felixstowe Road Development:

Opportunities

• High density and height precedence for the development;• Provision of high quality dwellings with an increased supply of affordable homes;• Attractive outlooks to Lesnes Abbey and London;• The improved transport links and employment opportunities afforded by Crossrail, and

proximity to the station are likely to increase the demand for one and two-bed residentialunits, as well as potentially reducing the quantum of residents’ parking required;

• Footfall to Abbey Wood station also provides potential opportunities for commercial units;• Site accessible from three sides, with potential to possibly link the development to the

Harrow Manorway flyover, and potentially separate access for public and residential parking;• Site in close proximity to the wider Thamesmead Housing regeneration;• Landmark building to anchor the Gateway Quarter with a strong architectural narrative and

palette of materials;• Integration of public realm with the new Crossrail station and the wider Masterplan, including

potential for creative solutions for the area beneath the Harrow Manorway flyover, andpedestrian permeability through the site - particularly to the proposed Southmere Lane tothe north;

• A level and relatively clear site.

Constraints

• The Harrow Manorway flyover covers approximately one-third of the site area;• Requirement for re-provision of 120 municipal car parking spaces;• Building height will require wind engineering, and due consideration given to emergency

access and egress;• Proximity to a live railway line will require consultation with Network Rail;• Due consideration will need to be given to noise and vibration from Harrow Manorway and

the railway, as well as potential impact on air quality;• Three active frontages to consider, with a desire to provide an active frontage at the station

and flyover levels;• Due consideration will need to be given to views from/to Lesnes Abbey and the

development’s impact on existing properties in terms of light, privacy and outlook -particularly the semi-detached and terraced properties to Sedgemere Road, Rushdene andSydney Road;

• The constrained nature of the site will require careful consideration of logistics/buildability;• Site designated as lying within Flood Risk Zone 3 (high probability of flooding without local

flood defences);• High water table, poor ground conditions (with low load-bearing stratum) likely due to former

marshland;• Extensive excavation of basement likely to be prohibitive on basis of cost;• Possible risk of site contamination as Thamesmead marshland was historically used as a

dumping ground;• Thamesmead known to have a medium risk of unexploded ordnance from WWII;• Maintenance access will be required beneath the Harrow Manorway flyover;• Observance of wayleaves associated with high voltage cable and BT cable that run beneath

the site.


9

5. Policy Context

In February 2015 the Mayor of London confirmed Abbey Wood 2.7 and South Thamesmead as one of nine Housing Zones within an overall investment value of £320million, with £50million through grant funding.

AWST has long been identified as an area in need of regeneration. Long before the announcement of the area’s Housing Zone status, the principle of regeneration of the area had been established within the Bexley Core Strategy (February 2012); London Plan incorporating Minor Alterations to the London Plan (MALP) 2016; Abbey Wood and Thamesmead Supplementary Planning Guidance Document (June 2009) and the South Thamesmead Regeneration Framework (2012).

The Felixstowe Road development will need to take into account LBB’s Supplementary Planning Documents www.bexley.gov.uk/services/planning-and-building-control/planning-policy/supplementary-planning-documents-spds and in particular:

• Affordable housing SPD

• Design for living - Bexley’s residential design guide

• Thamesmead and Abbey Wood SPD

The development will need to be designed to meet all existing regulations, cognizance of the interim findings of Dame Judith Hackitt’s Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety (with a particular focus on their application to high-rise residential buildings) and awareness of recommendations made by professional bodies in response to the interim Hackitt report. www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/668831/Independent_Review_of_Building_Regulations_and_Fire_Safety_web_accessible.pdf

The residential component will need to provide accommodation that complies with the London Plan Housing Standards. It is anticipated that the Felixstowe Road Development will be a GLA referable scheme. www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/implementing-london-plan/supplementary-planning-guidance/housing-supplementary www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/housing_standards_malp_for_publication_7_april_2016.pdf

6. Performance Standards & Sustainability

There will be a requirement for sustainable construction, low carbon design and sustainable use throughout the life of the development. The design proposals developed by short-listed teams will therefore need to address the wider issues of sustainability in terms of material selection, reducing resource consumption and incorporation of renewable technologies, etc., but not at the expense of the design aesthetic, functionality or buildability.

https://www.bexley.gov.uk/sites/bexley-cms/files/Bexley-Core-Strategy.pdf

https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/current-london-plan

https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/current-london-plan

http://www.royalgreenwich.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/759/thamesmead_and_abbey_wood_supplementary_planning_document_dec_2009_annexes+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

http://www.royalgreenwich.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/759/thamesmead_and_abbey_wood_supplementary_planning_document_dec_2009_annexes+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

https://www.thamesmeadnow.org.uk/whats-happening/south/

https://www.thamesmeadnow.org.uk/whats-happening/south/

http://www.bexley.gov.uk/services/planning-and-building-control/planning-policy/supplementary-planning-documents-spds

http://www.bexley.gov.uk/services/planning-and-building-control/planning-policy/supplementary-planning-documents-spds

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/668831/Independent_Review_of_Building_Regulations_and_Fire_Safety_web_accessible.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/668831/Independent_Review_of_Building_Regulations_and_Fire_Safety_web_accessible.pdf

http://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/implementing-london-plan/supplementary-planning-guidance/housing-supplementary

http://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/implementing-london-plan/supplementary-planning-guidance/housing-supplementary

http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/housing_standards_malp_for_publication_7_april_2016.pdf

http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/housing_standards_malp_for_publication_7_april_2016.pdf


10

7. Development Cost Envelope

An overall construction cost envelope of GBP £3,600/m² has been established for the project which includes:

• Facilitating works – demolition and site preparation

• Construction – new build residential flats

• External works – car parking, external works and abnormals

• Main contractors on costs – preliminaries, overheads and profit allowance,design fees and risk allowance

Based on existing framework agreements, the Partnership has established that the professional fee for the Architect firm(s) to deliver the scope of services from RIBA Stage 0 to 3+ (to also include preparation of tender documentation pack for the selection of the main contractor) is expected to be in region of 0.9625% of the estimated £40m construction value.

8. Overview of the Procurement Procedure

The selection of an architect firm(s) is being procured by the London Borough of Bexley on behalf of the Partnership in accordance with the requirements of the Restricted Procedure as set out within Regulation 28 of The Public Contracts Regulations 2015.

RIBA Competitions is assisting the Partnership with the management of the competitive process. The selection process will be organised over the following phases:

Phase 1: Expression of Interest with Selection Questionnaire

Responses to the Selection Questionnaire will be used to select a short-list of suitable candidates (minimum 5) to proceed to the Tender (design competition) phase.

Phase 2: Invitation to Tender

Submission of Tender responses. As part of the Tender return, short-listed architect firms will be required to develop concept proposals to illustrate design intent and their approach to the project. Further detail about the Tender phase is set out at Section 14.


11

9. Procurement Timetable

The Timetable (which may be subject to alteration) for the procurement is as follows:

DATE (ESTIMATED)

Thurs. 15 March 2018

Thurs. 29 March 2018

14.00hrs, Mon. 16 April 2018

from Tues. 17 April 2018

w/c Mon. 30 April 2018

w/c Mon. 07 May 2018

w/c Mon. 14 May 2018

Thurs. 07 June 2018 (date TBC)

Thurs. 14 June 2018 (date TBC)

14.00hrs, Thurs. 28 June 2018

ACTIVITY

Announcement of Competition at MIPIM

OJEU Notice published with Memorandum of

Information & Selection Questionnaire made available

Latest date for queries relating to the SQ

Deadline for receipt of SQ returns

Evaluation of SQ returns commences

Moderation meeting & selection of shortlist

Shortlist notified &

Notification to unsuccessful candidates

Issue Outline Design Brief and ITT to shortlist &

Group site visit & briefing session

Latest date for queries relating to the ITT

Memorandum issued in response to queries

Submission of tenders

Tender evaluation w/c Mon. 02 July 2018 w/c Mon. 09 July 2018

Clarification interviews & presentations w/c Mon. 16 July 2018 (date TBC)

Notification of Preferred Bidder & start of 10-day Standstill period

w/c 23 July 2018 (date TBC)

Approval by London Borough of Bexley Date TBC

The Timetable is indicative only and the Partnership reserves the right to change it at its discretion. RIBA Competitions will notify Candidates of any changes made to the Timetable.

Friday 16 March 2018


12

10. General Notes

10.1. SQ & How to Obtain a URN

In order to be considered for the project, candidates must submit a duly completed Selection Questionnaire return. Candidates who intend to submit an SQ return must obtain an editable version of the SQ document together with a Unique Reference Number (URN) by completing the on-line request form available at: https://ribacompetitions.wufoo.eu/forms/felixstowe-road

RIBA Competitions will issue a URN [FR#] to interested parties within two working days of submitting the on-line request form. Candidates should refer to the Notes for Completion section of the SQ, together with the Submission Instructions provided at Section 10.3 of this MoI.

10.2. Information available to Candidates at the SQ phase

The following documents will be made available to Candidates on submission of the on-line request and checking of the relevant box confirming that the Candidate agrees to treat the supplied information in the strictest confidence:

• PDF version of MoI (this document)

• Editable (Word version) of the SQ

• Draft PDF version of ITT

10.3. Submission instructions for return of SQs

The SQ must be submitted in English (including all additional information). Any financial data provided must be submitted in, or converted into GBP Pounds Sterling. Where official documents include financial data in a foreign currency, a Pounds Sterling equivalent must be given.

The SQ must be completed in its entirety, with an electronic version (PDF format) of the completed SQ return submitted via RIBA Competitions’ digital submission portal (RIBASubmit). A total upload limit of 15MB will be available, but candidates are requested to keep file sizes as small as practicable whilst ensuring that the information presented is readily legible. A secure link for this purpose will have been sent to the e-mail address entered in the Wufoo on-line form used to request the SQ and Unique Reference Number [FR#].

The file name of the completed SQ should consist of the URN [FR#] assigned to the Candidate by RIBA Competitions, together with the name of the architect firm:

‘FR#_Architect Firm Name_SQ.pdf’

Any other appended files should follow a similar file-naming protocol.

https://ribacompetitions.wufoo.eu/forms/felixstowe-road


13

The contract example case studies and CVs of the Technical and Professional Ability component of the SQ return (Part 3, Section 8.7) must use Arial 11 point typeface (or close equivalent). Candidates may elect to submit responses to Section 8.7A through to Section 8.7C (Project Specific Questions to assess Technical and Professional Ability) as a separate, collated Appendix provided the requested information is presented and numbered in the order set-out in the SQ and the responses do not exceed the specified page limits. Candidates electing to submit a separate Appendix should append a Front cover sheet displaying the URN [FR#] and name of the architect firm(s). The Appendix should be named:

‘FR#_Architect Firm Name_Technical & Professional Ability.pdf’

Candidates are strongly advised to familiarise themselves with RIBA Competitions’ digital submission portal and allow sufficient time for their SQ return to successfully upload in advance of the deadline stated in Section 10.4 of this MoI for receipt of SQ returns. The portal system will not allow material to upload after the deadline has expired.

10.4. Deadline for receipt of SQ returns

The deadline for receipt of SQ Returns is 14:00hrs (BST) on 16 April 2018. The Partnership and RIBA Competitions will not be responsible for any SQ returns delayed, lost or otherwise damaged or corrupted during transmission, however so caused. Late submissions will not be accepted without prior authorisation.

10.5. Eligibility

The architect firm must include an architect who has the right to practice in the country where he/she is qualified or in the country where he/she currently resides or practices. UK-based Candidates should therefore be registered with the Architects Registration Board (ARB) with overseas-based Candidates registered with an equivalent regulatory body. Architects with more limited experience in the delivery of relevant projects may wish to consider collaborating with another practice, but the proposed delivery arrangement should be clearly articulated in the SQ return.

The Partnership intends to appoint consultants from all other required design disciplines for the project directly. This will include the separate appointment of a Principal Designer with responsibility for co-ordination of Health and Safety during the pre-construction phase, as per the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. The Quantity Surveyor retained by the Partnership will, based on the drawings and outline specification submitted at the tender and design phase of the selection process, undertake cost viability checks on the concept designs.

Candidates should note that design data for the Felixstowe Road development will be managed and co-ordinated using BIM. The appointed architect firm will therefore be expected to have appropriate capability to manage the BIM model, with constructive input from all other design disciplines. The Partnership currently anticipates that it will want to implement BIM to Level 2.

No member of the Evaluation Panel, employees of the Partnership’s respective organisations, their advisers, or any third party connected to the procurement (including any partners, close associates or employees of them) shall be eligible to compete or assist a participating Candidate.


14

10.6. Conflicts of Interest

The Partnership is concerned to avoid conflicts of interests.

In accordance with Regulation 24 of the Public Contract Regulations 2015, the Partnership may exclude the Candidate if there is a conflict of interest between the Partnership and the Candidate or a member of the consortium or a key sub-contractor which cannot be effectively remedied. The concept of a conflict of interest includes any situation where relevant staff members have, directly or indirectly, a financial, economic or other personal interest which might be perceived to compromise their impartiality and independence in the context of the procurement procedure.

Where there is any indication that a conflict of interest exists, or may arise then it is the responsibility of the Candidate to inform the Partnership, detailing the conflict in a separate Appendix. Provided that it has been carried out in a transparent manner, routine pre-market engagement carried out by the Partnership should not represent a conflict of interest for the Candidate.

10.7. Commitment

This is a Selection Questionnaire stage only. Nothing in this MoI or accompanying SQ is to be construed as implying commitment by the Partnership that it will award a contract. The Partnership is not obliged to accept any submissions or enter into any contract pursuant to this procurement and reserves the right in its absolute discretion to withdraw from or terminate the process set out in the SQ and this MoI at any time, for any reason and without prior notice to the Candidates and at its sole discretion re-invite proposals on the same or any alternative basis. Any expenditure, work or effort undertaken is accordingly a matter solely for the commercial judgement of the Candidate. The Partnership will not reimburse any expense incurred by Candidates in preparing their responses to the Selection Questionnaire.

10.8. Disclaimer

Candidates are responsible for obtaining the information which they consider necessary in connection with the procurement and must form their own judgement on its validity and suitability. Each Candidate must make its own independent assessment after making such investigations. The subject matter of this SQ and/or the SQ Return shall only have a contractual effect when it is incorporated into the express terms of an executed contract.

The Partnership (including its employees, agents, consultants, advisers and representatives) does not make any representations or warranties (express or implied) or accept any liability or responsibility (other than in respect of fraudulent misrepresentation) in relation to the adequacy, accuracy, reasonableness or completeness of the information in the SQ, this MoI or any part of the SQ or MoI (including but not limited to, any loss or damage arising as a result of reliance by the Candidate on the information or any part of it).


15

10.9. Changes to the SQ response

The Candidate must confirm whether there has been any change in relation to the information submitted at the SQ stage. Where any change has occurred, the Candidate must provide updated equivalent information to that requested in the SQ.

The Partnership reserves the right to disqualify any Candidate where there is a change to any aspect of its response to the SQ if such Candidate has failed to notify the Partnership of such change or, having notified the Partnership, the Partnership considers the effect of the change is such that the basis of the evaluation for the purpose of selecting potential Participants, the Candidate would not qualify.

10.10. Confidentiality

The information supplied with this MoI and all other information whether written or oral made available at any time to Candidates by or on behalf of the Partnership in connection with this procurement (“Information Provided”) is provided on the basis that the Candidates, their sub-contractors and/or respective advisers will keep such Information Provided confidential at all times and that such information will only be used for the purpose of participating in this procurement. For the avoidance of doubt nothing in this paragraph shall prevent a Candidate from passing the Information Provided to its employees, potential sub-contractors and professional advisers in connection with this procurement provided such persons agree to treat such information as confidential in accordance with the duty described in this paragraph. The duty of confidentiality in this paragraph does not apply to information:

(i) which is in or enters the public domain otherwise than by breach of an obligation of confidentiality; or

(ii) which is or becomes known from other sources without breach of any restriction on disclosure; or

(iii) which is required to be disclosed by law or any professional or regulatory body.

11. Approach to Evaluation of SQ Returns

11.1. Evaluation Summary

The objective of the selection process is to assess the responses to the Selection Questionnaire. Responses to the SQ will be used in the evaluation process to determine Candidates’ qualification for inclusion to proceed to the next stage of the procurement process. Each SQ return will be evaluated in the same manner as per the methodology outlined in this section.

The SQ document indicates which responses are to be provided for information purposes only, PASS/FAIL questions that the Partnership considers essential to perform the contract, and which responses are to be scored. Failure to meet PASS/FAIL will be a ground for rejection of Candidates.

The Economic and Financial Standing sections of the SQ will be appraised by LBB’s procurement department. The Technical and Professional Ability component of the return will be appraised by an Evaluation Panel.


16

11.2. Economic and Financial Standing

The Partnership has established the following minimum requirements in terms of Economic and Financial Standing:

Turnover for each of the most recent two years in respect of the Architectural Services to be provided for the Felixstowe Road development

GBP £750,000

Profitability No repeated losses or single loss in the past two years in excess of 5% of turnover

Liquidity ratio To be greater than 0.6

Gearing ratio To be greater than 0.5

Professional Indemnity Insurance It is anticipated at this stage that, on appointment, the successful architect team will be required to have or obtain Professional Indemnity Insurance cover of GBP £10 million in respect of the project for each and every claim

• Candidates who are not able to self-certify turnover of at least seven hundred and fifty thousand pounds (GBP £750,000) should, by use of an additional Appendix (maximum x1 side of A4) to their SQ, provide alternative evidence to demonstrate that their firm has the capacity and resource capability to undertake the Scope of Services described and its delivery within the anticipated project programme given under Section 16.

• The Partnership will reserve the right to ask Candidates to provide information to demonstrate their economic and financial standing if they are Invited to Tender following the short-listing of the SQs.

• Candidates who do not currently hold the required Professional Indemnity Insurance cover will, if short-listed, be asked to separately identify within their Tender proposals any additional costs in increasing their Professional Indemnity cover to the required level.

Please refer to Section 8.1 of the accompanying SQ document for the requirements in respect of Employer’s Liability Insurance and Public Liability Insurance.

Prior to appointment, the London Borough of Bexley will require the successful architect firm to be suitably registered - with regards to Health and Safety - by a Safety Schemes in Procurement (SSIP) Forum member as ‘Compliant’ and this compliance must also be Valid’ (i.e. assessed within the last year). The SSIP Forum acts as an umbrella organisation to facilitate mutual recognition between Health and Safety Pre-Qualification schemes wherever it is practicable to do so. The successful architect firm will be expected to maintain a compliant registration (with regards to Health and Safety) with an SSIP Forum member for the duration of any contract.


17

11.3. Evaluation of Technical & Professional Ability section of the SQ return

The Technical and Professional Ability component of the SQ return will be appraised by an Evaluation Panel. This is the key section of the return for Candidates to use to differentiate themselves and demonstrate to the Partnership why they should be short-listed for the Felixstowe Road Development.

Please refer to the corresponding sections of Part 3 (Section 8) of the Selection Questionnaire document for the maximum page limits over which the requested information must be presented.

*

TECHNICAL & PROFESSIONAL ABILITY WEIGHTING DEMONSTRATED BY EVALUATION NOTES

Ability to design & deliver schemes of architectural

distinction of a similar nature, scale &/or complexity to the

proposed Felixstowe Road development

50%

[25% per Case

Study]

Part 3, Section 8.7A of the SQ *

Illustrative case studies (2 No.) of the contract examples cited under Section 6.1 of the SQ which demonstrate:

• Delivery of schemes involving tall buildings that have acted as gateway anchors for areas undergoing long-term regeneration

• Schemes that have maximised development potential to ensure financial viability, whilst delivering residential units of high design quality in which there is no external differentiation discernible across the tenure mix

• Successful integration of residential elements with other land uses to deliver a high level of amenity for building occupants, including consideration of wider public realm

• Innovative approaches which incorporate a large quantum of car parking without detriment to the overall scheme

Contracts for supplies or services should have been performed during the past five (5) years and relate to the architect firm wishing to be considered for the opportunity.

Candidates should consider the relevance & relative merits of projects within their portfolio. Whilst the inclusion of an ‘incomplete’ project (i.e. a project that is on, or about to commence on site); as one of the contract example case studies would not deem the submission unacceptable, it may, depending on the stage that it is at, limit the ability of its qualities to be appraised.

Similarly, whilst Candidates may elect to include projects which reached completion beyond the stipulated 5year limit, their inclusion may limit the current technical & professional ability of the architect firm to be appraised

If a collaborative approach with another architect firm is proposed, at least one contract example case study should be included for each practice under Section 8.7A.

A clear distinction should be made between photographic images of completed projects and computer-generated visualisations. Any images featured within the submission should be clearly annotated to explain to which project(s) and/or firms they refer.

The contract example case studies will be evaluated in a holistic manner. Greater weight will be applied to the contract example case studies where individuals named in the CVs were involved in delivery of the project(s) shown.

Ability to design & deliver complex developments to

budget & programme on sites with challenging sets of

constraints

25% Part 3, Section 8.7B of the SQ *

Illustrative case study (1 No.) for the remaining contract example cited under Section 6.1 of the SQ which demonstrates:

• Space efficient design that dealt positively with a site’s challenges and constraints - particularly in respect of site access and/or proximity to infrastructure

• Creative but deliverable design and specification, with a project delivered to time and in line with projected budget estimates

Overall experience & balance of the architect team, including

proposed key personnel who would be responsible for design

development & potential delivery of the Felixstowe Road

Development

25% Section 8.7C of the SQ *

• Team organogram showing key positions within the architect firm(s) and proposed interactions with the Partnership’s wider project team

• Brief CVs for key members of the architect team demonstrating professional qualification, recent project experience, current position and proposed role within the team. Reference should be made to the contract example case studies where possible

• Experience of working within a project team environment where consultants from other design disciplines are retained or appointed directly by the Client body

CVs will be evaluated as a package. Greater weight will be given where reference is made to the contract example case studies where possible.

Projects undertaken at a previous practice may (with appropriate recognition) be included but the role in developing and delivering the scheme - design team leader, project architect etc. - must be clearly outlined.

If a collaborative approach with another firm of architects is proposed, the respective roles and anticipated delivery arrangement must be clearly articulated.


18

The following scoring guide will be used to evaluate Technical and Professional Ability:

SCORE DEFINITION BENCHMARK

10 Excellent response to question

In the opinion of the Evaluators, the Candidate’s response provides information which addresses all requirements and provides very good or excellent quality relevant supporting evidence, which to some material degree provides evidence of an exemplary or class leading response

8-9 Very Good Response to question

In the opinion of the Evaluators, the Candidate’s response provides information which addresses all requirements and provides very good quality relevant supporting evidence

6-7 Good response to question

In the opinion of the Evaluators, the Candidate’s response provides information which addresses all requirements and provides good quality relevant supporting evidence which to some material degree provides evidence of a good response

4-5 Adequate response to question

In the opinion of the Evaluators, the Candidate’s response provides information which addresses all requirements; but the supporting evidence is less than good in some material degree or is of limited relevance to the response

2-3 Poor response to question

In the opinion of the Evaluators, the Candidate’s response provides information which addresses all requirements. However the Candidate’s s response fails to provide relevant supporting evidence; or the evidence is not relevant to the response required.

1 Deficient In the opinion of the Evaluators, the response does not adequately address the stated requirements in respect of the project and the criterion being scored.

0 Not Answered The Candidate failed to provide a response.

Notes

(i) Candidates must obtain a score of four or more against each of the sections used todemonstrate Technical and Professional Ability in order to be further considered for thecontract opportunity.

(ii) Each member of the SQ Evaluation Panel will undertake an initial review of the SQ returns. Amoderation meeting will then be held to discuss each SQ return, with weightings applied tothe agreed scores against each criterion accordingly.

(iii) The weighted overall score achieved and weighted consensus score for each scoring criteriawill be released to each Candidate upon completion of the SQ stage. Additional feedbackwill only be provided upon request.


19

11.4. Selection of Architect Firms to participate in Tender phase

The weighted overall score arising from the evaluation of the Technical and Professional Ability section of the SQ will be used to order the returns in order of highest to lowest for the purpose of short-listing and selection of suitably qualified Candidates. It is proposed that the five highest scoring Candidates (subject to them meeting the Partnership’s minimum criteria) will be invited to proceed to the ITT phase.

11.5. SQ Evaluation Panel

To ensure the design concept selected to take forward is as creative and innovative as possible, whilst responding to the opportunities and constraints of the site and the wider local context, an experienced Evaluation Panel will review the submission material at both phases of the procurement process. The Evaluation Panel that will appraise the Technical and Professional Ability component of the SQ return is expected to comprise:

NAME AFFILIATION

Graham Ward Deputy Director - Major Projects, Infrastructure and Delivery; London Borough of Bexley

Kevin Taylor Head of School Place Planning, Commissioning, Admissions and Major Projects; LBB

Dr Phil Askew Director Landscape & Placemaking, Peabody

John Whiles Jestico + Whiles, Founding Director - acting as the RIBA Architect Adviser

Representatives from LBB Procurement and RIBA Competitions will not score but will attend the moderation meeting to document the process and provide procedural support.

The Evaluation Panel will be provided with advisory assistance from representatives of LBB, the Peabody Group and/or consultants employed by them. In the event of a Panel member being unable to act through illness or any other cause, the Partnership, in consultation with RIBA Competitions, reserves the right to appoint an alternative Panel member.


20

12. Invitation To Tender Phase

Reference should be made to the draft Invitation to Tender document available to Candidates on registration. It is anticipated that the Tender phase of the procurement process will involve:

• A group site visit and briefing session to review the project aspirations and constraints whichwill include presentations from the Partnership team.

• Submission of up to x4 No A1 boards illustrating the proposed approach to the projectand design concept; a design report; schedule of accommodation, tenure mix and outlinespecification of key elements (and accompanying drawings for cost viability purposes),together with the return of tender documentation. The latter will include a lump sum fee forthe Scope of Architectural Services to be provided. This will include the cost of: (i) developingthe proposals in sufficient detail to clarify the design and project budget leading tosubmission of planning application (RIBA Stage 3); (ii) preparation of a tender documentationpack for selection of the main contractor. The pricing element of the tender return will alsoinclude a percentage-based fee proposal to cover the cost of developing and delivering theproject over RIBA Stages 4 to 7.

• The design submission will need to outline the Tenderer’s proposed approach and how itwould work within a wider project team environment to ensure delivery of an architecturallydistinguished scheme that will meet the Partnership’s aspirations for the Felixstowe RoadDevelopment.

• The process will conclude with a clarification interview and teams making a presentationto the Evaluation Panel. The purpose of the interviews will be to provide architect teamswith an opportunity to present their design concepts as tendered, and to enable Panelmembers to seek clarification on any issues that are un-clear from their initial appraisal of thesubmission return.


21

13. Award Criteria

The aim of this procurement is for the Partnership to select a preferred architect firm on the basis of the Most Economically Advantageous Tender* in respect of design, value and potential deliverability within the identified project cost envelope. Further details of the Award Criteria will be included in the final version of the Invitation to Tender document issued to short-listed architect firms but are expected to comprise:

AWARD CRITERIA WEIGHTING

1 Quality and architectural distinction of the design concept 15%

Quality 60%

2 Appropriateness of proposed response to the site-specific challenges, its constraints & opportunities

15%

3 Satisfaction of the requirements of the Outline Brief & the proposals ability to meet the Partnership’s vision for the gateway development

15%

4 Understanding of the Partnership’s expectations and ability to work with the wider project team as demonstrated through the overall approach and presentation at interview

15%

5 Quantum of development, buildability, cost and commercial viability of the proposals. The potential deliverability of the proposals within the target cost/m2 rate will be appraised to ensure that whilst the development is of high architectural design quality, it will capable of being constructed economically on the constrained site

20%

Cost 40%

6 Submission of a competitive fee proposal (broken down per RIBA work stage) whilst demonstrating a sufficient level of resourcing to deliver the quality and scope of design services required

20%

The financial component of the Tender return will be evaluated separately by representatives from the Partnership and/or a Cost Consultant retained by them. The Quality and Cost scores for each tendering architect firm will then be aggregated to determine the preferred Bidder.

Most Economically Advantageous Tender means that Tender returns will be assessed on Quality and Cost. The relative split is anticipated to be 60% Quality and 40% Cost.

*


22

14. ITT Evaluation Panel

The Panel that will evaluate the Quality component of the Tender returns is expected to comprise:

NAME AFFILIATION

Richard Blakeway (Chair) Chairman, BexleyCo

John Lewis Executive Director, Thamesmead - the Peabody Group

David Lunts Executive Director, Housing and Land, Greater London Authority

Sadie Morgan Founding Director, dRMM

Gill Steward Chief Executive, London Borough of Bexley

TBC LBB/Peabody Delivery team representative

John Whiles Jestico + Whiles, Founding Director - acting as the RIBA Architect Adviser

The Evaluation Panel will be provided with advisory assistance from representatives of LBB, the Peabody Group and/or consultants employed by them. Representatives from LBB Procurement and RIBA Competitions will not score but will attend the clarification interviews to document the process and provide procedural support.

In the event of a Panel member being unable to act through illness or any other cause, the Partnership, in consultation with RIBA Competitions, reserves the right to appoint an alternative Panel member.

15. Honoraria

Each tendering architect firm who submits a compliant Tender for the design phase and gives a clarification interview presentation will receive an honorarium payment of GBP £8,000 (+VAT). The Partnership will undertake to make the honorarium payments within 30 calendar days of the clarification interviews and on receipt of Invoice. No payments will be made in respect of the SQ phase.


23

16. Post-Procurement Commitment

The final decision on the appointment of the preferred Bidder identified by the Evaluation Panel will rest with the London Borough of Bexley. However, the Partnership will reserve the right not to proceed beyond the competition stage in the event that no one scheme meets the requirements and aspirations in respect of the project. All honorarium payments will however be paid as indicated

It is the Partnership’s intention to appoint the successful architect firm(s) to develop the design proposals up to RIBA Stage 3+ in the first instance, leading to submission of a planning application in early 2019 and preparation of a tender documentation pack for selection of the main contractor. Further progression of the project will be subject to securing necessary consents and confirmation of construction cost. The successful architect firm may be novated to a lead contractor from RIBA Stage 4 onwards, although the form of construction procurement is yet to be determined.

The Partnership reserve the right to review and terminate the project at the key breakpoints listed below:

• End RIBA Stage 3

• End RIBA Stage 4 (Detailed Design)

17. Publicity

Candidates and participating bid teams will be required to maintain confidentiality throughout the procurement process and not identify themselves; the names of short-listed participants; or the names of successful or unsuccessful bidders; or release any design proposal images etc. to any third parties or media outlets until after an official announcement has been made, and/or any related embargoes/mandatory standstill periods have elapsed.

Once any restrictions or embargoes have been lifted, authors of all proposals will be duly credited and recognised in all associated media publicity.


24

18. Enquiries

RIBA Competitions are assisting the Partnership with the management of the procurement process. Members of the Evaluation Panel and individuals from the respective Partner organisations should not be directly solicited for information as this may lead to disqualification from the process. All queries relating to the Selection Questionnaire phase should be submitted via e-mail to [email protected] and contain Felixstowe Road Development in the ‘subject’ header line, with the body of the text clearly identifying to which section of the SQ or the MoI the question relates. Candidates should refer to the Procurement Timetable regarding the latest deadline by which to raise queries.

The intention will be to make advice arising from queries received available to all Candidates via the e-mail address entered in the on-line request form, where doing so is in the interest of maintaining transparency and fairness in the procedure, and would not constitute a breach of commercial confidentiality

RIBA Competitions No. 1 Aire Street Leeds LS1 4PR 0113 203 1490 [email protected]

Copyright © Royal Institute of British Architects 2018