Management Committee Meeting 59 Minutes

WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT COMPANY
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING NO 59
7.30 pm, Tuesday 17th November 2015
Present: Adrian Olsen (Chair), Imogen Olsen, Nicholas Orme, Raquel Stremme, Hilary
Sorensen, Paula Reynolds.
In attendance: Jeetindar Gill, FirstPort Property Services
Minute taker: Emma Thompson

  1. Apologies
    1.1 Louise Robertson, Tao Tao Chou, Sowon Park, Adrian Mourby, Sally Duncan, Greg
    Barnes, Mary Tovey and Ann Hall.
    As the number present did not represent a quorum, those items requiring a decision were
    discussed and will be submitted to the meeting in January for ratification.
  2. Minutes
    Approval of the minutes from meeting 58 (06/1015)
    2.1 No amendments to the minutes were noted. They will be submitted to the next
    meeting for approval as an accurate record.
  3. Matters arising from the minutes
    3.1 The Chairman reported that he had received a reply from GreenSquare regarding the
    Government’s Right to Buy policy. The company had directed him to their website
    which included a response to the Government’s proposals which had been submitted
    by the National Housing Federation. The director of GreenSquare had indicated that
    whilst those renting could purchase the property they would probably remain
    leaseholders with an obligation to continue to pay a maintenance charge.
    3.2 It was noted that the County Council was required to progress through a three-stage
    process in respect of the provision of any proposed extra parking restrictions on the
    development:
    (a) An informal consultation – the current stage. The proposals would be promoted in
    the next edition of the Waterways World and the plans will be displayed on the
    community notice board and added to the WMC pages of the WRA website. The
    current suggestion was for extra double yellow lines on parts of Elizabeth
    Jennings Way, particularly by the nursery, and Frenchay Road which would also
    have parking bays marked out. Residents and committee members would be
    encouraged to respond by the deadline of 13th December 2015.
    (b) A formal consultation with stakeholders in January 2016.
    (c) Submission to the Cabinet Member for approval, with likely implementation in
    Spring 2016.
    The committee re-stated that this should be only a first stage and that a full residents
    parking scheme was required.
    2
    3.3 Subsequent to the walk around by the Gardening Sub-Committee and FirstPort, it
    was reported that the double yellow lines would be marked on WMC land at the
    entrance to Clearwater Place as a trial and that parking bays would be remarked at
    1-25 Stone Meadow.
  4. Welcome to the Waterways booklet
    4.1 A mutually agreeable date to progress the content of the booklet had yet to be
    arranged. Consequently it was still work-in-progress.
  5. Railway line developments
    5.1 A meeting had taken place with Nicola Blackwood who was supportive of residents
    (particularly as she actually lives on the estate). It had been recognised that pressure
    would need to be brought by central government regarding limitations on speed and
    other issues as the local authority did not have sufficient powers. She agreed to take
    up these issues with Claire Perry, Transport Minister.
    A director arrived.
    5.2 It was noted that the number of trains allowed overnight had been restricted for each
    rail operator. For instance, Chiltern Railways was limited to seven trains between the
    hours of 11.00 pm and 7.00 am. However, the newly published timetable for Oxford
    Parkway would appear to indicate that the number of trains due to run during that
    time period was scheduled to be nine. This issue needs to be taken up with the City
    Council.
    5.3 Residents’ preference for noise mitigation remained Tata’s silent track which had
    been invented by the University of Southampton and was already in use in
    Blackfriars’ Station, London and in Europe. Network Rail had confirmed that it would
    trial the track on the Wolvercote stretch before securing ‘type approval’ which was
    necessary before it could be used elsewhere. Southampton University claimed it
    would reduce noise by 5-7 decibels. It was felt that there was a strong case for its
    use, particularly as the noise levels mapped out for the stretch adjacent to Stone
    Meadow and Cox’s Ground would peak at 82 decibels, even with mitigation. The
    recognised maximum desired level was 55 decibels before noise was deemed to
    have an impact on health. Clearly the development was outside the tolerance level.
    5.4 It was noted that the discharge of planning condition 19 for section I/1 (Wolvercote to
    Phil & Jim’s primary school) would be submitted to the West Area Planning
    Committee probably in either December 2015 or January 2016. This would be the
    last chance to influence the outcome. The Committee would monitor the website for
    any sign that the Network Rail application had been submitted. Any response to
    Planning Committee Councillors, Local Councillors and the Leader of the Council
    would have to be quick as the timeframe between notification and the meeting would
    be short.
  6. Health and Safety
    6.1 There was nothing to report other than the two yearly health and safety/ fire risk
    assessment would take place in 2016.
    3
  7. Sub-Committee round up
    7.1 Finance Sub-Committee
    7.1.1 It was reported that the accounts had been issued on 30th October 2015. In future the
    finance team would be preparing figures on a quarterly basis for internal
    administrative purposes to aid forecasting and year-end preparation but would
    continued to issue the accounts annually to owners.
    7.2 Apartment Block Sub-Committee
    7.2.1 It was reported that the short term let at 8 Cox’s Ground had now terminated but it
    appeared as if an owner was renting out a room in their property on a short let basis
    on Airbnb which FirstPort would investigate. In the meantime, Penny & Sinclair
    continue to advertise short lets within the development. When approached by
    FirstPort they said they had no right to dictate to owners what they did. The links
    would be distributed to directors in an attempt to identify the addresses of the
    properties concerned.
    7.2.2 The tender for the flat roof replacement Section 20 works for Frenchay Road had
    now been awarded. Materials would be guaranteed for 20 years and workmanship
    for 5 years.
    7.2.3 A tender had been issued for the apartment block carpet replacement and surveys
    had been completed by potential suppliers. Quotations were awaited.
    7.2.4 Following a review undertaken by a Kone technician on the Complins Close lift which
    had consistently failed over the summer, it had been identified that the positioning
    switches had deteriorated and they had been replaced. Since then a further call out
    had been necessary which had been due to a separate fault. Concern was
    expressed that owners may feel that nothing is being done to mitigate future failure.
    Directors were reassured that Kone complete quarterly visits which are
    supplemented by an annual inspection which is required for the insurance cover.
    At the next meeting directors would be asked to ratify a decision to secure a
    quotation for an additional survey on this particular lift.
    7.2.5 No response had been received from Estates & Management regarding the
    application for a loft conversion by 131 Frenchay Road within an apartment block to
    which the WMC had expressed its reservations.
    7.3 Gardening Sub-Committee
    7.3.1 It was reported that a meeting with Thames Water had taken place on 22nd October
  8. Whilst the company had brought with them an A4 sized map showing the
    catchment for the siphon, the directors had been unable to secure a full copy as it
    was deemed proprietary. It was noted however that the public was entitled to view
    the detailed plans at Thames Waters’ Reading HQ. The catchment for road and
    surface water run-off into the siphon is sizeable, stretching a considerable distance
    up and down the Woodstock Road and Banbury Roads, and most of the connecting
    4
    roads in between. The map has been passed on to Curt Lamberth to support the silt
    testing exercises.
    7.3.2 Thames Water would not agree to assist in removing silt from the first section of the
    balancing pond but did agree to test the silt there to assess whether there was any
    residual pollution arising from the incident in the Woodstock Road and at St Clare’s.
    .
    7.3.3 It was noted that Aquatic Solutions would be attending the development on 2nd
    December 2015 for up to three days to clear the watercourse of silt from the
    balancing pond down to the Trap Grounds.
    7.3.4 Curt Lamberth had been installing his measuring equipment at strategic points
    across the development with the intention of reporting back his findings in January
    2016.
    7.3.5 A grid over the exit pipe from the swale to the siphon was now in situ.
    7.3.6 No further fly tipping had been noticed in the vicinity of the Ryder Close.
    7.3.7 Metrorod had attended site on 20th October to examine the underground section from
    the end of the swale to the siphon. They removed the silt but had been unable to
    undertake the camera survey of the siphon because Thames Water were working on
    it at the same time. The survey could only be undertaken during a dry spell. FirstPort
    will chase and monitor progress.
    7.3.8 The Canal and River Trust had been approached to cease the licence to dispose of
    water into the canal. The Trust would only cancel the licence once the channel which
    had been created to remove the water from the development had been closed and
    inspected to its officers’ satisfaction. FirstPort are pursuing this.
    7.3.9 The level of graffiti across the development had reduced significantly and Liz Wade,
    Local Councillor, had been pursuing the option of creating murals underneath the two
    bridges where attempts at removing the graffiti had proven difficult. An artist would
    need to be agreed and a director was investigating potential contacts that could be
    approached. One of the boat owners on the canal nearby has expressed a desire to
    be involved in the process, and claimed that he and others could create a mural. It
    was noted that graffiti was the topic to be discussed using Appreciate Inquiry on 26th
    November at the Town Hall. Directors were encouraged to attend, if available.
    7.3.10 It was reported that planned tree works by Evergreen would take place at the end of
    November/early December in Frenchay Road and elsewhere across the estate but
    concern was expressed at the potential delay which might ensue for the works
    scheduled to be done by MBS behind Stone Meadow. It was reported that the
    contractor had completed a questionnaire required by Network Rail to gain their
    permission before works could commence. The timing of the tree works had been
    deliberate so that it could take place before the new line closest to properties came
    back into use, possibly in Spring 2016. However, Network rail has failed to respond,
    despite being chased several times by MBS. FirstPort will monitor this and if there is
    still no response soon the Chair will write to Network Rail.
    5
    7.3.11 A draft letter had been prepared notifying residents of the next bike cull in late
    November/early December. It was proposed that a separate exercise should be
    undertaken to remove bicycles that were chained to railings owned by WMC as this
    impeded the work of the gardeners. The Chair has written to GreenSquare
    concerning bikes at the very end of Stone Meadow next to the Trap Grounds and
    also bikes fixed to the railings there, which are likely to belong to their tenants and
    which could be included in the cull, but he has not received a reply so far.
    7.3.12 Despite an earlier request, it was noted that the gardeners had failed to remove
    grass cuttings from the wildlife corridor between Cox’s Ground and Complins Close.
    The Chair will investigate and FirstPort would issue a reminder if required. The grass
    cuttings have been removed elsewhere in the watercourse.
    7.4 Scrutiny Sub-Committee
    7.4.1 FirstPort had yet to respond to the comments made by the WMC on the new
    management agreement. The Property Manager had yet to review whether there
    would be any impact to its operational requirements. Consequently its legal team had
    yet to receive the paperwork for comment.
  9. Feedback
    8.1. One resident had complained about parking in Frenchay Road and a reply had been
    issued.
    WRACIC
    9.1 A statement detailing how the payment from the WMC would be used by the
    WRACIC had been requested but not yet received.
    9.2 The next edition of the Waterways World would be available for delivery on Friday
    27th November in time to publicise the Christmas hog roast which would take place
    on 5th December 2015.
    10 Managing Agent
    10.1 It was noted that a date for the inspection of the access ramp proposals behind the
    Crescent had yet to be arranged.
    10.2 Jeetindar informed those present that he would leaving FirstPort at the end of the
    year. He would be replaced by two property managers, one of which would be
    Rebecca Hill, who had previously managed the estate. It was proposed that she
    would be the main point of contact for complaints and committees and that the
    second property manager would attend site to assess and manage the suppliers.
    Good communication between the two individuals would be crucial to make the
    proposal work. FirstPort would be very flexible about how the new arrangement
    would work and so the committee agreed to this proposal and would review the
    situation after 6 months.
    6
    10.3 The WMC thanked Jeetindar for his hard work and commitment to the development
    and wished him well for the future.
    11 Any other business
    11.1 A director declared an interest in relation to a planning application which had been
    submitted for a 2 metre single storey extension to a property on the estate. The
    committee raised no concerns.
    11.2 A director had been absent from Committee meetings for a prolonged period of time
    due to personal reasons and, in accordance with the Memorandum and Articles,
    directors agreed that it would be reasonable to allow this to continue for another six
    month period. The decision would be ratified at the next meeting.
    .
    12 Date, time and location of future meetings
    12.1 It was noted that future meetings would be held at 7.30 pm in the Community
    Meeting Room as follows:
    12th January 2016
    15th March 2016
    It was noted that despite several attempts at booking the hall for the AGM on 21st
    April at 7.30 pm in the Baptist Church, the administrator concerned had yet to confirm
    availability. The Chairman agreed to see if he could find the relevant booking form as
    a follow up to the several calls which had already been made to try to book the
    venue.