The report of the Strategic Director, Place (Document “I”) provides Members with a further update relating to the Council’s involvement with high rise residential buildings following the Grenfell Tower disaster.

Recommended –

That the Committee note the report and request that a further update in the form of an electronic briefing be provided should there be any implications for local authorities of the Building Safety Bill following its enactment.

(Chris Eaton/Julie Rhodes – 01274 432843/431163)

HIGH RISE BUILDINGS

The report of the Strategic Director, Place (Document “I”) was submitted to the Committee to provide Members with a further update on the Council’s involvement with high rise buildings following the Grenfell Tower disaster.

Officers advised that the Improvement notice in the report under item 2.5 which had been served had since been revoked on 15 November 2021 as building owners had complied with it.  They further advised that the Safety Bill contained in paragraph 6.4 of the report had progressed to report stage in the House of Commons.

The report advised that there were two buildings which had been subject to remedial works to remove and replace ACM materials used in cladding.  Funding had been granted from Central Government to meet the significant cost to those who would be responsible for replacement in both cases.

An Improvement Notice was served by the Council in January 2019 in respect of Landmark House as fire hazards were identified including the presence of ACM cladding which required removal.   This notice was revoked on 15 November 2021 as all the works had been completed. 

In respect of the other building (Appleton Point), a Prohibition Notice was served by WYFRS and was still in force and still prevented the building from being occupied.  Significant progress had been made and the Council and WYFRS continued to work with the building owner and representatives to monitor the work required.

Further enquiries had been registered to the Department of Levelling up, Housing and Communities for the Building Safety Fund and the process was being led by WYFRS to work with the nine enquirers.

The Council’s Building Control service was appointed to undertake the building control function for remedial works carried on the nine buildings in question.  The work was ongoing

Significant changes had taken place since the previous annual report was submitted to the Committee as both buildings in the district had both remediated and changes to legislation clarified that WYFRS were the lead enforcement body.

Members were then given the opportunity to ask questions and make comments.  The details of these and any responses received are as below:

·         A Member expressed concern regarding national legislation regarding permitted development rights in planning and asked what proactive steps were being taken to reduce the risk of another similar tragedy to Grenfell? 

·      Officers responded that whilst they themselves were not Planning Officers that the Housing and Planning teams were working together to comment on and address potentially problematic applications.  Officers advised that recent changes to the rules around permitted development relating to space standards and natural light should also improve the quality of developments. Officers also advised that Fire Safety was dealt with as part of  the planning application process as a result of the introduction of new safety regulations.  Further changes to  building control regulations were expected in 2022

·         A Member asked about the sixteen properties documented in the report in section 2.1.2 which had reduced to nine and asked why the number had gone down. 

·      Officers advised that it was due to a combination of reasons, such as height of the buildings and some that did not require the removal of cladding.  The nine were going through a process of due diligence and may reduce further.  For all nine, a building safety audit had been carried out by WYFRS

·         How long would it be until the final determination was made in respect of these buildings as residents may have had concerns?  Were there any timescales for works to be carried out?

·      Officers stated that the work was governed by central Government and was a long and complicated process as there were numerous stakeholders involved.  There were no timescales on schemes that officers were aware of. WYFRS were satisfied with the situation at present. 

Resolved:-

That the Committee notes the report and requests that a further update in the form of an electronic briefing be provided should there be any implications for local authorities of the Building Safety Bill following its enactment.

Action: Strategic Director, Place