THE ROYAL BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA
https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/committees/Document.ashx?czJKcaeAi5tUFL1DTL2UE4zNRBcoShgo=h7YDTlzNpGmdV2bZnqZAnU0mOgWux367Ie7fj5LBoJS9pZcpFBOfug%3d%3d&rUzwRPf%2bZ3zd4E7Ikn8Lyw%3d%3d=pwRE6AGJFLDNlh225F5QMaQWCtPHwdhUfCZ%2fLUQzgA2uL5jNRG4jdQ%3d%3d&mCTIbCubSFfXsDGW9IXnlg%3d%3d=hFflUdN3100%3d&kCx1AnS9%2fpWZQ40DXFvdEw%3d%3d=hFflUdN3100%3d&uJovDxwdjMPoYv%2bAJvYtyA%3d%3d=ctNJFf55vVA%3d&FgPlIEJYlotS%2bYGoBi5olA%3d%3d=NHdURQburHA%3d&d9Qjj0ag1Pd993jsyOJqFvmyB7X0CSQK=ctNJFf55vVA%3d&WGewmoAfeNR9xqBux0r1Q8Za60lavYmz=ctNJFf55vVA%3d&WGewmoAfeNQ16B2MHuCpMRKZMwaG1PaO=ctNJFf55vVA%3d
A4
HOUSING AND PROPERTY SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
11 MAY 2016
GRENFELL TOWER REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR OF HOUSING
The purpose of this report is to provide the Housing Property and
Scrutiny Committee with information and recommendations from the Board Member
review of the Grenfell Tower regeneration project.
FOR INFORMATION
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 In association with the development of the Kensington Academy
and Leisure Centre projects, which completed in summer 2015, it was decided
that money should be invested into Grenfell Tower. Stock condition information
highlighted that Grenfell Tower was in poor condition and therefore it was
agreed to invest £10.3m on improvements. The money invested came from the sale
of basements at Elm Park Gardens and was not part of the HRA capital programme.
The works commenced on site in June 2014 and are due to be completed at the end
of March 2016. Final landscaping works will then be undertaken during April and
May typically the planting season.
1.2 The scope of works included the following:
New heating and hot water
New double glazed windows
Thermal cladding of the building
Smoke/safety and ventilation works
Improved foyer and door entry
Associated environmental works
9x new hidden homes
New nursery
New boxing club
Landscaping improvements
1.3 The contractor Rydon was selected to undertake the work
supported by consultants Artelia for contract administration and Max Fordham as
specialist mechanical and electrical consultants. Rydon were responsible for
design, construction and resident liaison work. The
2
TMO
worked with all partners and were responsible for the overall project
management.
1.4
Resident consultation indicated their preferred approaches to resident
engagement were: letters & newsletters, informal “drop-in” sessions and one
to one consultation. These approaches were adopted throughout the project.
1.5 A
group of residents living in Grenfell Tower formed a resident compact halfway
through the project in June 2015. The TMO worked with the compact to address
issues that were raised relating to the regeneration project. At full council
on 2nd December 2015
a petition signed by 51 residents was tabled at the meeting. The matter was
referred to the Housing and Property Scrutiny committee and a speech from one
of the compact members was presented to the meeting of the 6th January 2016. At the Board meeting of the 5th January the KCTMO Board members were made aware
of the petition and agreed that a delegated group of board members would review
the issues raised. The Scrutiny committee was then informed that the Board
would review the project and respond to the matters raised in the speech by the
compact. The Board has previously been emailed a full copy of this speech.
1.6 All
members of the Board were invited on the 19th January to express an interest in joining the review group. The
following members put themselves forward:
Paula
Fance – Chair
Kush
Kanodia
Mary
Benjamin
Councillor
Condon-Simmonds
Deborah
Price
Anne
Duru
1.7 An
initial scoping meeting was held on 24th February for the Group to define the scope of the review. It was
agreed that the review would be undertaken over one full day and would cover
the following areas:
Resident consultation and engagement
The position of the HIU in the hallways
Allegations of threats, lies and intimidation
Response to complaints
Quality of work and site management
Compensation
3
1.8 The
review day held on Saturday 12th March commenced with a presentation covering background information to
the project and detailed information on each area of the review as set out in
2.7 above. The Group was then taken on a tour of Grenfell Tower to view; the
construction works, the show flat, the boxing club and the hidden homes. Each
member was provided with a full pack for the day which included the detailed
information covering each area of the scope. The group discussed each point
mentioned above in detail and the recommendations were noted for future
projects of this nature.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 The
following recommendations were the outcome of the discussion held by the Group:
The names and addresses of all those attending
public meetings should be recorded and minutes taken of each meeting for future
reference should this be required.
Where projects span over 12 months in duration
the initial resident profile survey information is repeated on a six monthly
basis. This would help to ensure that any additional needs that have not been
identified at the beginning of the project are identified.
Where
residents have language requirements and have chosen to use family members to
help translate then this information should be recorded and signed off in order
to help ensure that if the family member is not available then translation
services can be provided.
A
procedure is drafted to outline the different stages involved in gaining access
on future projects this procedure could then be sent to only those residents
that were not cooperating to avoid any misunderstanding and to ensure that due
processes are always followed.
The
Group agreed that this report be shared with RBKC (attached as Part B Report
B2)
3. CONCLUSIONS
3.1 The Group recognised that there
were significant challenges with the project and acknowledged that residents
would have experienced inconvenience due to the nature of this type of
construction work and the constraints of the particular design of Grenfell
Tower. This disruption included:
Noisy work: Demolition and drilling
Access: Use of lifts by contractors to transport materials
4
Pipework: Retrofit of pipes
Additional floors for lifts
Wet Trades (e.g. plastering)
Sub-contractors that went into administration
during the project
Maintaining services (heating and hot water) whilst residents are in situ
3.2 The
Group were satisfied with the following mitigating actions that were undertaken
to limit the disruption caused by the above:
Limiting noisy work hours: 9am to 3pm
Lifts: one for passengers and only one used for
materials.
Two flats were made available for respite
facilities for residents to use
Rydons RLO was based on site to deal with all specific issues on a day to day
basis
3.3 It
was further acknowledged that residents had experienced disruption from both
the KALC project and the Grenfell Tower works over an extended period of time
since December 2012.
3.4 The Group commended the
contractor Rydon on their performance and ability to deliver a complex construction
project. They considered that a number of high quality hidden homes had
been delivered together with excellent new facilities for the boxing club and
community room. A door knocking exercise was undertaken in December 2015 to ask
residents if they were satisfied with the works. 77 of the 120 households
responded and of these 90% of residents confirmed that the improvements to
heating and hot water were working effectively. 83% of residents were happy
with their new windows.
3.5 Rydons are an experienced
contractor that has a good reputation for delivering this type of construction
work where residents are in occupation. The combination of all partners
involved in this project has contributed to very successful improvements to the building and
residents homes. The regeneration works have provided individual control over
their own utility usage and residents will benefit from increased thermal
insulation.
3.6 The Group commended the
excellent work of the Director of Assets and Regeneration and the KCTMO team
involved in high quality management of the project over 22 months.
3.7 The
Group noted that a full project review and resident satisfaction survey would
be undertaken six months after the project is
5
completed.
The results of this review will be presented to a future Board meeting.
Laura Johnson
Director of Housing
Background Papers used in the Preparation of this Report:
None
Contact Officer: Ms Celia Caliskan, General
Needs Housing Commissioning Manager.
Tel: 020 7361
2238 and E-mail: celia.caliskan@rbkc.gov.uk
1
A5
THE ROYAL BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA
HOUSING AND PROPERTY SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
16 JULY 2013
|
AN UPDATE ON GRENFELL TOWER IMPROVEMENT WORKS AND THE
RECENT POWER SURGES The purpose
of this report is to inform members of the Grenfell Tower improvement works
and the recent power surges.
FOR INFORMATION
|
1. Introduction
1.1 This report provides Members of the Housing and Property
Scrutiny Committee with an update on the Grenfell Tower improvement works and
the recent power surges.
1.2 There have been a number of communications from a small number
of residents in the form of blogs and open “round robin” e-mails on these two
separate topics. This report sets out to clarify the current situation in
regard to both the planned improvement works to Grenfell Tower and the recent
power surges.
Grenfell Tower Improvement Works
2. Background
2.1 Grenfell Tower is located on Lancaster West Estate, adjacent
to the site of the KALC project which is currently on site. On 2nd May 2012, RBKC Cabinet approved a
budget of £6m to deliver major improvements to the fabric of Grenfell Tower,
including new homes and improved accessible office space. These improvements
were to be funded from income generated from the sale of basement spaces in Elm
Park Gardens.
2.2 Subsequently, the TMO Board proposed that the
budget for the scheme be increased to enable additional investment. This
additional investment will deliver the renewal of key mechanical and electrical
elements such as the communal heating system, which will complement the
proposed investment in the building fabric. As part of the quarterly monitoring
process, Cabinet will be asked at its meeting in July to increase the budget
for the scheme to 9.7m. This can be met from the HRA working balance
3. Scope of the Improvement Works
3.1 A summary of the current, proposed scope of works includes:
Window renewal
Roof renewal
Thermal external cladding of the
building
New entrance lobby
Communal redecoration
New communal heating system (with
individual control)
Hidden Homes – seven new flats
Relocate the boxing club
Relocate the nursery to the ground
floor
Relocate and improve office space
within the block
Improvements to the public realm.
3.2 These works will significantly improve the physical appearance
of the building as well as renewing key building elements that are now at the
end of their useful life. Residents will have improved control of the heating
and hot water supply to their homes and will benefit from significant
improvements in the thermal performance of the building. Additional housing
will be located in the underused lower levels of the building and improved
office accommodation provided.
4. Planning Issues
4.1 In August 2012, a planning application was submitted for the
refurbishment proposals to Grenfell Tower. Planners considered this application
in November 2012 and have asked for a resubmission including the following
amendments:
Removal of the canopy at 1st floor level
Give further definition to the roof
detailing
Consider
alternative colour schemes.
4.2 The Grenfell Design Team has been developing a revised and
updated design ahead of a revised planning submission.
5.
Procurement
To date, KCTMO have progressed the procurement of the proposed
works through the IESI1 Framework.
This is the procurement route used for KALC.
1 “Improvement and Efficiency South East”
5.2 Since
January, the design team has been working with Leadbitter (the proposed
contractor) to bring the scheme within budget and to ensure that the project
will deliver value for money. Progress has been slow and Leadbitter currently
estimate the cost of works to be £11.278m (inclusive of fees), which is £1.6m
above the current, proposed budget.
5.3 A range of options have been considered to bring the scheme
within budget. It is now proposed to market test the works through an open OJEU
tender to ensure that the best contractor is selected and value for money
achieved. Subject to planning and procurement risks, this process will result
in a start on site in Quarter 4 of 2013-14. By comparison, the IESI procurement
process with Leadbitter would have resulted in a start on site at the end of
Quarter 3; however, that route also had a significant risk of delay if a
negotiated agreement could not be achieved with the contractor.
5.4 In tandem with this procurement process, the design team will
undertake a “Value Engineering” process to maximise the delivery of key project
outputs within the proposed budget.
The following is the current indicative timeline for the delivery
of the works:
Prepare tender documents: August
2013
Planning Approval: September 2013
Tenders issued: November 2013
Tender return: December 2013
Evaluation January 2014
Contract Award: February 2014
Start on site: March 2014
Completion of work: March 2015
6. Resident Engagement
6.1 Resident engagement in the refurbishment of
Grenfell Tower has been reviewed and actions agreed to ensure that all
residents have clear information about the current status of the scheme and are
clear about how they can influence the proposals.
6.2 Recent engagement includes:
Grenfell Tower Newsletter: A
newsletter was sent to all residents on 14th
May giving an update on progress and
inviting them to a public meeting.
Public Meeting: A public meeting was held on Monday 17th June. 25 residents attended and
commented on the scheme design proposals.
6.3 Next Steps involve a further newsletter which will be sent to
Grenfell Tower residents giving feedback and responding to the issues raised at
the public meeting. A series of further meetings is planned.
6.4 Further engagement is planned over the summer period to ensure
that all residents have an opportunity to engage in finalising the scope of
works; be consulted on the designs submitted to planning and be involved in the
selection of the contractor for the works. Particular focus will be given to
face to face contact with residents to ensure the widest possible engagement.
7. Conclusions
7.1 The
refurbishment of Grenfell Tower is a large and complex project and time and
careful planning has been required to ensure that the proposals and design of
the scheme meet the requirements of residents, RBKC and Planners. Particular focus has been required
to ensure that the project representing value for money and can be
successfully delivered to the satisfaction of residents.
Grenfell Tower Power Surges
8.1 A series of surges were reported in Grenfell Tower in May 2013
and KCTMO has been actively investigating the cause.
8.2 Residents have been informed in writing and
face to face contact has been made with all 45 residents affected to identify
and resolve any issues arising.
A
summary of the current situation is as follows:
A fault has been identified on the
incoming mains supply and a repair has been carried out to a faulty cable.
There have been no further surges since this repair was completed and further
tests have been carried out on the mains.
Ongoing monitoring of the incoming
electrical supply and we are investigating whether there are other factors that
have contributed to the surges.
Full renewal of the rising
electricity main is planned to commence on 7th
July. This work will include the
installation of surge protection to give additional protection to the block.
An electrical contractor has
carried out electrical testing to all individual properties in the block to
ensure that domestic supplies are safe.
Arrangements have been made for a
contractor to inspect any damaged electrical appliances reported by residents
Details of residents’ damaged equipment are being collected to
deal with any compensation claims.
8.3 In summary, KCTMO has carried out some repairs and continue to
monitor the situation. It is too early to say whether the problem has been
fully resolved and where responsibility lies for the cause. It is possible that
the fault that has been rectified is not the primary cause.
8.4 KCTMO has worked hard to keep residents informed throughout by
letter and face to face contact. They have also discussed the matter at the
residents’ meeting on Monday 17th June and have responded to residents who have made direct
contact with the TMO in relation to the surges.
8.5 There has been a considerable volume of communication from a
small number of residents in the form of blogs and open “round robin” e-mails,
some of which is from people who are not residents of the block. This
communication contains a lot of speculation about the cause of the problem.
KCTMO has not responded directly to this communication and has focused on
keeping residents informed of the facts through direct communication.
8.6 Residents have been advised to inform their
insurers of any loss or damage for which they may wish to claim. KCTMO has also
stated that they will collect information and pass the details to their
insurers. To date 25 residents have submitted claims for damaged electrical
goods. These claims are now with RBKC insurers. KCTMO is also making further
contact with the 20 residents who have not claimed to ensure there are full
details of any loss.
8.7 Financial help has also been offered to residents who may have
lost fridge or cooking facilities at the time of the incidents, however, to
date no residents took up the offer.
FOR INFORMATION
LAURA JOHNSON
DIRECTOR OF HOUSING
Contact Officers:
Peter Maddison, Director of Assets and Regeneration, KCTMO
Tel: 020 8964 6140 and E-mail: pmaddison@kctmo.org.uk
Amanda Johnson, Head of Housing Commissioning
Tel:0207
361 2178 and E-mail:Amanda.johnson@rbkc.gov.uk
No comments:
Post a Comment