Meeting documents
Cabinet
Wednesday, 11th January, 2006
1. Question from Cllr Shaun McGall
Has the Executive Member investigated establishing a register for Houses of Multiple Occupancy?
Answer from Executive Councillor Vic Pritchard
The introduction of the Housing Act 2004 has created three licensing schemes for use by local housing authorities. These are summarised below:
a) Mandatory licensing of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs)
This is aimed at improving housing conditions in the highest risk properties. To require licensing the property needs to have residents sharing some facilities, such as a bathroom or kitchen, be three storeys or more and contain at least 5 occupants.
b) Additional discretionary licensing for HMOs
This allows a local authority to extend the licensing of HMOs to other HMOs not covered by mandatory licensing.
c) Discretionary selective licensing of the private rented sector.
Designed to help councils improve local communities by ensuring bad landlords take greater responsibility for the management of their property and deal with anti-social tenants. However, can introduce only if:
A7 the area is, or is likely to become, an area of low housing demand; or
A7 the area is experiencing a significant and persistent problem caused by anti-social behaviour.
Housing Services are currently working to ensure that mandatory licensing is implemented effectively in April 2006. This is causing significant strain on Housing Services, particularly in light of long-standing recruitment issues. Indeed the team currently has four vacant posts, two of which still remain unfilled. Therefore, to date the introduction of either additional discretionary licensing of HMOs or discretionary selective licensing of the private rented sector has not been investigated. However, it is clear that the introduction of discretionary licensing would require additional staff resources.
2. Question from Cllr Shaun McGall
What is the economic impact of HE students in Bath & North East Somerset?
Answer from Executive Councillors Vic Pritchard and/or Colin Darracott
There are currently just over 14,000 full time Higher Education (HE) students in Bath& N.E. Somerset. Using DfEE figures on student expenditure it is estimated that HE students will spend in the region of A377million in the local economy.
There are 2950 people employed directly at the area's two Universities and it is estimated that there are approximately a further 1700 local jobs supported indirectly by the HE sector and student expenditure.
3. Question from Cllr Shaun McGall
Has the Executive Member investigated applying for additional controls to remove the deemed consent rights for the display of residential letting boards?
Answer from Executive Councillor Gerry Curran
The planning service has just received (within the last 10 days) confirmation from the ODPM that the council's application to renew the Direction preventing the "deemed consent" display of For Sale and To Let signs within the Bath conservation area, for a further period of 10 years. We will now publicise this in the local press as required by the regulations.
The Direction only relates to the Bath conservation area, and has been approved by the ODPM because of the area's "special character". It is not likely that a further direction for other areas could be secured.
The Direction only controls external signs - signs inside buildings do not require consent, and do not come under Planning control.
4. Question from Cllr Shaun McGall)
Does the Council, either directly or through the Universities, have any influence over landlords to control students behaviour?
Answer from Executive Councillor Vic Pritchard
Housing Services does not enjoy any formal powers to influence landlords' control of their tenants' other than in certain defined areas such as overcrowding. However, we do try to influence landlords through the use of the voluntary property accreditation scheme. This is achieved in two principal manners. Firstly, it identifies the landlord of a property, or his/her agent, to Housing Services, thus allowing dialogue. Secondly, by agreeing to accredit their properties housing services ensures that all physical conditions, including fire safety requirements are met and adhered to. In addition we are currently introducing a management protocol as a pre-condition of accreditation. This details what we expect of landlords and their tenants. It is debatable how effective this will be, given the limited powers landlords have over their tenants.
5. Question from Cllr Shaun McGall
Does the Executive Member believe that the current voluntary Housing Accreditation scheme is fully resourced to cope with the increased demand from landlords to accredit their properties?
Answer from Executive Councillor Vic Pritchard
The property accreditation scheme has proved to be extremely successful and indeed has been cited by the ODPM as an example of good practice. However, a factor of this success is that the number of properties joining the scheme continues to increase. Over recent years the number of properties on the scheme has increased from below 500 accredited properties to the current level of almost 1,000 properties. Maintaining an effective scheme of such size, including the processing of annual landlord gas certificates, electrical inspection certificates, property inspections etc. is a demanding and time consuming process. The staffing available to run this scheme was marginally increased during 2005 from 1.4 FTE to 1.5 FTE, though effectively has remained unchanged for a number of years. With current staffing levels the scheme is probably at the limits of its development. However, even at present a large number of simultaneous applications can cause a delay in processing applications without the input of temporary additional resources. Regrettably other service demands and staffing reductions prevent Housing Services from permanently reallocating staff to this service.
6. Question from Cllr Colin Barrett
I noted the article on the front of the Bath Chronicle on Tuesday 6th December, `You've been fined'. After reading the comments by Councillor Curran in this article, a local resident in Weston asked the Council whether the facts contained in the newspaper were true: they were told `no'.
Could the Executive Councillor clarify whether the Council or the Bath Chronicle are right?
Answer from Executive Councillor Gerry Curran
Councillor Curran will respond at the meeting.
7. Question from Cllr Colin Barrett
Since the Bath Chronicle article on Tuesday 6th December, could the Executive Member reveal the following figures,
a) How many A350 fines have been issued since this date for people who have left rubbish out on the wrong day?
b) Could a distribution of fines by Council ward please be given?
Answer from Executive Councillor Gerry Curran
a) 5 fines have been issued
b) All fines are in the Abbey Ward
8. Question from Cllr Gordon Wood
Does the Executive Councillor expect the Bath Spa will open in April 2006?
Does she expect the Bath Spa will be completed within the resources currently committed to the project?
Answer from Executive Councillor Nicole O'Flaherty
The progress which has been made within the Spa over the past few months has been clear to see, so obviously I am disappointed to hear that Capita Symonds has uncovered further problems (see Capita Symonds statement attached at the end of the Questions document).
There is, however, more transparency and a better understanding of what is going on than we had under previous arrangements.
I am pleased that, although very tight, we are currently still on course for practical completion in April. However, I am aware that these extra defects mean that we have no spare time in the schedule, should unforeseen delays occur.
The Capita Symonds programme shows that construction of the building will be completed by the end of April. Given the number of additional design/construction defects that have been uncovered since the building was taken back from Mowlem, this demonstrates remarkable progress. However, the programme now has no slack and if any other defects are uncovered, or problems encountered, these could result in some slippage.
The actual date for the opening of the building is the responsibility of TDC.
The Council is committed to making sure that the building is of the highest possible quality.
The extent and number of construction/design defects discovered in the building is more than could have been imagined (see Capita Symonds statement) and correcting these will initially have to be funded by the Council, although they will then be the subject of claims against those responsible. Detailed estimates of the costs to rectify all the defects have not yet been completed, but they will result in the Council having to increase its funding in the interim by circa £1.2m until such time as it can claim against those responsible.
It is better that existing problems are uncovered and dealt with now, rather than that they remain hidden only to emerge later.'
9. Question from Cllr Chris Watt
What formal consultation has taken place with Norton Radstock Town Council in relation the proposals for the Midsomer Norton and Radstock area set out in paras 4.6 - 4.10 in Appendix 1 to the paper titled Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West being considered by the Executive on 11th Jan 2006?
Answer from Executive Councillor Gerry Curran
Original consultation on the preparation of a sub-regional spatial planning strategy for the West of England area took place in November 2004 - January 2005 carried out by the West of England Partnership. Scenario 3 of that consultation included development of between 5,000 - 10,000 homes at Norton-Radstock.
This consultation provided an input in preparing First Detailed Proposals (FDP) by the West of England Partnership agreed by the Council Executive on the 7th September 2005. These were forwarded as advice to the Regional Assembly which is responsible for preparing the Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West, including the sub-regional spatial strategy for the West of England area.
Paras 2.9 to 2.10 of the FDP state:
"Provision for significant economic growth and housing at the other regionally important centres within the area, Weston-super-Mare and Bath, will reflect their future potential, environmental factors and the need to address problems associated with commuting by improving the balance between economic activity and housing provision. Sustainable urban extensions will be considered at Bath, subject to the need to address environmental and landscape constraints associated with its status as a World Heritage Site, its setting, transport implications, and the release of land from the Green Belt. At Weston-super-Mare, urban extensions will accommodate mixed development, a new sustainable community, and transport infrastructure improvements.
Where there are major environmental or transport constraints to extensions to the major urban areas, significant development at settlements outside the main urban areas will be considered if it is well related to sustainable transport links to a main urban area, enhances or supports services, facilities and employment opportunities in the settlement and meets Green Belt, environmental and other sustainability objectives for the sub-region. It may not be possible for Bath, in particular, to accommodate levels of development appropriate to its role in the sub-region, because of its environmental, transport and Green Belt constraints, and therefore settlements beyond the Green Belt within Bath & North East Somerset will need to be considered for development."
Whilst the FDP did agree an overall level of development in Bath & North East Somerset - 15,400 dwellings for the 2006 - 2026 period it does not put forward precise locations and capacities for development as the results of the Greater Bristol Strategic Transport Study were still awaited and further work on a strategic review of the Green Belt and Strategic Sustainability Appraisal still needed to be completed.
The West of England Partnership therefore agreed that on completion of this work proposals would be further developed and reported to the Regional Assembly as early as possible in 2006.
However, the four Unitary Authorities had not come to a conclusion on locations for development by November 2005 and the Regional Assembly requested more information on locations and capacities for development to meet it's programme of completing the Draft Regional Spatial Strategy for submission to the Secretary of State by March 2006. Failing this officers of the Assembly would set out their own proposals for the West of England based on the information they had before them, including the FDP.
Consequently Bath & North East Somerset officers in consultation with leaders developed a possible strategy for Bath & North East Somerset during December 2005 which builds upon the FDP and includes proposals for the area south of the Green Belt including Norton-Radstock and surrounding area. As stated in the report to the 11th January Council Executive this would be subject to the necessary provision of transportation and other physical and social infrastructure. Because of these tight timescales there has been no further public consultations on the sub-regional spatial strategy. However, a letter dated 2.12.05 from Norton-Radstock Town Council indicates the Town Council's general acceptance that the Norton-Radstock area would accommodate a significant amount of new residential development in the context of the RSS.
If agreed, the strategy as set out in the report to the Executive can be confirmed as this Council's and the West of England Partnership's advice to the Regional Assembly for a spatial strategy for Bath & North East Somerset.
If agreed by the Regional Assembly and incorporated into the RSS it will be subject to formal public consultation during Spring/Summer 2006 with the Examination in Public (EIP) on the content of the RSS held next year.
If the strategy is then adopted by the Secretary of State following the EIP then Local Development Documents would be prepared by this Council, setting out detailed proposals for the area identified for development in the RSS. These would also be subject to further public consultation.
10. Question from Cllr Gail Coleshill
I would like to congratulate the Executive Member for Sustainability and the officers involved for the success of the Environmental Action days and ask the Executive Member to extend this scheme and to hold an Environmental Action day in Peasedown St John in 2006
Answer from Executive Councillor Gerry Curran
Anti-social behaviour (including nuisance, disorder and criminal damage), arson, abandoned vehicle and fly-tipping statistics have been used to select the Environmental Action Day areas, both the completed ones in 2005 and the planned days for 2006. The statistics come from the Police via the CSDP Research Officer, the Arson Task Force and the Council's Enforcement Team.
For 2006, updated statistics were considered at a planning meeting in December by the EAD multi-agency implementation team. The areas planned for 2006 include repeat actions in 4 areas aimed at both reinforcing the messages from the first days as well as forming an assessment of the longer-term impact, and one new area (Norton-Radstock) has been included. The overall activity level for the coming year was agreed in terms of viable ongoing use of all the agencies' resources. Discussion with regard to future activity and areas can be opened up and progressed throughout the year.
11. Question from Cllr Tim Ball
Can the Leader of the Council say what he is doing to sign up to the LGA's Greening Communities?
Answer from Executive Councillor Paul Crossley
The Council has not yet had time to consider this new LGA initiative properly.
However, the Council was one of the first authorities to sign up to the revised Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change on 5 December 2005 and is developing its sustainability work around the central priority of tackling climate change, which will cover a good many of the issues highlighted in the LGA Greening Communities campaign.
We are exploring whether these developments already qualify the Council to become an LGA Environment Champion, within the Greening Communities campaign, and will contact the LGA about this.
(Reference question 8)
Bath Spa
Statement by Jonathan Goring, Director, Capita Symonds
In September we presented Bath & North East Somerset Council with a list of the faults which needed to be rectified before the Spa building could be handed over to the operator (list and update attached).
Significant progress has been made since then - a number of problems have been resolved and, although the schedule is very tight, we are currently still on track for completion in April.
However, the problem with the glass became a complicated legal issue. The architect asked the glazier (Mag Hansen) to replace the glass to the standard required. The glazier refused to do this as part of its contract so we have had to go to tender for a new supplier. We have appointed Haran Glass. Work will begin in February subject to weather conditions.
Furthermore, in addressing the faults we had identified - such as lifting floors to tackle leaks or removing ceilings to address electrical problems - we have uncovered several other design and / or workmanship issues, including, for example, poorly-built shower room walls, inadequate support for a glass ceiling, non-connection of heat exchangers and leaks in the copper piping. Clearly such problems need to be rectified.
Costs are being evaluated. Some of the issues can be resolved within the existing contingency planning budget while other costs could be claimed back in compensation in due course.
Ends
Spa site problems - updated report, Capita Symonds (January 2006)
|
Problem (reported September 05) |
Current status (January 2006) |
|
1) The glass wall surround - which has been vandalised - has many panes of defective glass. |
A new supplier has been appointed. Work to be undertaken in February. |
|
2) Several of the internal fire doors are sub standard and need replacing. |
Currently being replaced along with affected plasterwork. |
|
3) Doors in the steam room and treatment room are insecure. The weight of the door is too great for the hinges and fittings. |
New floor boxes where required have been installed. Doors will be reinstalled on completion of floor screed and finishes. |
|
4) The leaking floors are a bigger job than first anticipated. As more flooring came up the scale of the problem has grown with additional areas needing to be re-laid. However this work will be accommodated in the schedule and will not delay the opening. |
More defective screed has been removed than first thought. The screeds include the waterproofing system, underfloor heating and the additional drainage has had to be installed. More complex design work involved in achieving required slopes to floors and special steelwork for heating pipes between rooms. |
|
5) There are a number of areas where galvanised steel was used instead of stainless steel. These have started to rust and although they don't present a structural threat, they will need replacing. |
Steam pipes and angle beads to corners of plasterwork have been/are in the process of being replaced. |
|
6) While the problem of peeling paint in the pools was solved last year, paint is peeling from other areas (eg. walls in the steam room) and this is the subject of further investigations. This is not as serious as the peeling pool paint. |
Grit blasting of columns required to both columns and steelwork. Replacement of protection paint to structural steel columns. Delays have occurred as this additional work has to be completed before scheduled works can progress. |
|
7) When the floors were taken up to solve the leaks, we noticed some electrical fitments would need to be re-installed (eg. inaccessible for maintenance) and water ducts would need to be re-constructed (eg. they have been constructed out of perishable materials). These problems are being corrected as part of the floor replacement programme. The wiring does not match the wiring diagram (eg. some of the switches do not operate the equipment they are supposed to). |
We have replaced the underfloor heating pipework and added further drainage. We have encountered significant defects with the electrical system which we are continuing to correct. |
|
8) There is a crack in the basement. This is a joint where work was temporarily finished, but when it was started again the new concrete was not keyed to the old properly. We have devised a solution for this problem. |
This has been resolved by drilling and injecting a chemical sealant into the wall. |
NEW PROBLEMS SINCE SEPTEMBER 2005
|
1. Replacement of glazing system to the external walls, commencing in February 2006. |
|
2. Removal of and replacement of ceilings to gain access to mechanical and electrical faults |
|
3. Identification and rectification works to mechanical and electrical services including rewiring, replacement of copper pipe work, valves etc |
|
4. Increased scope of works to floor waterproofing including increased testing regime |
|
5. Building in of missing fire dampers into air conditioning ductwork |
|
6. Remedial Works to non-compliant drainage above ceiling |
|
7. Grit blast removal of existing flaking and poor quality paintwork to steel and concrete columns and replacement |
|
8. Replacement of fire doors, that do not meet fire officer requirements, installation of missing fire stopping where services pass through firewalls and repairs / replacement of floor finishes removed to allow missing sensors to be installed to under floor heating |
|
9. Increase in scope of decoration works e.g. painting to replace ceilings and walls where plaster replaced |
|
10. Replacement of defective stainless steel works |
|
11. Sundry scaffolding, stonework's, external waterproofing works |