Agenda item

Report of the Director of Community and Children’s Services.

Members received a report of the Director of Community and Children’s Services in respect of progress on the Housing Major Works Programme. The following matters were raised:

·         Following feedback from Members, the Assistant Director agreed to revise the key in appendix 1 to make any project ‘slippage’ clearer within the delivery forecasts.

·         The results of destructive testing for the front door replacement project at Great Arthur House had demonstrated that the removed door did not comply with current fire safety requirements. Work was underway to improve the fire resistance of the sample door and if this also failed then there would be a requirement to replace all doors. There would be no testing on the panelling as the project team were aware these were not in line with current fire regulations and the Project Team were working directly with the Planning Team to agree a resolution. A key issue remained with the Parcel Cupboard, which was also non-compliant, and it was proposed that this may need to be replaced with something that looked similar but functioned differently. A Member asked why the doors were so unsatisfactory. The Assistant Director explained that, at the time of installation, all City of London Corporation buildings met the contemporary fire safety regulations and that current regulations were not applied retrospectively. However, if a Fire Risk Assessment is completed and buildings are considered unsafe, with improvements needed, the Corporation were obliged to make these improvements.   

·         A recent procurement exercise for works on Petticoat Tower Balcony Doors and Windows had led to the successful contractor withdrawing having been unable to accept the City of London Corporation’s Terms and Conditions. On this basis the City of London Corporation was no longer able to accept this tender bid and was able to award the project to the second-place contractor. Members felt that, by virtue of submitting a bid, contractors were agreeing to the Corporation’s terms and conditions and were concerned at the Corporation’s inability to hold the original successful contractor to account for the cost in both time and monetary terms caused by the delays caused by their subsequent withdrawal. They wished for their concerns to be raised with the Finance Committee through its Procurement Sub-Committee.

·         A Member identified that the five-year Major Works Programme had reached its halfway point and within which a number of projects had been completed. They queried when any planned future projects would be brought to the Committee’s and to residents’ attention. The Assistant Director explained that towards the end of 2019 a forward look would be provided and that the scale of works, with the exception of the roof replacement programme, would be far smaller than the current Major Works Programme. There was concern that this would give too little time for residents to plan ahead. Members asked and the Assistant Director agreed that officers could consider providing some form of ‘good news’ notification for residents, sooner rather than later, explaining that there was very little work needed in the following five years. It was suggested that this communication be sent to residents by the respective Estates’ Offices in conjunction with their annual service charge circulation. The Chairman wanted to ensure that, even if the size of the projects were going to be smaller, that the current level of report detail and Committee scrutiny be maintained going forward.

RESOLVED, that

·         Receive the report;

·         Request that the Procurement Sub-Committee consider the concerns expressed by the Housing Management and Almshouses Sub-Committee regarding the costs associated with the delayed works on Petticoat Tower Balcony Doors and Windows following the withdrawal of the successful contractor, and come to a view regarding whether contractors could be held accountable for meeting those costs and if not, how we might be able to amend procurement processes in future in order to do so.