Sun, Mar 26, 2017 


Redevelopment or Social Housing?


mail this discussion to a friend..


Total = 6 messages   -   Viewing all 6 messages   -   View by pages of 10:  1

  [Redevelopment or Social Cleansing?] - Posted: 01 April 2015 - 09:53 pm GMT   /   Edited: 01 April 2015 - 10:02 pm GMT
Micro

View user details & audio files
*
New-user

Posts: 5

Website?:  No link
File/Image?:  No file



How many estates is this happening on? Share your comments and views if you relate to this:
According to reports, Peabody has been given £ millions towards providing 'affordable' housing under the Estate Regeneration Grant. However, on the Clapham Junction estate Peabody has apparently squandered money in the last two years since redevelopment commenced, paying contractors Lakehouse to make cosmetic 'improvements' to existing flats in each block. This was under a so-called Quality Homes Programme which Peabody failed to provide full information on, despite promises to do so. Tenants were bullied and harassed by the contractors to have surveys done, resulting in flats having complete electrical re-wiring, kitchen and bathroom works and recently front doors being replaced. All this has been done in blocks due for demolition- some by summer 2016 !
How could this possibly be justified economically at a time of austerity cuts, especially when the whole justification for the redevelopment of this estate, was that it was uneconomic to repair and maintain? Yet these works have been carried out at this late stage, which is a gross contradiction. The only reason I and other tenants suspect, is that Peabody have a hidden agenda to 'decant' existing assured rent social tenants off the estate, so that those refurbished flats vacated can be re-let to new tenants at high market rents on a short term lease. This has already happened in around 76 flats, where assured tenants were paid to move away from Clapham Junction.
Peabody promised us in a printed booklet that if planning permission for redevelopment went ahead, every tenant living on the estate at the time would be guaranteed the offer of a new flat on the redeveloped estate. Peabody and the building contractors have now reneged on that promise, by announcing there will be fewer flats for assured tenants and pressuring more of us to move off the estate. We are only being offered a derisory sum of money. We have also heard this is happening on other estates. Is this redevelopment or really 'social cleansing' to sell off flats to wealthier people? Has Peabody 'sold out' on providing sufficient social housing?



[back to forum][quote]
  [RE: Redevelopment or Social Housing?] - Posted: 10 April 2015 - 01:15 pm GMT
erewhon

View user details & audio files
***
Main-user

Posts: 499

Website?:  No link
File/Image?:  No file



This is a very important issue. From the news item about the change of Chair of Peabody Board that the incoming new Chair, Sir Bob Kerslake, looks forward to taking up the role at a time when Peabody is developing 8000 new homes.

“I am fortunate to be joining Peabody at such an exciting time. Peabody has an ambitious programme of investment and regeneration in Thamesmead.

"And across the whole of London Peabody has a development pipeline of 8,000 new homes and aims to support 1,000 people a year to find employment. "

This raises questions: How many of these homes will be for social rent? How 'affordable' is Peabody affordable housing (look at the problems the ex Crown Estate Peabody tenants are having with huge rent rises to 'affordable' levels').

Will Peabody actually be providing more social rent homes overall, will the figure remain static, or will there be an overall loss of social rent homes?

How many more assured and secure tenancy residents will find themselves being pressured to accept housing elsewhere with inadequate compensation?

How well supervised are these contracts? Are they value for money (this is the only thing the government cares about when it comes to monitoring Housing Associations).



[back to forum][quote]
  [RE: Redevelopment or Social Housing?] - Posted: 10 April 2015 - 03:43 pm GMT
erewhon

View user details & audio files
***
Main-user

Posts: 499

Website?:  No link
File/Image?:  No file



Is this the same estate, with flats for sale at these prices?


Prices: £820,000 - £870,000
Postcode: SW11 1TY
Units: 2 bed apartments
Status: Just launched- 70% of first release under offer

https://www.peabodysales.co.uk/developments/st-johns-way/



[back to forum][quote]
  [RE: Redevelopment or Social Housing?] - Posted: 10 April 2015 - 03:49 pm GMT
erewhon

View user details & audio files
***
Main-user

Posts: 499

Website?:  No link
File/Image?:  No file



The new front doors are because there are more recent fire safety regulations that the 'old' front doors (some of which are not very old) do not conform to. The same might go for electrical wiring on safety grounds. But the rest - if the flats really are due for demolition - this is a waste of money.



[back to forum][quote]
  [RE: Redevelopment or Social Housing?] - Posted: 18 April 2015 - 04:29 am GMT
Micro

View user details & audio files
*
New-user

Posts: 5

Website?:  No link
File/Image?:  [image]



Thanks to erehwon for your comments. You are right, this is an important issue that has implications for all Peabody residents in London.

Yes, this is the same estate with those high flat prices as SW11 1TY is the main postcode for the Clapham Junction estate. This is where blocks are being demolished, that were only recently refurbished by Lakehouse in the 'Quality Homes' fiasco. Also, this is now an even more topical issue with the Tory proposed 'right to buy' policy for housing association tenants. This is clearly an election bribe and many who watched the local news on BBC1 that evening, might have welcomed the comments made by spokesman David Lavarack on the Blackfriars Estate, that Peabody opposed the policy as it would reduce the social housing stock availability for those who can only afford to rent. However, while we know there are some decent people working within Peabody, (often they eventually leave in their high staff turnover) they have sold properties on the open market, as happened on the Shaftesbury estate in Battersea and other areas. These houses are lost to social housing needs and not replaced. (We notice that Peabody has an account with Coutts the bank for the super rich, while the local council only used Barclays!) This all seems hypocritical, to say the least.

Lastly, the architect's digital image of the new estate is inaccurate. For it to make any sense, three of the existing adjacent private buildings and shops would also have to be demolished! Local businesses are amazed at how Peabody's architect could make such a mistake in printed leaflets and on the website. If Peabody gets that information wrong, then how much else are they getting wrong in their redevelopment plans?
Tenants associations seem to be too tame and ineffective in raising these issues. Some of us have already lobbied our local election candidates. Perhaps Peabody residents in London also need to form a new joint pressure group to hold them to account? All comments welcome.



[back to forum][quote]
  [RE: Redevelopment or Social Housing?] - Posted: 21 April 2015 - 11:54 am GMT
erewhon

View user details & audio files
***
Main-user

Posts: 499

Website?:  No link
File/Image?:  No file



And see this piece of housing news - Peter Vernon of Grosvenor and Jenny Daly of Taylor Wimpey have just joined Peabody as non-executive directors.

http://www.24dash.com/news/housing/2015-04-20-Big-names-from-property-world-join-Peabody-Board.


Howlett said

“Both Peter and Jennie bring a wealth of additional experience to Peabody. Their expertise in urban regeneration, planning and investment will help us deliver even more for Londoners."

“Over the next few years we will significantly increase our development pipeline, improving more neighbourhoods through creative and attractive urban design and public realm enhancements, great services and more investment in our communities. These appointments reflect Peabody’s intention to play a major part in tackling London’s housing crisis.”

Also in the article:

Vernon has been a London First board member since 2008. He is deputy chair of the West End Partnership, a public/private partnership to set and deliver strategy for the West End. He was a member of the 2012 Montague Review and the RSA City Growth Commission and remains a member of the British Property Federation policy committee.

Peabody owns and manages around 27,000 homes, with 8,000 new homes planned across the capital, meaning Peabody will home one in every 100 people in London.

Peabody has already announced that the former Civil Service head, Lord Kerslake, will take over as Peabody chair from 1 June.

The Empire grows. And when will equal quality and expertise be applied to the repairs services for social housing tenants?



[back to forum][quote]

Total = 6 messages   -   Viewing all 6 messages   -   View by pages of 10:  1

Reply to Thread



You are not Registered or not Logged-in - You must register to use the forum.


Wanna join up? - Click here  to Signup or Login !!

[you'll be brought right back to this point after signing up]




Back to Forum





[About Peabody Tenants]   [Contact us]   [Privacy Policy]