Chairs report for 2000/01 Steering Committee Pepys Estate Action

The Action Group - Steering Committee - Annual General Meeting - Monday 12th February 2001 held at the Daubeny Tower Meeting Room, 7.30pm.

Open to all tenants effected by Lewisham Councils' Estate Action plans for the Pepys Estate, Deptford, SE8 :- in particular Aragon Tower, Millard, Marlowe, Barfleur, Limberg and Dolben House.

CHAIRS REPORT : for year 2000 / 01

1. At the end of 1999 it was clear that Lewisham Councils Estate Action programme was effecting tenants and the Council were not engaged in discussions with the tenants effected.

The clear purpose of the SC ( Steering Committee ) was to protect tenants rights.

2. The previous work done by the 'Save Our Homes' action group is acknowledged.

3. Accurate surveys undertaken by tenants representatives showed a majority in the blocks effected by change of landlord ( Aragon Tower ), or demolition ( Millard, Marlowe, Barfleur, Limberg and Dolben House ); were in favour of staying on the Estate, and preferred the Council to remain as the landlord, and seeing refurbishment of the properties. As took place in Albemarle House in early 2000.

4. The Estate now has a good sense of community, with a low crime rate; as result of regeneration under Estate Action. The Estate in not in the position of other Council estates across the country that have severe problems. The Pepys Estate has an established multi-ethnic community. It is a good place to live. Many tenants had been living here for 20 or even 30 years or more dating back to when the estate was first built.

5. Many people had been given the impression that they will get something better than they have now. Yet, unless tenants are directly involved in discussions they will not get anything better, and most likely a lot worse.

6. A general 'run down' had been happening on the Estate in the blocks effected. The Estate Action began in 1993, seven years ago. The blocks left until the latter stages had been doubly disadvantaged. By not being refurbished, and by being neglected in major and minor repairs. Now the change in plan is to demolish, and rebuild with a new landlord other than a Council tenancy. Tenants will lose both their home and their tenancy rights acquired under successive governments.

7. There are different housing needs on the Estate by tenants. For example, many people have enjoyed living in a tower block, e.g, Aragon Tower, even though they now had young families. They were looking for alternatives because their needs had changed, yet the property was liked. Many other types of tenant enjoyed the layout, space and access to open views that the Estate currently provides.

Why should the opportunity for social housing be moved away from a riverside position ? If Housing Associations managing parts of the Estate were to become established, it was feared that later in the 21st Century the whole area would eventually be privatised, and then only be available to those of 'middle class' income, or greater.

8. Our concerns have been about a lack of real consultation on the behalf of Lewisham Council :-

� the right to return to this area, and a home at a reasonable rent;

� the provision of social housing;

9. The tenants in Limberg, Dolben and Barfleur - have no opportunity to return to the proposed 'new build', as it has not been built yet.

10. Good tenants, paying their rents and socially responsible, as most have lived on the estate for 15, 20 or even 30 years or more. Bringing up families in the area. Are being forced to leave the area.

11. The right to return to this area, was identified as a key issue for all tenants. Need to guarantee those who wished it the right to come back. Need this commitment from Lewisham.

12. Should be 'like for like' as far as possible. Especially when decanting the offer should be the same.

13. Must not reach a situation where the last 2 or 3 left were in a deteriorating property open to problems like vandalism, etc.

14. Leaseholders position - valuation of the property. For example, a leaseholder had lived here for 31 years, and had bought for the purpose of living here.

15. Protection of 'right to buy' rights, with a move to Housing Association. Tenants had built up this right over the years and could end up being denied this right. Keep your rights, council tenancy if have to move from present home. Retain secure tenancy and a good quality home.

16. At Neighbourhood Committee, in March 2000. We asked that our Steering Committee, of 12 members and open to anyone effected by the Estate Action, be recognised by the Neighbourhood Committee. A vote was taken on this and it was agreed unanimously.

17. We have maintained regular contact with FELTRA, inviting a representative to attend our meetings. We have also attended ourselves at the FELTRA offices, and sent the minutes of our meetings to them on a regular basis.

18. The 'best endeavours' offered by Gordon Sandifer, for Lewisham Council in April 2000, to meet tenants needs for housing was not seen as being good enough to have any substantial meaning. The Single Regeneration Budget already obtained for the Pepys Estate and other adjacent areas meant that the decanting and demolition were in opposition to each other. Gordon had raised the issue with a management committee, and reported - cannot do more than 'best endeavours'.

19. The question as to why existing tenants cannot move back. Is there someone else who is going to move in ? Moving existing people out, and then introducing others to come in, could work out as a 'cheaper' option for the council. Yet this should be negotiated, as had been done elsewhere. Not a single place on the Estate to anyone else before those who already live here.

20. In April 2000 news that Aragon Tower was in the midst of being sold to a private developer. Hyde HA were in the running to takeover.

21. May 2000 established our position regarding the first issue of the 'right to return'. A special Lewisham Council sub-committee meeting was held on the Monday before Easter regarding this issue. Initially no information on the outcome was received. Malcolm Cadman and Dave Fleming attended the Council Assembly meeting on the same Monday.

22. Support on this issue - right to return - from the chair of the Neighbourhood Committee by email and by letter.

23. In June 2000 proposed to write to the new London Mayor, Ken Livingstone, or Housing representative. Malcolm Cadman and Dave Fleming to draft a letter for approval by committee.

24. Noted that many people are being locked into a 'poverty trap' because of the reliance on Social Security and Housing Benefits to pay the rent.

25. Questioned why are the Council still moving other people around the estate, when the decanting process has already started to take place now in Barfleur, as well as in Aragon ? It seems contradictory. Although the law is on their side to be able to move where they wish. This now conflicts with the decanting process.

26. One case of a 74 year old tenant who wants to stay on the estate. Wishing to go to Cranley Court. Yet it is being opposed. Yet the right to transfer between blocks on the estate is written down.

27. The council have to give you 'like for like', although you may accept less if you wish. A person who doesn't want to go, but is forced to leave. Could have the right to return, and have the same neighbours if possible. This had been promised earlier, yet was now being ignored.

28. May 2000. First article published in Mercury local newspaper had been well received. Will be followed by detailed interview with Barfleur tenants for early June 2000. Will also hope to highlight the discrepancy in Lewisham's policy of Evelyn and Pepys, as well as Silwood.

29. New Lewisham re-organisation to 'improve service' is to be centralised. 4 main areas involving over 36,000 properties. HA's are looking for new properties because it raises income for themselves, and they have to be viable.

30. Compulsory Purchase Orders ( CPO's ) are already being applied for by Lewisham, in preparation to use against leaseholders on the estate.

31. At Silwood they have 200 family units to decant, this has delayed Pepys estate.

32. A private company has been negotiating for Aragon Tower, so no longer to be sold to Hyde Housing. The selling cost has also gone up. There is a 'pink papers' meeting of the Council on Wednesday 17th May 2000 to discuss the disposal of Aragon Tower. This is restricted to council members only. No members of the public are allowed. It seems that Lewisham council are now undervaluing their properties. So that the 'right to buy' is being 'jeopardised'. Should be able to transfer the RTB discount to a new property. Leaseholders, especially, should look out for their own rights - undervaluing of property. What is the true 'market value' ? An example from Daubeny Tower where a property was sold at 37K, and then re-sold at 85K.

33. A 'right to return' established, after a recent special committee meeting of Lewisham Council. However, we have yet to see any written statement from the Council. Two councillors, Mark Nottingham and Mee Ling had verbally related this to us at the last Neighbourhood Committee AGM.

34. Hyde HA have dropped out of the plans for Aragon Tower. Now to be sold to a private developer.

35. Update on financial situation. Do Lewisham have any of the Estate Action funding left ? Is the proposed demolition of some of the low rise blocks because of this ? HA's can demolish and rebuild, but not re-furbish. The Pepys Estate properties that are proposed for demolition are very well built, as they were built 'in situ' - concrete poured on site, not constructed from pre-cast panels. The council's only argument is that they are expensive to maintain. How is it then that Albemarle has recently been refurbished, and all the other blocks on the estate have already been refurbished ?

36. Convoys Wharf, the adjacent land going towards Greenwich, is being run down. They have applied for 'change of use' for the land, over 40 acres. Therefore could be a mix of housing and industrial use. With this huge area available why do they need to sell off and re-build on Pepys ?

37. June 2000 - Special Neighbourhood Committee on Aragon Tower. Lead officers from Lewisham Evelyn also had an overspend. Ombudsman and Audit Commission brought in. Legal action on the suspected 'overspend' by Lewisham may be the best way forward. Family housing provision is what is required. HA's build and retain 25% for council housing. Overspend on Daubeny �1.2m. Has �640,000 been spent on new lifts ?

38. The HRA budget has been taken from Estate Action. This budget is applied for from government. Has Lewisham stopped applying for HRA and just used Estate Action ? Need to get the accounts audited to see if there has been any 'mis-spent'.

39. June 2000 - Aragon Tower residents granted special 'one-off' 'right to return', also preserve money for right to buy.

40. With sale of Aragon Tower - capital receipts come back to Lewisham. Council wanted 1m back as 'CR', from Hyde. Lewisham raised what they wanted as a return. Flats valued at about �85,000 on the market, making the tower block as a whole worth at least �12.5m on the open market.

41. If the low rise blocks are to stay - where is the money ? Estimate about 6m left. But would still have to put in new lifts and roofs. A way around it would be to sell Aragon to a HA that could then be added to Estate Action. Council is at present trying to spend Estate Action money to meet targets. We have said to the council that Estate Action is now effectively stopped, although money is still being spent on Pelican and Harmon Houses, for example.

42. June 2000 - Joseph Montgomery, Director for Regeneration taken on visit of the effected blocks of Limberg and Barfleur; as a direct result of our pressure. Surprised by the good condition of the blocks that he saw and the commitment of the tenants.

43. July 2000 15 questions sent to Lewisham from Neighbourhood Committee and Lewishams' reply.

For example - Question 1 about the actual amount of Estate Action money. Have included the HRA budget in the sum. Does not include CRS. Or private market from Family Housing. Does the new Community Centre belong to Lewisham ? Or to us ? �634,000 cost for the new building. It is used as matched funding for the the Pepys Community Forum SRB.

Question 2 - Demolition of Merrick House. �6m should have been left in EA. About �3.2m to refurbish Aragon Tower, and the remainder for the low rise blocks that have not been completed. We have to prove that there was an overspend, like on refurbishment of the Neighbourhood Office.

44. July 2000. Pete Pope, Deptford Discovery - presented a proposal for community involvement in Aragon Tower. Lewisham have gone down the road where they are inviting private development on to the Pepys Estate. Potential to go to the PCF to get money for an investigation in to the feasibility of a community use for Aragon Tower, rather than it go to a private developer. Funding will be needed in order to conduct the research. Willing to look at the options that could be available. Deadline for presentation by 30th September 2000.

45. Will also look at the other parts of the estate effected, e.g, the low rise blocks. Local people owe it to themselves to look at this option. Aragon Tower is one of only 4 like it in the country. Could it become a listed building of 1960's architecture ?

46 Self-management of all the blocks is also a possibility. Ethical investment is now available as a possible source of funding. Look at partnerships with a variety of people. Are there any other examples of tenant-led management available ? This would provide an example for people on this estate.

47. Housing Commission report meeting led by Jillie Smithers, the new Area Manager, at the Evelyn Community Centre on Monday 3rd July 2000. Attended by Dave Fleming and Malcolm Cadman from TAG. The reports' findings were not well received by anyone on the floor of the meeting, the majority of whom were ordinary tenants who were acting as representatives for their local area. There were many detailed criticisms concerning who was on the panel of the commission - many Lewisham employees, including Gavin Moore; the nature of the middle class composition of its members. The lack of any actual Lewisham tenants, etc.

In terms of policy decisions it was evident that it had produced the kind of justifying report that Lewisham wanted - that there should be a variety of housing types in the 21st Century, and a mix of different people, with different income levels, living along side each other. Which justifies HA's taking over a part of the role that has been played up until now by Council Housing.

No one present was 'fooled' by the report, and there were many very good and detailed criticisms made. Although 'minutes' of the meeting were made, it will be interesting to see what they actually record. As far as Councillors are concerned they will probably get a report back that there was a well attended meeting at the Evelyn Centre where tenants views were heard - i.e, consultation had taken place. Yet no action will be taken.

48. Need to obtain an accurate list of tenants remaining in Aragon Tower. This was raised with Ron Hipwood at last neighbourhood Meeting. Also need a list of 'destinations' of those tenants who have been decanted. According to Ron Hipwood only one tenant has expressed an interest in returning to Pepys.

49. Monday 10th July 2000 a two page list of internal repairs outstanding in Marlowe and Millard Houses sent by fax by Malcolm Cadman to Helen Dobbs, Operations Manager at Pepys Neighbourhood Office. Reply received by email dated 18th July 2000, from Simon Crossman, Estates Development Technical Inspector, at Grove Park Neighbourhood Office; under Executive Director for Regeneration Joseph Montgomery. The two blocks have been inspected and the relevant repairs specified. "You will in the coming weeks see a dramatic improvement in the areas that you have brought to our attention".

50. Letter to Helen Dobbs stating that no further action on decanting should take place in Barfleur until the councils 'marketing exercise' for Aragon Tower is completed in November 2000. All Barfleur tenants received a letter from Warren Hipwood, Pepys Neighbourhood Office, on Friday 21st July 2000 that decanting would commence from September 2000.

51. Information received that there is no structural damage on the low rise blocks worthy of demolition. The properties would be better off being refurbished.

52 Informed, via FELTRA, that there is to be a Executive Committee meeting of Lewisham Council on Wednesday 26th July, at Capital House. A need to attend this meeting. Request for any volunteers. Malcolm Cadman and Dave Fleming to attend.

53. A further press interview has been arranged for Thursday 3rd August 2000, from around 4.30pm. This will concentrate on Barfleur House, and compare with the refurbishment of the adjacent Albemarle block in 2000. Need to prepare a leaflet for Barfleur tenants to advise them of their rights.
Try to avoid the council 'picking off' individual tenants, as they have tried to do in Aragon Tower. Tenants have a right to be informed about what is going to happen to them.

54. Lewisham will have to pay for leaseholders who have exercised the Right To Buy the value of their properties at current market rates. At present this is over �3m on the Silwood estate, and over �1m for the effected low rise properties on Pepys, has been set aside.

55. July 2000 there has been a new announcement by John Prescott, Deputy Prime Minister, that �1.8 billion is available to let councils develop in areas like this.

56. The Council now operate an Executive Committee of eight councillors who are only answerable to the Mayor. The small number of Liberal opposition councillors have declined to be a part of this.

57. Update on the Executive Committee meeting of Lewisham Council of the 26th July 2000. Item 8 on the agenda was Estate Action on Pepys. Attended by Malcolm Cadman and Dave Fleming.

Phoned Capital House on Wednesday morning for the papers. Went to collect by around 10.30am. Found the section amongst a 120 page document. Read it through. Realised its importance, and the need to oppose its decision for approval by the Executive Committee.

Put together a 2 sided A4 reply in the afternoon, and went to the meeting at 6.00pm. Arrived there, yet we didn't initially know that the meeting had started. Went in the committee room at around 6.20pm and they were already onto item 6 on the agenda of 10 items - Estate Action on Pepys being item 8.

Malcolm Cadman was granted just '5 minutes' by the chair - Gavin Moore - to address the meeting. Which consisted of about 20 people around the main table, and another 15 observers, which included many Lewisham council employees. Pat Greenwood the Mercury newspaper reporter was also present. Read through our prepared paper which addressed a number of points specifically.

Mee Ling as the local ward councillor was asked by the chair if she had anything to say in support of our contention, yet she did not support our view, rather she went along with the council's policy.

A vote was taken, which was unanimous to continue with the submission to the Secretary of State for the decanting and demolition of the low rise blocks on Pepys.

58. Tenants in Limberg have now received a letter on decanting dated 4th August 2000. This states that "owing to the many calls on the rehousing programme in the Spring and Summer", the date as been put back to offers starting in January 2001 through to July 2001. With visits by the decanting officer starting at the end of September 2000.

Quote - "By starting the decant programme later than was intended it is felt that we have a greater chance of moving residents reasonably quickly once the programme starts and also increasing everyone's prospects of receiving an offer which suits their needs" - end quote.

No tenants in the low rise blocks of Barfleur and Limberg who have now received these 'decanting letters' have any 'right to return' to Pepys. Want to get rid of all the existing tenants - to where ? Are Lewisham putting temporary tenants into Barfleur and Limberg ? This pressure is getting tenants to be very worried about their future ! The Council clearly have their 'plan' for us - yet we still have our own intentions for what we want.

59. A Special Neighbourhood Committee meeting jointly with the Regeneration Forum has been set up for Tuesday 15th August 2000 at the Eddystone Tower office.

This has been called in the usual 'holiday' period owing to the issue of Sapphire Road, and now the events with Estate Action. All TAG members are urged to attend this meeting as many officers from Lewisham have been called to be present.

60. Estate Action 'money' is now being spent very quickly by Lewisham to 'get rid of it' by April 2001.

61. Regeneration of the Pepys Estate ( Summary of contents ) - a letter to all residents of the part of the estate covering Dolben Court and Barfleur, Limberg, Marlowe and Millard Houses - dated 10th August 2000. From Ashley Hook, Acting Head of Housing.

'We have undertaken a consultation programme with residents ... with newsletters, door to door visits and open days with architects'.

'We ... carried out an independent survey last year, asking residents their views regarding plans for the estate. The majority of residents were in favour of the current redevelopment proposals for the estate'.

'The Council has decided that secure tenants and residential leaseholders of the 5 blocks should be rehoused and the blocks demolished, with new homes being built by Hyde Housing Association'.

Target programme for decanting :-

Barfleur September 2000 to April 2001
Limberg January 2001 to July 2001
Dolben January 2001 to July 2001
Marlowe August 2001 to March 2002
Millard August 2001 to March 2002

'...you will be visited by a decanting officer. The purpose of the visit is to find out what your housing requirements are, in terms, for example of the size of property you need, and also to find out what your wishes are for where you are rehoused and the type of property you are interested in'.

'The Council will do everything it can to find the sort of property you want but it is not always possible to find an exact match'.

'Some people have said that they wish to remain on Pepys Estate or to move temporarily and then return to one of the new homes'.

'Lewisham ... is committed to preserving communities in regeneration schemes across the Borough and "where the redevelopment or refurbishment programme includes suitable property for residents needs in a later phase, they will be eligible to be considered for such property, if they requested one at the time of their decant" - Lewisham Decant Policy, November 1999'.

'This policy is Borough-wide and has been highly successful in implementing other Estate Actions schemes. Due to the relatively low numbers of people who wish to remain resident on the Pepys Estate, It will be possible either to rehouse them directly on the estate or to allow them to return into the new homes at a later date. This was agreed by Councillors at an Executive Committee meeting on 26th July 2000'.

'The new build in this area of the estate could provide up to 260 units, potentially 38 more than those demolished ( 222 ). We therefore strongly believe that there will be enough homes for those who expressed a wish to move back to the new properties on the estate, providing that they are eligible for the size of properties available'.

'Hyde have appointed a firm of architects, BPTW, one of 3 firms who presented initial ideas at an open day earlier this year. BPTW have started drawing up plans for the new housing and they will be working closely with the Council to develop them over the coming months. We are keen to work with residents of the whole estate as the scheme develops, to ensure that wherever possible residents' views can be incorporated'.

'We will be sending out newsletters to residents on a regular basis to keep everyone on the estate informed of key consultation events regarding the regeneration of the estate'.

'A series of meetings with residents will be set up to enable you to discuss design issues with our partners and ourselves'.

62. Estate Action Review Update - August 2000 - received on Friday 1st September 2000. A very short notice for the open day meeting. ( Posters around the estate were only put up on Tuesday 5th September 2000 ). This A4 leaflet uses quotes from the 10th August letter, e.g, 'Lewisham Council is committed to preserving communities in regeneration schemes ...',

'The new build in this area could provide up to 260 units, potentially 38 more than those demolished ( 222 )', 'Hyde have appointed a firm of architects, BPTW'.

An Open day for Saturday 9th September 2000, 10.30am to 3.00pm, at the old Pepys Tenants Hall in Grove Street. A short presentation will also be given at 11.00am and 2.00pm. All committee members are urged to attend, and to make their opinions clear. We are disappointed with the entire manner of Lewishams' consultation procedure with residents, and oppose this style of redevelopment proposal. We believe that this firm - BPTW - are the worst of the 3 options that were seen and rejected earlier in the year ! Worst style of building and higher density !

63. Discussions with FELTRA - Malcolm Cadman and Dave Fleming had a meeting on Wednesday 20th August 2000. Many important advice points were raised, which are summarised below.

- Lewisham survey of 1999 - get the raw data from Lewisham.
- Phone survey company for a copy of their code of conduct.
- 80% of questions asked were nothing to do with Estate Action.
- Survey said 'no right to return'.
- Tenants should understand the issues involved as thoroughly and well as the officers from Lewisham.
- Tenants not involved in the survey process, e.g, setting questions.
- Survey went to the whole estate, not just the blocks directly effected. This favoured Lewishams preferred result, as many tenants on the estate do not know or even care where other parts are.
- Guidance on this to local government is unclear, yet there is the issues of 'best practice'.
- As a good landlord, duty to communicate this information to all tenants.
- Compare to Woodpecker and Evelyn - see the evidence easily - on Pepys not so evident.
- Update training on financial mechanisms used by Lewisham for regeneration for tenants.
- How far have they got with their submission to Secretary of State ? Need to inform us.
- There needs to be a leaflet to all 28 tenants in Barfleur to have ONE whole meeting with Lewisham. For 'equities sake'. An open public meeting that tenants representatives could also attend. We need to take our own minutes, then produce a bullet point list for tenants of the meeting points.
- What level of rents are going to be set if return ? They can give a breakdown of rents, using the standard formula.
- People like the community here, 'may want to come back'.
- Convoys - 'gentrify' the area - what consultations have Lewisham had ?
- Housing commission report - shouldn't build anymore housing where there already is social housing !
- Local area needs must be in agreement.
- Not increase the density of properties.
- Not replacing with family homes - what is the logic here ?
- Look up Joseph Rowntree foundation reports into social housing.
- Local ward councillors are the 'community champions' not just towing the political lines of the party in power. What they say at local level should go up to a higher level. Do they deserve our support ?
- 'Demolishing for demolishings sake'.

64. Deptford Discovery update report - Pete Pope explained that DD had sought and received a commission from PCF to investigate retaining social housing provision of Pepys estate this was to look at ways in which the Forum/CDT may obtain an asset base. Clear that Lewisham have gone all out to sell Aragon to a private buyer. Deadline for bids was 28th July 2000. The DD investigation had just started the week before ! The intention being to sell freehold and with vacant possession ! Although they expect that gaining vacant possession may take up to 18 months !

Had then come up with the idea, if the sale were to go ahead, then sell the freehold and retain a lease on 36 flats ( 1/4 ). Do up all the flats and then get the block for a cheaper price, e.g, �6m rather than �8m. Lewisham only get 25% of capital receipts, the remainder going to government to reduce housing debts. Lewisham would only lose �0.5m. Then they make the 36 flats over to the CDT.

A 'key workers' scheme would then be introduced by the CDT, e.g, nurses, teachers. The retained flats would be let at less than the market rent. Occupants would sign for a 3 year rent agreement to encourage them to stay in the area and with the scheme. This would be done in association with a HA. This would potentially bring in an income for 70 years or more to the CDT. Also the value of the retained flats would increase.

Idea had been taken back to PCF earlier in this month, so that DD could already begin to make it known. PCF had placed 2 conditions on further progress, as it was an unexpected idea. One - look at a way in which the leased back flats could be occupied by existing tenants. Second - bring to this meeting for approval by those concerned directly in the proposed redevelopment. As well to further investigate how the low rise blocks could also be involved in a social housing scheme. A feasibility scheme has been commissioned by Shaw-Sprunt - �10-12m for conversion to build a new lift shaft.

65. Lewisham have been saying all along that Aragon would be retained for social housing, not just private. Yet their recent 'marketing exercise' had abandoned this principal. The HA's had pulled out owing to the increased price asked by Lewisham, e.g, �4m.

66. Open Day by Hyde and their chosen architects BPTW. Not clear what was going to happen with the low rise blocks. Lewisham still have to apply to Secretary of State for approval. This will probably be at the end of October 2000. Some people could return to the new build. Suggested that when asked the question by the decant officers - where do you want to be ? That the reply should be to here, come back to the new build. Elsewhere and this is what has happened. As had the Right To Return at Silwood and Evelyn. Proposed to reject the plans by BPTW the architects appointed. As there was very little about the plans that we like.

If any new build does get built, then would favour the other 2 architects ideas, as they retained the grid and feeling of Pepys estate. Although each of them had many faults in their proposals. None of them had been ideal, as they had not involved tenants in consultation in a genuine way. Yet both of the other 2 architects, PRP and Shaw-Sprunt had shown an interest in real consultation with tenants.

Also the concern that with the BPTW proposals any new buildings will still leave opportunities for further buildings.There needs to be discussions on these issues, like keeping the green spaces, when the new build is in place - if it were to go ahead as in the BPTW proposal. This side of the river had not had the high rise development that was now 'typical' of the other side. We want to see good quality buildings on Pepys. Good light, views, proper balconies, etc. Tenants should not feel that their views were in any way inferior to those of professional like architects. Ordinary people have proven that when genuinely consulted that they know how to build best. Because they have had the experience of living with the problems of poor design, they have brought up families. The one good thing to emerge from the Open Day was the statement that the architects had stated that they could start building some to move into whilst the present building were being demolished.

67. Housing needs survey - the group decided not to return these as they did not give any indication to a tenant of their rights, or any future rental level.

68. Unity of group. Some disunity amongst tenants and their representatives that had emerged from the first meeting of the 'Focus group' on redevelopment jointly organised by Peter Walker for Lewisham and Mark Leader for Hyde Housing. No formal minutes of the meeting had been taken, and Peter Walker had refused to take a vote on three occasions as to whether the meeting should continue as the 'chosen architects' - BPTW - had not been selected by any involvement by tenants, or their representatives.

It clearly emerged that the unanimous vote taken by the Neighbourhood Committee not to cooperate with the redevelopment proposals until the Right to Return issue was resolved for the tenants of the properties directly effected, was being ignored by some of those present ( who had also been at the Neighbourhood meeting ). It had been pointed out that there was a 'primary' and a 'secondary' case in the redevelopment proposals. The primary one was those directly effected by decanting and demolition proposals; the secondary was those who existing properties would be effected by any 'new build' proposals.

This led to disagreement amongst tenants at the meeting. The Foreshore representatives were concerned to continue the meeting, so that Lewisham did not make decisions without tenants involved; others were concerned with the Right to Return being established first for those primarily effected. Overall this disunity amongst tenants is something that Lewisham can exploit to their own ends to push through the proposals with nominal consultation. The Steering Committees' position is that it cannot now attend the 'Focus group' meetings until the RTR is clearly established by Lewisham. Hyde Housing gave indications that is would not be a problem for them to give such an undertaking.

Members of the committee could still attend these meetings if they so wished, in a private capacity to best protect their own interests, or as representatives of other tenants organisations.

69. Members indicated that the stress of attending meetings was a factor to stop attending the Steering Committee meetings on a regular basis. Recognised as being a difficult time, and there is a lot of pressure on now from both Lewisham and Hyde to get on with things from their point of view. Yet if this is not in accordance with tenants wishes, we need to stay together. There are a lot of things going on at present that should resolve themselves in our favour. It is difficult to 'go against the 'Council'. We have good grounds to believe that we have 'won' the moral argument. We also have to win the legal and political argument.

Approval has not yet been sought by Lewisham under Section 10a of the Housing Act 1985, from Secretary of State. We are going to oppose this. Planning permission has not yet been granted, we are going to oppose it. The GLA has just taken over the supervision and approval of all riverside developments, from the DETR. We are writing to the GLA for an urgent meeting, as the adjacent redevelopment of Convoys wharf has to be considered too.

70. One positive thing that did emerge from the 'Focus group' meeting was that the architects, BTPW, had changed their ideas about building on the green spaces of the Pepys estate; responding to the concerns expressed.

71. Cleaning / repairs on the estate. Issue that the cleaning in Barfleur was now very poor. Also a problem of large items being left by the disposal chutes. In Marlowe and Millard regular cleaning had been reinstated over the last 3 months. A number of faxes had been sent to Lewisham's Eddystone Tower offices regarding maintenance and repairs in Barfleur, Marlowe and Millard. These should be actioned shortly. At present there was an new system being put into place by Lewisham for this. As ever the 'interim' period was not being well covered.

72. A fire at the top of the stairwell on floor 6 of Marlowe House. A large item of soft furniture - 3 piece suite - had been left there on Sunday night - 24th September 2000. A fax had been sent warning that this needed immediate removal, as it was likely that it would be set alight. On Tuesday 26th September 2000 at around 6.00pm to 6.30pm, the fire brigade were called to a fire in Marlowe caused by this being set alight.

Malcolm Cadman, Pat Greenwood from the Mercury and Tiri Oyawole, Chair of the Neighbourhood Committee were just coming out of Barfleur House - where Pat had conducted a brief survey of tenants opinions ( very positive about wanting to stay and see refurbishment ).

73. A response on the follow up to the Executive Committee meeting of 26th July 2000 was expected shortly from Ashley Hook, Lewisham.

74. Yinka is leaving the FELTRA organisation this coming month, and she has requested a final meeting to discuss issues before then. Someone else will take over her post in the near future. Yinka has recently passed on a contact with a planning advice service - PAL.

75. Right to Return. Hyde HA have indicated that they can give this - separately from Lewisham. Will try to contact Mark Leader directly to clarify this.

76. Right To Manage document. A National scheme to allow tenants to directly manage council properties.

77. Feedback from briefing given by Gillie Smithers, Area Manager, at Neighbourhood Committee. Gillie Smithers gave a presentation to the Neighbourhood Committee at a special meeting on Tuesday 17th October 2000. The purpose was to inform tenants representatives about the new housing and regeneration policies that Lewisham are now seeking to introduce.

1 - Executive Committee - An Agenda for Action - Implenting the Recommendations of the Housing Commission, dated 13th September 2000. Prepared by Ashley Hook, Head of Housing. ( 6 pages ).

2 - Building Successful Neighbourhoods - The Housing Commission Action Plan - ( 14 pages ).

3 - Creating Balanced Communities - Housing Commission Action Plan Timescales - ( 8 pages ).

4 - Housing Commission Consultation Programme - ( 13 pages ).

5 - Housing Management Best Value Review - Briefing for Neighbourhood Committees - ( 2 pages ).

6 - Building Successful Neighbourhoods - Summary of Terms.

78. Letters sent for support and meeting - Letter sent to Ken Livingstone - Mayor of London, at Greater London Authority - for information on Pepys and to arrange a meeting urgently.

Letter to HRH Prince of Wales - for information, given his historical links with Pepys.

79. Legal advise sought- Papers have been left with a legal person and a discussion held.

80 Write to Ashley Hook - Advice has been given that Ashley Hook, Head of Housing, may be sympathetic to the Right To Return issue that we have being putting to Lewisham since our formation in January 2000. Please write a personal letter to him outlining your our feelings about the problems raised by the proposed decanting, demolition, and transfer to an RSL; at the following address :-

Capital House, 47 Rushey Green, Catford, London SE6 4BA.
Tel : 020 8314 6000

81. Hyde Housing Association - a meeting held with representatives from Hyde HA on Monday 30th October 2000, Mark Leader and Barbara Stockbridge. All agreed that this had been very useful, and were satisfied with the meeting. Working with Hyde HA would not be a difficulty, were it to come about. Our problems lay with the attitude of Lewisham council.

Query raised as to what nomination rights were to be implemented for council tenants to any new build on Pepys. Query raised at to what capital receipts Lewisham would receive for the land. Any new building to be phased, so that there will be properties available for those who currently live here.

82. Visit to Limberg on Thursday 16th November 2000 - Visit with press to put Limberg point of view. Also Tiri and Malcolm to be present.

83. Press articles - Protest in Southwark, reported by South London Press, around 100 marchers, against proposal for 55,000 homes to be transferred to outside landlords. Objectors fear that the rents will soar after the initial fixed term of five years tied to council rents.

Piers Corbyn, chair of Defend Council Housing in Southwark, said : "Tenants all over Southwark are saying they don't want stock transfer and they don't want any more money-wasting schemes. The council is playing an information game and tenants are seeing through it".

84. Article on key workers in the capital, reported by SLP, vital for health service. The Association of London Government chair, Cllr Bernadette Lappage, warned that affordable accommodation for NHS staff was 'essential' to improving the capital's health.

85. PPCR survey - Obtained a copy of the survey results from 1999 that Lewisham have 'selectively' used. In fact the survey is overall very positive about the estate. Over 70% being satisfied with it, for example, as the estate action has been implemented.

86. Constitution - A Constitution for the group was presented - to be known as The Steering Committee for Pepys Estate Action ( The Action Group ), a Tenants and residents Association - has been drawn up by the Secretary, Malcolm Cadman. This is modelled on the Lewisham recommended Constitution for tenants groups. This has been signed by the current Chair, Simon Greening, and the current Secretary, Malcolm Cadman; it will also be endorsed by members at the next AGM that needs to be held in January or February 2001. We need to give 21 days notice of an AGM.

A copy of this Constitution has been forwarded to the Lewisham Tenants Fund, as we have an application for funding with them, pending receipt of being a recognised Constitutional body.

87. Leaflet to tenants - A revised leaflet has been prepared to keep all tenants and residents directly effected by the Estate Action informed. This will be displayed in all the blocks concerned.

88. PCF proposal for Aragon Tower - The colour copy of the full proposal is now available for view by committee members. This has been sent to key people by PCF to bid for a retention of 36 flats in Aragon Tower for 'key worker', should it be sold to a private buyer.

89. Aragon Tower repairs - A paper on the problems of poor repairs and maintenance in Aragon Tower, with the signatures of tenants still in residence. This would be passed on the Malcolm, who send it to the Neighbourhood Office, as well as pass a copy on to the Chair of the Neighbourhood Committee.

90. Letter to Mike Smith - Malcolm has been in communication with the Neighbourhood Office over a period of time this year to get repairs and maintenance continued to a good standard for all those effected by the Estate Action programme not being completed in the effected blocks.

On Friday 24th November 2000, from 2.30pm, Mike Smith, the Pepys Estate Manager, agreed to do a walkabout to view the problems highlighted. This he did, together with Malcolm, and Tiri, the Chair ofthe Neighbourhood Committee. Action is now expected to restore a better standard of service.

91. Letter from Debbie Hawke - Malcolm has received a letter from Debbie Hawke, Lewisham Customer Services, to investigate the complaints about the poor information to tenants and the delay in repairing the lift in Marlowe House after the fire in September 2000. This is a claim for compensation to all tenants in Marlowe House for the loss of this facility.

92. Press article - The reply from the Steering Committee, and the Chair of the Neighbourhood Committee, to the Gavin Moore advertisement article concerning Pepys Estate Action has been delayed for the latter few weeks. It should appear in the newspaper on Wednesday 13th December 2000.

93. Funding for the Committee has now been agreed by LTA. This will also fund a legal challenge to Lewisham over the way they have handled the proposed changes in the Estate Action programme.

94. In the Constitution it is stated the we will hold a minimum of 10 meeting per year. This current year we will have held 21 meetings, as people have felt the need for this frequency ( every fortnight ). We can now have the opportunity to change this to monthly meetings in the coming year, ( if members so wish ); with additional 'special' meetings as may be required to deal with pressing issues.

95. Objection to planning - A draft objection was prepared

96. Proposed and agreed that meeting every fortnight was now no longer necessary. Agreed to now meet on the second Monday on the month, once a month. Special meeting can then be arranged as required.

97. Bank account opened at HSBC, Deptford High St. Signatories, Simon Greening, Chair, Malcolm Cadman, Secretary, Dave Fleming, Treasurer.

98. Planning objections sent in to Lewisham Planning on 22nd January 2001. Letter of acknowledgement received. Actual plans not yet seen.

Presented by the CHAIR Simon Greening............Date ........................

Prepared by the Secretary Malcolm Cadman.........Date ........................