Decision - Brunswick Estate Paint Review

(1)       That the Cabinet Member for Environment agrees that the requirement for the Brunswick Estate properties to be redecorated in 2010 remain unaltered.

(2)       That the Cabinet Member for Environment agrees that the condition of the painting be monitored over the subsequent years, and if by summer 2013 the paint schemes on all properties are considered to be good, that the repainting cycle be extended.

(3)       That the Cabinet Member for Environment approves that a formal closely supervised trial be undertaken on one of the properties in Brunswick Terrace, in partnership between the Council, the property’s owners and their agents in 2010.

1.     Due to the limitations of council control and the impact any sub-standard schemes would have on the estate as a whole, it is considered that the spirit of the legislation, which is aimed at a cohesive high quality townscape for the Brunswick Estate properties, would be severely undermined by the extension of the repainting cycle at this time.

1.     It has been suggested by the consultant that the ironwork requires more frequent attention than the masonry, and being generally at low levels requires less scaffolding than is necessary to do the whole building, therefore one option could be to extend the paint cycle for the masonry but require the redecoration of the balconies and area railings on a shorter cycle, ie. at 3 (or 4) yearly intervals for the railings and 6 (or 8) yearly for the masonry and windows.  This option would have resource implications for the council by requiring notification of owners, provision of information and specifications, monitoring, chasing and enforcement on a more frequent basis than is currently required, it would also require the owners and agents involvement on 3 or 4 yearly cycles along with the more frequent redecoration costs for the ironwork itself.  The advantage of saving of some scaffolding costs would therefore be diminished.