Agenda item

Reference was made to article 11 of the minute of meeting of the former Community Services Committee of 15 November, 2005, at which time it was agreed that the demolition of 44 garage units and the refurbishment of the remaining 235 lock up garages could proceed. The Committee had before it on this day, a report by the Director of Housing and Environment which updated members on the progress of these works, and advised of problems encountered in relation to phase three of the project.

By way of background, the report advised that phases one and two of the project had been completed, with 167 garages having been built, and 25 having been demolished. Tenants had returned to their garages and no problems had been encountered during the first two phases.

Phase three of the project, in which it was proposed to demolish 89 garages and rebuild 58, covered garages that had not been built in a traditional manner, but that had been built with precast concrete rather than block concrete. This meant that although the internal dimensions were similar, the overall footprint of the garages was less than those in phases one and two.

The report continued that the first 8 of the phase three garages had been handed back to tenants on 23 March, 2010, and on 24 March, 2010, officers had received complaints stating that the garages were smaller than they had previously been, and that tenants could not get their car doors to open far enough to exit their cars when in the garage. On inspection, it was found that the width of the garages had indeed decreased from 2440mm to 2300mm, which was a loss of 140mm (approximately 5.5 inches). The report advised that this was due to (a) the failure of a lead officer to respond to a request from the appointed contract administrator to check the proposed layout of the phase three garages which clearly showed the use of 215mm blockwork to reconstruct the internal and gable walls; (b) the use of 215mm wide blocks to rebuild walls which were originally constructed of precast concrete panels; and (c) the garages being rebuilt on the original concrete bases, which meant that when the wider block work was used to construct the new walls, the internal dimensions of the garages was reduced.

The report continued that work was suspended on the garages with the exception of two sites, the first of which had 17 garages that were nearing completion and it was decided to continue in order to ensure they were protected against the weather; and at the second of which demolition had already commenced, so it was decided that work should be completed for health and safety reasons.

The report then presented three costed options for the way forward, namely (1) do nothing with the 25 garages that had been rebuilt to smaller dimensions and cancel works at the remaining sites; (2) do nothing with the 25 garages that had been built to smaller dimensions but complete work at the remaining sites in phase three; and (3) partially replace the gable and internal walls of the 25 garages that had been completed, and complete the works at the remaining sites in phase three. 

The Committee intimated their strong disappointment at this situation; and were also concerned at the length of time it had taken for the project to get to this stage, with the original decision having been taken at the aforementioned meeting of the Community Services Committee in 2005, and instructed that the matter be referred to the Audit and Risk Committee in order for a full investigation to be undertaken.  At this point the Convener suggested that there may be a requirement for a policy to the effect that if a Committee decision has not been implemented within a set period of time (for example, one year) then a report must be presented to the Committee with an explanation.

The Committee were advised by the Head of Regeneration and Housing Investment that should the suspension of these works continue, that a charge of £178 per week would be made to the Council by the contractor as part of a penalty clause, but that this could be built into the cost of the overall project.

The report recommended:-

(a)       note the content of this report, and

(b)       approve option 3 as detailed within the report (partially replace the gable and internal walls of the 25 garages that had been completed, and completion of the works at the remaining sites in phase three).   

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to approve recommendation (a);

(ii)        to instruct officers to report back at the next meeting providing more clarity on the options set out within the report;

(iii)       to defer any decision to continue until a further investigation is conducted into cost of each garage in phase three and whether this is now best value for the Housing Revenue Account;

(iv)       to refer this matter to the Audit and Risk Committee in order for a full investigation to be undertaken; and

(v)        to request that the Chief Executive report to the Corporate Policy and Performance Committee, proposing a policy that would instruct officers to report back to a Committee with an explanation in the circumstance where  a Committee decision has not been implemented within a set period of time.