Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Here is Olive Morris the squatter:
In new development I want to make sure that her name is retained.
In new development I want to make sure that her name is retained.
Huge proposed development around Lambeth town hall promises 'community space and feel good vibes'
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
For those that may have missed it. Organised Youth revive the history of the Brixton Black Panthers.
http://www.brixtonblog.com/organised-youth-revive-the-history-of-the-brixton-black-panthers/16297
http://www.brixtonblog.com/organised-youth-revive-the-history-of-the-brixton-black-panthers/16297
Brixton Hatter
Home is south London mate
I've looked at the plans in more detail now. Some interesting stuff in there, including (as we should expect in modern building design) some good environmental and sustainability features. I like the idea of opening up the town hall, creating a new entrance in Buckner Road and a public thoroughfare right through the middle of the building. Whether Olive Morris House actually needs to be demolished and expensively rebuilt (rather than refurbished) I don't know, but it certainly fits with the current strategy of 'knock'em down and sell'em off'.
As with always, the rub is in how it is financed. £30m is a lot of money. It is also coincidentally roughly the amount the council has cut from services as part of 'austerity'. I'd like to know more about how this is going to be paid for and I'm trying to find out...
As with always, the rub is in how it is financed. £30m is a lot of money. It is also coincidentally roughly the amount the council has cut from services as part of 'austerity'. I'd like to know more about how this is going to be paid for and I'm trying to find out...
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
I'm sure that is a coincidence tbh. It will almost certainly be paid for through some sort of long term finance agreement. So the cost will be calculated as an annual cost over x years - they won't have scraped together 30m from this year's budget to pay for it outright.
Which of course doesn't discount their ability to get a really, really bad deal on said finance agreement.
Onket
Je suis [CONTENT REMOVED]
Getting rid of OMH in that way would certainly contribute towards paying for the new Town Hall development, tbf. As far as I know they only want one Council building in future, so won't need anything on the OMH site once the new place is up/running/in use.
Onket
Je suis [CONTENT REMOVED]
A given.
sparkybird
ask the bird...
I've had a look at the proposals which seem to include an awful lot of council offices still! I thought the plan was to get rid of much of this (much moved I thought to St Georges Wharf in Vauxhall?). And vague uses such as 'community' are a cop out - we all know that 'community' use brings in no money and it has to be subsidised. And yet more posh flats is s short term gain - we need employment generators longer term. Isn't this whole development called 'SW2 Enterprise Centre' - bugger all enterprising about the current proposals
Early on, I did comment on the website, that the Town Hall would be ripe for development as a luxury city hotel similar to the Bethnal Green one.... could have spa/gym/restaurants/conference facilities/wedding venue as well as a hotel. No one from the Council bothered to respond - so much for interacting with the community
what a load of old bullocks
EDIT: I've just noticed that they've changed the name of the develepment from SW2 Enterprise Centre (which I quite liked) to Your Town Hall!! Flipping cheek - so it is just a revamp for all those council workers
Early on, I did comment on the website, that the Town Hall would be ripe for development as a luxury city hotel similar to the Bethnal Green one.... could have spa/gym/restaurants/conference facilities/wedding venue as well as a hotel. No one from the Council bothered to respond - so much for interacting with the community
what a load of old bullocks
EDIT: I've just noticed that they've changed the name of the develepment from SW2 Enterprise Centre (which I quite liked) to Your Town Hall!! Flipping cheek - so it is just a revamp for all those council workers
Last edited:
Onket
Je suis [CONTENT REMOVED]
They rent that and it's expensive.
As I said earlier, I think the idea is to have all Council staff in the one building, the Town Hall, rather than all over the place.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Yep - getting rid of the Vauxhall offices, I understand.
sparkybird
ask the bird...
Ah, I see - wonder why they ever moved into the Vauxhall offices then???
I'm not sure they all need to be in the same spot. I agree that those who have to deal with the public a lot need to be in places which are easy for the public to get to (eg the Town Hall) BUT for the behind the scenes workers could be located somewhere else (cheaper) and free up 'expensive' space for income generation
I'm not sure they all need to be in the same spot. I agree that those who have to deal with the public a lot need to be in places which are easy for the public to get to (eg the Town Hall) BUT for the behind the scenes workers could be located somewhere else (cheaper) and free up 'expensive' space for income generation
leanderman
Street Party: July 2
Aren't some services down in Brighton, council tax or parking? Presumably outsourced to Crapita or something
I do work for local government and whenever I am asked to post - always post in the 21st century - an invoice for a council in London to Sheffield or Andover or wherever they've housed the latest crapita outsourced shite i write that invoice off for months. I have not once been paid on time by them and you waste months chasing shadows in payment centres with no contact numbers etc.
And i am a small business who is supposed to take priority.
Bit of a derail really but they are a bunch of utter wankers and the quicker we realise they are a false fucking economy the better.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
I agree - I don't think any of the services need High Street frontages as long as they are easily accessible and signposted. There is such demand for retail that it seems ridiculous to chog up the main road with office entrances. And it would be extra income.
I did make this point once before at a meeting ages ago (in relation to the redevelopment of OMH, I think) but was shot down for wanting to "hide" community services.
sparkybird
ask the bird...
One reason I never do any work for local councils - they seem to forget that I have a mortgage and bills to pay each month......
Onket
Je suis [CONTENT REMOVED]
Brixton Hatter
Home is south London mate
And council tax administration in Kent I think.
Brixton Hatter
Home is south London mate
They reckon they can save £4.5m each year by consolidating offices - so over 5 years that would be £22.5m (though we've already heard that is looking optimistic.) The rebuild itself is being done by a developer, who will get given International House (big red brick tower block behind the Rec/opposite the Canterbury pub) in exchange. So yes, there won't be £30m changing hands (people like to tot up the figures and brandish a big number to make the development seem impressive.)
I'm interested in how the deal is being financed and how International House has been valued. If this scheme ends up costing more than expected (which is almost inevitable) I assume the council will dip into its (allegedly) vast reserves, rather than adding it on to our council tax.
I've FOI'ed them on this anyway, so we should find out in 28 days
Brixton Hatter
Home is south London mate
Yeah I know that. It's just a shame we continually sell public assets. And the council is gambling it will never want to expand again. Once the property is gone, it's never coming back.
There must be a better way.
For example, if "asset disposal" is really required to fund new projects, why not sell off, say, half a building for property, retain the other half and retain the freehold. That way you get cash but retain public ownership of the land and some of the property. One day there won't be anything left to sell off. Look at what happened with the sell off of all the Lambeth schools in the 80s and 90s....we have a shortage of places and many local secondary-aged kids now have to go to Wandsworth, Southwark or Croydon to go to school.
leanderman
Street Party: July 2
Basically what they are doing in Rushcroft road
editor
hiraethified
Be great if you put this together for a Brixton Buzz article too, if you fancy it. It's important that all this gets out.They reckon they can save £4.5m each year by consolidating offices - so over 5 years that would be £22.5m (though we've already heard that is looking optimistic.) The rebuild itself is being done by a developer, who will get given International House (big red brick tower block behind the Rec/opposite the Canterbury pub) in exchange. So yes, there won't be £30m changing hands (people like to tot up the figures and brandish a big number to make the development seem impressive.)
I'm interested in how the deal is being financed and how International House has been valued. If this scheme ends up costing more than expected (which is almost inevitable) I assume the council will dip into its (allegedly) vast reserves, rather than adding it on to our council tax.
I've FOI'ed them on this anyway, so we should find out in 28 days
Brixton Hatter
Home is south London mate
Perhaps, but I don't necessarily think asset disposal was required in that case. And it remains to be seen whether the 22 units will be available for social rent.
Brixton Hatter
Home is south London mate
Yes I will do that. I might wait for the FOI to come back though...will give it some thought.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
The first I heard that this project was being planned was when a website aimed at development partner appeared.
I have searched for that website and cannot find it now.
The Future Brixton website makes much of "Co production" of this site. But it was not "Co produced" with local community.
There was some consultation. But that was after the main outlines of scheme were already planned by officers.
What I object to is the Council trying to make out residents have a big say in this scheme. They did not.
If the Council wants to do big projects that rationalise its assets fair enough. But please Council do not try and say its being done in conjunction with the community. Its not.
It may or may not end up being a good scheme. But in reality the community do not have a say other than to vote this administration out if it ends up not working out.
Onket
Je suis [CONTENT REMOVED]
I agree. They don't always seem to have the same views as sensible people like you and me though!
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
It was the LDs who acquired the offices in Vauxhall. Its been a bone of contention between th LD and Labour group for years.
Planning moved from Acre Lane to Vauxhall. In Acre Lane you could easily go and find info and talk to a planner. Also access planning documents etc. Once they moved up to Vauxhall this became not really possible.
It would be good if planning dept could be more accessible for general public.
sparkybird
ask the bird...
I think the renaming of the development has taken down that website.....
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
That website aimed at development partners was out before any consultation with residents. Which is the wrong way around. If the idea is that this is a Cooperative Council who want to Co-produce projects with the community then a website seeking development partners first is not the way to do it.
Taking it down is wiping out history of how this project has been developed.
Similar threads
