Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

bimble said:
Not sure you're right.
2-4 million fee doesn't seem to include the actual design proposals, just the task of pushing them through the hoops (getting planning sorted, making sure the 'consultation' goes well)?

"It is proposed that either the existing design teams will be novated across to the appointed development managers or new design teams will be procured. If new design teams are to be procured then the intention is they would be procured as a sub-consultant to the development manager." The unclarity on this might explain why it's '2 to 4' million, quite a big gap of uncertainty for a skint council.

Publication
Click to expand...

The whole gig is for "masterplanning". If the specs are the same as the masterplanning for Cressingham (we've had tenders submitted 4 big consortia), then it'll include the lot.
 
Greebo said:
Thanks for the heads up.

I rushed out to get that paper but it turned out that the article in question is only online - just as well you mentioned it, as VP's printed off a copy. :)
Click to expand...

The last march we did from CG to Brixton was only online which arsed me off as there was a picture of me looking defiant whilst holding up a No 2 bus or something. :confused: The wider world should see that I feel. :mad:
 
friendofdorothy said:
you all look very defiant!
Click to expand...
We felt pretty defiant - it was the final chance to get our voices heard through local democracy.

Except that, when things are decided by cabinet, there is no local democracy in Lambeth except in name. It didn't stop us thinking that maybe, just maybe, somebody might listen to us, somebody might realise how much it mattered, somebody might reconsider, even at that stage.

The council's decision to demolish was nodded through, without even a show of hands . :mad:

That's also why the finding of the recent Judicial Review makes such a difference. :)
 
Greebo said:
We felt pretty defiant - it was the final chance to get our voices heard through local democracy.

Except that, when things are decided by cabinet, there is no local democracy in Lambeth except in name. It didn't stop us thinking that maybe, just maybe, somebody might listen to us, somebody might realise how much it mattered, somebody might reconsider, even at that stage.

The council's decision to demolish was nodded through, without even a show of hands . :mad:

That's also why the finding of the recent Judicial Review makes such a difference. :)
Click to expand...
it was a really good turn out that demo. Maybe the councillors weren't listening then, but other people must have been.
 
Greebo said:
We felt pretty defiant - it was the final chance to get our voices heard through local democracy.

Except that, when things are decided by cabinet, there is no local democracy in Lambeth except in name. It didn't stop us thinking that maybe, just maybe, somebody might listen to us, somebody might realise how much it mattered, somebody might reconsider, even at that stage.

The council's decision to demolish was nodded through, without even a show of hands . :mad:

That's also why the finding of the recent Judicial Review makes such a difference. :)
Click to expand...

Edited to add: You know what's been really weird this year? Being interviewed, snapped, and recorded umpteen times this year, but hardly ever getting to see it because of being out on yet another march or protest!
 
The judgement from the judicial review is up on Bailii (via Brixton Blog) The judge's reasoning starts at para. 78 and the conclusion is set out in para. 98.
 
Paragraph 81 of that report seems to indicate that Lambeth would be perfectly at liberty to re-run the consultation and then come to the same conclusion anyway, regardless of whatever representations were received from residents.
 
irf520 said:
Paragraph 81 of that report seems to indicate that Lambeth would be perfectly at liberty to re-run the consultation and then come to the same conclusion anyway, regardless of whatever representations were received from residents.
Click to expand...

I think that's true, yes.
 
Winot said:
I think that's true, yes.
Click to expand...

it's accurate.

HOWEVER, if Lambeth do reach the same conclusion, they'll have to present data supporting their case - something they didn't do the first time round because they didn't bother to do simple stuff like Net Present Value calculations, proper estimates of repair costs etc.
When they present that data, we've got people in place to analyse it, and see whether it stands up. If they don't present that data, then it'll be "rinse and repeat" for the Judicial Review procedure.
 
ViolentPanda said:
it's accurate.

HOWEVER, if Lambeth do reach the same conclusion, they'll have to present data supporting their case - something they didn't do the first time round because they didn't bother to do simple stuff like Net Present Value calculations, proper estimates of repair costs etc.
When they present that data, we've got people in place to analyse it, and see whether it stands up. If they don't present that data, then it'll be "rinse and repeat" for the Judicial Review procedure.
Click to expand...

Is it me and just my imagination, or do I get the impression that Lambeth could do with a thorough audit of their accounts? Just to shine a light in some very murky corners, and to dispel any doubts about their integrity....
 
299 old timer said:
Is it me and just my imagination, or do I get the impression that Lambeth could do with a thorough audit of their accounts? Just to shine a light in some very murky corners, and to dispel any doubts about their integrity....
Click to expand...

As far as I can recall, although they've had their accounts signed off every year, it's been "with reservations" - i.e. specific pointers have been given by the district auditor about where they'd like stronger practices in place.
As a totally tangential (honest!) example, Lambeth's spend on the "Decent Homes"/Lambeth Housing Standard initiative (a mix of central government grant and permitted expenditure from Lambeth's Housing Revenue Account) is so badly-accounted that although Lambeth can tell the public the total spent on new kitchens borough-wide, they're unable to breakdown the expenditure area by area or estate by estate, so effectively there's no way to cross-check the total spend against actual installations.
 
Imagine that new rule will have some far reaching impact on how deeply people feel connected to their home and community, right? I mean if you always know that you are likely to be moved / chucked out in under 5 years.
 
bimble said:
Imagine that new rule will have some far reaching impact on how deeply people feel connected to their home and community, right? I mean if you always know that you are likely to be moved / chucked out in under 5 years.
Click to expand...
Yep. Less of an incentive to keep on good terms with your neighbours, let alone try to get to know them...
 
bimble said:
Imagine that new rule will have some far reaching impact on how deeply people feel connected to their home and community, right? I mean if you always know that you are likely to be moved / chucked out in under 5 years.
Click to expand...

The Tories are counting on it to whittle away the solidarities council tenants might have with one another, just as the counted on the amended Right to Buy to do the same 30 years ago.
 
Good piece here:

In housing, maintenance is more important than design: if this were more often acknowledged, then the lifespan of many social houses could be drastically extended.

But instead, their inadequacy and rapid dilapidation is typically blamed on poor design – either due to modernist architecture’s excessive social engineering, or due to the overreach of post-war local and national governments, racing to build more houses at an ever decreasing cost. To this way of thinking, post-war social housing was an unmitigated mistake and given the chance it should be replaced with something better.

The importance of maintenance could not be clearer in the case of a pair of estates in South London, both built in the 1970s under the oversight of Lambeth council’s chief architect, the late Ted Hollamby were both highly praised upon their completion, particularly for the Scandinavian-influenced humanist architecture prevalent in the design. In the past few years, both have been under threat of demolition.

On its website, Lambeth council makes the reasonable claim that the estates need to be regenerated because the houses are in such a state of disrepair. But this raises the question of how these housing developments fall so rapidly into this state in the first place.
Click to expand...
How poor maintenance of London's social housing created the conditions for its demolition
 
It seems the Regenerators are back after Christmas Consultation on the future of Cressingham Gardens

Consultation on the future of Cressingham Gardens
Posted by Abbas Raza on January 06, 2016
Come along to our up coming exhibition on the future of Cressingham Gardens Estate.

The details are:

Where?

The Rotunda Community Hall, Cressingham Gardens Estate

When?

Wednesday 20th January 2016

2pm to 8pm

At this exhibition you will be able to review information on all five of the previously discussed options. There will also be information relating to Green Retro fitting and Right to Manage (which we are aware that some residents are investigating) and you will be able to have your say on all five options at the exhibition.

This exhibition is the first in a number of events where you can have your say. Please see below the current timetable:

What? When? Where?
Options exhibition Wednesday, 20th January, 2pm to 8pm The Rotunda
Green retrofitting sub-group meeting Tuesday, 26th January, 7pm to 9pm The Rotunda
Viability sub-group meeting Thursday, 28th January , 7pm to 9pm The Rotunda
Green retrofitting sub-group meeting Tuesday, 16th February , 7pm to 9pm The Rotund
Viability sub-group meeting Thursday, 18th February , 7pm to 9pm The Rotunda
Options exhibition Thursday, 25th February from 2pm to 8pm The Rotunda

While the Council will make every effort to adhere to this, there maybe some changes. For the most up to date information please go to:

Cressingham Gardens


If your question is not answered there, then please get in touch with the Estate Regeneration team. You can use the details below:

Call: 0207 926 2452 / 0207 926 3607

E: cressinghamgardens@lambeth.gov.uk

W: Cressingham Gardens
 
CH1 said:
Maybe it might be necessary to demand separate video recording of proceedings at each "table"
We know how the consultant's composite tends to Orwellian Newspeak.
Click to expand...
Help me out here, please - who do we (people on the estate) ask? Or must residents do it themselves?

Although somebody on the estate has videoed some previous events connected with the current situation, they won't be available for all of each session, and it'd be unfair to expect them to do all of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

editor
Lambeth's useless, appalling phone customer service
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
nagapie
N
friendofdorothy
Age Friendly Lambeth
Replies
14
Views
850
Shippou-Sensei
Shippou-Sensei
Rushy
Action on ASB! Public meeting on 30 November at Lambeth Town Hall
Replies
2
Views
406
Rushy
Rushy
Maggot
Lambeth Country Show 10 and 11 June 2023
2 3
Replies
60
Views
3K
magneze
magneze
lang rabbie
The return of Lambeth Central - change to Brixton's Members of Parliament?
Replies
25
Views
2K
CH1
CH1
Back
Top Bottom