The Report to Cabinet on the Englishcombe Lane Supported Housing Scheme has been published today, 4th September 2025 for confirmation at the Cabinet meeting of the 11th inst.
In summary
1. Delegation of Authority
Cabinet is asked to delegate all authority for decisions on this scheme to the Director of Capital and Housing Delivery, currently Simon Martin.
2. Proposed timescales:
| Stage | Date |
| Invitation to Tender | September 2025 |
| Contract Award | November 2025 |
| Enabling Works to Site | February 2026 |
| Practical Completion | March 2028 |
3. Key risks:
| Risk | Summary | Mitigation |
| Funding Delays | Delay in funding confirmation may impact programme timelines. | Programme planning includes parallel delivery options and ongoing engagement with funders.Scheme co-designed with Adult Social Care to align with identified needs. Allowance for voids included within Business Plan. |
| Ground & Infrastructure Cost Uncertainty | High proportion of groundworks may lead to cost increases. | Ground investigations completed and planned; cost risks quantified with specialist contractor input. |
| Market Engagement Challenges | Technical complexity and pricing may reduce contractor interest. | Two-stage tendering informed by market testing and specialist procurement advice. |
| Ecological Sensitivities | Environmental concerns may affect public perception and support. | The scheme exceeds biodiversity requirements and includes ecological oversight during construction. |
| Retaining Wall Design Complexity | Design challenges may increase costs. | Contractor-led design approach with specialist input to manage risk. |
| Demand Risk | Potential for low demand leading to void costs. | Scheme co-designed with Adult Social Care to align with identified needs. Allowance for voids included within Business Plan. |
| Construction Traffic & Access Disruption | Safety and reputational risks from traffic and access issues. | Contractor to implement traffic management and community liaison plans. |
| Drainage | RiskReport to Cabinet of reputational harm if existing drainage issues are wrongly linked to the new development. | Proactive communication during construction to clarify planned infrastructure improvements on site. Drainage engineers to provide detailed and robust drainage calculations to support the design and enable effective mitigation strategies. |
| Construction Complexity | Technical and logistical challenges may cause delays or safety issues. | Contractor selection based on experience; risks managed through KPIs and contract terms. |
A Project Risk Register will be used to manage risks and this will be kept under review as the project progresses, under the supervision of the project manager and reported regularly.
4. Business Case
The Business Case is not to be made public. An exemption under the Local Government Act 1972 (amended Schedule 12A) has been applied, using this clause, Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).
Commentary
The decision to redact the Business Case is nothing short of outrageous and a blatant abuse of powers designed to legitimately protect privacy and commercial sensitivities. There is no case in this instance to protect this information, the Council has a budget and an expectation of long-term cost-saving and these should be publicly available for scrutiny and long-term monitoring before commitment to expenditure of this amount of tax-payers’ money. The only conclusion is that the Business Case is not robust, that this is not a good use of scarce public funds and that those who might benefit from such funds are being failed once again.
The reality of the risk list is that significant unknowns still exist, that there is highly likely to be major cost and timescale overruns and that potential residents of the scheme will be denied local accommodation and support for even longer.
The risk list also demonstrates at a deeper level why the Council is so inept when it comes to managing major capital projects. A professional organisation would expect to provide detailed metrics to quantify risk analysis, an everyday occurrence when Senior Managers are asked to make decisions. Here there is merely subjective mitigation of the form “It’ll be alright, really it will” . This is wholly unacceptable Councillors and the Chief Executive must be much more demanding of Officers, there must be genuine oversight of expenditure and sanctions for failure. Only then will there be some semblance of control and confidence that the Council is using our money wisely.
Total views : 93831
September 4, 2025 at 11:06 am
Your comments on the situation of secrecy are so right. What do in this awful scenario? Proper oversight of all expenditure us surely something that councillors should be demanding?
What is there to do that might change this? Deeply disappointing. Consultation feels like lip service.