Michael Fabricant has learned that damages are being claimed against the
contractor responsible for the paving works around Lichfield Market
Square. And the Council has said "We believe that a significant
proportion of the delay can be attributed to the contractor not planning
its work effectively, including at times having an inadequate number of
skilled labourers on site to lay the paving and insufficient materials."

In a letter to Lichfield District Council at the beginning of September,
Michael Fabricant asked: "Have any additional costs, over and above the
original contract cost, been incurred by the Council for the extended
period of works? Has the contractor suffered any penalty charge for the
extended period of works? Have any lessons been learned by the Council
for the management of future projects? What has caused these excessive
delays?"

In a detailed response to Michael Fabricant, the works implementation
manager from the District Council wrote:

"The District Council is deeply disappointed that the project has taken
longer than originally expected and I can reassure you that we are
taking every step we can to ensure that the contractor finishes the work
as soon as possible. I would like to make the following points:

1) The Contractor has indicated that the majority of the works will be
finished by the end of September. However, as you know we have been
given assurances of finish dates in the past and these have been missed.
So, whilst we believe the date is achievable and likely, it is given
with some degree of caution.

2) The Contract Administrator has issued Extensions of Time to the
contract, currently totally 24.9 days, which will result in additional
costs to the contract.

3) However, the District Council has notified the Contractor that we
will be deducting Liquidated Damages for the non-completion of the
scheme by the dates in the Contract. At present these are anticipated to
total 51.1 days. It must be noted that both the Extension of Time and
Liquidated Damages periods are subject to further contractual
negotiation and may change.

4) The District Council put an enormous amount into the preparation and
planning for this work, agreeing the timing, phasing and how we could
keep the disruption to a minimum, with partners at the City and County
Council, the Chamber of Trade and the Access Forum of the Disability
Partnership.

We undertook a detailed and careful procurement process to appoint the
contractor, based not only on price but also experience of similar
projects and respective performance.

However, we could not plan for or foresee changes in personnel on site
that duly occurred following the appointment of the contractor and we
feel this is where a large number of problems have arisen.

When the project has finished the District Council will evaluate the
management of the project and identify what lessons can be learnt.

5) There are several reasons for the delays to the project, and the
views of the contractor and ourselves differ about a significant number
of these.

We believe that a significant proportion of the delay can be attributed
to the contractor not planning its work effectively, including at times
having an inadequate number of skilled labourers on site to lay the
paving and insufficient materials.

In terms of the approved extensions of time these relate to the need to
re-lay parts of Breadmarket Street kerb line and paving as requested by
Staffordshire County Council (12 days), additional works associated with
the Bower weekend and the 2 military parades (2.4 days), the
installation of the traffic management, additional investigations as to
the construction of the carriageway and excavating around previously
unidentified services.

Whilst we have maintained access to the city centre throughout the
works, the extended length of the contract has, it is acknowledged,
caused inconvenience to users of the city centre. We will continue to
undertake the necessary steps to ensure the work is finished as soon as
possible and that we can have the City Centre back to normal. We believe
that when the works are finished they will enhance the character and
appearance of the city centre making it a safer and more attractive
place for visitors, residents and businesses."

Michael Fabricant agrees. "Unlike some recent construction close to the
City Centre, I believe that the work in the Market Square is fully in
keeping with the character of Lichfield and I welcome this much needed
make-over. It will help attract additional tourism and boost the
economy of the City. However, I am pleased the Council is taking a
robust attitude regarding the costs of this project for they must never
forget they are the guardians of council tax payers’ money.

"There are lessons to be learned as confirmed in the letter and in
subsequent statements by councillors. Nevertheless, I recognise from my
own experience as a chartered engineer that it is impossible to foresee
every contingency on a major project such as this.

"I know that local traders and residents have been badly inconvenienced
by all the disruption in the City Centre. I have received many
complaints as well as observations about the degree of ‘work ethic’
amongst some of the builders on site. I have seen some of the builders
sunbathing in the market square on the odd sunny day we had during the
summer.

"What with barricades in the road and diverted traffic, there has been
something of the Dunkirk Spirit amongst pedestrians in Lichfield this
year. But in a few weeks from now, I hope most will say: ‘It was worth
the wait’."