Residents of a housing estate whose future is in jeopardy have been promised “at least as many council homes” will be built on the site.

Peckham’s Ledbury Estate, which was due to be strengthened and refurbished, may be demolished instead after a report revealed the necessary works to keep the towers structurally safe for the next 50 years will be much more extensive than previously thought – and likely cost much more.  

In 2017 Southwark Council became aware of cracks appearing in the high-rise buildings, which were built between 1968 and 1970 using the Taylor Woodrow Anglian large panel system. 

Bromyard House, Peterchurch House, Sarnsfield House, and Skenfrith House on Peckham’s Ledbury Estate were all found to have structural problems after a post-Grenfell public meeting on fire safety.  

Checks revealed the four blocks had been built without the correct strengthening measures, with the tower blocks of a similar design to those at Ronan Point, where a 1968 gas explosion killed four residents. 

The council was forced to cut off the gas supply to the buildings in August 2017.  

An engineering report, released last week by Arup, looked into the work needed to ensure the estate’s lifespan for the next 50 years.  

Arup found that “the blocks at the Ledbury Estate do not comply with the requirements for resistance against disproportionate collapse” and noted that the floors need to be strengthened because “the hollowcore floor panels do not fully comply with the gravity loading requirements in the current UK concrete code”.  

As a result the council voted at a cabinet meeting on Tuesday to look into the costs – initially estimated to be £32.5 million – to inform its decision on the future of the estate.  

Although residents in the estate voted in favour of refurbishing rather than demolishing the buildings last year, which was backed by the council, they now fear the potential costs may stop the plans going ahead. 

Members of the Ledbury Residents Project Group also voiced their concerns about replacing council homes at the cabinet meeting on Tuesday were the towers to be knocked down. 

Neal Purvis, the independent tenant and leaseholder advisor for the estate, who noted the “anxiety and upheaval” of the the last two years, said: “The Ledbury Estate Residents Project Group has concerns that the proposed works on Bromyard are much more extensive that the previous recommendations and the recommendations previously were used as part of the option appraisal process reported at cabinet in October 2018.  

“The cost of the works proposed by Arup may be too costly to carry out … overall Ledbury residents are concerned about the extra works and how this will impact on the refurbishment option. 

“There was widespread support for refurbishment from existing residents and former tenants when they were consulted last summer.  

“The works proposal means  a reduction in the size of the homes on higher floors and steel beams inside the existing walls. 

“The impact will also change the internal room sizes and there’s a question about how that fits with the existing leases the council has granted to lease holders. 

“After more than two years of anxiety and upheaval because of the gaps and cracks in the blocks the need to reconsider the proposal will lead to a further period of uncertainty for residents in the towers, tenants with a right to return and those living nearby in the Ledbury low-rise.” 

Mr Purvis asked for clarity on how long residents would have to wait for a decision based on the new information and a “commitment that there will be at least as many council homes at the end of this process on the site of Ledbury towers and rented homes will be council homes for council rent”.  

Kieron Williams, cabinet member for housing management and modernisation, admitted the process has been “long and difficult” and added that “we’ve still got a way to go to define what the future [of the estate] is going forward”.  

Although he did not offer a timescale for a decision in the wake of the report, he said: “With any rebuild we would have at least as many council homes on the site as when we started and absolutely they would be council homes at council rents.”