Brixton Somerleyton Road development, Ovalhouse and Brixton Green - funding, proposed rents etc

[Gramsci]

The Bugle story states:

"Brixton Green proposed to buy the lease of the Somerleyton Road site, working with the council, and to build 234 homes.

Brixton Green believes it can build homes on Somerleyton Road faster than Lambeth council and says it could be ready to start in a year."

This seems a little at odds with this statement that has now been deleted from the Brixton Green website.

Actually the Brixton Green statement is still on the BG website.

Which makes the report of what they said to Bugle more puzzling.

Also found this in the Q&A page of BG website:

Q&A | Brixton Green

Is there a private developer involved?

No. Rather than have a private developer deliver the project, Brixton Green encouraged Lambeth Council to develop the site directly themselves. Lambeth have employed Igloo who provide their development experience, but receive a fee not a share of the profit.

In light of what Bugle report BG now saying I'm perplexed.

My reading of the Bugle piece is that BG had rival plans to the Council's officers to work with Places for People ( whose track record in Brixton isn't that great) to build and finance it themselves.

I can't find anything on BG website about BG relationship with Places for People.


I'm not criticising Bugle reporting.

 

[Gramsci]

Been trying to see what BG proposed partner Places for People are now.


Places for People | News | Latest news | Strong results lay the foundations for investment in new homes and communities

They are not for profit company that specialises in housing management, leisure centre building/management and placemaking.

They don't have charitable status.

The website talks of " diversification". More build for sale at market levels etc is how I read this. Standard procedure in the not for profit housing sector. With some "affordable" housing.

I don't see that much difference between the Council's proposed Homes for Lambeth vehicle and Places for People in his they will work.

 

[Gramsci]

I thought that BG thought that Lambeth and Oval House would finance and build the site.

Then transfer the housing to a kind of estate management board. That BG role was to work with Council to set up how this would work. Then BG would dissolve itself.

Oval House as a charity in its own right, raising its own funds to build a new theatre would enter into a long term lease with the Council and manage that section of the Somerleyton road site themselves. Including managing the work units in the refurbished Carlton Mansions.

As the BG website says BG didn't at some point have a problem with the Council developing the site.

So what happened?

 

[editor]

I'm not criticising Bugle reporting.

I am. To suggest there is widespread 'fury' among local residents is simply bullshit.

 

[David Clapson]

So who's the idiot in the room? I don't know anything about BG except what I've read in the Bugle and Editor's views. I only know McGlone from attending two meetings of the licensing committee. Each time he just stared into space and only opened his mouth to ask an off-licence owner "what is the ethos of your business?" Maybe that's his default question to justify attendance fees and expenses and such. I came away with the impression that he is a redundant airhead with no appetite for public service. I would be interested to know exactly what he's contributing to the many multi-million pound property projects he makes statements about. He's been a councillor for 20 years so I hope he's doing something right. Maybe he's just one of those complacent Labour councillors who get re-elected every year without having to lift a finger. Once you are an official Labour candidate in Lambeth it must be difficult to lose an election. You toe the party line and the voters don't worry about your name, they just want to put a cross in the Labour box. On the other hand, if you don't toe the party line because you want to stand up for your constituents, the party slings you out. Cf Rachel Heywood.

 

[Tricky Skills]

So who's the idiot in the room?

The proven liar Brad Carroll.

Although it appears that he has done a runner after flying a little too close to the white heat of his Nu Labour pals in Cabinet, and then being burnt.

If you sleep with dogs...

 

[David Clapson]

Why is the Bugle so uncritical of BG?

 

[editor]

Why is the Bugle so uncritical of BG?

That's a good question.

 

[Gramsci]

Got this through my letterbox today.

 

[editor]

Their head bloke is not local at all so the first lie is stinking bullshit.

I'm a local resident and I don't trust Brixton Green to be in control of a Monopoly set, let alone an actual estate.

They're a bunch of charlatans and proven liars.

 

[Gramsci]

What irritates me about the leaflets I got through my door is that Brixton Green now say they want to join forces with other community groups re community assets.

When they were in favour with the Council they never had opinion on issues like Cressingham Gardens estate "regeneration". Unless I missed something ViolentPanda

Now the Council won't give them the site they are suddenly becoming campaigning group to protect publicly owned assets.

The leaflets is misleading. The Council, as far as I know , aren't planning to sell this land. They are thinking of building it with the Homes for Lambeth development vehicle they are setting up. I don't really understand the difference between what Brixton Green are proposing and Lambeth proposal. Why giving it to Brixton Green is better I don't see. Brixton Green leaflets are small on details.

It needs to be remembered that at one point Brixton Green were Lambeth Labour Council pet community group. Including , as Tricky Skills has found the Council paying them for work. When it was all going well Brixton Green saw themselves as the future for social housing. Part of the New Labour Coop Council way forward for "affordable" housing. Which was the "mixed sustainable communities" approach. Didn't want to have much to do with Council tenants opposing Council "regeneration" schemes.

 

[Tricky Skills]

I thought the whole point of Brixton Green was to 'engage' the community with the plans that the Council had for the whole Somerleyton project? They were the PR people on the ground - albeit being extremely shit at this.

The Council tested out the competence of Brad by letting him manage No. 6. He fucked this up spectacularly, leading to a court case and a guilty verdict against an individual that Brixton Green brought in to 'manage' the community space.

I can't see why Brixton Green is now talking as though it has had the development taken away from them. It was never theirs to lay territorial claim to in the first place. In fact Brad even went as far to state on the record that he didn't want to manage the new development, but to hand it over to the community.

It seems that even the Progress mob in Cabinet have finally been awoken as to what a bunch of lying amateurs Brixton Green are.

 

[ViolentPanda]

What irritates me about the leaflets I got through my door is that Brixton Green now say they want to join forces with other community groups re community assets.

When they were in favour with the Council they never had opinion on issues like Cressingham Gardens estate "regeneration". Unless I missed something ViolentPanda

Nope, they wanted nothing to do with any regeneration issues except their own

Now the Council won't give them the site they are suddenly becoming campaigning group to protect publicly owned assets.

The leaflets is misleading. The Council, as far as I know , aren't planning to sell this land. They are thinking of building it with the Homes for Lambeth development vehicle they are setting up. I don't really understand the difference between what Brixton Green are proposing and Lambeth proposal. Why giving it to Brixton Green is better I don't see. Brixton Green leaflets are small on details.

The difference is that with the original project, Brixton Green had a chance of managing the homes, and therefore achieving a satisfactory income from it. With HfL now in line to develop and manage, Brixton Green's hopes have been dashed.

It needs to be remembered that at one point Brixton Green were Lambeth Labour Council pet community group. Including , as Tricky Skills has found the Council paying them for work. When it was all going well Brixton Green saw themselves as the future for social housing. Part of the New Labour Coop Council way forward for "affordable" housing. Which was the "mixed sustainable communities" approach. Didn't want to have much to do with Council tenants opposing Council "regeneration" schemes.

They didn't want anything to do with us, in case we tainted their "brand". Frankly, fuck 'em.

 

[editor]

Nope, they wanted nothing to do with any regeneration issues except their own



The difference is that with the original project, Brixton Green had a chance of managing the homes, and therefore achieving a satisfactory income from it. With HfL now in line to develop and manage, Brixton Green's hopes have been dashed.



They didn't want anything to do with us, in case we tainted their "brand". Frankly, fuck 'em.

Perhaps it might be worth letting that fact be more broadly known (tweet/facebook etc). It's important people know what lying frauds Brixton Green are.

 

[CH1]

I don't really understand the difference between what Brixton Green are proposing and Lambeth proposal.

Surely this is a hangover from the Cameroonian days - essentially Brixton Green were trying to persuade everyone including government agencies that Brixton Green was a suitable vehicle to vest ownership of social housing in - prior to the days of council owned Development Vehicles.

If you care to delve into Brixton Greens picture archive you ought to be able to see photos of Grant Shapps visiting Brad Carol on Somerleyton Road.

It was all a long time ago!

 

[Gramsci]

Surely this is a hangover from the Cameroonian days - essentially Brixton Green were trying to persuade everyone including government agencies that Brixton Green was a suitable vehicle to vest ownership of social housing in - prior to the days of council owned Development Vehicles.

If you care to delve into Brixton Greens picture archive you ought to be able to see photos of Grant Shapps visiting Brad Carol on Somerleyton Road.

It was all a long time ago!

 

[Tricky Skills]

"Brixton Green said that many points made by the council were false."



Oh the irony.

Why would even Lambeth Council believe a single word that the proven liars Brixton Green come out with?

The Bugle is sure warming that bed with Brixton Green and their own particular version of local history.

 

[teuchter]

essentially Brixton Green were trying to persuade everyone including government agencies that Brixton Green was a suitable vehicle to vest ownership of social housing in -

I thought their proposals never involved them owning any of it.

 

[CH1]

I thought their proposals never involved them owning any of it.

You tell me. How would they get rent to spend on community proposals then?

 

[teuchter]

You tell me. How would they get rent to spend on community proposals then?

What do you mean by "community proposals"? Stuff after it's built? My understanding was that they would be involved in the delivery of it, then hand it over to another body for management etc.

And the council would have 100% ownership (edit - of the freehold) - that was the whole point wasn't it?

 

[Pickman's model]

What do you mean by "community proposals"? Stuff after it's built? My understanding was that they would be involved in the delivery of it, then hand it over to another body for management etc.

And the council would have 100% ownership - that was the whole point wasn't it?

answering a question with a question suggests you've nary a clue, my sweet

 

[teuchter]

Who will own the completed development?

Lambeth Council will retain the freehold providing 250 year leases to the Ovalhouse Theatre (for the theatre). The ambition is for there to also be a 250 year lease to a new community body for the remainder of the site.

Who will live in the new homes?

100% of the homes will be for rent and they will all be owned by a new housing cooperative. The aim is for the development to provide homes for a mix of income groups. 40% of the homes will have genuine low cost rents, the kind of rents that the Council sets. 50% of all the homes will be Affordable Homes, as defined by the government. At least 60 of the homes will be part of an extra care scheme for older people.

There is a proposal for a local lettings policy for the homes.

Will Brixton Green be the new community body?

No. Brixton Green’s role is to make sure the community are at the forefront of the redevelopment. When the new community body is up and running, the community will have succeeded and Brixton Green’s job will be done.

How will the new community’s body board be elected?

The board of this new body will be elected from the residents, wider community, non-residential occupiers (e.g. the chef’s school) and Lambeth Council. This structure makes sure this public asset continues to benefit the community throughout the 250 years and its management is publicly accountable.

Is there a private developer involved?

No. Rather than have a private developer deliver the project, Brixton Green encouraged Lambeth Council to develop the site directly themselves. Lambeth have employed Igloo who provide their development experience, but receive a fee not a share of the profit.

Q&A | Brixton Green

 

[CH1]

Q&A | Brixton Green

Their specification shifts like quicksand. Vote for trustees of a ginger group which has nothing at all to do with development of Somerleyton Road!

And if its all for the local community I find it odd that their proposed trustees are not Coldharbour Ward based - although one was a governor of the school.

In any case there are three candidates for three vacancies. What is the need to vote then?
It would be interesting to see what the turnout is of this election.

To be quite honest there is nothing at all that Brixton Green does which could not have been done by the local councillors working with officers (if they could have "found the time").

 

[Tricky Skills]

To be quite honest there is nothing at all that Brixton Green does which could not have been done by the local councillors working with officers (if they could have "found the time").

And the local Cllr's would have at least been accountable for any actions. Plus they have a mandate, unlike Brixton Green.

 

[editor]

Their specification shifts like quicksand. Vote for trustees of a ginger group which has nothing at all to do with development of Somerleyton Road!

And if its all for the local community I find it odd that their proposed trustees are not Coldharbour Ward based - although one was a governor of the school.

In any case there are three candidates for three vacancies. What is the need to vote then?
It would be interesting to see what the turnout is of this election.

To be quite honest there is nothing at all that Brixton Green does which could not have been done by the local councillors working with officers (if they could have "found the time").

I've attended meetings with them and their agenda literally changes in front of your eyes. Slippery, unrepresentative and dishonest. Brixton is well rid of them.

 

[teuchter]

To be quite honest there is nothing at all that Brixton Green does which could not have been done by the local councillors working with officers (if they could have "found the time").

That's the thing though, "finding the time", isn't it? Now the setup is for councils to outsource as much of their work as they can get away with to local volunteers working for free. I don't like it, because of the lack of accountability, and the fact that it means only certain kinds of people can ever get themselves into those potentially influential roles. But whatever issues folk have with Brixton Green I don't see evidence that they are in this as some kind of sinister money making attempt.

 

[editor]

I'll always remember being at a meeting and hearing Brixton Green suggesting that their proposals were backed by their 1,000 members, which was as blatant a piece of misrepresentation as you could get. Apart from the fact that their proposals seemed to be constantly shifting, it was completely dishonest of them to assume that anyone buying one of their stupid £1 shares was automatically backing whatever their latest angle on their project was - and the fact that their own promo pics showed young children waving their shares around made it all the more ridiculous.

It would be like me claiming that my latest opinion was backed by all 53,000 members on urban.

 

[CH1]

Well I think its like they did a survey "How would you like the west side of Somerleyton Road given over to housing? We would make sure there was some social housing there."

Obviously many people agreed with the proposition on that level, without breaking it down. Then there are the exhibitions at 6 Somerleyton Road and various workshops and "tables" whereby the people are said to endorse the designs.

Essentially this is similar to any other Lambeth planning Masterplan situation and it seemed to be Lambeth and Neil Vokes in charge. Neil Vokes was then sent off to sort out Cressingham - and has now escaped to become Director of Development (whatever that is) at Camden

Everything has ground to a standstill and now Brixton Green are saying "If you don't want to s**t, get off the pot". Brixton Green actually don't have a financial stake, nor much in depth popular support, how can they progress the scheme either?

 

[Gramsci]

Q&A | Brixton Green

I think the this Q&A is out of date.

Is there a private developer involved?

No. Rather than have a private developer deliver the project, Brixton Green encouraged Lambeth Council to develop the site directly themselves. Lambeth have employed Igloo who provide their development experience, but receive a fee not a share of the profit

The recent news reports in Bugle give me impression that Brixton Green want to develop the site now. They don't want the Council to develop the site directly themselves.

The Bugle article leaves me somewhat at a loss to know what exactly has been going on. The Council still say they want to work with Brixton Green. But the Council is going to build out the site. Which was , from Brixton Green Q&A , what I thought BG wanted. The Q&A states that it was BG who encouraged the Council to go this route. Rather than the more traditional one of partnering with a private developer.

 

[Gramsci]

I'll always remember being at a meeting and hearing Brixton Green suggesting that their proposals were backed by their 1,000 members, which was as blatant a piece of misrepresentation as you could get. Apart from the fact that their proposals seemed to be constantly shifting, it was completely dishonest of them to assume that anyone buying one of their stupid £1 shares was automatically backing whatever their latest angle on their project was - and the fact that their own promo pics showed young children waving their shares around made it all the more ridiculous.

It would be like me claiming that my latest opinion was backed by all 53,000 members on urban.

They were all over the place. Picked then dropped one idea after another.

From what I remember. An urban farm on site, a recycling plant to produce energy, self build housing, student housing, Carlton Mansions as a hotel, a hairdresser school. There are probably more.

The housing tenure they envisaged changed over time. I was never clear about it.

The fact is, and I know as I attended early meetings with Council, that it was the Council who put the plans together for the site. They have hired Igloo and others to do it. They also were looking seriously at a financial model for the site. I don't remember BG complaining about that.