ESTATE Upper Clapton E5 INTRODUCTION AND UPDATE We are holding these events this week to discuss the redevelopment solutions which have been developed by the design team on behalf of The Guinness Partnership. The three solutions which have been considered are infi ll, partial and full redevelopment of the Northwold Estate. The ideas which have informed the solutions have come from discussion with Guinness, feedback from the initial resident consultations in July and August and from site visits to the Estate as well as background research on policy and local plans. A set of key drivers for the project have been identifi ed and each solution has been tested against these drivers. The Guinness Partnership s preferred solution is partial redevelopment which will affect some existing households on the Estate. In advance of this consultation, The Guinness Partnership have written to all residents on the Estate to inform them whether they will be affected by the preferred solution and to set out the guarantees which The Guinness Partnership are making to tenants and the options which are available to resident leaseholders. All the information below has been circulated to the affected residents in advance of this consultation and further detail should be discussed with Newman Francis and The Guinness Partnership. TENANTS Any tenant with an assured, secure or fixed-term tenancy who wishes to continue to live on the estate will have the opportunity to do so You will be guaranteed a new property and where possible we will try to match the new property with your housing needs You will remain on the estate during the development and we aim to make sure you only have to move once Your tenancy conditions will be protected you will have the same tenancy type at your new home Your rent will remain the same and will only change if you move to a smaller or larger home You will be provided with a tailored support package to move, including both practical and fi nancial support Guinness will pay you a statutory home loss payment plus reasonable costs of removal and disturbance. RESIDENT LEASEHOLDERS There are a number of options available to resident leaseholders such as: leasehold swap: this means you can opt to buy a new lease on a new home on the estate at 100% equity share. leasehold swap with shared equity: this means if you are unable to afford the full value of a new home, you can acquire an equity share of a new home. The value of the equity share would be the same as the value of your existing property, with Guinness owning the other share. There would be no rent payable on the equity share owned by Guinness. shared ownership: We can offer leaseholders a conventional shared ownership option this means that resident leaseholders can share ownership with Guinness on a new home. All resident leaseholders who qualify will be entitled to receive: a home loss payment plus reasonable disturbance costs, stamp duty and mortgage redemption and/or arrangement fees we will pay relevant and reasonable legal and valuation costs, which enable leaseholders to obtain their own independent advice an advisor will provide assistance with the transaction and moving home we will provide additional assistance to homeowners in fi nancial diffi culties and for homeowners who consider themselves vulnerable. NON-RESIDENT LEASEHOLDERS Non-resident leaseholders qualify for a basic loss payment and a limited right to reasonable incidental costs when buying alternative accommodation in the UK within 12 months.
THE DRIVERS FOR DEVELOPMENT New homes? Will the proposal provide new homes? How many new homes will be provided? Keep the community together? Will the proposal keep the existing community together? Homes for the existing community? Will the proposal provide new homes for existing residents? Appropriate for context? Will the proposal fi t into the existing context and maintain the scale and character of the existing neighbourhood? Fund improvement works? Will the proposal generate enough capital to fund landscape, refuse and parking improvements across the whole estate? Safety and security? Will the proposal improve safety on the estate by promoting passive surveillance and active street fronts? Will the play areas and communal areas be overlooked? Reduce energy use? Will the proposal improve the sustainability of the estate by reducing energy consumption and energy bills for future residents? Improve community facilities? Will the proposal deliver new community facilities for the existing and new residents? Improve play facilities? Will the proposal deliver new play areas and ballcourt for the existing and new residents?
IDEAS FOR IMPROVEMENTS AND REDEVELOPMENT New homes here? More trees in the parking areas and front gardens to ground floor flats? Improve street front to Upper Clapton Road? Upgrade community and play facilities? Improve street front to Geldeston Road? Improve use of Weald Sq courtyard? Could garden space be shared between all residents? Improve surroundings to Rossington St? Improve surveillance of ballcourt? Build new homes? New homes here? Improve street frontage? Improve connection to surrounding streets? Secure the courtyard and improve landscaping? Reduce front gardens and add parking? Secure the courtyard and improve landscaping? Improve street frontage to Evering Road?
INFILL DEVELOPMENT RETAINED HOMES 580 (100%) NEW HOMES 40-60 RETAINED BUILDINGS 3-5 STOREYS NEW BUILDINGS 3-5 STOREYS DEMOLISHED BUILDINGS 1-2 STOREYS ESTATE DENSITY 148 UNITS PER HECTARE PROPOSED DEMOLITION PROPOSED NEW BUILDINGS PHASING STRATEGY NO DECANT
INFILL DEVELOPMENT New homes? Yes, 40-60 new homes could be built. These would be a range of unit sizes and will be a mix of private for sale and social rent units. Keep the community together? Yes, the development would keep all residents in their current homes. Homes for the existing community? No, the new homes would bring new residents into the estate. Existing residents could apply for a new home, however the new homes would be allocated based on need. Appropriate for context? Yes, the infill development would be in keeping with the scale of the retained buildings. Fund improvement works? No, the scale of development would not generate sufficient funds to support large-scale improvements of the public realm, refuse, cycle, parking and play areas across the whole estate. Safety and security? Yes, the infill developments would improve surveillance of some areas of the estate and would remove areas not overlooked around Rossington St. Reduce energy use? Not significantly. The infill developments would have low energy requirements, however the impact would only slightly reduce energy use on the estate. Improve play facilities? Not signifcantly. The scale of development would not support major upgrades of the play areas and ball court. Improve community facilities? Yes, the infi ll development would include building on the community building site and reproviding new community facilities at the ground floor.
PARTIAL REDEVELOPMENT RETAINED HOMES 426 (73%) NEW HOMES 420-440 RETAINED BUILDINGS 4-5 STOREYS NEW BUILDINGS 2-7 STOREYS DEMOLISHED BUILDINGS 1-5 STOREYS ESTATE DENSITY 185 UNITS PER HECTARE PROPOSED DEMOLITION PROPOSED NEW BUILDINGS PHASING STRATEGY SINGLE DECANT WITHIN THE ESTATE Phase 1 new build and decant (Years 2-3) Affects residents of Brierley and Abbotstone House Phase 2 new build and decant (Years 3-5) Affects residents of Melton, Fernhill, Chedworth, Aldergrove & Stapleford Houses PROPOSED PHASING OVER 10 YEARS Phase 3 new build and decant (Years 5-8) Affects residents of Hendale, Scardale & Whitwell Houses Phase 4 new build (Years 8-10) No decant
PARTIAL REDEVELOPMENT Keep the community New homes? Yes, 420-440 new homes could be built. These will be a range of unit sizes and will be a mix of private for sale and social rent units. together? Yes, the development would be phased in such a way that existing tenants and resident leaseholders would be rehoused in a single move on the estate. Homes for the existing community? Yes, 154 existing residents would be rehoused in the new development. The new housing will be warmer, more energyeffi cient and mostly have bigger fl oor area than the existing dwellings. Appropriate for context? Yes, many of the existing buildings on the estate will be retained and the new buildings will be in keeping with the scale of these and add a new layer to the built history of the area. Fund improvement works? Yes, the scale of development would generate funds for large-scale improvements of the public realm, refuse, cycle, parking and play areas across the whole estate. Safety and security? Yes, the partial redevelopment solution focuses on areas of the estate which have poor or no passive surveillance and would create active street fronts and improve safety on the estate and neighbouring streets. Reduce energy use? Yes, the new housing would be designed to meet Passivhaus standards, which will mean low energy consumption and bills for future residents. The scale of development would substantially reduce energy consumption on the estate. Improve community Improve play facilities? Yes, the proposal would have secure courtyards with dedicated play areas, a high quality multi-purpose ballcourt and playable pedestrian streets. facilities? Yes, there would be a new centrally-located community centre connected to a main public space, which could support an enhanced programme of events and classes.
FULL REDEVELOPMENT RETAINED HOMES 0 (0%) RETAINED BUILDINGS 0 DEMOLISHED BUILDINGS 1-5 STOREYS NEW HOMES 1500-1600 NEW BUILDINGS 5-10 STOREYS ESTATE DENSITY 390 UNITS PER HECTARE PROPOSED DEMOLITION PROPOSED NEW BUILDINGS PHASING STRATEGY DOUBLE DECANT (RESIDENTS MOVE OFF AND BACK ONTO THE ESTATE)
FULL REDEVELOPMENT Keep the community New homes? Yes, 1500-1600 new homes could be built. These would be a range of unit sizes and will be a mix of private for sale and social rent units. together? No, the scale of redevelopment would require a decant of some existing residents off the estate and a second move back onto the estate at a later point. Homes for the existing community? Yes, all existing residents would be rehoused in the new development. The new housing will be warmer, more energyeffi cient and mostly have bigger fl oor area than the exisitng dwellings. Appropriate for context? No, the scale of redevelopment would not be appropriate for the context and would require a density much higher than anything in the surrounding area. Fund improvement works? Yes, the scale of development will generate funds for large-scale improvements of the public realm, refuse, cycle, parking and play areas across the whole estate. Safety and security? Yes, the full redevelopment solution would create active street fronts, secure courtyards and improve safety on the estate and neighbouring streets. Reduce energy use? Yes, the new housing would be designed to meet Passivhaus standards, which would mean low energy consumption and bills for future residents. Improve play facilities? Yes, the proposal would have secure courtyards with dedicated play areas, a high quality multi-purpose ballcourt and playable pedestrian streets. Improve community facilities? Yes, there would be a new centrally-located community centre connected to a main public space, which could support an enhanced programme of events and classes.