Lambeth's plans to demolish Cressingham Gardens and other estates without the consent of residents
- Thread starter Brixton Hatter
- Start date
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
I would have thought if Marcia Cameron signed that indicated a bit of a climb down or at least a desire to consider all aspects of the situation.
Did a councillor present the petition, or did you do it yourselves?
I turned up at 6.50 expecting a normal meeting, only to find that there was this extra item - a sort of "debate" about economic development of Lambeth, to be fronted up by Cllr Jack Hopkins before the main business.
Did you hear that debate. Was it any good/enlightening?
I had arranged previously a trip to the West End (he says guiltily) and went ahead with that. So any feedback from the council chamber would be most welcome!
As I say, small victories, no point getting too complacent but it's a glimmer at least.
A councillor presented it, after a photo op outside with one of our lot handing it over to them.Heard it, have some scrappy notes, it was quite interesting. In a nutshell:
The council need to have 5 and 10 year plans instead of lurching from one pilot scheme to another.
More communication and cooperation between young people (and others looking for work), educators, training providers and employers, so that placements are there when needed, and people have a chance of getting ready in time to take up the work.
More needs to be done to encourage and nurture local businesses, including considering them for things like the cleaning contracts.
London Liviing Wage to be brought in as the standard minimum to be paid to anyone working for Lambeth or for any of their contractors. Zero hours contracts to be got rid of.
More fruit and veg needs to be grown locally, even if it's edible bus stops (or maybe lettuces on the roof of the new Town Hall).
Most of the cooperative council's claimed victories and achievements have bugger all to do with it (so said Tim Briggs). Same councillor apologised after some hefty prompting for getting his figures
Comments about Matthew Bennet reminding Tim Briggs of a young goodlooking but not v upright citizen (whose name escapes me).
Social entrepreneurs if given the right support (including free/cheap pop up space for sessions of training or work) may well be able to provide a lot of long term sustainable employment in the area, without costing the council a lot.
Repeated comments about things should be made more local and/or brought back in house - to save money and keep things efficient.
CBA to do the rest right now.
Edited to add: I'll put the bit about jobs and increasing Lambeths's wealth in the Brixton bit, with a bit more detail
Last edited:
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
Odd then that Pope's Road has now been allowed to change from Grow:Brixton to Pop:Brixton. Enterprise has taken over the growing agenda.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Shouldn't you complain to Democratic Services? They have to produce an accurate record. Or the councillor who handed it in could do so.WTAF? The handing in of the petition at the council meeting last week has not been included in the minutes.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
According to the website arasmussen@lambeth.gov.uk (Anne Rasmussen, Tel: 020 7926 0028) is the appropriate contact - both for full council and for petitions.How on earth would I know, and how do I contact them? I realise this probably sounds as if I'm asking to be spoonfed, but this sort of thing is generally not found out until you need to know it.
I think Councillor Ainslie handed it in.
If you can't get through you could simply ring 926 1000 and ask for the committee section.
There are no minutes up on the website yet BTW.
Some residents did officially complain over the December minutes that they didn't accurately reflect what was said by the delegation of residents and that the petition wasn't mentioned.... but complaints essentially ignored by council. Hence the second attempt at submitting the petition this time via a councillor. Will see when the minutes come out if they have recorded it this time.
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
After a little digging I managed to find the Cressingham Tenant Offer - a document that Lambeth Council has claimed doesn't exist.
Of interest is the difference between the Council's Draft Principle's for Estate Regeneration and how Cressingham is being singled out as a separate case.
Essentially the Council can't guarantee that it will be in control of the rents, should any new homes be built. These might be shipped out to a housing association, a coop or a 'Special Purpose Vehicle.'
BBuzz piece.
Of interest is the difference between the Council's Draft Principle's for Estate Regeneration and how Cressingham is being singled out as a separate case.
Essentially the Council can't guarantee that it will be in control of the rents, should any new homes be built. These might be shipped out to a housing association, a coop or a 'Special Purpose Vehicle.'
BBuzz piece.
Thank you
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
The petition is in the draft minutes for January's Full Council [pdf].
The Mayor's showing up at 2pm, sans regalia, to be given a large postcard, before he attends another engagement in Croydon.
I wonder where he is going to put that?
He handed it back after the photo op. Don't be giving me ideas about where it could be stuck.
A bit of shameless photobombing from the day. Those who got there enjoyed it, and it really was just intended as a bit of fun after a year of one bit of bad news after another.
Thanks to everyone (including the 49ers) who made the day possible, helped out with it, or turned up - the general vibe of the day was great. Even if I don't remember all of your names, I do remember your work and your good attitude.
Thanks to everyone (including the 49ers) who made the day possible, helped out with it, or turned up - the general vibe of the day was great. Even if I don't remember all of your names, I do remember your work and your good attitude.
Attachments
Last edited:
A bit of shameless photobombing from the day. Those who got there enjoyed it, and it really was just intended as a bit of fun after a year of one bit of bad news after another.
Thanks to everyone (including the 49ers) who made the day possible, helped out with it, or turned up - the general vibe of the day was great. Even if I don't remember all of your names, I do remember your work and your good attitude.
Really enjoyed the event... just what was needed to soothe the soul
But ate way too much sugar with all the yummy home made cakes :-(
Nice coverage here http://www.brixtonblog.com/we-love-cressingham-residents-hold-event-to-show/28179
also a bit more on the save cressingham FB page
also a bit more on the save cressingham FB page
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
Here's an FoI worth following.
Cllr Cameron you might recall has taken claim as being the person responsible for 'initiating' the Cressingham regeneration / gentrification.
Cllr Cameron you might recall has taken claim as being the person responsible for 'initiating' the Cressingham regeneration / gentrification.
Oh yes, I remember her well.
Insufferable IMHO.And that's quite an achievement, my memory for names and faces is usually appalling.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I would have come up on that Sat but got sidetracked into helping out at Guinness Trust.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
So they want to set up a Special Purpose Vehicle for the "regeneration" of the estate? This means they could exclude RTB?
I do not understand how they can do this. If , for example, and estate is transferred to an RSL its normal that existing Council Tenants retain the RTB on transfer.
Also looks to me that they are thinking of using the model that they are working up for the Somerleyton road project.
Effectively what Bennett is saying is that if you want to keep a Council tenancy then you have to bid to get another property elsewhere.
The ease of doing that of course depends on the Category you have when bidding.
The Guinness Trust Tenants's need was greater, anyway.
1) Yes
2) This is Lambeth - duh! You can't expect legal niceties to matter.
3) Yes
4) But it's been repeatedly also been stated that every tenant will be offered a decant to somewhere on the estate (which will be a lot more expensive if it's a newbuild and still in council hands), therefore any bid for somewhere off the estate is (by implication) self-inflicted...
Lambeth council working with tenants, my flabby white arse!
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Tricky Skills editor Gniewosz
We had a circular from Lambeth delivered this morning. As you're no doubt aware, in December 2014, the council took the decision that Cressingham and 5 other estates would bear the brunt of development of the council's ambition to put another 1000 council homes in the borough.
They claim to have "now undertaken the necessary financial analysis on the refurbishment options (Options 1 to 3). We have worked with residents on these costings,and even using a best-case scenario the lowest cost for refurbishment of the whole estate is still three times what the council can afford, and it would not be right to continue to consult with residents about an option that is simply unaffordable and cannot happen ".
So, as we were cynically aware, the consultation is a sham. It looks like an FoI on the "financial analysis" is required, to make sure they're not still using their hoary and inaccurate £14-16 million figure, which the residents' independent survey established to be inflated by 7-8 million. Tricky, if I send a scan of the doc to you, could you do the FoI/use the doc as a basis for a bit more investigative journalism?
We had a circular from Lambeth delivered this morning. As you're no doubt aware, in December 2014, the council took the decision that Cressingham and 5 other estates would bear the brunt of development of the council's ambition to put another 1000 council homes in the borough.
They claim to have "now undertaken the necessary financial analysis on the refurbishment options (Options 1 to 3). We have worked with residents on these costings,and even using a best-case scenario the lowest cost for refurbishment of the whole estate is still three times what the council can afford, and it would not be right to continue to consult with residents about an option that is simply unaffordable and cannot happen ".
So, as we were cynically aware, the consultation is a sham. It looks like an FoI on the "financial analysis" is required, to make sure they're not still using their hoary and inaccurate £14-16 million figure, which the residents' independent survey established to be inflated by 7-8 million. Tricky, if I send a scan of the doc to you, could you do the FoI/use the doc as a basis for a bit more investigative journalism?
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
ViolentPanda Happy to. Thanks for the heads up. The whole estate regeneration has been a sham. And that's putting it mildly. Feel free to send anything on.
Thanks.
Thanks.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Sent.
Over the weekend I'm going to try to put together a chronology of the twists and turns, but from here it's a stitch-up.
I really do hope they've been stupid enough to use their own costings for this!
