WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT COMPANY
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING NO 77
Tuesday 20 November 2018 at 7.30pm
Present: Adrian Olsen (Chair), Sally Duncan, Tao Tao Chou, Nicholas Orme, Paula Reynolds, Hilary
Sorensen, Raquel Stremme (part)
In attendance: Rebecca Burt, Rachel Dolacinski and Usman Zaman, FirstPort Property Services
Minute taker: Imogen Olsen
The Chair welcomed Usnam Zaman, a graduate trainee from FirstPort attending as an observer.
1 Apologies for absence
1.1 Ann Hall, Adrian Mourby, Louise Robertson, Mary Tovey, Liz Wheater, Cath Whitehead
The Chair said that the meeting was not quorate at that stage but the meeting agreed to
continue but with any decisions made as recommendations to the next quorate
meeting.
2 Minutes
Approval of the minutes from meeting 76, 25 September 2018
2.1 The minutes were approved as an accurate record, subject to ratification at the next
quorate meeting.
3 Matters arising from the minutes
3.1 The Living Waterways Award outdoor plaques are now completed and will be put up as
soon as convenient.
3.2 Residents had recently received a letter from the County Council regarding the
consultation process for the proposed Controlled Parking Zone. It was agreed that the
committee is in favour of this consultation and will encourage people to take part.
3.3 The gate to the lake had now been made self-closing.
3.4 FirstPort would check whether the letter informing residents/owners in Lark Hill about
the decision not to install the alleyway gate had been sent out.
3.5 There had been no report from the director [AM] who was going to contact the Council
about bins left out in Stone Meadow and causing an obstruction on the pavement.
At this stage a director (RS) arrived which made the meeting quorate. The minutes of
the previous meeting 76 were then revisited and approved as a correct record.
2
4 Negotiation with Berkeley Homes concerning transfer of estate freehold to WMC
4.1 The director leading these negotiations reported that there had been much progress. BH
have sent an amended plan of the estate and there is still a need to clarify ownership of
the land surrounding GreenSquare blocks. Disappointment was expressed that WMC
will have to take over ownership of the retaining wall under the new Fielder’s Row
houses by the lakeside, though two surveyors reports have established that there is a
reinforced concrete structure behind this wall which is purely decorative and has no
structural function. BH are to provide a new survey on the wall [this subsequently
confirmed the other surveyors conclusions]. FirstPort would look up the correspondence
between their surveyor and the builder of Fielder’s Close.
It was noted that there are two ransom strips, not one, of which BH will retain
ownership, both at the only possible access points into the Trap Grounds, an area which
when the Waterways was built had originally been suggested for new housing.
5 Railway line developments
5.1 Giles Parker is still working on his noise-monitoring report.
5.2 The Chair had heard from Councillor Upton regarding the City Council’s new system for
monitoring diesel pollution. This is currently being trialled but has encountered
problems and delays.
5.3 A resident of Cox’s Ground had spotted teenagers trespassing on the railway line to the
north of Cox’s Ground and had reported it to Network Rail. NR had been previously
warned about this problem two years ago but had failed to mend the security fence. At
the time of the meeting this had still not been rectified.
6 Sub-Committee round-up
6.1 Finance
6.1.1 The Accounts had been distributed. A director had raised several queries, including the
sharp increase in insurance charges and the inclusion of a company secretarial charge,
which according to the current agreement is included under management fees. FirstPort
agreed to pass the latter query back to the Company Secretariat, and also to provide a
full explanation for the increase in insurance charges. She said that the increases were
the result of a recent re-evaluation of the estate which takes place every few years.
The Chair suggested that the big increase in terrorism insurance was due to the reevaluation that had taken place and had obviously resulted from the increase in
terrorism.
6.1.2 Regular updates on the financial situation were now being supplied quarterly to the
Treasurer. The next one was due in January. It was agreed to circulate these updates
more widely.
6.2 Apartment Blocks Sub-Committee
3
6.2.1 Roofing works were now complete and awaiting final sign-off by the surveyor.
Scaffolding would remain in place until then. There had been three leaks during the
works, caused by the fact that tiles had been glued down by the original builders and
were difficult to remove. FirstPort were on standby to repair all damage after sign-off.
One block in Complins Close had turned out not to need a new roof after all as the
present one still had an estimated five years’ life left.
6.2.2 Plans for exterior redecoration/cleaning were going ahead. Stained exterior walls would
be steam cleaned.
6.2.3 All lifts were now repaired, except for one in 108-124 Frenchay Road which involves an
obsolete part. This lift will require some upgrading before it can be repaired.
6.2.4 The one remaining short-term let in Clearwater Place was due to terminate at the end of
October. However, staff from a short term let company van has been seen entering the
block, although bookings on their web site have now been blocked. FirstPort would
continue to monitor.
6.2.5 The Clearwater Place bin store was now being cleaned weekly, but there were still large
amounts of cardboard left on the floor. Evergreen are to be asked to fold this up and put
it in the bins. FirstPort agreed to ask Evergreen to remove the one remaining lid on the
bins in order to make it easier to use.
6.2.6 Several owners had received a letter from a new freeholder. FirstPort has checked with
Estates and Management that this was legitimate and explained that E & M act as the
managing agent for the various freeholders of blocks.
6.3 Gardening Sub-Committee
6.3.1 There had been a walkabout on 8 October. The Chair agreed to send FirstPort a copy of
the minutes.
6.3.2 There was a discussion about the problem of refuse bins which are stored permanently
at the front of houses, contrary to the covenant contained in the freehold houses’ legal
transfer documents which requires bins to be stored at the rear of dwellings. In the past,
action had been taken against such breaches of the covenant and a number had been
identified during the walkabout, including some bins hidden by hedges or trellises. After
the walkabout FirstPort’s Company Secretariat had been asked whether it would be
reasonable to vary the covenant to allow bins to be stored at the front of houses if well
hidden. The reply was the covenants in a legal contract should not be changed or varied
and also that to do so would undermine the committee’s authority in enforcing other
covenants and set a precedent in resisting demands for other future variations or
exceptions. The committee accepted this advice and agreed that the covenant should be
enforced to all equally, whether bins are hidden or on open view.
The recent walkabout had identified a number of bins kept at the front of houses, both
hidden and on open view, and FirstPort reported that letters had been sent to these
properties requiring compliance. In terms of the enforcement procedure, FirstPort
reported that they would follow the normal process of issuing a series of four letters of
warning, with an increasing admin charge made for the third and four letters. The Chair
4
asked FirstPort to investigate whether in view of inflation it would be reasonable to
raise these admin charges which have never been changed. It was also agreed that
resorting to court enforcement action would be out of proportion to the severity of this
breach, would have to be taken for each individual case and would prove extremely
costly.
The Chair raised the issue of a director who has refused to abide by this covenant and
keeps bins at the front of the house hidden behind bushes. This director has been
contacted several times on this issue asking for compliance, including messages from
the Chair, but is still in breach of the covenant. Just a few minutes before the meeting,
the Chair had received a letter from this director stating the reasons for the noncompliance and he relayed these arguments to the committee. In view of the advice and
decision above concerning bins stored at the front, the committee did not think these
arguments and the particular circumstances described justified a breach of the covenant
and agreed that therefore compliance with the covenant must be required from the
director in the same way as from everyone else.
The committee expressed disappointment and regret that a director continued in
breach of a covenant. It felt that all directors should obey covenants and regulations and
failure to do so undermines the committee’s authority in enforcing these requirements
on others when it is known and can be claimed that if a director of the company does
not obey the rules then why should anyone else. In the light of this, it was hoped that
this director would now comply with the covenant. The Chair would send a reply.
6.3.3 The gate at the wildlife corridor end of the passageway between 59-61 Frenchay Road
had been found difficult to open. Evergreen would investigate and repair, but it may
require a letter to one or both of the owners on either side of the fence requesting work
to the fences which are leaning outwards and to the tree(s) there which may be
interfering with the fences and gate.
6.3.4 There had been a meeting with Complins Close residents to discuss the gardens. Fifteen
or so people had attended, plus the Chair and three directors, and the meeting had
been both amicable and successful. It had been decided to have a hedge instead of a
railing around the grass areas, with short path ways through the hedges on both sides.
Also the two parallel borders on either side of the roadway just in front the arch will be
re-planted and one resident offered to supply a list of suitable plants for the area.
6.3.5 Replacement of shrubs around the estate would be carried out in late winter/ spring.
6.3.6 Evergreen had advised that the roots of some of the felled trees by the lakeside would
have to be ground out. When work was complete, new planting of suitable shrubs, grass
and daffodils would be carried out, while maintaining the current sight lines. The Chair
requested FirstPort to ensure that committee members were involved in the selection
of the re-planting.
6.3.7 The report from Berkeley Homes’ surveyor regarding the retaining wall beside the lake
was still awaited. The FirstPort surveyor had concluded that the wall was not structural
but merely a façade in front of reinforced concrete which acted as the structural
element. He included in his report the original survey carried out by the developer of
the new houses which confirmed his conclusions and indicated that the foundations of
the new houses had been constructed in a secure and proper manner which did not
5
threaten the integrity of the wall. The surveyor concluded that the wall was quite safe
but that the loose brickwork at the top left corner would need to be repaired. It was
hoped that Berkeley Homes would carry out the necessary repair before handing it over
to WMC. [Subsequently Berkeley Homes reported that their surveyor had agreed with
the conclusions of the two surveys mentioned above.]
6.3.8 It was agreed after some discussion that FirstPort would employ an independent tree
surveyor to produce a report on the Frenchay Road alders, another one of which had
just been felled (privately owned). Replacement would be difficult and costly, but might
eventually be necessary.
6.3.9 There had been a report of antisocial behaviour behind an unoccupied house at the
eastern end of Cox’s Ground. Evergreen had cleaned up the rubbish, and FirstPort had
contacted the absent owner to report this and to ask for the graffiti on the fences to be
removed. This situation will be monitored to judge whether this area needs to be
blocked off.
6.3.10 FirstPort reported that in January 2019 they would be tendering out the gardening
contract, which expires at the end of April. Evergreen would be asked to tender, along
with two other contractors. It was agreed that the university gardeners should be
considered.
6.3.11 Tendering has begun on the replacement of paving slabs in three priority areas and this
will be moved forward when all the scaffolding has been taken down.
6.3.12 There was not much to report on the silt situation. Stuart Divall, the original designer of
the watercourse system, has been hired by Berkeley Homes to design the proposed
stone weirs for the silt trap between Frenchay Road and the canal, and he has had a
productive meeting, particularly concerning the flood risk assessment, with the City
Council official who will have to grant permission for the scheme. Berkeley Homes have
said that the forms to gain permission for the scheme will have to be submitted to the
city council by the land owner , so it is likely that the transfer of the freehold to WMC
will have to take place before that.
6.3.13 It was agreed that the clearance of reeds from the watercourse should take place in
- A director has asked Berkeley Homes to recommend a contractor.
6.3.14 Denise Kinsella, our main contact at Thames Water had gone on extended leave. A
director had spoken to Matthew Peapel who in turn had spoken to Dave Strickland of
TW, neither of whom understood the problem of the damaged TW manhole on the
canal towpath and have said that nothing can be done at the moment to investigate the
problem as the chamber is full of water. Some time ago we informed the Canal and
River Trust of the problem and it was hoped that before the canal towpath is resurfaced (planned before the end of the financial year) the CRT would contact TW
themselves and sort out some solution. If this problem is not solved it would have an
impact on our ability to carry out the next silt clearance of the silt trap. TW requested
that we let them know when we next carry out an emptying of the balancing pond and
they would look to investigate their manhole when our work was finished.
6.3.15 The Chair reported that the swale seemed to be flowing well after all the recent rain. He
had cleared out a lot of leaves and debris which had slowed the flow a little. Evergreen
6
would be asked to clear out the leaves regularly from the entrances to the two culverts
in the swale where they tend to accumulate.
6.3.16 There had been a complaint about a tree near parking space no. 28 in Clearwater Place.
Upon inspection this was discovered to be on GreenSquare property who have been
contacted.
6.3.17 A resident in Lark Hill had complained about the trees at the back of his house. FirstPort
were to meet Evergreen to discuss, although Evergreen had already said it would involve
a lot of work. The Chair disputed this, as he himself had cut back similar shrubs at the
back of his own garden in a matter of a couple of hours and after looking he thought the
trees there were not causing any problems. Evergreen and FirstPort will investigate and
report back.
6.4 Scrutiny Sub-Committee
6.4.1 There had been no meeting.
7 Feedback
7.1 Nothing to report.
8 WRACIC
8.1 The grant from WMC had been paid and received.
8.2 The litter pick on 13 October had been very successful, with 20 volunteers.
8.3 The Christmas event (hog roast) was scheduled for 8 December and assistance was
sought.
9 Managing Agent
9.1 Nothing to report.
10 Any other business
10.1 None.
11 Dates of next meetings
11.1 15 January, 19 March (2019) – Tuesdays at 7.30 pm in the Community Room.