Carlton Mansions co-op, Coldharbour Lane, Brixton - history and news

[Gramsci]

Gramsci have you made any attempt to get this story picked up by a newspaper or anything? Things having been "settled" now, does that make doing that any easier? I think as many people as possible should know about what's happened here.

Another journalist contacted me today.

 

[Gramsci]

Thanks to all Urbanites for the kind comments and likes.

Much appreciated.

 

[editor]

Another journalist contacted me today.

You're free to write whatever you like for Brixton Buzz, and be as direct and uncensored as you like!

 

[equationgirl]

So sorry to hear about this Gramsci you have all been treated very shabbily by the council.

 

[teuchter]

Another journalist contacted me today.

Good.

 

[Gramsci]

South London Press will have article on the Mansions next Tuesday.

 

[editor]

South London Press will have article on the Mansions next Tuesday.

The SLP are generally bloody good at supporting things like this. They gave us loads of support for the Brixton Buzz beer.

 

[Gramsci]

Piece in Brixton Blog

 

[ddraig]

sorry if i've got it wrong
it doesn't mention that the fire safety stuff was sorted

 

[Gramsci]

sorry if i've got it wrong
it doesn't mention that the fire safety stuff was sorted

The level was reduced one level down to substantial rather than intolerable.

 

[ddraig]

ah i see

 

[CH1]

South London Press will have article on the Mansions next Tuesday.

It's on page 7. They seem to have got the facts right - the headline and first sentence of the article both start with the word tenants.
The SLP give the council a three paragraph right to reply - which is more than I would do after they moved their corporate information advertising to Weekender.

 

[Gramsci]

It's on page 7. They seem to have got the facts right - the headline and first sentence of the article both start with the word tenants.
The SLP give the council a three paragraph right to reply - which is more than I would do after they moved their corporate information advertising to Weekender.

Page 6 is good as well. On the older peoples homes that are under threat. Liked they way that SLP put two communities, under threat from Lambeth the "Cooperative Council" next to each other.

Its unfortunately not online.

 

[CH1]

Page 6 is good as well. On the older peoples homes that are under threat. Liked they way that SLP put two communities, under threat from Lambeth the "Cooperative Council" next to each other.
Its unfortunately not online.

It was reported elsewhere that Fitch Court in Effra Road is to be closed/redeveloped. Also council-owned elderly/sheltered accommodation, and only opened in the 1980s. Amazing to me.

 

[Gramsci]

It was reported elsewhere that Fitch Court in Effra Road is to be closed/redeveloped. Also council-owned elderly/sheltered accommodation, and only opened in the 1980s. Amazing to me.

I do not understand this. Without any "community" consultation the Somerleyton road project will have 60 units for older people. So Council are getting rid of homes that older people like and then building new ones on Somerleyton. Bonkers.

BTW this was decision taken by the Council. Not even my Ward Cllrs knew about it. So much for the Somerleyton road project being "Co produced" I only knew because it was mentioned in passing at a recent consultation meeting. I did ask when this was decided as it was not consulted about. Also an older person at the meeting said that older people often prefer a smaller group of up to 30units.

I did point out this was a big change to the scheme. Not that I was necessarily against it. My problem was that I thought the project was being "Co-produced".

Its yet another example of how the Council really wield the power. "Co operative Council" and "Co production" are done when it suits them.

 

[leanderman]

It was reported elsewhere that Fitch Court in Effra Road is to be closed/redeveloped. Also council-owned elderly/sheltered accommodation, and only opened in the 1980s. Amazing to me.

But Lambeth loves to knock down new buildings, even ones recently refurbished, such as Olive Morris, which was being geo-surveyed today.

 

[CH1]

I do not understand this. Without any "community" consultation the Somerleyton road project will have 60 units for older people. So Council are getting rid of homes that older people like and then building new ones on Somerleyton. Bonkers.

BTW this was decision taken by the Council. Not even my Ward Cllrs knew about it. So much for the Somerleyton road project being "Co produced" I only knew because it was mentioned in passing at a recent consultation meeting. I did ask when this was decided as it was not consulted about. Also an older person at the meeting said that older people often prefer a smaller group of up to 30units.

I did point out this was a big change to the scheme. Not that I was necessarily against it. My problem was that I thought the project was being "Co-produced".

Its yet another example of how the Council really wield the power. "Co operative Council" and "Co production" are done when it suits them.

Maybe this ties in with the proposed day centre for Alzheimer's sufferers?

 

[Gramsci]

Just got an invite from "Future Brixton" inviting me to "Somerleyton Road Community Day"

 

[Gramsci]

Maybe this ties in with the proposed day centre for Alzheimer's sufferers?

I do not know. The point is that this is top down decision by the higher ups in Council. Similar to the way the Mansions has been treated.

The way the Somerleyton road project is being decided is not "Co-production". Nor is it "Co-operative Council" whatever thats supposed to be.

 

[leanderman]

I do not know. The point is that this is top down decision by the higher ups in Council. Similar to the way the Mansions has been treated.

The way the Somerleyton road project is being decided is not "Co-production". Nor is it "Co-operative Council" whatever thats supposed to be.

But then we get back to the problem of working out who the 'community' is.

Councils, in theory, strike a balance between competing interests.

While they may have got it wrong in this case, their loss of control in other areas, such as free schools, is disastrous.

 

[Gramsci]

But then we get back to the problem of working out who the 'community' is.

Councils, in theory, strike a balance between competing interests.

While they may have got it wrong in this case, their loss of control in other areas, such as free schools, is disastrous.

The Somerleyton road project was said by Council to be done with community consultation as an example of how the "Coop Council" will work.

The decision to put 60 units for older people was not consulted on. In the sense that the Council did not ask anyone there opinion on it. So the issue of what is the community is not the point here. I am not saying its a good or bad thing to have these sixty units. I’m just saying I was never asked as someone who lives on the site (until the Council evict me and finally break up my community).

 

[Gramsci]

One of soon to be gone Coop members posted this up on the Brixton Blog article.

It’s worth adding here that we ( I have lived in Carlton Mansions 30 years) had the support of our elected ward councillors who didn’t like the way the council officers went about this. They didn’t believe a “co-operative council” should be treating it’s constituents so harshly. And I can tell you a barrister working for the council looking you in the eye telling telling you you have 48hours to get out and appearing to enjoy it is no fun. The judge wouldn’t entertain that attempted injunction. We also had the support of the leader of the housing committee at the London assembly and countless local groups and individuals including the Brixton Society, Oval House Theatre who will establish on the site, some ex Labour councillors and our extraordinarily dedicated solicitor’s team and human rights barrister. It is a small handful of officers who seem in a hurry to execute their paperwork requiring our eradication. These are sad days and have taken a colossal toll on our community members and their dependents in unnecessarily nasty and presumably expensive (public money) litigation. We at CM are extremely grateful to all those who have supported us – Thank you

This brought tears to my eyes. Really going to miss her.

 

[nagapie]

Who are these shameful council officers, are they petty jobsworths or higher ups? Although let's not forget they could not do it without the backing of the leaders of the council, there was plenty of time and opportunity to back down.

 

[leanderman]

Should they not be congratulated for so losing control of their housing stock that people with little means were able to live there very cheaply for 30 years?

 

[SpamMisery]

Am I right in thinking the contract was essentially 'you can live here very cheap but at some point we will want the building back'?

 

[teuchter]

Am I right in thinking the contract was essentially 'you can live here very cheap but at some point we will want the building back'?

I don't think anyone's arguing about the principle that the building would be taken back by the council eventually. It's the way they have gone about it which seems to have been done in a more agressive way than necessary and which has shown a disregard for the welfare of the people living there.

 

[leanderman]

I don't think anyone's arguing about the principle that the building would be taken back by the council eventually. It's the way they have gone about it which seems to have been done in a more agressive way than necessary and which has shown a disregard for the welfare of the people living there.

True, still, overall, a decent deal.

 

[peterkro]

Am I right in thinking the contract was essentially 'you can live here very cheap but at some point we will want the building back'?

Villa road is a case in point.The council wanted to knock them down and moved everyone out ( not so ideal a lot of those people were elderly and had lived there for decades more than a few died soon after they were shifted) in decades of negotiations most of the surviving north side became housing association,since the cooperative council took over some of the remaining houses were sold on the open market (my house went for £905,000 at auction).
None of those houses would have been there if they weren't squatted and kept in good working order for those 35 years.

 

[Rushy]

I don't think anyone's arguing about the principle that the building would be taken back by the council eventually. It's the way they have gone about it which seems to have been done in a more agressive way than necessary and which has shown a disregard for the welfare of the people living there.

Agreed - although the council has had repeated problems with getting people to voluntarily leave other sites. I think what it has failed to do is recognise that it is dealing with, from what I have understood, a more cohesive group at Carlton who are organised/well lead enough to negotiate as a group.

 

[Rushy]

Villa road is a case in point.The council wanted to knock them down and moved everyone out ( not so ideal a lot of those people were elderly and had lived there for decades more than a few died soon after they were shifted) in decades of negotiations most of the surviving north side became housing association,since the cooperative council took over some of the remaining houses were sold on the open market (my house went for £905,000 at auction).
None of those houses would have been there if they weren't squatted and kept in good working order for those 35 years.

I viewed that house. Good working order is obviously highly subjective but in my professional opinion it was way beyond a general refurbishment project and essentially required a rebuild behind a restored façade.