Agenda item

Andrea Ripley, Housing Strategy Officer:

1. presented Housing Scrutiny Sub Committee with a report to outline the Post Implementation Review (PIR) findings of the delivery of De Wint Court Extra Care facility, following handover from the developers in March 2022

2. added that In July 2016, Executive approved, as part of the Housing New Build Strategy, to consider a detailed appraisal of options for the refurbishment or redevelopment of De Wint Court, a 37 unit supported scheme

3. confirmed that following the open procurement exercise in the summer of 2019, ESH Construction Limited were awarded the contract to build De Wint Court with an anticipated build time of 80 weeks

4. reported that there were delays to the delivery of the scheme due to the Covid-19 pandemic restrictions. The availability of materials and labour impacted delivery substantially with a 41-week extension to the contract

5. highlighted that De Wint Court was handed over from the contractors at practical completion to City of Lincoln Council on 11 March 2022

6. added that the findings of the post implementation review could be seen at Appendix 1 to the report

7. reported that the scheme had achieved the scope to deliver a 70-unit extra care facility within the budget allocated. Lessons learned had been captured as detailed within Appendix 2 to the report

8. invited comments and questions from Members of the Committee.

Members discussed the content of the report, commented, asked questions and received relevant responses from Officers as follows:

Question: Had all units been taken?

Response: Yes. There were a small number of voids due to the nature of the scheme however all units were signed up as of October 2022.

Question: Could Officers share an update in regard to the onsite hairdressing salon?

Response:A meeting had taken place with a working hairdresser.  There had been interest in the lease however, the original design included three hair wash basins.  One of these basins was being replaced with a forward-facing hair wash basin for ease of use for wheelchair users and another basin would be removed to enable a clear view to the mirror whilst hair was  being cut.  This work was being progressed and once completed, the hairdressing salon would be ready to let.

Comment: There were lessons to be learnt in every scheme.

Question: Would the building benefit from full staff cover?

Response: Staff cover should be 07:00-22:00. Any absence of staff could be attributed to sickness. Comments regarding staffing would be fed back.

Question: Should the situation arise, was there provision for a tenant to complain to the Council regarding the Service Charge?

Response: Yes. The right to reply on the level of service charge was lawful.

Comment: A percentage of the staff charge was covered by the Council. It was a very good scheme and feedback received from residents had been very positive.

Question: The rent breakdown included an element for void properties and rent arrears. Why was this?

Response: Rent breakdowns were important to demonstrate transparency. It was not uncommon within the sector to include an element for void properties. The advice of the finance team was sought and acted upon.

Question: Would the Council consider another building similar to De Wint Court?

Response: Future buildings would be dependent on demand. The Council worked with Lincolnshire County Council (LCC) and would need to consider available land.

Comment: LCC would approach CoLC and request involvement. The additional care package that LCC provided was expensive however, the idea was that we kept people within the community, rather than hospital.

Comment: It was positive to hear that the hairdressers had progressed as it had been a year.

Response: The end of defects had been concluded. The list was set and contractors had been back for the last couple of weeks. They were also scheduled to come back next week.

Comment: There had been the advertisement of a unit on Home Find. It was important to be careful with advertisement of units due to the nature of the residents within the building. It needed to be monitored carefully.

Response: The building was accessible with secure areas that needed a key fob to gain entry.

RESOLVED that the contents of the report and associated appendices be noted.