Lambeth's plans to demolish Cressingham Gardens and other estates without the consent of residents

[Greebo]

Yes, but are all the residents going to be turfed out - with the land used for luxury apartments for the rich? Or not?

As I said in post 47: Any tenant who is moved out for the duration of building work, will not be moved back into their original home afterwards.

There will be a "one move" operation. One new block A built; existing tenants from B which will be worked on moved into A; B rebuilt, tenants from C moved into B, repeat ad nauseam.
...................................................
Most of the unbuilt land at the back can't be touched. A more cynical person might suggest that any move to intensively build on the rest of the estate is as much motivated by spite as greed. OTOH the sides, middle, and front of the estate can be built up.
....................................................
Newly built flats are projected to go up by at least one CT band. This 1976 1 bed flat (not huge for 2 adults, one of whom is housebound) is band B, it'd be band C. All new builds will be on water meters instead of water rates - this will hit hard as few flats here are underoccupied, and many have somebody who needs extra water for their health or for pain relief. Unless all the M class flats (there will be several built) are on the ground floor, they will need lifts. Lifts mean higher service charges. Service charges are not covered by Housing Benefit or Local Housing Allowance.

Rents are projected to go up by £20, maybe more for existing tenants - the regeneration guy seemed unwilling to admit what level it would rise to and his first reply was "affordable rent". You know how affordable that could be.
.............................

Anyone moving onto the estate, after the building, will not get the same tenancy conditions and protection as those already here might just about be able to keep hold of. Their rents etc will be higher, as the council won't have the same responsibility towards them.

leanderman sorry about the indirect answer - it's complicated. People won't be forced off so much as nudged off by degrees.

 

[Winot]

Sounds very disruptive Greebo and I'm not belittling the effect on existing tenants, but doesn't sound quite like

luxury flats for the rich

as originally claimed. Do you have any more information about that Brixton Hatter?

 

[Gniewosz]

The scary situation is for the home owners (leaseholders and freeholders). There will be a "market value gap" between the price that the council will pay for their old homes and the price of the new homes. In all other regeneration programs this gap is usually more than £100k. Even if they can get a mortgage under the new rules, not many will have the income level to support the extra mortgage. "Shared ownership" is often bandied around as an alternative, but if anyone has looked into what the eligibility criteria are, they will see that typically a household needs a minimum of approx £39k income just for a 1 bed flat. For a 3 bed flat, income levels often need to be over £60k. Consequently, around 30% of the community is at risk of having to leave London entirely in order to afford a home, even if they have lived in the area for 30+ years

 

[leanderman]

The scary situation is for the home owners (leaseholders and freeholders). There will be a "market value gap" between the price that the council will pay for their old homes and the price of the new homes. In all other regeneration programs this gap is usually more than £100k. Even if they can get a mortgage under the new rules, not many will have the income level to support the extra mortgage. "Shared ownership" is often bandied around as an alternative, but if anyone has looked into what the eligibility criteria are, they will see that typically a household needs a minimum of approx £39k income just for a 1 bed flat. For a 3 bed flat, income levels often need to be over £60k. Consequently, around 30% of the community is at risk of having to leave London entirely in order to afford a home, even if they have lived in the area for 30+ years

Some are freeholders?

 

[Rushy]

Some are freeholders?

the houses are.

This one was sold ages ago but seems to have fallen through and come back on (at a higher price). Can't imagine the threat of CP is a great selling point. It's also the house I mentioned in an earlier thread with a jungle of Japanese knotweed in the neighbour's garden.

 

[Gramsci]

Greebo ViolentPanda

I am really sorry that the Council are attempting to break up your community and your estate.

I have been to the Rotunda and seen the estate. I like it. It has plenty of green space and trees. I know the residents there have resisted Lambeth "Coop" Council threats to your estate.

I have read the articles in Brixton Blog about residents there and it sounds a great community to live in.

I know how you must be feeling.

 

[Greebo]

Thanks Gramsci - at the moment I just get the nagging suspicion that people on this estate are being softened up. Tell us that the worst case is inevitable so that we'll let almost anything else through.

 

[Gramsci]

It's all listed on the pages I posted up, although one of the options doesn't mention that if Crosby Walk is demolished, the estate will gain an extra ten homes on top of the developer's figure, because that's how many are bricked up and unusable.

The amount of extra housing is listed for each option. But not the % of affordable.

I guess they are already ruling out option one on cost grounds. Though given size of estate it does not seem to high.

Option 5 gives maximum increase in units.

I am guessing that Council want to get a "development" partner. They build new estate and sell % on open market as payment?

 

[ViolentPanda]

The amount of extra housing is listed for each option. But not the % of affordable.

I guess they are already ruling out option one on cost grounds. Though given size of estate it does not seem to high.

Option 5 gives maximum increase in units.

I am guessing that Council want to get a "development" partner. They build new estate and sell % on open market as payment?

Yep, which means that "the co-operative council" will almost certainly punt more heavily for option 4 or option 5, than for 1, 2 or 3. Less cost to the council, greatest publicity benefit to the council, highest return to the "development partner, and fuck the residents and tenants.

 

[Dan U]

Used to score decent pills off a guy on Cressingham bitd. For that I will always like it.

 

[editor]

In depth update from Mr Cobb:

Cressingham residents fear homes being left to rot ahead of possible Lambeth Council regeneration

 

[Greebo]

Those ones (Crosby Walk) have been blocked up for a few years now, and it's a tiny part of the entire estate, maybe 10 flats at most. Still ridiculous mismanagement, given the desperate need for social housing in Lambeth.

<snip>

 

[editor]

Those ones (Crosby Walk) have been blocked up for a few years now, and it's a tiny part of the entire estate, maybe 10 flats at most. Still ridiculous mismanagement, given the desperate need for social housing in Lambeth.

It still upsets me to see them empty.

 

[Greebo]

It still upsets me to see them empty.

Rightly so - those are good size flats in a good location (transport and schools v nearby), and it would've been cheaper to fix them than for the tenants to move into HA or privately rented accommodation and then need far more HB.

 

[SpamMisery]

Not seen them before. Seems barking not to use them as some form of temporary housing even if the council's plan is to demolish

 

[Greebo]

Not seen them before. Seems barking not to use them as some form of temporary housing even if the council's plan is to demolish

And yet you claim to know this estate and have visited it frequently. Perhaps you should spend a few hours walking around and getting to know it properly. Crosby Walk, before being emptied and breezeblocked up, would have been quite picturesque to live in.

It's in one of the more woodland areas of the estate. In a corner, near the hideously newbuilt block of flats just downhill from Tesco.

 

[SpamMisery]

And yet you claim to know this estate and have visited it frequently.

You're joking right? And, to correct you, I never said I 'know' the estate. I simply said I had visited frequently.

I've also not been on the London Eye yet I "claim" to live in London - what a fraudster!

 

[Manter]

And yet you claim to know this estate and have visited it frequently. Perhaps you should spend a few hours walking around and getting to know it properly. Crosby Walk, before being emptied and breezeblocked up, would have been quite picturesque to live in.

It's in one of the more woodland areas of the estate. In a corner, near the hideously newbuilt block of flats just downhill from Tesco.

I don't think those flats are that bad. A hell of a lot better than Brockwell gate.

 

[editor]

A hell of a lot better than Brockwell gate.

^^^
Damning with faint praise!

 

[Greebo]

You're joking right? And, to correct you, I never said I 'know' the estate. I simply said I had visited frequently. <snip>

You implied sufficient knowledge of the estate to be able to form an opinion of what it must be like to live here. Would you like some gravy to go with that foot in your mouth?

 

[SpamMisery]

You implied sufficient knowledge of the estate to be able to form an opinion of what it must be like to live here. Would you like some gravy to go with that foot in your mouth?

No I didn't; you inferred it - an entirely different thing. I never formed (or explicitly stated) an opinion of what it was like to live there. I simply said:

I find Cressingham Gardens an immensely depressing estate. Many (but not all) of the people who live there love it to bits, but I can't see the appeal - besides being right on the edge of the park

To which you took great offence; but, again, as I've already said:

It's nothing personal, it's just my own preference.

I'm sorry it annoys you but I'm sure there are lots of places you dislike. There are lots of places we all dislike. It's a fact of life.

 

[SpamMisery]

Because you can't see it in person, here's a gif of me doing my victory dance

 

[editor]

Because you can't see it in person, here's a gif of me doing my victory dance

Stop this disruptive nonsense please. People are trying to have a grown up discussion about people's homes.

 

[Gramsci]

In depth update from Mr Cobb:

Cressingham residents fear homes being left to rot ahead of possible Lambeth Council regeneration

I particularly like this bit of Jasons piece:

We are reminded here of the blog piece penned by Cllr Jack Hopkins, the Lambeth Council Cabinet member for Jobs and Growth.

You may remember how Jacko banged on about the importance of residents stepping forward to have their say, else they risk on losing out when the developers come sniffing around and asking Lambeth Council for help during the gentrification of our area.

We trust that Jacko and his pals will be true to their word when the residents of Cressingham Gardens step forward to put forward their views.

I never did get a reply to the email I sent to Hopkins about his blog piece.

From article and when I have met residents sounds to me like they want option one- repair existing estate.

I wonder how the Council will get around that?

 

[editor]

From article and when I have met residents sounds to me like they want option one- repair existing estate.

I wonder how the Council will get around that?

I know a few residents there and they all say the same: they want to stay there and they just want their properties fixed.

 

[leanderman]

I particularly like this bit of Jasons piece:



I never did get a reply to the email I sent to Hopkins about his blog piece.

From article and when I have met residents sounds to me like they want option one- repair existing estate.

I wonder how the Council will get around that?

Not the most balanced article I have read.

 

[editor]

Not the most balanced article I have read.

Nothing wrong with having a view and an opinion on a topic as emotive as housing. Given the politics, I imagine it would be pretty hard to present a truly balanced view without rattling on for pages. And that would be boring.

 

[leanderman]

Nothing wrong with having a view and an opinion on a topic as emotive as housing.

Truth is the first casualty of journalism!

 

[editor]

Truth is the first casualty of journalism!

Indeed it is. And when you're starting from a position of a seriously skewed powerbase (e.g. coming up against the slick PR of councils and developers) then writers are often less inclined to present a far-reaching view 'for balance' given that things are already way out of balance.

 

[leanderman]

Indeed it is. And when you're starting from a position of a seriously skewed powerbase (e.g. coming up against the slick PR of councils and developers) then writers are often less inclined to present a far-reaching view 'for balance' given that things are already way out of balance.

Fair enough - balance is over-rated (see global warming).