Purpose

Growth Board (28th Aug 2025) – Spire
Neighbourhood

Recommendations: That authority is given to the Service Director
for Economic Growth, to progress the procurement of geotechnical
services at Spire Neighbourhood.

At the Growth Board meeting on the 22nd May 2025, an approval was
given to establish a £50,000 budget to support the
development of a business case for land at Spire
Neighbourhood.

Since then, a project working group has been established and is
investigating several work streams including site investigation
(SI) works, which will establish the abnormal costs of development
associated with the site. These will be critical to understanding
the viability of the development proposals.

An initial desktop study and topographical survey which was
procured through a competitive process. This process identified
several risks and concerns which require further detailed and
intrusive investigation to confirm the level of risk, the
remediation strategy and likely cost of works to mitigate these
issues.

It is now proposed that these works are procured to inform the
development of a viable development scheme. The anticipated costs
are £45,000 and will utilise most of the remaining budget for
the development of the business case.

It is likely that further budget will be required to consider the
design of the scheme. These will be assessed following the
conclusion of the site investigation works.

Content

The Service Director, has approved the
commencement of a procurement process to appoint a consultant to
provide the following geotechnical services:

• Phase 2 Site investigation report.
• Phase 3 Remedial Options Appraisal

The cost is anticipated to be £45,000

Alternative options considered

An alternative option has been
considered:

1) A reduced scope or 2) no further SI works could be carried out
prior to marketing the site, and high-level assumptions made
against certain risks in the business case.

These options were discounted as they would expose the Council to
risk at a later phase of the process and could lead to the
development being unviable and exposing the council to a higher
level of financial risk once a land disposal process had
started.