Rother District Council Agenda Item: 9.1
Report to-Cabinet
Date-12 October 2009
Report of the -Director of Services
Subject-Public Conveniences Refurbishment
Recommendations: It be RESOLVED:That
1)the prioritised list of public conveniences requiring refurbishment as set out within the report be approved;
2)Architect 1 be appointed for the sum of £7,500 to be met from within existing budget and the earmarked reserve;
3)Architect 1 be retained to complete phase two (if approved); and
4)A further report be submitted to Cabinet following completion of the cost benefit analysis and financing prior to initiating any work on phase two.
Head of Service: Madeleine Gorman
Lead Cabinet Member: Councillor Russell
Introduction and history
- Rother District Council has operated public conveniences in the district for overthirtyyears and currently manages 32public convenience facilities. Thisservice is provided under the provisions of Public Health Legislationfor the well being and good health of residents and visitors to the district.However, the provision of public conveniences is not a statutoryfunction of the Council.
- As a key front line service the provision of public conveniences has been subject tosignificant scrutiny over the past fifteen years. The factors to consider have been reported to the Council as follows:-
- Public Conveniences, “Are The Pennies Being WellSpent?” (1995) - this internal audit report focussed on value for money.
- Best Value service review, Public Conveniences(2000) –this review examined value for money, maintenance, management of the facilities and opportunities to involve the private sector.
- Overview and Scrutiny Public Convenience Working Group(2005) – this Working Group examined the financial costs of the service and identified options for reducing provision.
- The most recent and thorough review was undertaken by the Public Convenience Working Group in 2005 on behalf of the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The outcomes of the review were reported to Cabinet in February 2006 (minute CB167/02/06 refers). This extensive study of the need for, and the future of, public conveniences provided by the Council throughout the district considered:-
- Financial issues
- Land ownership
- Potential for alternative providers
- Potential closures
- Alternative uses for the land
- Privatisation of the service.
On completion of the Working Groupreview the Council chose to continue operating the service as previously with the exception of facilities at Rope Walk,Rye;The Down, Bexhill; Buckhurst Place, Bexhill and Marina Bexhill.These four public conveniences were closed in response to increasing levels of damage and misuse of the facilities as well as the need to reduce operational expenditure. The facility at Marina was later reopened.
- Historically, pressure on revenue budgets has resulted in consolidation of repairs and maintenance budgets. This has led to a gradual reduction in the quality of the infrastructure, décor and presentation.The current budget provision for responsive repairs and refurbishments is £74,370 per annum. The annual spend on responsive repairs at public conveniences over the past three years is tabled below. It is noted that expenditure on responsive repairs (e.g. to deal with vandalism and similar issues) results in less annual expenditure available for planned maintenance or a programme of improvements.
Year / 2006/07 / 2007/08 / 2008/09
Expenditure on repairs / £59,381 / £55,202 / £73,602
Taking thislevel of spend on repairs into consideration the public conveniences have a basic refurbishment cycle circa15 years. Thus, to significantly change the style and layout of conveniences requires additional investment.
- In adopting therecommendations of the Working Group in 2005, Cabinet recognised the need to improve the condition of Public Conveniencesacross the district.The following criteria have been used to assess the need for refurbishment and prioritise the public convenience most in need of investment:-
- Nature of location, e.g. close to main access points or in rural isolated area.
- Distance from attractions, e.g. the beach, local play areas etc
- Proximity to other public conveniences.
- Importance to other organisations.
- Need to meet the criteria of other organisations, e.g. beach award areas.
Current Position
- The Council continues to managethirty two public conveniences in the district. These are listed at Appendix 1.The reasons for providingpublic conveniences at each of these locations varies according to local circumstances and demand. For example, the Devonshire Road Public Conveniences serve local shoppers and Bexhill town centre visitors; theCamber Public Conveniences serve visitors to the beach areas at Camber Sands and Rye Public Conveniencesserve a combination of visitors to the town, local residents and school children.
- While it is not possible to gather quantitative evidence of demand or actual usage of public conveniences the conclusion of the Working Group in 2005 was that there is real demand for these facilities in the district, especially for visitors to the area.
Assessment of Condition and Proposed Priorities for Investment
- The public conveniences most in need of refurbishment (or rebuilding)are listed (in priority order) below with a brief summary of their condition, history and use.
a)WinchelseaBeach - Dogs Hill
This is a small facility constructedfrom brick and concrete which now suffers from damp. The decorative state is poor and the location has a very restricted internal and external layout. This PC is important as it is the only facility along that section of the beach so provision is essential to maintain the Quality Beach Award. The WinchelseaBeacharea has a number of caravan parks close by hence there are a significant numbers of summer visitors. It is concluded that this location is a high priority for investment.
b)WinchelseaTown
Located on the main street through the village this painted brick facility has been experiencing structural movementin recent years so requires investment to remain operational. It serves local users and is well used by passing motorists and as a comfort stop for coach trips. This is the only public facility between Hastings and Rye which is easily accessible from the A259. It is concluded that this facility is a high priority for investment.
c)East Parade, West Parade and the Marina Bexhill
These brick built facilities are well used by locals and visitors. They provide an essential facility to beach users in Bexhill. The brick built facilities have suffered from extensive vandalism in recent years and a revised design could minimise vandalism opportunities. It is envisaged that given the intended investment in the Bexhill seafront areas the number of visitors will increase making the future operation of these public conveniences a priority. It is concluded that these facilities are a high priority for investment.
d)Pett Level
Located on the Coast Road between Fairlight and WinchelseaBeachthis facility is constructed in painted brick and concrete. The decorative state is poor, the structure is damp and the external approaches, entrances and internal layout makes for an unwelcome atmosphere. The current layout does not make the best use of the space available. It is concluded that this facility is a high priority for investment.
e)Devonshire Square, Bexhill
This is a key facility in Bexhill town centre used by local shoppers, visitors to the town by car or the railway station. Feedback from the community indicates a strong demand and need for a facility at this location to meet the needs of elderly residents and visitors to this part of the town. The current condition is functional but the facility could be improved by installation of energy efficiency mechanisms and basic decorative refurbishment. It is concluded that this facility is a high priority for investment.
f)RyeHarbour
Situated at the southern end of the Rye Harbour Road this brick built structure serves visitors to the harbour area and the adjacent nature reserve. Use can be high during the peak summer season. The current condition is poor largely due to ongoing vandalism at this site. It is concluded that this facility is a high priority for investment.
g)Robertsbridge
This facility is located in the Council owned car park to the rear of the High Street. Brick built and situated centrally in the car park the facility is used by some locals, visitors to the local shops and commuters using the rail link at Robertsbridge station. The current condition is functional and the facility could be improved by installation of energy efficiency mechanisms and basic decorative refurbishment. It is concluded that this facility is a medium priority for investment.
h)Sedlescombe
Situated in the Council owned car park this facility is close to the local primary school and is used by children, parents and locals. The structure is brick built and of modest provision. The current condition is functional and the facility could be improved by installation of energy efficiency mechanisms and basic decorative refurbishment. It is concluded that this facility is a medium priority for investment.
i)Manor Barn
Located within the Manor gardens the public convenience facility was constructed in the late 1970s. The facility has deteriorated over the years and is now out of keeping with its surroundings. The current condition is functional and the facility could be improved by installation of energy efficiency mechanisms and basic decorative refurbishment. It is concluded that this facility is a low priority for investment.
Redevelopment of this facility will also give the Council the opportunity to makeabetter use of this valuable site.
j)Market and Mount Street Car Park, Battle
These facilities are well used by locals and visitors alike. Both have benefited from minor refurbishment in the past and remain suitable for the location and usage. As they are both located in a town with high visitor numbers it would be appropriate to include these facilities on the next schedule of refurbishments. Both are brick built and in keeping with their urban surroundings. It is concluded that this site is currently a low priority for investment.
k)BexhillCemetery
This is an isolated facility and only serves the public using the cemetery. It was recently subject to a refit and redecoration. Its condition remains adequate to the level of service anticipated in this location. This structure is of conventional build with brick walls and slate roof. It is concluded that this site is currently a low priority for investment.
l)BroadoakPark
The facilities here serve the public using BroadoakPark and Little Common Recreation Ground. It is located at the northern end of the Council’s old environmental interpretive centre and has provided toilet facilities for the occasional users of that facility. As a converted farm building the structure consists of concrete walls and corrugated roofing. Although not an attractive building it is in keeping with its surroundings. It is concluded that this site is currently a low priority for investment.
m)Cooden Sea Road
This is a small facility located close to Cooden Rail Station and used by rail travellers. Although a small facility it plays a key role of providing facilities at the western end of the Council beach area. Its provision is essential to the successful applications for the quality beach award. It is concluded that this site is currently a low priority for investment.
n)Sidley
Located on the main street in Sidley it offers facilities to shoppers, through traffic and is close to play facilities. The modest facility is constructed of brick and has an old design. Vandalism is not currently high at this site. It is concluded that this site is currently a low priority for investment but it would be appropriate to include this facility on the next schedule of refurbishments.
o)Camber West Car Park (Old), Camber West Car Park (New) and Camber Central Car Park
These facilities experience the highest levels of use and have as a result required a high level of ongoing maintenance. The facility at Camber West has recently been refurbished and is in good order. Due to the ongoing need for annual works, improvements to these facilities will be funded from the annual revenue programme. These are key facilities required to retain the clean beach award.
p)EgertonPark
The facility forms an integral part of the BexhillMuseum building and received a major refurbishment as part of the new museum rebuild. A number of minor jobs to further improve the facilities are still needed and will be included in the future refurbishment plans for the park.
q)Little Common Recreation Ground, Polegrove Bowls Area and Polegrove Grandstand
These facilities are located in specific areas of open space and recreation grounds to cater for the needs of sportsmen and other users of the areas. The facilities are considered adequate at this time as usage is not high. However the facilities are aging and will require investment in the medium term and should be considered for the next schedule of refurbishment.
r)Little Common Roundabout
Located on the A259 at a main bus stop this facility receives a moderate volume of users and suffers little vandalism. The facilities are in need of refurbishment but are not currently considered a priority. The public convenience is an integral part of the bus stop and would be better treated as a stand alone project outside this programme.
s)The Strand, Lucknow Place Car Park, GunGardens and Station Approach Rye
All public conveniences in Rye receivehigh levels of use and continually requirerepair and minor refurbishment. The Lucknow Placefacility has been redecorated this year hence it is currently a low priority but appropriate toconsider for inclusion in the next schedule of refurbishments. The RyeGunGardenfacility was fully refurbished in 2002 when the entire GunGardenbenefited from investment from this Council and English heritage. It is concluded that these sites are currently a low priority for investment.
t)Burwash Car Park, Sedlescombe Car Park and Ticehurst
The facilities in these rural areas receive low to moderate levels of use and require less frequent refurbishments. The facilities currently provided are considered adequate but investment will be required in future years to avoid a situation where the condition of these facilities goes beyond economic repair.
Members are asked to consider and approve the proposed prioritised list of public conveniences (a to t above).
Current BudgetPosition
2009/10 revenue budget provisionPremises costs, Building maintenance, labour costs, repair, refurbishment and grounds / £75,280
Amenities service costs / £56,890
Cleaning contract / £183,500
Utilities and NNDR / £136,970
Other Costs / £35,770
IT, Finance, HR, legal, property services, printing and phones / £20,880
Capital Charges / £53,660
Total / £562,950
- There is currently £5,500held within the Councils scheduled (earmarked) reserves for the refurbishment of public conveniences that is available to part-fundthis project.
- The total public conveniences budget for 2009/10 includes £50,280 for responsive repairs and £25,000 for refurbishment. It is noted that in 2008/09 the portion of the budget available for refurbishment was utilised to complete necessary repairs rather than programmed refurbishment work.
Proposals to Improve Public Conveniences
- To achieve a significant improvement in the quality of the districts public conveniences it is necessary to review the design and infrastructure of each facility. This proposal aims to develop new designs so that the facilities can be rebuilt or refurbished to:-
- Improve supervision, hygiene standards, and the standard of repair and decoration;
- Minimise opportunities for vandalism and other forms of anti-social behaviour;
- Provide facilities that meet the needs of parents with young children, customers with disabilities, and fully comply with the Disability Discrimination Act;
- Minimise the future running costs.
- Expressions of interest were sought from architectural practices and tenarchitectssubmitted a fee and outline proposals. These are summarised in Appendix 2.
- It is proposed that the work needed to refurbishorrebuild facilities be undertaken in two stages:-
Stage one:
- Initial design process
- Feasibility depending on the attributes and limitations of each site
- Outline cost proposals and schematics
- Final scheme design for prioritised locations
- Scheme cost proposal
- Financial appraisal and cost benefit analysis
Stage two:
- Approval to proceed
- Detailedtechnical design for each location
- Production of works information and Bill of Quantities
- Obtain tenders and project planning
- Operations and commencement on site
- The basic criteria for the selection of the preferred designers are:-
- Cost (affordability)
- Experience of the architect / designer in Public Convenience design
- Track record in completingsimilar schemes for public use
- Availability to comply with start and completion dates
- In selecting the preferred designer it is important to consider additional factors such as inspirational design and confidence in the designer’s ability to deliver a quality building, on time and within budget. The table included in Appendix 2showsthe anticipated costs for phase one and two.
- The quality of responses received from the architects varied significantly and unfortunately many of the submissions fall far short of what is required. Selecting a preferred architect at an early stage in the design process providesthe best opportunity to develop realistic estimates of the final costs to complete the work considered most essential.
Evaluation of tenders
- Having considered the tensubmissionsreceived, officers short listed four which best met the design brief and operational expectations.
Architect 1
This proposal has been well thought out, offers the Council the most flexible options to move the project forward and is a realistic financial tender value.By suggesting a third option of refurbishment combined with abuilding extension the architect has shown their understanding of the different public convenience sites, their limitations and the needs of the public. Included in the tender are arange of sketch designs which enabled officers to gain a good understanding of the architects’ intentions.
Architect 6
The experiencegained duringconstruction of the Marina Pavilion in St Leonards provides this architect with local knowledge of conditions and public use. The design of the Marina Pavilion is far more than a public convenience butit is located in a coastal position and shares some of the design characteristics needed for two of the public conveniences included in the brief. The fee proposal is mid range of the tenders returned.