IN Brief:
- TVCA has selected Morgan Sindall Construction and Infrastructure for a £113,680 early contractor involvement package.
- The contractor will review Engineering Stage 2 work and assess constructability across three shortlisted station locations.
- The contract remains pending signature and includes an option to continue into Engineering Stage 3.
Morgan Sindall Construction and Infrastructure has been selected to provide early contractor involvement services for the planned railway station serving Teesside International Airport.
Tees Valley Combined Authority has identified the contractor for a £113,680 package covering review of the project’s Engineering Stage 2 design and associated reports. The work includes a gap analysis of development completed so far, together with contractor input on constructability, risk and opportunities across three shortlisted station locations.
The published award notice records the contract as pending, with signature estimated for 28 September. Subject to that step being completed, the initial appointment is expected to run from 1 October 2026 to 1 April 2028, with an extension available to April 2029.
Morgan Sindall is therefore entering the programme before a main construction contract has been defined. Its immediate role is to test the engineering work developed through Stage 2 and identify where assumptions around access, sequencing, buildability or risk need further attention before the project moves into more detailed design.
Once the review is complete, the scheme will pass through a formal gateway process. Approval at that point would allow progression into Engineering Stage 3, with the current ECI contract containing an option for Morgan Sindall to continue supporting the project through that phase.
The station development has a £20 million allocation through the Tees Valley transport programme. Earlier programme documentation divided development work into stages covering scope definition, constraints and feasibility before moving towards selection and endorsement of a preferred station location.
Onward access to the airport terminal and nearby employment areas also forms part of the project development work. That means the preferred station position has to be considered alongside the routes passengers will use after leaving the rail network rather than simply against the geometry of the railway itself.
The three-location assessment gives early contractor involvement a practical role. A station position that appears attractive from a passenger-access perspective may create more demanding railway possessions, earthworks, structural work or utility interfaces, while another location may simplify construction but require greater investment in onward connections.
Those trade-offs become more expensive to resolve as a design matures. Bringing a contractor into the project at Engineering Stage 2 gives the authority and design team an opportunity to test assumptions while the preferred solution can still be changed without rewriting a completed tender package.
Rail station construction also combines several disciplines within a constrained operating environment. Platforms, drainage, structures, electrical systems, communications, access arrangements and public realm need to be coordinated around an existing railway, with some activities potentially dependent on controlled access to the operational network.
Temporary works and construction logistics can influence the permanent design at an early stage. Space for cranes, compounds, material deliveries and safe workforce access may differ significantly between the shortlisted locations, particularly where neighbouring roads, businesses or railway infrastructure limit the usable footprint.
The ECI review can also test procurement assumptions. Specialist railway packages, long-lead equipment and access requirements can dictate programme sequencing, so identifying them before the project progresses into detailed engineering can reduce the amount of redesign required later.
The £113,680 value is modest compared with the £20 million development allocation, but the appointment sits at a point where decisions can influence a considerably larger future construction commitment. The contract is for engineering and construction advice rather than delivery of the station itself.
Its pending status is equally important. The procurement notice identifies Morgan Sindall as the selected supplier, but the contract is not recorded as signed at the time of publication. The estimated signature date therefore remains a milestone to be completed rather than a formality that should be written as finished business.
If the project clears its next gateway, continuity into Engineering Stage 3 would allow the contractor’s buildability work to follow the design into greater detail. That could retain knowledge developed during the comparison of the three locations rather than handing the next team a completed Stage 2 assessment without its underlying construction reasoning.
The current appointment moves the airport station programme further into engineering development without implying that construction is authorised. Morgan Sindall’s immediate task is narrower but consequential: challenge the existing work, expose practical constraints and help establish whether the emerging station options provide a credible route into the next design stage.
