Agenda and minutes

(see Minute Book dated 16^th September, 2009 pages 17-31J)

Resolved:- That the minutes of the meetings held on 13^th and 27^th July, 2009 were approved as a correct record.

In accordance with Minute No. 95 of 27^th October, 2008, the Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods reported on the local impact of the requirement to provide EPCs to date.

There were five service areas within the Council affected by EPC legislation:

• Key Choices Property Management (KCPM)

As part of the KCPM service, properties belonging to private sector landlords joining the accredited scheme or benefiting from initiatives such as Rent in Advance were required to have a current EPC in place, prior to the property being occupied.  Within KCPM, there was a registered EPC Assessor and to date 20 properties had been assessed.

• Trading Standard

The requirement to provide an EPC was self regulating to a degree; in that to sell a property on the open market, an EPC was required as part of the Home Buyers pack.  Properties cannot be marketed by an estate agent without 1 and, as with structural surveys, EPCs were required by lenders to satisfy mortgage purposes.

For rented property the new tenant was entitled to receive an EPC, however what was not yet known was what level of EPC awareness there was amongst households moving within the private rented sector. 

To date, Trading Standards had not taken any enforcement action in relation to non-compliance with EPC legislation.

• Neighbourhood Investment Service

A very limited capacity existed within Neighbourhood Investment Services to carry out an EPC assessment.  This opportunity was initially made available to private sector landlords registered with the Council’s Registered Quality Landlord Scheme.  To date no EPC inspections had been carried out.

• 2010 Rotherham Limited

EPCs applied to all social housing.  2010 Ltd. employed 2 accredited Agency Surveyors to carry out EPCs on all voids, vacated and Right to Buy properties.  2010 intended to employ in-house operatives to carry out EPCs in due course.  3119 EPCs had been carried out to date, with an average rating of ‘C’.  EPCs were made available to prospective tenants through the lettings process.

124 public buildings had been surveyed for the Display Energy Certificates for the Council and the average rating was ‘E’.  Comparison benchmarking with other authorities was not yet available.

Resolved:- That the content of the report be noted.

The Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods presented the submitted report which provided an update on the proposals received from the Wentworth North and Wentworth Valley Area Assembly Co-ordinating Groups for projects identified to be funded from the Area Assemblies Devolved Budget.

These proposals would enable the delivery of local initiatives which met community priorities as identified in the Area Plans of the Area Assemblies.

Resolved:- That the project proposals to be funded from Area Assemblies Devolved Budgets be approved.

Mike Shaw, Finance Manager (Neighbourhoods) presented the submitted report which detailed the income, expenditure and net position for the Neighbourhoods and Adult Services Directorate compared to the profiled budgets for the period ending 31^st July 2009.

The Independent Support Service (Wardens) or Older People’s Service, was currently subject to a full management review, with the potential to integrate this area with Domiciliary Care within Adult Services being explored.  Continuation of the Service in its present format, would result in a projected overspend of £492k in 2009/10.

Current budget pressures within Safer Neighbourhoods related to estimated Flare system costs (£30k) and Service Quality costs (£10k at 08/09 levels), unbudgeted salary costs relating to a temporary contract which was due to finish in March 2009, advertising costs for new posts within the Community Protection Service (£22k), essential Health and Safety work at Old Landfill Sites (£35k), additional staff cost (£9k) and redundancy costs (£29k) within the Anti-Social Behaviour Team.  The wider Neighbourhoods Service was optimising opportunities to save staff costs through tight vacancy management and have implemented a suspension on non-essential expenditure with the aim of delivering a balanced position by the end of March 2010.

An estimated pressure of (£25k) which related to the purchase of bespoke computer equipment and additional software cost associated with the implementation of Worksmart, whilst a shortfall in income received and maintenance costs relating to disused chapels and the payment of grants to Paraochial Church Councils was creating a pressure of £40k within Bereavement Services.

Resolved:- That the reported be noted and received.

Further to Minute No. 61 of 1^st September, 2008, the Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods presented the submitted report which provided a response from 2010 Rotherham Ltd. in respect of a petition received to reinstate the Caretaker at Beeversleigh. 

He summarised the main concerns raised and actions taken as follows:-

·      Poor standard of cleanliness of the building (Action: The building was now cleaned once a week, this was managed by Facilities Services and monitored by the neighbourhood office).

·      Confusion over how to report estate problems and repairs, and over the role of the Estate Officer (Action: Information was provided to residents via letters and posters to clarify roles and set out contact details.  Home visits were also carried out to explain that there was no longer a site-based Caretaker and to clarify the role of Estate Officers).

·      Concern over health and safety, specifically lack of fire alarm testing (Action: Fire alarm now tested every week at the same time, residents informed).

·      Lack of clarity regarding service charges (Action: Confirmed no service charge was paid by residents other than rent and district heating).

·      CCTV not working properly (Action: CCTV was now operating correctly, viewable from within residents’ homes, and was monitored by the Safer Neighbourhood Teams.  Estate Officers were now part of the SNTs and partnership working had been strengthened.  Police Community Support Officers attended a community meeting to provide advice on crime prevention).

·      Bin chutes and bin rooms not cleaned (Action: Arrangements put in place for cleaning of bin chutes).

·      Cracks noted at the bottom of the building (Action: A joint 2010 / RMBC structural survey took place and ascertained that the cracks were not dangerous - currently investigating cause).

·        Inadequate recycling facilities (Action: Recycling Service would be looked at for flats throughout the Borough.  Discussions were currently taking place with RMBC Recycling Team)

The Cabinet Member asked for further information relating to the costs involved in reinstating the caretaker.  The Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods agreed to look into this and report back directly to the Cabinet Member with his findings.

Resolved:- (1) That the content of the report be noted.

(2) That the action taken by 2010 Rotherham Ltd. be approved, but further work be undertaken into what costs would be involved in reinstating the caretaker.

Further to Minute No. 39 of 28^th July, 2008, the Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods presented the submitted report which provided a response from 2010 Rotherham Ltd. in respect of a petition received to reinstate the Caretaker at the Lanes (East Dene). 

The main concerns were that anti-social behaviour would increase, the estate would become unsightly and grounds maintenance would deteriorate.  Residents also raised concern over a lack of presence on the estate of other agencies.  A meeting took place between 2010 Rotherham Ltd.’s Estate Champion and the main petitioner in April 2008, and visits and an action week were held during May, 2008.

A range of concerns were discussed, including broken glass, litter, fly tipping, anti-social behaviour, maintenance of shrubbery, confusion over who to report issues to and the removal of the caretaker.  Actions were put in place by 2010 Rotherham Ltd. to address these concerns and as a result no further complaints had been received.

The Cabinet Member asked for further information relating to the costs involved in reinstating the caretaker.  The Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods agreed to look into this and report back with his findings.

Resolved:- (1) That the content of the report be noted.

(2) That the action taken by 2010 Rotherham Ltd. be approved.

Resolved:-  That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in those paragraphs indicated below of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

Resolved:-  That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in those paragraphs indicated below of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

Consideration was given to a report relating to the acquisition of the Bellows Road Shopping Centre.

The comprehensive redevelopment of the Bellows Road Shopping Centre in Rawmarsh was one of the Council’s key regeneration schemes within the Rawmarsh and Parkgate Area Development Framework.  It had been agreed as a Priority 1 capital project and also recognised and supported by Transform South Yorkshire as a major project within the Rotherham Housing Market Renewal Programme.

The report provided information relating to the progress achieved to secure control of part of the development site and to seek approval for the agreed terms for the acquisition of the above property.

Resolved:- That the acquisition of the subject property be approved.

(Exempt under paragraph 3 of the Act)

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

Resolved:-  This item be deferred to a future meeting.

(Exempt under paragraph 3 of the Act)

Further to Minute No. 55 of 9^th September, 2009, the Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods presented the submitted report which sought approval to appoint a contractor to undertake structural repairs to 92 ‘Airey’ non traditional properties across the Borough, which had been previously approved for investment.

Resolved:- That the tender submitted by Bramall Construction dated 31^st July, 2009, in the sum of £2,732,767.64 be accepted.

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

The Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods presented the submitted report in respect of tenders for level access improvements to the following Sheltered Housing Schemes:-

• Dorothy Taylor (Dalton)
• Marshall Close (Rawmarsh)
• Pottery Close (Rawmarsh)
• Woodland Gardens (Maltby)
• Bevan Crescent (Maltby)

Resolved:- That the tender submitted by N. Stones Builders Ltd. dated 8^th September, 2009, in the sum of £599,560.00 be accepted.

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))