Lambeth's plans to demolish Cressingham Gardens and other estates without the consent of residents
- Thread starter Brixton Hatter
- Start date
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I was actually stunned for a moment, when that was said. Then I asked them what legitimacy making assumptions about future goodwill added to their argument.
They did impersonations of goldfish in reply.
They think it's final, but it's as porous as the last one. Finality is only available if we roll over for them.
Are we going to do that? Not while I'm still breathing!
It will be challenged, and for more than one reason.
The council have their plans and we (on the estate) have ours.
boohoo
No.
Let us know how we can help.
Thank you, that's appreciated more than you might think.
VP and I will, it's just that some things have to be kept under wraps for now.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Private Eye's "Rotten Boroughs" page has a couple of items about Lambeth - one about Lambeth Labour jumping on the anti-Housing Bill bandwagon by tweeting a set of pictures of housing activism, one of which was of a Cressingham Gardens resident holding a "save our homes!" banner and wearing a "Save Cressingham Gardens" t-shirt. Oh the ironing!!!
The other story is about the Goddard Inquiry, as it pertains to historic child abuse in the borough.
The other story is about the Goddard Inquiry, as it pertains to historic child abuse in the borough.
Robert Langtry
Member
ref: Lambeth poster using Cressingham picture - you may just have a friend in the Graphics / Press / Publicty / Office / Company. A secret Anarchist in the System. A Rebel with a cause !
editor
hiraethified
My photo, I do believe.
If we do, they're not going to be outed on this thread.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I'm betting a dollar to a doughnut that whoever made and posted the photo-montage didn't bother to get permission from ANY of the photographers to use their work.
21st March (Monday) there will be a Cabinet meeting at Lillian Baylis, where we'll be asking the council to give serious consideration to the People's Plan. Usual starting time of 7pm for the actual cabinet meeting, but hanging around outside from about 6pm.
If you want to speak, you'll get 3 minutes, if Lib Peck lets you, and you need to register as soon as possible via democratic services.
Residents and non residents are welcome to come and show their support on the night. That includes standing around outside before those of us about to speak and those with tickets go in. If you do get allowed in, please keep it quiet and well behaved so that the council don't have an excuse to chuck us out before giving us a fair hearing. Thank you.
The bus route which gets you nearest is the 196 to St Ann's church, Vauxhall, but the 2 will get you most of the way there, if you don't have difficulty walking.
If you want to speak, you'll get 3 minutes, if Lib Peck lets you, and you need to register as soon as possible via democratic services.
Residents and non residents are welcome to come and show their support on the night. That includes standing around outside before those of us about to speak and those with tickets go in. If you do get allowed in, please keep it quiet and well behaved so that the council don't have an excuse to chuck us out before giving us a fair hearing. Thank you.
The bus route which gets you nearest is the 196 to St Ann's church, Vauxhall, but the 2 will get you most of the way there, if you don't have difficulty walking.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Had a few business cards printed, to hand out at the cabinet meeting.
Front:
Card back:
Front:
Card back:
editor
hiraethified
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
As expected, the sheep-like "Cabinet" nodded through the decision to demolish Cressingham Gardens.
We didn't expect any different, as it was obvious from as soon as the "consultation" was resumed, that the decision would be a re-run of the previous one.
The reason we bothered (several hundred people!) to attend, was to put objections on the record - no, I don't mean the council's minutes, as we're familiar with their ability to revise "as needed" - I mean the fair amount of local media and private citizens who recorded everything, including myself. I was lucky enough to get the opportunity to speak (while wearing my lucky Urban 75 t-shirt!), and I did so about the lack of substantive data about how the council intend to deal with the reality of a larger than average population of elderly and/or disabled people on the estate,given that their "equalities impact assessment" with regard to the demolition sets out no budget, and details no strategies. I also - along with many other speakers - requested that the council reply substantively to The People's Plan, and that their own "regeneration" financial calculations be audited.
We didn't expect any different, as it was obvious from as soon as the "consultation" was resumed, that the decision would be a re-run of the previous one.
The reason we bothered (several hundred people!) to attend, was to put objections on the record - no, I don't mean the council's minutes, as we're familiar with their ability to revise "as needed" - I mean the fair amount of local media and private citizens who recorded everything, including myself. I was lucky enough to get the opportunity to speak (while wearing my lucky Urban 75 t-shirt!), and I did so about the lack of substantive data about how the council intend to deal with the reality of a larger than average population of elderly and/or disabled people on the estate,given that their "equalities impact assessment" with regard to the demolition sets out no budget, and details no strategies. I also - along with many other speakers - requested that the council reply substantively to The People's Plan, and that their own "regeneration" financial calculations be audited.
brixtonblade
Well-Known Member
They are unbelievable 
brixtonblade
Well-Known Member
The financial modeling point here strikes me as similar to the one around the alternative library (carnegie, possibly others) proposal - it seems the council seem able to reject proposals because of missing data even when their own ones have bigger holes
In two words - completely Lambeth.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Yup. We're expected to take their models on in an uncritical manner - even when they're visibly flawed - but allow them to exaggerate flaws in our models or - as Lambeth have done regarding The People's Plan - manufacture spurious objections that have no actual basis in reality.
SpamMisery
Pretty comfortable here right under your skin
So what happens now? Is that a final decision from the councils perspective? There hasn't been much coverage of the second consultation (relative to the first round) - was there less consultation or less coverage?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Less consultation. 4 workshops and 2 "exhibitions" over a 6 week period, that pretty much just reiterated the council's prior thinking. Attendance was very poor - we spent 2.5 years with the first round of consultation with the council making it VERY clear that they'd already decided what they wanted to do regardless of resident wishes - although some of us attended in order to assess what was being offered. The "resumed consultation" (as the council call it) was window dressing - an attempt to present themselves as being trustworthy - something the judge at the JR cast a fair amount of doubt on in her summing up.
What happens now? More protest, more legal action and perhaps a little bit of politics.
We fight and we win.
Legal and peaceful options still remain and we will use them. This is merely Save Cressingham Gardens stage two.
SpamMisery
Pretty comfortable here right under your skin
Certainly feels like a quick box ticking exercise
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Kudos to Tricky Skills for his report. Shame he got Tom Keene's surname wrong - I don't give a sod that he called Matthew Bennett "Mark", though!!
Another interesting development was that a resident of Park View House - a small private block on Tulse Hill between Longford Walk and Papworth Way - mentioned that Lambeth claimed to have consulted them over possible CPOs (compulsory purchase orders) but had actually done nothing of the kind beyond Julian Hart ("head of regeneration" and a git) phoning one resident and smarming him.
Another interesting development was that a resident of Park View House - a small private block on Tulse Hill between Longford Walk and Papworth Way - mentioned that Lambeth claimed to have consulted them over possible CPOs (compulsory purchase orders) but had actually done nothing of the kind beyond Julian Hart ("head of regeneration" and a git) phoning one resident and smarming him.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It was. Their "before" and"after" exhibitions - their proposals exhibition and decision exhibition - were almost identical. There was a difference of a single display board between them, which was the board detailing (I say "detailing",but there was no detail) their decision to go with demolition.
editor
hiraethified
Is anyone signed up to this website? Here's the bullshit snippet:
I'll be sad to see Hollamby estates go - but people must come first, says rebuild architect
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Text of article is:
"Lambeth’s Central Hill and Cressingham Gardens face demolition
The architect behind the redevelopment of the Central Hill estate in south-east London has spoken of his sadness that some of Lambeth’s finest post-war social housing is facing the bulldozer.
Brendan Kilpatrick, joint MD of housing specialist PRP, said many of the borough’s estates had “architectural merit”.
But he defended his firm’s plans, saying providing decent housing had to trump any other concerns.
“There is a cultural loss of housing of that nature, but the over-riding need to rehouse people living in substandard conditions has to outweigh the cultural value of keeping estates which are not listable,” he said. “For me that has to be the litmus test.”
To me, it’s the atmosphere of the place. The reflection of the sky and trees on the smoked balcony glass is wonderful. When the wind blows on a summer’s evening and you look along the flats hugging the contours of the hill, it could be a modern Italian hill town.
Central Hill resident, interviewed by the Twentieth Century Society
Lambeth said it is still reviewing how much of Central Hill can be retained. But it is almost certain that most of it will be lost unless a bid by the Twentieth Century Society (C20) to list the whole 7ha estate is successful.
C20 director Catherine Croft described it as “one of the most important examples of social housing in London” and a “strong example of the important legacy of progressive public housing created by Lambeth council under Ted Hollamby”.
Its 450 low-rise homes of varying sizes were designed to nestle on the ridge of a hill above Crystal Palace by Rosemary Stjernstedt between 1967-74. It is celebrated for its views over London as well as its cleverly designed interiors and separation of cars and pedestrians.
A decision on the listing application is expected in the next month but Kilpatrick said it was unlikely to be approved because of years of alterations and deterioration.
He dubbed an alternative proposal by pressure group Architects for Social Housing (ASH) to increase density at Central Hill without any demolition as a “noble idea but not really practical”.
ASH has worked with residents to identify 14 possible infill sites and opportunities for adding storeys to the existing low-rise buildings which would add 250 homes.
Geraldine Dening, architect and ASH co-founder, said: “I believe our solution is genuinely the most economically viable and environmentally and socially sustainable.
“Far from demolishing the estate, ASH believes we should be exporting Central Hill as a model of council housing that can meet London’s housing needs.”
Lambeth said it was reviewing these proposals but Kilpatrick said any scheme had to generate enough income to pay for itself – and that ASH’s would not do that. He said PRP’s aim was to keep all the residents on the estate.
Kilpatrick’s comments came the week that Lambeth finally voted to bulldoze Cressingham Gardens, designed by Hollamby in 1967-78 and another C20 and ASH case.
The Tulse Hill estate was briefly reprieved when the High Court ruled that Lambeth’s consultation was unlawful and must be rerun."
Basically an ethics-free architect saying "it's okay to fuck people over, and ruin good architecture for profit".
