VOLUNTARY EX ANTE TRANSPARENCY NOTICE

Section I: Contracting Authority/Entity

I.1)

Name, Address and Contact Point(s)

I.2)

Type of contracting Authority and Main Activity or Activities

Ministry or any other national or federal authority, including their regional or local sub-divisions National or federal agency/Office Regional or local Authority Regional or local Agency/Office Body governed by public law European Institution/Agency or International Organisation

General public services Defence Public order and safety Environment Economic and financial affairs Health Housing and community amenities Social protection Recreation, culture and religion Education

Section II: Object of the Contract

II.1)

Description

II.1.1)

Title attributed to the contract by the contracting authority

The gateway development.

II.1.2(a))

Type of works contract

Execution		Design and execution
Execution, by whatever means

II.1.2(b))

Type of supplies contract

II.1.2(c))

Type of service contract

II.1.2)

Main site or location of works, place of delivery or performance

WIndsor Street, Car Park, Stratford-Upon-Avon.

II.1.3)

This notice involves a framework agreement

II.1.4)

Short description of the contract or purchase(s)

The District Council is proposing to enter into a contract by which it will pool its land with an adjoining landowner to enable that landowner to undertake mixed use development of the overall site.

The Council land is currently occupied by an aging multi-storey car park and a coach drop off facility. The Council wish to retain similar levels of public car parking (243 Spaces) and coach drop off facilities on the combined site. To maximise the potential quality of development the sites need to be combined. Car parking would be included within the development rather than separate commercial and parking developments on the land currently owned by the individual parties.

Gateway One will be granted exclusivity to undertake all works and services necessary to implement and deliver the development. The Council will retain public car parking within the development. The Council will receive overage generated from the scheme in accordance with a mechanism specified in the contractual arrangements.

One of the main reasons that the District Council are pursuing this scheme is that it gives the opportunity to create a pedestrian link between the Birmingham Road area of the Town containing the Maybird Shopping Centre and the emerging canal quarter development with the historic town centre. These two areas are currently divided by the development along Arden Street and the Gateway site provides the opportunity to open this up to create better linkages. As the Gateway site is on the corner of Arden Street and Birmingham Road it is in practice the only opportunity to create the link the District Council are seeking.

II.1.5)

Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV)

II.1.6)

Contract covered by the government procurement agreement (GPA)

II.2)

Total final value of the contract(s)

II.2.1)

Total final value of the contract(s)

Section IV: Procedure

IV.1)

Type of procedure

IV.1.1)

Type of procedure

IV.2)

Award criteria

IV.2.1)

Award criteria

IV.2.2)

An electronic auction has been used

IV.3)

Administrative information

IV.3.1)

File reference number attributed by the contracting authority

IV.3.2)

Previous publication(s) concerning the same contract

Other previous publications

Section V: Award of contract

Contract No:

 Lot Number: 

 Title: 

V.1)

Date of contract award decision:

V.2)

Numbers of offers received:

V.3)

Name and address of economic operator to whom the contract has been awarded

V.4)

Information on value of contract

V.5)

The contract is likely to be subcontracted

Short description of the value/proportion of the contract to be subcontracted

Section VI: Complementary Information

VI.1)

Contract related to a project and/or programme financed by community funds?

VI.2)

Additional Information

VI.3)

Procedures for appeal

VI.3.1)

Body responsible for appeal procedures

Body responsible for mediation procedures

VI.3.2)

Lodging of appeals

VI.3.3)

Service from which information about the lodging of appeals may be obtained

VI.4)

Dispatch date of this Notice

Annex D1 – General procurement

Justification for the award of the contract without prior publication of a contract notice in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU)
Directive 2004/18/EC

a) No tenders or no appropriate tenders in response to:

	Open procedure
	Restricted procedure

b) The products involved are manufactured purely for the purpose of research, experiment, study or development under the conditions stated in the Directive (for supplies only).

c) The works/goods/services can be provided only by a particular tenderer for reasons that are:

	Technical
	Artistic
	Connected with the protection of exclusive rights

d) Extreme urgency brought about by events unforeseeable by the contracting authority and in accordance with the strict conditions stated in the Directive.

e) Additional works/deliveries/services are ordered under the strict conditions stated in the Directive.

f) New works/services, constituting a repetition of existing works/services and ordered in accordance with the strict conditions stated in the Directive.

g)Service contract awarded to the successful candidate or one of them after a design contest.

h) For supplies quoted and purchased on a commodity market.

i) For the purchase of supplies on particularly advantageous terms:

	from a supplier which is definitely winding up its business activities
	from the receivers or liquidators of a bankruptcy, an arrangement with creditors or a similar procedure.

j) All tenders submitted in reply to an open procedure, a restricted procedure or competitive dialogue were irregular or unacceptable. Only those tenderers were included in the negotiations which have satisfied the qualitative selection criteria.

Other justification for the award of the contract without prior publication of a contract notice in the OJEU:

k) The contract has as its object services listed in Annex B of Directive 2004/18/EC or in Annex XVII B of Directive 2004/17/EC

l) The contract falls outside the scope of application of the relevant directive.

In addition to the box(es) ticked above please explain in a clear and comprehensive manner why the award of the contract without prior publication of a contract notice in the OJEU is lawful, stating in any case the relevant facts, and, as appropriate, the conclusions of law in accordance with the articles in the relevant Directive (500 words maximum):

The District Council considers the development must be undertaken as an indivisible whole and that in so far as there may be public works or services contracts, then for technical reasons and for reasons connected to the protection of exclusive rights, the contractual arrangements for the implementation and delivery of the development can only be awarded to Gateway One Limited (‘Gateway’) and the District Council is therefore justified in using the negotiated procedure without prior competition as permitted by Article 31 of Directive 2004/18 and by Regulation 14(1)(a) (iii) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006. This notice is therefore published in the interests of transparency alone. The following issues have been taken into account in reaching this view: — Gateway are the landowners of a key component of the development site, have initiated the proposals and borne the costs of progressing it to date; — the Gateway landownership is integral to the totality of the site and forms a key part of the development site; — this is not a generic development proposal that could be procured elsewhere in the District Council's area, this is in practice the only opportunity to create a permeable link from the corner of Arden Street and Birmingham Road to link the large footprint retail site at the Maybird Shopping Centre and the emerging canal quarter with the historic town centre; — the development of the site cannot be implemented in separate parts; — The public procurement rules recognise the principle of proportionality and it would in all the circumstances be disproportionate for the District Council to exercise compulsory purchase powers over Gateway One Limited and run a procurement for a developer, even if they could establish grounds for a compulsory purchase order and provide the finance to do so, neither of which is at all likely.