BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//Kings Crescent - ECPv6.15.20//NONSGML v1.0//EN CALSCALE:GREGORIAN METHOD:PUBLISH X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://kingscrescent.org X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Kings Crescent REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H X-Robots-Tag:noindex X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Europe/London BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20180325T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20181028T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20190331T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20191027T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20200329T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20201025T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20210328T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20211031T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20220327T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20221030T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20230326T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20231029T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20240331T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20241027T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20250330T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20251026T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20260329T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20261025T010000 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0000 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:BST DTSTART:20270328T010000 END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0000 TZNAME:GMT DTSTART:20271031T010000 END:STANDARD END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260317T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260317T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20260407T214542Z LAST-MODIFIED:20260407T214542Z UID:3258-1773774000-1773779400@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:KC RSG 17 March 2026 DESCRIPTION:Notes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting held on 17th March 2026 \n  \n  \n\n\n\nPresent:\nCllr Clare Potter (CP) (Chair) \nResidents: \nRB\, JWM\, GG\, ES\, KM\, EP\, PD\, EV\, KH \n  \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nJoe Stancer (JS) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nJohn Morris (JM) (minutes) \nLee Walsh (LW) \nChristina Byrne (CB) \n \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nMulalley \nMulalley \n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n \nApologies were received from Alfred Fiorentini\, Paul Cushion\, Menekse Saitoglu\n  \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 20th January 2026 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n2.1 \n \nActions from last minutes: \n·       Discussions on play facilities ongoing between Mulalley\, HHB\, LBH \n·       Footpath has been redirected by Datchworth Court following discussions around DZ6S hoarding \n·       Feedback from last year’s exhibitions has been incorporated in the Statement of Community Involvement in planning application. \n·       Invitation for CB to attend this meeting made and she is here \n·       Source drop ins continuing starting at 4.30 now \n·       Construction vehicle mud-washing run off now being filtered and Mulalley have an agreement with Thames Water to drain straight into mains \n  \nEP raised the issue of lights on the hoardings that were discussed at the last meeting. Some are still very bright and shine into flat windows. LW -highway regulations mean that there needs to be white lights illuminating footpaths\, red lights on roadways and a certain lux level maintained. RB – lights shine into her bedroom in Theobalds Ct. KH – Casbeard St seems dark. LW to investigate lighting on Casbeard St.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nLW\n\n\n3.0\nProject update – Lee Walsh & Ron Greenwood\n \n\n\n3.1 \n  \n  \n  \n3.2 \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \nThere is not much new to report from the last meeting. Ground investigations continue; many obstructions\, e.g. under the DZ6S site and an old plant room from the towers under Casbeard St. and unregistered services uncovered. Mulalley are undertaking a mapping of the entire estate\, which takes time. The water table is high as a result of the wet winter and ground conditions are poor across the whole estate. Concrete that has been unearthed is stockpiled to test if it is contaminated and if it isn’t to be re-purposed. \n  \nQuestions/comments \n  \ni)        KH raised the issue of mosquitos that have been a major problem\, over summer months but also over the winter too. ES endorsed this\, stating that agencies (unknown?) have been investigating the infestation. Bob Miller (Project Manager) is aware of this and is ensuring that\, as far as possible\, there is no ponding or static water. JWM mentioned the constant high level of standing water in front of the old boiler room. Again\, Bob is aware of this and is striving to mitigate impact from this potential mosquito infestation. \n  \nii)       EV asked if more notice can be given when noisy works are planned. She recently tried to contact Joanna Kaye\, RLO when some loud excavations started and did not receive a response. LW accepted that messaging could be better and Malcolm Stephenson\, Senior Project Manager\, is working with LBH to agree more effective communications plan. JS confirmed that letters are being sent out to the flats worst affected by the ongoing works. ES asked what hours Mulalley are contracted to work within. LW – 8.00 am to 6.00 pm Mon-Fri and 8.00 am to 1.00 pm on Saturdays. In response to ES’s observation that some works went on until 8.00 pm.\, LW noted that UKPN are not covered by Mulalley’s agreed hours\, so this would have been their contractors. \n  \niii)     RG updated the meeting on progress with the planning application. This is due to be decided at a Planning Committee in late April. He asked the RSG if members would endorse a statement of support from the group\, read out by CP. \n  \nKH asked if the record of community consultation included the change of brick colour on some new blocks. RG confirmed that it did. \n  \nES suggested that the 4th bullet point in the list of aspirations: “A well managed and maintained neighbourhood where incidences of anti social behaviour are dealt with effectively\,” should be more accurately classified within a management area of responsibility and therefore not a design aspiration. It was agreed to omit this bullet point. \n  \nEV stated she wouldn’t be comfortable signing this statement. \n  \nKM stated that this was the first time she has seen this document. CS – this is a slightly amended version of a statement that was agreed to and signed by CP and a number of other members for the original planning application. KH suggested this was actually  less contentious than the original. \n  \nIt was agreed that an amended version of the statement would be circulated for members to have another week to comment. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nSource \n \n\n\n4.0\nIntroduction to Christina Byrne\, Social Value lead at Mulalley\n \n\n\n4.1 \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \nCB introduced herself and gave an overview of Mulalley’s interpretation of ‘social value.’ This is focused on skills\, work experience\, employment opportunities and\, sometimes directly and sometimes via local charities\, is presented via schools and colleges. Mulalley already run a work experience programme across Hackney for 16-24 year olds. Mulalley also use their supply chain to employ local labour. They also partner with Hackney Food bank to provide donations\, financial and in kind. RB has provided a list of ideas for projects with the TRA and young people\, including trips off the estate while there is no play area/MUGA. Views from young people have been garnered from doorknocking across the estate. \n  \nCB – are there any other suggestions from members? It is important to provide as wide a range of choices as possible across age ranges and the local demographic. But it is also important that initiatives funded by Mulalley Social Value Team do not replicate what LBH management should be providing (e.g. maintenance of open spaces). \n  \nKM suggested that the success of the allotment/gardening group could be built on by helping generate interest in wider planting opportunities across the estate. CB gave volunteer days from within Mulalley staff as an example of how support in kind can be provided. Hackney Foodbank also has volunteering opportunities. \n  \nCP suggested the elders group is a good contact for a different segment of the Kings Crescent population. RB raised the feeling from the doorknocking exercises that many KC-resident elders do not want to attend the Friday lunches in Hackney Showroom. HS are still delivering some lunches on the estate. HS also organise other activities\, e.g. over 60’s disco. \n  \nEP asked if Mulalley can generate a list of projects that have had success in the past to stimulate ideas that could work here. CP suggested this accompanies the list that LW showed the meeting of projects already funded. \n  \nLW noted the proposal for a celebration\, possibly a barbecue to mark the milestone of the new planning approval. This could take the place of the next scheduled RSG date. KH asked if there could be a digger available for children who are excited by construction vehicles. \n  \nEV noted that there is an appetite for residents to meet each other more. Estate-wide social events might help promote this. CS added that the Source drop ins are available for residents who do not want to attend formal meetings. \n  \nKM acknowledged that language issues sometimes prevent greater levels of involvement. Turkish-speaking parents often bring their children to interpret but many are now getting involved in the allotment group (now there are 69 allotment beds in the phase 1 courtyards with many new people involved). \n  \nMuch communication between residents at the moment is conducted via WhatsApp groups. KH – there are 127 members of the Leaseholders Action Group\, with 100+ communicating on whats app. He added that there is a sense of demoralisation amongst residents in the north side ‘new’ blocks\, particularly leaseholders who have experienced many issues with the management of the common areas\, in particular the lifts. RB is in the process of setting up an estate-wide whats app group through the TRA. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nMulalley (CB?)\n\n\n5.0\nSource update \n \n\n\n5.1\nCS – drop ins still useful\, held on the first Wednesday of each month\, 4.30 to 6.30 in Hackney Showroom. The February drop in highlighted the appearance of the hoarding around the DZ6S site and the closure of the footpath. Credit is due to Mulalley for responding quickly to this. JS will attend the drop in on 1/4/26 to deal with queries\, concerns about the proposed temporary parking rearrangements. \n  \nSource can also be a conduit for social value ideas that residents might communicate to us. We have raised the opportunities presented by the proposals for artwork or an enlivening of the Weston Court Green Lanes façade. \n  \nFurther suggestions were raised for public displays: JWM – could we use the material that is available on the history of KC? Stories on hoardings? EV suggested that a better public mapping of the blocks would be welcomed.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n6.0\nAOB\n \n\n\n6.1\nES sought clarification on the Weston Court Green Lanes elevation  proposal. RG – the proposals at the moment are that there would be artwork that is co-designed between residents and a professional artist. CB has an artist contact who has produced work in Finsbury Park. KH noted the well known mural in Dalston and KM the artwork at Regents Park Estate that features ex residents. She suggested trying out ideas on the hoardings that currently envelop the site.\n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n6.2\nES asked if lessons are being learnt from the experience of residents in the phase 1&2 blocks in terms of design\, installation of services etc.? KH suggested that if LBH can confirm that the same issues will not affect the new blocks\, the fact that these issues have been acknowledged and efforts made to ensure they do not repeat\, might improve morale slightly amongst the current leaseholders. RG confirmed that LBH are of course very much aware of the issues with lifts etc. and will continue to learn lessons from phase 1&2 and strive to make sure these problems do not reoccur. \n \n \n\n\n7.0 \nDate of next meeting\n \n\n\n7.1\nIt was proposed that the June meeting would take the form of a wider community event. Current dates already occupied include 14/6 for a TRA family fun day and 11/7 for Hackney Showroom’s street party. Other suggestions included an early evening summer event\, potentially on a Friday. \n \n  \n  \n \n\n\n\n  \nKings Crescent Residents Steering Group \n  \n  \nMeeting to be held on \nTuesday 17th March 2026 starting at 7.00pm \nHackney Showroom \n  \n  \nAGENDA \n  \n\n\n\n1\nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Potter (Chair)  \n \n\n\n2\nMinutes from the last meeting 20th January and matters arising \n \nCllr Potter (Chair)\n\n\n3\nProject update & RSG support for planning application\nLee Walsh\, (Mulalley) \n \n\n\n4\nIntroduction to Social Value Manager Christina Byrne \n(Mulalley) and Discussion \n \nCllr Potter\n\n\n5 \nITLA Up-date\nCarol & John \n(Source Partnership) \n \n\n\n7\nAOB\nCllr Potter (Chair)  \n \n\n\n8\nDate of next meeting \nCllr Potter (Chair) \n \n\n\n\n  \n  \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/kc-rsg-17-march-2026/ LOCATION:Hackney Showroom\, Murrain Road\, London\, N4 2GD CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260120T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260120T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20260407T215147Z LAST-MODIFIED:20260409T211114Z UID:3261-1768935600-1768941000@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:KC RSG 20 Jan 2026 DESCRIPTION:Notes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting held on 20th January 2026 \n  \n  \n\n\n\nPresent:\nCllr Clare Potter (CP) (Chair) \nResidents: \nPC\, KM\, EP\, PD\n  \n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nJoe Stancer (JS) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nMenekse Saitoglu (MS) \nJohn Morris (JM) (minutes) \nLee Walsh (LW) \n \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nMulalley \n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n\nApologies were received from Jill Walker-Murrain\, Ellie Virk\, Karsten Hartman\, Ewan Stone\, Alfred Fiorentini\, Gouri Ghosh.\n  \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 23rd October 2025 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n \nOne action on page 4 of the previous minutes remains: Tom to speak to MUF re play facilities . LW to remind Tom (Roberts of HHB).  The rest of the minutes were agreed.\n  \nLW\n\n\n3.0\nProject update – Lee Walsh\n \n\n\n3.1 \n  \n3.2 \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \nLW gave an update on Mulalley’s activities since the last meeting and proposed timings for future events. Presentation slides are attached with these minutes. [Slides HERE] \n  \nQuestions/comments \n  \nEP noted that the hoarding for DZ6S seemed to be going up. RG confirmed struts are in place. LW to further investigate this. \n  \nKM raised the concerns that may be expressed at the loss of the play street for 3 months. LW clarified that there will not be a loss of space but that there needs to be temporary access from Green Lanes provided for emergency vehicles as a result of the sewer diversion works.  CP noted concerns and asked that the changes to the play street happen asap to minimise disruption during the Spring and Summer seasons. \n  \nEP addressed the general issue of children’s play and complaints from some residents about noise. In the longer term\, can residents be assured that LBH\, when marketing new flats\, will make it clear that they are situated on an estate with many families? \n  \nRG – new MUGA plans will start to be developed in the Spring. LBH are aware of how intensively the courtyards are used. There will be a management strategy in place for public realm as part of the planning application. \n  \nPC asked how the decommissioning of parking spaces will be managed. RG – some spaces have already been taken out of use. The process will be phased and LBH think there will be enough spaces for existing users. Regen. Team are working closely with the Parking team. RG and JS will hold surgeries to deal with queries and concerns with the proposed parking restrictions\, supplemented by Source drop ins (first Wednesday of every month). \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \nLW \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n4.0\nFeedback from 2/12/25 exhibition – Joe Stancer\n \n\n\n4.1 \n  \n  \n  \n4.2 \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \nJS presented the outcomes of December’s consultations. The comments from the exhibition held on 2/12 were generally positive about the development and the survey on brick colours resulted in an overwhelming vote in favour of the lighter colour (57 in favour of the lighter brick\, 7 in favour of the current\, darker red colour). There was also an invitation to RSG to suggest ways to canvass views on the proposed Weston Court\, Green Lanes façade artwork. See attached slides. \n  \nEP asked about wider publicity for artwork ideas. Could the Youth Club be involved? KM suggested a history of the estate as a theme; she had been impressed by a mural at Regents Park Estate\, LB Camden that featured people who used to live there. CP noted the work that went into the history project and the photography project 10 years ago. \n  \nPC thought the model at the exhibition was very helpful to help residents understand the phase 3&4 plans. \n  \nCS asked how the outcomes from the exhibition are to be communicated\, noting that residents have expressed frustration in the past at being consulted but then not finding out the outcomes of that consultation. \n  \nIt was agreed that feedback should be produced before news of the outcome of the planning application. In order to do this more quickly\, LW offered Mulalley to produce the publicity from material written by LBH.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nLBH/Mulalley\n\n\n5.0\nSocial Value\n \n\n\n5.1\nCS observed that residents were unsure about how they can influence social value contributions. \n  \nLW – Christina Byrne\, Social Value Manager at Mulalley has been in touch with KM re some funding for allotments and will be making further contact soon to scope out what Mulalley can offer. CS – can she come to the March RSG? LW to check her availability over the next 2 months to get KC social value engagement moving. \n  \nLW reminded the meeting that Mulalley have one fund to spread across the 3 projects it is working on in Hackney at the moment\, although KC is the largest. There will be significantly more money available once formally in contract and on site. Mulalley currently fund the local food bank. The meeting called for Mulalley to publicise more what it is funding; LW to co-ordinate this information for the RSG. As before\, LW suggested that residents draw up a ‘shopping list’ of needs for Mulalley to use to target its funding. EP made the point that similar exercises have taken place in the past and she would feel reluctant to ask everyone again to elicit the same information. \n  \nGetting residents involved in these kinds of exercises has proved difficult. KM suggested setting up a stall outside Hackney Showroom to gather views. LW warned of managing expectations. \n \n  \n  \n  \nLW \n  \n  \n  \nLW \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n6.0\nITLA update\, RSG terms of reference – Source\n \n\n\n6.1\nCS expressed It was noted that there were more apologies from residents than attended. Our summary paper (attached) indicates that general motivations for being an RSG member and attending meetings was to receive updated information and to be kept informed. Source can offer induction training/workships for residents interested in becoming RSG members. It was agreed that Source will target publicity/invitations to unrepresented blocks (e.g. social housing blocks at the west end of Murrain Road). \n  \nResidents at this meeting all agreed that they found the meetings very useful\, otherwise they would not know what’s going on. JM suggested that now that Mulalley updates with clear presentations are a key part of the agenda\, residents might find attending meetings more informative. \n  \nIt was agreed that an open event in the summer to mark the completion of the planning process would be organised to attract and inform residents. \n  \nCS reminded the meeting that Source will continue its drop ins every first Wednesday of each month. Timings to be reviewed\, to 4.30 to 6.30 or 5.00 to 7.00\, subject to the availability of HS space. \n \n  \n  \n  \nSource \n  \n  \n  \n  \nSource\, LBH\, Mulalley\n\n\n7.0 \nAOB\n \n\n\n7.1\ni) PD reported that the run off from jet-washed wheels of construction vehicles could be causing drain blockages. LW to raise this with the relevant team\, look at fitting silt filters to drains and carry out a drain survey. Mulalley have permission from Thames Water to deal with drain blockages now. \n  \nii) PD also raised the issue of the slope around the new DZ6S hoardings that could become very muddy and difficult to navigate when access to the bus stop on Green Lanes is restricted by the hoarding. LW to check this on site. \n  \niii) MS reported that most questions she receives are around start on site dates. LW could not provide a definite date as the time the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) may take to provide approval is unknown. But the aspiration is still to start on site towards the end of 2026/start of 2027. \n  \nKM asked how long it may take to mobilise for a start on site once  BSR approval is received. LW – not long but contracts with sub contractors and final procurements will need to completed after approvals\, which could take approx. 2 months. \n  \niv) EP asked why the lights on hoardings had to be so bright and why some are pink\, some white. LW will check with relevant team; some may still be waiting for shrouds to be fitted. Also to check colours! \n  \nv) EP also noted that leaseholders’ estate lighting bills have increased by approx. £400 p.a. Are Mulalley using estate lighting that is paid for by owners? LW confirmed not. \n \n  \nLW \n  \n  \n  \nLW \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nLW\n\n\n8.0\nDate of next meeting \nTuesday 17/3/26 at 7pm\n \n\n\n\n  \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/kc-rsg-20-jan-2026/ LOCATION:Hackney Showroom Space\, 4 Murrain Road\, London\, N4 2BN\, United Kingdom CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20251023T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20251023T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20251125T133938Z LAST-MODIFIED:20251125T133938Z UID:3239-1761246000-1761251400@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:RSG 23 Oct 2025 DESCRIPTION:Resident Steering Group‘ meetings happen every few months. \nKings Crescent residents can apply to be in the RSG and it is a chance to meet with Hackney’s Regeneration Team\, architects\, builders etc to discuss the plans for the next round of new buildings and refurbishment of existing blocks on the South of Kings Crescent Estate \n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting held on 23rd October 2025 \n  \n  \n\n\n\nPresent:\nCllr Clare Potter (CP) (Chair) – late \nPaul Cushion (PC) (Theobalds Court) \nKarsten Hartman (KH) (Wallington Court) \n \nKathy MacEwan (KM) (Kimpton Court) \nPatricia Sim (Theobalds Court) \nEmley Pine (EP) (Bramfield Court) \n  \n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nMenekse Saitoglu \nJohn Morris  (minutes) \nLee Walsh (LW) \nTom Roberts (TR)\nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nMulalley \nHHB Architects \n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n \nApologies were received from Peter Douglas\, Rowena Scarborough\, Ellie Virk. Cllr Potter gave advanced notice that she would be late. \nCS chaired the meeting in Cllr Potter’s absence.\n  \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 9th July 2025 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n \nOne correction to the last minutes: item 4.1\, Jane Kaye should be Joanna Kaye\, Mulalley RLO. \nThe rest of the minutes were agreed.\n  \n \n\n\n3.0\nProject update – Lee Walsh\n \n\n\n3.1 \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n3.2 \n  \n \nLW gave an update on Mulalley’s activities since the last meeting and proposed timings for future events. Presentation slides are attached with these minutes. \n●      S73 planning application due to be submitted Nov 2025. This seeks approval of the changes made to the original\, consented application from 2021. Outcome of this expected March 2026. It is hoped that the process of seeking approval from the Building Safety Regulator will conclude in Sept 2026. Mulalley hope to be able to start on site Oct 2026. \n●      Some live services are still being uncovered. \n●      Sewer diversion works along Casbeard St will start early in the new year and last approx. 12 weeks. Casbeard St will be closed to traffic but the footpath retained\, protected by Heras fencing. \n●      Ground remediation will continue until Spring 2026. \n●      Site investigations will continue until Aug/Sept 2026 to align with anticipated Building Safety Regulator approval around the same time. \n●      LW illustrated façade investigation locations on the slides. Scaffolding will be erected at these points.  The intention is to start and complete the investigations between November and December. \n●      Joanne\, the RLO’s role was explained. (See slide). \n●      Communications: monthly newsletters will be established\, supplemented by bulletins on specific issues. The Comms. portal will be set up once building work starts on site. In the meantime\, LW suggested a work group with residents and relevant Mulalley staff to tailor comms for this particular scheme. \n  \nQuestions/comments \n  \nEP – can we share Joanna’s number with residents? \nLW – yes. \n  \nEP – will sewer diversion works affect the trees at the end of Murrain Rd? \nLW – not the trees but some street furniture might have to be relocated \n  \nKH – will the road be renewed after the diversion works are completed? \nLW – it will be repaired and properly resurfaced at the end of the construction works \n  \nKM – what is the current approach to Social Value? It would be good to hear from Julian’s successor and get a sense of what resources might be available from the SV team at this stage. \nLW – Amber\, in the Social Value team is available and Julian’s successor as Head of Social Value\, Christina Byrne will introduce herself very soon. A budget has been allocated for all 3 schemes in Hackney that Mulalley are working on\, with Kings Crescent benefitting from the majority of it. LW and Christina will meet to agree what is left from the current SV allocation\, pre construction phase. \n  \nKM felt that there should be some support left in the budget for the garden project\, from Julian Sanz’s time. \nLW suggested that Kathy email him with her/the TRA’s assumptions to prompt him to discuss with Head of SV. \n  \nEP – is there still money available to fund youth workers? Remi (TRA Chair) has asked if this can be extended pending the outcome of a National Lottery application. \nLW wished to make it clear that there was never a commitment to fund these roles. The support provided was to pay for a shortfall temporarily following a previous unsuccessful external funding bid.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nKathy to email Lee \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n4.0\nOverview of S73 planning application – Tom Roberts\n \n\n\n4.1 \n  \n  \n4.2 \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \nTR gave a comprehensive presentation on all aspects of design and other elements of the Section 73 application that seeks approval for the parts of the scheme amended since the original application. Presentation slides accompany these minutes. There were also brick sample boards available in the meeting room. \n  \nQuestions/comments \n  \nKH – can TR confirm that heights of blocks hasn’t changed? \nTR – no heights have changed but there have been some increases in roof parapets (of approx. 0.5 of a metre) to keep maintenance workers on the roofs safe. \n  \nCS – is there an impact on room sizes following reconfigurations? \nTR – some rooms have been redesigned to create new layouts for fire separation \n  \nPC – have flats been made smaller to allow for 2nd staircases? \nTR – Some 2 beds have become 1 beds. Minimum size of 70sq m for a 2 bed has been retained. \nRG confirmed that the scheme is still viable even though there are some different sized flats. The overall number of homes is the same. \n  \nEP queried the dark brick on the external elevations of DZ4. She believes it will feel oppressive. Currently the sunlight bounces off the light coloured brickwork of phase 1 blocks. Could we ask that a survey is carried out of residents’ perceptions and preferences on the brick colour? \nTR – we feel that it will not be as dark as feared. \nKH asked if the choice of brick is a cost issue. \nRG confirmed not. \nKH – light coloured brick can look beautiful. \nKM – while a dark brick looks good on some buildings\, it does seem that a lighter brick would work better here. Could we visit some developments where the proposed type of brick has been used? \nCS suggested taking this issue away from this meeting and Source will carry out a simple poll of potentially affected residents to gauge views while the idea of a lighter brick colour is being reviewed by HHb\, Mulalley and LBH \n  \nEP – how tall will the new buildings be? \nTR – DZ4 will be 6 stories high. No additional stories have been added. \n  \nKM asked if a more detailed impression of what it would be like to walk around a new block could be produced. \nKH – Kimpton and Wallington Ct residents will be facing the tallest building so it would be good to get a better sense of how this would feel. \nTR – there will be a model but it won’t show brick colours. \n  \nBalconies \nPC – re south side new balconies; will they have solid floors? \nTR – yes\, they have to be solid. \n  \n  \n  \nLandscaping/public realm \nEP raised the issues that there have been with the Murrain Rd play equipment; residents wouldn’t want these replicated in the new courtyards. Equipment needs to be able to be maintained by the management team after completion. \nTR – LBH have hopefully learnt lessons from phase 1&2 play arrangements. RG confirmed this. TR will check back with MUF what current thinking is on play equipment. \n  \nEP – will sound from the new courtyards be similar to existing behind new blocks? Is there a way the sound from play can be mitigated? \nTR – the nw courtyards will be bigger\, more open and MUF have designed in trees that should dampen down noise. \n  \nKM – leading on from Dinah Bornat’s work\, has there been enough consideration given to the way children navigate their way safely around the estate and between play spaces? There will still be vehicles moving round the estate\, drawings still show vehicle routes. Bikes deliveries speed through. Could routes be designed so they read less like roads? PC added that bikes and e scooters can be dangerous when driving through; the play street needs better segregation from this. \nTR acknowledged there is a conflict between ‘doorstep play’ and children’s ability to move around and make noise. \nCS suggested picking these items up at the exhibition\, provisionally organised for 2nd December. \n  \nCP asked whether the planning application will be considered by the Planning Committee or by delegated authority to officers. \nRG – delegated unless there are material objections. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nSource \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nTom to speak to MUF re play facilities \n\n\n5.0\nITLA update – Source\n \n\n\n5.1\nCS – Source have continued to hold monthly drop ins during the summer. The MUGA consultation has been a key topic over these months. \n  \nWe have also circulated some revised terms of reference for the steering group and JM asked members\, by email what motivates them to attend meetings and to invite suggestions on how the group can play a more active role in the development proposals. JM summarised the responses – most who answered said they came to RSG meetings to keep informed of current progress and for updates. It was also apparent that we need to be clearer with residents on what they can influence and what is presented to them as information. The quality of the consultation material was also raised and the presentations tonight have been an improvement\, particularly in terms of ‘readability’ on the screen. \n  \nCS – we also looked at what could usefully be a regular agenda item. \nCP\, reflecting previous discussion\, suggested Social Value. \n  \nEP – at TRA meetings we try to ask residents what they want\, so it would be useful to know what money might be available and when. \nLW reminded the meeting that their Social Value budget has to be spread across 3 estates and this budget in the pre-construction phase is limited. It will be larger when construction starts. Mulalley would like to see a ‘shopping list’ of suggestions that doesn’t just funnel all the money to youth activities. He repeated that a working group of residents and Mulalley staff could start to address some of these issues. KM endorsed this approach as a way of keeping the TRA involved and valued. \n  \nCS suggested deferring further discussion on the group’s terms of reference but adding Social Value as a regular agenda item. CP suggested further discussions on our approach to the governance of the RSG could take place at the next partnership meeting which is the regular meeting between CP\, Source and LBH officers. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nAny other business  \n \n\n\n6.\nThere was no further business\n \n\n\n7.0 \nDate of next meeting \n \n \n\n\n7.1\nCS suggested 21st January and 25th March 2026 with the exhibition for all residents taking place on 2nd December. \n \n \n\n\n\n  \nA copy of the minutes and the accompanying presentation slides from Mulally can be found HERE URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/rsg-23-oct-2025/ LOCATION:Hackney Showroom Space\, 4 Murrain Road\, London\, N4 2BN\, United Kingdom CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20250320T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20250320T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20250518T192534Z LAST-MODIFIED:20250518T193233Z UID:3114-1742497200-1742500800@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Resident Steering Group Meeting 20 March 2025 DESCRIPTION:Resident Steering Group‘ meetings happen every few months. \nKings Crescent residents can apply to be in the RSG and it is a chance to meet with Hackney’s Regeneration Team\, architects\, builders etc to discuss the plans for the next round of new buildings and refurbishment of existing blocks on the South of Kings Crescent Estate \n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting held on 20th March  2025 \n  \n  \n\n\n\nPresent:\nCllr Clare Potter (CP) (Chair) \n  \n \n  \n  \n10 Residents: \nEP\,PS\, PD\, RB\, RW\, ES\, SJ\, KM\, GG\, EV \n(names removed for web version) \n  \n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\n  \nRon Greenwood (RG) \nChey Brown \nWill Greatrex \nJane Havemann \nCarol Squires (CS) \nMenekse Saitoglu \nJohn Morris (minutes) \nLee Walsh (LW) \nTom Roberts  (TR)\n  \n  \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nMulalley \nHHB Architects \n \n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n \n  \nApologies were received from JWM\, KH\, PC\, Cllr Adejare\, AF\, RS \n \n  \n  \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 4th December 2024 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n \n  \nThe minutes from the last meeting were agreed. \n \n  \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3&4 update – Mulalley \n \n\n\n \n  \nLW and TR presented a programme update and the latest redesigns of the new build proposals. Presentation slides accompany these minutes. \n  \nQuestions/comments: \n  \nBrick details. EP – concern about the darkness of brick that might absorb rather than reflect light. TR – the precise spec for the brickwork is not fixed. CP – there has been discussion about a visit to another Hackney estate that has used similar shades of brick. RG – this is the Frampton Estate which used bricks from the same manufacturer but the colours are not identical to those proposed here. \n  \nBalconies. CP – will residents feel or hear a difference when the new balconies on the south side of KC are in use? LW – the walkways are concrete paviours\, so there will not be any ‘metallic’ sound as people walk on them. \n  \nCP – what will the front of the balconies look like? TR- metal mesh that can be seen through. But emphasised that it’s still early days in the design process. \n  \nThere was further discussion around maintenance of balconies. LW assured the meeting that the steel construction would be as robust as concrete and there would not be additional maintenance requirements \n  \nRB asked about the disruption in ground floor gardens when balconies are being installed. TR acknowledged there will be disruption but it will less than with the previous design and balcony materials. RG confirmed that gardens will be reinstated on a like for like basis. \n  \nWeston Court bike store. RB asked if LBH will manage the proposed bike storage under Weston Court as current storage facilities are quite chaotic. KM added that bikes are stacked up with some abandoned; there must be some learning from the bike storage under north side blocks. ES questioned the security of the proposed arrangements. RB asked if entrances to stores could be within the courtyard. LW – this proposal has been made in collaboration with Secured by Design. There will be access from the courtyard with individual fob access to compartments within the storage facility. TR added that part of the design involves finding a solution to the drop in level immediately outside Weston Court. \n  \nTR also noted that the bike store will have Sheffield stands\, i.e. metallic installations fixed to the floor rather than hangers which should help address some of the issues with bikes not being stored tidily. \n  \nES expressed regret at the abandonment of the plans for work spaces under Weston Court. LW reminded the meeting of the reasons why this was no longer practical\, including major disruption to residents above. \n  \nCP asked what the difference was between the new flats in phase 1 created from old garages and the situation under Weston Court. TR – in phase 1 the foundations were level and provided sufficient room for new flats to be created. At Weston Court\, the foundations are close to ground level and would need to be underpinned which is very noisy and disruptive. In phase 1&2 the foundations were deeper so underpinning was not needed. \n  \nSJ asked if there could be some general storage space created and not all bike storage. LW – there needs to be a minimum amount of bike storage for the number of homes. RG suggested there could be some creative use of the space as long as planning regulations are met. \n  \nHoarding line and routes through the estate. JM asked for clarification on the hoarding line that seems to cut off Casbeard St. LW – the route shown has marshalled gates at each end for construction traffic. This arrangement was in the original plans once the Casbeard St route was chosen; it was always the case that Casbeard St would be closed to pedestrians and is not the result of any changes to the hoarding line. But LW confirmed that  Casbeard St will be kept open for as long as possible. \n  \nRB asked about routes for elderly residents who need to get to the shops. Will LBH help them navigate the estate once hoarding is up? RG stressed importance of involving housing management teams. CP – we need to work closely with TRA and LBH to keep vulnerable residents in mind. \n  \nEV – can there be a pedestrian route that maybe sacrifices some parking spaces? LW – the construction zone is\, as planned\, as small as possible and there is very limited storage space for materials. There also needs to be access on the road in front of Bramfield\, Theobalds and Datchworth for emergency and refuse vehicles. CS reminded the meeting that phase 1&2 split the estate and we need to try to avoid this for phase 3&4. \n  \nGG – is there going to be a loss of parking? RG – some spaces will be lost but there are arrangements being put in place for off estate parking. \n \n \n\n\n4.0\nTemporary MUGA consultation\n \n\n\n  \n \n  \nRG presented the outcome of the consultation to assess views on the proposal to create a temporary play area on Murrain Road for the duration of the building works. Slides attached. \n  \nQuestions/comments: \n  \nES asked what the objections were from those against the proposals. RG – the impact of noise\, the potential for ASB\, a focus for drug users. RB – these aren’t the users of the MUGA. \n  \nCS pointed out that the location was cited as a problem by residents on the south side of the estate\, so those opposed to the proposals were not all necessarily objecting on grounds of noise\, ASB etc. \n  \nRG – we are suggesting that\, given the closeness of the result of the consultation\, we take a step back and look again at the issue\, this time with a commissioned play specialist. KM – it will be good to have someone involved who really understands the issues and who will look at the estate as a whole\, across ages and all options; as long as it doesn’t take too long! \n  \nEV – ideas might include 2 smaller spaces for play? \n  \nRG\, in response to brief discussion about formal/informal play made the point that LBH don’t want to produce something that is not used or is inappropriate. \n  \nRB – the objection to having to use the park is that each trip needs to be fully risk-assessed. She added that some facilities would be good for the summer. \n  \nIt was noted that there was some disappointment that this has not been concluded yet. \n  \n  \n  \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nITLA update – Source \n \n\n\n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n  \nCS reported that residents visiting the Source drop ins have reflected the views just discussed about the MUGA. RB noted that there is a perceived divide between north and south on the estate.\n \n\n\n6.0\nAny other business  \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nPD raised an instance of Sunday working on 23rd February. Contractors were using very noisy equipment\, including circular saws; could have been UKPN. RW endorsed this as a major disruption on a Sunday at Datchworth Court. PD emailed an RLO email address at Mulalley but didn’t receive a response. Who could he have called to complain at the time? LW – this would not have been Mulalley carrying out enabling works. Unfortunately\, Mulalley have little control over statutory authorities if they are not working within the curtilage of the Mulalley site. Mulalley should be aware of works but not the times they are carried out. CP noted that there needs to be procedures in place in the future to deal with this type of incident. LW committed to invstigating why there was no response to PD from the RLO email address. \n  \n·       Post meeting note. The following response has been received from LBH: \n  \nLee from Mulalley has followed up on the AOB raised by Peter at last week’s RSG\, around the works taking place at the weekend\, and his subsequent email which was not responded to. \n  \nIt does seem that Peter’s email was missed\, as it went direct to the RLO director’s inbox – Mulalley have apologised for this and have advised that all resident liaison emails for King’s Crescent should be directed to joanna.kaye@mulalley.co.uk. Please could this email be included / updated in any future correspondence with residents? \n  \nJust so you’re aware regarding the complaint itself\, it does appear to have been contractors employed by UKPN. Mulalley will raise this with the contacts they have but as noted in the RSG\, UKPN are a statutory undertaker so Mulalley have no real control over their working hours. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nLW\n\n\n  \n6.2\n  \nEV asked for an update on the promised Mulalley website. It would be helpful so residents can be better informed about when and why things are happening and who is carrying them out. LW – there will be more communications\, including a website when there is a greater level of activity to report on. Newsletters should be going out. RB noted that residents do not receive regular bulletins. LW – a new Project Manager will start in early April who will be a contact. He also committed to resolving the issue with newsletters. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nLW\n\n\n  \n6.3 \n \n  \nRG – we will be planning an open exhibition of plans possibly in June. This will be part of the consultation leading up to the planning application with amendments from the original\, determined application. \n \n \n\n\n7.0 \nDate of next meeting \n  \nCP – date to be decided. Likely in 3 months time\, to be confirmed after the exhibition referred to above. \n \n \n\n\n\n  \nSlides from the presentation can be viewed HERE URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/resident-steering-group-meeting-20-march-2025/ LOCATION:Hackney Showroom\, Murrain Road\, London\, N4 2GD CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20231128T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20231128T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20231221T102647Z LAST-MODIFIED:20231221T144913Z UID:2923-1701198000-1701201600@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Resident Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:Resident Steering Group‘ meetings happen every few months. Kings Crescent residents can apply to be in the RSG and it is a chance to meet with Hackney’s Regeneration Team\, architects\, builders etc to discuss the plans for the next round of new buildings and refurbishment of existing blocks on the South of Kings Crescent Estate \n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting held on 28th November  2023 \n  \n  \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr Clare Potter (CP) (Chair) \nResidents: \nEP\, JWM\, EV \nKH\, ES\, PS\, RS \nPA\, PD\, KM\, AF \n(Names removed on website version for privacy)\n  \n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\n  \nRon Greenwood (RG) \nChey Brown \nJane Haverson \nMenekse Saitoglu \nJohn Morris (minutes) (JM) \nLee Walsh (LW) \nVincent Raymond (VR)\n  \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nMulalley \nMulalley\n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nApologies were received from Carol Squires\n  \n  \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 17th April 2023  and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nThe minutes were agreed as a true record\, although they were circulated several months ago. CP and JM committed to pick up any actions that were noted in April. \n \n  \n \n\n\n3.0\nEnabling works for phase 3&4 – Mulalley \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nLW and VR gave a presentation; slides HERE. \n  \nQuestions and subsequent discussion as follows: \n  \nPA – when will the sewer problems in Weston Court be picked up? There should be information on this issue from before. \nVR – we need to do comprehensive surveys of all components to ascertain the extent of all potential problems. \n  \nKH – how will the height difference between old and new blocks be dealt with? \nVR – buildings will follow a gradient. \n  \nEV – for clarification\, Casbeard St will be closed from approx. Sept 2024 onwards? \nVR – timings on street closure depends on response times of utilities companies. Mulalley will close the street as late as possible. Also\, if there is likely to be a prolonged period of inactivity between end of prep/enabling works and start on site\, Mulalley would be willing to consider a temporary re-opening of the street. \n  \nCP recorded thanks to residents for their feedback and to Mulalley for reconsidering the access route onto site. \n  \nKM –  what can be done with the new hoarding? \nLW – Mulalley will change all the hoarding; existing has been in place for many years and there will be a new hoarding line. Mulalley very open to ideas to e.g. paint the hoarding using local young people or street artists. Easter holidays might be a good time to start to organise this. \n  \nAF – the presentation mentioned the possibility of access works from Green Lanes affecting the bus stop opposite. \nLW emphasised that it may be necessary to move the bus stop – not take it away – to accommodate a layby opposite on the Sainsbury’s side of the road. Mulalley will be talking to Highways about this. \n  \nPA – the tree on Murrain Rd that will need to be relocated could be planted in a space near Sainsbury’s. \nVR – Mulalley are flexible about where trees that need to be moved can be re-situated and it will be done after discussion with LBH and the community. VR emphasised that any relocation will be done by an experienced arboriculturist and any trees that do not need to be moved will be fully protected. \n  \nPA – is the Datchworth arch high enough for construction traffic? And will it be possible to open Queens Drive at its junction with Green Lanes so vehicles do not have to come down all the way down Queens Drive? \nLW – yes\, there will be no problem getting appropriately sized vehicles through this point. The access to Queens Drive from Green Lanes will not be opened\, although if it could be it would be very helpful. Feedback from discissions with Highways will be provided. \n  \nPD – on the same point\, there will be disruption to more people with traffic approaching along Queens Drive. \nLW – LBH will not want to keep the gate open and it could not reasonably be overseen by a marshall/banksman who would have to open it for construction traffic while preventing all other vehicles from also driving into Queens Drive. A permanent opening here would create a rat run from Green Lanes at periods of high traffic density. However\, LW committed to speaking to Highways about this and feeding back either at the next meeting or via Ron. \n  \nJWM – will there be certain times of the day when deliveries will be made to site? \nVR – school run times will be avoided\, so traffic will be allowed access only from 8.30/9.00 a.m. and only up to approx. 3.00/3.30. \n  \nEP – what will happen to the trees on the Green Lanes/Queens Drive corner (where DZ6S will be)? \nVR – there are trees that will be too big to move; the machinery to do this doesn’t exist in the UK. Mulalley will carefully work around trees and have to be careful not to affect the root structures. \n  \nKM sought clarification on timelines. \nLW – we are about 20 weeks into the original programme for redesign and cost optimisation process. Starting enabling works now and seeking all relevant permissions during 2024 should ensure alignment with a start on site in 2025. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nLW to feedback from discussion with Highways \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nLW to feedback from discussion with Highways \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n4.0\nApproach to future Social Value work with Mulalley – Source  \n \n\n\n  \n4.1\n  \nJM – further to discussions with Mulalley and LBH\, Source are keen to facilitate the formation of a residents group specifically to look at Social Value issues with Mulalley\, the TRA and Hackney Showroom. This could consist of a number of residents who are not on this RSG but who have an interest in Social Value issues. \nCP – Councillor Adejare would like to promote any opportunities that might emerge for Parkwood School students. Other areas of interest could be: funding/resourcing the Youth Club\, the hoarding decoration project\, funding/support for making the allotments work better for residents. CP added the idea mooted earlier this year of establishing a memorial as part of the public realm works to residents who passed away during the covid pandemic. EV also mentioned a sustainable energy project. \n \n  \n  \nSource to start work on facilitating a Social Value steering group Q1 of 2024 \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nITLA update \n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nJM – Source have continued to run monthly drop in sessions between 4.00 and 6.00 pm for any resident to call in for an update. The last one of the year will be on 12th December and will be advertised as an opportunity to see Mulalley’s proposals as presented tonight. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nAny other business  \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nCP asked about the other workshop sessions that have been discussed for 2024. \nRG – once a firm programme has been agreed\, it will be possible to align workshops with the relevant elements of the design/cost optimisation process. Subjects for workshops are likely to focus on play/public realm works\, refurbishment details and the new community centre fit out. \nLW – the public realm discussions will be the first priority as this will need to be included in the minor planning amendment application and discussions could start around Easter 2024. Workshops on design modifications for the refurbishment and the new community centre might be appropriate mid to late summer 2024. \n  \nKM asked for confirmation that the planning application will be for minor amendments (S73). \nLW – yes. The footprint of the buildings will not change (except possibly and slightly\, DZ6S)\, but this will impact on the need to now build a second staircase within the affected blocks. \n  \nKM – the quality of materials is also important. \nLW – there are budget concerns but the client wants quality maintained and Mulalley’s design team will be working closely with LBH’s design guardians. \n  \nES asked that RSG is informed of design changes. He also requested a commentary on where savings have been made in order for residents to understand how the cost optimisation has been achieved. \n  \nRG – residents will no doubt be interested in the impact of cost optimisation on how buildings will look. A presentation on the revised designs can be provided prior to the S73 application. \n  \nKH – what is the latest thinking on programming of the refurbishment and new build? \nLW – it will be one construction period\, although for the refurbishment\, there is still discussion to be had with residents around a quicker but more disruptive programme or a less disruptive but slower programme. To re-emphasise\, the Building Safety Regulations affect all existing blocks as Weston Court is +18 metres high and is connected to the rest of the south side blocks. Also\, services infrastructure is also linked between southside existing homes and new build\, so e.g. fire strategy\, road network will be established across the whole estate. \n  \nCP – the last LBH Cabinet meeting considered an update on the KIngs Crescent scheme and asked if this could be circulated as it is a public document. NB timescales mentioned in it are now out of date.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nMulalley and LBH to provide details when able \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nJM to circulate with presentation and minutes\n\n\n7.0 \nDate of next meeting \n  \nNext meeting will be in March 2024\, date to be proposed nearer the time.\n \n\n\n\n  \nThe meeting ended at 8.15 pm \n\n\n\nActions \nBy when\nWho?\n\n\nFeedback from discussion with Highways on moving Green Lanes bus stop\nNext RSG\nLW\n\n\nFeedback from discussion with Highways on possibility of opening gate to enable access to Queens Drive from Green Lanes\nNext RSG\nLW\n\n\nWork on facilitating a Social Value steering group to start\nQ1 of 2024\nSource\n\n\nDetails of where design changes have been made and how cost optimisation has been achieved\nQ4 of 2024?\nMulalley and LBH\n\n\nReport to November Cabinet on Kings Crescent regeneration to be circulated with Mulalley presentation slides\nWith minutes by 11/12/23\nJM\n\n\n\n  \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/resident-steering-group-meeting/ LOCATION:Hackney Showroom Space\, 4 Murrain Road\, London\, N4 2BN\, United Kingdom CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230712T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230712T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20230704T134529Z LAST-MODIFIED:20230704T134804Z UID:2822-1689188400-1689193800@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Open Resident Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:For more details of what will be discussed see the Hackney Update Newsletter (delivered to all properties & HERE) and the minutes of the previous RSG meeting in April and slides of Mulalley’s presentation HERE URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/open-resident-steering-group-meeting/ LOCATION:Hackney Showroom Space\, 4 Murrain Road\, London\, N4 2BN\, United Kingdom CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://kingscrescent.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/KC-regeneration-drawing.jpg ORGANIZER;CN="Hackney Regeneration Team":MAILTO:ron.greenwood@hackney.gov.uk END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230417T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230417T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20230509T161457Z LAST-MODIFIED:20230509T162550Z UID:2762-1681758000-1681761600@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Resident Steering Group meeting 17 April 2023 DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the ‘residents steering group’ (RSG). \nIt is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. \nThe steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \nKey Summary Points:\n* Mulalley have been appointed as Hackney’s building contractor\n* Plan: 1 year of design review for cost optimisation then 1 year for design approval process and ‘Building Safety Act’ compliance (new regulation). So work due to commence in 2 years\n* Part of the Play Street will be out of action for approx 2 years once the work starts at the Green Lanes end of the site\n* There will be opportunities for residents to be consulted and meet the contractors during this coming year of design review\n* Hackney Regeneration Team will be sending out a newsletter to all residents in June to provide an overview of the process and programme with Mulalley\n* Source Partnership will be resuming a drop-in service from June onwards to answer resident questions \n\n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting held on 17th April  2023 \n  \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr Clare Potter (CP) (Chair) \nCllr Soreya Adejare  (SA) \n8 Residents: \nEP\, JWM\, EV\, PS\, PA\, PD\, KM\, AF\n\n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nChey Brown \nCarol Squires (CS) \nMenekse Saitoglu \nJohn Morris (minutes) \nLee Walsh (LW)\n  \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nMulalley \n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nApologies were received from resident KH\n  \n  \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 13th October 2022  and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nThe minutes were agreed as a true record \n \n  \n \n\n\n3.0\nIntroduction to Mulalley and the Kings Crescent project – Lee Walsh \, Contracts Manager \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nLee gave a presentation\, (slides below) followed by questions. \n  \nCP asked for the slides to be circulated. \n  \nPA – can data from previous site surveys be used by Mulalley to reduce the work involved? \nLW – these will be used to provide a basic understanding but Mullalley will need to explore in much greater detail\, e.g. soil surveys will be taken at 5m intervals. \n  \nCP – will the extended period for redesign etc. mean that investigations will be more thorough\, so chance of issues arising later is minimised? \nLW – no\, the delays at this stage won’t mean the surveys will be any more thorough; they will be thorough anyway but it means that due diligence can be completed earlier\, making good use of the extended period of redesign\, sign off etc. \n  \nSA – can we be assured that the length of time at this stage will not have a detrimental impact on leaseholders? \nRG – leaseholders will benefit from cost optimisation but it is important that the principle of design parity between new build and refurb is maintained. Cost optimisation is a way to balance quality and cost. \nLW – no one can predict market forces but there are signs that costs are starting to plateau. The pressures on the building industry have been unprecedented following Brexit\, the pandemic and the Ukraine war (an example of the latter was a 500% increase in the cost of concrete and steel in 3 months). RG added that estimates of build cost inflation had been factored into the approval of the scheme. \n  \nSA – what does ‘added value’ mean to Mulalley? \nLW – it differs between projects and depends on what communities’ priorities are. It could be funding existing projects\, business development mentoring\, local school equipment donations\, work in schools on career options and job-readiness. \n  \nKM – the plan to use the section of Murrain Road at the Green Lanes end is a real concern as Hackney Showroom and the street immediately outside have become a valuable focus for community activity. It is a ‘people street.’ How can you help limit the impact? JWM added that taking away the play area and the other site logistics mean that there will be little space for young people to play\, gather etc. \nLW – unfortunately\, the only way to get construction vehicles on and off site is from Green Lanes; there are height and width restrictions that prevent other means of access. \nJWM – can’t the currently vacant area adjacent to Green Lanes not be used as it was for phase 1&2? \nLW – we will be building on that. The plan is that the new build blocks will be constructed all at the same time; a phased programme for this part of the development will prolong the build period by years. \n  \nEV – will the refurbishment take place in parallel with the new build? \nLW – there is some flexibility in when and how long the refurbishment takes. If it is done at pace\, it will obviously be completed sooner but there will be more disruption. If the community want to see less disruption\, then the programme for the refurb. could be lengthened. \n  \nCP asked how long the half of the play street nearest Green Lanes will be out of action. \nLW – maybe 2 years? \nRG added that there will be photographic and video evidence stored of the play street in its current form so it can be reinstated exactly as before. Items on the play street that need to be moved will be stored or re-located. This includes the trees. It was noted that pedestrian access along Murrain Road to Green Lanes will still exist. \nEV – it will be important to maintain easy pedestrian access across the estate\, so the north and south sides are not completely separated. Does this mean the ball court will go? \nLW – yes. \nRG – we aim to try to find solutions to some of these issues with residents through workshops etc. \nCP – it will be important that the estate continues to be brought together through the social value part of Mulalley’s contract. \nLW also noted that a lot of space on the estate will be taken up by storage of materials (illustrated by black cross-hatched areas on the site plan). \n  \nCS – could meanwhile uses be considered for e.g. storage facilities when not in use? Also what are residents’ views on the proposed respite facilities? \nThere was discussion about the respite provision\, noted that it wasn’t well used in phase 1&2. Can it be used for more social/community/play activities? LW – this is all up for further discussion and community will have the opportunity to reshape provision in dialogue with Mulalley. \n  \nCS noted that there is only one lift serving Weston Court – at the Datchworth Court junction. If the access to Green Lanes at the north end of the block is closed off\, it will be a long walk for residents to access the lift. \nLW – would be open to keeping the access available at the other end of Weston Court. \n  \nCP – phase 1&2 had major problems with lifts and the energy centre working efficiently. If better aftercare can be assured for installations in this phase\, perhaps by sourcing from UK\, more expensive manufacturers\, this might be worth it to save costs after completion. \nLW – the cost optimisation process is being done in collaboration with the client; ultimately\, these sort of costs are not Mulalley’s decision. Note that the cost optimisation exercise isn’t a way for Mulalley to make savings and maximise profit; it’s about getting best value. \nRG – there is a new\, borough-wide spec for lifts that will be used and there will be an enhanced M&E clerk of works inspection process. \nLW – Mulalley will employ its own lift consultants who will have an input into design\, will lead on market testing of suppliers and will carry out an inspection function pre-handover\, at snagging before the lifts are put into operation. \nCP -what about the energy centre? \nLW – Mechanical & Electrical contractors will be managed separate M&E managing agents\, who are consultants\, not Mulalley\, therefore there is independent scrutiny of this aspect of the contract. \n  \nPA asked when the Weston Court podium will be coming down. \nLW – we will look to progress this as early as possible. However\, it will be a process of deconstruction rather than demolition in order to minimise noise\, dust etc. \n  \nAF asked about access to Weston Court for deliveries. \nLW confirmed that access will be maintained. \n  \nEP sought confirmation of the timeline; 90 to 100 weeks before start on site? \nLW – yes\, it will be that long. An early start to the refurb. was considered but compliance with the new Building Safety Act is needed for all aspects of the contract before any work can start. Planning consultation and the impact of the BS Act are 2 key factors that will affect the timeline that are out of Mulalley’s control. \nCP noted that another 2 year’s wait is hard to hear for residents but commended Ron on providing consistency throughout the process leading up to this point. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n4.0\nFuture resident engagement – Source  \n \n\n\n  \n4.1\n  \nCS noted that Source have now vacated the VM Community Centre but we want to agree a programme of activities to maintain momentum with resident engagement. We propose monthly drop ins at Hackney Showroom to provide information and seek views on e.g. meanwhile uses and other issues that residents can help to influence. Noted that information needs to be disseminated widely across homes; the 8 households represented at this meeting cannot be expected to be the conduit for spreading all info. \nRG – there is a newsletter due to go out. \nCS – if there are design and other significant changes\, these should be communicated as we go along. This could include introduction of meanwhile uses to soften the blow of losing part of the playstreet. \nRG agreed and highlighted the importance of resident input into design of the public realm. \nCS – we could use the logistics plan to generate residents’ views at drop ins. We could start drop ins this month. \nJWM suggested speaking and visiting the Elders Lunch Club. \n  \nRG also noted ongoing discussions about site visits. Mulalley sites in Bethnal Green\, Parkview (Highbury New Park) and the now completed Bridge House still possibilities. \n  \nCP – are there any other communities we are not reaching? \nEP – non-resident leaseholders? \nSA – are translated written materials needed? \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nTRA update \n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nEP reported back: \n· A newsletter was produced in Nov 2022. \n· The winter market\, where the TRA had a stall was a success. \n· The recent Community Meeting which was less formal engaged more people. \n· Youth Club going well. \n· Gardening also going well. \n· Upcoming events: \no  7/5  –  a coronation event\, with LBH funding will be held at the VMCC \no  13/5 –  a gardening event \no  14/6 – next Community Meeting \no  20/9 – TRA AGM at which Emley will stand down as Chair \nETRA meetings have stopped in their previous format. LBH/resident liaison will be organised differently. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nAny other business  \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nSA wished to record thanks to Emley for her participation in the Council’s scrutiny review of regeneration. \n \n  \n \n\n\n7.0 \nDate of next meeting \n \n\n\n  \n7.1\n  \nCP proposed quarterly meetings would be appropriate\, so the next RSG would be early July. However\, it was agreed to wait until the new year’s municipal calendar has been published to confirm a date when CP and SA can attend. \n  \nCS – there needs to be something to say to make the meetings worthwhile. \nRG – next meeting could include discussions about preparing for the cost optimisation exercise. \nCS – once people have had a look at the slides from tonight’s presentation\, there should be more questions. \nLW – Mulalley can commit to attending all future RSGs\, even if LW himself does not attend; it may be more relevant for specialists within the company to attend to deal with specific issues with RSG  meetings focusing on one or two themes at future meetings. \n  \n \n \n\n\n\n  \nThe meeting ended at 8.45 pm \n  \nSlides from Mulalley presentation:\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/resident-steering-group-meeting-17-april-2023/ LOCATION:Hackney Showroom Space\, 4 Murrain Road\, London\, N4 2BN\, United Kingdom CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20221013T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20221013T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20221017T192449Z LAST-MODIFIED:20221017T201339Z UID:2558-1665687600-1665693000@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Resident Steering Group Meeting 13 Oct DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the ‘residents steering group’ (RSG). \nIt is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. \nThe steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n\n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting held on 13th October  2022 \n  \n  \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr Clare Potter (CP) (Chair) \n7 Residents: \nEP\, JWM\, KH\, PS\, PA\, ES\, PD\n  \n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nMenekse Saitoglu \nJohn Morris (minutes) \nBrian Bell\nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nGuest \n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nApologies were received from residents KM\, NJ\, & AF and Cllr Soreya Adejare\n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 21st July 2022  and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nThe minutes were agreed as a true record\n  \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3&4 update  \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\nRG confirmed the successful contractor is Mulalley. LBH hope to sign a contract with them in December or January. CP noted that no communication has gone out to residents formally announcing this and it would be prudent to wait until the contract is signed. However\, RSG members are under no obligation to keep this confidential. \n  \nRG explained the actions over the next year. These include ensuring the development is compliant with new building regulations coming into force next June; these cover provision of ventilation\, energy\, electric charging points for vehicles and fire safety. There is also the need to get any blocks over 18m high signed off by the new Building Safety Regulator which takes 12 weeks. During 2023\, there will also be a value engineering exercise carried out to try to achieve approx. 10% savings. LBH will explore with Mulalley the possibility of starting the refurbishment works while awaiting the Building Safety Regulator sign off. \n  \nKH asked if the designs were based on the old building regs. \nRG – yes\, but now there is a definite implementation date for the new regulations\, LBH cannot now avoid the requirement to redesign in order to comply with them. \n  \nES suggested that the benefits of 10% savings could be wiped out by inflation. \nRG acknowledged this but LBH are committed to achieving savings in e.g. sub and superstructure of the new buildings\, looking at off site construction\, possibly standardising some components such as windows. ES noted that off site construction can create a higher quality product. CP added that there have been constant reassurances that quality will not be compromised. \n  \nPA asked if changing the use of the proposed workspaces under Weston Court had been considered. RG explained LBH doubts that creating residential units here might not provide sufficiently high quality accommodation and floor to ceiling heights could be an issue. PA noted that the phase 1 garage conversions had worked well. CP’s understanding is that if the commercial units do not work out\, there is the option to convert them to residential. It was agreed that it would be worth exploring a residential use as an option. \n  \nKH asked about phasing; will the new build be linked to the refurbishment? \nRG replied that as they are signing one contract\, the two will be linked and Mulalley have said they will try to stick with the proposed programme of starting at Bramfield Court and working round the south side blocks from there. \n  \nKH asked about viability in terms of achieving good sales value when marketing flats. RG replied that the time it will take to complete new homes for sale will probably extend beyond the current economic cycle\, so current market conditions are not necessarily an indicator for the viability of the sales. \n  \nPA mentioned the Mulalley’s site on Highbury New Park which seems to have stalled. RG – this is in Islington and there may be many reasons why the programme has been delayed. Mulalley have done a lot of work in Hackney and are committed to continuing work in the borough. \n  \nPA and JWM thought that the internal Decent Homes work that Mulalleys did was not very satisfactory. RG acknowledged that at the site visits\, residents preferred Durkan but this tender has been won fairly and represents the best value for residents and the borough. \n  \nES asked about checking the quality of work. RG responded that there will be Clerks of Works by trade and the LBH in-house design team are also a resource to ensure high standards. \n  \nES asked about the extent to which architects KCA and HHB will be involved. RG replied that Mulalley are being strongly encouraged to retain their services. \n  \nCP raised the positive feedback from other existing and more recent Mulalley schemes in Hackney. CS referred to the good tenant feedback from Bridge House. It was agreed to work towards a site visit here on a Saturday morning in January 2023. CS to suggest possible homes to visit and to make initial approaches to residents. \n  \nRG showed slides of Mulalley’s tender introduction to illustrate their approach to resident engagement (using Newman Francis as engagement specialists). There was evidence that they had looked carefully at lessons from phase 1&2 and future involvement with the RSG. \n  \nKH emphasised the importance of making communications easy if things are not looking right. RG highlighted an example of Mulalley’s approach: when arranging the works in south side rear gardens\, they will have block meetings and 1:1 meetings with ground floor residents\, a condition survey will be completed\, secure storage for items that need to moved will be arranged and good notice of the start of works given. \n  \nJWM asked about how concrete posts for the balconies will be installed in ground floor rear gardens; the pocket park and other features on Queens Drive must be preserved. RG indicated that Mulalleys will be aware of all the constraints and suggested that they be invited to an RSG meeting soon to explain their access management plan. \n  \nRG talked through slides reminding the meeting of the design principles and illustrating  Mulalley’s approach. It was agreed to look at the second half of the presentation at the December RSG meeting which showed elements of Mulalley’s Invitation to Tender response. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nCS\n\n\n4.0\nPhase 1& 2 update  \n \n\n\n  \n4.1\nRG introduced a post-occupancy evaluation exercise to concentrate on the heating\, ventilation\, energy efficiency and comfort of flats. A survey will be carried out between 25th October and 27th November. In addition\, volunteers are sought for a data logging exercise to gather more detailed information. ES and KH volunteered and JWM suggested that Julie\, a ground floor tenant in the northside blocks might also be willing to put herself forward.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n4.2\nRG introduced the proposal to replace an item of equipment on the play street with stepping stones (images were circulated before the meeting). JWM reported a lack of enthusiasm from members of the youth club. No decision could be made on this at the meeting. \n[See images below of suggested ‘stepping stones’ for Play Street] \n \n \n\n\n  \n4.3\nOngoing defects in the new northside blocks was discussed. RG reported that the LBH lifts team have a proposal that Steve Waddington (the director responsible for this service area) is committed to implementing. CP reported that she and Cllr Adejare have received a lot of casework on this issue. She has asked for data on each breakdown and is pressing to get someone to speak to this at the ETRA on 19th. \n  \nKH wished to emphasise the importance of communication from LBH; the service from the operational teams has been unacceptable. He also cited the failure of the main door to his block. JWM added that southside residents have also been dissatisfied with the service they receive. CP re-stated that she is working to get someone to address these issues at next weeks’ ETRA meeting. KH also asked for someone to attend to deal with fire safety issues. \n  \nCP suggested that EP email her with anything else that needs to be raised at the meeting. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nEP\n\n\n5.0\nTRA update \n \n\n\n  \n5.1\nEP gave an update. \ni)        The AGM was held on 14th Sept. The committee is largely the same; EP still Chair. \nii)       A trip to the beach was organised for 10th Sept. \niii)     The committee had decided to issue a newsletter update instead of the next community & social TRA meeting \niv)     A winter market is planned for 3rd December \nv)       Hackney Showroom’s next Kings Feast is on 19th November \nvi)     JWM reported that the Youth Club is getting stronger. A small group of older ‘young’ people approached her to ask about a youth club for their age group\, so she is meeting them again to explore this\n \n\n\n6.0\nITLA update\n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nCS reported that Source are now halfway through their 5 year contract but are not halfway through their budget. We have met RG to discuss a revised work programme to be established early in 2023 so that it links with Mulalley’s work programme. CS encouraged the RSG to let us know if there’s anything else we could be doing.\n  \n \n\n\n6.0\nAny urgent business  \n \n\n\n6.1\nNone \n \n\n\n\n7.0 \nDate of next meeting \n \n\n\n  \n \n  \nTuesday 6th December\, 7.30 pm start to allow for yoga class in the HS Studio to finish. \n \n \n\n\n\n  \nSuggested new ‘stepping stones’ installation for Play Street: URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/rsg-meeting-13-oct/ LOCATION:Hackney Showroom Space\, 4 Murrain Road\, London\, N4 2BN\, United Kingdom CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20220721T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20220721T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20220708T161901Z LAST-MODIFIED:20220722T164059Z UID:2389-1658430000-1658433600@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Steering Group 21 July 2022 DESCRIPTION:RSG\n\n\n\nThis is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the ‘residents steering group’ (RSG). \nIt is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. \nThe steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n\n(Minutes of the meeting will be posted here when they are available) \nAgenda\n\n\n\n\nAgenda item \nLead \n\n\n1\nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Potter (Chair) \n \n\n\n2\nNotes of previous meeting held 28th February and any matters arising not elsewhere on the agenda \n \nCllr Potter (Chair)\n\n\n3\nPhase 3 & 4 update \n \nRon (LBH)\n\n\n4\nPhase 1 & 2 update \n \nWill (LBH)\n\n\n5\nTRA update \n \nEmley (TRA Chair)\n\n\n6\nITLA update\nSource \n \n\n\n7 \n \nAny urgent business \n \nCllr Potter (Chair) \n \n\n\n8\nDate of next meeting \n \nCllr Potter (Chair) \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-21-july-2022/ LOCATION:Hackney Showroom Space\, 4 Murrain Road\, London\, N4 2BN\, United Kingdom CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20220228T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20220228T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20220722T163911Z LAST-MODIFIED:20220722T163911Z UID:2425-1646074800-1646078400@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Steering Group 28 Feb 2022 DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the ‘residents steering group’ (RSG). \nIt is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. \nThe steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n\n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting held on 28th February  2022 \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr. Brian Bell (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Clare Potter (CP) \n8 Residents: \nEP\, JWM\, PA\, PS\, AA\, KM\, AF\, ES \n(Resident names removed on web version)\n  \n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nWilliam Owen (WO) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nMenekse Saitoglu (MS)\n  \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\nApologies were received from John Morris and residents KH\, PD\, NJ \nMost members had not received their RSG papers Brian apologised and ask that these be circulated with the minutes of this meeting \n \nSource\n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 27 January 2022  and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nThe minutes were agreed as a true record subject to those residents who had not received them having chance to comment on them. To be sent to Source \n \n  \nAll\n\n\n  \n2.2\n  \nA good meeting with Mayor\, service heads and leaseholders was held where frustrations were aired and dates have been agreed for leaseholder surgeries. \n \n  \n  \n  \nTRA \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3&4 update  \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nContractor Procurement Update \n  \nRG stated that the negotiations with Durkan are frustratingly still on-going and had not as hoped been completed and there will be a delay of around   3-4 months whilst the Council is acting in the best practice procurement and due process to ensure that there is no risk to the programme or compromise to the quality of delivery. \n  \nThe Regeneration team will be exploring how much design development work can be done ahead of completion of negotiations. \n  \nReasons for the need for care at this stage is the volatility in supply chain and materials needs to be de-risked.  This may have an impact on price. \n  \nThere remains a second contractor who will need to be given the opportunity to review their bid. There was a discussion about the realistic chances of reaching a conclusion with the main contractor. \n  \nThe Greater London Authority (GLA) will be advised that there will be no start on site for the GLA funded council housing during March. \n \n  \n  \n  \nRG\n\n\n3.2\nSection 20 process \n  \nThe start date for the “5 year” recharge will remain as at 1 April 2022  the Stage 2 process may have to be re-run but the date will not be adjusted \n  \nResponses to Section 20 Stage 2 Observations has been published and information provided where requested. Emley stated that some of the answers were inconclusive\, Ron asked her to e-mail where more detail is required and to raise these issues at the surgeries when they are convened \n \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n3.3\nCommunity Centre Fit-out \n  \nThe Community Centre Working Group have visited the Gascoyne CCs and the Barnsbury CC\, there is a meeting arranged for them to discuss progressing the brief for the fit out. \n \n  \nWO\n\n\n4.0\nTRA update \n \n\n\n  \n4.1\n  \nEmley provided an update on activities: \n  \n·       Half-term art project led by Andrew Mitchelson \n·       Input into the Resident Engagement Strategy with TPAS \n·       Now A Whatsapp Group for the Southside \n  \nFuture events: \n  \n·       Gardening event 6 March \n·       TRA meeting 7 March \n·       Kings Feast 19 March \n·       Charity Day for Autism 2nd April \n·       Well-being  classes (Zumba\, Pilates\, Yoga and meditation) \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n4.2\nIt was suggested that a Walkabout with Annette be arranged to address some repairs issues (Cables dangling from buildings etc). CS to arrange with her. \n \nSource\n\n\n4.3\nPA complained that posters are being stuck to the outside of new notice boards. Annette to be asked to provide TRA and / or Source Partnership with keys\nSource\n\n\n5.0\nITLA update\n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nSource continues to provide a limited on-site. Presence will increase when activities do. Very quiet in terms of residents approaching us for advice reflective of lack of progress to getting on site. \n  \nDiscussed the possibility of holding advice sessions around the mobilisation and site set-up using the presentation shared at the January RSG.  Design refresher suggested also. These to be programmed for the Spring. \n \n  \nSource\n\n\n6.0\nAny urgent business  \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nDay-to-day Service charges there is an on-going issue with completion and quality of work carried out.  BB asked that this be dealt with at the leaseholder surgeries \n \n  \n \n\n\n6.2\nJWM advised that Peter Gorman has passed away after a short illness recently. He was a long-standing member of the community and had been very active in the tenant management organisation and TRA in years gone by. The RSG asked for condolences to be passed to his family. \n \nJWM\n\n\n8.0 \nDate of next meeting \n \n\n\n  \n \nTo be confirmed subject to progress within the next few weeks \n  \n \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-28-feb-2022/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20220127T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20220127T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20220213T135743Z LAST-MODIFIED:20220213T135743Z UID:2104-1643310000-1643313600@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Steering Group Jan 2022 DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting \nheld on 27th January 2022 via Google Meet \n  \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr. Brian Bell (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Clare Potter (CP) \n4 residents: \nEP\, PD\, KM\, KH\n(resident’s names removed for public version) \n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nWilliam Owen (WO) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nJohn Morris (JM) \nMenekse Saitoglu\nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA)\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nApologies were received from residents JWM & AA. \nKathy was welcomed to the RSG; she has recently moved [to Kings Crescent].\n  \n  \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 17th November and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n2.1\nMinutes were agreed.\n\n\n\n  \n2.2\nBB noted that he did write to Judith Morrison\, Head of Leasehold Services to ask her to organise another meeting with northside blocks leaseholders re bills etc. TRA to let him know if dates are not agreed.\n  \n TRA \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3&4 update  \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n RG reported that on 10th January\, 3 pieces of correspondence had gone out: \ni) a letter to all residents to inform them that Durkan were the preferred bidder\, \nii) letters to Durkan informing them of this and to Mulalleys informing them that they were unsuccessful; and \niii) the S20 stage 2 Notice to all southside leaseholders. \n  \nNext steps are now to finalise the contract negotiations and enter into a contract by mid March. There may be some visible signs of works starting by the end of March\, e.g. bore holes to discharge planning conditions\, investigate possible adverse ground conditions before foundations start. At the same time\, Durkan will start to generate a Construction Management Plan.\n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n3.2\nRG presented 4 key aspects of the bid. \n1.   Pre-contract works. These will take approx. 5 months\, including developing detailed designs (M&E\, kitchen and bathroom details)\, investigating soil and ground for asbestos\, concrete\, ordering materials – in particular the pre cast concrete panels\, organising parking suspensions\, party wall agreements\, erecting site facilities (which will be in front of Datchworth Ct on the Queens Drive/Green Lanes side)\, respite facilities\, dismantling the community centre\, erecting hoarding\, stripping out the Weston Court garages and part of the podium. \n2.   Construction and phasing. The whole contract is scheduled for 140 weeks. Refurbishments will take place first\, starting at Bramfield Court and working round to Theobalds\, Datchworth and Weston Courts. Each block’s works will start within 3 months of each other\, 10 months per block\, 12 months for Weston Court. The refurbishment will be completed well in advance of the new build. \nThe respite centre will be situated within the estate. Durkan will explain their reasoning for this at Meet the Contractor events. (Residents  and LBH originally preferred these facilities to be sited outside the estate on Queens Drive). \nEP asked for an explanation of the reference to the Weston Court podium. RG described how the podium will be cut back slightly to make space for the work space underneath\, but there will still be a walkway outside front doors. EP also asked for confirmation of the location of the respite centre. RG confirmed\, illustrated with a presentation slide where the facilities will be located along with a temporary ball court and storage. \nRG – works will start with hoarding off areas and starting to take down garden fences and sheds in order to provide access for plant to install balconies. \nPD asked if the respite centre will have computers. RG – that is the intention\, based on lessons learnt from phase 1&2. He also queried removal of sheds from rear gardens. JM noted that the installation of balconies will be very disruptive but that gardens will be reinstated in full. \nPD – where will the columns go that will support the balconies? There are cables etc that run up the wall that need to be preserved. WO – there will be a full inspection of the gardens and individual issues before works start. PD also has a soakaway in his rear garden that he will not want to be damaged when scaffolding is installed. RG reassured that full surveys and individual consultations will take place before works start. BB emphasised the extent of disruption to gardens. \nRG continued with construction plans for the new build. This will commence within 4-6 months of start of refurbishment works and will proceed west to east\, i.e. DZ4\, DZ5N\, DZ5S\, DZ6N\, DZ6W\, DZ6S. 219 new homes will be built\, 4 retail units\, workspace\, community facilities and 3 courtyards. \nKM asked if the design of the public spaces had been completely worked up yet. RG replied that there will be an element of detailed design still to complete. Residents have requested a review of phase 1&2 play equipment\, so a workshop will be organised to discuss details of phase 3&4 landscaping etc. \n3.   Community Engagement.  Durkan are keen to follow up initial discussions with the TRA and Hackney Showroom. They have noted the need to bring the north and south sides of the estate together\, to produce engaging communications in a variety of formats and to have discussions around the fit out of the new community centre. They plan a series of workshops and wish to produce a Residents Charter. There is a desire to learn from phase 1&2. They will attend RSG\, TRA meetings and also organise dedicated communications meetings. One offer from them is regular site visits for residents to see first hand progress of the construction work. \n4.   Training & Employment. Durkan will promote site-based roles for local residents and provide funding\, to be agreed with the TRA and HS. They will have contractual apprenticeship and local labour targets.\n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n3.3\nSection 20 process.  RG reported that stage 2 consultation ends on 11th Feb. 3 households attended the surgeries on 24/1. Questions at these centred on timescales\, the discount eligibility and scope of works. RG announced that\, following representations from leaseholders\, the decision on the 5 year discount period has now been signed off and this will now start from 1/4/22 for all southside leaseholders. \nThe 3rd stage of the S20 process will start once the contract is signed at which point leaseholders will receive a detailed breakdown of costs applicable to them as individuals. EP asked for confirmation that contracts will be signed by the time that the stage 3 notice goes out. RG confirmed this will be the case.\n \n\n\n4.0\nTRA update \n \n\n\n  \n4.1\nEP reported back. The community-focussed meeting before Christmas was combined with a Winter Market which was successful. However\, the meeting itself was less well attended\, leading the TRA to look at different ways of engaging with residents. An ideas sheet is up on the wall at HS rear room for people to leave comments and suggestions. The Kings Feast was split between a children’s event and an adult one. The adult event was cancelled due to the covid concerns before Christmas as was a proposed theatre outing for elders and other events throughout January. TRA and HS are planning to get things back up and running in February with the resumption of the homework club (now transitioning into a youth club) and the Friday lunch club. \nBB asked about the Community Centre Working Group. WO noted that there is a meeting arranged for 4th Feb to discuss possible visits to other centres and progressing the brief for the fit out.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nITLA update\n \n\n\n  \n5.1\nCS reported that Source’s time recently has been spent supporting leaseholders during the S20 process and helping to facilitate surgeries/meetings. We have also spoken about the imminent decommissioning of the community centre. We plan to establish a regular time to be available at HS to raise awareness of Durkan’s emerging proposed approach to the building works and community engagement.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n6.0\nAny urgent business  \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\nKH raised the ongoing issues for northside leaseholders with EWS forms and the cladding on the blocks. BB reported that a comprehensive briefing had been provided by officers but it is confidential. His view is that the problem lies 100% with the lenders and councillors have been reassured that the other issues are relatively minor. There may be another meeting with offices on this in 2-3 weeks time. \nKH emphasised that he and fellow leaseholders want the regeneration to work and that the community is brought together. But many are concerned that the blocks contain the Kingspan cladding that was present at Grenfell. If the EWS rating was compliant then there wouldn’t be a problem. There is dissatisfaction that LBH are not taking their responsibilities seriously and just laying all the blame on the lenders. BB re-emphasised his point about lenders and that the buildings were compliant when the products were installed. However\, LBH do want to resolve these issues. If elements do need to be removed then a capital works programme will need to be agreed across the borough. He acknowledged that the letter that went out just before Christmas was poorly expressed. \nKM added that it is important that people can work together on this and that it is sad that a problem like this threatens the good will that exists. \nKH noted that many leaseholders will be stuck with existing mortgages as lenders won’t now lend on the properties and LBH cannot just step away from this.  BB denied the Council were stepping away. CP added assurances that officers are working on this as a priority and that everyone’s ‘eyes are still on the ball.’ \nKH – Clare Williams’ explanations at the last TRA meeting didn’t leave leaseholders satisfied. Who else can we contact? RG explained that the Resident Safety Team are the people who are dealing with this. This team is led by Mikel Jankowski. He also reminded the meeting that this is a national issue – not just a local\, Hackney problem. A Building Safety Act is imminent and there is an onus on LBH to have a resident engagement strategy in place. \nBB – Steve Waddington as Director of Housing is an officer further up the hierarchy if residents are not satisfied with responses to date. \nKH raised the Government’s Building Safety Fund; if the view is that LBH don’t need it now\, if they decide later they do\, will the fund be exhausted? BB – if we’re eligible for funding\, we will apply for it. CP added that this point is taken and will raise it with Michal. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nBB \n \n\n\n8.0 \nDate of next meeting \n \n\n\n \n28th February 2022\, 7.00. URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-jan-2022/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211117T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211117T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20220213T122133Z LAST-MODIFIED:20220213T122133Z UID:2095-1637175600-1637179200@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Steering Group Nov 2021 DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting \nheld on 17th November 2021 via Google Meet \n  \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr. Brian Bell (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Clare Potter (CP) \n6 residents (names removed for public version)\n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nWilliam Owen (WO) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nJohn Morris (JM) \nMenekse Saitoglu\n  \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nNo apologies were received.\n  \n  \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 22nd September and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nOne correction was noted from 5.1. The minute should have read: ‘MUF to be invited to a meeting specific to the design intent for the landscaping and play facilities.’ Subsequent to the September meeting\, MUF have met with WO and colleagues on site. \n \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3&4 update  \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nIndicative timetable for contractor selection \nRG thanked all for participating in the selection process and for their patience during such a long procurement period. A preferred bidder has now been identified and approved at the internal approval panel\, the Gateway that comprises all relevant senior managers. Tender levels were approved and risks (e.g. sales element\, future management and maintenance commitments) all noted. The Cabinet Procurement and Insourcing Committee (CPIC) will consider the recommendation on 6/12. The report will be publicly available on 26/11 but with the identity of the recommended contractor and commercially sensitive information in a confidential section. The publicly accessible section of the report will include descriptions of the S20 process\, design changes\, risks considered\, sustainability and how the tenders were evaluated and scored. It will be possible to watch the CPIC meeting on 6/12\, in person or via livestream but the public parts will be short\, with discussion about the confidential parts of the report exempt from public viewing. Questions can be submitted to the meeting from members of the public but because of the notice needed\, they will need to be submitted at the same time as the report becomes public. However\, in exceptional circumstance\, the Chair may allow a late submission for consideration.  If approved\, the Council’s Chief Executive will have delegated authority to enter into a contract with the successful bidder\, subject to the S20 process.\n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n3.2\n  \nS20 process \nRG reported that the aim is to issue Stage 2 Notices on 10/1/22 with the statutory consultation period ending on 11/2/22. Surgeries for leaseholders will be set up in the 3rd or 4th week of January. The Q&A section from Stage 1 will be amended\, with a likely change being the  timing of the start of the 5 year discount period to a date\, to be decided\, that will be the agreed start on site date for the refurbishment works rather than the practical completion dates of the different blocks. The aim is to respond to all leaseholder observations will be by the end of February so that contracts can be signed in March. \n  \nEP asked if any more information will be given to leaseholders before January. RG replied that all information will go into the Stage 2 Notice and accompanying letter and FAQs in January\, so\, no. \n  \nEP – many leaseholders are still very unhappy and it seems their ability to influence further decisions will now be taken away because the CPIC will have approved the appointment of the tenderer and the costs by the time of the Stage 2 Notice. RG replied that the recommendation to cabinet is subject to completion of the S20 process and there will be due regard paid to submissions as part of this process. BB added that objections would have to be quite fundamental and valid to change the approach. RG emphasised the amount of time and effort that has gone into making sure the quality and price of the contractors’ tenders has met very tight criteria. He also confirmed that the whole package of works\, refurbishment and new build will be let as one contract and has been the subject of one planning permission\, although acknowledges that they form two different elements. \n  \nEP is still concerned about the huge financial impact on non-resident leaseholders. BB felt that this has been answered at length and that leaseholders who rent out their properties have made this decision to become landlords and it is reasonable for them to not qualify for the discount. CP reiterated this point. RG added that individual leaseholders will be able to talk to the Leasehold Team about personal circumstances and cases of financial hardship will be considered. \n \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n3.3\n  \nIndicative timescales and other issues with phase 3&4 \nRG noted that after contract signing\, mobilisation works will include surveys to ascertain presence of asbestos\, underground obstructions and issues around drainage of the site. Other activities will include planning submissions for the design changes and site set up including erection of hoardings\, site facilities etc.  Preparatory works could include strip out of Weston garages. \n  \nThere will also be initial events organised by the contractor around their construction management plan\, communications\, resident liaison\, attendance at RSG\, workshops on lessons learnt from phase 1&2\, investigation on connecting up to the existing CHP\, drainage\, decommissioning of the current community centre and support for community activities. BB emphasised that the drainage under and around Weston Court is a key issue that he has expressed concern about. \n  \nParty Wall Notices  \nWO is leading on this. Potentially at the same time as the Section 20 consultation\, Party Wall Notices will be sent to all leaseholders so that where works take place\, e.g. construction of balconies\, that will affect the existing building structure\, there are surveyors appointed to ensure that the previous condition is reinstated.  Notices will go out before contracts are signed so there is time for the process to be conducted properly. EP asked if leaseholders will have to pay if they wish to appoint their own surveyor. WO – no\, but surveyors will need to be approved by LBH and need to be RICS certified. \n  \nFire safety and cladding \nKH raised the issue of phase 1&2 new blocks no longer being compliant with current fire safety regulations. He was concerned about his own and neighbours’ circumstances but also asked how LBH will address this for phase 3&4. RG replied that this is one reason why the tender process was prolonged; this formed an extra section that tenderers had to address in the Best and Final Offer. The contractor will be obliged to provide EWS1 forms. LBH has made every effort to anticipate as best they can what fire regs. will be in the future\, and ensure full compliance. Another element of the tender process was the implementation of a record of building components for the new blocks for reference if issues arise in the future.  Building materials will be different from those used in phase 1&2 but LBH can only comply with whatever legislation is in place at the time of construction. \n  \nKH emphasised that leaseholders are trapped with many mortgage providers now not lending because of the materials used in the phase 1&2 construction. RG acknowledged this as a nationwide problem. KH asked what plans LBH have to remediate the situation. AA added that information is produced in plenty of time\, so LBH must have had notice that an approach to this problem was needed.  BB and CP offered to take up this issue as Councillors. \n \n \n\n\n4.0\nFeedback from Community Centre Working Group\n \n\n\n4.1\nThe working group met this morning (17th November) and consisted of Emley\, Andrew Mitchelson\, Remi Murrain\, RG\, WO and JM. Good progress was made with a discussion about possible uses and management of the new CC and consequently\, what sort of fit out will be needed. It will be important that the group can meet the contractor asap for early discussions.  A wider resident consultation will take place in January with an update at the next RSG.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nTRA update\n \n\n\n  \n5.1\nEP reported that the family fun mornings are still happening monthly. The half term art project was successful. BB noted that the contractor’s hoardings will need artwork. CP suggested making sure that Andrew Mitchelson is involved in this. \nChama\, Hackney Showroom’s Engagement worker has started monthly drop ins on the first Thursday of each month for anyone to visit HS with ideas\, to volunteer or just to find out what HS are doing. \nThe TRA meeting scheduled for 7th December will be preceded by a winter market and the meeting itself will be informal to encourage people to get involved. \nHackney Showroom are organising another Kings Feast on 11th December with family entertainment between 5 and 7 pm\, then adults 7 to 9 pm. \nBB noted that Annette Reid\, KC Housing Officer is off on sick leave. Her manager\, Andrea Scott is providing an ad hoc management service with existing resources.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n6.0\nITLA update \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\nCS gave an update. Source Partnership’s contract is currently on an extension. Source are keen to get back working on site and we will be discussing with Hackney Showroom possibly using their facilities once the Vince Murrain Centre is decommissioned. There is Source equipment and furniture in the VM Centre which can be recycled for use elsewhere within KC. \n  \nWe are working with Chama (HS) to introduce him to vulnerable and/or elderly residents who might be interested in the Friday lunch club or might benefit from some support for e.g. shopping or just more regular contact.\n \n\n\n7.0\nAny urgent business  \n \n\n\n  \n7.1\nKH wished to voice dissatisfaction about the continued repair issues in the northside blocks. Lifts were out of order again at Wallington Court and bike thieves are at work again. Video evidence of the latter was sent to LBH but with no response. \n  \nWO gave advice to use the repairs email box and the webchat function to report repairs. He added that it is best to not email several LBH officers at once as this results in no one taking responsibility to respond; it’s sometimes unclear who’s job it is to reply in these instances. \n  \nEP noted that there are still many phase 1&2 issues unresolved.  Service Charges are now the big issue with many leaseholders experiencing significant increases. Leaseholders have asked for another meeting with Judith Morrison but so far she has not responded. BB offered to help contact her.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nBB \n \n\n\n  \n7.2\nAA asked if the cyber attack had compromised residents’ personal data. BB stated that the main problem was not so much the leakage of data\, rather that the attack rendered older computer systems useless. CP reported that a minor breach of data did occur and people affected have been contacted.  CP added that the attack had been a serious issue for some services e.g. children’s services and officers have spent considerable time resolving these.  There is information on the LBH website and an email to contact if further follow up is required.\n \n\n\n  \n7.3\nJM offered apologies to Federica (residemt) who joined this meeting for the first time and who wasn’t introduced at the start of the meeting.\n \n\n\n8.0 \nDate of next meeting \n \n\n\n  \n \n27th January 2022\, 7.00.\n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-nov-2021/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20210922T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20210922T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20220213T133916Z LAST-MODIFIED:20220213T133916Z UID:2102-1632337200-1632340800@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Steering Group Sept 2021 DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting \nheld on 22nd September 2021 via Google Meet \n  \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr. Brian Bell (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Clare Potter (CP) \n3 residents: \nEP\, ES\, PD\n  \n(resident names removed in public version)\n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nWilliam Owen (WO) \nJohn Morris (JM)\nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA)\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\nApologies were received from residents HC (who asked for her intention to step down from the RSG to be noted)\, KH\, JWM\, PA\, AA\, Carol Squires (Source)\n  \n \n\n\n2.0 \nPeter Sim\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\nCouncillor Bell and Councillor Potter shared some memories of Peter Sim who died on 23rd August. Peter was the longest standing RSG member and a tenacious advocate for Kings Crescent residents and for the progression of the estate’s improvement and redevelopment.  A minutes silence was observed.\n \n\n\n3.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 27th July 2021 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n3.1\nThe minutes from the last meeting were agreed as accurate. All matters arising to be discussed on the agenda.\n\n\n\n4.0\nPhase 3&4 update  \n \n\n\n  \n4.1\nContractor procurement update \nRG reported that negotiations with the 2 bidding contractors are now complete but the deadline for submission of their Best & Final Offers has now been extended to 30th September. This is in response to the recent holiday period and the requirement for them to provide additional detailed information for LBH that was recently requested to establish a comprehensive Building Information Modelling system. This provides a detailed record of all components of new buildings once built. This is particularly important for setting in place a fire safety record. ES confirmed that this comprises 3D modelling and is now becoming standard across the industry. \nRG stressed that although this means more delays\, LBH are working to achieve the best quality scheme possible. Post Grenfell\, there are more safety requirements to deal with. CP acknowledged the frustration this will undoubtedly cause for residents but it is important that the Council meets all these obligations. \nRG reported that the programme is now aiming for a Cabinet approval for the successful tenderer on 6th December\, with contract signing January 2022. There will be 3 – 6 months set up before start on site in Spring/early Summer 2022.\n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n4.2\nSouthside leaseholders S20 \nRG reported that the Stage 2 Notices will now be sent out in January to avoid arriving with leaseholders just before Christmas.  They cannot be sent out before the Cabinet approval as the identity of the contractor has to be included as well as cost estimates\, total costs broken down by block and component. The specification will also be available on request. There will be surgeries organised for individual owners to discuss personal circumstances and to get clarity on the Notice and payment options. These will be held approx. half way through the statutory 30 day consultation period. \nEP raised the issue of the stress this has been causing leaseholders who have no way of planning for the future\, not knowing when the 5year clawback of charges period will start. She asked that LBH seriously consider setting a start date for the 5 years now rather than leaving it as the practical completion date. This could be from now\, contract signing date or start on site date. RG indicated that internally\, this has been raised and a response to the project slippage is being considered. The S20 letter will contain information on any changes to the current arrangements. CP asked that her and Cllr Bell’s weight be added to the representations being made to senior management for this review.\n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n4.3\nPre start on site engagement \nRG noted an important piece of work will be around the fit out of the new community facility in DZ5N. The programming of the new build is not known but early decisions on how the space can be fitted out to match the community’s needs and aspirations will ensure it is fit for purpose when completed. The space\, at 195 sq m is slightly smaller than the Vince Murrain centre and roughly the same as Unit C. There is a fit out budget. Some LBH officers are looking at options for the future management of the new centre and using Woodberry Down as an example of how social businesses can be involved. \nRG would like a clear brief agreed with residents involved in the decision-making\, via the RSG\, TRA and Hackney Showroom. An example would be whether a commercial kitchen is required. Many at the Ladderswood visit in Enfield liked the size of the community centre there but felt that the size and facilities in the kitchen were unnecessary. However\, EP pointed out that a kitchen similar in size to the one in Vince Murrain made it possible to run small cooking classes and to make simple hot meals\, while the kitchen in the Hackney Showroom facility is not big enough or well enough equipped to do this. \nCP – a commercial kitchen is more about the facilities and standard of the equipment rather than the size of the room. \nThere was discussion around the need for a business case for a particular approach to the CC fit out. However\, there has been consultation through surveys on what residents would like to see in a community facility and EP added that through the activities now running at Unit C\, the TRA are able to judge demand and interest from users that can inform decisions on the new space. \nIt was agreed to set up a Working Group to explore options and produce a brief. EP to canvass interest among residents to join this\, RG to identify relevant Council officers to participate and JM to help facilitate. \nAction – the Working Group to be constituted by the next RSG meeting on 17/11/21.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nRG\, EP\, JM \n \n\n\n5.0\nPhase 1 & 2 update \n \n\n\n  \n5.1\nWO reported back. \n·     Still waiting for Higgins to produce a programme for venting the lift mechanisms. As soon as this is available\, a letter will be sent to all affected residents telling them when their lift will be taken out of service for the work to be carried out. \n·     Work is still progressing on reconciling energy bills with use. A consultant has been commissioned to inspect the energy centre and they will use a monitoring system that individual residents can use to check their usage against what the energy centre is saying is produced. WO asked for volunteers to have a small piece of equipment fitted. This will produce anonymised data on energy usage. ES volunteered. EP also offered to ask other residents through the TRA facebook site. She also suggested targeting residents who have experienced problems with billing. WO agreed with this. \nWO also reported that the relevant section of the LBH IT system is now able to process refunds and the new charges from April 2021 and an update will be available for the ETRA meeting on 12th Oct. \n·     ES raised an issue with weeds in the Radwell courtyard and who is responsible for keeping this area tidy. WO is on site before the end of the week and will take photos. \n·     There was discussion about responsibilities for the maintenance of the courtyards\, play equipment and the plants\, shrubs and fruit bushes. EP asked who to get permission from if the TRA wanted to remove the metal structures that were supposed to be the frames for a fruit maze in one of the courtyards. These are in the shade and haven’t grown. The metal frames are now just a hazard. WO stated that ultimately it is Housing Services who will give the go ahead. He added that he had seen emails between Annette Reid and Eray Taylor on this issue. \nThis discussion led to a wider one around a lack of clarity on how decisions are made to change designs and layouts and in some cases to remove items that were installed as part of the original development. \nES thought that the original designers should be consulted first before changes to their structures are made and are leaseholders paying for these alterations? \n  \nRG agreed that MUF should explain the rationale behind their design. It is important that design intent can be explained and lessons learnt when these are later contradicted by H&S considerations. \nES noted that this is a common tension but that if designers can justify their ideas\, H&S should be satisfied. \nIt was agreed that MUF should be invited to an RSG meeting to talk through these issues. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n EP \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n6.0\nTRA update\n \n\n\n  \n6.1\nEP reported that the AGM took place on 15th Sept. There was a delay to starting the meeting while waiting for a quorum but this was achieved and a new committee was elected with EP still Chair. \nActivities are now restarting with the homework club\, Family Fun mornings and many other events being run by Hackney Showroom. It is proposed to make the Kings Feast a regular occasion\, with the next one in December then again in March 2022.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n7.0\nITLA update \n \n\n\n \nThere were no updates from Source.\n \n\n\n8.0\nAny urgent business  \n \n\n\n \nNone\n \n\n\n9.0 \nDate of next meeting \n \n\n\n  \n \n17th November\, 7.00.\n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-sept-2021/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20210727T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20210727T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20210727T172721Z LAST-MODIFIED:20220213T124814Z UID:1738-1627412400-1627416000@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Steering group Meeting July 2021 DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n\nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting \nheld on 27th July 2021 via Google Meet \n  \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr. Brian Bell (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Clare Potter (CP) \n7 residents: \nEP\, JWM\, KH\, PA\, PD\, HC\, TD\n(Names removed for public version)\n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nWilliam Owen (WO) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nJohn Morris (JM) \nMenekse Saitoglu \nSam Curtis Lindsay (SCL)\nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nHackney Showroom\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\nApologies were received from residents ES and RA\n\n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 26th May 2021 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\nThe minutes from the last meeting were agreed as accurate. All matters arising to be discussed on the agenda. \n  \nIt was noted that the sewer behind the Vince Murrain Community Centre has finally been repaired with a permanent cover.\n \n\n\n3.0\nHackney Showroom update  \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\nSam updated the meeting with the planned events over the coming months organised by HS: \n·   14/8 – street party 12 noon to 6.00 pm to launch the refitted HS/TRA space. \n·   Everyone on the estate should have received a brochure listing activities for the rest of 2021. \n·   16/8 for 2 weeks Futureheads for 8-11 year olds. On line sign up. All activities are free for KC residents. \n·   From 3/9\, every Friday an over 60s lunch club\, 12 -2. In parallel with this\, HS are also launching a befriending service. \n·   The TRA is restarting the homework club in the HS space from 6/9. \n·   Disco Loco library on Tuesdays 4-6 with reading and activities \n·   Easy Rollers – soft play and music for under 1s between 10 and 11 am\, under 5s 11 to 12. \n·   Kings Feast – a meal and quiz\, kids before 7.00\, adults 7.00 to 9.00 \n·   15/9 TRA AGM \n·   TRA family fun mornings once a month from 7/10 – coffee and drop in to chat to Chama\, HS Community Co-ordinator. \n·   The space will also be open for hirers. \n·   Once open\, HS will be at Murrain Rd 10-6 Monday to Friday. \nCP asked what the arrangements will be for local residents to run activities. \nSCL confirmed that for events run by HS there will be no charge for KC residents but if someone is running an activity for which they charge\, a small subsidised charge will be levied on their use of the space. \nJMW to send SCL details of someone she knows who is interested in running seated exercise classes.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n JMW \n \n\n\n4.0\nUnit C update\n \n\n\n  \n4.1\nWO reported that there are a few snags to sort out before hand over. He showed some photos of the internal fit out.\n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nPhase 3&4 update  \n \n\n\n  \n5.1\nRG reported that the 6th and final negotiation meeting is due to be held next week. A total of 12 weeks of negotiations. He was encouraged by the attention to detail and the involvement of senior directors\, demonstrating a keenness to win the work. \nIssues that have been challenging or been the subject of value engineering include: \n·        Uncertainty about pricing and availability of pre cast concrete such that part of the ground floor flank elevation to the main courtyard on DZ5N has been changed to brick \n·     Alternative lift supplier being discussed with the LBH lifts team for sales flats \nSavings on refurbishment have been considered in the light of a desire to maintain design parity with the new build blocks. \n·     RG presented proposals to retain brickwork to walkways facing inwards to the estate. EP\, PA and JWM were in favour of this as long as existing metal work and other retained elements are cleaned up.  JWM asked if the balcony walkways would be resurfaced. RG confirmed they will. \nThe view is that the external changes may require a planning application as a material amendment to existing permission. \nFurther value engineering proposals will result in: \n·     Not replacing Weston Court roof. The condition survey indicates that the roof has a 15 year life. The view is that preserving the roof is more sustainable than its replacement with a green one. RG acknowledged that this will put Weston Court out of synch with the other blocks in terms of future roof replacement programmes. PA agrees with this. \nKH asked if brick is not considered a better option visually. RG – specifying pre cast concrete does fit with fashion but there is an aspiration to specify a mix of pcc and brick. \nCP asked if these reductions will result in a lower charge for leaseholders. RG replied that inevitably\, the less is spent on the refurbishment\, the lower the leaseholder recharge will be. \nHC queried the rationale for changing roofs given the release of carbon when carrying out building works. RG agreed with the principle that it is more sustainable not to change the roof. \nCP asked if\, when the Weston Ct roof does need replacing it will be replaced with a green roof. RG assumed that this would be the case unless there has been further technological developments when this time comes. \n·     Omission of external resident stores from spec. is another potential saving. JWM strongly opposed to this; they are used extensively\, though she acknowledged they can attract ASB. RG suggested the option of identifying alternative storage facilities. Fire safety is also a consideration in removing stores where they are currently situated. BB asked what is proposed for the areas where the stores will have been removed. RG replied that there are no plans at the moment; it could be worked through with residents and the contractors. \nCP asked if data could be brought to the next meeting demonstrating how well used the stores are at the moment. WO to compile a report for the next RSG. \n  \nBB asked for an updated timetable. RG reported: \n  \no   Final negotiation meeting 6/8/21 \no   Best and final offer to be submitted by 23/8/21 \no   S20 stage 2 to be issued once the result of the tender is known – Sept. \no   A surgery for leaseholder queries will be organised mid Oct. \no   End of October completion of S20 process. \no   Cabinet approval on 6/10/21. \no   Contract signed in November. \no   3rd stage S20 notice is more by way of information and can be issued after contract entered into. \no   Spring 2022 start on site. \n  \nEP raised the timescale of the S20 process: if cabinet has given the go ahead early in October\, there will not have been the opportunity for leaseholders to put concerns via S20 consultation before the cabinet approval. RG stated that the issues are well known and there will be a delegated authority to deal with ongoing concerns at Director level. \n  \nBB emphasised that leaseholders can only be charged a maximum of what they have been notified in the S20 notices. It looks likely that there will now be reductions for all blocks. \n  \nEP asked for an update on leaseholder buy backs. RG reported that they have continued and that 2 or 3 more are being processed at the moment.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nWO \n  \n \n\n\n  \n5.2\nThere was a site visit to [one of the potential contractor’s] sites this morning. BB asked for feedback. \n  \nPA found it interesting. The finishes and the show flats seemed well designed\, despite a few small issues with cupboards and doors. The community centre was an impressive size and similar to the size of the planned CC at Kings Crescent. \n  \nPD thought common areas were a generous size and again\, finishes looked good. \n  \nBB noted the balconies that looked out over a very busy road and the underground car park apparently flooded. \n  \nWO ran through photos and videos he took on the visit. \n  \nRG noted that one area of discussion arose around the desire to start the conversation about the fit out of our community centre early.\n \n\n\n6.0\nPhase 1 & 2 update \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\nWO reported that many defects have now been resolved. An external consultant went round the energy centre and has asked to speak to a few residents about monitoring their energy use over a period of time. \n  \nLBH are still waiting for a response from Higgins on resolving the problem with venting the lift shafts. WO will let residents know when remedial works are starting. \n  \nKH reported that the Wallington lift is very noisy. WO to note and pass onto the lift consultant. He also noted that a new lift contractor is now in place for LBH – Apex. \n  \nBB asked that this is kept on the agenda for future meetings.\n  \n  \n  \n WO \n  \n  \nWO \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n7.0\nTRA update \n \n\n\n  \n7.1\nEP reported that the TRA had their quarterly community-focused meeting on 10/6. An event around the allotments was organised on 20th June; there is another one this Sunday. \n  \nThe homework club is switching to HS in September. \n  \nThe TRA secured a grant so that HS’s Futureheads programme can be extended into a second week. \n  \nTRA AGM is on 15th Sept. Nominations for new committee members are welcome.\n  \n  \n \n\n\n8.0\nITLA update \n \n\n\n  \n8.1\n JM gave an update: Source have resumed a presence at the CC office on Mondays and Wednesdays but there have been very few visitors. We will take a break over August and review in September. \n  \nWe have been dealing with leaseholder buyback requests and anticipate  more work when the next stage of S20 Notices go out.\n \n\n\n9.0\nAny urgent business  \n \n\n\n \n None\n \n\n\n10.0 \nDate of next meeting \n \n\n\n  \n \n22nd September 2021\, 7.00. We will seek advice nearer the date if it will be possible to meet in person.\n \n\n\n\n\nAgenda:\n\n\n\n\nAgenda item \nLead \n\n\n1\n  \nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n \n\n\n2\nNotes of previous meeting held 26th May 2021 and any matters arising not elsewhere on the agenda \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n3\nHackney Showroom – update and future activities \n \nNina\, Sam (HS)\n\n\n4\n  \nUnit C update \n \nWill (LBH)\n\n\n5\nPhase 3 & 4 \na)     Update on progress with contractor procurement \nb)     Site visits – Ladderswood Estate 27th July \n \n  \nRon (LBH) \nRon (LBH) / John (Source) \n \n\n\n6\nPhase 1 & 2 \n \nWill (LBH) \n \n\n\n7\nTRA update \n \nEmley (TRA Chair)\n\n\n8 \n \nITLA update\nSource\n\n\n9\n  \nAny urgent business \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n \n\n\n10\nDate of next meeting \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-meeting-july-2021/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20210526T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20210526T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20210423T123559Z LAST-MODIFIED:20220213T132502Z UID:1609-1622055600-1622059200@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Steering group meeting May 2021 DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting \nheld on 26th May 2021 via Google Meet \n  \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr. Brian Bell (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Clare Potter (CP) \n5 residents: \nEP\, JWM\, KH\, PA\, PD\n  \n  \n(residents names removed for public version)\n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nWilliam Owen (WO) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nJohn Morris (JM)\nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\nApologies were received from residents JG\, PS\, NJ\, TD and AF. \nBB asked it to be noted that he would call on Peter Sim and Alfred as they have been unable to attend any meetings since they started to take place remotely.\n  \n BB\n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 31st March 2021 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n2.1\nThe minutes from the last meeting were agreed as accurate. All matters arising to be discussed on the agenda.\n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3 & 4 \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\nUpdate on progress with contractor procurement – RG \nWeek 4 of negotiations has now started with the 2 remaining tenderers. One tenderer dropped out as they were realistic about their likely inability to meet the budget target. The 2 tenderers are very keen to win the work and have devoted a lot of resources to achieve a deliverable programme within budget. Both MDs have been involved\, demonstrating commitment from senior managers within the organisations. \nRG expects another two rounds of negotiations before a Best & Final Offer in early July; the whole period of negotiation will have taken approx. 8-9 weeks. One challenge the tenderers are facing at the moment is getting commitments from pre-cast concrete suppliers at the necessary price and scale. This illustrates the issue of achieving savings while retaining the integrity of the design. LBH are also looking at alternative specs for the new build in the areas of structural engineering and M&E\, so alternative specs for lifts\, lighting etc. \nScheduled for the selection of a contractor in July\, with internal approvals (including Cabinet) in September. The 2nd stage of the S20 process would be due to complete at the end of August\, with stage 3 completing at the end of October. Contracts would be signed in mid November with start on site March 2022. \nBB asked which contractor dropped out. RG informed the meeting that it was United Living.\n \n\n\n  \n3.2\nSite visits \n  \nThese have been proposed in order for the tenderers to provide some exemplar projects for RSG members and LBH to visit. [One potential contractor] have offered a visit to Thamesmead to illustrate a project that is completed and one on site. [The landlord] are welcoming the opportunity too. RG acknowledged the distance away from Kings Crescent and will talk to [contractor] about other possible options. [Another contractor] have offered sites in Enfield and Lewisham. JM reported that dates being proposed are in w/c 7th June but week day visits are a problem for some residents.  BB suggested looking at Saturdays 12th or 26th. He would prefer the same group to be at all visits for consistent comparison. JWM asked if a photographic or video record of the visits could be taken for those who can’t make the dates. RG agreed.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nRG\n\n\n  \n3.3 \n \nFeedback from tenderers’ meetings with TRA and Hackney Showroom \nRG thanked Emley\, Nina and Sam from Hackney Showroom and JM for participating in the ‘added value’ meetings with the contractors. EP felt that both were very open to hearing about what the TRA and HS are planning and seemed responsive to helping meet their aspirations if successful. EP also emphasised the point she made about wishing for early community involvement in fitting out the new community space to be built as part of the new development.\n \n\n\n4.0\nUnit C update\n \n\n\n  \n4.1\nWO gave feedback on the new timescales for the fit out. The building contract has been signed off following resolution of a few queries from London Fire Brigade. Contract will be signed tomorrow (27th May). Start on site scheduled for 7th June with estimated completion in 6 weeks. Building Control will need to sign off at the end of the process. Overall completion now likely to be end July/beginning August.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nPhase 1&2 update  \n \n\n\n  \n5.1\nWO gave feedback on the Post Occupancy Evaluation survey. He noted that there were more responses than expected and they were well thought through and articulate. The single biggest group of responses came from shared ownership properties. There was a wide spread of scores by block and by tenure and the message was similar across all. Highlights of the responses included: \n·    heating and plumbing issues were a common cause of concern \n·    winter gardens and balconies were generally welcomed \n·    problems with front doors and bike sheds were also highlighted. (CCTV in bike sheds is due to be installed very soon). \n·    in terms of services\, repairs received the lowest scores (both for speed of completion and confusion over who to contact) \n·    increases in energy costs a major concern (the Energy Team in LBH are investigating this) \nActions include: \n·    the problem with the lifts has been identified as overheating in a key part of the mechanism; ventilation measures are being investigated. \n·    new door handles have been fitted to Kimpton and Sandon \nWO felt that although many of the issues are not new to officers\, it has been useful to convey to colleagues in other departments the concerns expressed by residents. BB concurred that the exercise has been helpful and it proves that the issues are widespread – not just a few people complaining loudly. \nKH asked if LBH are looking at lift issues in all the blocks. WO replied that the assumption now is that the problems experienced in Kimpton and Sandon are common to all blocks. The mitigation measure of installing some extra ventilation is now about identifying where this should be – in the control panel\, in the lobby area? \nKH added that the lifts are very noisy and he is surprised that these modern lifts do make so much noise. WO explained that the plan is to solve the overheating problem\, isolate that as an issue then look at other factors. \nEP expressed concern at the number of people still reporting that the emergency button is not working and are still getting stuck in the lift. It is frustrating that experts apparently confirm that the lifts are ok while residents know there are still problems. \nKH mentioned that although signs in lifts say not to call the Fire Brigade in case of emergency\, if the lift engineer is e.g. 2 hours away\, people will call the FB.\n \n\n\n6.0\nTRA update \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\nEP reported on recent meetings. There has been an ETRA meeting since the last RSG. One outcome was a promised separate meeting with Leasehold Services.  BB agreed to help chase the leasehold section for a further meeting. \nAnother major issue that arose was the ongoing concerns over electric meters overcharging. RG stated that problems are made complex by the need to bring together so many departments within the Council. Regen is not necessarily the best team to resolve these. BB acknowledged the time it takes to resolve problems. \nThere is a community activity-oriented TRA meeting on 10th June and an AGM in September. New committee members would be very welcome.\n  \n  \n  \nBB \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n7.0\nITLA update \n \n\n\n  \n7.1\nCS reported back. Source had hoped to be able to be back on site; Community Halls Team were slow to respond to our Risk Assessment and request to be allowed back into the Vince Murrain CC office.  BB to take this up with Community Halls. \nCP asked if the capping off of the sewer pipe was still a problem. JWM said she saw someone around the rear of the centre\, so they could have been fixing this. WO to investigate if this work has been carried out.\n  \nBB \n  \nWO \n \n\n\n8.0\nAny urgent business\n \n\n\n 8.1\nNone\n \n\n\n9.0\nDate of next meeting \n \n\n\n  \n9.1\n27th July 2021\, 7.00. We will seek advice nearer the date if it will be possible to meet in person. \nEP asked if the Stage 2 S20 Notices will have gone out by the time of the next meeting. RG replied that\, technically on current timescales\, yes but cannot be guaranteed. In any event there will be an update on the process at the meeting.\n \n\n\n\n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-meeting-may-2021/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20210331T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20210331T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20210318T141942Z LAST-MODIFIED:20210423T123037Z UID:1524-1617217200-1617220800@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Steering group meeting March 2021 DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \nMinutes\n\n\n\nIn Attendance:\nCllr. Brian Bell (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Clare Potter (CP) \nRon Greenwood (RG) \nWilliam Owen (WO) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nJohn Morris (JM) \nMenekse Saitoglu \n7 residents (members of RSG)\nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nApologies were received from Hana Chambers\, Natalie Crouchley (who is moving from Kings Crescent)\, Peter Sim and Alfred Fiorentini. \n \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 8th February 2021 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nThe minutes from the last meeting were agreed as accurate. All matters arising to be discussed on agenda. \n  \nBB reminded members of the RSG that their role was to represent the whole community of Kings Crescent or at least their own block. It was not a forum for private or personal business to be raised. \n \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3 & 4 \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nProcurement update – RG \n  \nThe three tenders have been submitted to an LBH moderation meeting and elements were assessed by a resident evaluation panel. LBH QS are now reviewing the commercial aspects of the bids and some contractual requirements. LBH are aiming for maximum risk to be borne by the contractor so there are cost implications to this approach. There is also a check going on with LBH Legal and Procurement teams to ensure that all requirements have been complied with. \n  \nThe negotiation period will now start on 21/4/21 and last approx. 6 weeks\, with a favoured contractor hopefully emerging late May. The internal approval process will start in June alongside the Stage 2 S20 notice which involves a 30 day period for representation back to the Council. Stage 3 and its 30 day notice period will start in August. Concurrently\, work on preparing a cabinet report will be carried out with a likely Cabinet meeting to approve the awarding of the contract in September (subject to the S20 process). Contract mobilisation will run from approx. Oct 2021 to Jan 2022 with start on site predicted for late Jan next year. \n  \nRG recorded thanks to the Evaluation Panel for their contribution; LBH want to capture the best of all the qualitative sections of all 3 bids to persuade the successful contractor to adopt them. \n  \nJG asked if the negotiation period meant that all 3 bids were over budget. RG confirmed that this was the case and that LBH are looking for savings but not ones that will compromise fundamental design elements. \n  \nJG asked what happens if there is no agreement on price after the negotiation period. RG is confident that agreement will be reached and added that the bidders know the overall budget so know where they need to make savings if they want to be successful. \n  \nJG asked if any change of scope of the works will impact on the S20 liabilities of leaseholders. RG – yes and these will be reflected in the costings in the Stage 2 S20 notice. This stage of the process cannot take place until LBH know the costs from the successful contractor. \n  \nPD asked if Early Contractor Involvement will result in any change to detailed design. RG noted that contractors will be looking at supply chain savings\, e.g on kitchen fittings or on consultancy costs (e.g. structural engineers). LBH will not allow an impact on the external appearance. Any savings on building standards will be on internal specifications. \n  \nKH asked if issues around costs might be addressed by adding more stories onto planned blocks. RG – definitely not. BB added that this would need a new planning application which isn’t feasible. \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.2\n  \nResident Evaluation Panel feedback \n  \nJG went through the summary of the Panel’s impressions of all 3 bids. JM emphasised the closeness of the scores. JG highlighted some key elements of the 3 bids in the sections that the Panel considered. The summary document is attached to these minutes. \n  \nCP agreed with the conclusion on the best site for the respite facilities (behind Bramfield Court on the Queens Drive side) and commended the positive feedback from the Panel. BB and CP noted thanks to the Panel for their work on this. \n  \nKH emphasised the importance of the inclusion of daytime sleeping arrangements in the respite approach for shift and night workers. \n  \nPA noted that all 3 contractors gave comprehensive\, good quality answers and that it was hard to distinguish between them. \n  \n  \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.3 \n \n  \nConsiderate Constructors Scheme (CCS) \n  \nJWM gave an overview of the scheme based on her experience of working for Higgins on phase 1&2. \n  \nCCS is a voluntary scheme that aims to raise standards across the whole of the construction industry. It consists of 5 parts. Contractors should: \n1. Care about appearance. \nExamples from Higgins included: wheel washing of all vehicles and regular washing down of the road\, all hoarding were kept neat and tidy\, non-construction employees had to wear a suit to look professional \n2.     Respect the community \nThis was a big part of the RLO’s job; they managed the respite centre and it was important that everyone visiting the site was made to feel welcome and safe. The RLO was the first point of contact for complaints. The local economy was supported by providing local work as traffic marshalls and apprenticeships \n3.     Protect the environment \nThis was everyone’s responsibility and of paramount importance. Jill did daily boundary walks with monitoring equipment to log noise levels. This will be of particular importance for Weston Court. Higgins also worked with allotment holders to help them encourage beneficial wildlife to their plots. \n4. Care about safety \nAll staff and visitors had to do a H&S induction before coming onto site\, CCTV\, well maintained fences\, 24 hr security were all part of this. CCTV picked up an assault and this was of help to police dealing with the incident. \n5.     Value their workforce \nHiggins had monthly Employers Engagement Meetings where a rep from each sub-contractor met to raise issues\, e.g. standard of site facilities\, H&S problems. Personal development needs were also met – Jill went on training courses (e.g community dev. course with Newman Francis\, First Aid)\, all employees and sub-contractors were provided with training to obtain CSCS cards and alerted when certificates were due for renewal. \n  \nThere are also mascots and resources for going into local schools to raise awareness of site safety amongst younger children and for older students\, a chance to ‘sell’ the industry as a potential career option. \n  \nThe standards are monitored by twice yearly visits from CCS inspectors who allocate marks out of 9 for each part\, with 5 more marks available for ‘above and beyond’ achievement. Contractors should aim to score at least 40 points. \n  \nRG added that in addition to these standards\, LBH will have its own key performance indicators. \nThe meeting’s thanks to Jill for this presentation was noted.\n \n\n\n4.0\nUnit C update\n \n\n\n  \n4.1\n  \nWO reported that a contractor has been selected to do the fit out. The timescale for the whole process of completing the work is extended by the requirement to get Building Control sign off once works are completed.  A pre-contract meeting will determine likely start and finish dates. Approx. start in June? A more definite timeline should be available at the next RSG.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nTRA update  \n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nEP reported that the TRA and Hackney Showroom have been busy planning for activities that can take place as soon as restrictions are  further eased. LBH Community Development fund paid for a successful quiz night on 19/3\, an activity book for primary pupils\, both organised with Hackney Showroom. Future projects being planned include gardening (purchase of seeds\, tools and the creation of new beds for community use)\, an art project and support for a local film maker who is creating a Black Lives Matter-themed film. \nEP also welcomed the new noticeboards on the estate. Meetings for the rest of 2021 are now in place and publicised. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nUpdate from ITLA\n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nCS noted that Source’s involvement has continued to be minimal due to lockdown restrictions. A request has been made to open up the allotment area behind the Vince Murrain Centre; this could be unwise given the current condition of the area and the still unresolved issue of the open sewer pipe.  CP asked if this area could be made safe so that residents can capitalise on one more growing season now. RG said that the issue with the sewer pipe has been noted and needs to be chased internally. \n  \nJM raised the continued inability to use the VM Community Centre. CS noted that it will be open for local elections in May\, so Source will be pressing to be able to use it for meetings of 6 or less. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nRG\n\n\n7.0\nPhase 1 & 2 \n \n\n\n  \n7.1\n  \nPost Occupancy Evaluation (POE) \n  \nWO asked if RSG members and neighbours could be encouraged to complete this. 10 have been completed on line; there may be others completed in hard copy and waiting in the LBH offices. WO will be calling all residents in the new blocks to chase for the surveys. \n  \nEP has reminded everyone on the TRA website and Whatsapp groups. KH to also add a reminder on the FB site. \n  \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nKH\n\n\n8.0\nAny urgent business\n \n\n\n  \n8.1\n  \nRG informed the meeting that the CCTV to the bike stores is being installed next week. \n \n \n\n\n  \n8.2\n  \nKH asked about progress on resolving the problems with some of the northside blocks’ lifts. WO reported that a lift consultant had visited yesterday; their report should be available in approx. 4 weeks. \n \n \n\n\n  \n8.3\n  \nEP raised the continued long list of outstanding defects in the northside blocks which is taking up a lot of time at TRA meetings. RG reported that issues have been escalated to Head of Regen. and Head of Building Maintenance. There should be some tangible progress to report at the next TRA meeting on 15th April.  EP noted that residents are getting very frustrated with the time this is taking to resolve\, especially now that increased service charges bills have been sent out. Can RG help to get Leasehold Services Team to the next meeting on 15/4? RG said he would contact them. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nRG\n\n\n9.0\nDate of next meeting \n \n\n\n  \n9.1\n  \n26th May 2021\, 7.00\n \n\n\n\n  \nPrevious information: \nMeeting to be held on \nWednesday 31st March starting at 7.00pm \n(via Google) \n  \nAGENDA \n\n\n\n\nAgenda item \nLead \n\n\n1\nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n \n\n\n2\nNotes of previous meeting held 8th February 2021 and any matters arising not elsewhere on the agenda \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n3\nPhase 3 & 4 \na)     Update on progress with contractor procurement \nb)     Feedback from resident evaluation panel \nc)     Considerate Constructors Scheme \n \n  \nRon (LBH) \n  \nJill\n\n\n4\nUnit C update \n \nWill (LBH)\n\n\n5\nTRA update \n \nEmley (TRA Chair)\n\n\n6 \n \nITLA update\nSource\n\n\n7\nPhase 1 & 2 \n(a)   Post occupancy survey \n(b)   Outstanding issues \n \n  \nWill (LBH) \nRon (LBH)\n\n\n8\nAny urgent business \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n \n\n\n9\nDate of next meeting \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-meeting-march-2021/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20210322T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20210322T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20210304T145348Z LAST-MODIFIED:20210318T141402Z UID:1492-1616439600-1616443200@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:POSTPONED March Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:POSTPONED to 31 March 2021\nThis is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \nMeeting to be held on \nMonday 22nd March starting at 7.00pm \n(via Google) URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/22-march-steering-group-meeting/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20210208T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20210208T200000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20210208T160958Z LAST-MODIFIED:20210331T154023Z UID:1463-1612810800-1612814400@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:February Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \nMeeting held on \nMonday 8th February starting at 7.00pm \n(via Google) \n MINUTES \n  \n\n\n\nIn Attendance:\n  \nRon Greenwood (RG) \nWilliam Owen (WO) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nJohn Morris \nCllr Clare Potter \nCllr Brian Bell \n11 residents\nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nLB Hackney (Cllr) \nLB Hackney (Cllr)\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nThe meeting was chaired by Cllr Potter. \n  \nApologies were received from Hana Chambers\, Peter Sim and Alfred Fiorentini. \n \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 14th December 2020 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nThe minutes from the last meeting were agreed as accurate. All matters arising to be discussed on agenda. \n \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3 & 4 \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nProgramme update – RG \n  \nThree tenders were submitted by the deadline: midday today (8th Feb). The next month will be spent evaluating the tenders with a scheduled tender report to be written by 8th March. The quantitative part (pricing) is being assessed by QS and Potter Raper\, the LBH Employers Agent. The qualitative parts break down into: programming proposals\, resourcing\, risk mitigation\, site logistics\, design integrity\, community engagement and local employment and training opportunities. \n  \nWO has set up a meeting on 16th Feb for the resident reps who will evaluate some of these items. \n  \nLBH would still like to arrange visits to tenderers’ sites but ongoing restrictions mean this will have to wait until March/April. \n  \nThere will be an internal moderation meeting on 25th Feb. to review the final qualitative scores. \n  \nA negotiation period of 9 weeks is in place if bids are non compliant in any way or come in over budget. This period will take until approx. mid June if needed. There will then be a report to Cabinet written while the leaseholder S20 process runs its course. A Cabinet approval will be subject to the S20 consultation process. \n  \nNC asked if this meant that the whole process is still on track to meet expected deadlines.  RG replied that the 9 week negotiation period should allow for delays to be minimised. \n  \nCP asked if everything was likely to be agreed by the end of summer. RG – hopefully and\, if so a start on site date of December 2021 should be achievable. \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.2\n  \nResident Evaluation Panel \n  \nWO reported that an e mail has gone out to all on the evaluation panel with a Confidentiality Agreement. WO urged all to fill their names in on the electronic versions asap and return to him as he cannot share the tender docs. until this has been done.  JM confirmed the Panel as Emley\, Peter D\, Peter A\, Jill\, Karsten and Jo. \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.3 \n \n  \nRespite Centre \n  \nWO led on this item. It is generally agreed that the Respite Centre for phase 1&2 was inadequate. More people are now working from home but does LBH ask contractors to provide sleeping facilities? LBH have no fixed ideas on what the Respite Centre should consist of but contractors will want to provide one in order to qualify for the Considerate Constructors Scheme Award. So\, questions WO was interested in getting answers to include: \n·       what should a Respite Centre provide? \n·       what are the different needs on phase 3&4 c/w 1&2? \n·       where should a centre be located? \n·       how can users make the most of it? \n·       how will it be managed? How will a booking system work? \n  \nJWM made the point that in phase 1&2\, the centre was on site and therefore\, it provided little respite and there was little uptake. So location this time should be a prime consideration. It needs to be near but off the estate. \nAA stated that in the summer with windows open it is noisy in normal times. \nCP suggested that the Green Lanes/Queens Drive corner where DZ6S will be built would be a possible site. JWM thought this was still close to Weston Court\, where the noisiest works are likely. \nEP didn’t realise there was a Respite Centre available in phase 1&2 so good publicity for the one on phase 3&4 will be crucial. It should be something that can be used at short notice. Could local cafes or soft play areas be subsidised by the contractor to provide space for those seeking respite? It would be good if individuals who wish to do some work away from home could sit in a café without having to buy lots of expensive coffee! \nJWM proposed the idea of the reservoir centre as a location where people could use rooms to work in or have meetings. Could a shuttle bus be provided to transport people there and back? PA said he would be prepared to walk up to the reservoirs if necessary. He also observed that the centre in phase 1&2 was not very big. It would also need a good internet connection. \nCP suggested a survey to assess the numbers of night workers in order to inform the decision on providing sleeping facilities. RG thought the contractor’s Resident Liaison Officer would be tasked with getting this sort of information. \nJG emphasised the number of people working from home\, so in her view\, this would likely be the main focus. WO asked if people were likely to be happy to work immediately alongside others\, or require separate rooms. JG said she’d rather work in the company of others than try to work in a very noisy environment. \nKH asked when the noisy work is likely to start. RG replied that this depends on the contractor’s programming but that good advanced notice will be required. \nES asked if contractors will be allowed to work at weekends. RG – it will be for Building Control to decide but the expectation is that work will only be carried out Mon – Fri. CP recalled that Higgins did work some Saturdays in phase 1&2 to catch up on the programme. JWM confirmed that some Saturday work did take place inside buildings during the 2nd fix period. \n \n \n\n\n4.0\nUnit C update\n \n\n\n  \n4.1\n  \nWO reported that the 3 tenders received for the refit were all over budget but a productive meeting with Hackney Showroom and the TRA had resulted in a revised and cheaper brief. The 3 new tenders are expected back tomorrow (9th Feb). If work can start in late March\, there should be completion in June. Part of the extra time delay will depend on contractor availability.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nPhase 1 & 2 remaining items\n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nRG gave an update: \nPaving: LBH need to establish whether Higgins have now finished the works that comprise their commitments. \nCCTV to bike stores: a quote for installation is with the CCTV team which is likely to be accepted. The installation will take approx. 3 or 4 weeks and they are waiting for an indication of when this can start. \nLifts: a quote is being reviewed for an independent consultant to inspect and do a report on the two worst affected blocks – Kimpton and Sandon. \n  \nMain front doors: a sub contractor will remove the superfluous handle \nLatent defects records: a meeting with Higgins has been arranged to make sure that all defects reported directly to Higgins are known to LBH and have been dealt with. \n  \nFollow up questions: \nNJ asked if there is going to need to be ongoing fixes to the paving that could have an impact on future service charges. RG – the meeting with Higgins will hopefully resolve if any outstanding issues are latent defects or now repairs \nES asked if this includes future treatments to the paving and also who is paying for the lift consultant. Could they include Radwell in their investigation? \nKH asked that Wallington lift also be included. He also reported that there are still other defects outstanding. \nRG added that it will becoming increasingly difficult to claim future repairs to paving are defects; the new sealant shouldn’t fail again. \nAA reported that there are several issue with her flat and block; damp causing mould and door locks broken. RG and CP suggested taking these issues off line. AA to contact CP for follow up. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nRG to ask Bronwen and Employers Agent to include these two blocks in the lift analysis\n\n\n  \n5.2\n  \nPost Occupancy Evaluation (POE) \n  \nWO emphasised that the POE survey is not primarily intended to resolve defects but rather as a lessons learnt exercise to inform future regen. However\, LBH do still want to gather information on what is still outstanding. WO asked for any views on the survey form. \nCP thought it looked well laid out and stated that it is important that as many people as possible are encouraged to complete it. \nWO – it can be filled in on line as a test by anyone wanting to check how it works and then the form will be deleted. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nTRA update  \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nEP reported that the TRA and Hackney Showroom are discussing how to spend a budget of £3k that needs to used by end March. Proposals they are looking at include: a Zoom art project\, a Zoom quiz evening (with drag host) and assistance with a BLM film project. There are also Spring gardening events planned. The next meeting date is TBA. \n \n \n\n\n7.0\nUpdate from ITLA\n \n\n\n  \n7.1\n  \nCS gave an update: \n·       we have continued to support leaseholders throughout the S20 process\, \n·       liaised with Annette Reid on vulnerable residents\, noting that there have been several bereavements over the last few months\, \n·       we circulated a flier inviting residents to get in touch if needed \n·       we await news on 15th Feb about whether some relaxation of restrictions may make it possible to resume some appointments in the community centre \n \n  \n \n\n\n8.0\nSection 20 issues \n \n\n\n  \n8.1\n  \nRG reported that there had been 3 more one to one meetings with leaseholders\, to follow the 7 meetings held on 10/12/20. The next steps are: 2nd stage S20 ‘Notice of Proposal’ with details of the successful contractor with individual\, per flat costings and a 30 day consultation period; a 3rd stage ‘Notice of intention to carry out qualifying works’ with more specific details of works proposed and costs\, again with a 30 day consultation period.   Leaseholders have been made aware of repayment options. The upcoming newsletter will remind residents what is being proposed in the refurbishment programme. \nEP expressed concern that the strength of feeling about the costs has been judged by LBH in the light of the numbers attending the surgeries (10). In fact the leaseholders whatsapp group has 34 members.  RG stressed that the consultation is not over. \nEP was also concerned that non residents are disadvantaged as the backdated cut off date of 28th May gave them no opportunity to return as residents or to change plans. She pointed out that there are no non resident owners on the RSG to articulate their concerns. Many do not receive mail from their tenants. RG noted that non resident leaseholders are obliged to inform LBH Leasehold Services of forwarding addresses. \nRG reminded the meeting that the default position is that all leaseholders are charged the full recharge amount; the current arrangements are a variation to this. LBH dispute that a 10k cap was promised to all leaseholders. \nEP asked when the stage 2 Notice will be issued. RG – when LBH are in a position to accept a tender and while the internal approval process is progressing. If September 2021 is the aim for Cabinet approval\, then this will be the time when the Stage 2 Notice will be issued. \nJG asked if there is anything the Leaseholder group can do now or do they have to wait until the Stage 2 Notice consultation? RG – comments should be lodged at the time of the Stage 2 Notice. LBH can’t do anything with the representations being made now. \nJG asked if there was an update on the buyback option. RG – those interested should contact him and he will approach Simon Theobald (LBH Director of Finance) who will arrange for a valuation visit. \n \n \n\n\n9.0\nAny urgent business\n \n\n\n  \n9.1\n  \nEP raised mould issues in the southside blocks. Will the major repairs deal with these?  RG – the 5 or 6 worst affected properties will have passive ventilation measures installed and the roof insulation\, new windows and cladding of the undercrofts should improve thermal efficiency. CP has been closely involved in these issues through casework and is keen to see how these measures will improve the situation. \n \n \n\n\n  \n9.2\n  \nES raised the £750 fee that sellers have to pay to have fire insurance cover confirmed.  RG – this is out of LBH hands as the insurance industry has reacted to new legislation in an extreme way. \n \n \n\n\n10.0\nDate of next meeting \n \n\n\n  \n10.1\n  \nWeek commencing 22nd March (probably 22nd as this is the Monday) To be confirmed next week. \n \n \n\n\n\n  \n  \nAGENDA \n\n\n\n\nAgenda item \nLead \n\n\n1\nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n \n\n\n2\nNotes of previous meeting held 14th December 2020 and any matters arising not elsewhere on the agenda \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n3\nPhase 3 & 4 \n  \n(a)   Update on progress and next steps \n(b)   Respite centre (feedback exercise) \n \nRon (LBH)\n\n\n4\nUnit C update \n \nWill (LBH)\n\n\n5\nPhase 1 & 2 \n  \n(a)   Update on progress and next steps \n(b)   Post occupancy survey (feedback exercise) \n \n  \n  \nRon (LBH) \nWill (LBH)\n\n\n6 \n \nTRA update \n \nEmley (TRA Chair)\n\n\n7\nITLA update \n \nSource\n\n\n8\nSection 20 update\nRon (LBH) \n \n\n\n9\nAny urgent business \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n \n\n\n10\nDate of next meeting \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/february-steering-group-meeting/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20201214T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20201214T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20201109T111543Z LAST-MODIFIED:20210106T193728Z UID:1366-1607972400-1607977800@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:December Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \nMinutes \n\n\n\nIn Attendance:\nCllr. Brian Bell  (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Clare Potter (CP) \nRon Greenwood (RG) \nWilliam Owen (WO) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nJohn Morris \n  \n9 resident RSG members\n  \n  \nLB Hackney \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nApologies were received from JWM and NC. \n \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 9th November 2020 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nThe minutes from the last meeting were agreed as accurate. \n \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3 & 4 \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nProgramme update -RG \n  \nThe three bidding contractors were shown round the estate on 8th Dec. Particular thanks to Menekse for allowing them into her flat. It’s likely that there will be another chance for them to visit the boiler room and the underground car park in the new year. All contractors were very positive and one said they had visited the estate 12 times. Therefore LBH are expecting very thorough submissions. LBH hope to arrange visits to tenderer’s schemes In late Jan/early Feb.  WO will co-ordinate RSG involvement in the evaluation during February. \n  \nThe tender period has been extended by 2 weeks in order to give the bidders time to put together a fully compliant bid; the LBH tender portal experienced problems with the amount of information uploaded onto it.  Therefore\, return date for tenders is now 8/2/21. RG confirmed that he will post the Social Value statement to the portal 15/12. \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.2\n  \nMaterials workshop \n  \nUnfortunately the planned workshop to demonstrate some of the materials specified was not able to take place because of the latest lockdown in November. A newsletter from LBH will now go out in January giving details again of the phase 3 & 4 proposals. RG apologised for the delay. \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.3 \n \n  \nFollow up questions \n  \nJG asked if there was a process for residents not on the RSG to see the tenders. RG explained that only the sub group of residents who volunteered to evaluate some of the qualitative elements would be able to see the relevant sections of the documents and they would be required to sign confidentiality agreements. \nEP – a lot of people may not have seen the design images. Will all residents get the newsletter? RG – yes. \nEP also asked if there will be any opportunity for changing materials or colours at this stage. RG explained that the only way changes to these items might now be made would be if the budget did not allow for a particular specification. ES added that the planning consultation would have been the time when residents could have influenced changes. \n \n \n\n\n4.0\nLeaseholder recharge proposals and FAQs\n \n\n\n  \n4.1\n  \nRG reported on the leaseholder surgeries that were held on 10th December. 7 appointments were made and very strong views were expressed\, particularly from those who wished to sell now. RG stressed the LBH regeneration strategy of trying to achieve parity between existing and new build residents and the Council’s desire to specify high quality materials that have a higher capital cost now but which will have a lower long term maintenance cost. The surgeries confirmed the Council’s repayment options. In response to one leaseholder raising the option of the Council buying their flat back\, RG made further enquiries with colleagues. LBH does have a programme of buy backs and a report will go to Cabinet in January to request approval of a budget for this for 2021/22. It ought to be possible to offer this option to some KC leaseholders\, subject to valuations. A Council valuer could start to make appointments as early as Jan 2021. The Council will be writing to all leaseholders about this response to the surgeries. This approach would also benefit the Council by releasing properties that could be relet to secure tenants. \n  \nBB invited comments and questions but emphasised the need to stick to the overall policy impact and not to bring up personal concerns. \n  \nJG asked for clarification of the buy back option. RG replied that it is a borough-wide fund and will be subject to Cabinet approval in January. \n  \nJG recorded the general feeling of shock amongst leaseholders at the level of possible recharges and noted that a buy back policy might well help in particular non-resident owners. RG emphasised that it will be a specified pot of funding so will not be a limitless fund. \n  \nCS noted that there may well be many other leaseholders in addition to the 7 who came to the surgeries who would benefit from this and who also may have concerns\, so it will be important to set a clear priority for applicants. RG acknowledged that prioritising will be a challenge and that LBH will need to establish the rules before formally offering the option. BB added that KC will be in competition with the rest of the borough for this funding. \n  \nNJ asked if a resident who is a tenant of an absentee owner would have to leave if the flat was bought back. RG – yes but they could apply for social rent housing\, although the resulting vacant flat would be allocated to a family in priority need of accommodation. \n  \nEP asked if this was a short term solution. RG replied that it could be a longer term programme of buy backs\, subject to funding availability. \n  \nES asked if a new secure tenant would be able to buy the flat. RG to check but probably\, yes\, subject to standard criteria for length of residency etc. CP pointed out that discounts for RTB are not as generous as they used to be so there is less incentive to exercise RTB. \n  \nNJ noted the possible impact this will have on community cohesion as some people are forced to leave. CP noted that numbers involved will be quite small and it could be that non-residents are prioritised. \n  \nJG thought this would be positive for non-resident leaseholders faced with a potential £80k bill. BB’s view is that non-resident owners should pay in full and they should not be the priority for any very limited funding for buybacks. \n  \nCP made the point that values of properties will increase as a result of the refurbishment works. \n  \nJG asked that the whole issue of recharges is approached sensitively as it is an emotive subject for many. \n  \nEP noted that most owners are ‘ordinary’ people (not rich landlords) and that the bill and the arrangements were sprung on them. RG reminded the meeting of the sliding scale of charging and that there are two further stages of consultation next year as part of the S20 process. \n  \nEP queried whether this was in fact a consultation. RG replied that LBH had made this overall estimate of possible recharge levels in response to requests from the first stage of the S20 process\, rather than waiting for stages 2 and 3 when estimates are usually produced for the first time. \n  \nEP asked what the ongoing consultation can achieve. For instance\, can some of the design proposals be amended to save some money? RG repeated that the regen. will benefit the estate and its residents and add value to properties. There will be a positive impact on the external appearance and the public realm will improve. EP – some dispute this. \n  \nRG challenged this assumption and asked if EP thought that values would decrease. EP thought that it was difficult to argue that values would increase by £80k. She re-emphasised the request that conversations around the size of the bill should be dealt with sensitively.  RG reminded the meeting of the repayment options and that the LBH Leasehold Team can consider genuine financial hardship on individual cases. \n  \nKH asked what the £80k represents as a proportion of the property value and would the recharge be adjusted if property values decreased (so the recharge becomes a higher % of the total value). RG explained that the charges are calculated as an apportionment of the costs applicable for leaseholders to pay over the whole scheme; it’s not linked to existing property values. RG added the point that as values are likely to increase\, the proportion represented by the recharge figure will decrease. \n  \nCS made the point that there needs to be ongoing discussions. For many leaseholders who regard their flat as their permanent home for life\, this is an excellent deal. RG added that the current arrangements are unique to Kings Crescent\, not offered to any other LBH estate. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nUnit C update\n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nWO reported that tenders should be received on Friday with evaluation scheduled for January. \n  \nBB asked about a target date for completion. \n  \nRG suggested that an optimistic date would be end of March\, probably April. The main delay will be Building Control approving the ventilation arrangements. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nPhase 1 & 2 remaining items \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nEP asked how the review of documents with Higgins was going. RG reported that discussions had been very challenging.  This is now not Higgins’ top priority to deal with. LBH hope to get more information from further post-occupancy evaluation surveys. More detail will hopefully be available at the next RSG. \n  \nAA sought confirmation that residents will have the opportunity to give feedback. RG confirmed that surveys will be co-ordinated in the new year and the survey form will be brought to the next RSG. \n  \nRG noted that the issues are now only around the latent defects that affect all the northside blocks. \n  \nKH asked if some of the defects are covered by the 10 year NHBC guarantee and if LBH are aware of issues that fall in this category. Could LBH check if the NHBC guarantee is appropriate? \n  \nES raised the issue of entrance doors that have had new fittings that are inappropriate for the design consistency of the rest of the building. E.g. a new handle has been fitted on one block that is out of keeping with the look of the other doors. More substandard additions seem to be appearing as time goes on.  RG could only comment that these were approved by the LBH design team. \n  \nEP is meeting Bronwen before the January TRA meeting to go over outstanding defects. She is frustrated because nothing seems to get resolved. Is it possible to sign off the things that have been sorted out so that the outstanding items can be properly dealt with? \n \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n7.0\nTRA update  \n \n\n\n  \n7.1\n  \nEP reported that there was a productive meeting 2 weeks ago to discuss community and social initiatives. The TRA has £3k unspent from the LBH Community Development Fund. Some ideas that emerged from the meeting were: support for a local resident film maker who is making a film about BLM – she requested some money to pay extras (who could be local  people)\, Zoom art sessions\, a gardening event and art ‘safari’ around the estate. There is also still a budget for the summer party that had to be postponed. \n \n \n\n\n8.0\nUpdate from ITLA\n \n\n\n  \n8.1\n  \nCS gave an update: we have been supporting many leaseholders\, some with in depth advice and information. We attended the surgeries and are continuing ongoing discussions with some. Leasehold Services were helpful; it’s worth continuing to engage positively with leaseholders. \n  \nWe participated in the onsite visits with the tendering contractors. \n \n  \n \n\n\n9.0\nAny urgent business\n \n\n\n  \n9.1\n  \nNone \n \n \n\n\n10.0\nDate of next meetings \n \n\n\n  \n10.1\n  \n8th February 2021 at 7.00 via Google Meet \n \n \n\n\n\nThe agenda will be posted here when available and the minutes will be posted here after the meeting URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/december-steering-group-meeting-3/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20201109T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20201109T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20201108T105715Z LAST-MODIFIED:20201122T185400Z UID:1361-1604948400-1604953800@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:November Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n  \nMinutes\nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting held on 9th November 2020 via \nGoogle Meet \n  \n\n\n\nResidents Present:\n(EP) (Bramfield Court) \n(PD) (Datchworth Court) \n(ES) (Radwell Court) \nTD (Theobalds Court) \n \nJWM (Theobalds Court) \n(JG) (Theobalds Court) \n(AA) (Barley Court) \n(NC) (Kimpton Court) \nHC (Sandon Court) \n(PA) Weston Court) \n(NJ) (Sandon Court)\n\n\nIn Attendance:\nCllr. Brian Bell  (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Clare Potter (CP) \nRon Greenwood (RG) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nJohn Morris (JM) \n \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA)\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nNo apologies were received. \n \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 28th September 2020 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nThe minutes from the last meeting were agreed as accurate. \n \n \n\n\n  \n2.2\n  \nCP noted that her and Cllr Bell have not been able to restart surgeries due to lockdown but they are available for residents via Members’ Services or direct contact. \n \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3 & 4 \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nProgramme update \nRG gave feedback. \nShortlisted contractors are currently working through the tender documentation and RG and colleagues are fielding questions from them. Residents may have seen people walking round the estate from the bidding contractors but there should have been no knocking on doors. LBH have set aside times for escorted site visits between 7th and 12th Dec. One tenderer has asked to see the inside of a southside flat. RG is arranging this via Source. Anyone willing to allow a contractor to visit please contact CS or JM.  NB\, the inspection will be purely visual. \n  \nThe deadline for tender returns is now 25/1/21. Evaluation will be between 25/1/21 and 19/2/21. If the tender price of the successful contractor is beyond the LBH budget or there are other elements that need to be clarified\, a 9 week period for negotiation has been set aside. Best and final offer will be put to LBH Cabinet early summer 2021 with planned contract signing July. Mobilisation and satisfying some planning conditions will follow with start on site targeted currently for 23/11/21. \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.2\n  \nTender evaluation and site visits \nDuring the evaluation period resident involvement in site visits to bidders’ other sites and evaluation of some of the qualitative sections of the brief will take place. These will include approaches to site logistics\, respite facilities\, road closures\, parking arrangements and community engagement. CP noted that a resident evaluation panel was agreed last time: Emley\, Jill\, Karsten\, Peter Akhurst and Jo. Possible Peter D. if a Datchworth resident was required. BB suggested paring down the numbers nearer the time if needed. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n3.3\n  \nMaterials workshop \nThe materials workshop had to be put on hold with the new lockdown. There will now be a newsletter from LBH with a summary of the design information and contact for queries. \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.4 \n \n  \nFollow up questions \nAA asked how many shortlisted contractors there are. \nRG – 3. \nAA also asked for clarification on the materials workshop. \nRG explained that the materials that would have been on display were examples of those specified already that were part of the planning application. The only forseen reason these might be changed is if there is an issue with supply. \nAA – will there be one principal contractor? \nRG – yes\, with sub contractors for various aspects of the works. \nNC asked about possible completion dates for the whole scheme. \nRG – approx. 3 years\, so possibly January 2025\, although refurbishment will be finished first \n \n \n\n\n4.0\nLeaseholder recharge proposals and FAQs\n \n\n\n  \n4.1\n  \nThe latest draft of the FAQ document from LBH Leasehold team was circulated on 6th Nov. BB stated that the purpose of this being an agenda item was to make sure that the arrangements are explained as properly and clearly as possible. \nNJ sought confirmation that this only applies to southside leaseholders. \nResponse – yes. \nEP asked how long it took to invoice the northside leaseholders given that LBH say final invoices are issued within 18 months of completion of works. \nRG – Leasehold Team should really deal with this but it can be emphasised that individual\, interim invoices will be sent out within 12 weeks of start on site which is when leaseholders should start to pay. \nEP asked about the situation if she wanted to sell her flat\, e.g. in early 2021\, i.e. after 28th May 2020 but before works start. \nRG – any seller’s enquiry would pick up the existence of the S20 notice and if there was no formal estimate of the full costs to the existing owner\, it would come down to a negotiation with the purchaser. \nJG – if it’s right that the cap cannot be passed onto an incoming purchaser\, this isn’t consistent with the aim to encourage a stable community at Kings Crescent. She felt it unfair to backdate the rule to this May. What is the justification for this? \nRG – Hackney wished to recognise the time that existing residents have spent waiting for the works to get underway\, so the cap arrangement was implemented. \nJG – we now have no options if we wish to move. \nRG – future purchasers would benefit from the added value of the refurbishment\, so the flats should hold their value. \nJG expressed disappointment at the approach\, having up to now felt positive about the RSG. \nRG replied that the arrangements took a lot of internal discussion within Hackney with a view to coming up with something that was fair. The rationale was set out in the Cabinet report. \nEP asked if someone was selling\, who is Hackney invoicing? \nRG – there would be a charge on the property and this would be disclosed at the point of the sale process. The exact cost will be clear at the time the interim invoice is issued. \nEP – so the understanding would be that the invoice goes to whoever is in ownership at that time? \nJG asked if this would be the first time leaseholders would know the exact full cost. \nRG replied that the 2nd stage S20 notice which is issued after the successful tender has been accepted would contain the first\, personalised notification of the recharge cost to each owner. \nBB emphasised that the cap is a huge benefit to those who get it but it comes at a significant cost to the overall scheme. \nEP raised the issue of the 2011 cap that apparently included major repairs to the southside blocks. This would mean that roofs and windows already paid for from that tranche of works should count towards the cap. \nRG clarified that these were paid for from a specific source of funding and a line was drawn under the costs. We are starting again to reflect a new set of circumstances. \n  \nPD asked if higher costs due to contractual variations that are not the contractor’s fault will be included in the cap. \nRG confirmed that the £10k cap remains in place for anyone qualifying. \nPD – so leaseholders are also protected against something that is not the client’s responsibility? \nRG – yes. \nPA asked if works that were carried out at the time of the Leaseholder Charter (when the £10k cap was first introduced) would be done again. We have already paid for some of the works. \nRG suggested bringing individual circumstances up in a surgery meeting when they are arranged. RG also apologised for the delivery of the notice concerning podium works which was a mistake. \nCP asked if there was a date yet for the surgeries to take place. \nRG – at the moment they are planned for w/c 7th December. \nCP added that concerns can still be raised with councillors or Source.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nUnit C update\n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nRG reported that unfortunately\, no tenders were received for the fit out work. It is likely that the complexity and amount of tender documentation was too great for the 3 companies invited to tender. \n  \nTwo more contractors have been identified and the retender period will now close on 10th December with a possible start on site date early in January. The works themselves should not take long but the process of getting sign off from Building Control will take some weeks\, so completion may be in March 2021. RG expressed confidence that there will be tenders returned this time\, including possibly from two new contractors. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nPhase 1 & 2 remaining items \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nBB did not want to spend time in this meeting covering these issues again; they are being worked through within the Council and at ETRA meetings. \nEP asked if lessons had been learnt from the experience of many defects being reported directly to Higgins without LBH knowing. \nRG explained that the arms length arrangement with Higgins will not be repeated. Hackney will be marketing the open market sale homes themselves with a new in house team. \nLBH have only recently got full details of the defects from Higgins and these are being reviewed. Another post-occupancy survey will be carried out this winter and there will be time to transfer these lessons learnt to phases 3 & 4. \nES commented that the arrangement whereby defects were reported directly to the contractor was unconventional; it should have been to the Employer’s Agent/Client side. \nBB stressed that it is essential that this does not happen again. \n  \nRG advised that this is the understood procedure but that the process is often short cut. RG added that dealing with defects management is one of the questions to be evaluated in the current tender. \n \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n7.0\nTRA update  \n \n\n\n  \n7.1\n  \nEP gave an update. Homework Club started and has continued since the current lockdown with some one to one sessions and some done via Zoom. \nThe next general TRA meeting is on 2nd December. \nThere is still a significant sum available in the Community Development pot\, so the TRA would welcome ideas on how this could be spent. \nNJ expressed a huge thanks to Emley for her hard work and commitment\, which was endorsed by all. \n \n \n\n\n8.0\nUpdate from ITLA\n \n\n\n  \n8.1\n  \nCS reported that it has been frustrating to almost be in a position to resume face to face activities and then have another lockdown imposed. Source have been supporting leaseholders and working with LBH on the FAQs and proposed surgeries. \n  \n \n  \n \n\n\n9.0\nAny urgent business\n \n\n\n  \n9.1\n  \nNone \n \n \n\n\n10.0\nDate of next meetings \n \n\n\n  \n10.1\n  \n14th December at 7.00 via Google Meet \n \n \n\n\n\nPrevious information: \nKings Crescent Residents Steering Group Agenda \nMeeting to be held on \nMonday 9th November starting at 7.00pm \n(via Google) \n  \n\n\n\n\nAgenda item \nLead \n\n\n1\nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n \n\n\n2\nNotes of previous meeting held 28th September 2020 and any matters arising not elsewhere on the agenda \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n3\nPhase 3 & 4 \n  \n(a) Programme update \n(b) Tender evaluation\, site visits \n(c) Materials workshop \n \nRon (LBH)\n\n\n4\nLeaseholder recharge proposals. Further FAQs. \n \nRon (LBH)\n\n\n5\nUnit C update \n \nRon (LBH) \n \n\n\n6 \n \nPhase 1 & 2 remaining items\nRon (LBH)\n\n\n7\nTRA update \n \nEmley (TRA Chair)\n\n\n8\nUpdate from ITLA \n \nSource\n\n\n9\nAny urgent business \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n \n\n\n10\nDate of next meeting \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) \n \n\n\n\n  \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/november-steering-group-meeting-3/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ORGANIZER;CN="Source Partnership":MAILTO:john@sourcepartnership.com; carol@sourcepartnership.com END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20200928T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20200928T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20201108T111638Z LAST-MODIFIED:20201108T111638Z UID:1364-1601319600-1601325000@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:September Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nFor further information on joining the ‘Resident Steering Group’ please email john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n  \nNotes of Kings Crescent Steering Group Meeting held on 28th September 2020 via \nGoogle Meet \n(Resident’s names removed for privacy on web version)\n \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr. Brian Bell  (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Clare Potter (CP) \nEP (Resident Bramfield Court) \nPD ( ResidentDatchworth Court) \n \nJWM (Resident Theobalds  Ct) \nJG (Resident Theobalds Court) \nKH (Resident Wallington Court) \n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\nRon Greenwood (RG) \nCarol Squires (CS) \nJohn Morris \n \nLB Hackney \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nSource Partnership (ITLA)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nApologies were received from residents PS\, HS\, AF\, TD. \n \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 29th January 2020 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nThe minutes from the last meeting were agreed as accurate. \n \n \n\n\n  \n2.2\n  \nBB noted that the management of the new blocks is now with Annette Reid and Housing Management\, having transferred from the New Build Team. \n \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3 & 4 \n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nProgramme update \nRG gave feedback. \n  \nBids from the Expression of Interest stage have been received and are being evaluated. Key elements of this include contractor’s capability and experience of working at this scale and type of project. LBH asked for examples of their track record and ability to work closely with residents\, Council members and officers. Evaluation should be completed by the end of this week. The tender period will run for at least 14 weeks to approx. 14th December (there are more than 1\,000 drawings and a huge amount of information for bidding contractors to consider). They will want to visit KC\, probably in mid November\, Covid restrictions allowing. \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.2\n  \nTender evaluation and site visits \nThere are some key areas in the qualitative section of the bids that a small evaluation panel from the RSG can look at once tenders are in. These include: site logistics\, how disruption will be minimised\, how parking can be arranged and how the contractor proposes to consult with and involve residents. 4 or 5 residents would be ideal\, with a mix of tenures and areas of the estate represented. Source will identify training needs and prepare members. The evaluation exercise with residents is currently scheduled for January 2021. \n  \nEP said she would be happy to be involved but asked whether there would be an opportunity for wider groups. BB hoped that by getting back to 6 weekly RSG meetings there would be the opportunity to get regular feedback. \n  \nCP emphasised that engagement with residents is crucial; residents know how disruptive this is going to be so the right approach from the contractor is key. It would be good to get someone from Weston Court involved as the works to the podium and the creation of the commercial units below will be very disruptive\, like the garage conversions in phase 1. \n  \nCS suggested that Source would ask other residents what would concern them so the evaluation panel can look out for whether bidding contractors deal with these\, e.g. approach to working in people’s homes which was an issue in phase 1. \n  \nJWM\, who had just joined the meeting\, agreed to be part of the evaluation panel\, depending on timing of meetings so that she can fit it around her work. \n  \nIt was suggested that PA from Weston Court was asked to be part of the group. KH said he’d be able to be involved as a resident from the northside blocks as long as meetings were out of work hours. \n  \n(Post-meeting note\, JG\, who had to leave part of the meeting to attend to childcare issues also indicated her willingness to be on the panel if meetings etc. fitted in with work and family commitments).  \n  \nTherefore\, the resident evaluation panel would consist of EP\, JWM\, KH\, PA and JG. \n  \nEP asked if relevant sections of the tender documents would be sent round in advance. RG would make sure there is plenty of time for the panel to read submissions and consider their views before convening to discuss and moderate scores. Hopefully\, this would only take one meeting. \n  \nSite visits\, if possible\, will be organised through Source. This could include to the tendering contractors’ other schemes on site as well as comparable schemes from a design aspect in Hackney. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n3.3\n  \nMaterials workshop \nRG noted that it has been a long time since the last design workshop (Dec 2018) so it is proposed to hold a display/workshop to show proposed materials and landscaping proposals again. But\, due to Covid restrictions\, this would be co-ordinated and controlled by Source at the Community Centre. Samples and drawings would be kept at the CC for a few weeks from 26th October and Source would arrange individuals or small groups to be able to visit and have questions answered. Any queries that need to be dealt with by the design team would be forwarded to them. EP endorsed this as some aspects of the design had changed since the last public event and up to now\, residents have had little chance to take time to look at (and feel) some of the materials that will be used. \n  \nCP asked if it will be possible to make appointments. CS – Source will produce a flier and control visits to 4 at a time. If the weather is good\, the displays could be set up outside the CC and more people\, potentially\, could attend. JWM offered the use of a gazebo if needed. \n \n \n\n\n4.0\nUnit C\n \n\n\n  \n4.1\n  \nRG gave an overview of the works proposed: construction of a partition to divide the space\, related ventilation\, new flooring\, storage and signage.  Funding is a mixture of GLA funds\, crowdfunding and from LBH.  There have been several productive discussions between LBH\, the TRA and Hackney Showroom. HS are committed to working in partnership with residents and arrangements for this will be encapsulated in the lease. \n  \nThe process and the contract documentation will be overseen by LBH outsourced Contract Managers. 3 contractors have expressed an interest in tendering. Tenders will be evaluated 80% on price\, 20% quality. Tender period will run from 5th October for 4 weeks. Evaluation early November\, with a possible period to negotiate price then 2 weeks site mobilisation. Building Control will need to sign this off\, so early December earliest possible start on site. 4 weeks building period followed by another Building Control sign off may mean completion February or early March. GLA need  timescales and once tenders are back\, LBH should be clearer on this. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n5.0\nTRA update\n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nEP gave report back. A newsletter went out over the summer. Meetings now alternate between ETRA meetings that deal with estate and housing  management issues and open TRA meetings that discuss community and social activities. The next ETRA meeting is on 7th October. A Neighbourhood Watch scheme has started on the estate and a representative from the LBH co-ordination team will attend next week’s meeting. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nLeaseholder recharge proposals\, S20 process \n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nRG reported that all respondents to the S20 notice will have now received an individual reply. The Leasehold team propose running some online surgeries in mid November. Before that\, a refreshed FAQ sheet will be circulated\, dealing with queries that Source picked up in June and July. A ‘broad brush’ estimate of the full cost of the works will also be sent out in advance of the stages 2 and 3 S20 notices. These will be calculated to give individual leaseholders an idea of what the total cost might be but these will be very indicative figures. \n  \nEP asked how much room there might be to challenge the arrangements. RG emphasised that the approach to recharges is a policy decision contained in a Cabinet report from February and as such\, this is not up for discussion. EP made the point that there was no consultation on the proposal to taper the potential pay back over 5 years; no resident knew what was going to be put forward so there was no chance to respond when it may have been possible to contest the policy approach. RG indicated that there had been lots of discussion internally up to Director level and the rationale for the approach was clearly set out in the Cabinet report. \n  \nEP added that in terms of the refurbishment proposals\, if leaseholders had known earlier what the possible cost was going to be\, they could have commented on the elements of the works. RG noted that unfortunately there are some decisions that cannot be decided by residents. \n  \nCP stressed that her and Cllr Bell lobbied hard for the £10k cap to put in place for phase 3&4 but appreciated that it’s not a blanket cap. The intention is to be as fair as possible within financial constraints. \n \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n7.0\nPhase 1 & 2 update \n \n\n\n  \n7.1\n  \nRG reported on the remaining issues still being dealt with by Bronwen: \ni)      the paving work is complete and arrangements are in place to monitor these areas to ensure they are kept clean. Sealant was incorrectly applied in wet weather which caused the failure. \nii)     CCTV in bike stores has been agreed and is being priced. \niii)   an independent consultant has been engaged to investigate the cause of the AOV problem. Thanks to KH for his ongoing communication on this issue. KH asked why this has only happened in Wallington Court. RG replied that finding this out is why an independent consultant has been commissioned. EP thought there had been similar problems in Radwell Court. \niv)   main front doors now strengthened and LBH contractors are now maintaining them. BB asked to whom complaints should be directed if there are further issues with the doors. RG – as this will be a repair from now on\, it should be Annette Reid. EP asked if doors keep failing\, would cost of repairs be a service charge issue? RG – potentially\, yes. Up to now Higgins have been doing repairs as a latent defect. \n \n \n\n\n8.0\nUpdate from ITLA\n \n\n\n  \n8.1\n  \nCS reported that Source’s work has mostly been phone support and work on the S20 issues. Publicity will go out soon to let residents know that we will be available\, by appointment on Mondays and Thursdays in the CC office. \n  \nBB added that him and CP are hoping to start Councillor surgeries again in the Community Centre\, starting on Friday with a joint surgery and\, initially once a month to start with.\n  \n \n\n\n9.0\nAny urgent business\n \n\n\n  \n9.1\n  \nNone \n \n \n\n\n10.0\nDates of next meetings \n \n\n\n  \n10.1\n  \n9th November at 7.00 via Google Meet (with the draft leaseholder FAQs on the agenda) \n  \n14th December  at 7.00 via Google Meet (with update on the tendering process on the agenda) \n \n \n\n\n\n  \nThe meeting ended at 8.00. URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/september-steering-group-meeting-3/ LOCATION:Online CATEGORIES:steering group meeting END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20200129T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20200129T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20200118T205703Z LAST-MODIFIED:20200118T205703Z UID:950-1580324400-1580329800@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:January Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the residents steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source Partnership. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/january-steering-group-meeting-2/ LOCATION:Hackney Showroom Space\, 4 Murrain Road\, London\, N4 2BN\, United Kingdom CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://kingscrescent.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Model-of-new-build-from-Queens-Drive.jpg END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20191218T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20191218T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20190709T222620Z LAST-MODIFIED:20191219T212013Z UID:751-1576695600-1576701000@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:December Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the newly formed steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nIf you are not part of the steering group you can always express any views directly to Carol and John or discuss with the KC residents committee who can feedback into the steering group:\n john@sourcepartnership.com\ncarol@sourcepartnership.com\nkcresidentsgroup@outlook.com\n\nAgenda:\n\n\n\n\n \nAgenda item \nLead \n\n\n1\nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n2\nNotes of previous meeting held 9th October 2019 and any matters arising not elsewhere on the agenda \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n3\nPhase 3 & 4 update\, including planning and procurement \n \nRon (LBH)\n\n\n4\nPhase 1 & 2 update \n \nBronwen (LBH)\n\n\n5\nUpdate from ITLA \n \nSource\n\n\n6\nTRA update \n \nEmley (Residents  Group Chair) \n \n\n\n7\nAny urgent business \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n8\nDates of next meeting \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n\n\nChristmas drinks after the meeting URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/december-steering-group-meeting-2/ LOCATION:Unit C (vacant unit by Wallington)\, Murrain Road CATEGORIES:steering group meeting END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20191113T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20191113T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20190709T222319Z LAST-MODIFIED:20191113T184416Z UID:748-1573671600-1573677000@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:November Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:This steering group will be for TRA committee\, Source Partnership\, Regen team and steering group members to discuss the use of unit C as a community facility along with the group who are proposed to be renting the space as a hybrid rent paying charity/community facility. \nAgenda \nUnit C Business Planning/visioning exercise \n  \nWed 13th November at 7.00 p.m. \nUnit C\, Murrain Road \n  \nSession with TRA\, Hackney Showroom\, Ron (LBH) and RSG members \n  \n7.00                 Introductions \n  \n7.10                 What do each of us want to get/need from the space at Unit C? \n  \n5 mins each from Emley\, Ron and Nina/Sam to list out what they envisage/aspire to use Unit C for \n  \n7.25                 What are the barriers to achieving these aspirations? \n  \n(Could be the physical space\, volunteer time\, staff time\, Council requirements\, finance) \n  \n7.35                 What does each party offer in terms of resources to help overcome these barriers/realise their ambitions? \n  \n(time\, enthusiasm\, connections\, ability to lever in funding\, p(P)olitical backing???) \n  \n7.45                 How can some of these be resources be pooled or what can we work on together to help meet objectives? \n  \n(Practically\, how can we work together?) \n  \n7.55                 Timescales. What are any externally driven timescales/deadlines? \n  \n(Funding deadlines? LBH need to start to show some community use of the space? Development programme?) \n  \n8.05                 Costs. Where are the main areas for expenditure? \n  \n(Division of the space\, employing someone to run the centre\, revenue expend. that has to be met….) \n  \n8.15                 Income. Opportunities to generate income? \n  \n(What grant finding opportunities are available? Other sources? Crowdfunding?) \n  \n8.25                 Actions; individuals and something that can be formed into an action plan? \n  \n8.30/8.35        Finish \n  \n  \n  \nThis is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the newly formed steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nIf you are not part of the steering group you can always express any views directly to Carol and John or discuss with the KC residents committee who can feedback into the steering group:\n john@sourcepartnership.com\ncarol@sourcepartnership.com\nkcresidentsgroup@outlook.com URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/november-steering-group-meeting-2/ LOCATION:Unit C (vacant unit by Wallington)\, Murrain Road CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://kingscrescent.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Model-of-new-build-from-Queens-Drive.jpg END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20191009T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20191009T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20190709T220041Z LAST-MODIFIED:20191004T110456Z UID:742-1570647600-1570653000@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:October Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the newly formed steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source. The steering group comprises of residents from both the old and new blocks and provides resident input into the next stage of new build and refurbishment of Kings Crescent. \nAgenda: \nMeeting to be held on \nTuesday 9th October 2019 starting at 7.00pm in Unit C\, Murrain Road \n  \n  \nAGENDA \n  \n  \n\n\n\n \nAgenda item \nLead \n\n\n1\nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n2\nNotes of previous meeting held 3rd September 2019 and any matters arising not elsewhere on the agenda \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n3\nPhase 3 & 4 update\, including planning and procurement \n \nRon (LBH)\n\n\n4\nPhase 1 & 2 update \n \nBronwen (LBH)\n\n\n5\nUpdate from ITLA \n \nSource\n\n\n6\nTRA update \n \nEmley (Residents  Group Chair) \n \n\n\n7\nAny urgent business \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n8\nDates of next meeting \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n\n  \nIf you are not part of the steering group you can always express any views directly to Carol and John or discuss with the KC residents committee who can feedback into the steering group:\n john@sourcepartnership.com\ncarol@sourcepartnership.com\nkcresidentsgroup@outlook.com URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/october-steering-group-meeting-2/ LOCATION:Unit C (vacant unit by Wallington)\, Murrain Road CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://kingscrescent.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Model-of-new-build-from-Queens-Drive.jpg END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20190903T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20190903T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20190709T215503Z LAST-MODIFIED:20191003T143530Z UID:738-1567537200-1567542600@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:September Steering Group Meeting DESCRIPTION:Minutes \nMinutes taken by John from Source Partnership. Resident surnames removed for web version. \n\n\n\nThose Present:\nCllr. Brian Bell  (BB) (Chair) \nCllr Claire Potter (CP) \nEmley P (EP) \nPeter S (PS) \nThomas D \nHana C \nAlfred F \n \nPeter A (PA) \nNatalie C (NC) \nMichael N (MN) \nPeter D (PD) \nKarsten H (KH) \nJill WM (JWM) \nLate – Yannis V \n  \n \n\n\nIn Attendance:\nJohn Morris (JM) \nRon Greenwood (RG) \n \nSource Partnership (ITLA) \nLB Hackney \n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nApologies were received from Jo G\, Nick J\, Ewan S Andrew M\, Bronwen T\, and Carol Squires (Source). \n \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 9 July 2019 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nFrom 2.1 re Sainsbury’s vent. The noise report has been supplied. LBH Planning still chasing Sainsbury’s for a response. Objections have been received from some residents. \n \n \n\n\n  \n2.2\n  \nFrom 2.2 re ITLA re-procurement. Source were re-appointed and new contract started 20/8 for 2 years\, which can be extended if necessary.\n  \n \n\n\n  \n2.3\n  \nFrom 2.3 re Unit C. A successful bidder has been identified but contracts still not exchanged. Planning application for additional use will be determined by 27/9; no objections received so hopefully the decision can be delegated to officers. Once the lease is signed\, the space will be fitted out and in use by end October.  RG hopes that the successful bidder will be able to present to the RSG on 9/10. \n  \nBB asked about a temporary licence that has been granted for an activity. RG reported that Hackney Showroom have been given a licence to use Unit C for rehearsals from 9/9 to early October but knew it had to be available for the Big Lunch on 28/9. \n  \n \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3 & 4 update\n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nPlanning update \nA total of 27 objections have been received\, most from Wallington and Kimpton Courts and mostly concerning the scale of the proposed block opposite and the potential for ASB in the courtyards. RG confirmed the expectation that the application will be heard on 2nd October. \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.2\n  \nConstruction procurement \nLBH are currently preparing more detailed design information for tenderers to bid on and more time will be spent on evaluating their response. As a result\, the sign off of the tender documentation is delayed by approx a month.  However\, there will be scope to make up time if the negotiation period shrinks (period allowed for this has been quite generous). \n  \nLBH are going to carry out an exercise to photograph the current condition of all south side ground floor flat gardens; Karen Jelenje\, who is working with RG as a new Project Officer is co-ordinating this with Source to take place on 19th and 23rd Sept. \n  \nRG acknowledged that progress is slow but it is felt to be better to allow more time now to detail the specification of works so that competitive and as accurate as possible costings can be obtained from bidding contractors in a very uncertain market. \n  \nPS commented on the delays and that residents are asking him about progress.  RG added that detailed questions about site management\, dealing with noise\, dust\, parking\, respite facilities etc. are all being developed. These will be of particular interest to the 3 or 4 residents who form the procurement panel. \n  \nCP asked if the original start on site timing of Oct/Nov 2020 could be achieved if time is made up. RG suggested this might be possible but it is unknown how much time will be needed for contract negotiations which may delay the process. \n \n \n\n\n4.0\nPhase 1 & 2 update\n \n\n\n  \n4.1 \n \n  \nUse of vacant area south of Murrain Road \nRG circulated the T&Cs of use of the area by film crews. So far\, £14\,000 has been generated in fees for hiring out this space\, £3\,500 of which will be paid to the TRA and £3\,500 will be available for Unit C to go towards running the new community facility. \n  \nRG reported that 2 written complaints were received about noise early in the morning from generators used by the film crews\, so in the revised T&C’s\, it is stipulated that ultra silent generators must be used and catering vehicles cannot access the site until 6.00 a.m. However\, the later start has deterred some crews from using the site as they need to be up and running at 5.00 a.m. Consequently\, there are no lettings in September at the moment. RG put to the RSG the option of reverting to allowing a 5.00 start in order to capitalise on what is a lucrative source of income for residents of the estate. \n  \nPA was in favour of this if it could be guaranteed that noise would be kept to a minimum. NC is a resident in Kimpton Court and she gets up early and hasn’t noticed undue noise. JW-M commented that residents can do a lot with £3\,500. \n  \nCP asked if the portion of the funding that is earmarked for the new community facility has to be spent on anything specific. RG responded that it is just a condition that it has to be used towards running the facility. \n  \nPA asked if there is a market for this arrangement. RG – yes there is\, as long as crews can access and start work at 5.00 a.m. \n  \nThere was a consensus in the meeting that 5.00 starts should be permitted again. RG assured the meeting that the LBH Film Unit will keep track of activity and are very responsive to complaints and comments. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n4.2\n  \nDefects \nRG reported that there are a few items still outstanding to individual homes. The main item that is still causing concern in common parts is the algae on areas of the courtyards. There was an inspection last week with LBH Regen Team and the architects. LBH have asked for a report from the brick manufacturers but also an independent analysis\, to try to determine the cause. EP asked if cost of mitigating this will be a service charge item.  RG replied that it will not as long as it is a contractor’s liability. EP suggested roping off the affected areas\, PA jet washing them. RG noted that a long term solution is needed. LBH are changing the product for the phase 3 & 4 spec. and these bricks are being tested now throughout the winter months. \n  \nOther defect items include: \ni)      a tree needs replacing in the far west courtyard and this will be done later this year\, just before the end of defects period in December. PA also noted a tree that has been broken outside the Sainsbury’s on Green Lanes/end of Murrain Rd. \nii)     door closers are being replaced at Chipping\, Kimpton and Wallington. \niii)   KH reported that the fire/smoke vents are defective in Wallington. They were fixed at the end of July but the warning lights came on again. The issue is with the New Build Team but the problem hasn’t been permanently fixed yet. \niv)   EP raised the bike shed break ins. This was done by de-activating doors generally\, so there is a general sense of lack of security. KH commented that it cannot be right if buildings are ‘secured by design’ that doors can be de-activated [easily]. NC noted that LBH have told all residents that bikes need to be stored in the bike sheds\, not flats and so\, in her view\, LBH should take responsibility if they are saying where bikes can be stored and this area is not safe. RG will arrange for this issue to be taken up with Higgins as part of the defects monitoring meetings. Discussion with the New Build team will also take place. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nRG\n\n\n  \n4.3\n  \nOpen House\, 21st September \nKings Crescent will be part of the annual Open House weekend on 21st between 10.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. Any residents are welcome to join a tour or be around to chat to visitors. A letter is going out to residents next week. \n  \nAlso\, on 25th Sept\, the panel of judges for the Civic Trust Design Awards will be visiting and in another few weeks\, representatives from LB Haringey’s Regen Team are also visiting. RG thanked residents for their patience and in some cases\, hosting these and many other visits. \n \n \n\n\n5.0\nSource training for contractor procurement\n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nJM reported that Source still intend to hold sessions on contractor procurement but that with the delays to the procurement process\, these are now likely to be October/November. These will be open to anyone but it is suggested that a small group actually take part in the contractor selection. Those who have put themselves forward are PA\, PD\, Ewan S and Jo G. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nResidents Group update\n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nEP gave feedback on progress and activities. \n  \ni)      On Thursday\, 5th Sept. a general meeting will vote on whether to become a TRA. EP noted that there are spaces still available to be on the committee\, so anyone interested is welcome. NC asked how everyone can hear about meetings\, activities etc. EP replied that the website (kingscrescent.org)\, facebook and e mails are kept updated with news. \nii)     On 28th Sept. the Res Group/ TRA is organising a Big Lunch. Food will be provided by people bringing a dish to share. It will be in and around Unit C\, so will have easy access to the play street. There have been discussions with LBH Resident Participation Team about taking Casbeard St out of commission to enable it to be vehicle-free for the period of the event between 12.30 and 3.00. JW-M suggested policing it ourselves and CP added that a play street she was involved in also used local residents to keep the street free of traffic for a few hours. RG added that Hackney Showroom are offering tables and chairs for the afternoon. \n  \n  \n  \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n7.0\nAny urgent business\n\n\n\n  \n7.1\n  \nMN asked about details of the new scheme proposals. Agreed for JM to meet him to go through the drawings\, plans etc.\n  \nJM\n\n\n  \n7.2\n  \nPA raised the issue of the bollards on the new streets. There is one particular bollard that vans often get stuck on.  BB suggested LBH need to keep monitoring this.\n\n\n\n8.0\nDate of next meeting\n\n\n\n  \n8.1\n  \nWednesday 9th October\, 7.00. \n \n \n\n\n\n  \nThe Meeting closed at 8.00 pm \n  \nPrevious information: \nThis is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the newly formed steering group. It is mandatory to have attended the steering group training provided by Source. \n\nIf you have already applied but haven’t been able to attend the training they have run so far but would still like to be part of the steering group please contact john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n\nIf you are not part of the steering group you can always express any views directly to Carol and John or discuss with the KC residents committee who can feedback into the steering group kcresidentsgroup@outlook.com\n\n\nAGENDA \n  \n  \n\n\n\n\nAgenda item \nLead \n\n\n1\nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n2\nNotes of previous meeting held 9th July 2019 and any matters arising not elsewhere on the agenda \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n3\nPhase 3 & 4 update\, including planning and procurement \n \nRon (LBH)\n\n\n4\nPhase 1 & 2 update \n \nBronwen (LBH)\n\n\n5\nSource training for contractor procurement \n \nJohn (Source)\n\n\n6\nResidents Group update \n \nEmley (Residents  Group Chair) \n \n\n\n7\nAny urgent business \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n8\nDates of next meeting \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n\n  \n  \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/september-steering-group-meeting-2/ LOCATION:Vince Murrrain Community Centre\, N4 2GD CATEGORIES:steering group meeting ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://kingscrescent.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Model-of-new-build-from-Queens-Drive.jpg END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20190730T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20190730T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20190517T001451Z LAST-MODIFIED:20190727T150646Z UID:637-1564513200-1564518600@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:CANCELLED Steering Group meeting July DESCRIPTION:Dates changed – next Steering Group meeting is 3rd September \nThis is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the newly formed steering group. \n\nSource Partnership\, in their capacity as Independent Advisors for residents of Kings Crescent have been running some induction training for new and existing steering group members. If you haven’t been able to attend the training they have run so far but would like to join the steering group please contact john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n\nIf you are not part of the steering group you can always express any views directly to Carol and John or discuss with the KC residents committee who can feedback into the steering group.\n\nThe agenda for and minutes of the meeting will be posted here when available. URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-meeting-july/ LOCATION:Vince Murrrain Community Centre\, N4 2GD CATEGORIES:steering group meeting END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20190709T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20190709T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20190606T172639Z LAST-MODIFIED:20190902T225457Z UID:649-1562698800-1562704200@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Steering Group Meeting 9 July DESCRIPTION:Minutes: \n\n\n\n \n \n\n\n \n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nApologies were received from Natalie Crouchley \n \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 16 May 2019 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nFrom 2.2 re Sainsbury’s vent. LBH are waiting for Sainsbury’s to respond with  a noise report and to set out proposals to deal with the profile of the vent on the roof \n \n \n\n\n  \n2.2\n  \nFrom 4.2 re ITLA re-procurement. A decision has been made on the successful tenderer. RG is writing a recommendation to colleagues which will be made public by the end of July. [Post- meeting note from RG: thanks to Peter Akhurst for his assistance in the evaluation process]. \n \n  \n \n\n\n  \n2.3\n  \nFrom 5.2 re Unit C. RG reported that LBH are currently working on a 5 year lease to offer the preferred managers of the unit. A planning application is also being prepared to temporarily change the use from A1/A3 (retail) to A1/A3 and D1 (community use) for 5 years. This may need to go to the October Planning Committee\, if there are objections. . EP asked how long the fit out might take. RG suggested 4-6 weeks. YV asked why this has taken so long. RG explained that LBH wanted to do something innovative\, that there was a period of soft market testing\, that the financial challenge of a loss of rent had to be considered and that the process of inviting bids for taking over the space also took time. \n \n \n\n\n  \n2.4 \n \n  \nFrom 9.1 re the old boiler house. RG confirmed that the plan is to convert this to a 3 bed social rent flat. \n \n \n\n\n3.0\nPhase 3 & 4 update\n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nPlanning \n  \nRG reported that notification letters went out to local residents mid June\, with a deadline of 7/7/19 for representations\, although BB pointed out that comments to the Council will continue to be accepted up to the date of the Planning Committee. RG hopes to have the application dealt with at the 2nd October Committee. He confirmed that 6 objections to the scheme have been received so far. \n  \nEP asked if the pressure on local schools is a factor in approving the development. Few residents in the first phase of the new build got their first choice school places and the second phase will only increase demand. CP reminded the meeting that\, as councillors\, her and colleagues do keep a close eye on school places and demand.  BB noted that some schools are under occupied due to families moving out of the area once children get to school age\, so the issue may not be as severe as might be thought. \n  \nRG added that an education contribution will be included in the developer’s S106 obligations. \n \n \n\n\n  \n3.2\n  \nConstruction procurement \n  \nRG reported that\, in advance of the planning determination\, LBH and the design team are continuing to work on detailed design issues to ensure standards are maintained and to make sure that the eventual spec. for contractors to tender on are as unambiguous as possible. This work will be completed mid September for inclusion in the Employer’s Requirements. \n  \nThe procurement strategy was approved yesterday. LBH will take on the sales of the new homes themselves in order to tailor the marketing locally and to manage the risk of fluctuations in the market. \n  \nThe process for the tender is as follows: \ni)                 Expressions of Interest will be advertised by mid August with a month for interested developers to respond \nii)               Those responding will be shortlisted \niii)              Tender documents will be issued early October with 10 weeks for responses \niv)              There will then be a period of negotiation with the successful bidder during January 2020 \nv)               Final evaluation of tender will start around end Feb 2020 \nvi)              This will then be presented at another Procurement Committee in May 2020 (NB this is a multi million £ contract\, so LBH due diligence is very thorough). \nvii)            Contracts will hopefully be signed approx. June 2020 \nviii)           There will then be 4 to 5 months for contractor’s mobilisation \nix)              Start on site around October 2020 \n  \nKH asked about how Brexit would affect this process if it happens 31/10\, which will be during the period that bidders will be compiling their tenders. RG noted the uncertainty inherent in this and raised the prospect of bidders increasing proposed costs to cover potential risks; the negotiation with the successful tenderer will address some of the issues here. \n  \nES commented on the length of time this is likely to take. RG responded by highlighting the statutory periods for consultation\, the desire to give tenderers plenty of time to formulate their bid and the Council cttee cycle. \n  \nKH asked about the branding likely to be used by LBH Sales. RG confirmed that there will be no Clissold Quarter! The marketing will be honest but commercial. CP added that LBH will want to market the homes for sale as part of a wider community – not just on the KC estate. \n  \nCS asked about the involvement of residents in this process. Source would want residents to be able to participate in evaluating the quality aspects of the tender which might include site visits to other bidders’ schemes. RG confirmed this would be the case and he would want residents to pay particular attention to proposed construction management plans (i.e. how contractors will mitigate noise\, dust\, dirt\, ensure site security etc.) \n  \nPS asked if it was known which southside block the refurbishment would start on. RG – no and we won’t know this until the successful contractor finalises their work programme. \n  \nPS asked if contractors will need access to homes. RG – yes\, especially ground floor flats where balcony columns will be sited but also other homes in order to complete e.g. balcony installations.  RG added that tenderers’ proposals for Resident Liaison staff will be crucial. JW-M highlighted the importance of asking about respite facilities and that residents need time in advance to think about what other questions they want to ask. \n  \nAA asked if\, as part of the tender process it is possible to ask about suppliers and sub contractors. RG replied that bidders are often not willing to commit to providing definitive answers to this sort of question but certainly CDM and health & safety will be key areas to probe. \n  \nNJ asked if\, because they built phases 1 &2\, Higgins are precluded from tendering. RG – no and in fact they should be able to use their experience on KC to their advantage.\n \n\n\n  \n3.3\n  \nFilm Unit request \n  \nRG informed the meeting that LBH Film Unit had been in touch to ask if the currently vacant part of the middle of the estate could be used by visiting film crews to park vehicles\, catering vans\, dressing rooms etc. The hours of use would be strictly monitored: 7.00 – 23.00 on weekdays\, 8.00 – 22.30 on Saturdays and 9.00 – 22.00 on Sundays. LBH could charge film companies up to £1\,000 a day. 25% of this would go to the Residents Group and 25% to LBH Regen team who could for instance use the money for fitting out/adapting Unit C. It would also be good security for the site as it will be in regular use. RG committed to publicise this well to all residents and\, in response to JW-M reminding the meeting that the last time this happened the promised money didn’t materialise.  RG committed to being open with the amount of funding this attracts and to the relevant proportion of it definitely being available as promised. \n \n \n\n\n4.0\nPhase 1 & 2 update\n \n\n\n  \n4.1 \n \n  \nBT fed back that there is still a very short list of outstanding defects to deal with. There may be another 2/3 weeks still to resolve the issue with the block front doors. \n  \nYV raised the defects period at Chipping Court which\, he understood was 1 year.  BT confirmed that this is just for internal defects. The problem with the communal door at Chipping Ct is a latent defect and still needs resolving with Higgins.  KH also mentioned smoke vent problems. BT confirmed she is aware of these faults; they should be fixed very soon. YV also mentioned problems with the floor of Chipping Court; BT will talk to him after the meeting. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nBT\n\n\n  \n4.2\n  \nBT reported that the energy centre will be handed over from Higgins to LBH very soon. The Combined Heating & Power (CHP) part will still be maintained by an external organisation. \n \n \n\n\n  \n4.3\n  \nBT raised the possibility that LBH would like Kings Crescent to be part of Open House weekend in September. KCA/HHB architects will want to organise tours around the new blocks and if any residents wish to help with this\, please let Bronwen know.\n \n\n\n  \n4.4\n  \nBT thanked those who came and contributed to the Kings Crescent Story launch.  The hard copy booklet of the boards will be finalised soon and the display boards are on the KC website and still up at the windows on Unit C.  BT reported that some stories are still being offered and JW-M also added another story she had received from an old tenant. \n  \n \n \n\n\n5.0\nDraft statement of community support for phases 3 & 4\n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nThere was discussion about how best to incorporate a reference to the objections raised by residents at consultation events and the wording KH proposed. After contributions particularly from PD and HC\, it was agreed that the following sentence be added to para 5 in the statement: “While there are some remaining objections to specific design features\, on balance the majority of residents on the Steering Group endorse the overall design.”  A vote was taken on adopting this wording: 12 were in favour\, 2 were against using it in the statement.  It was further agreed that the statement should be signed by a representative sample of residents from the RSG and PS\, JW-M\, EP and KH all offered to put their names to the statement. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nRSG training update and feedback\n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nCS reported that most of the RSG had been to at least one training session. Source will now organise a semi-formal evening where the Design & Access Statement will be available for members to look at. Possible date for this 5th August. \n  \nTraining will still be held for contractor procurement – tba. \n  \nThe July coffee afternoon will be replaced by a summer social on 25th July\, 5.00 to 8.00. \n  \nBB asked that those on the RSG list who have not yet been to a meeting be contacted to ask if they do still wish to be members.\n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nJM \n \n\n\n7.0\nResidents Group update\n \n\n\n  \n7.1\n  \nEP gave an update: \ni)          Sainsbury’s are now donating refreshments for the monthly family events \nii)         There are plans to establish a Youth Group with the help of Jill’s daughter who is a Youth Worker. This may be put back to September or even later depending on progress with the Unit C lease \niii)       The Residents Group had an open meeting on 6th June at which it was agreed that they will propose becoming a TRA at the September meeting. If agreed\, there will be an AGM soon after to elect a committee. \niv)       13th July there will be a gardener’s tea to follow up the informal gardening event in May. \nv)         A trip to Walton on the Naze is planned for 21st July. \nvi)       The Friends of Woodberry Down hold events every Tuesday and Friday afternoons in the community centre. These are attended mostly by residents from the Manor House area\, so if anyone knows of any KC residents over 50 who might like to attend\, they could be encouraged to come along. \nvii)      EP went to a CCTV control centre open day which was very educational. She highlighted the ongoing concerns with KC cameras and the control centre staff asked for details of the hotspots. RG reported that he had also met with the CCTV staff with Housing Management to see how cameras can be re-sited to avoid being damaged or sprayed over. \n \n \n\n\n8.0\nAny urgent business\n \n\n\n  \n8.1\n  \nCP reported that Alice Whalley\, vicar from one of the local churches had spoken to her about forming a local Scout Group. This could be something the Residents Group might wish to consider. \n \n \n\n\n9.0\nDates of next meetings\n \n\n\n  \n9.1\n  \nNext meeting will be: \nTuesday 3rd September \nWednesday 9th October \nWednesday 13th November \nWednesday 18th December \n  \nAll 7.00\, venues to be confirmed depending on other activities in the community centre. \n \n \n\n\n\n  \nThe Meeting closed at 8.34 pm \n  \n  \nThis is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the newly formed steering group. \n\nSource Partnership\, in their capacity as Independent Advisors for residents of Kings Crescent have been running some induction training for new and existing steering group members. If you haven’t been able to attend the training they have run so far but would like to join the steering group please contact john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \nThe training is mandatory so Source are running a catch-up session on 20th June for those who have missed any of the training so far. 6.30-8.30pm in the community centre. \n\nIf you are not part of the steering group you can always express any views directly to Carol and John or discuss with the KC residents committee who can feedback into the steering group.\n\n\nMeeting to be held on \nTuesday 9th July 2019 starting at 7.00pm in the Vince Murrain Community Centre \n  \n  \nAGENDA \n  \n\n\n\n\nAgenda item \nLead \n\n\n1\nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n2\nNotes of previous meeting held 16 May 2019 and any matters arising not elsewhere on the agenda \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n3\nPhase 3 & 4 update\, including planning \n \nRon (LBH)\n\n\n4\nPhase 1 & 2 update \n \nBronwen (LBH)\n\n\n5\nDraft statement of community support for phases 3 & 4 \n \nCarol (Source)\n\n\n6\nRSG training update and feedback \n \nCarol (Source)\n\n\n7\nResidents Group update \n \nEmley (Residents  Group Chair)\n\n\n8\nAny urgent business \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n9\nDates of next meeting \n \nCllr Bell (Chair) URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-meeting-9-july/ LOCATION:Vince Murrrain Community Centre\, N4 2GD CATEGORIES:steering group meeting END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20190626T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20190626T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20190517T001255Z LAST-MODIFIED:20190606T172247Z UID:635-1561575600-1561581000@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:POSTPONED! Steering Group Meeting June DESCRIPTION:This is a closed meeting for those who have applied to be part of the newly formed steering group. \n\nSource Partnership\, in their capacity as Independent Advisors for residents of Kings Crescent have been running some induction training for new and existing steering group members. If you haven’t been able to attend the training they have run so far but would like to join the steering group please contact john@sourcepartnership.com or carol@sourcepartnership.com \n\nIf you are not part of the steering group you can always express any views directly to Carol and John or discuss with the KC residents committee who can feedback into the steering group.\n\nThe agenda for and minutes of the meeting will be posted here when available. URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group-meeting-june/ LOCATION:Unit C (vacant unit by Wallington)\, Murrain Road CATEGORIES:steering group meeting END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20190516T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20190516T203000 DTSTAMP:20260501T013729 CREATED:20190516T175221Z LAST-MODIFIED:20190606T171833Z UID:621-1558033200-1558038600@kingscrescent.org SUMMARY:Steering Group Meeting May DESCRIPTION:Minutes: \n\n\n\n1.0\nIntroductions and apologies \nAction\n\n\n  \n1.1\n  \nApologies were received from Gouri Ghosh\, Cllr Clare Potter\, Roy Watkin\, Anna McConnell (stepping down from the RSG) and Ron Greenwood. (Post meeting note : Jo Griffiths also gave late apologies not picked up until after the meeting) \n \n \n\n\n2.0\nNotes of previous meeting held 11 April 2019 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda\n \n\n\n  \n2.1\n  \nFrom 4.1 re pigeons. BT confirmed that the anti pigeon gel is being piloted on 2 new blocks. Also\, that it lasts for approx. 5 years and therefore will be replaced at Weston Ct as well. \nIf pilot is unsuccessful\, other methods will be tried. \n \n \n\n\n  \n2.2\n  \nFrom 11.2 re Sainsbury’s vent on Green Lanes. This query is with Planning. BT to update at June RSG. \n \n  \nBT\n\n\n3.0\nKings Crescent Story update and presentation\n \n\n\n  \n3.1\n  \nBT gave a presentation of the boards that will be produced for the launch on 25th June. She asked if anyone has more photos or other material that could be added to fill the ‘middle years\,’ these would be welcomed. \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n \n\n\n4.0\nPhase 3 & 4 update\n \n\n\n  \n4.1 \n  \n  \n  \n \n  \nBT reported that the scheme has passed Gateway 1. A few details were flagged up internally which have delayed submission of the scheme to the planners. LBH are quite a strict client\, which is positive. The Regen. team now hope to submit the application next week.  Formal consultation letters will be sent out to all local residents 3 to 4 weeks after submission of the planning application and this will describe how representations in response to the plans can be made. \n  \nLetters have gone out to refurbishment blocks for final consultation meetings. The main date is 30th May\, to run alongside Source’s May coffee afternoon. 2 additional meetings have been arranged for residents in the Weston Court podium flats and the north east corner flats of Datchworth Court. \n  \nBB referred to the previous RSG minutes for details of the full planning process. He also asked if any RSG member is interested in being part of the contractor selection process; PD put himself forward. \n  \nBT also noted that additional GLA funding has enabled LBH to produce 12 more social rented flats (28 in total). This is part of 100 extra social rented homes across the borough. CS asked if these will be subject to the local lettings policy that was piloted here in phase 1 & 2; we were expecting some feedback last year from the pilot. BT confirmed that they would be available for the revised local lettings arrangements. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n4.2\n  \nThe ITLA contract needs to be re-procured. There is a framework of 5 consultancies that LBH use. BT invited a resident to sit on the selection panel with her and Ron; PA volunteered. Interviews possibly in late June/early July. This might take 2 half days to score the submissions and possibly to interview. \n \n \n\n\n5.0\nPhase 1 & 2 update\n \n\n\n  \n5.1\n  \nBT reported that final defects are now with Higgins\, mostly small\, individual items. TV reception and the problems with the fobs and main front doors to the blocks are the main estate-wide issues remaining. EP thought that posts on the local Facebook site suggest that there are more complaints than reach LBH. ES added that the problems are intermittent and because they keep recurring\, it gets tiring continually reporting them. There was further discussion about the door closers; BT concluded that for the Northside blocks\, LBH looking to get the door manufacturers back.\n \n\n\n  \n5.2\n  \nBB noted that the lease and management of Unit C is still in negotiation. \n \n \n\n\n  \n5.3\n  \nEP raised the issue of the slippery courtyards. BT – LBH is looking at specialist cleaning contractor. ES noted that it seemed to be the areas that don’t get sunlight which become slippery; c/w the pocket park brick paving which is south facing and which doesn’t get slippery. \n \n \n\n\n6.0\nDraft statement of community support for phases 3 & 4\n \n\n\n  \n6.1\n  \nCS introduced this; it is customary for steering groups to offer a statement of support for planning applications. It is acknowledged that there is not 100% support for 100% of the scheme but a general level of support exists which can be ratified by a signed statement of support addressed to the planners. In some schemes all members of the SG sign\, in others\, just the Chair. The draft was circulated and everyone given the chance to read it. KH felt that he personally would not be able to sign it\, nor could he as a representative of Wallington Court residents. ES queried ‘well-managed’ (3rd bullet point on page 1). CS explained this meant maintained and managed in terms of ensuring behaviour is reasonable and ASB is dealt with. BT added that housing management and the ASB Team will try to ensure that there is a shared understanding of how communal spaces should be used properly.  It was agreed that the statement will be amended to broaden this out/be more descriptive about what this means. \n  \nKH highlighted the last sentence of para 5\, where there is reference to ‘lively discussions.’ BB suggested that if he wants this to be more reflective of the challenges presented to the scheme\, he could contribute his wording for the sentence to the draft. \n  \nJM will circulate the draft to the whole RSG mailing list so that those not present now can read it and comment\, and attendees tonight can consider a response with more time. \n  \nBT and JWM emphasised that it is important that anyone who wishes to is able to express a view. BB emphasised that this does not prevent anyone from making their own comments as part of the statutory planning consultation. \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \nCS \n  \n  \n  \n  \nKH \n  \n  \n  \nJM\n\n\n7.0\nRSG training update and feedback\n \n\n\n  \n7.1\n  \nCS gave an update on dates which have been affected by the 23/5 elections and 30/5 consultation event. It is now proposed that the session for catching up on the induction training is held 20th June with the session on contractor selection in early September. Overall\, the feedback from the training has been very positive. \n \n \n\n\n8.0\nResidents Group update\n \n\n\n  \n8.1\n  \nEP gave an update: \ni)  another successful family fun morning (last Saturday of each month) was held in April \nii)  the Town Hall visit went well – attended by some children as well as the adult members of the group \n \n  \n  \n  \n  \n  \n \n\n\n  \n \niii)  the service charge meeting on 9th May was useful but the general view was that there are still questions to be answered. Notes from Alice Hutchinson are on the KC website. The Residents Group committee feel this as ongoing item of concern. \niv)  the gardening morning took place on Saturday (11th May). Compost was bought with last year’s funding. Sarah Coxhead brought her own seeds that were planted. PA made the comment that the event was not as ambitious as he thought it could be. EP invited suggestions on how a similar event could be improved\, given that it was also aimed at children. But pointed out that Sarah C. had brought and paid for her own seeds and equipment to start it off. It was up to residents\, via the Residents Group to decide how to spend their funding – so if a bigger and better event was popular\, money could be set aside for this. The next Residents Group open meeting is 6th June\, where views on how to use the funding can be discussed. \n \n \n\n\n9.0\nAny urgent business\n \n\n\n  \n9.1\n  \nPS asked for an update on plans for the old boiler house. BT explained that different options were explored\, including using it for additional community space. But the difficulty of access made this unviable. Currently\, it is marked on the plans as a space for back up generators for the lifts\, but it is unlikely that this will be needed. Therefore\, it is likely to be converted to create another flat.  PA asked what will happen to the chimney. BT stated that at the moment\, it will be left in place. \n \n \n\n\n  \n9.2\n  \nPA enquired about the opening up works for the ground survey that was carried out around Weston Court. BT is still waiting to see the results. \n \n \n\n\n  \n9.3\n  \nJM asked how many of those present would still like hard copies of the papers delivered in addition to the emailed versions. PA\, PD and PS requested a posted hard copy\, the other members confirmed they are happy to receive them electronically. \n \n \n\n\n10.0\nDates of next meetings\n \n\n\n  \n10.1\n  \nNext meeting arranged for 26th June.  (Post meeting note – BB has notified that there is a full Council meeting on 26th June\, so the RSG date will need to change) \n \n \n\n\n\n  \nThe Meeting closed at 8.15 pm \n  \nMeeting to be held on \nThursday 16 May 2019 starting at 7.00pm in the Vince Murrain Community Centre \n  \n  \nAGENDA \n  \n  \n\n\n\n\nAgenda item \nLead \n\n\n1\nIntroductions and Apologies \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n2\nNotes of previous meeting held 11 April 2019 and any Matters Arising not elsewhere on the agenda \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n3\nKings Crescent Story update and presentation \n \nBronwen (LBH)\n\n\n4\nPhase 3 & 4 update \n \nBronwen (LBH)\n\n\n5\nPhase 1 & 2 update \n \nBronwen (LBH)\n\n\n6\nDraft statement of community support for phases 3 & 4 \n \nCarol (Source)\n\n\n7\nRSG training update and feedback \n \nCarol (Source)\n\n\n8\nResidents Group update \n \nEmley (Residents  Group Chair)\n\n\n9\nAny urgent business \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n10\nDates of next meeting \n \nCllr Bell (Chair)\n\n\n\n  \n  \n  URL:https://kingscrescent.org/calendar/steering-group/ LOCATION:Vince Murrrain Community Centre\, N4 2GD CATEGORIES:steering group meeting END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR