Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact
  • Hi Guest,
    We have now moved the boards to the new server hardware.
    Search will be impaired while it re-indexes the posts.
    See the thread in the Feedback forum for updates and feedback.
    Lazy Llama

Southwark Council approve Elephant redevelopment

hatboy said:
PS - You never did send that IWCA booklet as promised. I know you didn't otherwise I'd have it. I'm afraid that now makes me think you are not a man of your word.

If that was the reason for the "past caring" then I'd suggest it was best kept to PMs - but seeing as we're dealing with this in public - I asked you to PM me if the thing hadn't arrived by Thursday last week - and offered to drop it through your door if it hadn't as I was going to be in the area. Not hearing anything, I assumed it had arrived.

You will get one, if it's the last thing I do.
 
Thanks for the reactions everybody, all really informative.

I wasn't aware that Fred Manson had left Southwark -- I should have been, as my Dad knew him.

I'm very much with guinnessdrinker and past caring on this, I am VERY suspicious about plans that reduce both the number and rights of council tenants with secure tenancies.

Brixton Hatter said:
I remember from a thread here previously the reasons Southwark gave for not replacing the flats with the same number of new homes - they apparently did a survey and claimed that out of the Xthousand (might have been 2,500) on the Heygate, only (something like) 1500 wanted to stay, with the others planning either to get their own accomodation or move away from the borough. Would be interesting to find that info again.

I'd be very interested too -- I wonder how new that survey was, how the questions were worded (I probably saw it, but there has definitely been more than one), why, if Southwark are so confident that the redevelopment plans are popular, they are so reluctant to put it to a direct local ballot of all affected tenants rather than a 'survey' :rolleyes:

Thats a bit of rhetorical statement because I know they got their fingers burnt over their backfiring attempts to hive off the Aylesbury.

lang rabbie said:
Err.. I'm not sure how many flats there currently are on the Heygate, but I'm pretty sure that it is has to be less than the "5,300 new and replacement homes" included in the latest Elephant and Castle masterplan.

I'm not sure how many flats there are on the Heygate either, and in any case any figures I can remember off the top of my head leave me confused about whether I'm thinking about flats, or tenants, quite a difference obviously, but somewhere in the very rough region??? of 2000 I think.

But that 5,300 figure lang rabbie mentions leads one to ask the OBVIOUS question -- what proportion of that will be social housing??

Quite apart from my earlier point that whatever proportion is social housing, it will be HA not Council. I agree with hatboy that some HA's are excellent, probably more often the smaller ones, and I take marty21's point that few HA's act in a really draconian way towards their tenants, but this is a bulldozer led stock transfer on a far greater than normal scale, affecting far more people.

The more arcane (but still important) details of differences between HA and Council tenancies I'll leave to experts such as guinnessdrinker and marty21, but from my Council flat not far away I'm bound to be very concerned that it doesn't lead to further stock transfer projects that leave people like Keith Hill able to threaten Councils/tenants with the 'Get privatised or be starved of investment' non-choice.

My own estate is likely for the time being to be one of the last bastions of unaffected Council housing round here for various reasons (it's a small estate, with an older than average tenant profile) but I am still angry about the way that all over the cpountry, Councils are not being allowed to spend existing Government and European funds on improving the estates -- mine is in good condition and only needs a relatively small proportion of money spent on it to make it excellent, but for now maintenenance only seems to be the policy ....

Defend Council Housing campaign site

And that suggestion that Housing Benefit will end up being paid direct to tenants, even if it takes ages for it to happen on actual Council estates, is outrageous ...

If those reports of what Keith Hill said and what Fred Manson thinks are true, then it's equally outrageous ...

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not against mixed development per se so long as existing, less well off residents don't end up seeing it as the thin end of a threatening wedge which will either lead to pricing out or unacceptable degree of polarisation --- an over Yuppified area will lead to pubs becoming winebars (I propose the severest punishment possible for anyone who prefers a bad "wine bar" (ie all of them :D ) to a good pub) and shops will become boutiques and independent small shops will become branches of chains ...

As I'm sort of repeating my first post here though, let me also repeat that I'm by no means totally against these changes, the planned architecture is far from awful and the landscaping, new trees, traffic rerouting, railway station refurbishment, possibly trams, etc etc will all be A Good Thing.

But it seems from what I'm discovering so far that neither the Government and the Council are at all interested in genuinely trying to involve the local community in a positive way -- perhaps on a superficial, anodyne, misleading survey kind of way, but not in any way that will compromise the real agenda of sending the area way upmarket and satisfying the ambitions of very hardfaced property developers.

In other words many local babies will be thrown out along with the admittedly very grubby architectural bathwater ....

Will continue to follow this thread ...
 
Selling the Elephant in Cannes

At the risk of sounding like a capitalist running dog, it is not completely mad for Southwark Council to be going to the MIPIM 2004 conference if they are looking to raise several hundred million quid for investment in a redevelopment scale. Other UK organisations are there - e.g. I see the Yorkshire Regional Development Agency are trying to entice money into Doncaster.

palais.jpg


The Palais des Festivals is a bunker with about as much atmosphere as the Brighton Centre. OK, so the weather is likely to better in Cannes next month. It's only a scandal if large numbers of Southwark Councillors and officers go along for a jolly, or (depending on how puritanical a view you take) if their commercial agent engages "glamour models" to entice people to their stand (not unheard of at French trade shows, which have the same neanderthal attitude to sexual politics as the French advertising industry).
 
lang rabbie said:
At the risk of sounding like a capitalist running dog, it is not completely mad for Southwark Council to be going to the MIPIM 2004 conference if they are looking to raise several hundred million quid for investment in a redevelopment scale.

fine to do whatever they have to do - but we're not talking about trying to raise money - kea said (and she should know) that it was a 'launch' of the redev. A 'launch' should present it/celebrate it to the people directly affected, surely?

btw, Kea - any chance of getting smuggled along in your hand luggage? i'm sure there'll be some champers, if nothing else :)
 
not going mate, sorry :D i went last year tho and while they didn't stoop to glamour models, it was certainly a nice little trip for quite a few local council and development agency people from all over the place. i met a lady from southwark actually, can't remember her name tho sorry :oops:

lang rabbie is right that this is not an unnusual step for a project this size; in fact, if they weren't there, they'd suffer. i dunno if there's a local launch as well; this is the 'industry' launch and you don't usually get local people invited to those. they'd have a seperate one, if they have one at all, i would think. perhaps soemone who lives locally (william?) could contact the council and make it clear they're aware of this cannes jaunt and enquire whether there'll be a local event. if not, i'm sure the local papers could manage a skwawk of outrage .... ;)


edit: the text from the invite says:
"Join the Elephant and Castle regeneration team to celebrate a new vision for one of Europe's leading regeneration projects ...
"dear <kea>,
on behalf of southwark council i am delighted to invite you to a reception and seminar to celebrate the agreement of a new development brief for Elephant and Castle.
The £1.5bn development brief to regenerate 170 acres will transform the north roundabout into a pedestrianised civic centre, extend the Walworth Rd into a vibrant high st, and create a market square and green space. The rejuvenated town centre will create thousands of jobs and homes, and will radically enhance what is already one of the capital's most dynamic areas, in close proximity to the West End and the City."

speakers at the event will be:
chris horn, Elephant & Castle Regeneration
John Prevc, Foster and Partners
Someone from CABE (they haven't decided who yet - it won't be jon rouse tho)
 
kea said:
extend the Walworth Rd into a vibrant high st

Another rather telling statement.

Not too many trendy wine bars, eateries or places to buy designer furniture, it's true - but the last time I looked, the Walworth Road was busy with both traffic and shoppers, had plenty of "colour", well-supported shops and businesses and serves the needs of the community well....

Perhaps we're talking Upper Street "vibrant", though..... :mad:
 
I'm curious as to what they propose to do with all the people they are saying will be without homes if this goes ahead? They have security of tenure. Do they hope that they can persuade them away? Wastage? What?

I'm also wondering if the current property prices in London are the basis for the investment?
 
i would have thought that if this project does get the go ahead, southwark will get quite a few of the flats back via natural wastage, people dying, being transferred elsewhere for other reasons - and these empty flats will not be re-let, but will be boarded up - they will probably use the iron doors to stop enterprising squatters from getting in there...
 
I talked to my Mum about the Heygate last night. When she moved in in 1974 the place was brand new - that's not very long for an estate to last is it?
 
sadly it isn't, the nightingale estae in hackney was of similar vintage, that has now largely been demolished and is in the process of being rebuilt...hate to think how much money has been wasted over the years on similar schemes
 
Badly designed, depressing concrete jungles that have not been well maintained. Money should be set aside from the development that goes into a trust fund that the council cant touch to pay for things like caretakers and general maintenance.

My friends now live in a Private block that once was council. Recognised architect designed. Amazing building. Thats in hackney, well just.
 
Brixton Hatter said:
I talked to my Mum about the Heygate last night. When she moved in in 1974 the place was brand new - that's not very long for an estate to last is it?

That style of architecture (ie massive brutal concrete blocks) is generally considered to have failed. Because it has. The sooner they get rid of all but the few that work or are architecturally significant (Trellick Tower/Alexander Fleming House for example) the better.
 
Sunray said:
My friends now live in a Private block that once was council. Recognised architect designed. Amazing building. Thats in hackney, well just.

Would that be Keeling House?
 
past caring said:
Not too many trendy wine bars, eateries or places to buy designer furniture, it's true - but the last time I looked, the Walworth Road was busy with both traffic and shoppers, had plenty of "colour", well-supported shops and businesses and serves the needs of the community well....

Perhaps we're talking Upper Street "vibrant", though..... :mad:

Excellent post seconded .... :(
 
Thirded really. I am excitied by the architecture. But the more I read here the more this scheme seems a part of the gradual cleansing of the poor and unconventional or "unco-operative" from zones 1 and 2.

How sad it will be if Walworth Rd goes upmarket. Upmarket always seems to mean chains and bland. I like it as it is. I feel comfortable with shops and shop keepers with some personal character.

Wbsite with lots of info here:

http://www.designforhomes.org/projects/planned/elephant/elephant.html

modelbig.jpg


:)
 
If anyone has ordered a CD from the elephantandcastle.co.uk website, I was told last week that they won't be sent out until next week. They are "still working on" the document that was supposedly launched the other week.
 
Sunray said:
Badly designed, depressing concrete jungles that have not been well maintained. Money should be set aside from the development that goes into a trust fund that the council cant touch to pay for things like caretakers and general maintenance.

My friends now live in a Private block that once was council. Recognised architect designed. Amazing building. Thats in hackney, well just.

i agree with the implications of this - that there's nothing necessarily wrong with a whole type of design, mostly the problems are down to poor maintenance, and, of course, some of them are badly designed, just like some of them are extremely well designed, and loved by their tenants.
 
Can someone clarify whether the link I posted is for the abandoned scheme or not and link me to clear pictures of what is now proposed please? :confused:
 
i think the most up to date info is here hatboy:
http://www.elephantandcastle.org.uk/
there are some pics on there. and this is a pdf on that site:
http://www.elephantandcastle.org.uk/downloads/Section_2.pdf
which has the 'illustrative masterplan' with pics. i can't read much of it tho cos i can't work out how to zoom in on the text :confused:

incidentally, Southwark Land Regeneration is a consortium comprising two companies, called European Land and Frogmore Estates. Frogmore's website is here:
http://www.frogmore.co.uk/
i can't see anything on their site about Elephant & Castle. i think they've quit.

edit: i found this tho:
http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?storyType=7&sectioncode=29&storyCode=1024793
"Foster and Partners has returned to the project as part of the design team, which also includes consultant JMP, management consultant Tibbalds TM2, spatial design adviser Space Syntax, environmental engineer Battle McCarthy, and retail consultant Roger Tyms and Partners.
The proposals represent the latest twist in the attempt to regenerate the area. Last year a deal between the council and developer Southwark Land Regeneration collapsed and the council went back to the drawing board.
The new document was produced with the council's development team. It will be fleshed out by April. Designs by Foster and Partners will be submitted to the council's executive this spring."

so yeah, i think you'll have to wait a bit to see what Fosters come up with.
 
kea said:
i can't read much of it tho cos i can't work out how to zoom in on the text :confused:

that would be the magnification tool, which looks handily like... a magnifying glass!

(my bid for irritating twat of the year)
 
bruise said:
that would be the magnification tool, which looks handily like... a magnifying glass!

(my bid for irritating twat of the year)


and if you can show me whereabouts on that document the magnifying glass tool appears - you win ... erm .... some exciting information about development opportunities in southwark :confused: :D :p


edit: no probs hatboy :)
 
kea said:
and if you can show me whereabouts on that document the magnifying glass tool appears - you win ...

I see the problem now - they've done some irritating locking effect

you have to download it first (right click etc) it takes ages
then it loads as if some kind of whole-screen presentation
so press escape and it appears in Acrobat with the magnifier as normal.

Weird. why would they want to do that? I hope it doesn't catch on.
 
bruise said:
Weird. why would they want to do that? I hope it doesn't catch on.

Suspect that the designers have been asked for pdfs for the promised free CD versions !!! IIRC the draft framework has similarly annoying glitches.
 
according to this elephant redevelopment link, the intention is to reduce the current 1212 council flats on the heygate to between 700 to 800 housing association flats. and they could be smaller too, because standards have changed since the sixties. it's also not clear whether there will be more or less social housing all together as a result of the project.
 
W of W posting

Bumped out of amazement that this thread still exists ... I've started a thread in UK Politics :eek: about enforced privatisation of council housing ... :mad:

W of W (using Stig's account very temporarily -- I'm busy in my own window at the moment).
 
Back
Top Bottom