On Thursday 1 May the CoL Major Works project team shared an update on the Golden Lane Estate Investment programme for Wider Estate residents (Crescent House Community Meeting was on April 6).
On the project website you can find a video recording of the meeting, presentation slides, the proposed timeline and notes from the Q+A.
GLERA questions with answers
GLERA submitted the questions below in advance of the meeting (the first two were submitted to the Crescent house meeting and considered relevant to residents on the Wider Estate too);
1. Could you please give us a statement outlining the objectives of the Golden Lane Investment Programme (as opposed to the scope of the work)? This will not only reassure residents that the huge expense and disruption will have measurable and clear outcomes, but will encourage active engagement – we know that resident input via the CH RLG has been considered very useful to the project team and we would like to see the same relationship with other RLGs (Wider Estate, and block specific as work progresses).
The objectives of the Golden Lane Investment Programme are to ensure the following:
- That all buildings are wind, weathertight and maintained to a good standard in terms of building fabric condition
- That the thermal efficiency of all buildings is optimised through improved glazing and upgraded roof insulation (in line with current Building Regulations), which will in turn help to reduce residents’ heating costs
- That upgraded ventilation will help to combat future damp and mould within individual properties, to the benefit of residents
- That the Corporation fulfils its landlord obligations in terms of cyclical decorations and also health and safety with regard to electrical compliance
2. How will the Corporation calculate the consequences of their neglect of the Estate, particularly in relation to the windows and roofs? Expecting leaseholders to ignore this issue is unrealistic and compensation of some kind should be offered.
This is a matter which is currently under consideration by both Peta Caine (Assistant Director, Housing) and Judith Finlay (Director of Community and Children’s Services). Initial discussions have focused on the matter of ‘meanwhile’ repairs (which will be carried out at no cost to Leaseholders) and the possibility of further winter measures (which were implemented on a one-off basis previously). There are further potential items which will be discussed in greater detail at the next scheduled meeting with GLERA. This will form part of an ongoing dialogue, once the full scope of the project has been defined and costed.
NOTE: in response to a resident question, the meeting was told (see Q+A notes):
The purpose of PC’s [Peta Caine] letter in February 2025 was to clarify the Corporation’s position in respect of the matter of ‘repair versus improvement’ (along with what are considered rechargeable items). However, the letter was intended to clearly set out a starting point for further discussion, which will result in some form of proposal.
3. The aluminium frames in the marionette blocks and Cullum Welch are not wide enough to accommodate the new vacuum glazing. The Architects have proposed options and we understand that the option to create an adaptor will be trialled in Bayer House. Will residents be able to see the impact of adding additional framing before any decisions are made on how to proceed?
Trials are continuing to help the project team understand how best to fit vacuum glazing into frames, including extensive testing in the Cullum Welch pilot flat. Residents will have an opportunity to see the pilot works in Bayer, prior to the reinstatement of the original installation. This will be managed through the Resident Liaison Groups and GLERA, as access will be limited due to resource availability.
4. Has the replacement of aluminium windows been considered? The refurbishment approach came about because of Crescent House residents understandable desire to retain the hardwood window frames, but is there scope to consider the different types of windows separately, particularly the aluminium framed?
Possible replacement of the aluminium windows was previously considered during the early design stages, but significant challenges in respect of obtaining Planning approvals and Listed Building Consent was anticipated. This was emphasised during early discussions with relevant statutory bodies. Furthermore, initial cost estimates indicated a significant increase compared to the refurbishment option.
5. Has replacement of bathroom and kitchen windows been considered (not hard wood as in Crescent House)? If replaced would these windows need scaffolding access (ie can they accessed from balcony and walkway. If not could the programming of the work be speeded up?
Possible replacement of the softwood kitchen and bathroom windows in Crescent House was also considered during the early stages, but again, significant challenges in respect of obtaining planning approvals ad Listed Building Consent were also anticipated. Now that the scope of works for Great Arthur House will. be expanded, it is not seen as practical or cost efficient to consider replacement of the windows at this stage.
6. What is the status of the proposed sprinkler system for Great Arthur House as the planning application was withdrawn?
Great Arthur House was previously the subject of three separate projects relating to a) sprinkler installation, b) fire doors and fire compartmentation and c) kitchen and bathroom window refurbishment. A report has been approved by committee to combine these into a single project and the intention is to revisit the sprinkler element of the works, but with full resident engagement and consultation.
7. Fire Safety in the walkways – is the glazing to doors and kitchen windows to be fire glass? If so can kitchen window open? Ref Building Safety act duty to prevent fire transmission from common areas.
This will be identified in the Fire Strategies which have been commissioned by the Corporation and the appropriate remedial works will be incorporated into the design. We will take specific guidance from our appointed Fire Engineer.
further questions answered post meeting
1. Can maisonettes be done without decanting? Decanting the whole Estate, even in stages is a major undertaking.
There is a possibility that Stanley Cohen House and some of the first-floor maisonettes may not have to be decanted, but this will have to be explored further during the tendering process, when prospective contractors can provide input. At this present time, we are assuming that all blocks (apart from Great Arthur House) will require a phased decant.
2. Impact of extra elements added to the aluminium frames. Is this acceptable aesthetically and from a listed building perspective?
This will be determined through the work undertaken to the pilot properties and in consultation with the appropriate statutory bodies.
3. Is it quicker or cheaper to replace windows rather than upgrade? Has an analysis been carried out and if so can it be shared?
This was explored early in the design process and initial estimates indicated a significant cost difference between refurbishment and replacement. This will be revisited as an exercise and consequently shared with the RLGs/GLERA, but with due consideration of the ambitious programme which the project team is already pursuing.
4. In the maisonettes can the tall window be done without internal scaffolding?
This would have to be confirmed during the tendering process but our assumption at this stage is that it could not.
5. On upper floors in some blocks dead ends to walkways mean escaping from a fire past kitchen windows and unprotected doors. Works to upgrade?
This will be identified in the Fire Strategies which have been commissioned by the Corporation and the appropriate remedial works will be incorporated into the design. We will take specific guidance from our appointed Fire Engineer.
6. The indicative programme shows Hatfield House will not complete until 2035. The City has duty under the Building Safety Act for fire prevention works and not meeting this could lead to serious issues if there were a loss of like in a fire. Will these be carried out sooner?
The Corporation will carry out a review of the Fire Strategy (which has been commissioned) and will prioritise any urgent remedial work, further to the advice of our appointed Fire Engineer.
7. With the roof replacements how are the issues with moving roof slabs going to be resolved?
This is currently under review and the Corporation’s appointed Structural Engineer will provide the necessary input into the design process. Any remedial work will be incorporated as part of the tendered works.
