Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Did I miss the comment from the council? Or an explanation of their rationale?

The explanation of their rationale is all in the drawing etc in the article. The outline development options have a link on the piece.

The one question that Jason could have asked Council is what they will do if the preferred option of the residents is option one. Will the Council keep to its "Coop Council" / "Co production and do option one?
 
Proposal and rationale are obviously not the same thing.

Out of interest, how would people feel about pursuing full development option 5 if all the new properties were to be social housing?
 
This is an interesting commons debate about compulsory purchase (not the rights and wrongs but the way it was being handled) from the mid seventies which contains some figures. Lambeth was making four or five compulsory orders a year in the late 60s early 70s - averaging 25 acres/ year. In 1973 it increased to 200 acres. People were forming into residents groups to fight it.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1973/feb/16/compulsory-purchase-orders
 
But if it were feasible?
Sorry, but my imagination can't run as far enough as to conceive of a large council house development being built in such an area without it being peppered with luxury flats. Either way, it's hard to form an opinion based on those vague, blocky diagrams.
 
But if it were feasible?
It's not feasible, but let's play: In my arrogant opinion, option 5 is hideous. Quite apart from all of those newbuilds being more expensive to live in (higher council tax bands, "affordable rent, rather than social rent, all on water meters), the part of the estate nearest the park would have its upper floors level with the treetops along that side of Brockwell Park. Less natural light for people wanting to catch a bit of sun without going too far into the park.

Less light beween and around the blocks, less privacy, fewer natural meeting points, less of a neighbourhood feel, less of a chance for noise to dissipate between blocks (more hard surfaces). To me, option 5 looks like the type of barrack-style council housing around Trott Street in Battersea, but worse; it lacks soul.
 
It's not feasible, but let's play: In my arrogant opinion, option 5 is hideous. Quite apart from all of those newbuilds being more expensive to live in (higher council tax bands, "affordable rent, rather than social rent, all on water meters), the part of the estate nearest the park would have its upper floors level with the treetops along that side of Brockwell Park. Less natural light for people wanting to catch a bit of sun without going too far into the park.

Less light between and around the blocks, less privacy, fewer natural meeting points, less of a neighbourhood feel, less of a chance for noise to dissipate between blocks (more hard surfaces). To me, option 5 looks like the type of barrack-style council housing around Trott Street in Battersea, but worse; it lacks soul.

Thanks for playing Geebo! I agree it's not feasible but I'm considering the principles behind the opinions more than the reality. I'm not sure why you think your opinion is arrogant? I like Cressingham a lot and would be hugely protective over it - apart form a couple of the taller blocks which I think lack the design integrity of the smaller units and dominate them. The three bed houses are a particularly great design. When my old Mum started looking at returning to the UK I thought that would be an ideal place for her to live. But, realistically, I'm also aware that one of the reasons I like it so much is that it is a large space which is not as intensively occupied as much of the surrounding area. I can see why having it replaced with "luxury" flats - or largely "luxury" flats - would feel / be like a slap in the face.
 
Proposal and rationale are obviously not the same thing.

Out of interest, how would people feel about pursuing full development option 5 if all the new properties were to be social housing?

You mean, even though it's already been stated that they won't be, so we're basically indulging in fantasising?

If option 5 were to be developed entirely as local authority social housing, not RSL or any other type of social housing, I would, as a tenant, swallow it, though not easily or quietly.
Option 5 will, however, be (at best) "mixed" tenure with mixed ownership, so...
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but my imagination can't run as far enough as to conceive of a large council house development being built in such an area without it being peppered with luxury flats. Either way, it's hard to form an opinion based on those vague, blocky diagrams.

As Greebo and I were walking through Brockwell Pk down to Water Lane yesterday, I did a bit of "back-of-an-envelope" estimating, with regard to the projected heights (allowing the standard eight and a half feet per storey) of the 4 storey blocks. They'd pretty much overshadow the majority of the trees that currently border the park's estate-side fence by about a storey. It'd also mean that the majority of trees on the estate, apart from those in the Brockwell Park Conservation Area, would be felled, so one of the features that best integrates the estate into the surrounding landscape would be sacrificed in order to milk as much profit as possible.
 
Not to mention the new internal roads & parking that would probably need to be built. Most of the "green spaces" on Cressingham would normally be covered in streets and carparking if it were a standard style development.
And if anyone has tried to get a bus in the morning at peak hour, it is only going to get worse.
 

A fascinating read.

Makes Lambeths "Coop Council" look paltry in comparison with the post war vision of the Labour party and committed socially aware architects like Hollamby.

In 1962, he was appointed Chief Architect for the Borough of Lambeth. Interviewed in the Council Chamber with half the councillors present and appointed there and then, Hollamby describes the process as ‘inspiring’ – he was ‘amazed that there were such interesting and progressive views that were being put out by the councillors’.

I’m sorry if all this seems to have taken us some away from the focus of this post, Cressingham Gardens, but it seems important to establish this context and remember an era when local government had the power to innovate and held still to a vision of transforming the lives of our people. In this project, it attracted some of the most idealistic and able individuals in the country; not all were ‘big names’, of course, though we have focused on those here.
 
Interesting article. I didn't realise George finch built Lambeth towers - it's a nice looking block.

designed by George Finch and completed in around 1970, was a flagship Lambeth scheme – a group of eleven-storey blocks which included a medical practice, old people’s club, post office and shops: ‘a microcosm of the 1960s Welfare State’ according to one source. (5)

The Labour party then would be regarded as far left by the kind of people in Labour party now.
 
Labour will be fucked if Scotland departs. They'll have to move right of centre. I wonder if they'll change their name
 
Cressingham Gardens is open again this weekend for Open House London. Exhibition, tours, plus a bit of local community flair.
View attachment 61254 View attachment 61255

We've seen an excellent throughput of visitors yesterday and today, and it all helps keep Cressingham Gdns "as is" in the public mind, and hopefully will generate a bit of anti-drastic redevelopment sentiment too, which Lambeth will hate.
 
We've seen an excellent throughput of visitors yesterday and today, and it all helps keep Cressingham Gdns "as is" in the public mind, and hopefully will generate a bit of anti-drastic redevelopment sentiment too, which Lambeth will hate.
Oula was telling me how much she enjoyed the tour. As did Z :)
 
Oula was telling me how much she enjoyed the tour. As did Z :)
Two of the groups touring it today seemed larger, younger, and less timid than yesterday. They seemed fascinated by the view of through the walkway of the mounds. :cool:

Yesterday it seemed to be mostly middle aged people looking nervous about walking around a council estate in broad daylight. Mind you, one of them was enthusiatic enough that he kept lagging behind while taking photos.
 
Yes, I really enjoyed the tour. If any of you are the lady (Australian with glasses) who did our tour it was great. I was amazed at how long my 3 year old son lasted. He loved the bed up the ladder and the opportunity to run up and down all the stairs in the estate. Really very interesting and great to see.
 
Yes, I really enjoyed the tour. If any of you are the lady (Australian with glasses) who did our tour it was great. I was amazed at how long my 3 year old son lasted. He loved the bed up the ladder and the opportunity to run up and down all the stairs in the estate. Really very interesting and great to see.

Glad you enjoyed it :) It was a great couple of days...
 
Back
Top Bottom