Following the Grenfell Tower fire in London, the Corporate Management Team commissioned a review into fire safety aspects of the Council’s tower block refurbishment project, specifically the use of aluminium composite material (ACM) rain screen cladding on parts of two tower blocks in Blackbird Leys.  The Executive Director of Organisational Development and Corporate Services had submitted the report which was introduced by  the Corporate Affairs Lead  who gave a brief introduction to the report, the conclusion of which was that the Council had followed a robust process and taken proper account of the guidance and regulations in force at the time; advice flowing from pre-Grenfell incidents (eg Lakanal House); and advice from Oxfordshire Fire & Rescue (which had been consulted throughout). The Council had taken steps to keep residents fully informed, to reassure them about safety matters and had taken account of their concerns.

The Committee and Member Services Manager confirmed that the high turnover in the Clerk of Works role identified in the report had not given any cause for concern as far as safety was concerned.  The Clerk of Works was employed by the Council to provide an additional layer of quality assurance.

In response to questions about the capacity of Building Control referred to in the report (and attributable in part to pressures caused by the Westgate project) the Head of Housing Services said that he had appointed a full time Building  Control Officer for the task and who would remain in post until the end of March.

In response to a question about the reference  to a fire test on 02 August involving “some” residents, the Head of Housing Services explained the process for the evacuation of the Evenlode  and Windrush tower blocks which, in normal circumstances, would involve residents of the floor on which the fire had been identified and the ones immediately above and below.  Officers had worked with a self-selected reference  group of residents about this issue and all residents had been informed about the procedure to be followed in the event of fire.

Members were grateful to officers for the report and were interested to understand how residents felt now that the project was coming to an end and that reassurances had been given about  safety of the tower blocks. The Head of Housing Services  said that residents were now generally more secure, officers would continue to reassure and there would be a final survey of residents once the project was complete.

Vulnerable residents were made known to the Oxfordshire Fire and Rescue Service which would prioritise their evacuation in the event of fire. There was no reason not to continue housing vulnerable people in tower blocks when it was, by all other counts, an appropriate offer.

The Building Control’s assessment referred to in the report had been based on Building Regulations rather than the Building Control Alliance guidance simply  because the latter had not been published at the time of the assessment.  The approach taken would have met at least one of the routes to compliance set out in the BCA guidance.

The towers were fitted with effective sprinkler and alarm systems and the cladding material was non-combustible. While it was not possible however guarantee that the towers would meet future regulatory requirements or guidance the Head of Housing Services thought it unlikely that they would impact too heavily on the  Council’s provision, if at all.

The Panel had been pleased to note the outcome of the report and thanked the officers for it.

The Chair reminded the Panel that the principle of a visit to the Tower Blocks had been agreed at a previous meeting. The Head of Housing Services suggested that a good time to do this would be once the project had been completed in a few weeks’ time.