Nationwide Data Collection (NDC) noting the first part of your car registration number (on sheets of paper) in regard to using parking spaces in Eastwood Park Leisure/Council HQ main Car Park.


Nationwide Data Collection (NDC) commenced trading in the UK and Ireland in 2008. A new European office was opened in the Netherlands in 2016.

NDC provide specialist data collection services for transport planning, traffic engineering and market research. Our staff can offer clients many years of survey experience which equals or exceeds that of any of our competitors.

Our aim is to rapidly grow by increased geographical coverage and technical diversification to become the largest independent data collection consultancy in Europe.

Our staff have been carefully selected for their expertise in organising traffic & transportation surveys, market research and the subsequent data analysis & presentation.

The vast majority of our staff were previously employed by other data collection companies for many years.

They were motivated to join NDC because we are a very ambitious company with an innovative approach to data collection.

Nationwide Data Collection Ltd is registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office under Registration reference: Z1633744


Why?

Who for?

In connection with?

Cost?

----Original message----
Date : 25/01/2019 - 14:22 (GMT)
To : This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ,
Subject : Director of Environment reply to A&S Committee meeting Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 2.00 pm Council HQ

Dear Audit & Scrutiny Chairman and Committee Members.

This refers to the A&S Committee meeting - Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 2.00 pm Council HQ

Regarding questions asked to the Director of Environment concerning -


'At the Full Council Meeting on 31 October 2018 regarding Agenda Item 15 Report by Director of Environment LEISURE CENTRE UPDATE

The recommendation was accepted that

'(C) That the Director of Environment will now undertake the master planning of Eastwood Park and this will specifically explore the feasibility of a new build leisure centre within Eastwood Park based upon the latest information on Council property options for schools and office accommodation''

and the reply given by the Director of Environment regarding the tender/appointment of Consultants to carry out the above work.

I would ask for your patience and ask that you read the emails to/from Peter Brett Associates attached below.

I don't think the Director of Environment was very clear with their reply.

Their reply was a bit vague considering they are to spend another £49,000.00 of Council Tax Payers money on yet another consultancy regarding Eastwood Park Leisure.

The Director of Environment has been negotiating with Peter Brett Associates since 27 April 2018.

As at 5 December 2018 it would appear Peter Brett Associates were under the impression that they had been awarded a contract.

The Director of Environment would appear to be not negotiating with any other company/Third Party regarding a tender/contract.

Would appreciate if you could ask the Director of Environment to clarify and clear up this matter regarding what he said to the Committee on the tender and awarding of this contract.

As said, I would ask you to read these emails (extracts from FoI (10/12/2018) regarding request for latest information on

'(C) That the Director of Environment will now undertake the master planning of Eastwood Park and this will specifically explore the feasibility of a new build leisure centre within Eastwood Park based upon the latest information on Council property options for schools and office accommodation'' )

The technical Document referred to by Peter Brett Associates is attached also for info.


Sent: 27 April 2018 17:18

Andy,
Please find attached our fee proposal for delivery of Feasibility and Masterplanning for Eastwood Park. Should have any questions about this please come back to me directly.

There are three documents attached;
• Technical Submission
• Project Team CVs
• Project Team Case Studies
Please confirm receipt of this email.

Kind Regards
Ralston Mackenzie
Senior Associate

Fry, Lesley
From: Cahill, Andrew
Sent: 27 April 2018 17:52
To: 'Ralston Mackenzie'
Subject: RE: PBA proposal - Eastwood Park Masterplanning[/left]

Ralston

Thanks
I will get back to you.

Regards
Andy
Andrew Cahill
Director of Environment
Environment Department
East Renfrewshire: Your Council


From: Ralston Mackenzie
Sent: 27 April 2018 17:18
To: Cahill, Andrew
Cc: McAleer, Anne; Emma Jopling; Mark Johnston; Chris Benn; Richard Neilson
Subject: PBA proposal - Eastwood Park Masterplanning

Andy,

Please find attached our fee proposal for delivery of Feasibility and Masterplanning for Eastwood Park.

Should have any questions about this please come back to me directly.

There are three documents attached;
Technical Submission
Project Team CVs
Project Team Case Studies

Please confirm receipt of this email.

Kind Regards
Ralston Mackenzie
Senior Associate
For and on behalf of Peter Brett Associates LLP Glasgow

Fee Proposal

PBA will deliver this project under the terms specified for Lot 7 of the Scotland Excel Framework and in order to carry out the tasks we have shown the fees associated with respect to each task in the table below.

It should be noted that whilst this is a Project Management led task, we are also providing technical consultancy advice and therefore we have used Lot 2 person rates to calculate our fee.

This has been successfully applied in other submissions on the basis that the project management rates require a knowledge of the Project / Construction Value and at this stage we do not know what that will be until we have completed this commission.

Task Sub-total
Peter Brett Associates LLP
Project Management Inputs £7,800

Transport Inputs £12,150

Planning Inputs £5,700

Economic Inputs £2,550

Denham Benn Architects
Architectural Inputs £15,000

Quantum Solutions – QS
Cost Consultancy Inputs £5,100

Expenses £450

Total Fee £48,750

The above sums show costs per task, exclusive of VAT.





From: Ralston Mackenzie
Sent: 31 May 2018 15:31
To: Cahill, Andrew
Subject: Eastwood Park - Draft Proposal
Attachments: PBA_Eastwood Park Masterplan - Technical Submission 31052018.pdf; PBA_Eastwood Park Masterplan - Case Studies 31052018.pdf; PBA_Eastwood Park Masterplan - Project Team CVs 31052018.pdf
Categories: No Action Required

Andy,

Further to our discussions last Friday I have attached a draft proposal for Eastwood Park.

Hopefully this is in line with our discussions and your expectations of what is required?

Should you wish to proceed please let me know by return email.

Kind Regards
Ralston Mackenzie
Senior Associate
For and on behalf of Peter Brett Associates LLP Glasgow


In order to fully investigate the future opportunities for development in the Eastwood Park Campus a Masterplanning exercise needs to take place.

A masterplan for this site would allow the Council to consider all available options for the site against future plans and priorities for the local area, this will help them to determine the best possible mix of services at Eastwood Park.

A masterplan for the Eastwood Park Campus would be considered against three key Council drivers:

Office accommodation strategy and recommendations;

Options available for the expansion of St Ninians High School; and
This business case for a new build Leisure facility, including the availability and viability of alternative sites.

The masterplan will consider essential elements such as, but not limited to;

Statutory framework review – national policy for economic development and planning, in order to understand the context of the development and ensure stakeholder buy-in

Development framework – This will be a long term vision for Eastwood Park Campus, providing the Council with guiding principles for the development, including, site appraisals, site analysis and development zoning

Access and services – A major concern at Eastwood Park Campus is access, traffic and congestion are extremely high, particularly at peak times.

The masterplan will consider road and access improvements to alleviate health and safety concerns. Furthermore, a utilities strategy, services plan and long term sustainability plan will be developed.

The masterplan will explore all available options for the Eastwood Park Campus going forward, ensuring the best mix of services and in the context of future requirements and ambitions for the Council in regards to St Ninians High School, Eastwood Park Council HQ and Eastwood House


From: Ralston Mackenzie
Sent: 15 June 2018 14:51
To: Cahill, Andrew <
Subject: Eastwood Park Masterplan Feasibility??

Andy,

Hope you are well?

I wondered whether there had been a decision made in respect of our recent proposal for Eastwood Park. If you could provide a quick update that would be appreciated.

Kind Regards
Ralston Mackenzie
Senior Associate
For and >
Subject: Eastwood park

Hi Malcolm,

can you please provide me with copies road traffic survey information relating to eastwood park.

I see from the Esri layer that there is a 2013 road traffic survey at the park entrance and a parking survey and also a survey on the A727 at the Park.

Thanks Gillian.
Gillian McCarney
Strategic Services Manager
Environment Department

From: Matheson, Malcolm
Sent: 08 November 2018 12:17
To: McCarney, Gillian
Subject: RE: Eastwood park

Gillian,

All requested survey data attached.

Malcolm


From: McCarney, Gillian
Sent: 08 November 2018 12:42
To: Cahill, Andrew
Subject: FW: Eastwood park

Traffic and parking surveys from a few years ago.

There is a report that should be helpful but a lot of this is data in spreadsheets.

Gillian.

From: Cahill, Andrew
Sent: 08 November 2018 14:40
To: Ralston Mackenzie
Subject: FW: Eastwood park

Ralston

As discussed.

Regards

Andy
Andrew Cahill
Director of Environment
Environment Department


From: Ralston Mackenzie
Sent: 08 November 2018 15:08
To: Cahill, Andrew
Subject: RE: Eastwood park

Andy,

Perfect – thanks…..good discussion earlier.

We are much clearer how we frame this and take things forward.

This survey information will be enough in terms of understanding parking patterns, so we will only need to allow for Junction Turning Counts at the Rouken Glen main access and the roundabout at Fenwick Rd / Ayr Road Eastwoodmains Rd, plus some Automatic Tube Counters both within and surrounding the masterplan area.

Kind regards,
Ralston Mackenzie
Senior Associate
PBA has joined the Stantec family, find out more at peterbrett.com.



This email was part of a text document and as such had no 'sent' date.

15 November 2018 ? - No date on this email but file is dated November 2018


Andy,

Please find attached the technical submission for the visioning and masterplanning exercise at Eastwood Park.

This has been re-worked to reflect our recent discussions and CVs and project experience / case studies from both ourselves and Stallan Brand are attached.

As you will see, we have reacted to this opportunity as if it were to be awarded through Scotland Excel Lot 7 (Project Management), although we have shown our fees and rates in line with our framework rates from Lot 2.

I trust that you will be able to formally appoint us and can advise whether any specific variations to Scotland Excel terms & conditions will be required or whether any commission specific contract data will be issued to us.

If this is all in order, I trust that you will be able to create a Purchase Order and send this out to us for formal appointment.

It should be noted that Stallan Brand will be appointed as sub-consultants to us in respect of this commission.

I can also confirm that this email is deemed to be our covering letter in respect of our attached formal technical submission.

Kind regards,
Ralston Mackenzie
Senior Associate


From: Ralston Mackenzie
Sent: 05 December 2018 10:11
To: Cahill, Andrew; Ian Harper
Cc: Fry, Lesley
Subject: Eastwood Park Vision & Masterplan

Attachments: Risk Register_Issued.pdf; Project Plan & Programme_Issued.pdf

Andy,

Following on from our positive discussions about Eastwood Park Vision & Masterplan, I have attached a copy of our project plan & programme and a risk register for your information.

You will note that we have added a proposed invoice schedule, which I trust will be acceptable?

Any questions please do not hesitate to ask.

Finally, please note that I have yet to receive a PO for this commission.

I trust that this is on its way?

Kind regards,
Ralston Mackenzie
Senior Associate
PBA has joined the Stantec family, find out more at peterbrett.com.



Again, your help with this matter will be appreciated.

Thanks

Sent: 04 February 2019 15:26
To: Ireland, A (Cllr); Fletcher, J (Provost); Swift, Jim (Cllr); Miller, Stewart (Cllr); Gilbert, C (Cllr); Grant, B (Cllr); McLean, J (Cllr)
Subject: Re: Director of Environment reply to A&S Committee meeting Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 2.00 pm Council HQ

Dear Audit & Scrutiny Chairman and Committee Members.

An acknowledgement/reply with the requested information would be appreciated.

Thanks


----Original message----
From : This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Date : 06/02/2019 - 13:37 (GMT)
Subject : RE: Director of Environment reply to A&S Committee meeting Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 2.00 pm Council HQ

I acknowledge your email.

I haven’t quite figured out what to do with it.

Please accept my apologies, I have been rather busy, but will attend to it.

Sincerely,
Jim

----Original message----
From : This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Date : 06/02/2019 - 13:52 (GMT)
Cc : This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Subject : RE: Director of Environment reply to A&S Committee meeting Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 2.00 pm Council HQ

I have had a chance to read it now.

As I see it, Mr Cahill was already in dialogue with PBA, but it would appear had not commissioned the work back in April of last year.

The rules have changed and he would need to put this out to tender now.

However, the decision to commission this work was taken prior to the change in ceiling and as such, seems to be perfectly in order.

I am also comfortable that the consultancy appear to be acquainted with the issues, in that they have had background reports and I assume briefings) and what requires to be addressed and what the focus of their work is to be.

Given the overwhelming desire of people in our communities to see how Eastwood Park could accommodate a new leisure centre and a quick result and the background familiarity of PBA and Ralston McKenzie in particular (he is an ex-Council employee) with this specific project, I cannot see what your issue is.

Sincerely,
Jim

----Original message----
Date : 07/02/2019 - 15:25 (GMT)
To : This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Subject : RE: Director of Environment reply to A&S Committee meeting Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 2.00 pm Council HQ

Hi Jim

Thanks for your reply....is this a personal reply or are you acting on behalf of all A&S committee members?

However, I do have a few comments and would appreciate your comments.

It was only at the Full Council Meeting on 31 October 2018 That the Director of Environment was instructed -


'The recommendation was accepted that

'(C) That the Director of Environment will now undertake the master planning of Eastwood Park and this will specifically explore the feasibility of a new build leisure centre within Eastwood Park based upon the latest information on Council property options for schools and office accommodation''

The Director of Environment has been negotiating with Peter Brett Associates(PBA) since 27 April 2018.

There have been reports published 2014, 2017 & 2018, and an Accommodation report published - All concerning Eastwood Park.

Now another report at £49,000,00 is to be commissioned - There can't be much left of Eastwood Park that has not been surveyed and documented.

You would have thought that with all this information at their fingertips, Turner & Townsend could have provided this service considerably cheaper.

At the A&S meeting on the 24th The Director of Environment praised Turner & Townsend and said they were the right people for the job.

What made the Director of Environment change their mind?

Why are Peter Brett Associates now flavour of the month?

Again, it was not very clear to those sitting in the Public Gallery who the Director of Environment was in contact with regarding this work and if more than PBA had been approached or expressed an interest.

What happens to all the expertise Turner & Townsend have regarding Eastwood Park.

What are Peter Brett Associates going to recommend that Turner & Townsend could not?

Peter Brett Associates are only going to do what the Director of Environment tells them to do - again the Director of Environment is less than open & transparent with Residents/Council Tax Payers, in their instructions to PBA and on what work they are to carry out.

Should PBA not consult with Residents/Council Tax Payers via an open public meeting, where they can be questioned on their intentions & approach to this work.

I applaud your perceived optimism in that just because someone worked for ERC(Ralston McKenzie in particular (he is an ex-Council employee) ) that they know what they are doing !!

It is of course feasible for a new build leisure centre within Eastwood Park.

These previous reports (There have been reports published 2014, 2017 & 2018, and an Accommodation report published - All concerning Eastwood Park) did highlight that there were options available to keep Eastwood Leisure Centre in Eastwood Park -


- The Council and the Trust just chose to ignore them in pursuit of their £40m vanity project.........which probably cannot be accommodated within Eastwood Park (It is important to recognise that the footprint for a site as suggested in option 4 in the consultation exercise requires to be sufficient for a building footprint of 5500 m² along with 8500 m² for parking and external pitches. Allowing for buffer planting and infrastructure such as sustainable urban drainage schemes the full estimated site area is 2 ha (or 20,000 m² or almost 5 acres). )


- so someone has to compromise.

It is not the build but the associated problems put up by the Council and the Trust that they say accompany a new build that are a problem - These do not just simply disappear -

Demolition - This would have an enormous impact on the Eastwood Park site, management of construction and site, traffic management, health & safety and the inevitable impact on St Ninians during exam times. Furthermore, the associated cost and impact of demolition and construction on a multi-use site would greatly increase risk to the Council throughout the project life cycle

•The Trust and Eastwood Leisure Centre / Theatre / Carmichael Hall users would incur a detrimental loss of service.

•There is hard evidence to show that once people are deprived of a facility, many do not return as they will have made alternative arrangements during the period of closure

•As a result of the loss of service, the Trust will incur a dramatic loss of revenue

•Health and Safety; one of the Council’s key concerns on this site is level of traffic and congestion at peak times. The new build Eastwood Leisure Facility would only increase this as it is of a larger scale than the current facility and will attract an increase in attendance

Again, it has always been feasible for a new build leisure centre in Eastwood Park, but it needs the Council and the Trust to curtail their pursuit of a £40m vanity project for this to happen.


Thanks

----Original message----
From : This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Date : 07/02/2019 - 16:13 (GMT)
Subject : RE: Director of Environment reply to A&S Committee meeting Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 2.00 pm Council HQ

This is my reply, which I have not run past anyone for comment or agreement, but copied in the Director of the Environment (the relevant officer), so he could comment if he wished to.

I agree with your assertion that the Council does not require a new leisure centre, but that is not the matter at hand.

You ask a range of questions, some of which I think are fair, but others I consider unreasonable because the answers are self evident, others are just daft and your insinuation around Mr McKenzie, who I had always considered competent when here at the Council, is I think rude and unnecessary.

I therefore consider our dialogue on this matter closed.

Perhaps you can try your ward Councillors, as they may be willing to indulge your line of questioning, but I would doubt that and that is I think the rub that you should consider.

It is my opinion and so is probably worth what you paid for it, but you would be better served by not asking dozens of pointless questions that people don’t have to answer.

I suspect you get people’s backs up needlessly by not thinking through what it is you want to accomplish and asking one or two pointed questions.


Sincerely,
Jim

----Original message----
Date : 08/02/2019 - 14:26 (GMT)
To : This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Subject : Re: RE: Director of Environment reply to A&S Committee meeting Thursday, 24 January 2019 at 2.00 pm Council HQ

Hi Jim

I addressed my request to the Audit & Scrutiny Chairman and Committee Members.

The Chairman of the A&S committee is Cllr Miller one of my ward Councillors.

He did not reply...thus I was seeking to clarify if you were answering for all of the Committee.

My apologies if you thought I was rude. It was not my intention to be so. My comment was made 'tongue in cheek'.

I am sorry you consider some questions daft. I am sure you have asked quite a lot of daft questions during your time as a Councillor.

It would appear that you only want me to ask the questions that you want to answer. How does that work?

I am sorry that I cannot phrase my requests as articulately as yourself but I am not a BA MSc.

I consider your reply somewhat rude.

However, as usual I do appreciate your time and effort in replying to me but...........ouch !

Thanks