St Jude’s Regeneration Continues Whilst Council Flat Repairs Paused for Safety
Consultation on Frome Gateway launches, but council flats repair paused due to building safety concerns
Big changes to St Jude’s have been in the pipeline for a while. They’re all part of the forthcoming Frome Gateway development. This will change the face of one of the most neglected areas of Bristol. The regeneration will see new homes, work spaces, commercial spaces and an ‘upgraded infrastructure’.
As part of that, Bristol City Council is consulting on the future of Riverside Park. This could see access to the River Frome – AKA The Danny – opened up.
The work to do so will be funded from part of a £200m Flood and Coastal Innovation Programmes, managed by the Environment Agency.
Bristol City Council says that the work will create a community space for residents to enjoy as well as supporting ‘local regeneration’.
The River Frome – AKA locally as The Danny
Work on the river would make it more visible by lowering the walls and creating seating areas. Improved wildlife friendly lighting would make the park feel more ‘welcoming and safe’.
There are also proposals to improve water quality, remove litter from the river, cut back ‘invasive’ species and make improvements to encourage water wildlife.
Proposed changes are currently being consulted on with local residents. The final results will be analysed this summer and form part of a report to Economy and Skills Policy Committee for a final decision. The work on the park could be completed by the summer of 2027.
Although change is going to happen over the former and some current industrial areas of St Jude’s, the area’s residents living in the mid-rise blocks of flats of John Cozens, Haviland, Langton, Charleton and Tyndall House are having major issues with the safety and quality of their homes. These Bristol City Council owned blocks do not feature in any of the Frome Gateway St Jude’s regeneration plans.
Improvement work approved in 2023 and being carried out by Synergize Ltd, has been paused after urgent safety work to several blocks needed to be carried out.
An update and report to Homes and Housing Delivery Policy last week shows that John Cozen, Haviland and Charleton Houses were found to have ‘insufficient’ horizontal ties or adequate vertical ties between wall panels.
These ties connect floors and walls together to prevent the movement of masonry, something needed for the building’s structural stability.
John Cozens, Haviland and Charleton House were all found to have insufficient load bearing wall panels above level 2 of the buildings.
The fire resistance meets the 60 minute requirement at the time the flats were built. But now the minimum standard for a Stay Put evacuation strategy is 90 minutes.
The blocks also have areas of concrete deterioration causing parts of it to break way increasing the risk of spalling due to corrosion.
All four of the block of flats were found to have corroded balustrades along the shared access walkways. In several areas, these had been propped up for temporary support.
Findings from the contractors conducting the work found that the concrete sections of all four blocks of flats was ‘inadequate’ in the case of a ‘non-piped gas explosion’.
A Waking Watch is continuing to take place across the St Jude’s blocks. The updated building evacuation strategy is now to evacuate the building instead of staying put.
The gas supply to the laundry rooms has been removed. Regular inspections of the communal areas is taking place with an immediate ban on any gas cannisters, bottles or cylinders. This also includes a ban on families using any portable gas cookers.
Families must also ‘limit hoarding to minimise fire loads in flats’.
Regular flat inspections will be taking place to ensure that the ban on the items is being maintained
There are 135 homes containing 539 registered residents impacted by the safety issues. Papers for the meeting show that whatever happens, when it comes to the repairs, residents are ‘likely’ to experience ‘prolonged uncertainty, disruption, and possible relocation.’
Papers also say: ‘The implications are therefore deeper than standard construction works and affect housing security, mental wellbeing, and trust in services.’
The blocks themselves fall into one of the most deprived wards in Bristol, with a significant difference of those with below mental well being compared to the least deprived wards.
In the meeting update about the St Jude’s redevelopment at the council house, Craig Cook – Head of Capital Works and Special Projects said: “The fire evacuation strategy has been amended and changed to get out. The gas supply has been completely removed. The scaffold has been erected at the bottom parts of it to stop concrete falling and further spooling. Balustrades where were severely corroded have been already temporarily repaired in the worst locations.”
Liberal Democrat councillor for Westbury-on-Trym & Henleaze Caroline Gooch said: “I’m just conscious that obviously people are going to have in their head Barton House and worry if there’s all this work that needs to be done – are we going to at some point just woken up at some point and told you have to move? So I just want to make sure that obviously that’s really managed and we’re not going to get into that situation we have to have an emergency evacuation.”
Bristol City Council’s Transformation Director Building Safety, Claire Gibb said: “We have taken external validation for the approach from a emergency services and also we’re in constant communication with our Audit Insurance and Risk Management Team. If I’m going to be overly simplistic, we ensured we had the full facts and I am personally assured that if one of my family lived there they would be safe. It’s not going to suddenly fall down. But, we have to take these actions in a measured and appropriate way which is why at any change in actions or any options or milestone, we have to ensure that residents understand why? And in addition to that, Mark’s team is is already sort of engaging with residents on a one-to-one basis saying “What are your personal concerns?” And that’s why we’ve got the FAQs so that we can build up a sort of notice of how people are feeling so that we can we can actually involve people.”
Executive Director of Housing, Sonia Furzland added: “In relation to giving assurance that that people can be safe, I think the the important thing is that you know we’ve had credible, qualified, individuals have a look at what’s happening within the building. They’ve also reviewed and made recommendations in terms of the actions that we should take. We’ve had further third party assurance in terms of Avon Fire and Rescue who are the the appropriate authority.
“But critically all of that then needs to be communicated with our residents in a way which gives them assurance. And that’s really the purpose of having both technical colleagues and our housing officers on site on a regular routine basis. So that we can offer one-to-one assurance to residents.
“We went out with the communications on this some weeks ago actually and um we haven’t had a huge response from residents within the blocks in terms of having real concerns for their safety. So it would seem that the messages are landing well.
“I think your point’s really important though in terms of the option appraisals in terms of the long term here, because yes we have to look at the property. So you know what is what can we do in terms of the building? How much? What’s the value for money? Elements of that. How much will it cost? What will it deliver?
“It won’t fundamentally change some of the challenges in the building, such as having been in the flats they’re quite small. So understanding residents’ experiences of living in those homes and what they want will be really critical to determining what we do as part of the outcome of that option appraisal. The building is just a part of it. Residents’ views is you know just as important if not more important.”
Green councillor for Easton and Chair of the Homes and Housing Delivery Committee, Barry Parsons said: “This is something that that we really need to grapple with, you know, across across all of our estates. We have, you know, an aging estate and this is something that that this committee is going to have to get very very deeply involved in as time goes on.”
Labour councillor for Avonmouth and Lawrence Weston, Councillor Zoë Peat said: “Like Councillor Gooch, I was reminded of Barton House too when reading about this. All but one of the criteria are marked as either insufficient or partly insufficient, and yet, it was deemed appropriate for the residents to remain in these buildings.
“I would like to know why there is one standard for one and a different one for another. Could someone please explain the difference between these two estates? Because so far without that implication, or without that clarity, the implication is that either the council believes the residents of St Jude’s deserve to live in a building with insufficient fire safety, or, that the council essentially evicted the residents of Barton House needlessly.”
Bristol City Council’s Craig Cook said: “It’s not quite as clear cut as that. Every building needs to be taken into consideration for the elements within said building. And interestingly even just looking at St Jude’s, everyone expected to see the LPS [Large Panel System] traditional type building. It’s not a fully traditional LPS. But actually bang in the middle then Langton was a poured in concrete situ frame. So it’s very it’s very interesting in different ways buildings are put together.
“Barton House, parts of Barton House were poured in concrete situ outside flank walls. So when the intrusive surveys were carried out in more depth at the time rather than just the three that were completed up to the 10, that changed learning at the time.
“We can’t just draw the the comparisons so this has to focus on what the reports say about these four blocks and what the recommendations are over the periods of time from the independent structure engineering practice.”
Zoë Peat followed up by asking if there was going to be any form of ‘rent reduction’ or ‘compensation’.
She said: “There’s an argument to say that these homes are not fit for human habitation. So is there going to be any rent reduction while they stay?”
Claire Gibb replied: “The homes are safe to occupy because we have proceeded at pace to do the immediate mitigation. The homes do not meet current building control standards, but building control standards are not retrospective. However, I recognise that people have a right to feel safe, warm and secure in their own homes. Had we had independent professional advice to evacuate that is what we would have done. We have not had that advice. Instead, we have a programme of works to ensure we maintain people in a safe environment.”
Finishing off with one final comment, Zoë Peat said: “In the meantime residents are going to be paying full price for a property that does not have full safety, full fire safety resistance?”
Claire Gibb responded: “Residents are paying rent for a building that was built in accordance with the building regulations apparent at the time of construction. “We are looking to enhance those. The full rent represents a build, premises where, which it is safe for people to remain in.”
Sonia Furzland said: “Just to just to re-emphasise that point actually is that – there there has been no change in the immunity in in terms of actually the mitigating actions that have been taken pretty much immediately as soon as we became aware of challenges within the building. So we have no plans to reduce rent.”
Papers for the meeting detailing the issues facing St Jude’s council residents.
Green councillor for Central Ward, Councillor Sibusiso Tshabalala said: “I think it would be useful, and I understand the challenges, and therefore it’s good that we’re working towards addressing these challenges. But, clearly they are here with us now and looking at the Equalities Impact Assessment is more of a ward profile versus the bespoke kind of tenency profile. sS we see the urgency of having up-to-date tenancy profiles. I would urge that we kind of move more towards a non-voluntary entry of tenency profile data, but to more mandatory one. Because when situations like this arise, we’re not able to act effectively, we’re not able to act strategically, and we’re not able to provide the reassurance to our residents because there’s limited data. There’s options of either putting in the data or getting involved or not getting involved. But when decisions like these or allocations have to take place, we need to understand the needs of the families of the individuals- age – all of that matters. And if we continue with this voluntary approach, when situations come, we will not be able to address them in the most appropriate and strategic way where we can. And that means residents will be putting themselves at risk. So can officers and chair, kind of think about the approach towards our tenancy profile being more mandatory, versus voluntary?
“my second one [question] Sonia is something that I know you stand for. And I’d like to see it within this. Because within these Equalities Impact Assessments, you have gone really deep in terms of the contractual obligations and how you work with contractors. What I don’t see is how we are able to actually utilise our buying power through our social value and making sure that this situation is dealt with on a bespoke approach. Not about taking on apprenticeships, not work placements, not any of that stuff, but something that deals with the immediate situation at hand. And that means we need to really be bespoke and use innovation partnerships which is at our gift. In which we are able to address contractors. Going with the basic approach would not help and will not be sufficient and will obviously mean that we end up using more of our purse than using our purchasing power. This is where this makes a big difference and I’d like to see this big difference being implemented in the contractual spending that we’re going to be utilizing in this estate
“My final one is that for the benefits of the residents, I think we need to really think about our local allocations policy. Where we have situations like these so that we don’t cause major displacement of families moving apart, communities breaking apart, breaking those family ties, creating larger isolation, we need to really think about a local allocations policy. Where there is local developments like the Frome Gate, you know how will these residents benefit from that Frome Gate development. From Broadmead development and so forth?”
Sonia Furzlandon replied: “On our residents data, I think the important thing for me is that we make every contact count. So I’m spending time listening to our resident calls actually coming into us here because that’s the main way in which our residents engage with us is via the phone. I think there’s more that we can do there to actually be capturing data, just checking people’s email addresses, their their communication preferences.
“At the point of allocation I think we have improved. We are now collecting more routinely information around who we’re moving into our homes. The challenge is I think where we have residents who are long-standing tenants in our homes. And it’s difficult to compel people, you know, legally we can’t compel people what we can do is encourage. And I think particularly in St Jude’s where we are doing tenancy audits I would expect and I’m sure – Mark will confirm this is the case – is that we are trying to capture as much resident data there. Because you are absolutely right. If we’re going to deliver great service, we need to understand who’s living in our home so that we can tailor that service to their individual needs.
“On the point in relation to social value um I agree I suppose is the is the simple answer. So I think where we have individual works which are inconveniencing the residents living in that block we should be targeting the social value at benefiting those individuals. And we should be working with the residents. And indeed our our community networks who you know we have community development workers who work in a range of our areas who understand the needs of that community so that we are tailoring the social value.
“I think the challenge is sometimes you know when you just add sums to contractors all they do is they just add it to the price. So I think the route that we have predominantly taken is the delivery of opportunities or doing work. But I think certainly it’s something that Craig can take away as part of the procurement process to see how can the residents institutes benefit from the procurement opportunity here.
“The last one I think was allocations about the allocations policy. I don’t know the answer to that.I can certainly take it away in terms of looking at the opportunities but what I would say, I think that actually given that we have to think again in terms of doing a full option appraisal here in St Jude’s, it would not make sense to do that in isolation. There is already a big regeneration scheme in From Gateway which is right on the doorstep of of St Judes. Because the point is really important around community displacement. I think where housing organizations have made mistakes with regeneration in the past is that they have underestimated the importance of community. Who you live next door to? Where your children go to school? Where your networks are is really critical.
“linking it to a wider regeneration programme could give us an opportunity to look at phasing. So that you develop, you decant, you then demolish and redevelop. So I think looking at the round in terms of what other regeneration is happening around our homes presents an opportunity to us to look at that that.”
Green councillor for Cotham, Guy Poultney said: “It was very tempting when you’re looking at one of these papers to look at, obviously, because of the way that these papers have to be structured to look at option one and option two and compare the two rather than look at both in relation both to each other, but also in terms of the actions that have already been taken, the actions that are timetabled.
“And it’s only when you look at all of those documents in that way that you get a sense of the the council’s priorities. I’m hugely relieved to see as I would expect, but of course, hugely relieved to see such an emphasis on resident safety and prioritizing the residents in terms of of immediate actions. That’s really gratifying to see. I would just stress for the obviously for the record, but in terms of the comparison between the two properties that we just had the, the technical overview of the reports and risks identified on page 160 of the report, I don’t think it’s unfair to assume that was that was all true before. It’s just that now we know, now we’re doing something about it and that that’s again something we have to recognize when we’re when we’re looking at these is I can’t think of a committee or an area of the council that’s had to respond to so many, let’s say so much new information over the last year.”
Watch the meeting covering the issues of St Jude’s housing below
St Jude’s Riverside Park and council estate
More Bristol News from Chopsy Bristol
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChopsyBristol
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/chopsybaby
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/chopsybristol.bsky.social
TikTok: www.tiktok.com/@chopsybristoltt