Minutes & Comments
RA Meeting 2 September 2023
1 HPS Residents Association (RA)
Meeting 2 September 2023 – 3 p.m. – 5 p.m. - Minutes
Attendees/Flat /Attendance
Frances Goldberg (RA Secretary)/Flat 1/In person
Sultan Bin Mahfouz/Flats 2 & 3/In person
Nadeem Anjarwalla/Flat 7/Zoom
Richard Bruce/Flat 10/In person
Irene & Stuart Munday/Flat 11/Zoom
Philip Hindley/Flat 12/Zoom
Gail Alexander/Flat 14/Zoom
Rahul Yadav/Flat 17/Zoom
Nick Hill/Flat 21/Zoom
Donald Gordon/Flat 27/In person
Faisal Shaker/Flat 28/In person
Iain & Anette Fergusson (RA Chair)/Flat 29, 30, 31/In person
1. State of the Building
a. Ground floor carpet
i. There was consensus that the ground floor carpet needs replacing.
ii. Sultan has proposed some options, which can be seen on the ground floor porter’s desk.
iii. There was consensus that, given the multiple assurances by the Church Commissioners’ agents’ contractors (The Furniture Union) that the present carpet would be hard-wearing and could be easily cleaned, the cost of a new carpet should be borne by Savills or the Church Commissioners.
b. Paint job
i. There was consensus that the state of the paint job and general decoration carried out by PJ Harte was sub-standard and had deteriorated and this should be remedied.
ii. There was concern that the managing agents had signed off on the works with these being sub-standard.
c. Cleaning
i. Differing views were expressed as to the cleanliness of the common parts.
ii. There was consensus that the ground floor and forecourt cleaning was not up to standard.
iii. There was uncertainty as to what duties the cleaning company and the porter had for cleaning.
2. Proposed works
a. Leaseholders’ Windows and Doors (including the Thursday 31 August letter from the Church Commissioner’s Solicitors)
i. There was consensus that the offer of replacing windows while scaffolding was up for external works potentially represented a good opportunity.
ii. It was recognised that as the windows and front doors are demised under the leases, it would be up to individual leaseholders to decide whether to replace them, and whether they could be repaired or repainted.
iii. A concern was voiced that some of the windows may not comply with current safety regulations for lettings and that in the event of injury to a tenant, the leaseholder could face criminal prosecution, potentially resulting in fines and imprisonment, this being a particular risk if a tenant were to fall out of a window or from a balcony.
b. Outside works
i. There was consensus that the louvered windows on floors 1-6 should be replaced as part of the external works.
ii. There was consensus that the exterior brickwork needs to be cleaned, likely with high pressure hoses, as was done to No. 2 Hyde Park Square, and that the brickwork needed to be repaired as necessary.
iii. There was consensus that the balconies should be repaired:
o The paintwork on the ceilings of the balconies needed to be repaired.
o There was a suggestion that window boxes should be removed as they are not always well-tended. It was recognised that as these are likely demised, this may be up to individual leaseholders.
o There was consensus that the green mosaic panels on the sides of the balconies should be removed or covered.
iv. There was consensus that Savills needed to exercise substantially improved quality control over building works than had taken place by Knight Frank with the interior works.
v. There was a suggestion to investigate the possibility of installing a common roof terrace on the 4th floor roof and solar panels on the South wall. Some doubts were expressed as to their desirability and viability.
vi. There was a suggestion to use moveable scaffolding platforms that would provide considerably more security.
vii. There was consensus that it was worth investigating whether the green canopy at the main building entrance could be made more attractive.
viii. There was consensus that the paving stones in the forecourt under the canopy needed to be cleaned and repaired as necessary.
3. Service Charge
a. Increase
i. There was consensus that the reasons for increases in the Service Charges should be investigated.
ii. There was consensus that the invoices provided to the RA for 2022 should be checked in detail against the budget and leases as to whether all charges were made correctly.
iii. Nadeem offered to take on the above two tasks.
b. Pre-payment
i. Nick explained his interactions with Savills regarding the proper quarterly invoicing of the service charge. It was noted that the correspondence with Savills was ongoing.
4. Building Management
i. There was a suggestion that the Residents Association should investigate the possibility of obtaining the right to manage the building.
ii. Some concerns were expressed as to the desirability of obtaining the right to manage.
5. Porterage
i. There was uncertainty as to the exact duties of the porter and the change of title to building manager.
ii. Some dissatisfaction was expressed with the work of the current porter. At the same time, there was considerable support for the porter and his commitment to the building.
iii. There was consensus that the porter’s presence at the front desk needs to be substantially increased and that he should refrain from being offsite for picking up newspapers for the block
6. Next Meeting
i. There was a suggestion that meetings should be held on a quarterly basis.
ii. There was a request for an AGM to be held in the near future.
7. AOB
i. Some dissatisfaction with the work of the RA Management Committee was expressed.
ii. There was a request by Gail and Philip to be on the RA Management Committee.
Actions / Target Date
1. Members to provide any comments on the draft minutes Thursday 7 September
2. Iain to circulate final minutes Friday 8 September
3. Iain to ask the porter to enhance his presence at the front desk. Friday 8 September
4. Sultan to provide versions of the carpet that can be circulated by email to those RA members not presently in London Saturday 8 September
5. Sultan and Gail to gather all evidence of deterioration of the state of the building, with photos and location of the faults, in one document that can be circulated to RA members by email and subsequently to Savills. Saturday 8 September
6. Frances to circulate the document of the state of the building to all RA members Sunday 10 September
7. Frances to write to Savills asking for details of the porter’s/building manager’s duties Sunday 10 September
8. Iain to write to Savills requesting an estimate of costs for replacement of windows such that leaseholders can decide whether to replace, repair or repaint their windows Sunday 10 September
9. Iain to conduct an online pole of RA members on the following questions:
a. Which carpet would you like for the Ground floor?
b. Would you like the window boxes to be removed?
c. Would you like the Residents Association to explore the possibility of having a communal roof terrace on the 4th floor?
d. Would you like the Residents Association to explore the possibility of having solar panels on the South-facing wall?
e. Would you like the Residents Association to request Savills to replace the porter?
f. Would you like the porter to cease to collect the papers for the residents?
g. Would you like the Residents Association to investigate obtaining the Right to Manage the building, with the understanding that legal fees for the investigation are likely to be in the region of £5,000?
h. Would you like to nominate yourself for the Residents Association Management Committee?
i. Would you like the AGM to be held on Saturday 30 September 3 p.m. -5 p.m., Sunday 1 October 3 p.m.-5 p.m., or on Saturday 7 October 3 p.m. – 5 p.m.?
j. Do you agree that RA meetings should be held on a quarterly basis (with the ability to join by Zoom or other video conference facilities)?
k. Do you give consent to your name, flat number, email, and phone number being circulated amongst the RA members for the purpose of communication on RA matters, on the understanding that this will be treated as confidential and not circulated outside of the RA or used for any other purpose and that you can withdraw your consent at any time and have your details removed from any list kept by the RA or any of its members? Sunday 10 September
10 Members to provide answers to the pole Saturday 16 September
11. Members to provide any additional comments on the state of the building, ideally with photos and location. Saturday 16 September
12. Iain to write to Savills regarding the ground floor carpet, state of the building and cleaning, and results of the poll, exterior works, and press for a meeting and resolution, including:
a. Requesting a schedule of what in the building is required to be regularly cleaned and the responsibilities for cleaning as between the cleaning company and the porter.
b. Requesting a change of the cleaning company.
c. Submitting the state of the building document prepared by Sultan and Gail.
d. Proposed schedule and content of exterior works. Sunday 17 September
13. Iain to organise a RA AGM, to include elections to the Management Committee. Sunday 17 September
14. Nadeem to report back on his findings regarding 2022 invoices and 2023 budget AGM
15. Nick to report back on his correspondence with Savills regarding quarterly invoicing of Service Charges. AGM
16. Iain to report back on the results of the polls and interactions with Savills. AGM
1 HPS Residents Association (RA)
Meeting 2 September 2023 – 3 p.m. – 5 p.m. - Minutes
Attendees
Frances Goldberg (RA Secretary) - Flat 1 - In person
Sultan Bin Mahfouz - Flats 2 & 3- In person
Nadeem Anjarwalla - Flat 7 - Zoom
Richard Bruce - Flat 10 - In person
Irene & Stuart Munday - Flat 11 - Zoom
Philip Hindley - Flat 12 - Zoom
Gail Alexander - Flat 14 - Zoom
Rahul Yadav - Flat 17 - Zoom
Nick Hill - Flat 21 - Zoom
Donald Gordon - Flat 27 - In person
Faisal Shaker - Flat 28 - In person
Iain (RA Chair) & Anette Fergusson - Flats 29, 30, 31 - In person
1. State of the Building
a. Ground floor carpet
i. There was consensus that the ground floor carpet needs replacing.
ii. Sultan has proposed some options, which can be seen on the ground floor porter’s desk.
iii. There was consensus that, given the multiple assurances by the Church Commissioners’ agents’ contractors (The Furniture Union) that the present carpet would be hard-wearing and could be easily cleaned, the cost of a new carpet should be borne by Savills or the Church Commissioners.
b. Paint job
i. There was consensus that the state of the paint job and general decoration carried out by PJ Harte was sub-standard and had deteriorated and this should be remedied.
ii. There was concern that the managing agents had signed off on the works with these being sub-standard.
c. Cleaning
i. Differing views were expressed as to the cleanliness of the common parts.
ii. There was consensus that the ground floor and forecourt cleaning was not up to standard.
iii. There was uncertainty as to what duties the cleaning company and the porter had for cleaning.
2. Proposed works
a. Leaseholders’ Windows and Doors (including the Thursday 31 August letter from the Church Commissioner’s Solicitors)
i. There was consensus that the offer of replacing windows while scaffolding was up for external works potentially represented a good opportunity.
ii. It was recognised that as the windows and front doors are demised under the leases, it would be up to individual leaseholders to decide whether to replace them, and whether they could be repaired or repainted.
iii. A concern was voiced that some of the windows may not comply with current safety regulations for lettings and that in the event of injury to a tenant, the leaseholder could face criminal prosecution, potentially resulting in fines and imprisonment, this being a particular risk if a tenant were to fall out of a window or from a balcony.
b. Outside works
i. There was consensus that the louvered windows on floors 1-6 should be replaced as part of the external works.
ii. There was consensus that the exterior brickwork needs to be cleaned, likely with high pressure hoses, as was done to No. 2 Hyde Park Square, and that the brickwork needed to be repaired as necessary.
iii. There was consensus that the balconies should be repaired:
o The paintwork on the ceilings of the balconies needed to be repaired.
o There was a suggestion that window boxes should be removed as they are not always well-tended. It was recognised that as these are likely demised, this may be up to individual leaseholders.
o There was consensus that the green mosaic panels on the sides of the balconies should be removed or covered.
iv. There was consensus that Savills needed to exercise substantially improved quality control over building works than had taken place by Knight Frank with the interior works.
v. There was a suggestion to investigate the possibility of installing a common roof terrace on the 4th floor roof and solar panels on the South wall. Some doubts were expressed as to their desirability and viability.
vi. There was a suggestion to use moveable scaffolding platforms that would provide considerably more security.
vii. There was consensus that it was worth investigating whether the green canopy at the main building entrance could be made more attractive.
viii. There was consensus that the paving stones in the forecourt under the canopy needed to be cleaned and repaired as necessary.
3. Service Charge
a. Increase
i. There was consensus that the reasons for increases in the Service Charges should be investigated.
ii. There was consensus that the invoices provided to the RA for 2022 should be checked in detail against the budget and leases as to whether all charges were made correctly.
iii. Nadeem offered to take on the above two tasks.
b. Pre-payment
i. Nick explained his interactions with Savills regarding the proper quarterly invoicing of the service charge. It was noted that the correspondence with Savills was ongoing.
4. Building Management
i. There was a suggestion that the Residents Association should investigate the possibility of obtaining the right to manage the building.
ii. Some concerns were expressed as to the desirability of obtaining the right to manage.
5. Porterage
i. There was uncertainty as to the exact duties of the porter and the change of title to building manager.
ii. Some dissatisfaction was expressed with the work of the current porter. At the same time, there was considerable support for the porter and his commitment to the building.
iii. There was consensus that the porter’s presence at the front desk needs to be substantially increased and that he should refrain from being offsite for picking up newspapers for the block
6. Next Meeting
i. There was a suggestion that meetings should be held on a quarterly basis.
ii. There was a request for an AGM to be held in the near future.
7. AOB
i. Some dissatisfaction with the work of the RA Management Committee was expressed.
ii. There was a request by Gail and Philip to be on the RA Management Committee.
Actions (with target dates)Target Date
1. Members to provide any comments on the draft minutes - Thursday 7 September
2. Iain to circulate final minutes - Friday 8 September
3. Iain to ask the porter to enhance his presence at the front desk. - Friday 8 September
4. Sultan to provide versions of the carpet that can be circulated by email to those RA members not presently in London - Saturday 8 September
5. Sultan and Gail to gather all evidence of deterioration of the state of the building, with photos and location of the faults, in one document that can be circulated to RA members by email and subsequently to Savills. - Saturday 8 September
6. Frances to circulate the document of the state of the building to all RA members - Sunday 10 September
7. Frances to write to Savills asking for details of the porter’s/building manager’s duties. - Sunday 10 September
8. Iain to write to Savills requesting an estimate of costs for replacement of windows such that leaseholders can decide whether to replace, repair or repaint their windows. - Sunday 10 September
9. Iain to conduct an online pole of RA members on the following questions:
a. Which carpet would you like for the Ground floor?
b. Would you like the window boxes to be removed?
c. Would you like the Residents Association to explore the possibility of having a communal roof terrace on the 4th floor?
d. Would you like the Residents Association to explore the possibility of having solar panels on the South-facing wall?
e. Would you like the Residents Association to request Savills to replace the porter?
f. Would you like the porter to cease to collect the papers for the residents?
g. Would you like the Residents Association to investigate obtaining the Right to Manage the building, with the understanding that legal fees for the investigation are likely to be in the region of £5,000?
h. Would you like to nominate yourself for the Residents Association Management Committee?
i. Would you like the AGM to be held on Saturday 30 September 3 p.m. -5 p.m., Sunday 1 October 3 p.m.-5 p.m., or on Saturday 7 October 3 p.m. – 5 p.m.?
j. Do you agree that RA meetings should be held on a quarterly basis (with the ability to join by Zoom or other video conference facilities)?
k. Do you give consent to your name, flat number, email, and phone number being circulated amongst the RA members for the purpose of communication on RA matters, on the understanding that this will be treated as confidential and not circulated outside of the RA or used for any other purpose and that you can withdraw your consent at any time and have your details removed from any list kept by the RA or any of its members?
Sunday 10 September
10 Members to provide answers to the pole. - Saturday 16 September
11. Members to provide any additional comments on the state of the building, ideally with photos and location. - Saturday 16 September
12. Iain to write to Savills regarding the ground floor carpet, state of the building and cleaning, and results of the poll, exterior works, and press for a meeting and resolution, including:
a. Requesting a schedule of what in the building is required to be regularly cleaned and the responsibilities for cleaning as between the cleaning company and the porter.
b. Requesting a change of the cleaning company.
c. Submitting the state of the building document prepared by Sultan and Gail.
d. Proposed schedule and content of exterior works.
Sunday 17 September
13. Iain to organise a RA AGM, to include elections to the Management Committee. - Sunday 17 September
14. Nadeem to report back on his findings regarding 2022 invoices and 2023 budget. - AGM
15. Nick to report back on his correspondence with Savills regarding quarterly invoicing of Service Charges. - AGM
16. Iain to report back on the results of the polls and interactions with Savills. - AGM
Please feel free to comment below, adding your name (anonymous comments will not show).
If you feel a comment is inappropriate, please flag it.
AGM 1 OCTOBER MINUTES
1 HPS Residents Association (RA)
AGM 1 October 2023 – 3 p.m. – 4:40 p.m. - Minutes
Attendees / Flat / Attendance
Frances Goldberg (RA Secretary) / 1 / In person
Sultan Bin Mahfouz / 2, 3 / Zoom
Nadeem Anjarwalla / 7 / Zoom
Basna Alnaqib / 8 / Zoom
Irene Munday / 11 / Zoom
Philip Hindley / 12 / Zoom
Gail Alexander / 14 / Zoom
Mohammed Bathich / 18 / In person
Nick Hill / 21 / Zoom
Donald Gordon / 27 / In person
Faisal Shaker / 28 / In person
Iain (RA Chair) & Anette Fergusson / 29, 30, 31 / In person
1. Actions from the last meeting, updates, and reports
Iain reported on the state of actions from the meeting held on 2 September 2023.
a. Accounts and Service Charge
i. Nadeem presented the state of the audit he is carrying out on 2022 accounts and 2023 budget.
ii. Nadeem aims to finish the audit by 1 December 2023 and circulate his findings to the members.
iii. Nadeem aims to propose areas for savings and challenges on the service charge that can be taken up with Savills.
iv. There was consensus that once the results of the audit have been circulated, the members should discuss and vote on which proposed areas for savings and challenges on the service charge the management committee should take up with Savills.
b. Letter to Savills
i. Iain presented a draft letter to Savills (attached) and requested assistance in drafting Annex A to the letter (a document to present to Savills the current state of the interior of the building). Nick Hill offered to prepare the document.
ii. Iain presented the results of the survey conducted on various matters following the meeting of 2 September 2023. No further comments were made.
c. Carpet
i. There was consensus that the carpet should not be replaced until external works were completed.
ii. Nick Hill offered a solution of hard flooring that is noise dampened and considerably easier to clean than carpet. There was consensus that it is worth exploring this option, but that the level of sound for those flats on the ground floor would be determinative as to whether this is a workable solution.
iii. Gail proposed that it was worth exploring that a carpet cleaning machine be purchased for the building, allowing the porter to clean the carpet, rather than having external cleaners every two weeks. There was consensus that this option should be explored.
d. External Works
i. There was discussion of the external works, including the potential costs of repair and the costs of improvements.
ii. Iain reported that Savills’ preliminary budget estimate is in the region of £500K - £750K. Gail suggested that these are likely to be low estimates.
iii. There was consensus that following receipt of an updated schedule and budget from Savills, the Residents Association should discuss and vote on which works should be carried out.
2. Management Committee
a. Each nominee for the management committee (Iain Fergusson, Frances Goldberg, Nick Hill, Gail Alexander, and Philip Hindley) explained their reason for standing and proposed actions, with the floor opened for Q&A.
b. The current management committee stood down and elections were held for the new management committee. The vote count included those present, votes by proxy, and votes by email. The results are:
Iain Fergusson 79%, Frances Goldberg 67%, Nick Hill 63%, Gail Alexander 48%, and Philip Hindley 43%. Percentages are of those members in attendance or voting by email or proxy.
3. AOB
There being no further business, the Chair closed the meeting.
Meeting with Savills 10 October 2023
1 HPS Residents Association Management Committee (RA)
Meeting with Savills 10 October 2023 – 4 p.m. – 5:30 p.m. - Minutes
Attendees / Flat / Role
Frances Goldberg / 1 / RAMC Secretary
Basna Alnaqib / 8 / RA Member
Gail Alexander / 14 / RA Member
Grace Yacoub / 19 / RA Member
Nick Hill / 21 / RAMC Member
Iain Fergusson / 29, 30, 31 / RAMC Chair
Tom Bell / Savills
1. Internal Works
a. Repair Work
i. The poor quality of PJ Harte work was discussed, that this had led to the need for repair work to be required already, and that this is not a question of snagging, but a question of fitness for purpose.
ii. Savills was asked to involve the RAMC in discussions with PJ Harte as to the quality of the work and meeting the repair and replacement costs.
iii. The poor quality of the front desk was discussed, options to be investigated and replacement to take place after the external works have been completed.
iv. It was suggested that PJ Harte should pay for the repairs, given their poor workmanship.
b. Carpet
i. The issue of the carpet not being what was promised by The Furniture Union (TFU) was discussed and that TFG should be responsible for the cost of replacement.
ii. Savills was informed that the RA is looking at hard flooring alternatives that have a similar degree of sound insulation as carpets.
iii. Savills was informed that the RA wants the carpet to be replaced after the external works are completed, to avoid the replacement being damaged.
iv. The cleaning of the carpet was discussed. Tom informed the RA that PTCS (the cleaning company) has been stepped down and that the cleaning has been moved to the porter’s responsibilities.
2. External Works
a. External Cleaning and Pointing
i. The proposed external works were discussed.
ii. Tom confirmed that no works other than those set out in the last Section 20 notice are being considered, namely cleaning of the brickwork, repointing the cement, repairing the roof and replacing the windows in the common parts, with the option of leaseholders replacing windows to their flats.
iii. It was suggested that a sample cleaning work of bricks be carried out (in a not highly visible part of the building) pre-tendering such that the requisite standard could be specified in the tender.
iv. Tom informed the RA that work on the exterior of the entrance (door, canopy, paving) was envisaged to be carried out as a separate project.
v. Tom said that the planning application for the externals and the tender were ready to send out now. The RAMC asked for copies and expressed surprise that they might be submitted without the RA being consulted.
vi. Tom was asked whether there was an overall plan for the future of the building.
vii. There was a suggestion that if the window boxes are demised and not all leaseholders wish to remove them, a solution might be to hire external contractors to look after them that leaseholders could subscribe to.
b. Schedule
i. Tom explained that with planning consent, tender, the Section 20 notice process, works were likely to commence ar the earliest in February 2024.
c. Windows
i. The RAMC asked Tom to explain where matters stood on the replacement of demised windows and the CRS letter. Tom explained that some letters were sent on the basis of a visual ground level inspection, which might therefore not be entirely accurate.
ii. The RAMC asked Tom whether the part of the project for the replacement of the louvre windows in the common parts could be sped-up. The possibility of applying for dispensation from the Section 20 procedure, running the Section 20 procedure in parallel with the tender was discussed.
iii. Tom said that the planning application for the windows was ready to submit. The RAMC asked for copies and express surprise that it had not been consulted.
d. Budget
i. Tom explained that there was no updated budget at present. The RAMC suggested that prior to the tender there would usually be an estimate from the building surveyors to measure the tender against.
ii. Tom confirmed that he would be open to discussing the 2024 budget with the RA during the preparation stage.
2. AoB
A question was raised as to the possibility of parking bicycles in the garage.
Actions
1. Nick is preparing a document to show the poor state of the work for Savills to take up with PJ Harte.
2. Tom to check whether as a matter of principle the Church is amenable to hard flooring on the ground floor.
3. Tom to review whether it would be economical to purchase a carpet cleaner for the building for the porter to use and what is required in terms of licensing and training.
4. Tom to involve the RAMC in discussion with PJ Harte on the carpet and general repairs to the internals.
5. Tom to review the options for replacing the front desk with something of better quality and cohesive for the building.
6. Tom to provide the planning applications and draft tenders for the externals to the RA.
7. Tom to review whether there is in place sufficient planning consent to replace the louvre windows in the common parts.
8. Tom to review as a matter of priority the possibility of expediting as a separate project the replacement of the louvre windows in the common parts to avoid another winter without the windows being closed, including applying for a dispensation from Section 20, and running the Section 20 process, planning application (if necessary) and tender in parallel.
9. Tom to clarify which leases would pay for the louvre windows (i.e. does it include all leases, or just those on the floors with louvre windows).
10. Tom to review whether window boxes are demised and the possibility of engaging outsided contractors to look after them.
11. Tom to review whether there is an overall plan for the building to ensure that works are conherent.
12. Tom to update the contact details for who at Savills looks after the car park and investigate turning a parking bay into a bicycle rack.
13. Tom to provide an updated schedule and budget for the external works.
Meeting with Savills 15 November 2024
1 HPS Residents Association Management Committee (RA)
Teams Meeting with Savills 15 November 2023 – 3 p.m. – 4 p.m. - Minutes
Attendees /Flat/Role
Gail Alexander / 14 / RA Member
Grace Yacoub / 19 / RA Member
Nick Hill / 21 / RAMC Member
Iain Fergusson / 29, 30, 31 / RA Chair
Tom Bell / Savills
Alex Brooks /Trinovant Surveyors
1. Agenda
External Works
2. Issues Discussed. Actions in bold.
a. Roof
i. The RAMC asked why the tender spec required a specific product (Bauder Roof Systems) rather than inviting bidders to be able to propose alternatives.
ii. Trinovant explained that the Bauder product was particularly suited and had been used on school projects, had the appropriate fire ratings, contained a mix of membranes and other elements, came with a 20-year guarantee, not just product against product failure, but also covering poor contractor work, which few products do.
iii. It was agreed that the tender would be worded to allow bidders to suggest alternatives that fitted the spec and cost profile.
b. 3D Visuals
i. The RAMC asked whether 3D visuals of the building would be provided before the spec and tender were finalised to ensure a more accurate tender to avoid surprises.
ii. Trinovant explained that there were only 2D drawings, if contractors felt that they needed 3D detail, this could be done.
c. Variations
i. The RAMC asked what Trinovant expected in terms of variation requests coming from contractors that could lead to overspend.
ii. Trinovant thought that variations were only likely for issues not picked up in the tender, where something was in poorer condition than expected rather than under-pricing and that there were contingencies.
d. Trinovant
i. Gail raised a concern that the owner of Trinovant has had 15 companies in the last 10 years that have gone into receivership.
ii. The RAMC agreed to follow this concern up with Gail after the meeting.
e. Drainage Survey
i. The RAMC asked whether there would be a video inspection of the drainage.
ii. Trinovant confirmed that there would be a drainage survey.
f. Asbestos Testing
i. The RAMC asked whether there would be an asbestos survey.
ii. Trinovant replied that this would be added to the preliminaries, but could not be done until the scaffolding was up and would cost about £2k - £3K.
g. Windows, Doors
i. The RAMC asked which areas are covered in the cleaning, windows, doors.
ii. Trinovant replied that this will be done off the window and door schedule that can be shared. The current schedule was put together about a year ago, some windows and doors have been changed since then. Bidders will put pricing next to each window and door, such that those that are not replaced can be removed.
iii. The louver replacements are a different design. Trinovant will share the design. They will remain closed and will open when a fire alarm is activated.
iv. Trinovant confirmed that some of the communal doors will be replaced, notably the back door to the bins.
v. The RAMC suggested that the communal door at the bottom of the stairs required a glass panel for safety reasons. Trinovant will investigate this.
vi. The RAMC asked that, as the £173K budgeted for windows included not just communal, but also demised windows and balcony doors the associated preliminaries and other on-costs, which represent approximately 50% on the construction cost should be apportioned to leaseholders who wished to replace their windows. Savills confirmed this would be the case. The RAMC also pointed out that the amount of the preliminaries and other on-costs would need to be reviewed depending upon the take-up of window and door replacement by leaseholders.
vii. Savills explained that if demised windows were in disrepair, repair or replacement might be enforced.
viii. The RAMC raised a concern that demised windows for flats that were let need to be HSE Regulation compliant. Savills explained that when granting licences, regulatory compliance was not taken into consideration. The RAMC suggested that this may expose the Church Commissioners to liability should there be an accident in a rented property, given they were aware of non-compliance and that compliance should be a condition of the grant of any licence
ix. The RAMC asked that replacement of the louvers before the cold season should be considered urgently. Trinovant explained that this was unlikely due to the planning and tender process and that scaffolding was necessary due to the size and weight of the units.
h. Design
i. The RAMC asked for more background on the role of the designers and contract administrators.
ii. Trinovant explained that as they are the sole party designing on this project, they had the principal designer. There was not much design involved, just the specification of the windows.
iii. Grace raised a question as to whether the contractor company should not be carrying out the design.
i. Front Paving
iii. The RAMC asked whether it was feasible to add redoing the paving in front of the main door.
iv. Savills said that it would have to be a separate project, as it had not been in the part 1 notice, but that it could be considered as a separate project to be carried out immediately following the external works project.
v. The RAMC agreed to send proposals to Savills, although these may change depending upon a decision to modify the position of the front door to increase space for a porter’s desk in the entrance area.
j. Cleaning Test on Mosaics and Stone
i. The RAMC asked whether there could be a cleaning test on some of the mosaic and stonework surrounding the windows pre-tender to assess what was feasible and its effect, in addition to the test on cleaning the bricks.
ii. Trinovant said this could be tested beforehand, they would look at the types of tests. What was proposed for the brick work was steam cleaning, which is less expensive and does not take as long as other forms of cleaning. This had been carried out on other buildings in the area, Trinovant will share which buildings.
iii. Irene raised a concern as to the safety of the structure of the balconies. Trinovant confirmed that they did not see any structural concerns. Trinovant would visit Irene’s flat to examine the balcony structure.
k. Budget
i. The RAMC asked for a detailed budget breakdown to better understand how the figures were arrived at, notably with reference to the demised windows and doors.
ii. Trinovant confirmed that this would be provided.
l. Scaffolding
iii. The RAMC asked whether Trinovant is considering mast climber scaffolding given the cost and time savings, safety and living condition improvements.
iv. Trinovant confirmed that they had sought to get in touch with the mast climbing company but had no reaction. The RAMC agreed to put Trinovant and Savills in touch with the right person.
v. The RAMC asked how the South wall and the East wall facing the narrow entry to the mews was proposed to be scaffolded. Trinovant agreed to revert with details.
m. Tenderers
i. The RAMC asked whether Savills would still accept suggestions for contractors. Savills confirmed they would, these should be sent to Savills.
n. Next Meeting
i. The RAMC asked for a follow-up meeting in the first week of December.
ii. Savills will organise a follow-up meeting.
3. AoB
No further questions were raised.
RA Minutes 21 February 2024
Attendees /Flat/Role
Frances Goldberg / 1 / RAMC Member
Richard Bruce / 10 / RA Member
Irene Munday / 11 / RA Member
Philip Hindley / 12 / RA Member
Gail Alexander / 14 / RA Member
Donald Gordon / 27 / RA Member
Iain Fergusson / 29, 30, 31 / RA Chair
The Chair reported back on the state of discussions with Savills on Externals and sharing of costs on Internals. Progress has been slow and the RAMC continues to push Savills. Details will be uploaded to the RAMC website. It was decided to approach the Church Commissioners should there be no satisfactory response from Savills within the next week.