Notes from meeting with Catalyst re. Friary Park Estate Development
May be of some interest to those in the Friary Park / Horn Lane area: Date: 19th February 2015Meeting: Julia Moulder, Director of Development, and Martyn Freeman, Head of Special Projects, of Catalyst HousingIn Attendance: Angie Bray MP and Sanya Sheikh, chair, CANForumIn General- Each design workshop considers a specific aspect of the regeneration, for example: 1) Inside the properties; 2) Public realm within the estate; 3) Impact of construction.- The third design workshop focusing on the impact of construction will include a number of participants from the surrounding areas.- The pre-application process itself involves approx.10 stages; Catalyst have scheduled their design workshops to ensure relevant consultation takes place before the related pre-application conversation with the council, so that the evidence can be taken into consideration first.Housing MixDiscussed: Concerns about the mix of housing.Catalyst has confirmed the units will be split 50% social and 50% private. The 50% social will include a replacement of all the current 239 social rentals, plus additional affordable housing and shared ownership. The 50% private includes both owned and rented. The final numbers of the mix depend on the final numbers of the approved planning application, however the likely figure will be circa. 500 units and the social housing minimum will be units to replace the 239 current social rentals, with no increase in rent. Catalyst assured us that they will accommodate as much sub-market housing as possible.Agreement: Catalyst will communicate their intentions to the wider community.HeightDiscussed: The need to answer concerns regarding the size and location of the main tower, including privacy and the oppressive height.Catalyst say in order to meet the density expectation of the urban location, the towers need to reach a certain height. The towers are staggered and placed on the parameter away from the more residential roads to balance the quality of life for those who live inside the estate, versus those who live outside, i.e. if all buildings were fewer stories, they would be the same height and the estate would be relatively monolithic, dark and warren-like for the Friary Park Estate (FPE) residents.Catalyst say the Council are encouraging the density to be accommodated upwards and, additionally, to locate the tower on the south-east corner as part of the 'Crossrail Gateway' urban regeneration plans. This in turn accords with the GLA's view. Therefore the balance of opinion of the developer, the Council and the GLA is that the tower should be as tall as needed to accommodate the density expectation for an urban location, and that it should be located opposite the Crossrail station.Catalyst say the location in the south-east corner will mean the principle overlook will be the main Crossrail junction and the railway running along the Friary Road. They are looking at other possible locations, but have warned that the perception of the height of the tower will not be ameliorated, as, despite the ridge, the site is relatively flat. The Council planners will be the ultimate arbiters of the planning application.Agreement: Catalyst will have the outcomes of the investigation as to how the shadows fall and which aspects will be overlooked in time for the relevant design workshop with the residents.TimeframeDiscussed: The uncertainty regarding the likely timeframe.Catalyst say consultation and the pre-application process is likely to be complete by the Summer, with the planning application reaching the Council in July 2015. They imagine the planning application process will be complete by February 2016, and Phase 1 FPE residents will be transferred to their temporary accommodation during 2016, with hoarding going up (i.e. breaking ground) in 2017.Agreement: Catalyst will communicate this general timeline to FPE and surrounding residentsDuty of CareDiscussed: The concerns regarding the movement of current tenants and especially the vulnerable.Catalyst say that each household will have a 'move plan', created after an intake session with each individually, and that they are recruiting someone to manage the overview of these. Catalyst say they have not accepted new permanent tenancies in order to develop an empty stock of properties.This empty stock will eventually be used to house those more vulnerable tenants whose 'move plan' would suggest they need to stay in the same location.All other FPE residents will be relocated; the locations are dependant on where Catalyst stock is available. Catalyst say they will work with schools to ensure minimum disruption to children, including taking into account where the children are in their educational cycle. 1 bed tenants without children will be moved first as they will experience less disruption. Some Phase 1 tenants may be returned in 2-3 years time, depending on their individual 'move plan' and children's ages / school years.Elderly and vulnerable people who have been recognised as such will be prioritised to stay within the estate. Catalyst were pleased to find that vulnerable people who had not yet been formally recognised have become visible through the consultation process. Catalyst expect to work with the elderly and the vulnerable to ensure any adaptations are planned in for their new properties. The aforementioned empty stock has been offered to the Council to accommodate temporary tenancies in the meantime, however Catalyst have no obligation to consult or rehouse these temporary residents.Agreement: Catalyst will communicate this general plan to FPE residentsCommunicationDiscussed: The need to increase the communication with the current FPE residents and those in the surrounding area.Catalyst say they are looking at how effective their communication has been and have already increased their newsletter drops to 2000 in the estate and around the area. Possible methods discussed include, using email more effectively, Twitter, posters in the area. And, 'over communicating', i.e. repeatedly making details of timelines etc. easily known and understood.Agreement: Catalyst will review their communication and method of reaching both FPE residents and those in the surrounding area. The further information email address for effected residents is: julia.moulder@chg.org.ukOutstanding: Catalyst believe the volume and detail communicated should differ between the two groups, with the emphasis being on FPE residents.MaintenanceDiscussed: The need to maintain the current properties and ensure they don't fall into disrepair between now and their demolition.Catalyst say it became clear this was an issue concerning the FPE residents during the consultation process. They are looking at how to ensure the correct 'pot' of money is in place both pre-construction and for this purpose per phase of the construction.Agreement: Catalyst will ensure finances are available for necessary maintenance of the properties pre-construction and per phase of construction.Steering Group/Resident's AssociationDiscussed: The possibility that the Steering Group is invisible, not independent and therefore ineffectively representing the real concerns of FPE residents.Catalyst say there is a small Steering Group, however they have found it hard to get people actively involved. They were please that 17 households joined the first design workshop and co-opted some of those who attended into the Steering Group, such as it exists. The possibility of an independent Residents' Association is welcome, though there are concerns that it not be dominated by those living in the surrounding areas, as their needs may differ from Catalyst's primary concern, the FPE residents themselves. It was impressed upon Catalyst that the impact on the residents in the surrounding areas will be life-changing during construction, let alone once the new development is at full capacityAgreement: Catalyst will engage with an independent Residents' Association when it is constitutedSection 106/CILDiscussed: The urgent need to understand the how Catalyst will be contributing to the infrastructure of the area, given the 100% uplift in units on the site.Catalyst say S106/CIL and how it is spent flows out of the housing mix, e.g. a higher percentage of 1 beds will equate to a lower percentage of the money being spend on schools as 1 beds do not house families. The exact mix is yet to be decided and how the money is allocated will need to be decided in collaboration with the Council, based on an assessment of the needs of the neighbourhood area. In terms of the pre-application process the Infrastructure is circa. Step 8 of 10. The Council have not yet proposed a dialogue on this subject. Catalyst are concerned they will be expected to shoulder an disproportionate cost, the real impact on local infrastructure being Crossrail. They hope to get an appropriate contribution from Crossrail and the Council.Outstanding: The exact housing mix which will be applied for, and therefore the equating S106/CIL the local neighbourhood can expect to generate from this regeneration scheme.Open SpaceDiscussed: Concerns that the open spaces are appropriately accessible and landscaped for family use.Catalyst say they have appointed the landscape architect; the firm is an arm of the architectural practice working on the rest of the development, which they hope will result in continuity in design and thought, inside and out. They reiterated their hope to co-opt the publicly accessible triangle of grass and slip road at the north-eastern edge of the site, matching it with a sympathetic amount of land to create a publicly accessible space for all. To this end they have delayed the pre-application meeting which would discuss their plans until after the relevant design workshop so that FPE residents' views can be taken into consideration.Agreement: The open space co-opting the triangle of grass and slip road will remain open for public access and use.Outstanding: The concern that the open space would be badly placed given it is next to a slip road off the A40.Community HallDiscussed: Concerns that the community hall will be lost during the regeneration.Catalyst feel the hall is not sufficiently used to merit an exact replacement. It was impressed upon them that the hall is valued by residents. Catalyst responded that they have incorporated community space, however it might change location and shape, e.g. a community creche-cafe located on Friary Road.Agreement: Catalyst have planned non-residential capacity built into the plan for community use.Outstanding: Where and what that community use would be.ParkingDiscussed: The concern that the CPZ allocation will be removed after 5 years.Catalyst are clear that parking, the number of spaces, the allocation of electric, disabled, car-club, etc., and CPZs are dictated by the Council, though they agree that the target market for their private units is Crossrail usersDrillingDiscussed: Concerns re. drilling seen at two separate locations on the site.Catalyst say that one location was due to uncertainty over services delivery (presumably pipes) and the second location was establish what was underneath the hardstanding (hard surface). Catalyst confirm they have not broken ground.
Sanya Sheikh ● 4215d22 Comments