Steering group Meeting July 2021

Cllr Clare Potter (CP)

7 residents:

EP, JWM, KH, PA, PD, HC, TD

William Owen (WO)

Carol Squires (CS)

John Morris (JM)

Menekse Saitoglu

Sam Curtis Lindsay (SCL)

LB Hackney

Source Partnership (ITLA)

Source Partnership (ITLA)

Source Partnership (ITLA)

Hackney Showroom

1.1

2.1

It was noted that the sewer behind the Vince Murrain Community Centre has finally been repaired with a permanent cover.

3.1

·   14/8 – street party 12 noon to 6.00 pm to launch the refitted HS/TRA space.

·   Everyone on the estate should have received a brochure listing activities for the rest of 2021.

·   16/8 for 2 weeks Futureheads for 8-11 year olds. On line sign up. All activities are free for KC residents.

·   From 3/9, every Friday an over 60s lunch club, 12 -2. In parallel with this, HS are also launching a befriending service.

·   The TRA is restarting the homework club in the HS space from 6/9.

·   Disco Loco library on Tuesdays 4-6 with reading and activities

·   Easy Rollers – soft play and music for under 1s between 10 and 11 am, under 5s 11 to 12.

·   Kings Feast – a meal and quiz, kids before 7.00, adults 7.00 to 9.00

·   15/9 TRA AGM

·   TRA family fun mornings once a month from 7/10 – coffee and drop in to chat to Chama, HS Community Co-ordinator.

·   The space will also be open for hirers.

·   Once open, HS will be at Murrain Rd 10-6 Monday to Friday.

CP asked what the arrangements will be for local residents to run activities.

SCL 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.

JMW to send SCL details of someone she knows who is interested in running seated exercise classes.

 JMW

4.1

5.1

Issues that have been challenging or been the subject of value engineering include:

·        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

·     Alternative lift supplier being discussed with the LBH lifts team for sales flats

Savings on refurbishment have been considered in the light of a desire to maintain design parity with the new build blocks.

·     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.

The view is that the external changes may require a planning application as a material amendment to existing permission.

Further value engineering proposals will result in:

·     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.

KH 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.

CP 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.

HC 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.

CP 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.

·     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.

CP 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.

BB asked for an updated timetable. RG reported:

o   Final negotiation meeting 6/8/21

o   Best and final offer to be submitted by 23/8/21

o   S20 stage 2 to be issued once the result of the tender is known – Sept.

o   A surgery for leaseholder queries will be organised mid Oct.

o   End of October completion of S20 process.

o   Cabinet approval on 6/10/21.

o   Contract signed in November.

o   3^rd stage S20 notice is more by way of information and can be issued after contract entered into.

o   Spring 2022 start on site.

EP 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.

BB 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.

EP 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.

WO

5.2

PA 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.

PD thought common areas were a generous size and again, finishes looked good.

BB noted the balconies that looked out over a very busy road and the underground car park apparently flooded.

WO ran through photos and videos he took on the visit.

RG noted that one area of discussion arose around the desire to start the conversation about the fit out of our community centre early.

6.1

LBH 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.

KH 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.

BB asked that this is kept on the agenda for future meetings.

 WO

WO

7.1

The homework club is switching to HS in September.

The TRA secured a grant so that HS’s Futureheads programme can be extended into a second week.

TRA AGM is on 15^th Sept. Nominations for new committee members are welcome.

8.1

We have been dealing with leaseholder buyback requests and anticipate  more work when the next stage of S20 Notices go out.

Introductions and Apologies

Unit C update

a)     Update on progress with contractor procurement

b)     Site visits – Ladderswood Estate 27^th July

Ron (LBH)

Ron (LBH) / John (Source)

Any urgent business