Issue - meetings

Report from the Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Recommendations

That Cabinet:

1.    Approves the revised budget of £12.02m for the Wath Library scheme, including an increase of £2.04m to be funded from unallocated Local Regeneration Grant, as set out in Appendix 1. 

2.    Approves the revised budget for the  ...  view the full agenda text for item 168

Consideration was given to the report which provided a summary of the challenges encountered during the delivery phase of the Wath Library and Rotherham Markets and Library schemes. These challenges had resulted in increased costs and the need to revisit aspects of scope and delivery. Cabinet were asked to approve  ...  view the full minutes text for item 168

Report from the Executive Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Recommendations

That Cabinet:

1.    Approves the revised budget of £12.02m for the Wath Library scheme, including an increase of £2.04m to be funded from unallocated Local Regeneration Grant, as set out in Appendix 1.

2.    Approves the revised budget for the Rotherham Markets & Library scheme, increasing the total project budget to £46.84m, representing an additional £5.95m, funded as set out in Appendix 5.

3.    Notes that the revised budgets reflect the completion of the detailed design, resolution of construction stage risks and the establishment of a more robust and deliverable position for both projects.

4.    Notes the intention of the Chief Executive to commission an investigation into the development and delivery of the Rotherham Markets & Library project which has resulted in the cost increase noted in Recommendation 2.

At the Chair’s invitation the Cabinet Member for Transport, Jobs and the Local Economy, Councillor Williams reported that a cabinet report relating to the Wath Library and Town Centre Markets and Library regeneration projects would be presented the following week, setting out revised budgets and additional funding requirements.

Significant concern and frustration were expressed regarding the need for additional funding, particularly for the Town Centre Markets and Library project, which had previously required further funding. It was noted that the Wath Library project required an additional £2 million (bringing the total to just over £12 million), and the Town Centre scheme required an additional £5.95 million (bringing the total to just over £46 million).

Assurance was provided that the additional funding would not require new borrowing but would be met through existing regeneration budgets and unallocated funds, including the capital programme contingency established to address cost pressures such as inflation.

It was acknowledged that the report set out, in a transparent manner, the issues contributing to cost increases. For Wath Library, a significant proportion of the additional cost was attributed to the discovery of asbestos. For the Town Centre project, a range of issues relating to design, cost management, and governance were identified.

It was confirmed that a review would be commissioned to examine the Town Centre project in detail, with a view to understanding what had gone wrong. It was also emphasised that lessons learned would inform future capital projects to prevent similar issues. Finally, it was indicated that a further report on the outcomes of the review and lessons learned would be brought back to the committee.

The Chair invited members of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board (OSMB) to raise questions and queries and began by asking whether an asbestos register had been in place for the Wath building and whether this should have identified the extent of asbestos and the associated removal costs.

In response, Simon Moss, the Service Director, Planning, Regeneration and Transport explained that assumptions had been made based on surveys undertaken to estimate the level of asbestos. However, it was noted that the full extent often only became apparent once intrusive works and more detailed surveys were carried out, which had been the case in this instance.

In the supplementary question the Chair sought assurance on health and safety grounds, stating that an asbestos register should have been in place to identify the presence of asbestos in the building and inform any required works. The Service Director, Property and Facilities Services, Kevin Fisher, confirmed that asbestos management requirements were in place, noting that all buildings should have an asbestos survey and a health and safety file containing an asbestos management plan. It was explained that buildings constructed before 2001 were generally assumed to contain asbestos, and management approaches were based on this assumption.

It was further clarified that fully invasive surveys were not normally undertaken unless necessary, with asbestos instead managed based on available information. In this case, while asbestos had been anticipated,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 146