# 'Is Brixton property worth investment?' asks business website. Brixton Green offer their plans



## editor (May 10, 2012)

*speechless



> With its trendy delis, food markets and impressive Victorian conversions, Brixton is no longer the poster boy of the anti-establishment. Just as unofficial Brixton poet laureate and proudly anti-establishment Linton Kwesi Johnson is now published in the Penguin Classics series, so too has Brixton been absorbed into the middle class mainstream.
> 
> And there’s more than fancy restaurants and dub poetry to prove it - there’s a 15 to 20 per cent rise in property prices over the last year. According to local property agents, house prices in the area are higher now than they were in 2007 and are forecasted to keep climbing.
> 
> Estate agent Shane Mercieca of Keating Estates says high-end, two-bedroom properties with a garden currently sell at £350,000 to £400,000. While at the end closer to neighbouring Clapham, similar properties on streets such as Abbeville Road can fetch in excess of £500,000.


 


> The rather imposing, horse-shoe shape block of flats have since been dubbed the Barrier Block and have remained a thorn in Brixton’s side ever since.
> 
> But now Lambeth Council has big plans to demolish Southwyck House and regenerate Somerleyton Road.
> 
> ...


http://www.londonlovesbusiness.com/...rixton-property-worth-investment/1815.article


----------



## quimcunx (May 10, 2012)

The dead water that is social housing?  fuckers.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> *speechless
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
That article's over 2 months old as well


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

Brixton Green. The people who claim that they 'know what the people of Brixton want' yet ran a fucking mile when Brixton residents here started asking pertinent questions about their opaque proposals.


----------



## ska invita (May 10, 2012)

Has brixton really changed all that much in the last few years? I only ever pass through for a few hours here and there - seems much the same as ever to me.


----------



## EastEnder (May 10, 2012)

> But now Lambeth Council has big plans to demolish Southwyck House and regenerate Somerleyton Road.


 
WTF???


----------



## Belushi (May 10, 2012)

> _What the council didn’t account for, though, is Brixton’s new Brixton-loving community._


 
Don't panic! The gentrifiers are going to save Brixton.


----------



## stethoscope (May 10, 2012)

> What the council didn’t account for, though, is Brixton’s new Brixton-loving community.


 
I mean, srsly, what the fuck is this supposed to mean?


----------



## Kanda (May 10, 2012)

steph said:


> I mean, srsly, what the fuck is this supposed to be mean?


 
It's the nu Brixton middle class hipsters, wanting it to be vibrant and edgy yet gentrifying it at the same time...


----------



## Brixton Hatter (May 10, 2012)

Knocking down the barrier block? Are they fucking nuts?

"invest now before it's too late" 

To reiterate a point that's been made thousands of times before on here: new property development will not solve the social housing problem, but merely creatre profits for developers and buy-to-let landlords.


----------



## Ms T (May 10, 2012)

"Most people view Brixton as finishing at the bridge of the junction of Railton Rd [parallel to Somerleyton Road] where the riots were."

What does that mean?  Because if they mean at the railway bridge, that isn't even Railton Rd, it's Atlantic Rd.  And there's no way Abbeville Road is in Brixton.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Brixton Green. The people who claim that they 'know what the people of Brixton want' yet ran a fucking mile when Brixton residents here started asking pertinent questions about their opaque proposals.


It disturbs me deeply that they've managed to get Tessa Jowell to be their 'patron', whatever that means. Gives the whole thing a false sense of legitimacy.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 10, 2012)

Brixton Green are not popular on my Estate (the one slap bang next to where BG are eyeing up their possibilities). One of the reasons (although there are several) is because Brad posted up the contents of an email on this very site. In fact I was told about that by a couple of residents who didn't know I have a U75 connection (_Don't ever email Brixton Green, they don't respect confidentiality!_). Big mistake on their part, that.


----------



## Winot (May 10, 2012)

ska invita said:


> Has brixton really changed all that much in the last few years? I only ever pass through for a few hours here and there - seems much the same as ever to me.


 
Pretty much the same, yes, just with better food and coffee.


----------



## eroom (May 10, 2012)

If you read the first line of this article...

'Search Brixton in Google news and you get some interesting results'

...I think you get a pretty clear indication of the quality of the journalism that went into producing this story.


----------



## gabi (May 10, 2012)

steph said:


> I mean, srsly, what the fuck is this supposed to mean?


 
'Brixton Village' methinks


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

Brixton Green. The people who keep telling us that they represent the community of Brixton yet in five years have made no attempt whatsoever to contact the community in Southwcyk House which they actively want to_ literally_ destroy.

Brixton Green. The people who keep telling us that they represent the community of Brixton yet refused point blank to discuss their proposals here, insisting that we should 'carry on the discussion' on their site - which has no means of open discussion


----------



## quimcunx (May 10, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Don't panic! The gentrifiers are going to save Brixton.


 

Don't worry, we'll be rid of the people who hate brixton.  Those brixton haters with no money to spend on executive penthouse apartments.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Brixton Green. The people who keep telling us that they represent the community of Brixton yet in five years have made no attempt whatsoever to contact the community in Southwcyk House which they actively want to_ literally_ destroy.
> 
> Brixton Green. The people who keep telling us that they represent the community of Brixton yet refused point blank to discuss their proposals here, insisting that we should 'carry on the discussion' on their site - which has no means of open discussion


...and publish emails on here without permission from the other party, which I deleted *and Brad reposted.*


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

Ms T said:


> "Most people view Brixton as finishing at the bridge of the junction of Railton Rd [parallel to Somerleyton Road] where the riots were."
> 
> What does that mean? Because if they mean at the railway bridge, that isn't even Railton Rd, it's Atlantic Rd. And there's no way Abbeville Road is in Brixton.


These are the people who believe in the fictional 'Somerleyton Triangle.'


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 10, 2012)

Well, there is a known area known as The Moorlands Triangle. This encompasses Council and HA tenants in the area. For instance the community garden on Moorlands is open to those in the Moorlands Triangle, not just Moorlands residents.


----------



## EastEnder (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> These are the people who believe in the fictional 'Somerleyton Triangle.'


One of Barry Manilow's lesser known hits.


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> These are the people who believe in the fictional 'Somerleyton Triangle.'


 
where no-one who goes in is ever heard from again?


----------



## ska invita (May 10, 2012)




----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Brixton Green. The people who claim that they 'know what the people of Brixton want' yet ran a fucking mile when Brixton residents here started asking pertinent questions about their opaque proposals.


 
I am available to meet tomorrow to discuss any questions(including pertinent ones) about the Brixton Green proposal.

Let me know the best time and place to meet.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

The Brixton Green proposal is just for Somerleyton Road.  Please see the link below:
http://www.brixtongreen.org/

Over 850 Brixton people are now shareholders in Brixton Green.  It is an inclusive, democratic registered mutual society. Anyone over 16 who lives or works in Brixton can become a shareholder.

I am happy to meet anyone who has concerns about the proposal or has misunderstood what Brixton Green is.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Brixton Green. The people who keep telling us that they represent the community of Brixton yet in five years have made no attempt whatsoever to contact the community in Southwcyk House which they actively want to_ literally_ destroy.
> 
> Brixton Green. The people who keep telling us that they represent the community of Brixton yet refused point blank to discuss their proposals here, insisting that we should 'carry on the discussion' on their site - which has no means of open discussion


 
I think it is essential to have an open debate regarding the proposal. Please view the film on our site to get a clearer idea of what we're proposing:
http://www.brixtongreen.org/

Brixton Green is continuing to actively engage with all parts of the Brixton community. As you know we have invited yourself and Mrs Magpie to meet. 
Somerleyton Road is one of the most important sites for the community in Brixton. We believe it needs the knowledge of all our communities to develop it in a way that could strengthen our town and community for generations.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Brixton Green. The people who keep telling us that they represent the community of Brixton yet in five years have made no attempt whatsoever to contact the community in Southwcyk House which they actively want to_ literally_ destroy.
> 
> Brixton Green. The people who keep telling us that they represent the community of Brixton yet refused point blank to discuss their proposals here, insisting that we should 'carry on the discussion' on their site - which has no means of open discussion


 
I'm happy to discuss on Urban75. To discuss such an important proposal it would also be helpful to for us meet.

Both you and Mrs Magpie have had long standing misunderstandings of what Brixton Green is. Let's meet and resolve those misunderstandings.

Please let me know when is best for you.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Brixton Green are not popular on my Estate (the one slap bang next to where BG are eyeing up their possibilities). One of the reasons (although there are several) is because Brad posted up the contents of an email on this very site. In fact I was told about that by a couple of residents who didn't know I have a U75 connection (_Don't ever email Brixton Green, they don't respect confidentiality!_). Big mistake on their part, that.


 
Mrs Magpie you know many of our shareholders and most active volunteers are on Moorlands Estate.

You may also know of our work with HIll Mead Primary(in the heart of Moorlands). Please see the link below to an event where the whole school recorded their thoughts on the area:
http://www.brixtongreen.org/brixton-greenhill-mead-event/

And our event at Dexter's playground - over 850 people from all parts of the Brixton community attended:
http://www.brixtongreen.org/over-850-come-to-brixton-green-family-event/

To engage all the various communities in Brixton is a lot of work and we're continuing to make good progress on making sure Brixton people know what Brixton Green is and making sure they have their say.

Brixton Green is owned by Brixton people. Over 850 Brixton people are already shareholders. The Brixton Green proposal is being developed by Brixton people. If you have any concerns or thoughts on how it could be better than have your say - make it better.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> I'm happy to discuss on Urban75. To discuss such an important proposal it would also be helpful to for us meet.


Could you explain - in simple terms - why in five years you have never approached any residents of Southwyck House (or its Residents Association, which I am part of) to inform them of your plans to smash their homes and their community to smithereens, but you still felt at liberty to inform the press about these plans?


----------



## colacubes (May 10, 2012)

But what are the possible proposals?  I've looked on the site and all I can see is that you're proposing to demolish some of the light industrial units.  That's all the info I can find.  Could you lay out in a post on here:

1.  What are the possible proposals?
2.  How does the membership of Brixton Green work?  Is it 1 member 1 vote for example?
3.  Is there a maximum number of shareholders you are looking for?  If there is do people who cannot join then not get a say
4.  If you do acquire the site what will the timelines be for this work?
5.  Whether you consider that the organisation is independent of the council, particularly as our local MP is your patron?
6.  Also I note you also have the Cabinet Office and Department of Communities and Local Government logos on your site.  Perhaps you could outline what support they have given you?

If this project is to be a success and garner support I think it would really help your cause if you were open on here about it.  This is a long established community website and a lot of people on here would be directly affected given the location of your proposal.  People cannot always get to 1 to 1 meetings or consultation events and this is an important source of information.

Many thanks in advance.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> The Brixton Green proposal is being developed by Brixton people.


Well, a truly _microscopic_ percentage of Brixton people who have managed to work out what you're about and who have paid money to be part of it.

A far as I know, none of the 'Brixton people' whose homes you want to destroy are signed up, but that might be because you've never bothered to get in touch and divulge your plans, instead preferring to broadcast them to the developer community.

How do you think we feel as residents finding out that you're proposing destroying our community through a newspaper article?


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 10, 2012)

Hi brad.  I too live in Brixton.  I am surprised you don't have a website.  Then  you could direct everyone there and not have to repeat the marketing cliches here.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Brixton Green. The people who keep telling us that they represent the community of Brixton yet in five years have made no attempt whatsoever to contact the community in Southwcyk House which they actively want to_ literally_ destroy.
> 
> Brixton Green. The people who keep telling us that they represent the community of Brixton yet refused point blank to discuss their proposals here, insisting that we should 'carry on the discussion' on their site - which has no means of open discussion


 
*To clarify, the Brixton Green proposal is just for Somerleyton Road. *
http://www.brixtongreen.org/

Many of our 850+ shareholders live in Southwyck House and over the coming weeks we are going up our activity to make sure all the residents in the area know about the proposal and invite them to get involved.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Well, a truly _microscopic_ percentage of Brixton people who have managed to work out what you're about and who have paid money to be part of it.
> 
> A far as I know, none of the 'Brixton people' whose homes you want to destroy are signed up, but that might be because you've never bothered to get in touch and divulge your plans, instead preferring to broadcast them to the developer community.
> 
> How do you think we feel as residents finding out that you're proposing destroying our community through a newspaper article?


 
TBF to him, whatever the history here might be, the article doesn't appear to suggest Brixton Green want to demolish the barrier block, only that the council apparently do.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> *To clarify, the Brixton Green proposal is just for Somerleyton Road. *
> http://www.brixtongreen.org/
> 
> Many of our 850+ shareholders live in Southwyck House and over the coming weeks we are going up our activity to make sure all the residents in the area know about the proposal and invite them to get involved.


Just to clear this up: Brixton Green is categorically against any plans to demolish Southwyck House, yes?

And why have you never approached the Residents Association?


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Could you explain - in simple terms - why in five years you have never approached any residents of Southwyck House (or its Residents Association, which I am part of) to inform them of your plans to smash their homes and their community to smithereens, but you still felt at liberty to inform the press about these plans?


 
I have asked to meet you many times. Are you free to meet this afternoon?


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> TBF to him, whatever the history here might be, the article doesn't appear to suggest Brixton Green want to demolish the barrier block, only that the council apparently do.


The demolition of Southwyck House is integral to some of the plans being proposed for Somerleyton Road, and some of those plans involve Brixton Green.


----------



## ddraig (May 10, 2012)

brad, you just said you are happy to discuss it on here
why should ed meet you
surely it is better all round to have it out in the open?


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

ddraig said:


> brad, you just said you are happy to discuss it on here
> why should ed meet you
> surely it is better all round to have it out in the open?


Exactly. These proposals affect thousands of Brixton residents, most of whom aren't signed up to Brixton Green, so it's only right that the discussion should be out in the open, where more Brixton people can freely access it.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Just to clear this up: Brixton Green is categorically against any plans to demolish Southwyck House, yes? "


 
Our proposal has nothing to do with Southwyck House. We are only concerned with ensuring the community can be at the forefront of the redevelopment of Somerleyton Road.

As a Brixton resident I have concerns about the relocation of our communities.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

ddraig said:


> brad, you just said you are happy to discuss it on here
> why should ed meet you
> surely it is better all round to have it out in the open?


 
Forums are one useful tool to discuss. However it is often easier to discuss such important matter in person and be able to talk through the issues.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Exactly. These proposals affect thousands of Brixton residents, most of whom aren't signed up to Brixton Green, so it's only right that the discussion should be out in the open, where more Brixton people can freely access it.


 
Yes - the proposal is being discussed openly. It is being developed by Brixton people - everyone can contribute.
http://www.brixtongreen.org/

Please view the proposal and make your comments on this forum.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Our proposal has nothing to do with Southwyck House. We are only concerned with ensuring the community can be at the forefront of the redevelopment of Somerleyton Road.


I'd really appreciate a direct answer please so I can inform the Residents Association of your views on this matter: is Brixton Green categorically against the demolition of Southwyck House?

The two are _*directly*_ linked as you well know because if the demolition of Southwyck House did go ahead, some of the replacement housing would be in Somerleyton Road - and I do believe that would involve Brixton Green to a large extent.


----------



## ddraig (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Forums are one useful tool to discuss. However it is often easier to discuss such important matter in person and be able to talk through the issues.


unless you've got something you'd rather not share with the Brixton community and/or are attempting to sweeten up/dissapear/shut ed up then why would you not want to discuss it here?


----------



## TitanSound (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Please view the proposal and make your comments on this forum.


 
Should you not have your own forum though? Or at least put a link to this thread on your page? If not, only a limited amount of people will be able to view and contribute to the discussion.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Could you explain - in simple terms - why in five years you have never approached any residents of Southwyck House (or its Residents Association, which I am part of) to inform them of your plans to smash their homes and their community to smithereens, but you still felt at liberty to inform the press about these plans?


 
You know I have asked to meet your association. Shall we arrange a meeting?


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Please view the proposal and make your comments on this forum.


I took a look at the site and it says that Brixton Green "has been set up by Brixton people." 

Where does your chair, Stephen Jordan live?


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> You know I have asked to meet your association. Shall we arrange a meeting?





editor said:


> Could you explain - in simple terms - why in five years you have never approached any residents of Southwyck House (or its Residents Association, which I am part of) to inform them of your plans to smash their homes and their community to smithereens, but you still felt at liberty to inform the press about these plans?


 
To clarify, I spoke to the journalist about the Brixton Green proposal. Not about Southwyck House.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> You know I have asked to meet your association.


When was that then?


brad said:


> Shall we arrange a meeting?


I shall bring it up at the next meeting and sort out a date, but I'd appreciate it if you would clarify your position about the block so we know where we stand.

Is Brixton Green categorically against the demolition of Southwyck House?


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> I took a look at the site and it says that Brixton Green "has been set up by Brixton people."
> 
> Where does your chair, Stephen Jordan live?


 
Stephen is part of our interim board. He is one of the few trustees who do not live in Brixton. The reason we invited him to join the project is because he led two of the biggest regeneration projects in the UK (Stratford City and Kings Cross). As you can see from our board we've brought together a wide skill set including various parts of the community, public services and business:
http://www.brixtongreen.org/who/

The current Brixton Green board is the interim board. Our first two elected members joined at our AGM last March. The interim board will stand down at our next AGM and the whole board will be elected. To stand for election you need to be a Brixton Green shareholder and live or work in Brixton.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Stephen is part of our interim board. He is one of the few trustees who do not live in Brixton. The reason we invited him to join the project is because he led two of the biggest regeneration projects in the UK (Stratford City and Kings Cross). As you can see from our board we've brought together a wide skill set including various parts of the community, public services and business:
> http://www.brixtongreen.org/who/


Perhaps you should make that clearer on your website, where his name appears right at the top of the list: 


> BOARD OF TRUSTEES
> 
> Stephen Jordan(Chair): Previously the Managing Director of London and Continental Railways‘ stations and property division and trustee of the Capital Community Foundation.  Stephen has experience in unlocking key London developments like King’s Cross and Stratford City; publicly owned land developed by private sector expertise and investment.   “Brixton Green excites me as a serious proposition with genuine local support.  At a time when money for public projects is tight, delivery through a cooperative structure is innovative.  It is a viable approach that will align the interests of all stakeholders.”


----------



## eme (May 10, 2012)

I still don't get why I should pay £1 to have my opinion heard. I know it's a v v v small amount, but to me, my opinion counts just by being a person in a borough where my *elected council* should be listening.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> When was that then?
> I shall bring it up at the next meeting and sort out a date, but I'd appreciate it if you would clarify your position about the block so we know where we stand.
> 
> Is Brixton Green categorically against the demolition of Southwyck House?


 
I look forward to meeting your association. I would also like to meet you sooner to see if there's a way Urban75 could become the main mechanism for positive debate of the proposal online.

Regarding Southwyck House: People sign up to be shareholders of Brixton Green because they support the idea that Brixton people should be at the forefront of the redevelopment of Somerleyton Road. We have not asked our shareholders what their views are on Southwyck House and therefore as an organisation we cannot have a view on it.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

eme said:


> I still don't get why I should pay £1 to have my opinion heard. I know it's a v v v small amount, but to me, my opinion counts just by being a person in a borough where my *elected council* should be listening.


 
You don't have to be a shareholder to contribute to the proposal.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> * We have not asked our shareholders what their views are on Southwyck House and therefore as an organisation we cannot have a view on it.*


----------



## colacubes (May 10, 2012)

nipsla said:


> But what are the possible proposals? I've looked on the site and all I can see is that you're proposing to demolish some of the light industrial units. That's all the info I can find. Could you lay out in a post on here:
> 
> 1. What are the possible proposals?
> 2. How does the membership of Brixton Green work? Is it 1 member 1 vote for example?
> ...





brad said:


> I look forward to meeting your association. I would also like to meet you sooner to see if there's a way Urban75 could become the main mechanism for positive debate of the proposal online.
> 
> Regarding Southwyck House: People sign up to be shareholders of Brixton Green because they support the idea that Brixton people should be at the forefront of the redevelopment of Somerleyton Road. We have not asked our shareholders what their views are on Southwyck House and therefore as an organisation we cannot have a view on it.


 
Quoting to get your attention as the debate moves on quickly, but it would be really helpful if you could answer some of my questions above.  Thanks.


----------



## TitanSound (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Regarding Southwyck House: People sign up to be shareholders of Brixton Green because they support the idea that Brixton people should be at the forefront of the redevelopment of Somerleyton Road. We have not asked our shareholders what their views are on Southwyck House and therefore as an organisation we cannot have a view on it.


 
Have you ever considered a career in politics?


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

TitanSound said:


> Should you not have your own forum though? Or at least put a link to this thread on your page? If not, only a limited amount of people will be able to view and contribute to the discussion.


 
Editor, how do we go about setting this up?


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Regarding Southwyck House: People sign up to be shareholders of Brixton Green because they support the idea that Brixton people should be at the forefront of the redevelopment of Somerleyton Road. We have not asked our shareholders what their views are on Southwyck House and therefore as an organisation we cannot have a view on it.


That can only be described as a very disappointing answer.

If the Barrier Block was to be demolished it would have a *direct* impact on your plans for Somerleyton Road - indeed, it has been posited that it may form an integral part, with housing built to accomodate displaced residrents. 

Are you saying you have had no such discussions with the council about this issue?


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Editor, how do we go about setting this up?


I could suggest to the mods that we to set up a dedicated Brixton Green forum here but it would have to be open to all and unmoderated (past our usual rules) and come with the expectation that representatives from Brixton Green would be active contributors.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

_1. What are the possible proposals?_
We have a short film on the site which outlines the current proposal:
http://www.brixtongreen.org/

We are adding more pages so the current proposals can be more easily viewed.

_2. How does the membership of Brixton Green work? Is it 1 member 1 vote for example?_
One share per person. One vote per person.

_3. Is there a maximum number of shareholders you are looking for? If there is do people who cannot join then not get a say_
The current cap is 5,000 shareholders. Anyone who lives in Brixton can contribute to the proposal whether they are a shareholder or not.

_4. If you do acquire the site what will the timelines be for this work?_
That's dependent on a number of factors(planning etc), but it will be a couple years plus.


_5. Whether you consider that the organisation is independent of the council, particularly as our local MP is your patron?_
Yes we are owned by our shareholders and independent from Lambeth Council.

_6. Also I note you also have the Cabinet Office and Department of Communities and Local Government logos on your site. Perhaps you could outline what support they have given you?_
The Cabinet Office and DCLG's support came as part of us being one of ten national pilots on community shares. Cooperatives UK and Locality(then the Development Trust) were also part of this support. It was a two year programme where we able to develop our governance structure and community shares.
http://www.communityshares.org.uk/


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (May 10, 2012)

Why do they want to destroy the barrier block?
idjeets
anyway, it's from a site to woo businesses to London, and the article in this particular case is aimed at BTL landlords, pile of dung IYAM; which you don't.


----------



## snowy_again (May 10, 2012)

As a minor aside, is this actually legal from a mutuals perspective:
From your Q&A, which seems to contradict your I&P Constitution (clause 7) here: 
*Can I withdraw my share?*
If you no longer wish to be a member of Brixton Green you can withdraw your share. However we are unable to return your £1 as the costs involved in processing your application exceeds £1. Even though it is only £1, the law requires we take a lot of trouble over looking after our members and so we cannot afford to return the one pound if you leave.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

I'm looking at the video now.



Why is 'reduced economic activity' seen as some sort of negative issue for a residential area?

The last time you were here you also insisted the green park space outside Southwyck House by Somerleyton Road was also bad for economic activity and you wanted to get rid of it. Do you still hold that view?


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

snowy_again said:


> As a minor aside, is this actually legal from a mutuals perspective:
> From your Q&A
> *Can I withdraw my share?*
> If you no longer wish to be a member of Brixton Green you can withdraw your share. However we are unable to return your £1 as the costs involved in processing your application exceeds £1. Even though it is only £1, the law requires we take a lot of trouble over looking after our members and so we cannot afford to return the one pound if you leave.


 
I agree this is awkwardly written and should be re-done. Basically if you buy the share online Paypal take a commission. If you buy one of our cards, there is obviously a cost in producing these. Plus all our volunteer time.


----------



## gabi (May 10, 2012)

just skimmed this - brad, are you proposing that the barrier block gets demolished?  i love that building! 

nice username btw.


----------



## Crispy (May 10, 2012)

Brad has not said he is proposing it. The council (as an option for discussion, by the looks of things) is.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> I'm looking at the video now.
> 
> View attachment 19022
> 
> Why is 'reduced economic activity' seen as some sort of negative issue for a residential area?


 
We speak with the local shop owners. If they find it difficult to get trade it is not good for the residents in the area. Local shops are more than just retail outlets.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

gabi said:


> just skimmed this - brad, are you proposing that the barrier block gets demolished?  i love that building!
> 
> nice username btw.


 
Absolutely not.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

gabi said:


> just skimmed this - brad, are you proposing that the barrier block gets demolished?  i love that building!


The council are putting it forward as one of several proposals for the area.

The first the Residents Association heard about it was last week,  and we were told to treat the matter as confidential for the time being.

Then we discovered that the property developer press have known all about it for months.

It's not the greatest start for a period of consultation, or for fostering the feeling that the resident's views are being listened to.


----------



## Winot (May 10, 2012)

Crispy said:


> The council (as an option for discussion, by the looks of things) is.


 
Sounds like the residents ought to be asking some hard questions of the council to find out exactly what is being discussed.

E2a - written before seeing Ed's post above ^


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> The council are putting it forward as one of several proposals for the area.
> 
> The first the Residents Association heard about it was last week, and we were told to treat the matter as confidential for the time being.
> 
> ...


Lambeth being less than  open?
surprising


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> We speak with the local shop owners. If they find it difficult to get trade it is not good for the residents in the area. Local shops are more than just retail outlets.


What shops are in that area of red highlighted on your map?

And how about your plans for the green space outside Somerleyton Road? You want to put shops there? Why?

It's hugely disappointing that in all this time your plans still seem rather opaque and straight answers are hard to get - even when they concern the homes of hundreds of people.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

Winot said:


> Sounds like the residents ought to be asking some hard questions of the council to find out exactly what is being discussed.
> 
> E2a - written before seeing Ed's post above ^


After seeing that article it's certainly made me think twice about how open they're being with us.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Regarding Southwyck House: People sign up to be shareholders of Brixton Green because they support the idea that Brixton people should be at the forefront of the redevelopment of Somerleyton Road. We have not asked our shareholders what their views are on Southwyck House and therefore as an organisation we cannot have a view on it.


Lots of people bought the shares out of curiosity, and because punting a quid was no great commitment, not because they are cheerleaders for BG. I know quite a few people who have shares.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 10, 2012)

I believe a couple of shareholders from the Golden Age Club have died too.


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Yes - the proposal is being discussed openly. It is being developed by Brixton people - everyone can contribute.
> http://www.brixtongreen.org/
> 
> Please view the proposal and make your comments on this forum.


 
on this forum?  or the one on your website?


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> What shops are in that area of red highlighted on your map?
> 
> And how about your plans for the green space outside Somerleyton Road? You want to put shops there? Why?
> 
> It's hugely disappointing that in all this time your plans still seem rather opaque and straight answers are hard to get - even when they concern the homes of hundreds of people.


 
*The Brixton Green proposal is just for Somerleyton Road - It does not include Southwyck House.*

Editor, you know our plans are just for Somerleyton Road. There is nothing in the proposal regarding Southwyck House or the land in front of Southwyck House.
http://www.brixtongreen.org/

Also as a local resident you know where the local shops are.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Lots of people bought the shares out of curiosity, and because punting a quid was no great commitment, not because they are cheerleaders for BG. I know quite a few people who have shares.


 
We go to great effort to ensure people understand what they are buying a share in.

Mrs Magpie, you have repeatedly been negative about this proposal. It is clear that Brixton Green is inclusive, democratic, and has enagaged with a wide section of the community. It is also clear that we are continuing to work to engage and involve more of the community. 

Our event at Dexter's Playground brought together over 850 people from a wide section of the Brixton community
http://www.brixtongreen.org/over-850-come-to-brixton-green-family-event/

Our work with the schools and other local groups:
http://www.brixtongreen.org/brixton-greenhill-mead-event/

What is the motivation for your continued negative comments?

http://www.brixtongreen.org/


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> I have asked to meet you many times. Are you free to meet this afternoon?


 

are you going to personally meet with every single Brixton resident?  or are all those who are not on Urban 75 expected to psychically know about it.  Until this thread the only thing i'd heard about Brixton Green was a poster in a neighbour's window which stated that Only Brixton People Know What Brixton Wants.  I assumed it was for the local Green Party.  This is important stuff and if you want people onside you have to stop acting like a politician.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

el-ahrairah said:


> on this forum? or the one on your website?


 
Please make your comments on this forum. Although it is helpful if you send messages directly to us on the Brixton Green site:
http://www.brixtongreen.org


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 10, 2012)

I agree with El-ah. A lot of local people get information on what is happening in Brixton from this and other Internet sites. I haven't seen any physical posters or leaflets for Brixton Green in the community. Your website seems very limited in details and with no discussion forum how are local people meant to engage with your project?


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

el-ahrairah said:


> are you going to personally meet with every single Brixton resident? or are all those who are not on Urban 75 expected to psychically know about it. Until this thread the only thing i'd heard about Brixton Green was a poster in a neighbour's window which stated that Only Brixton People Know What Brixton Wants. I assumed it was for the local Green Party. This is important stuff and if you want people onside you have to stop acting like a politician.


 
It is difficult for a voluntary organisation to get a message out to so many different communities. Over the next few weeks we aim to get leaflets to every home in Brixton.

This is an important proposal for Brixton people. We need constructive debate.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

shakespearegirl said:


> I agree with El-ah. A lot of local people get information on what is happening in Brixton from this and other Internet sites. I haven't seen any physical posters or leaflets for Brixton Green in the community. Your website seems very limited in details and with no discussion forum how are local people meant to engage with your project?


 
I suggest Urban75 is used as the discussion forum. We will work to get more info online.


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> What is the motivation for your continued negative comments?
> 
> http://www.brixtongreen.org/


 
If you wonder why two very long term residents of this area are concerned about the motives and actions of yet another group purporting to speak for Brixton residents then really, you don't have the experience necessary to lead this project.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Please make your comments on this forum. Although it is helpful if you send messages directly to us on the Brixton Green site:
> http://www.brixtongreen.org


 
Can you explain why Southwyck House residents have been told to keep the proposals confidential and why the same wasn't asked of you, and why you've known for at least two months about the proposals for Southwyck House?  Just curious


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> It is difficult for a voluntary organisation to get a message out to so many different communities. Over the next few weeks we aim to get leaflets to every home in Brixton.
> 
> This is an important proposal for Brixton people. We need constructive debate.


 
Yes, it is.  It is tricky.  Do you set up stalls in the centre ever?  Have any of your hundreds of supporters knocked door to door or delivered leaflets at the very least to those residents most directly affected by this?  If the patron is the local MP, does that mean that Tessa Jowell will support any collective decision made?  Also, are you a member of any political party or economic organisation that stands to profit from any particular outcome?


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Can you explain why Southwyck House residents have been told to keep the proposals confidential and why the same wasn't asked of you, and why you've known for at least two months about the proposals for Southwyck House? Just curious


 
To re-iterate: I discussed only Brixton Green with the journalist. Southwyck House is not part of the Brixton Green proposal. The Brixton Green proposal is just for Somerleyton Road.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> To re-iterate: I discussed only Brixton Green with the journalist. Southwyck House is not part of the Brixton Green proposal. The Brixton Green proposal is just for Somerleyton Road.


 
So the journalist/London Loves Business knows all about the proposal, but he never mentioned it to you?


----------



## Winot (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> It is difficult for a voluntary organisation to get a message out to so many different communities. Over the next few weeks we aim to get leaflets to every home in Brixton.
> 
> This is an important proposal for Brixton people. We need constructive debate.


 
That's all fair enough, but then it's a bit disingenuous to claim that:



brad said:


> Brixton Green is continuing to actively engage with all parts of the Brixton community.


 
I suspect that what this demonstrates is the gap between the bullshit necessary to get funding and the actual activity that's possible in a small voluntary organisation.  In other words, the model is flawed.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> To re-iterate: I discussed only Brixton Green with the journalist. Southwyck House is not part of the Brixton Green proposal. The Brixton Green proposal is just for Somerleyton Road.


To be clear: are you saying that you've never discussed the possible demolition of Southwyck House with the council and if that did happen Brixton Green has never discussed any possible involvement whatsoever in rehousing displaced residents/services, even though Somerleyton Road is directly adjacent?

You may think I'm going on a bit here, but this is a real community that I care deeply about, and these are _people's homes_ we are talking about, not shiny drawing board proposals.


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

el-ahrairah said:


> Yes, it is. It is tricky. Do you set up stalls in the centre ever? Have any of your hundreds of supporters knocked door to door or delivered leaflets at the very least to those residents most directly affected by this? If the patron is the local MP, does that mean that Tessa Jowell will support any collective decision made? Also, are you a member of any political party or economic organisation that stands to profit from any particular outcome?


 
I would prefer to move to constructive debate. However to address your comments:
_Do you set up stalls in the centre ever? _
We have had stalls at a number of community events and this activity will increase during the next few months.

_Have any of your hundreds of supporters knocked door to door or delivered leaflets at the very least to those residents most directly affected by this?_
Last May we distributed leaflets to all the homes in Moorlands, Guinness Trust and Southwyck House. We distributed a total of 15,000 leaflets that weekend.

_Also, are you a member of any political party or economic organisation that stands to profit from any particular outcome?_
No - Brixton Green is an independent, inclusive, democratic, not for profit registered mutual organisation owned by Brixton people.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

With over a 1,000 page views in little over 12 hours, I'd say Brixton Green is already reaching out to a lot more people by posting on this forum.


----------



## stethoscope (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> What is the motivation for your continued negative comments?


 
I must admit your response to Mrs M has really got my back up here (and I'm not even a Brixton resident!). You must surely be quite aware that local people become concerned because they see project after project, council group after council group do limited consultation exercises, and then develop what they like anyway.

I'm not saying this is your (at least intended) modus operandi, but this is how stuff so often plays out, even with community involvement. I've seen it in my area of Stratford time and time again, most recently with the Olympics. I think you need to think about how you engage with those people it affects, not criticise them for being 'negative'/expect them to accept things as given.


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 10, 2012)

I think Brixton Green needs to agree its position on Southwyck House and make it publically known. I certainly wouldn't support any scheme that endorses destroying viable social housing and peoples homes. 

If you stay silent on such a controversial scheme in such physical proximity to your development people will assume you support it.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Last May we distributed leaflets to all the homes in Moorlands, Guinness Trust and Southwyck House. We distributed a total of 15,000 leaflets that weekend.


For the record, I have never received a leaflet from Brixton Green. All I've ever seen in five years is the one small poster that appeared in the vestibule area last year.


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 10, 2012)

Thank you for your responses Brad.  I will attempt to engage with Brixton Green when I see a stall, now that I know they aren't the local Green Party!


----------



## brad (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> To be clear: are you saying that you've never discussed the possible demolition of Southwyck House with the council and if that did happen Brixton Green has never discussed any possible involvement whatsoever in rehousing displaced residents/services, even though Somerleyton Road is directly adjacent?
> 
> You may think I'm going on a bit here, but this is a real community that I care deeply about, and these are _people's homes_ we are talking about, not shiny drawing board proposals.


 
This is a real community and these are real peoples homes. 

Our discussions with Lambeth are just about Somerleyton Road.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> This is a real community and these are real peoples homes.
> 
> Our discussions with Lambeth are just about Somerleyton Road.


 
Re:  The London Loves Business article mentioning Southwyck House.  Had you *never* seen that article?  Is this thread the first you've *ever ever *been aware of the proposal?


----------



## Winot (May 10, 2012)

shakespearegirl said:


> I think Brixton Green needs to agree its position on Southwyck House and make it publically known. I certainly wouldn't support any scheme that endorses destroying viable social housing and peoples homes.
> 
> If you stay silent on such a controversial scheme in such physical proximity to your development people will assume you support it.


 
Brixton Green are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet and risk being snubbed by Lambeth in a post-Southwyck House world.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> Our discussions with Lambeth are just about Somerleyton Road.


The reason I keep asking is that the council have suggested that they might rehouse displaced residents in a new development in Somerleyton Road if the block was demolished.

Seeing as Brixton Green is all about developing Somerleyton Road, it would seem very strange indeed for you not to have had any discussions at all about this possibility.


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

FFS Urbans. The effort required to deal with the unrelenting and often personal negativity on here really can only be worth it to Brad if he genuinely wants to include you and interact with you. I really don't see why he is bothering to persevere with trying to break down this U75 brick wall which you are building.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

'Scuse me if I'm getting frustrated, but it's _our homes_ we're talking about here and I'm just trying to get a fix on exactly what is being proposed and by whom - and that's a story that's proving very difficult to unravel.


----------



## stethoscope (May 10, 2012)

I'm rather interested to know some of the details about this letter from CABE (Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment) which is on the Brixton Green site - http://www.brixtongreen.org/wp-content/uploads/Brixton-Green_CABE-11776_DH.pdf

I can't see any page that links to it that places it in context of what the scope of the discussions were, stakeholders involved, etc. but CABE certainly say its a 'proposal' and it does include housing. It's this sort of stuff that should be publicised on the site, explained.

EDIT - I've seen this was raised on the other thread... but the point above still remains that this stuff isn't at all easily accessible/detailed/explained on the site. All that is there is here - http://www.brixtongreen.org/cabe-review/


----------



## stethoscope (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> FFS Urbans. The effort required to deal with the unrelenting and often personal negativity on here really can only be worth it to Brad if he genuinely wants to include you and interact with you. I really don't see why he is bothering to persevere with trying to break down this U75 brick wall which you are building.


 
Surely his job as the founder/director of such a redevelopment/community group is to expend a great deal of effort to try and elicit as many residents feelings on the project as possible, and where there are fears and concerns, dispel them and help to bring them on side. Especially when such things can affect peoples homes.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

steph said:


> Surely his job as the founder/director of such a redevelopment/community group is to expend a great deal of effort to try and elicit as many residents feelings on the project as possible, and where there are fears and concerns, dispel them and help to bring them on side. Especially when such things can affect peoples homes.


 
and the fact that Brixton Green doesn't even have a forum doesn't give people much say (or not one that can easily be viewed publicly)


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

steph said:


> Surely his job as the founder/director of such a redevelopment/community group is to expend a great deal of effort to find out all residents feelings, and where there are fears and concerns, dispel them and help to bring them on side. Especially when such things can affect peoples homes.


I don't disagree. But I don't get the impression anyone is genuinely listening on here.

I totally get that residents of SH are concerned about this new _proposal_ to knock the building down. But the inference that this is part of the BG plan or even supported by them seems pretty unfounded and illogical.

I don't know anything about the SH demolition proposal (or indeed about SH itself and its communities) and as such could not support it. That said, I do know that the demolition of three blocks on Saint Matthews Road and subsequent redevelopment with higher quality low cost housing, including family houses, was mostly a good thing for the area and so I think an automatic principled objection from those who do not have an immediate personal interest would be misplaced.


----------



## ddraig (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> FFS Urbans. The effort required to deal with the unrelenting and often personal negativity on here really can only be worth it to Brad if he genuinely wants to include you and interact with you. I really don't see why he is bothering to persevere with trying to break down this U75 brick wall which you are building.


rubbish
brad, as much as he'd like it to all be fluffy 'positive' and 'constructive' can't control the debate
why should he be able to? surely local peoples views are peoples views?
tough shit if they go against the corporate blurb etc

maybe a developer could like, have an actual real honest and open debate for once!
now that would be community consultation

e2a and brad, you'd do well not to do down Mrs M's views
maybe the comments you perceive as negative stem from the negative experience of your project so far?
there are plenty people willing to engage, here, right now, take the opportunity


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

ddraig said:


> rubbish
> 
> there are plenty people willing to engage, here, right now,


 
with swords drawn.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> I totally get that residents of SH are concerned about this new _proposal_ to knock the building down. But the inference that this is part of the BG plan or even supported by them seems pretty unfounded and illogical


Please read my earlier comments re: the council's suggestion that displaced residents could be rehoused on Somerleyton Road if the Barrier Block gets knocked down. I have tried asking BG directly if they have had any such discussions but, as you can see, no direct answer has been forthcoming.

The Barrier Block is a fantastic place to live, despite being cheated of promised maintenance and refurbs by Lambeth's pointless ALMO scheme, and it would be insane to tear down such a well built and iconic building - and residents would have to have a screw loose to assume that any replacement housing will automatically be of a comparable quality.


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 10, 2012)

I'm really keen to engage and think the idea of some kind of development along somerleyton road would be good, particularly if it was a community based project rather than more yuppie rental flats with never used commercial premises on the ground floor.

If there is no connection between SH demolition and somerleyton redevelopment, great. Just be good to be clear.

Be interested to see a lot more detail from Brixton Green on financing and who will be occupying proposed housing.


----------



## stethoscope (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> and the fact that Brixton Green doesn't even have a forum doesn't give people much say (or not one that can easily be viewed publicly)


 
I can't see much on the site at all tbh - it seems to me you shouldn't rely on people either getting to events/meets, or having to arrange individual meetings to discuss concerns when they get discussed on a forum like urban, the site should form a lynchpin of what they're doing and to get messages across.

A forum for starters, a more comprehensive news/blog section which has links to detailed feedback from events/meets, proper clear intentions of plans - what their scope is, what isn't, what it does and doesn't include, etc.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

steph said:


> I can't see much on the site at all tbh - it seems to me you shouldn't rely on people either getting to events/meets, or having to arrange individual meetings to discuss concerns when they get discussed on a forum like urban, the site should form a lynchpin of what they're doing and to get messages across.
> 
> A forum for starters, a more comprehensive news/blog section which has links to detailed feedback from events/meets, proper clear intentions of plans - what their scope is, what isn't, what it does and doesn't include, etc.


 
and a link to that London Loves Business story about Southwyck House, if they really want to represent the local community and keep them informed


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> Please read my earlier comments re: the council's suggestion that displaced residents could be rehoused on Somerleyton Road if the Barrier Block gets knocked down. I have tried asking BG directly if they have had any such discussions but, as you can see, no direct answer has been forthcoming.
> 
> The Barrier Block is a fantastic place to live, despite being cheated of promised maintenance and refurbs by Lambeth's pointless ALMO scheme, and it would be insane to tear down such a well built and iconic building - and residents would have to have a screw loose to assume that any replacement housing will automatically be of a comparable quality.


 
Indeed.  Not sure of the size of Southwyck House flats, but all I keep reading is that new builds are getting smaller and smaller.  Who's going to want to move somewhere smaller


----------



## d'jANGO (May 10, 2012)

As a casual bystander who doesn't really know a great deal of the background to this, I've got to say the impression I get from this discussion is much the same as Rushy. I understand the need for people to feel that BG are not in 'control' of this debate, but I also get the sense that there are some people here who are not actually interested in genuine engagement anyway. If you want to influence the process, why not buy a share? Why not everyone in Southwyck House buy a share? Why *not* meet with BG? It's crazy to think that communication via an internet talk board is genuinely more effective than meeting face to face- look how people act on the internet! Not to suggest that online consultation doesn't have it's place - the number of views this thread has apparently received demonstrates precisely that it does - but if people genuinely think that the Editor might be 'compromised' by any kind face-to-face encounter, then that seems slightly paranoid to me.


----------



## OpalFruit (May 10, 2012)

The council has speculatively talked about demolishing Southwyck House in various schemes for years, just as they have of the Rec. I heard it mooted, speculatively, in the last consultation about Brixton, during the City Challenge years and at other times. Councils do sometimes demolish housing (and yeah, I'd be very upset if it was mine that was under the wrecking ball), Southwark demolished a load of blocks alongside Burgess Park and re-built them, parts of the Aylesbury estate have been similiarly demolished and replaced. But it's hard to see how Lambeth would have the capital to demolish Southwyck House and re-build in the current climate. To be clear - I am not supporting the demolition of Southwyck house, just surprised that people haven't heard of the proposal before.

Brad - do you have any development money, or is Brixton Green more like a lobbying group?

I would love to see more residential development along Somerleyton Rd, and businesses that were 'alive' in the evenings. I hate those set-back gateways and dark corners all along the road.

Likewise I can see why the shopkeepers on Coldharbour Lane would like some of the main windows from Southwyck House to overlook them, for example, or to have other businesses along there, and why the Brixton Green proposal to have houses along Somerleyton Rd looking into the street would be a good idea. And will say that when I get my chance in the forthcoming Brixton consultations.

But let's not treat the property press and estate agents as a source of real info.


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

steph said:


> a more comprehensive news/blog section which has links to detailed feedback from events/meets,


That would definitely be good.


----------



## OpalFruit (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> The reason I keep asking is that the council have suggested that they might rehouse displaced residents in a new development in Somerleyton Road if the block was demolished.
> 
> Seeing as Brixton Green is all about developing Somerleyton Road, it would seem very strange indeed for you not to have had any discussions at all about this possibility.


 
Would Brixton Green be in control of who the tennants were if it is social housing? I thought social housing had to be allocated from council lists?
What are the council proposing for the Southwyck house site if it were demolished?  Brixton Green are neither a property developer nor an SLR, are they?

Brad, how would residency of the Somerleyton Rd housing in your proposal be determined?


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

OpalFruit said:


> Likewise I can see why the shopkeepers on Coldharbour Lane would like some of the main windows from Southwyck House to overlook them, for example, or to have other businesses along there, and why the Brixton Green proposal to have houses along Somerleyton Rd looking into the street would be a good idea.


The area around the Barrier Block has got considerably better in recent years, with crime and anti-social behaviour nowhere near previous levels (but, of course, they could still get better).

Not sure what difference having bigger windows overlooking businesses would make, but what would make the street safer is putting businesses into those empty properties on the shoddy new build along the road.

Putting the Angel back to use is going to help too, but I imagine most locals would rather the park in front of the block stay right where it is.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

OpalFruit said:


> Brixton Green are neither a property developer nor an SLR, are they?


They are a 'not for profit property development company'.

I think Brad is a property developer too.


----------



## ddraig (May 10, 2012)

d'jANGO said:


> As a casual bystander who doesn't really know a great deal of the background to this, I've got to say the impression I get from this discussion is much the same as Rushy. I understand the need for people to feel that BG are not in 'control' of this debate, but I also get the sense that there are some people here who are not actually interested in genuine engagement anyway. If you want to influence the process, why not buy a share? Why not everyone in Southwyck House buy a share? Why *not* meet with BG? It's crazy to think that communication via an internet talk board is genuinely more effective than meeting face to face- look how people act on the internet! Not to suggest that online consultation doesn't have it's place - the number of views this thread has apparently received demonstrates precisely that it does - but if people genuinely think that the Editor might be 'compromised' by any kind face-to-face encounter, then that seems slightly paranoid to me.


 sockpuppet


----------



## Crispy (May 10, 2012)

ddraig said:


> sockpuppet


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Indeed. Not sure of the size of Southwyck House flats, but all I keep reading is that new builds are getting smaller and smaller. Who's going to want to move somewhere smaller


The minimum size standards have recently been increased in Lambeth. As absolute minimum's go I think they are fairly good.

​


> Minimum overall floor areas​1.11 The minimum space standards by overall floorspace are set out in the table below.​Fig. 1 Minimum overall floor area for new build, conversions and changes of use​No. of beds  minimum floor area​m2​1 bed 2 persons  45​2 bed 3 persons  60​3 bed 4 persons  70​4 bed 5 persons or more  85​new build only 1 bed 1 person   37m2​​Minimum space standards m2​1.12 New dwellings and conversions should meet and preferably exceed the minimum room sizes​set out below. The floor areas set out in the table below are in square metres.​Fig. 2 Minimum room sizes for new build and conversions​


​_(formatting didn't work with cut and paste - see here pgph 1.12)_​


----------



## kalibuzz (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> I don't disagree. But I don't get the impression anyone is genuinely listening on here.
> 
> I totally get that residents of SH are concerned about this new _proposal_ to knock the building down. But the inference that this is part of the BG plan or even supported by them seems pretty unfounded and illogical.
> 
> I don't know anything about the SH demolition proposal (or indeed about SH itself and its communities) and as such could not support it. That said, I do know that the demolition of three blocks on Saint Matthews Road and subsequent redevelopment with higher quality low cost housing, including family houses, was mostly a good thing for the area and so I think an automatic principled objection from those who do not have an immediate personal interest would be misplaced.


and what exactly qualifies you to decide that? This is a forum for people to give their opinions, if you disagree make your point, don't just judge the post. Most redevelopments are non-council, and therefore the easiest way of economically evicting residents - in the long run. How many homes in Brixton have been built by the council lately, do you know?


----------



## OpalFruit (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> The area around the Barrier Block has got considerably better in recent years, with crime and anti-social behaviour nowhere near previous levels (but, of course, they could still get better).
> 
> Not sure what difference having bigger windows overlooking businesses would make, but what would make the street safer is putting businesses into those empty properties on the shoddy new build along the road.
> 
> Putting the Angel back to use is going to help too, but I imagine most locals would rather the park in front of the block stay right where it is.


 
I have heard shopkeepers say that life became harder once the old petrol station closed down, because there was less mutual over looking / freindly surveillance. The windows of Southwyck House look towards Moorlands, giving the impression from Coldharbour lane, in architectural terms, that it is 'turning it's back' on that road. Of course the park and green space is important - and could be made even better with enhancements. I agree about the empty units.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> The minimum size standards have recently been increased in Lambeth. As absolute minimum's go I think they are fairly good.
> 
> ​​_(formatting didn't work with cut and paste - see here pgph 1.12)_​


 
Cheers Rushy, but that means nothing to me 

I'd be more interested in average room sizes.  All very well giving total floor space, but what if they do stupid things like giving you huge kitchens and tiny living areas?


----------



## d'jANGO (May 10, 2012)

ddraig said:


> sockpuppet


like i say, you can see how people act on internet forums


----------



## kalibuzz (May 10, 2012)

OpalFruit said:


> The council has speculatively talked about demolishing Southwyck House in various schemes for years, just as they have of the Rec. I heard it mooted, speculatively, in the last consultation about Brixton, during the City Challenge years and at other times.
> wasn't the idea to build a new main road or even motorway to ease congestion? (Few years back I mean, not the very original first one the block was built against)


----------



## Crispy (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> The minimum size standards have recently been increased in Lambeth. As absolute minimum's go I think they are fairly good


Agreed, those are pretty good. Big enough for separate kitchen and living room.
EDIT:



Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Cheers Rushy, but that means nothing to me
> 
> I'd be more interested in average room sizes. All very well giving total floor space, but what if they do stupid things like giving you huge kitchens and tiny living areas?


 
60m² lets you have (approx)
Two bedrooms 3.5 x 3m (11.5 x 10ft)
Bathroom 2.5 x 2m (8 x 6.5ft)
Kitchen 3.5 x 2.5m (11.5 x 8ft)
Lounge 4.5 x 4m (14.5 x 13ft)

plus hallway and storage. Very comfortable.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2012)

OpalFruit said:


> I have heard shopkeepers say that life became harder once the old petrol station closed down, because there was less mutual over looking / freindly surveillance.


It's probably busier than it's ever been with the extremely annoying car wash business, although the Stalag 18 security fences do a good job of making the street look unwelcoming.

There's almost always people on the street outside the shops though - mainly on the green spaces or sitting on the walls or hanging out around the delightful bookies.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

d'jANGO said:


> like i say, you can see how people act on internet forums


 
It can get like that when people don't answer questions asked of them


----------



## kalibuzz (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Cheers Rushy, but that means nothing to me
> 
> I'd be more interested in average room sizes. All very well giving total floor space, but what if they do stupid things like giving you huge kitchens and tiny living areas?


they tend to buil open-plan kitchens, more trendy for professionals, useless for many larger families, especially those who are so old fashioned that they even cook in the kitchen, rather than dine out in the Village.
60 square metres for a 3 person household is tiny. In fact they even state themselves to build 'preferably larger'. Match box houses, they probably tear them down again once the council tenants are out one way or the other, they are not build to last


----------



## OpalFruit (May 10, 2012)

I always understood that SH was built the way it is because at that time there was going to be a high level motorway or flyover over the top of Brixton, and so all the windows faced away from where that high level road would have been. It was built for a context that (thankfully) never transpired.

Doesn't automatically follow that it should be demolished, obviously!

WHY are Lambeth proposing the demolition of SH?


----------



## d'jANGO (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> It can get like that when people don't answer questions asked of them


ddraig didn't ask me any questions??

But if you mean BG, perhaps that's another reason why a face-to-face meet would be useful?


----------



## colacubes (May 10, 2012)

d'jANGO said:


> ddraig didn't ask me any questions??
> 
> But if you mean BG, perhaps that's another reason why a face-to-face meet would be useful?


 
Or why not just answer them here?


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Cheers Rushy, but that means nothing to me
> 
> I'd be more interested in average room sizes. All very well giving total floor space, but what if they do stupid things like giving you huge kitchens and tiny living areas?


No worries Minnie. The minimum individual room sizes didn't cut and paste properly into my post -just looked like a load of gobbledegook - but if you follow the link I provided they are set out in the document at the bottom of page three. For minimums they are pretty generous really.

They go as far as to define different sizes for open plan arrangements vs. separate kitchen / living etc..


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> The minimum individual room sizes didn't cut and paste properly into my post -just looked like a load of gobbledegook - but if you follow the link I provided they are set out in the document at the bottom of page three. For minimums they are pretty generous really.


 
I'm not sure if you're aware of how crap my maths is.  What's 12m squared in feet?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

d'jANGO said:


> ddraig didn't ask me any questions??
> 
> But if you mean BG, perhaps that's another reason why a face-to-face meet would be useful?


 
I asked him a simple question about whether he had only just found out about Southwyck House proposals or whether he knew about them from the article in London Loves Business from 2 months ago


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I'm not sure if you're aware of how crap my maths is. What's 12m squared in feet?


Firstly you need to know that 12m squared is not the same as 12m2 (12 square meters)! 12m squared is 12m x 12m = 144 square meters. Clear as mud, I know.

1sqm = 1mx1m = about 10.8 sqft


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 10, 2012)

OpalFruit said:


> WHY are Lambeth proposing the demolition of SH?


 
Presumably because there are lots of poor people living there getting in the way of all the nice rich people from the Home Counties.

Or, perhaps, because they can't afford to maintain SH so they would rather knock it down and rebuild less new flats with lucrative contracts for luxury flats and so-called affordable flats and ground floor level shops and all the wonderful things that a council needs to do when poor people insist obn living in their borough and costing money.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> Firstly you need to know that 12m squared is not the same as 12m2 (12 square meters)! 12m squared is 12m x 12m = 144 square meters. Clear as mud, I know.
> 
> 1sqm = 1mx1m = about 10.8 sqft


 
I knew that 

aargh, you've confused me!  If the room was perfectly square, what would the measuresments be - IN FEET from one wall to the other?!


----------



## stethoscope (May 10, 2012)

nipsla said:


> Or why not just answer them here?


 
Quite, or as per my other post above, use the website better so its provides plenty of content, answers concerns, provides a decent feedback mechanism (i.e. forum).

As I say, I'm not a Brixton resident, and have only just read both this and now the other thread. I have no individual stakeholding or grievances, but even this afternoon I come away with less than a positive impression towards this stuff. Just posts 25 to 27 were enough to get me riled - they read like PR. And setting up/offering out individual meetings with people who might have concerns? Doesn't sound too practical and actually that isn't ness. transparent, so instead why not just clearly and concisely state what the positions are here, or much better IMO provide links to pages on the Brixton Green site which then does (for everyone's benefit, not just urban).


----------



## d'jANGO (May 10, 2012)

nipsla said:


> Or why not just answer them here?


Absolutely. But that doesn't seem to be working does it? 

My point is that it seems crazy to keep saying "You've never asked to meet with residents", when there are half-a-dozen offers to meet with residents in this thread alone.  To claim that BG is being evasive, while refusing to communicate by any other means than a chat forum?  (Presumably there are residents of SH who barely even know this website exists, let along regularly contribute to it?).  If you want answers, then maybe it would be easier to get them when the person you're asking them of is in the same room as you- same goes for involving SH residents?


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I knew that
> 
> aargh, you've confused me! If the room was perfectly square, what would the measuresments be - IN FEET from one wall to the other?!


About 11'5" ish


----------



## Griffter (May 10, 2012)

..


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> About 11'5" ish


 
Much smaller than rooms in some old council flats then (although I forget whether that measurement was for a bedroom or a living room)


----------



## Crispy (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I knew that
> 
> aargh, you've confused me! If the room was perfectly square, what would the measuresments be - IN FEET from one wall to the other?!


 
a 12m² room would be 4x3m which is 13 x 10ft (more or less)

My three bed ex-council house is 85m² and the new minimum requirement is 70m²

So, not up to the old council standards, but still much better than some more recent new builds.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

Griffter said:


> if you've got nothing to say, then it's best to say nothing. If it's nothing to do with you then let these other grown ups voice their opinions rather than suggesting nice ways of resolving things


 
I don't think that's entirely fair


----------



## Griffter (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I don't think that's entirely fair


 Really sorry - was quoting completely the wrong person, sorry Steph - taken it down straight away


----------



## stethoscope (May 10, 2012)

No worries, I was a bit  more than anything!


----------



## kalibuzz (May 10, 2012)

Crispy said:


> Agreed, those are pretty good. Big enough for separate kitchen and living room.
> EDIT:
> 
> 
> ...


 
 You call a  10.50 sqm double bedroom comfortable? add a wardrobe to a double bed and you won't fit in anymore. It's actually too small to be called a double, therefore the single would be much smaller then what you say. Bathroom also, fit in toilet, bath and sink, no space for anything else. Kitchen? If you plan to cook AND eat in it, you won't fit in all the necessary furniture unless you touch them passing through.
there is hardly anything left for storage, and since these flats don't have cellars or attics, forget about bikes (for 3 people) , children? forget it won't even fit a buggy in.
I know I am exaggerating but it is small, hardly 'very comfortable', but hey, maybe I'm spoiled in my massive council flat  (which I thought was small. ) Kids will have no room to play or grow, happy days


----------



## Crispy (May 10, 2012)

Assumed built-in storage for those bedrooms. Also, I totally rushed my estimates a bit 


The actual standards document has 12m² as a minimum for a double room


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Much smaller than rooms in some old council flats then (although I forget whether that measurement was for a bedroom or a living room)


And much bigger than in some old council/HA flats.

They're absolute minimum standards Minnie. They apply equally to all housing, public or private.


----------



## Crispy (May 10, 2012)

Crispy said:


> a 12m² room would be 4x3m which is 13 x 10ft (more or less)
> 
> My three bed ex-council house is 85m² and the new minimum requirement is 70m²
> 
> So, not up to the old council standards, but still much better than some more recent new builds.


 
And thinking about it, I've been in similar council houses of similar vintage to mine that are about 70m²

I stand by my opinion, these minimum standards are pretty good.


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

kalibuzz said:


> You call a 10.50 sqm double bedroom comfortable? add a wardrobe to a double bed and you won't fit in anymore. It's actually too small to be called a double, therefore the single would be much smaller then what you say. Bathroom also, fit in toilet, bath and sink, no space for anything else. Kitchen? If you plan to cook AND eat in it, you won't fit in all the necessary furniture unless you touch them passing through.
> there is hardly anything left for storage, and since these flats don't have cellars or attics, forget about bikes (for 3 people) , children? forget it won't even fit a buggy in.
> I know I am exaggerating but it is small, hardly 'very comfortable', but hey, maybe I'm spoiled in my massive council flat  (which I thought was small. ) Kids will have no room to play or grow, happy days


 
Min for the main bedroom is 12sqm. If it is well designed it need not not be cramped and pokey at all - particularly if you build the wardrobes in. All new developments need to provide dedicated bike storage and waste storage.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

Crispy said:


> a 12m² room would be 4x3m which is 13 x 10ft (more or less)
> 
> My three bed ex-council house is 85m² and the new minimum requirement is 70m²
> 
> So, not up to the old council standards, but still much better than some more recent new builds.


 
Oh, that's much better than mine!  I think my living room is 8-9ft at its narrowest


----------



## lang rabbie (May 10, 2012)

So did no-one who posts here get to BrixtonGreen's event at the Dexter playground almost a year ago to ask them face to face.  
[BTW  Although I was out of town, I also think they showed their faces at last weekend's Brixton Windmill fair]


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

Griffter said:


> Really sorry - was quoting completely the wrong person, sorry Steph - taken it down straight away


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> And much bigger than in some old council/HA flats.
> 
> They're absolute minimum standards Minnie. They apply equally to all housing, public or private.


 
Good to see that they're improving, but don't we still have the smallest properties in Europe?


----------



## OpalFruit (May 10, 2012)

lang rabbie said:


> So did no-one who posts here get to BrixtonGreen's event at the Dexter playground almost a year ago to ask them face to face.
> [BTW Although I was out of town, I also think they showed their faces at last weekend's Brixton Windmill fair]


 
Yes, I went to to that (but mostly spoke to the virtual farm people) , and have seen them in the arcades. And at various Brixton Town Centre forums, when Phillippe from the restaurant was the main contact, and was working with the market traders to try and get an anearobic composter (?) for the market waste. I don't think the Somerleyton Proposal was current then, though. Brad, is Phillippe still involved?


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

lang rabbie said:


> So did no-one who posts here get to BrixtonGreen's event at the Dexter playground almost a year ago to ask them face to face.
> [BTW Although I was out of town, I also think they showed their faces at last weekend's Brixton Windmill fair]


Why was the Winmill Fair hijacked by Lambeth Recycling and called the lambeth recycling fair? I saw/heard  the procession gong up the hill, googled it and that name totally put me off!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

> *Philippe Castaing*: Philippe is a local resident and active member of the local community. He is a graduate of the School for Social Entrepreneurs, London Leader for Sustainable Development, served on Lambeth First local strategic partnership board and was the co-founder and founding Chair of Brixton Green. He is the owner of Opus Café on Acre Lane and Brixton’s first Michelin award winning restaurant Upstairs.


 
from their website

*http://www.brixtongreen.org/who/*


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

I had no idea Upstairs had won a Michelin award. Is that the same as a star?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> I had no idea Upstairs had won a Michelin award. Is that the same as a star?


 
No idea.  Can't afford to eat in such places


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

Apparently it has a Bib Gourmand.


> Since 1955, the guide has also highlighted restaurants offering "good food at moderate prices", a feature now called "Bib Gourmand". They must offer menu items priced below a maximum determined by local economic standards. Bib (Bibendum) is the company's nickname for the Michelin Man, its corporate logo for over a century.


 
But I digress.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> Apparently it has a Bib Gourmand.
> 
> 
> But I digress.


 
Ah well, as long as it has a Bib Gourmand 

According to Time Out, average cost for a two-course meal is £26


----------



## Winot (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> I had no idea Upstairs had won a Michelin award. Is that the same as a star?


 
They got a Bib Gourmand, which is the level below 1*.
Much deserved too.


----------



## Rushy (May 10, 2012)

Winot said:


> They got a Bib Gourmand, which is the level below 1*.
> Much deserved too.


Haven't been for a while but agree.
My old Mum is visiting from Oz next month so guess I will shortly be reacquainted with the place.


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Ah well, as long as it has a Bib Gourmand
> 
> According to Time Out, average cost for a two-course meal is £26



But then there is the wine Minnie!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

shakespearegirl said:


> But then there is the wine Minnie!


 


No lager?


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 10, 2012)

You can have lager


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

shakespearegirl said:


> You can have lager


 
I won't be able to afford the lager after spending £26


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

steph said:


> I mean, srsly, what the fuck is this supposed to mean?


 
They're attempting to imply that those who wish to see Brixton stay Brixton are trendy nu-Brixton types. The inference their readership are supposed to draw is that locals/indigenes would luuurve for this piece of social engineering bullshit to go ahead.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

Ms T said:


> "Most people view Brixton as finishing at the bridge of the junction of Railton Rd [parallel to Somerleyton Road] where the riots were."
> 
> What does that mean? Because if they mean at the railway bridge, that isn't even Railton Rd, it's Atlantic Rd. And there's no way Abbeville Road is in Brixton.


 
Abbeville Rd has been Clapham for the nigh on 50 years I've lived in south-west London. It doesn't suddenly become Brixton because some tit in a trance says so.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> These are the people who believe in the fictional 'Somerleyton Triangle.'


 
"Somerleyton triangle, it makes people disappear, Somerleyton triangle don't go too near.."
If only the gentrifying twats wouldn't "go too near".


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> The Brixton Green proposal is just for Somerleyton Road. Please see the link below:
> http://www.brixtongreen.org/
> 
> Over 850 Brixton people are now shareholders in Brixton Green. It is an inclusive, democratic registered mutual society. Anyone over 16 who lives or works in Brixton can become a shareholder.


 
Brad, your spelling is good, but your grasp of the meaning of words isn't. You're neither "democratic" or "inclusive" if you're exclusionary, and to be a shareholder one has to "live or work in Brixton". Drop the buzzwords and just go with "it's a registered mutual society", then you won't have the other tens of thousands of Brixton residents who don't "do" buzzwords laughing at you.



> I am happy to meet anyone who has concerns about the proposal or has misunderstood what Brixton Green is.


 
It's so much easier to neutralise opposition on a face-to-face basis, isn't it?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

brad said:


> I look forward to meeting your association. I would also like to meet you sooner to see if there's a way Urban75 could become the main mechanism for positive debate of the proposal online.
> 
> Regarding Southwyck House: People sign up to be shareholders of Brixton Green because they support the idea that Brixton people should be at the forefront of the redevelopment of Somerleyton Road. We have not asked our shareholders what their views are on Southwyck House and therefore as an organisation we cannot have a view on it.


 
Sophistry.
Of course your Board of Trustees can have a view or views on Southwyck House's future, you're merely not free to express those views as being the views of Brixton Green as an entity.  Anyone with an ounce of knowledge of organisational dynamics also knows that when a Board of Trustees (or directors etc) have their own views, it's usual for those views to colour those of the membership "below" them. This is a basic tenet of the use of social capital.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Abbeville Rd has been Clapham for the nigh on 50 years I've lived in south-west London. It doesn't suddenly become Brixton because some tit in a trance says so.


 
It became Abbeyville Village after I left in 1985. Standards obviously went up with my departure 

but it was always Clapham.  No way is it Brixton


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

gabi said:


> just skimmed this - brad, are you proposing that the barrier block gets demolished?  i love that building!
> 
> nice username btw.


 
I keep feeling the temptation to answer all his posts with lines from the RHPS.


----------



## d'jANGO (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's so much easier to neutralise opposition on a face-to-face basis, isn't it?


See, I'd have gone with the opposite- harder to ignore people when they're stood in front of you- but perhaps I'm in the minority.

As for the 'democratic / inclusive' thing- are you suggesting anyone should be able to have shares / voting powers in BG? If you don't live or work in Brixton, how can you be considered a 'resident'? It seems strange that people who only visit Brixton for the occasional weekend gig should be able to have a say over something that's basically not going to affect them in any way? I don't think that makes BG 'exclusive' or undemocratic though?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 10, 2012)

My feelings about BG aren't something that just fell upon me one morning, unbidden. One of the things that has got my back up is a lot ofwhat Brixton Green has said is so just ain't so.  For instance, that the light industrial units are unused. That's just not true, as anyone who lives in the area, or waits for the P5 on Somerleyton Road can attest to. In fact there seems to be a fair amount of activity even in the buildings which don't look bustling between the cold storage unit used by the market and some of the council facilities. That tells me they don't know the area, despite saying they do.

I believe it's just the temporary school building that isn't being used (although it's legally occupied by live-in 'caretaker/tenants') although I understand it's going to be used for another educational facility. What I do know is that no-one from BG has knocked on doors on the estate, (evidence for this is no-one has knocked on mine, nor my neighbours doors). They did leaflet the estate, co-incidentally or not, just after I moaned there'd been no leafletting or info given to Moorlands residents despite Brad giving the impression of widespread local consultation.

I know lots of people on the estate and they talk to me and I talk to them. I haven't heard a single positive comment about BG so far. That tells me something. 

Also, I can't trust someone who posts emails on a public board without permission, and then when they are deleted by a moderator posts them back up again. Call me old fashioned, but that's a breach of trust the first time and breathtaking arrogance the second.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

editor said:


> For the record, I have never received a leaflet from Brixton Green. All I've ever seen in five years is the one small poster that appeared in the vestibule area last year.


 We, up here in Tulse Hill, have had a leaflet from them.
Maybe they too don't believe that SW9 is "real Brixtonz"?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

d'jANGO said:


> See, I'd have gone with the opposite- harder to ignore people when they're stood in front of you- but perhaps I'm in the minority.


 
Depends on the personalities of the people meeting.

From what I've heard of brad, he's a _schmoozer_. As my late nan used to say, "always check your fillings after talking to someone like that, _bubeleh_. They can charm the gold from your teeth!" 



> As for the 'democratic / inclusive' thing- are you suggesting anyone should be able to have shares / voting powers in BG? If you don't live or work in Brixton, how can you be considered a 'resident'? It seems strange that people who only visit Brixton for the occasional weekend gig should be able to have a say over something that's basically not going to affect them in any way? I don't think that makes BG 'exclusive' or undemocratic though?


 
Interesting to see that your reading ability is on par with brad's understanding of the English language. It's quite simple. What I'm stating is that if you're exclusionary, you're not democratic or inclusive.  Nothing to do with your flight of fancy about me suggesting allowing non-Brixtonians a say. Think of it as a breach of the Trades Descriptions Act.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> We, up here in Tulse Hill, have had a leaflet from them.
> Maybe they too don't believe that SW9 is "real Brixtonz"?


of course it isn't


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> FFS Urbans. The effort required to deal with the unrelenting and often personal negativity on here really can only be worth it to Brad if he genuinely wants to include you and interact with you. I really don't see why he is bothering to persevere with trying to break down this U75 brick wall which you are building.


 
Because he's got something to sell, perhaps? Besides, what you're terming "negativity" seems to mostly be Brixtonites and others expressing worries that some Brixtonites might be sold down the river. That, to me, has no negativity about it, and if Brad, as someone who is part of an organisation that purports to, and desires to, represent Brixton and its' people, is thin-skinned enough that the rough and tumble of interaction comes across as negativity, then he's in the wrong job!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> From what I've heard of brad, he's a _schmoozer_. As my late nan used to say, "always check your fillings after talking to someone like that, _bubeleh_. They can charm the gold from your teeth!"


Someone I know (Irish) who has been schmoozed by Brad  said to me 
"Brad  He can talk that man, oh he can, so."

So, oy vey Maria!


----------



## d'jANGO (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Interesting to see that your reading ability is on par with brad's understanding of the English language. It's quite simple. What I'm stating is that if you're exclusionary, you're not democratic or inclusive.


I don't get it, sorry.

Why is BG exclusionary / undemocratic?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

kalibuzz said:


> and what exactly qualifies you to decide that? This is a forum for people to give their opinions, if you disagree make your point, don't just judge the post. Most redevelopments are non-council, and therefore the easiest way of economically evicting residents - in the long run. How many homes in Brixton have been built by the council lately, do you know?


 
Very few (by any council), given the legally-imposed 3-decade hiatus.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Someone I know (Irish) who has been schmoozed by Brad said to me
> "Brad  He can talk that man, oh he can, so."
> 
> So, oy vey Maria!


 
Ah, starts to make sense, the desire for a cosy téte a téte!


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

d'jANGO said:


> I don't get it, sorry.
> 
> Why is BG exclusionary / undemocratic?


 
Brad has attempted to sell it as democratic. Democracy implies (at least for the last 80 years or so in the UK) a universal franchise, yet all Brixtonians *don't* get a say. They have to fork over their quid and become a member of Brixton Green to do so. So, not "democratic".
Brad is attempting to sell Brixton Green as "inclusive". That may well be an aim that BG wishes to represent itself as being _pro_ (and who wouldn't, inclusiveness is an admirable aim!), but as a membership organisation it is, by it's status as that, an exclusionary organisation.

My point has been that while these words look good on a press release, represent the image ofthat the organisation wishes to promulgate and roll off the tongue smoothly at meetings with other like-minded fellows (and they're usually fellows), their value in terms of actually *meaning* anything is low. The meaningful words in Brad's _schtick_, as I said, were "registered mutual organisation".


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I'm not sure if you're aware of how crap my maths is. What's 12m squared in feet?


 
A room 9 feet 9 inches by 13 feet or 3 feet 3 inches by 39 feet 4 inches or 6 feet 6 inches by 19 feet 8 inches etc if I've done my maths properly.


----------



## d'jANGO (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Democracy implies (at least for the last 80 years or so in the UK) a universal franchise, yet all Brixtonians *don't* get a say. They have to fork over their quid and become a member of Brixton Green to do so. So, not "democratic".


So it excludes people who don't want to pay a quid.

It's not exactly the Poll Tax, is it?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> A room 9 feet 9 inches by 13 feet or 3 feet 3 inches by 39 feet 4 inches or 6 feet 6 inches by 19 feet 8 inches etc if I've done my maths properly.


 
stop confusing me with lots of numbers and measurements


----------



## bluestreak (May 10, 2012)

lang rabbie said:


> So did no-one who posts here get to BrixtonGreen's event at the Dexter playground almost a year ago to ask them face to face.
> [BTW Although I was out of town, I also think they showed their faces at last weekend's Brixton Windmill fair]


 
They did, but I thought they were to do with the Green Fair and ignored them.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

d'jANGO said:


> So it excludes people who don't want to pay a quid.
> 
> It's not exactly the Poll Tax, is it?


 
The cost isn't the issue, the membership is.


----------



## bluestreak (May 10, 2012)

Rushy said:


> I had no idea Upstairs had won a Michelin award. Is that the same as a star?


 
Only in the same way a McDonalds is like a dinner.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> stop confusing me with lots of numbers and measurements


 
In terms of an average room, then, 9ft 9in x 13ft. Not tiny, but not roomy either.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

bluestreak said:


> Only in the same way a McDonalds is like a dinner.


 
So it's about eating dung, then?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> In terms of an average room, then, 9ft 9in x 13ft. Not tiny, but not roomy either.


 
No, not once you've got furniture in


----------



## bluestreak (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Brad has attempted to sell it as democratic. Democracy implies (at least for the last 80 years or so in the UK) a universal franchise, yet all Brixtonians *don't* get a say. They have to fork over their quid and become a member of Brixton Green to do so. So, not "democratic".
> Brad is attempting to sell Brixton Green as "inclusive". That may well be an aim that BG wishes to represent itself as being _pro_ (and who wouldn't, inclusiveness is an admirable aim!), but as a membership organisation it is, by it's status as that, an exclusionary organisation.
> 
> My point has been that while these words look good on a press release, represent the image ofthat the organisation wishes to promulgate and roll off the tongue smoothly at meetings with other like-minded fellows (and they're usually fellows), their value in terms of actually *meaning* anything is low. The meaningful words in Brad's _schtick_, as I said, were "registered mutual organisation".


 

acually i don't have a problem with that in theory.  a quid isn't much to ask and encourages people to feel part of something - a member with a voice.


----------



## bluestreak (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> So it's about eating dung, then?


 
heh, no more like _it is, but then again it really isn't_


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 10, 2012)

bluestreak said:


> acually i don't have a problem with that in theory. a quid isn't much to ask and encourages people to feel part of something - a member with a voice.


 
All very well, but where do all these members get to discuss proposals when there's no forum on the Brixton Green website


----------



## bluestreak (May 10, 2012)

well, exactly.  i think that the proposal to host their forum here is a very good idea.  then we'll get to see how people really feel and how inclusive the whole thing is.


----------



## d'jANGO (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> The cost isn't the issue, the membership is.


Why?

You can't vote in Council elections without putting your name on the electoral register. I'm not sure that makes the process undemocratic though.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 10, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> and the fact that Brixton Green doesn't even have a forum doesn't give people much say (or not one that can easily be viewed publicly)


Well the last time Brad was here (last year iirc) he told us to get involved in discussion via his website, except it wasn't set up to make that possible. Well maybe it was but if so the means to do so were so opaque I couldn't fathom how. I wouldn't send him an email because he might publish it somewhere without my permission.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

bluestreak said:


> acually i don't have a problem with that in theory. a quid isn't much to ask and encourages people to feel part of something - a member with a voice.


 
The problem being, membership of a "registered mutual society" has it's rules and regulations, and I doubt most of the members have waded through the 27-page pdf setting out the society's rules under the relevant legal act. For example, their voice may not feel as meaningful if, for example, they know that:
14    Will members get a windfall if the society converts?

14.1 The society may convert itself into a company, amalgamate with another society or company, or transfer its business to another   society or company. The society or company (into which the society converts, or with which it amalgamates, or to which it transfers its business) must have objects similar to those of the society. The procedures and conditions for that are in ss50-52 and s54 of the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1965.

14.2 Members are not to benefit financially if the society converts, or transfers its business or is wound up (see rule 32.5)."

In fact, they could even feel slightly used if that came about.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

bluestreak said:


> heh, no more like _it is, but then again it really isn't_


 
Ah, more like eating Chop Suey, then!


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

bluestreak said:


> well, exactly. i think that the proposal to host their forum here is a very good idea. then we'll get to see how people really feel and how inclusive the whole thing is.


 
Conversely, if things go agin' them, they can just write that off as Urbanz "negativity" (thanks for that, Rushy  ).


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

d'jANGO said:


> Why?


 
Membership has rules and responsibilities, D'jANGO.



> You can't vote in Council elections without putting your name on the electoral register. I'm not sure that makes the process undemocratic though.


 
Do I have to pay a membership fee and accept the membership articles of an organisation in order to put my name on the electoral register?
That's right, I don't, do I? The two aren't really analogous.


----------



## d'jANGO (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Membership has rules and responsibilities, D'jANGO.  Do I have to pay a membership fee and accept the membership articles of an organisation in order to put my name on the electoral register?
> That's right, I don't, do I. The two aren't really analogous.


Well, you have to pay your taxes and abide by the law of the land, but however you see it I guess...

It's clearer having read your response to bluestreak, but the only negative there appears to be "shareholders aren't allowed to make any money if the mutual converts / winds up it's business"?  Doesn't seem like a huge price to pay to have an actual vote over development plans to me.  It's certainly more than you get with the Council most of the time.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

d'jANGO said:


> Well, you have to pay your taxes and abide by the law of the land, but however you see it I guess...


 
You have to pay your taxes and abide by the law of the land to be on the electoral register? First I've heard of it. In fact the only time your voting franchise is removed is if you receive a custodial sentence. No provision about being law-abiding and tax-paying whatsoever.



> It's clearer having read your response to bluestreak, but the only negative there appears to be "shareholders aren't allowed to make any money if the mutual converts / winds up it's business"? Doesn't seem like a huge price to pay to have an actual vote over development plans to me. It's certainly more than you get with the Council most of the time.


 
You're making assumptions. That's not a negative *for me*, it's just an example, picked at random, from the 27 pages of rules that most of the "more than 800 members" of Brixton Green may not have read, and may not realise they're bound by. Oh, and by the way, that vote on development plans? It's not binding. Not on the board of Brixton Green, and certainly not on the council.


----------



## newbie (May 10, 2012)

bluestreak said:


> well, exactly. i think that the proposal to host their forum here is a very good idea. then we'll get to see how people really feel and how inclusive the whole thing is.


I don't.  Urban75 has an ecology all of its own, one which it would be hard to pretend was either welcoming or inclusive for the vast majority of people, whether or not they're local.  Personally I like that and don't want it to change. 

If BG really want to involve 'the community' they need their own forum (facebook, twitter...) to complement their real life campaigning. They'll just have to put up with scrutiny on Urban75.


----------



## Winot (May 10, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Oh, and by the way, that vote on development plans? It's not binding. Not on the board of Brixton Green, and certainly not on the council.



And this is the point, isn't it. If someone wanted to set up a jargon-wrapped pseudo-democratic "localised" organisation to act as a figleaf for property development, it might look a lot like Brixton Green.

That may not be the case here, but there is some convincing to be done.


----------



## Crispy (May 10, 2012)

newbie said:


> I don't. Urban75 has an ecology all of its own, one which it would be hard to pretend was either welcoming or inclusive for the vast majority of people, whether or not they're local. Personally I like that and don't want it to change.
> 
> If BG really want to involve 'the community' they need their own forum (facebook, twitter...) to complement their real life campaigning. They'll just have to put up with scrutiny on Urban75.


Fully agree. Hosting their public feedback here would be suicide.


----------



## bluestreak (May 10, 2012)

for us or them?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 10, 2012)

Winot said:


> And this is the point, isn't it. If someone wanted to set up a jargon-wrapped pseudo-democratic "localised" organisation to act as a figleaf for property development, it might look a lot like Brixton Green.
> 
> That may not be the case here, but there is some convincing to be done.


 
Indeed there is.


----------



## gabi (May 10, 2012)

newbie said:


> I don't. Urban75 has an ecology all of its own, one which it would be hard to pretend was either welcoming or inclusive for the vast majority of people, whether or not they're local. Personally I like that and don't want it to change.
> 
> If BG really want to involve 'the community' they need their own forum (facebook, twitter...) to complement their real life campaigning. They'll just have to put up with scrutiny on Urban75.


 
I agree with this. Urban's a useful local resource but is very hostile to new posters. sometimes to its detriment..  personally i dont think this guy has come across *that* badly. Seems to have his head screwed on, unlike the chakra guy who was run off the boards a coupla years ago...


----------



## leanderman (May 11, 2012)

editor said:


> They are a 'not for profit property development company'.
> 
> I think Brad is a property developer too.



This is true. But, otherwise, a good guy.


----------



## lighterthief (May 11, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> You're making assumptions. That's not a negative *for me*, it's just an example, picked at random, from the 27 pages of rules that most of the "more than 800 members" of Brixton Green may not have read, and may not realise they're bound by.


You're nitpicking.  Better to have publicised governance, lengthy though it may be, than not.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 11, 2012)

lighterthief said:


> You're nitpicking. Better to have publicised governance, lengthy though it may be, than not.


 
Yes, it is. However, they couldn't *be* a registered mutual society without those rules, so "better to have than not" doesn't enter into the equation. Supposed nitpicking about whether the membership is cognisant of said rules, on the other hand...well, I'm sure that you take my point, but I'd be happy to elucidate if you're feeling a bit hard-of-thinking this morning.


----------



## soupdragon (May 11, 2012)

I would be more up for joining BG if they weren't dead set on Sommerleyton Road and were prepared to work out the location of a Community Land Trust as part of overall masterplan in consultation with council and whole community.
BG seem to have assumed that their idea is best, and are then just campaigning for it.
Having a CLT might be great, but it needs to be worked out from the point of view of the overall masterplan first, and with input of people who aren't members of BG.


----------



## OpalFruit (May 11, 2012)

I agree with SoupDragon's point - and assume that Lambeth will need to consider that when looking at the fortcoming consultation, anyway.

I would be happier with a group such as BG making proposals than land being sold off to developers - like the land on the other side of Coldharbour Lane, with the aforementioned empty units and the 'luxury' flats. It may well be that if the community don't support some viable community-orientated proposal Lambeth will simply flog off the land to a commercial developer.

There are three routes in to 'have a say' about this - one by taking part in dialogue with BG, as a member or even as a non-member maybe, as presumably BG's proposals have been formulated in conversation with non-members and then members have signed up to it? Two, by contributing to the Lambeth consultation on the Brixton SPD, however that happens in June and July, and Three by talking directly to ward councillors and other relevant council members.

As far as I can see BG are making a proposal which they believe will add to the provision of new social housing and to the improvement of the environment along Somerleyton Rd. Any other group is also entitled to make proposals. Or not, if they are happy with Somerleyton Rd as it is.

To succeed with their vision BG will need all the change of use and building development to be agreed by the council - all of which can be challenged if local residents are not happy.


----------



## editor (May 11, 2012)

OpalFruit said:


> As far as I can see BG are making a proposal which they believe will add to the provision of new social housing and to the improvement of the environment along Somerleyton Rd.


Any idea how much social housing, exactly? And what percentage of the new build will be private flats for the well heeled? Any idea?

Their website is, as ever, gloriously vague and unhelpful.


----------



## Kanda (May 11, 2012)

Dont you have to include a certain percentage of social housing in any new build over 7 flats in size??


----------



## quimcunx (May 11, 2012)

I'd prefer some genuinely social housing.  Council houses.  For rent.  To residents.


----------



## Kanda (May 11, 2012)

quimcunx said:


> I'd prefer some genuinely social housing. Council houses. For rent. To residents.


 
Built by Councils?  Big ask...


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 11, 2012)

Kanda said:


> Dont you have to include a certain percentage of social housing in any new build over 7 flats in size??


Over 14 iirc


----------



## quimcunx (May 11, 2012)

Kanda said:


> Built by Councils? Big ask...


 
They used to do it.  It's only politics that gets in the way of it happening again.


----------



## editor (May 11, 2012)

quimcunx said:


> I'd prefer some genuinely social housing. Council houses. For rent. To residents.


Damn straight.


----------



## OpalFruit (May 11, 2012)

editor said:


> Any idea how much social housing, exactly? And what percentage of the new build will be private flats for the well heeled? Any idea?
> .


 
That is a crucial question. Naively I assumed the whole point was to create housing association or co-op type housing. Though all the big housing associations now fund the build of social housing with a contribution from the profit on private. But is the alternative that Lambeth flog the lot off to a private developer once the temporary school has finished being a temporary school again? If BG development funds training organisations for young people, a nursery and an improvement of the alleyway (a big point they are always in the press for) , then that seems better to me than it going to a commercial developer with some crappy Section 106 agreement, refurbishng the lamp posts, or some other thing the council should be doing anyway. 

How much social housing, Brad? How much private? And how would the housing be funded?
Brad, I see you have done a couple of events at Hillmead, with kids and parents - could you have another more open event? Before we contribute to the Brixton consultation?
And
What did the Hillmead parents say? Is it possible to make the results of your consultations so far public?


----------



## editor (May 11, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Over 14 iirc


Does the new Barretts new build on Coldharbour Lane (opposite Somerleyton Road) have any social housing provision?


----------



## TitanSound (May 11, 2012)

quimcunx said:


> They used to do it. It's only politics that gets in the way of it happening again.


 
Islington have built a few new build schemes recently. They're also de-converting a good few houses from shitty little flats back into proper family homes.

PDF link regarding the new build:

http://www.homesforislington.org.uk/New Build And Regeneration/IslingtonNewBuildQAFeb10.pdf


----------



## editor (May 11, 2012)

OpalFruit said:


> How much social housing, Brad? How much private? And how would the housing be funded?


Those are the big questions that need to be answered, and sadly their website is not forthcoming on such vital issues.

The more cynical might suggest that they will be able to fulfil their social provision obligations in the form of a cosy partnership deal with the council to rehouse displaced residents of Southwcyk House in their Somerleyton Road development.

Sadly, it's been VERY hard to get any kind of straight answer on this, but brad does seem to have inferred that BG has never had any discussions at all  with the council about providing rehoused residents. Have I got that right, brad?


----------



## editor (May 11, 2012)

Of course the most insane part of all this is that the Barrier Block is not some falling-apart 60s council slum: it's relatively new, well designed, well built, in generally excellent condition with low crime and anti social behaviour and is generally liked by its residents, despite the disgraceful lack of promised maintenance.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 11, 2012)

There is no practical reason why councils could not do what they used to do, which is to borrow money to build social housing, then pay the money back over 20 or 30 years using the rents paid by tenants. There is finance out there willing to do this. There are most certainly the un- or under-employed builders/architects out there to carry out the work. There is an enormous need, in Brixton and everywhere else in London tbh. All that is needed is a government commitment to underwrite the loans. All that's needed is a political say-so. It is nothing short of criminal that it is not done.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 11, 2012)

editor said:


> Does the new Barretts new build on Coldharbour Lane (opposite Somerleyton Road) have any social housing provision?


What, ones that are going up or the ones gone up? Anyway, I don't know but it's something Ken brought in so I suppose it's still going as I haven't heard that's it's been repealed. What I do know the 'affordable' bit isn't particularly affordable. The only person I know who got one of the 'affordable' flats in a new build was head of dept in a secondary school so we aren't talking low-waged, and when she got another job up North she could only sell her place to another keyworker. This was several years ago and I believe she's still stuck with an unsold flat.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 11, 2012)

editor said:


> Does the new Barretts new build on Coldharbour Lane (opposite Somerleyton Road) have any social housing provision?


Except I'm not sure that it's social housing exactly. This is the sort of thing Marty21 will know about.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 11, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Except I'm not sure that it's social housing exactly. This is the sort of thing Marty21 will know about.


'affordable' can mean part-rent-part-buy. That's social-ish housing, imo. Social housing-lite.

It actually makes everything worse, really, by propping up house prices in the private sector. And I have to say that I find this concept of 'keyworker' rather insulting.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 11, 2012)

Kanda said:


> Dont you have to include a certain percentage of social housing in any new build over 7 flats in size??


 
14, and it's "affordable" rather than social. Plus, of course, the fact that developers are allowed to circumvent the "planning gain supplement" (i.e. providing that "affordable" housing) by buying their way out. Now, of course, the planning gain supplement no longer exists as such, and has been subsumed by provisions in the Localism bill.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 11, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There is no practical reason why councils could not do what they used to do, which is to borrow money to build social housing, then pay the money back over 20 or 30 years using the rents paid by tenants. There is finance out there willing to do this. There are most certainly the un- or under-employed builders/architects out there to carry out the work. There is an enormous need, in Brixton and everywhere else in London tbh. All that is needed is a government commitment to underwrite the loans. All that's needed is a political say-so. It is nothing short of criminal that it is not done.


 
Of course it's morally-repulsive, but to the thinking of our politicians (of whatever parliamentary party), lack of social housing is a social good in that the lack inflates the private sector housing economy, and the resultant property bubble caused in some areas buoys the economy as a whole. 20 years ago it was "unemployment is a price worth paying", now it's "poor housing conditions are a price worth paying". Who gets bitten both times? The least well-off, of course.


----------



## editor (May 12, 2012)

editor said:


> To be clear: are you saying that you've never discussed the possible demolition of Southwyck House with the council and if that did happen Brixton Green has never discussed any possible involvement whatsoever in rehousing displaced residents/services, even though Somerleyton Road is directly adjacent?


Brad: it would be really, really lovely to get a clear, unequivocal answer to this question seeing as so many people's homes are at stake here, and it involves the possible destruction of a real Brixton community with real Brixton people who definitely know more about 'what they want' for Brixton than any property developer or touchy-feely, self styled 'community-driven' redevelopment scheme.


----------



## quimcunx (May 14, 2012)

Does Brixton Green have any plans to build a school?  I've heard a rumour.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 15, 2012)

quimcunx said:


> Does Brixton Green have any plans to build a school? I've heard a rumour.


There is something about a school being built (don't know the details) on the bit of land BG want.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 15, 2012)

editor said:


> Brad: it would be really, really lovely to get a clear, unequivocal answer to this question


He doesn't do clear and unequivocal, he does slippy slidey waffle, or disappears completely.


----------



## editor (May 15, 2012)

quimcunx said:


> Does Brixton Green have any plans to build a school? I've heard a rumour.


Who knows?

I'm still none the wiser about even the fundamental elements of their proposals and it seems that the more I ask Brad to articulate exactly what it is Brixton Green is proposing, the more opaque his answers become.


----------



## snowy_again (May 15, 2012)

What school age? There's been an ongoing campaign for more primary places in the area for a while, because of the under capacity and staged entrance points at other local primaries. 

As for the Industrial & Provident model; that's still perplexing me. It's not democratic and open; it's got a closed membership and benefits are limited to members. That's why it's not 'charitable' in law, whilst some of the aims of BG may be charitable under the fourth 'other' head of charity. 

Brad's explained that the text on leaving the I&P is 'badly worded' but it's beyond that - it doesn't adhere to the I&P Act* re dissolution and/or leaving as a member; the waffle about it being 'expensive to process' is just that - waffle - many other I&Ps cope with it. Normally the strength of your governing documents will influence your ability and capability to deliver what you aim to achieve. If they can't get these little things right... 

* or whatever that Act is called, I've left that bit of my memory behind following a wedding in Bury.


----------



## quimcunx (May 15, 2012)

What sort of schools are getting funding to be built just now though?   Free schools?


----------



## Drew Peacock (May 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Brixton Green are not popular on my Estate (the one slap bang next to where BG are eyeing up their possibilities). One of the reasons (although there are several) is because Brad posted up the contents of an email on this very site. In fact I was told about that by a couple of residents who didn't know I have a U75 connection (_Don't ever email Brixton Green, they don't respect confidentiality!_). Big mistake on their part, that.


 Ahhhh man, all this talk of Brixton Green has wet my herbal appetite. Where are all those lovely loitering Acre Lane chaps when you need em?


----------



## snowy_again (May 15, 2012)

quimcunx said:


> What sort of schools are getting funding to be built just now though? Free schools?


 
There was a lot of lobbying of Lambeth for either land, or funding to build one. The people proposing it weren't the free school types.


----------



## editor (May 21, 2012)

The two threads on Brixton Green on urban75 have already attracted nearly 15,000 page views, gifting Brad and Brixton Green a wonderful opportunity to describe their plans to the Brixton community and clear up all those unanswered questions and nagging doubts.

Some of the questions are very important ones that may impact on hundreds of long term Brixton residents: for example, trying to get to the bottom of his vague replies about BG's possible involvement/collaboration with the council over rehousing displaced Southwyck House residents without them being consulted:


> To be clear: are you saying that you've never discussed the possible demolition of Southwyck House with the council and if that did happen Brixton Green has never discussed any possible involvement whatsoever in rehousing displaced residents/services, even though Somerleyton Road is directly adjacent?


There's also the question of their plans over the green space in front of the block. In the last thread, brad seemed to imply that they wanted to build on that land. Do you have any such plans or can you give me an unequivocal assurance that you have no plans whatsoever to build or alter that space?

Any chance of some direct answers to the _real_ community, Brad? Right here you're reaching more people than anywhere else.

Oh, and forgive me for being pushy, but these are people's _homes_ we're talking about.


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

*What is Brixton Green?*
From these threads there still appears to be some confusion what Brixton Green is.

Brixton Green is an umbrella organisation created to ensure that the Brixton community leads the redevelopment of Somerleyton Road and the community has ownership in the long-run. It is about approaching development differently.

It is:
*1) Democratic*
One member - one vote - £1 per share. Shares available to everyone over 16 years old who lives or works in Brixton (defined as the 5 Brixton wards).

Our first elected trustees joined our board in March this year. In 2013 our pathfinder board steps down to be replaced by a fully elected board.

It is a non-profit Community Benefit Society registered with the Financial Services Authority and Companies House.

*2) Inclusive*
Brixton Green is committed to being inclusive. It has, and continues to, actively engage all sections of the community and membership is open to everyone in Brixton.
If you are part of a group or organisation that we've not engaged yet then please contact us:
http://www.brixtongreen.org/contact/ and we will meet you in person as soon as possible to discuss the project and how you can shape it.

*3) Shaped by Brixton people*
Brixton Green has been created by and is being shaped by Brixton people. Anyone, whether a shareholder or not, can contribute ideas to the proposal for Somerleyton Road and suggest how the society can be improved. We are contactable all the time, hosting stalls at various Brixton events and planning more of our own. There will also be chances for more direct involvement with proposals as they take shape, and there are lots of opportunities to volunteer - www.brixtongreen.org/volunteer.

It is all about Brixton people working together so they can shape a key part of their town.


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

*Housing on Somerleyton Road*
Lambeth identified housing as one of the uses on Somerleyton Rd in the Future Brixton Masterplan (2009). We don't know any more detail about the housing mix they are looking for as the planning authority.

Our proposals are being developed by Brixton people feeding in their ideas. 
*Brixton people shaping what they want on the site!* ​​The community proposals so far include housing, alongside creative & community hubs, and employment and training opportunities. These are not fixed, but we have been testing out ideas with people who may want to work with us to make these a reality. 

Community homes proposal
Some of the ideas so far are for the homes to be sustainably built, family units on the ground floors, intermediate areas to make it easy for people to meet , the homes built in a way to bring activity to the street and a section of units that makes it easy for elderly people to look out for each other. 

If you have any suggestions regarding the housing or any other element, please let us know. http://www.brixtongreen.org/contact/


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

*Southwyck House*
Brixton Green is just about Somerleyton Road. Our proposal has always been just about Somerleyton Road. It has never included any other land, including the land in front of Southwyck House.
We have never given the impression that Brixton Green was about anything but community-led development of Somerleyton Road.


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

*The rumour that Somerleyton Road may be used for possible decanting from Southwyck House*
Lambeth has not discussed any of their options appraisals with us.  So we know as much as everyone else regarding Southwyck House or their plans for Somerleyton Road. 

I imagine Southwyck House will be discussed in the SPD consultations this summer. My personal feeling is that if it is demolished it could disperse communities , which would have a negative impact on the area. People and communities need their networks. In addition it is a well built building.


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

*Community engagement*
Editor, you have made a number of comments that we have not worked hard enough to engage the community.  As a board member of the Southwyck House Resident Association you must be aware of the challenges engaging a community. Many of the residents of Southwyck House don't know there is a resident association. Others who do know of it are not sure what it does.
I'm sure you make efforts to engage all the residents, but it is clearly a hard job even for a resident association trying to engage with just the residents of Southwyck House. We have members in Southwyck House - and would be happy to work with you, them and your neighbours on plans for Somerleyton Road.

Brixton Green is communicating a new concept to over 35,000 homes and businesses in the five wards of Brixton - we have held many events, attended many more, knocked on doors and sent leaflets out (some more are just being delivered across Brixton). I think we're doing a very good job so far and hopefully in the next couple of months we can get the message to even more Brixton people.

If anyone has suggestions on how we could do better, please let us know.


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

*Only debating online*
There's a few posts suggesting that online debate is the only 'open' debate. That is quite clearly not the case. There are many diverse communities in Brixton. Not all of them use the Internet. Not all of them know of Urban 75. Not all of them speak English as their preferred language.

To engage all the communities we need to use a lot of different ways of meeting and debating.

The strongest proposal we could bring forward would be one that has all the communities feeding into it. and that will include those who use online forums, as one of many forms of communication.

Discussing points face to face often means issues or solutions are raised that would not come up or be  harder to explain in enough detail online. 

We are aware of existing online debates, however, and it feeds into our knowledge of what different people know and think.


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

*Debating on Urban 75*
Some good points have been raised on this forum, however there has been quite a number of aggressive posts by a small number of people. The aggressive nature, and on occasions the deliberate misrepresenting of Brixton Green on these posts, discourages open and constructive debate.

Has anyone got any suggestions on how we could encourage a better online debate?


----------



## gabi (May 28, 2012)

brad said:


> Has anyone got any suggestions on how we could encourage a better online debate?


 
answering straight-forward questions straight-forwardly always helps


----------



## editor (May 28, 2012)

brad said:


> *Southwyck House*
> Brixton Green is just about Somerleyton Road. Our proposal has always been just about Somerleyton Road. It has never included any other land, including the land in front of Southwyck House.
> We have never given the impression that Brixton Green was about anything but community-led development of Somerleyton Road.


Thank you for finally giving a clear unequivocal answer about your designs (or lack of) on the land in front of Southwyck House. Your earlier comments did suggest that you had plans on some of the green space, hence the questions raised.

Could you now give me an equally unequivocal answer about whether Brixton Green has ever had any kind of discussions with the council regarding their possible involvement in rehousing displaced residents/services if Southwyck House was demolished?

The reason I ask is because Lambeth have suggested that residents might be rehoused on Somerleyton Road, and that's something that clearly would have an immense impact on your plans.


----------



## editor (May 28, 2012)

brad said:


> *Debating on Urban 75*
> Some good points have been raised on this forum, however there has been quite a number of aggressive posts by a small number of people. The aggressive nature, and on occasions the deliberate misrepresenting of Brixton Green on these posts, discourages open and constructive debate.
> 
> Has anyone got any suggestions on how we could encourage a better online debate?


Much of the 'aggression' appears to come from posters becoming frustrated at your reluctance to give straight answers to straight questions that are directly involved to your proposals.


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 28, 2012)

Stop talking like a salesman or politician and starting talking like a human being?


----------



## editor (May 28, 2012)

brad said:


> Community engagement
> Editor, you have made a number of comments that we have not worked hard enough to engage the community. As a board member of the Southwyck House Resident Association you must be aware of the challenges engaging a community. Many of the residents of Southwyck House don't know there is a resident association. Others who do know of it are not sure what it does.


In five years, Brixton Green has never approached anyone from the residents association, and in all that time I have seen just _one_ poster briefly stuck up in the vestibule, yet we're located directly adjacent to your proposed development.

By concentrating your efforts in postering the Villaaage and self-proclaiming that 'Brixton People Know What Brixton Needs' it does rather foster the impression that you're not really interested in the views of the long-standing community and your efforts are all about meeting the needs of more affluent and trendier incomers.

That may not be true, but that is certainly how it feels to me.


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

editor said:


> Could you now give me an equally unequivocal answer about whether Brixton Green has ever had any kind of discussions with the council regarding their possible involvement in rehousing displaced residents/services if Southwyck House was demolished?


 
Already answered:
*The rumour that Somerleyton Road may be used for possible decanting from Southwyck House*
Lambeth has not discussed any of their options appraisals with us. So we know as much as everyone else regarding Southwyck House or their plans for Somerleyton Road. 

I imagine Southwyck House will be discussed in the SPD consultations this summer. My personal feeling is that if it is demolished it could disperse communities , which would have a negative impact on the area. People and communities need their networks. In addition it is a well built building.


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

editor said:


> In five years, Brixton Green has never approached anyone from the residents association, and in all that time I have seen just _one_ poster briefly stuck up in the vestibule, yet we're located directly adjacent to your proposed development.
> 
> By concentrating your efforts in postering the Villaaage and self-proclaiming that 'Brixton People Know What Brixton Needs' it does rather foster the impression that you're not really interested in the views of the long-standing community and your efforts are all about meeting the needs of more affluent and trendier incomers.
> 
> That may not be true, but that is certainly how it feels to me.


This is not true. Editor, I first requested a meeting with your resident association two years ago.

I am baffled by your continuos desire to attack this community owned proposal. A proposal that gives people who live in Brixton a real chance of shaping part of their town. A chance for us to protect our communities.

What is your reason for this?


----------



## editor (May 28, 2012)

brad said:


> Already answered:
> *The rumour that Somerleyton Road may be used for possible decanting from Southwyck House*
> Lambeth has not discussed any of their options appraisals with us. So we know as much as everyone else regarding Southwyck House or their plans for Somerleyton Road.
> 
> I imagine Southwyck House will be discussed in the SPD consultations this summer. My personal feeling is that if it is demolished it could disperse communities , which would have a negative impact on the area. People and communities need their networks. In addition it is a well built building.


Any reason why you couldn't have just said this a few weeks ago?


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

editor said:


> Any reason why you couldn't have just said this a few weeks ago?


I thought my previous posts made our position clear.


----------



## editor (May 28, 2012)

brad said:


> This is not true. Editor, I first requested a meeting with your resident association two years ago.
> 
> I am baffled by your continuos desire to attack this community owned proposal. A proposal that gives people who live in Brixton a real chance of shaping part of their town. A chance for us to protect our communities.


I'm not attacking it. I'm trying to _find out what your plans are_, and have found your elusiveness incredibly frustrating.

BG keep telling me that 'Brixton People Know What Brixton People' want, yet it took me, what, three weeks and about five requests, to get one simple straight answer out of you. 

No one on the RA has any recollection of you ever asking for a meeting btw.


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

editor said:


> I'm not attacking it. I'm trying to _find out what your plans are_, and have found your elusiveness incredibly frustrating.
> 
> BG keep telling me that 'Brixton People Know What Brixton People' want, yet it took me, what, three weeks and about five requests, to get one simple straight answer out of you.
> 
> No one on the RA has any recollection of you ever asking for a meeting btw.


 
Everyone involved in Brixton Green has been, and is ,available to discuss any questions. I think I've answered all your questions you asked online. In addition I have asked you many times if you want to meet to discuss in more detail.

My offer still stands. If you and anyone else on this forum wants to meet then lets arrange it.


----------



## Crispy (May 28, 2012)

editor said:


> No one on the RA has any recollection of you ever asking for a meeting btw.


Has anyone on the RA ever asked brad for a meeting?


----------



## brad (May 28, 2012)

Crispy said:


> Has anyone on the RA ever asked brad for a meeting?


 
My offer still stands. If any Brixton based group, organsation or individuals want to meet then please email info@brixtongreen.org


----------



## editor (May 28, 2012)

Crispy said:


> Has anyone on the RA ever asked brad for a meeting?


We were rather sensibly waiting to find out exactly what their plans were so any meeting we would have would be from an informed position.

That was why I was constantly asking him for clarification here.


----------



## Crispy (May 28, 2012)

editor said:


> We were rather sensibly waiting to find out exactly what their plans were so any meeting we would have would be from an informed position.


Given that they claim



			
				brad said:
			
		

> Brixton Green has been created by and is being shaped by Brixton people. Anyone, whether a shareholder or not, can contribute ideas to the proposal for Somerleyton Road


Then you find yourself in a chicken/egg scenario. You refuse to talk until they tell you their plans. They want to talk so that they can formulate their plans. Something's got to give.


----------



## Winot (May 28, 2012)

editor said:


> We were rather sensibly waiting to find out exactly what their plans were so any meeting we would have would be from an informed position.
> 
> That was why I was constantly asking him for clarification here.


 
Fair enough. Do you feel in a position now to have a meeting?


----------



## editor (May 28, 2012)

Crispy said:


> Given that they claim
> 
> Then you find yourself in a chicken/egg scenario. You refuse to talk until they tell you their plans. They want to talk so that they can formulate their plans. Something's got to give.


Far from "refusing to talk," I have repeatedly tried to engage them here and have an open discussion about their plans and proposals: something I thought they'd welcome given the immense reach of these boards (this thread has had well over 5,000 views already).

Perhaps it's all been crystal clear to you from the start, but a lot of people I know have found their responses vague and opaque here and it's proved a very, very frustrating experience, particularly when they keep telling us that they know "what we want."


----------



## editor (May 28, 2012)

Winot said:


> Fair enough. Do you feel in a position now to have a meeting?


I'll certainly put it to the RA, although we have one or two rather more pressing concerns than BG right now.


----------



## Crispy (May 28, 2012)

I've got to stop posting on this topic.


----------



## ddraig (May 28, 2012)

Crispy said:


> Given that they claim
> 
> Then you find yourself in a chicken/egg scenario. You refuse to talk until they tell you their plans. They want to talk so that they can formulate their plans. Something's got to give.


 why can't BG who are set up and funded to consult and include just do their job and reach out to people who will be affected and who they want involved? 
and also be generally more open with their intentions, more forthcoming with their answers and tone down the marketing spiel and offers to "meet up" so they can control their own narrative.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 28, 2012)

brad said:


> *Debating on Urban 75*
> Some good points have been raised on this forum, however there has been quite a number of aggressive posts by a small number of people. The aggressive nature, and on occasions the deliberate misrepresenting of Brixton Green on these posts, discourages open and constructive debate.
> 
> Has anyone got any suggestions on how we could encourage a better online debate?


 
I think you're mistaking clearly and plainly-written questions, and a desire for straight answers, for "aggression".


----------



## quimcunx (May 28, 2012)

Are there any plans for a school?


----------



## brad (May 29, 2012)

quimcunx said:


> Are there any plans for a school?


The proposal includes a children's nursery. Not a school. As with all the proposal the aim of the children's nursery will be to strengthen the links and resilience of the local community.

We have a short film on our website which shows the proposal so far:
www.brixtongreen.org


----------



## editor (May 29, 2012)

brad said:


> As with all the proposal the aim of the children's nursery will be to strengthen the links and resilience of the local community.


Can you explain what that sentence means please?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 29, 2012)

Hang on, from what I understand from the talk you gave to the Golden Age Club there was going to be a place training up youngsters in hairdressing. Very handy, as it transpired later that one of the Brixton Green lot runs a hairdressing business. So have you dropped that idea then?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 29, 2012)

Or are the trainees going to be very very young? Nimble fingers, those pre-schoolers


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Hang on, from what I understand from the talk you gave to the Golden Age Club there was going to be a place training up youngsters in hairdressing. Very handy, as it transpired later that one of the Brixton Green lot runs a hairdressing business. So have you dropped that idea then?


 
See, Brad?
"clearly and plainly-written questions, and a desire for straight answers".


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 29, 2012)

I've managed to see the video on the BG site now (kept crashing before) and I see that the hairdressing training is still part of the plan.


----------



## editor (May 29, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I've managed to see the video on the BG site now (kept crashing before) and I see that the hairdressing training is still part of the plan.


Wasn't there a chef school in there too?


----------



## snowy_again (May 29, 2012)

brad said:


> The proposal includes a children's nursery. Not a school. As with all the proposal the aim of the children's nursery will be to strengthen the links and resilience of the local community.
> 
> We have a short film on our website which shows the proposal so far:
> www.brixtongreen.org


 
I can't get that film to load either.

Going back to the nursery - do you mean an Early Years Centre or a nursery? Have you contacted other current early year providers in the area?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 29, 2012)

....hope BG is paying royalties for the soundtrack they're using. Bit of a contentious issue that. I've heard loads of old-skool musicians in Brixton complaining of their music being ripped off.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 29, 2012)

snowy_again said:


> I can't get that film to load either.


Just have patience. It took me ages too.


----------



## editor (May 29, 2012)

Here's the video:


----------



## snowy_again (May 29, 2012)

Ah yes, I had to take it out of the embedded page to view it (seems that other people have that issue too, as it's only been watched 316 times, and I'm three of those hits apparently). 

Good to see that some of that work has already been completed (children's nursery linked with Hill Mead); but the video talks about a new primary school...


----------



## editor (May 29, 2012)

snowy_again said:


> Ah yes, I had to take it out of the embedded page to view it (seems that other people have that issue too, as it's only been watched 316 times, and I'm three of those hits apparently).


 Seeing as that video went up nearly a year ago, I'd suggest that BG should be somewhat concerned by the lack of interest shown in their proposals.

Still, now that I've kindly embedded the video here I'm sure that figure will rise.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 29, 2012)

snowy_again said:


> Ah yes, I had to take it out of the embedded page to view it (seems that other people have that issue too, as it's only been watched 316 times, and I'm three of those hits apparently).


I tried a lot more than three times, so a few of those hits are mine.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Or are the trainees going to be very very young? Nimble fingers, those pre-schoolers


 
If that's the case, I suspect Brad will find that the Factories Acts ban that sort of labour.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 29, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> If that's the case, I suspect Brad will find that the Factories Acts ban that sort of labour.


Beecroft wanted legislation about child labour abolished iirc


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (May 29, 2012)

brad said:


> *Community engagement*
> Editor, you have made a number of comments that we have not worked hard enough to engage the community. As a board member of the Southwyck House Resident Association you must be aware of the challenges engaging a community. Many of the residents of Southwyck House don't know there is a resident association. Others who do know of it are not sure what it does.
> I'm sure you make efforts to engage all the residents, but it is clearly a hard job even for a resident association trying to engage with just the residents of Southwyck House. We have members in Southwyck House - and would be happy to work with you, them and your neighbours on plans for Somerleyton Road.
> 
> ...


 

I don't think your view of 'community' is really viable tbh. 'Brixton as defined by the five council wards' isn't a defined community in any sense of the word as far as I can see. It's far too big. 35000 houses is the size of a middling sized town and within that (and overlapping with many other areas) there'll be a large number of different, interlocking 'communities' with very different interests. You've focussed on Somerleyton Road but don't seem to realise that for some people, like the editor and Mrs Magpie, that's of genuine local, community interest to them as it's right on their doorstep, while for others (probably the vast majority of those 35000 houses) they could live in Brixton for years with no knowledge of or interest in Somerleyton Road at all. It might be an interesting local project to them but it isn't a real community issue.

I'm sure the 'Brixton people know best' and 'community democracy' ideas are meant well but they're massively simplistic IMO and will always cause you problems.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 29, 2012)

Another thing that colours my outlook on all this is that over the decades I have worked really hard, unpaid, on voluntary projects that local people really want and have had to jump through ridiculous bureaucratic hoops while seeing it all come to nothing while paid consultants 'consult', pay lip service to local wants and needs and then something happens (usually at vast expense) that nobody actually wanted. Which is why people who actually live in the area these plans affect are deeply suspicious. I also suspect Brad is not doing this on a voluntary basis and I don't think he lives on Moorlands or in Southwyck House. Plus anything that Grant Shapps backs is extremely unlikely to have my interests at heart. I love my area and will fight like a tiger to protect it.


----------



## editor (May 29, 2012)

I've no idea what the financial arrangeable are for this proposed 'community' venture. Perhaps brad will provide the necessary transparency.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 29, 2012)

Well, ultimately it'll be our money, whether via taxes or council tax. Another reason I want the money spent on something that benefits the community. A lot of what is being put forward is based on a bare-faced lie anyway. The buildings along Somerleyton are neither derelict or unused.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 29, 2012)

Well, the temporary school is unused at the moment unless you count the people who live in it to prevent squatting. What a lot of people forget is that a really good long established project for adults with learning disabilities was evicted to build that.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Beecroft wanted legislation about child labour abolished iirc


 
Beecroft...Brad...same initial...


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Another thing that colours my outlook on all this is that over the decades I have worked really hard, unpaid, on voluntary projects that local people really want and have had to jump through ridiculous bureaucratic hoops while seeing it all come to nothing while paid consultants 'consult', pay lip service to local wants and needs and then something happens (usually at vast expense) that nobody actually wanted. Which is why people who actually live in the area these plans affect are deeply suspicious. I also suspect Brad is not doing this on a voluntary basis and I don't think he lives on Moorlands or in Southwyck House. Plus anything that Grant Shapps backs is extremely unlikely to have my interests at heart. I love my area and will fight like a tiger to protect it.


 
This.
I used to live (as I'm sure some Brixton forum posters are sick of hearing!) on Clapham Park estate. A decade and a half ago (I was in Tulse Hill by then), "regeneration" got underway with the usual consultations, boards, committees and all that stuff that plays really well to the media. What's it achieved a decade-and-a-half later? The 45-yr old blocks that were to be replaced are now 60-yr old blocks waiting to be replaced. Some housing has been demolished, but hasn't been replaced, and millions of pounds have been squandered or, worse, stolen. What have the locals got out of it? The square root of not very much.


----------



## OpalFruit (May 30, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> This.
> I used to live (as I'm sure some Brixton forum posters are sick of hearing!) on Clapham Park estate. A decade and a half ago (I was in Tulse Hill by then), "regeneration" got underway with the usual consultations, boards, committees and all that stuff that plays really well to the media. What's it achieved a decade-and-a-half later? The 45-yr old blocks that were to be replaced are now 60-yr old blocks waiting to be replaced. Some housing has been demolished, but hasn't been replaced, and millions of pounds have been squandered or, worse, stolen. What have the locals got out of it? The square root of not very much.


 
Well yes - but BG are not the company given power by Lambeth Council to undertake the project.

Brad - is BG funded? And if so what for?

I went to a consultation at Hillmead School, I understood that the then plans for a hairdressing training school were a suggestion / proposal based on the social enterprise project (not business) being run by a BG board member who no longer appears as  board member but is someone I have seen at many Brixton Area Forum meetings and the like.

I think it is time to look at the options here. Lambeth are conducting the consultation for a SPD for central Brixton. On the basis of this they will dispose of their land. Without an alternative, the likely outcome (in my humble opinion) is some kind of develolpment by a commercial developer, probably gated, faux-luxury houses and apartments, with the required quota of affordable put in the least conducive spot, and no regard for the context or the needs of the area. I am guessing that this is what BG wish to avoid?

If Lambeth are considering demolishing Southwyck House  they will do it with or without BG, they are hardly going to sit around saying 'oh well maybe we can persuade BG to build housing that we can move people into, and then we can trash Southwyck House'. Equally, if I understand the law correctly, any developer who builds social housing will need it to be allocated according to the housing lists held by Lambeth, so will be powerless in allocation.

Brad - the consultation is coming up, fast. Do you think it would be possible to have an open public meeting so that anyone interested can find out more about the detail of your proposals, and make their own observations?


----------



## soupdragon (May 30, 2012)

brad said:


> *Housing on Somerleyton Road*
> 
> Community homes proposal
> Some of the ideas so far are for the homes to be sustainably built, family units on the ground floors, intermediate areas to make it easy for people to meet , the homes built in a way to bring activity to the street and a section of units that makes it easy for elderly people to look out for each other.
> ...


 
Could you give more precise detail about the proposals on the ownership and costs of the housing? How much social housing is in your plan? Are there going to be high-value sections? Will they be gated? Is the mix of housing decided by the members of Brixton Green? Presumably some of these issues come down to the economic viability of your development and can't be open to members ideas? You must have some costed scenarios?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 30, 2012)

OpalFruit said:


> Well yes - but BG are not the company given power by Lambeth Council to undertake the project.


 
Had I claimed that they were?

I'm merely making a point about Lambeth's not inconsiderable record for botching and/or getting taken for a ride. Do a bit of research on "regeneration" projects in the borough over the last 20 years. It's not exactly cheerful and inspiring reading.



> Brad - is BG funded? And if so what for?
> 
> I went to a consultation at Hillmead School, I understood that the then plans for a hairdressing training school were a suggestion / proposal based on the social enterprise project (not business) being run by a BG board member who no longer appears as board member but is someone I have seen at many Brixton Area Forum meetings and the like.
> 
> ...


 
While I'd agree that they'd be hardly likely to sit around talking like that, if you believe such options aren't given consideration, then you're naive. The idea generally is to explore all avenues, then discount the politically and financially uncomfortable ones. If a political and financial cost/benefit analysis led them to believe they could get away with what you suggest, the'd try it on in a heartbeat.



> Equally, if I understand the law correctly, any developer who builds social housing will need it to be allocated according to the housing lists held by Lambeth, so will be powerless in allocation.


 
Well, currently that's absolutely true and you're absolutely right, but given that the ministers responsible for housing and for local authorities are in the throes of re-writing the primary legislation, we don't know how much longer that'll be the case. The whole concept of using "planning gain" (section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act, 1990) to leverage development of social housing is already being kicked in the arse by them via the "Localism Bill", so there may actually be no duty to include social housing extant at the time this development happens.



> Brad - the consultation is coming up, fast. Do you think it would be possible to have an open public meeting so that anyone interested can find out more about the detail of your proposals, and make their own observations?


 
This would be nice.


----------



## editor (May 30, 2012)

soupdragon said:


> Could you give more precise detail about the proposals on the ownership and costs of the housing? How much social housing is in your plan? Are there going to be high-value sections? Will they be gated? Is the mix of housing decided by the members of Brixton Green? Presumably some of these issues come down to the economic viability of your development and can't be open to members ideas? You must have some costed scenarios?


All important questions that desperately need to be answered for a self-proclaimed 'community-led development.'

I'd also be interested in how much, if anything, people at the top will be paying themselves if this gets underway and if any of those involved stand to profit in any other way. Transparency and all that.


----------



## Gramsci (May 30, 2012)

OpalFruit said:


> I think it is time to look at the options here. Lambeth are conducting the consultation for a SPD for central Brixton. On the basis of this they will dispose of their land. Without an alternative, the likely outcome (in my humble opinion) is some kind of develolpment by a commercial developer, probably gated, faux-luxury houses and apartments, with the required quota of affordable put in the least conducive spot, and no regard for the context or the needs of the area. I am guessing that this is what BG wish to avoid?


 
If you look at the SPD thread I started the Council say they will be consulting people about the SPD and the furthering of the Brixton Masterplan. This will be done using the Cooperative Council principles of involving local people now. (The Coop Council was not up and running when the original Brixton Masterplan started).

So they ( the Council )should be asking us (residents/ local business etc) what alternatives we want. Also presenting us with possible options.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 30, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I used to live (as I'm sure some Brixton forum posters are sick of hearing!) on Clapham Park estate.


Have you read Hard Work by Polly Toynbee? I know people sneer at her but I love her for that book. She was living on Clapham Park when she was writing that I think. I think it should be required reading for people of Braddish ilk if they want to get a handle on the realities of life for a lot of people in the area that they're often so keen to put a mark on without the* faintest* idea of the daily reality of life outside the PR bubble.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 30, 2012)

Gramsci said:


> So they should be asking us (residents/ local business etc) what alternatives we want. Also presenting us with possible options.


Got to buy a share first...apparently it will help give us a sense of ownership and a stake in our area....


----------



## editor (May 30, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Got to buy a share first...apparently it will help give us a sense of ownership and a stake in our area....


I refuse to buy a share on the grounds of:
(a) they still have not adequately explained their plans in any kind of reasonable detail at all, particularly in the area of social housing provision
(b) if I do buy a share, brad will wave that around as proof that I am signed up supporter and backer of their plans, even though I have no real idea what they are


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 30, 2012)

...plus I don't need to give an organisation a quid to feel I have a stake in the area where I have lived, worked and brought up three kids to adulthood with all the strong local social networks that brings. It's just all so patronising I could vomit.


----------



## Greebo (May 30, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Have you read Hard Work by Polly Toynbee? I know people sneer at her but I love her for that book. She was living on Clapham Park when she was writing that I think. I think it should be required reading for people of Braddish ilk if they want to get a handle on the realities of life for a lot of people in the area that they're often so keen to put a mark on without the* faintest* idea of the daily reality of life outside the PR bubble.


Agreed.  Got it, read it, kept it.


----------



## Ol Nick (May 30, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> ...plus I don't need to give an organisation a quid to feel I have a stake in the area where I have lived, worked and brought up three kids to adulthood with all the strong local social networks that brings. It's just all so patronising I could vomit.


 
True, but the alternative - Brixton Square, up and down Brixton Road, the market (the Nigel) - there's nothing remotely consultative about them. Do you prefer pure for-profit private sector to Brixton Green? Maybe it's more straightforward.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 30, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Have you read Hard Work by Polly Toynbee?


 
Yep. I also read the serialised bits before it came out. I recognised a few of the "characters", too. 



> I know people sneer at her but I love her for that book. She was living on Clapham Park when she was writing that I think.


 
She split the book between a couple of places, IIRC. The Clapham Park sojourn was when she was working in the care home.



> I think it should be required reading for people of Braddish ilk if they want to get a handle on the realities of life for a lot of people in the area that they're often so keen to put a mark on without the* faintest* idea of the daily reality of life outside the PR bubble.


 
You're (very kindly, IMO) pre-supposing that those people who're riding the current wave of interest in Brixton give a damn beyond moulding our town into a banal identikit of the likes of Hoxton. I've not yet put the board and employees of Brixton Green in that category, but if they carry on farting out stuff that's transparently written in PR double-speak, I may get suspicious about their intentions...


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 30, 2012)

editor said:


> I refuse to buy a share on the grounds of:
> (a) they still have not adequately explained their plans in any kind of reasonable detail at all, particularly in the area of social housing provision
> (b) if I do buy a share, brad will wave that around as proof that I am signed up supporter and backer of their plans, even though I have no real idea what they are


 
And, of course, there's still that unresolved issue of his posting up a private communication, isn't there?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 30, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> And, of course, there's still that unresolved issue of his posting up a private communication, isn't there?


Plus he did it twice. I removed it and _*he just put it up again. *_Well, that just showed us all the cut of his jib. Supreme sense of entitlement with a fucking great dollop of can't be trusted further than a mouse-click.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 30, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Plus he did it twice. I removed it and _*he just put it up again. *_Well, that just showed us all the cut of his jib. Supreme sense of entitlement with a fucking great dollop of can't be trusted further than a mouse-click.


 
I read that as mouse-dick.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 30, 2012)

Either works to convey my contempt for his breach of trust.


----------



## Gramsci (May 30, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Got to buy a share first...apparently it will help give us a sense of ownership and a stake in our area....


 
I meant the Council not BG. Edited my original post.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 31, 2012)

Ah, OK no worries


----------



## OpalFruit (May 31, 2012)

The thing is, BG or no BG, that stretch along Somerleyton Rd will be developed. It's part of a package of land that Lambeth may well be offering as a package to some huge developer, depending (perhaps) on the outcome of the SPD consultation. The value of the land is too great for Lambeth to leave with the one-story temorary school building on it.

What would people like to see along Somerleyton Rd? I use the alley under the railway line in daytime, but never after dark, I would like to see street-facing housing (council or HA or other genuinely affordable homes for families) and a range of things which would create genuine regeneration along the road. So youth and training projects, social enterprise, or small shops or workspaces available at reasonable rent. Community space. Things complementary with a residential community, but open at different times of day. The busy things along there are fine, but there are too many dark corners and it is bleak at night.


----------



## editor (May 31, 2012)

Thing is, I think most people like a lot of the ideas proposed in BG's plans (well, the bits they've bothered to make sense of).

I think the real problem is that a lot of people don't particularly like BG's way of doing things or feel inclined to particularly trust them. It feels like they're focussing on creating their own community that matches their plans, and then using that to justify their own ends under the name of a "community led" initiative.

More openness and transparency is needed here. Lots more.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 31, 2012)

Well,off the top of my head, at the moment there's that light industrial newish bit right at the end, a cold store for the market, community transport, meals-on-wheels, a new building (dunno what that's for) the old Community Industry buildings which are in use, but by who and what for I don't know, except there are clearly working blokes coming in and out (I think those are the ones that BG say are unused and derelict).


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 31, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Either works to convey my contempt for his breach of trust.


 
I thought it might.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 31, 2012)

OpalFruit said:


> The thing is, BG or no BG, that stretch along Somerleyton Rd will be developed. It's part of a package of land that Lambeth may well be offering as a package to some huge developer, depending (perhaps) on the outcome of the SPD consultation. The value of the land is too great for Lambeth to leave with the one-story temorary school building on it.
> 
> What would people like to see along Somerleyton Rd? I use the alley under the railway line in daytime, but never after dark, I would like to see street-facing housing (council or HA or other genuinely affordable homes for families) and a range of things which would create genuine regeneration along the road. So youth and training projects, social enterprise, or small shops or workspaces available at reasonable rent. Community space. Things complementary with a residential community, but open at different times of day. The busy things along there are fine, but there are too many dark corners and it is bleak at night.


 
I'd like to see much the same, housing-wise, and it wouldn't exactly be difficult to design out the "dark corners" and potential skulky bits.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 31, 2012)

editor said:


> Thing is, I think most people like a lot of the ideas proposed in BG's plans (well, the bits they've bothered to make sense of).
> 
> I think the real problem is that a lot of people don't particularly like BG's way of doing things or feel inclined to particularly trust them. It feels like they're focussing on creating their own community that matches their plans, and then using that to justify their own ends under the name of a "community led" initiative.
> 
> More openness and transparency is needed here. Lots more.


 
I'm not even sure it's BG's ideas as such, as much as it is that it *feels* like those ideas are being imposed from above, using the justification that "it's what our members (all 800-ish!) tell us they want". Residents, not just of Brixton proper, but of Lambeth as a whole, are rightfully cynical of such proposals, *wherever* they come from. We have a right to have a say, and that say very much *DOESN'T* have to be mediated through Brixton Green and their ambitions for Somerleyton Road, however much Brixton Green might like that to be the case.


----------



## BlackJamaican (Jun 15, 2012)

I think the question is do you know how many have been built in the borough?  What was said made sense to me...why are you defending the council when they're just ripping us off big time?  Obviously you have a secret interest in such matters?


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2012)

BlackJamaican said:


> I think the question is do you know how many have been built in the borough? What was said made sense to me...why are you defending the council when they're just ripping us off big time? Obviously you have a secret interest in such matters?


Who are you talking to here? Who is "defending" the council and over what?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 16, 2012)

Yes, that post baffled me too.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jun 16, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm not even sure it's BG's ideas as such, as much as it is that it *feels* like those ideas are being imposed from above, using the justification that "it's what our members (all 800-ish!) tell us they want". Residents, not just of Brixton proper, but of Lambeth as a whole, are rightfully cynical of such proposals, *wherever* they come from. We have a right to have a say, and that say very much *DOESN'T* have to be mediated through Brixton Green and their ambitions for Somerleyton Road, however much Brixton Green might like that to be the case.


 
Fine, but Brixton Green have got off their collective arse and done _something._ Think in terms of alternatives, and the only alternative seems to be Barrett Homes. Brixton Green seems to be an improvement on what has gone before. 

Is there an actual, existing alternative that you or anyone else prefers? If not, you have go with the least worst. Art of the possible and all that.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 16, 2012)

Ol Nick, seems like same old, same old to me. Our 'betters' coming along and telling us what's best for us, but dressing it up as what we want. Most NGOs seem to operate in this way too, just like local govt has done for time immemorial and all. A long and shameful history.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2012)

Ol Nick said:


> Fine, but Brixton Green have got off their collective arse and done _something._ Think in terms of alternatives, and the only alternative seems to be Barrett Homes. Brixton Green seems to be an improvement on what has gone before.


 
Brixton Green (or rather those behind it) have very obvious experience in working within the system. This, to a great extent, is what has enabled them to "get off their arse and do _something_". That it happens to be something that is officially approved-of is *obviously* neither here nor there. 



> Is there an actual, existing alternative that you or anyone else prefers? If not, you have go with the least worst. Art of the possible and all that.


 
Your argument reduces to "shit sandwich B tastes slightly better than shit sandwich A. Eat shit sandwich B".
I'd rather not eat a shit sandwich at all, thanks. 

And this isn't so much the "art of the possible" being practiced here, it's "the art of the sanctioned".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Ol Nick, seems like same old, same old to me. Our 'betters' coming along and telling us what's best for us, but dressing it up as what we want. Most NGOs seem to operate in this way too, just like local govt has done for time immemorial and all. A long and shameful history.


 
Quite.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jun 16, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Quite.


I will fight for the death for your right to hate and/or distrust Brixton Green. But if there's no alternative what does it matter on the ground. I admire them at least for the fact they have got up and tried to do something. If someone else got up and did something better, all the better.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 16, 2012)

Ol Nick said:


> If someone else got up and did something better, all the better.


Well, they are talking about demolishing industrial units on the basis that they are unused and derelict, when that is not the case at all, so maybe 'something better' is to stop meddling in the area I live, which they don't live in.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 16, 2012)

...and to be honest, I think they are not about making things better for me and mine, but all about trousering very large amounts of dosh. I may be cynical, but I have long exerience of being shafted by organisations who say they have my interests at heart.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 16, 2012)

...actually I've remembered a good example of the sort of thing that has made me cynical. Years ago I used to live in a block of flats with terrible damp problems. Thick black mould on walls, kids with bronchitis etc. What was actually needed was central heating (the flats had one gas fire, or coal fire in each flat and no other heating) and windows and roofs that kept the rain out.

Central govt. gave some sort of grant for major improvements. Very highly paid consultants came in and gave us tenants a whole range of options for what could happen over and above central heating, new windows and roofs. The walkways, which were open to the elements, were in very bad repair and we were given options regarding repairing and upgrading them. Eventually the tenants chose a particular option. When it was actually put in, any sort of relative humidity or rain rendered the walkways lethally slippery to walk on and there were a number of accidents. When we complained we were told it was our fault _because it was what the tenants had chosen_.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jun 16, 2012)

...I would also point out that we were initially told the damp and mould was down to 'tenant lifestyle' because we did things like boiling vegetables.


----------



## soupdragon (Jun 16, 2012)

Ol Nick said:


> Is there an actual, existing alternative that you or anyone else prefers? If not, you have go with the least worst. Art of the possible and all that.


 
This: http://www.homesforislington.org.uk/New Build And Regeneration/IslingtonNewBuildQAFeb10.pdf


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 16, 2012)

Ol Nick said:


> I will fight for the death for your right to hate and/or distrust Brixton Green. But if there's no alternative what does it matter on the ground. I admire them at least for the fact they have got up and tried to do something. If someone else got up and did something better, all the better.


 
You might feel clever paraphrasing Voltaire, but you sound more like Dr Pangloss.  "All is for the best in the best of all possible Brixtons".


----------



## BlackJamaican (Jun 17, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Yes, that post baffled me too.


Hello Mrs Pie...I tend to baffle many people...I responded to a moany man who's always moaning called kalibuzz, who seems to know everything.  He said
"*...and what exactly qualifies you to decide that?* This is a forum for people to give their opinions, if you disagree make your point, don't just judge the post. Most redevelopments are non-council, and therefore the easiest way of economically evicting residents - in the long run. How many homes in Brixton have been built by the council lately, do you know?"
So I thought that type of arrogance deserves a reply.

I am new here (this site), so I don't know how well people takes criticism  ...feel free to give me a piece of your mind all...I will not cry!!


----------



## BlackJamaican (Jun 17, 2012)

editor said:


> Who are you talking to here? Who is "defending" the council and over what?


Hello Mr Editor...I tend to baffle many people...I responded to a moany man who's always moaning called kalibuzz, who seems to know everything.  He said
"*...and what exactly qualifies you to decide that?* This is a forum for people to give their opinions, if you disagree make your point, don't just judge the post. Most redevelopments are non-council, and therefore the easiest way of economically evicting residents - in the long run. How many homes in Brixton have been built by the council lately, do you know?"







So I thought that type of arrogance deserves a reply.

I am new here (this site), so I don't know how well people takes criticism  ...feel free to give me a piece of your mind...I will not cry!!


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 17, 2012)

Ol Nick said:


> I will fight for the death for your right to hate and/or distrust Brixton Green. But if there's no alternative what does it matter on the ground. I admire them at least for the fact they have got up and tried to do something. If someone else got up and did something better, all the better.


 
There has been a long process of consultation about Brixton which many people have "got off there arses" to contribute to. This led to the Brixton Masterplan. Now there is further consultation on the Supplementary Planning Documents which are linked to the plan. Hopefully to further its agreed aims.

The alternative is to directly engage with the Council. As some Brixton residents have and are doing in various ways with the limited time they have. Without making a big song and dance about it.


----------



## kalibuzz (Jun 21, 2012)

.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 22, 2012)

soupdragon said:


> This: http://www.homesforislington.org.uk/New Build And Regeneration/IslingtonNewBuildQAFeb10.pdf


 
This is interesting. Things might have changed a bit due to this government. But shows it is possible to build Council Housing. I did hear that near end of Gordon Browns government he was supporting the idea of new Council Housing.

This is Islington not Lambeth. Maybe Islington Council is less ultra Blairite?


----------



## BlackJamaican (Jun 23, 2012)

Yes it all sound good and yes we should be happy this is exactly what we want.  The chance to have a property in trendy Brixton.  But we all want to have a place of our own to call ours for many years and then maybe pass onto our children, this can be possible with this scheme for - "will remain in
council ownership" is part of the plan.  So yeah we will have a place to call home but only for a while.  I suppose this is good by today's standards but in yesteryear when you got a council place it was for life to do with what you want....maybe even by it!!

Now the council will have to find someone to build it and that's where the price will start to rocket for it's always the way when the contract is given the builders will then rub there hands together and then have a conference on 'who' should give the lowest bid (to get the build) and then when the next big build comes about the next firm will bid the lowest....it's an old fiddle!

I am not against the council it's just that I am aware of corruption in the council lettings system which tell me that there will be some individuals who will profit out of this arrangement and it's this which makes me mad.

Islington Council is a much more fair council than Brixton's!!

I am glad that you have an interest in these matters...not many people do!!


----------



## snowy_again (Jul 2, 2012)

Brad Carroll (Brixton Green Director) is speaking at this event this week on 

*Case Study: Funding New Models of Public Service Delivery in the Big Society via Community Shares*

*Case Study: Funding New Models of Public Service Delivery in the Big Society via Community Shares*​
Identifying tools and methods to successfully secure funding
The various funding pots available: How to effectively apply for, and access these
Community investment: Highly effective way of engaging communities in the Big Society
The benefits of community investment
Lessons learnt from Brixton Green 

Brad Carroll, Director, *Brixton Green* (CONFIRMED) http://www.insidegovernment.co.uk/economic_dev/big-society-funding/index.php#agenda Only £285 per delegate! ​And judging by his attendance at the Community Land Trust conference here: http://www.brixtongreen.org/brixton-green-join-panel-discussion-at-clt-national-conference-2011/ seems to have some social housing on his agenda.  His presentation can be found here, which seems to perpetuate some of the Somerleyton Road myths: ​http://www.communitylandtrusts.org.uk/upload/public/CLT Annual Conference 2011/(B5) Brad Carroll.pdf ​


----------



## editor (Jul 2, 2012)

They've only sold 400 £1 shares in all this time? And a load of them seem to have gone to children too.


----------



## snowy_again (Jul 2, 2012)

I'd be surprised if children were legally allowed to be share holders / have voting rights; as the mutual-ness would imply some sort of limited liability that only someone over 18 could sign up to. Could be wrong though.


----------



## OpalFruit (Jul 2, 2012)

Gramsci said:


> There has been a long process of consultation about Brixton which many people have "got off there arses" to contribute to. This led to the Brixton Masterplan. Now there is further consultation on the Supplementary Planning Documents which are linked to the plan. Hopefully to further its agreed aims.
> 
> The alternative is to directly engage with the Council. As some Brixton residents have and are doing in various ways with the limited time they have. Without making a big song and dance about it.


 
I have spent hours off my arse contributing to the last Masterplan - I went to several public meetings, a few specialist focus group type meetings about specific sectors, wrote letters and contributed the website. I lobbied and protested about certain proposals in the last one (knock down the arcades and build a glass 'mall'). I have also begun my contributions to the new phase. The problem is that it is individual groups, organisations or companies which get things done, in my experience. The council can, and will, agree the SPD on paper, byt my guess is that they will then look to outside parties to do the development possible within the SPD. It is a planning framework, not necessarily a 'to do' list for council investment.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jul 3, 2012)

snowy_again said:


> I'd be surprised if children were legally allowed to be share holders / have voting rights; as the mutual-ness would imply some sort of limited liability that only someone over 18 could sign up to. Could be wrong though.


I believe that the situation is not at all that BG have knowingly sold shares to minors, it's just that some people see them as 'an investment' because they don't really understand what they are and have bought them for their kids. I have not actually seen hard copy evidence of this it's just what I've heard people say (as in, Mrs So-And-So got one each for her kids as well).


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jul 3, 2012)

Ol Nick said:


> ...Brixton Green have got off their collective arse and done _something._..


Yeah it's great that Brad is doing this out of the goodness of his heart....and won't make ANY money off the deal at all.

Greenwash IMHO.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jul 3, 2012)

snowy_again said:


> Brad Carroll (Brixton Green Director) is speaking at this event this week on
> 
> *Case Study: Funding New Models of Public Service Delivery in the Big Society via Community Shares*
> 
> ...


 

The Big Society eh?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jul 3, 2012)

Big Society who can't even get the names of local places right. Somerleyton Way? Er, no


----------



## youngian (Jul 9, 2012)

deleted


----------



## editor (Jul 9, 2012)

I think I need subtitles for the above.


----------



## youngian (Jul 9, 2012)

editor said:


> I think I need subtitles for the above.


 
My mistake- Moved to squirrels on crack thread


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jul 9, 2012)




----------



## leanderman (Jan 23, 2013)

Some development has occured. But I am unable to understand a word of tonight's press release, viz:

*Lambeth Council has agreed to transform Somerleyton Road in partnership with the local community!!!*

The Somerleyton Road Project will be one of the first of the Future Brixton schemes to be brought forward and *delivered in partnership with the local community*.
Cllr Pete Robbins, Cabinet member for Housing & Regeneration, said:_ “This is a new approach for Lambeth, and we’re excited about working with both Brixton Green and Ovalhouse theatre on these ambitious plans.”_
*We want to say a big thank you to all our members and supporters for their work over the past four years to help make this happen.*​Now the hard work starts.
*1)       Creating the shared vision*

We want to ensure this vision is built on the best knowledge of our whole community. Starting on *Saturday 2nd February (11am to 5pm*) Social Life will be running a series of community workshops so we can develop the proposal in more detail. Alongside this there will be on-line resources and activities with local groups and door-to-door discussions. We’ll be in touch soon with further details, venues and how you can get involved. If you would like to contact us before please call 020 7183 5838 or or email us.
*2)       Making sure everyone is involved*

Please check the list of organisations to help us make sure we include all groups(formal and informal): List of organisations to engage 
We will have additional activity to ensure those not involved in groups are engaged.
*3)       Volunteer*

There’s going to be a lot of work to make this happen. If you have time, skills or you are part of an organisation that can help please contact us.
*What’s happening now?*

The next few weeks will be busy. Alongside the Brixton Green workshops there will be:

A core group of local organisations and the Council meeting with architects to help design a proposal.
Ovalhouse consulting with visitors, members, tenants and local residents on a potential move to Somerleyton Road.
*Next steps*

Spring 2013 everyone will have the opportunity to review the shared vision and development ideas. Once we have agreed on a scheme we will start looking for a developer partner. Work could start on site in 2014.

*Other news*

*Brixton Neighbourhood Forum – 7pm Wednesday 23rd January – The Brix (St Matthews Church) level 4*
As well as the partnership with the community to deliver the Somerleyton Road scheme the Council is also consulting on the SPD planning document for the whole of central Brixton.
Next Wednesday between 7pm – 9pm the Brixton Neighbourhood Forum will be having a meeting to discuss this wider Brixton planning document.


----------



## editor (Jan 23, 2013)

Who the feck are Social Life and what does this buzzword gibberish mean?


> *putting people at the heart of placemaking*
> 
> Our mission is to reconnect placemaking with people’s everyday experience and the way that communities work...
> 
> ...


----------



## TruXta (Jan 23, 2013)

Wishy washy urban studies/planning/architecture consultancy bods that hope to rake it in big with councils. They could be great of course, but the website is chockablock with "thought leadership" and whatnot.



> Our objectives are to:
> 
> create a new urban innovators network, bringing together a group of city leaders interested in accelerating urban innovation
> 
> ...


http://social-life.co/page/social-life-cities-work/

As I said, without more detail it's hard to gauge what they're about. The lingo is buzzword bingo as per.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 23, 2013)

leanderman said:


> *1) Creating the shared vision*


My 'shared vision' would be brad pinned to the nuclear dawn mural with a firework sticking out of his arse


----------



## editor (Jan 23, 2013)

All that touchy-feely buzzword drivel just alienates and disfranchises the very people they're purporting to represent.

Why can't they talk in normal language with normal words that normal people can understand?


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 23, 2013)

dont get me wrong, it would be great to have the Oval House theatre in Brixton, as long as:

a - it doesn't mess with carlton mansions
b - it doesn't mess with the mural
c - brad doesn't trouser a load of cash for his supposed 'community project'


----------



## Belushi (Jan 23, 2013)

editor said:


> Why can't they talk in normal language with normal words that normal people can understand?


 
They're salesmen, they rely on wearing people down with bullshit. I wouldn't trust Brad further than I could throw him.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 23, 2013)

They try and fuck with the mural and there's going to be hell to pay.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 23, 2013)

At the end of the day it looks like a regular (read: piss poor) consultation process where a pre-judged plan will more or less whole-sale be foisted upon all affected. They might concede on some issues to appear compromising, but it'd be a mistake to think there's no deeper plan on the council's and commerce's side.


----------



## leanderman (Jan 23, 2013)

It's insane: completely devoid of details, facts and specifics. 

Is this really how the world works?


----------



## TruXta (Jan 23, 2013)

leanderman said:


> It's insane: completely devoid of details, facts and specifics.
> 
> Is this really how the world works?


Parts of it yes. Why the surprise?


----------



## editor (Jan 23, 2013)

Unlike the ever-slippery Brixton Green, Oval House have already been in touch with the Southwyck House residents group and appear keen to have a normal dialogue, using normal words.

I'd love to see a community theatre on Somerleyton (with the obvious caveats about Carlton Mansions/mural being protected).


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 23, 2013)

The forthcoming SPD consultation - I hope - will be an opportunity to comment on proposed developments like these all around Brixton.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 23, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:


> My 'shared vision' would be brad pinned to the nuclear dawn mural with a firework sticking out of his arse


 
I prefer a parking meter as opposed to a firework to be inflicted, if you don't mind.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 23, 2013)

editor said:


> Who the feck are Social Life and what does this buzzword gibberish mean?


 
"Placemaking" is wankspeak for designing a local environment that's conducive to the needs of the local community, that is also visually and aesthetically pleasing (often using stuff like landscaping, parks, water features, public sculpture etc). I'm sure Crispy can describe it better.

As for "accelerating local social innovation", that can mean anything from helping locals on a start-up for something needed locally (say a proper pre-school childcare operation) to providing a "talking shop" so that the local meeting attenders have somewhere to waffle.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Jan 23, 2013)

editor said:


> All that touchy-feely buzzword drivel just alienates and disfranchises the very people they're purporting to represent.
> 
> Why can't they talk in normal language with normal words that normal people can understand?


 
because they're smug self-satisfied wankers with less right to live on god's clean earth than norovirus.  they don't want to talk like normal people because they consider normal people beneath their dignity.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 23, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Wishy washy urban studies/planning/architecture consultancy bods that hope to rake it in big with councils. They could be great of course, but the website is chockablock with "thought leadership" and whatnot.
> 
> 
> http://social-life.co/page/social-life-cities-work/
> ...


 
Had a look at the website, and what I really loved is that while they "say" a lot, there's little actual meaning to what is said, beyond "behold my specious waffle".


----------



## TruXta (Jan 23, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Had a look at the website, and what I really loved is that while they "say" a lot, there's little actual meaning to what is said, beyond "behold my specious waffle".


It's incredibly difficult to work out what they actually do isn't it?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 23, 2013)

el-ahrairah said:


> because they're smug self-satisfied wankers with less right to live on god's clean earth than norovirus. they don't want to talk like normal people because they consider normal people beneath their dignity.


 
Alternatively, "talking normally" would send a message to the proles that "we don't need these fucks to tell us what to do, we can work that out for ourselves!".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 23, 2013)

TruXta said:


> It's incredibly difficult to work out what they actually do isn't it?


 
It distills down to "we're a consultancy that's a social enterprise, so we're not only good guys, we're cool too!".
They've obviously never heard that only square people think it's cool to be cool.

Follow the links, and they were set up by the Young Foundation, one of whose trustees is Tim Allen, the MD of Portland, and former nuLabour policy advisor.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 24, 2013)

editor said:


> Unlike the ever-slippery Brixton Green, Oval House have already been in touch with the Southwyck House residents group and appear keen to have a normal dialogue, using normal words.
> 
> I'd love to see a community theatre on Somerleyton (with the obvious caveats about Carlton Mansions/mural being protected).


 
Southwyck House residents group are on Brixton Greens website as one the residents groups they are engaging with.




> *MAKING SURE EVERYONE IS INVOLVED*
> 
> Please check the list of organisations to help us make sure we include all groups(formal and informal). Please contact us if we’ve missed any


 
And also




> *Lambeth Council has agreed to transform Somerleyton Road in partnership with the local community!!!*
> 
> The Somerleyton Road Project will be one of the first of the Future Brixton schemes to be brought forward and *delivered in partnership with the local community*.
> Cllr Pete Robbins, Cabinet member for Housing & Regeneration, said:_ “This is a new approach for Lambeth, and we’re excited about working with both Brixton Green and Ovalhouse theatre on these ambitious plans.”_
> ...


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 24, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:


> dont get me wrong, it would be great to have the Oval House theatre in Brixton, as long as:
> 
> a - it doesn't mess with carlton mansions
> b - it doesn't mess with the mural
> c - brad doesn't trouser a load of cash for his supposed 'community project'


 
As for a and b

Oval House will not be messing with either Carlton Mansions or the Mural. Both the mural and the Mansions are separate from the proposed Oval House Theatre development which will be on corner of Somerleyton road and Coldharbour lane. What happens to them is in the end up to the Council

Oval House Theatre will be negotiating with Lambeth Council to move to Brixton using there own resources and an arts grant ( if they get it) as a separate scheme within the whole development of Somerleyton road site. (That is my understanding at the moment. Its all a bit sudden and I am still taking all this in). It is not definite yet. But the Council support the idea.

Oval House Theatre are seeking to talk to as many groups as possible independently to explain why they want to come to Brixton and what they have to offer to the area.

Oval House Theatre need to be seen as separate issue to whatever people think of Brixton Green.

Personally I think they are a good organisation with a sound track record who want to play a positive role in Brixton.

They are not just a theatre. They work with young people for example.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 27, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Some development has occured. But I am unable to understand a word of tonight's press release, viz:
> 
> *Lambeth Council has agreed to transform Somerleyton Road in partnership with the local community!!!*
> 
> ...


 
Thanks for the info Leanderman. To clarify this is not a Lamberth Council press release. Its from the Brixton Green website.

The Council Future Brixton webpage says this. 




> Two Lambeth organisations are working with the council on an exciting project that could see a theatre at the heart of a development in Brixton town centre.
> The site is largely, but not wholly, council owned and was identified in the Brixton Masterplan (2009) as a key regeneration opportunity.
> 
> Brixton Green is a registered mutual organisation set up four years ago to make it possible for all sections of the community to come together and make a positive and informed contribution to the redevelopment of Somerleyton Road. There are now over 1,000 people who live or work in Brixton who are shareholders and supportive of the vision.
> ...


 
I think this needs a separate thread.


----------

