EC Harris LLP

Royal Exchange
Manchester M2 7EH
United Kingdom
t +44 (0)161 214 0214
f +44 (0)161 214 0215
echarris.com

dd 0161 214 2096

Minutes e riyaaz.patel@echarris.com

Meeting title Kirklees BSF - Earlsheaton / Thornhill

Item Project Review
Date 10 February 2010, 2:00 pm
209/1657
Venue Kirklees Council, Oldgate House
Who When
Chairman Riyaaz Patel (RP)
1.
PresentIntroductions Harvey
/ Apologies
Pownall – KSSL (HP)
1.1 RP welcomed Andrew Jessop
all parties – KMC
present. (AJ) introduced themselves.
All parties
Raj Singh – KMC (RS)
2. Jodi Robinson
Previous Minutes / Actions – Capita (JR)
Phil Timmis – ECH (PT)
2.1 none
Apologies none
Distribution Mark Pearson
3. Deliverables / Output Specification

3.1 Document Issue

3.1.1 In terms of surveys – JR confirmed the standard PfS survey checklist N
was reviewed. Not all of the surveys mentioned in this checklist ot
were carried out. This was based on a collective decision between e
KMC and Capita as not being required.

3.1.2 AJ confirmed the information issued to date is all that is proposed. N

HP/RP raised concerns regarding the information being issued as ot
‘indicative’ or ‘illustrative’ purposes and whether this was now e
‘fixed’ or ‘warranted’.

3.1.3 HP/RP highlighted the procurement of an architect/lead consultant N

would prove difficulty in achieving a fixed lump sum price if further ot
works were required to achieve a complete brief. AJ e
acknowledged this and confirmed it was appreciated by KMC the
information issued to date is at Stage B feasibility.

3.1.4 JR confirmed the information submitted to date is based on N

discussions with the school and Building Bulletins. Although the ot
design is simply control options with a preferred design e
highlighted, it is not mandatory to adhere to this.

3.1.5 RP highlighted in his opinion the school specific SfC (SSfC) would be R
a risk item if significant changes were made. It is also understood S
this SSfC would be required for OBC approval due 30th April 10.
RS to check on 2 things, 1) status of SfC 2 approval, and 2) status

EC Harris LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England (registered number OC304988). A list of members’ names and their
professional qualifications may be inspected at our registered office, ECHQ, 34 York Way, London N1 9AB United Kingdom.
WHOLLY OWNED OFFICES IN EMEA, ASIA PACIFIC AND NORTH AMERICA.
Regulated by RICS.

/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch2541/29984683.doc
page x of y

Item Who When

of SSfC submissions and whether any further revisions were in

pipeline.

3.1.6 KMC confirmed the information issued to date is to be used as a Note

starting point to move forward. The appointed designers need to
work within the parameters of the vision and costs (currently
confirmed as £19m for Earlsheaton and £11m for Thornhill). KMC
welcome design proposals from the designers if the scheme
works better but must comply with the parameters above.

3.1.7 £19m and £11m include abnormals up to £400k including FFE Note
excluding off site highways. ICT budgets are in addition to these.

3.1.8 JR confirmed the control options are within the budget allowances Note
and together with the accommodation schedules incl summary,
area data sheets and interactive scheduler all conform to the
requirements of Building Bulletins.

3.2 Capita – scope

3.2.1 KMC confirmed Capita will be retained by KMC upto OBC stage and Note
will be permitted to assist with any queries/clarifications with the
appointed designers.

3.2.2 KMC confirmed the draft B1 output specification will be submitted at

OBC; the B2 will be developed by the appointed design team with
KMC/Capita liaison as and when necessary.

3.3 Timescales for overall review

3.3.1 Capita / KMC have everything they need for OBC (targeted 30th April
2010). They do not need anything from KSSL to aid this.

3.4 Key deliverables

3.4.1 RS to review councils FAM whether it’s been reviewed by PfS to R

ascertain cost certainty. S

3.4.2 RP to commence tender for architect/lead consultant. It was agreed R

to receive the breakdown of fees in RIBA stages. P

4. Commercial / Programme

/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch2541/29984683.doc 2
page x of y

Item Who When

4.1.1 RS to provide the overall BSF programme to allow RP to factor these R

dates into the delivery programme and issue to all. S/
R
P

4.1.2 Phasing / decanting strategy and Sport England strategy to be R

reviewed and provided by RS. S

5. Cost

5.1 It was noted in terms of affordability KSSL are relying on the PT

information given which is ‘indicative’ or ‘illustrative’ purposes. PT
to prepare initial cost plan based on this information.

5.2 ECH QS proposal was discussed. AJ commented on the proposal in N

terms of fees upto outline planning to be on a lump sum basis. ot
ECH stated they are happy to agree this with the proviso that e
scope of service is clearly understood and not anticipated to
change.

6. Any Other Business

6.1 none

7. Date and Time of Next Meeting

7.1 TBA

/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch2541/29984683.doc 3