This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/oct/07/southwark-london-regeneration-urban-renewal-social-cleansing-fears

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Regenerating Southwark: urban renewal prompts social cleansing fears Regenerating Southwark: urban renewal prompts social cleansing fears
(about 1 hour later)
The London borough of Southwark has become a prime site for the capital’s housing crisis rage. From unsold £50m apartments at the top of the Shard to the redevelopment of postwar municipal estates, its 28.5 sq km (11 sq miles) spreading south from the Thames attract claims that London is becoming a high-rise, high-cost city that puts the wealthy first.The London borough of Southwark has become a prime site for the capital’s housing crisis rage. From unsold £50m apartments at the top of the Shard to the redevelopment of postwar municipal estates, its 28.5 sq km (11 sq miles) spreading south from the Thames attract claims that London is becoming a high-rise, high-cost city that puts the wealthy first.
It was in Southwark where spikes embedded beside the doorway of a block of flats to deter rough sleepers triggered a storm on Twitter. The council made news last year when it auctioned two houses for nearly £3m, prompting protesting squatters to move in and accuse it of social cleansing. Throughout this century the slow death of Southwark’s 1970s neo-brutalist Heygate estate has divided opinion about the built environment, urban communities and the treatment of the poor.It was in Southwark where spikes embedded beside the doorway of a block of flats to deter rough sleepers triggered a storm on Twitter. The council made news last year when it auctioned two houses for nearly £3m, prompting protesting squatters to move in and accuse it of social cleansing. Throughout this century the slow death of Southwark’s 1970s neo-brutalist Heygate estate has divided opinion about the built environment, urban communities and the treatment of the poor.
The borough contains some of the starkest contrasts between the glistening, gentrifying new London that sucks in global wealth and an older, wearier one that seems at risk of being devoured. Close by London Bridge station, the White’s Grounds council estate, though pleasant and well maintained, stands in telling contrast to the reclaimed Bermondsey Street with its White Cube art gallery, stylish restaurants and boutique hotel.The borough contains some of the starkest contrasts between the glistening, gentrifying new London that sucks in global wealth and an older, wearier one that seems at risk of being devoured. Close by London Bridge station, the White’s Grounds council estate, though pleasant and well maintained, stands in telling contrast to the reclaimed Bermondsey Street with its White Cube art gallery, stylish restaurants and boutique hotel.
John Paul Maytum, a council tenant who chairs the tenant management organisation that runs White’s Grounds, says many fellow residents are feeling “squeezed by the pace of change in Southwark”. He stresses that he is not opposed to improving the area and that it’s “absolutely a good thing” to have aspiration and economic growth. But adds: “It’s kind of beyond politics. A lot of people here feel that life is racing faster and faster ahead of them. They don’t feel they will ever catch up.”John Paul Maytum, a council tenant who chairs the tenant management organisation that runs White’s Grounds, says many fellow residents are feeling “squeezed by the pace of change in Southwark”. He stresses that he is not opposed to improving the area and that it’s “absolutely a good thing” to have aspiration and economic growth. But adds: “It’s kind of beyond politics. A lot of people here feel that life is racing faster and faster ahead of them. They don’t feel they will ever catch up.”
Southwark’s housing rows crystallise wider debates about London as its population and cost of living soar. The borough’s neighbourhoods vary from Bankside, where the Globe theatre and Tate Modern gallery stand proudly beside the Thames, to places with names historically synonymous with the working class – Bermondsey, Walworth, Peckham – to gentrified East Dulwich. It is home to about 300,000 people, a figure expected to rise by 50,000 by 2030.Southwark’s housing rows crystallise wider debates about London as its population and cost of living soar. The borough’s neighbourhoods vary from Bankside, where the Globe theatre and Tate Modern gallery stand proudly beside the Thames, to places with names historically synonymous with the working class – Bermondsey, Walworth, Peckham – to gentrified East Dulwich. It is home to about 300,000 people, a figure expected to rise by 50,000 by 2030.
Who will those people be? How will they all squeeze in? What sort of incomes will they need if they are to stay? A short answer comes from Peter John, Labour leader of Southwark council since the party regained power from a Liberal Democrat-Conservative coalition in 2010. “I’m trying to get as many homes as possible built,” he says. “I want high-quality housing for all, from council houses to homes for millionaires.” He also wants these properties to be evenly spread: “We want to create genuinely mixed tenure right across the borough.”Who will those people be? How will they all squeeze in? What sort of incomes will they need if they are to stay? A short answer comes from Peter John, Labour leader of Southwark council since the party regained power from a Liberal Democrat-Conservative coalition in 2010. “I’m trying to get as many homes as possible built,” he says. “I want high-quality housing for all, from council houses to homes for millionaires.” He also wants these properties to be evenly spread: “We want to create genuinely mixed tenure right across the borough.”
The objective and its pursuit have met determined opposition. John has characterised his administration’s approach to housing as part of a “jobs and growth agenda” embracing ambitious regeneration schemes in partnership with property developers. This is not unique to Southwark – such projects have long been commonplace in the capital – but the borough’s waterfront locations, just the width of the river from the City, attract interest from investors and with that comes the chance to extract “planning gain” from those investors in the form of affordable homes and other benefits, such as transport and street improvements, beyond what the shrinking public purse can supply.The objective and its pursuit have met determined opposition. John has characterised his administration’s approach to housing as part of a “jobs and growth agenda” embracing ambitious regeneration schemes in partnership with property developers. This is not unique to Southwark – such projects have long been commonplace in the capital – but the borough’s waterfront locations, just the width of the river from the City, attract interest from investors and with that comes the chance to extract “planning gain” from those investors in the form of affordable homes and other benefits, such as transport and street improvements, beyond what the shrinking public purse can supply.
But critics, notably media-savvy local activists, denounce John as a creature of big-money private interests and grand projects that colonise urban space and marginalise ordinary people. John has praised the Shard (which began sprouting before his time as council leader) as a job generator and beacon of aspiration; others deride Renzo Piano’s landmark spire as a monument to greed.But critics, notably media-savvy local activists, denounce John as a creature of big-money private interests and grand projects that colonise urban space and marginalise ordinary people. John has praised the Shard (which began sprouting before his time as council leader) as a job generator and beacon of aspiration; others deride Renzo Piano’s landmark spire as a monument to greed.
These regeneration conflicts illuminate the financial and political factors shaping some of the country’s most valuable real estate. The council’s director of regeneration, Stephen Platts, denies it is a soft touch for developers: “The public doesn’t see the storming out of meetings, the rows, the drama. It’s not all cosy cups of tea.”These regeneration conflicts illuminate the financial and political factors shaping some of the country’s most valuable real estate. The council’s director of regeneration, Stephen Platts, denies it is a soft touch for developers: “The public doesn’t see the storming out of meetings, the rows, the drama. It’s not all cosy cups of tea.”
John rejects accusations of social cleansing. Southwark is by far the largest local authority landlord in London, letting 39,000 homes that account for 29% of the borough’s housing stock. John says he considers that “a pretty good place to be” and is assembling an ambitious programme to build 11,000 council homes by 2043. Delivered through a separate, council-owned company, these dwellings would have conventional council rents and secure tenancies and could potentially be exempt from right-to-buy. However, about 40% of the funding will come from selling existing council homes.John rejects accusations of social cleansing. Southwark is by far the largest local authority landlord in London, letting 39,000 homes that account for 29% of the borough’s housing stock. John says he considers that “a pretty good place to be” and is assembling an ambitious programme to build 11,000 council homes by 2043. Delivered through a separate, council-owned company, these dwellings would have conventional council rents and secure tenancies and could potentially be exempt from right-to-buy. However, about 40% of the funding will come from selling existing council homes.
Such sales can prompt outrage. But Southwark’s cabinet member for housing, Richard Livingstone, says it was “a no-brainer” to dispose of the £3m council houses, grade II-listed but uninhabitable buildings near the fashionable Borough market. It meant 20 council homes could be built nearby, “places some of the 20,000 people on our waiting lists will actually be able to live in”.Such sales can prompt outrage. But Southwark’s cabinet member for housing, Richard Livingstone, says it was “a no-brainer” to dispose of the £3m council houses, grade II-listed but uninhabitable buildings near the fashionable Borough market. It meant 20 council homes could be built nearby, “places some of the 20,000 people on our waiting lists will actually be able to live in”.
Other scenarios have presented more complex challenges. Southwark contains the Aylesbury estate, one of the biggest in Europe. Built between 1963 and 1977, it was condemned as a concrete jungle long before Tony Blair made his first speech as prime minister there in 1997, pledging to help British people “forgotten by government”.Other scenarios have presented more complex challenges. Southwark contains the Aylesbury estate, one of the biggest in Europe. Built between 1963 and 1977, it was condemned as a concrete jungle long before Tony Blair made his first speech as prime minister there in 1997, pledging to help British people “forgotten by government”.
The Notting Hill Housing Trust, one of London’s largest housing associations, is to deliver a much-stalled transformation vision, which, over an 18-year period, entails the present 2,400 homes being replaced in stages by 4,200 new ones, half for market sale and half affordable. The council, its finances under pressure from cuts, had decided it could not afford to renovate the estate. A commission it appointed to explore options, led by Jan Luba QC, a housing law expert, found that “some of the badly designed system-built estates were simply beyond repair”.The Notting Hill Housing Trust, one of London’s largest housing associations, is to deliver a much-stalled transformation vision, which, over an 18-year period, entails the present 2,400 homes being replaced in stages by 4,200 new ones, half for market sale and half affordable. The council, its finances under pressure from cuts, had decided it could not afford to renovate the estate. A commission it appointed to explore options, led by Jan Luba QC, a housing law expert, found that “some of the badly designed system-built estates were simply beyond repair”.
Arguments about the relative costs and benefits of refurbishment and demolition were central to the battle over the Heygate. Its 1,200 mostly social rented dwellings will be replaced on the same site by twice that number of homes, but only 79 will be for social rent with a further 500 either for rent or part-buy at the higher “affordable” levels. The rest of the units will be for market sale. Already, two-bedroom flats in the area can fetch at least £1m. Closer to the river many properties are priced far above Labour’s £2m “mansion tax” threshold.Arguments about the relative costs and benefits of refurbishment and demolition were central to the battle over the Heygate. Its 1,200 mostly social rented dwellings will be replaced on the same site by twice that number of homes, but only 79 will be for social rent with a further 500 either for rent or part-buy at the higher “affordable” levels. The rest of the units will be for market sale. Already, two-bedroom flats in the area can fetch at least £1m. Closer to the river many properties are priced far above Labour’s £2m “mansion tax” threshold.
John insists the deal, sealed eight weeks after Labour’s return to power, brought the saga to an overdue end and that a 25% affordable component was “a bloody good one”, given the economic climate of the time. Yet he also has regrets: “If the opportunity ever arose again to clear out a whole estate, you wouldn’t do it. It’s not the right way to regenerate. It’s terrible.”John insists the deal, sealed eight weeks after Labour’s return to power, brought the saga to an overdue end and that a 25% affordable component was “a bloody good one”, given the economic climate of the time. Yet he also has regrets: “If the opportunity ever arose again to clear out a whole estate, you wouldn’t do it. It’s not the right way to regenerate. It’s terrible.”
In its defence, the council invokes the wider redevelopment of the busy Elephant & Castle area, of which the Heygate’s demise is but one part. The scheme promises transport, environmental, retail and employment enhancements too. The Elephant was designated an “opportunity area” by the London mayor, Boris Johnson, in his strategic planning role, another factor in the regeneration equation – London mayors can block or take over large schemes that are not configured as they would like.In its defence, the council invokes the wider redevelopment of the busy Elephant & Castle area, of which the Heygate’s demise is but one part. The scheme promises transport, environmental, retail and employment enhancements too. The Elephant was designated an “opportunity area” by the London mayor, Boris Johnson, in his strategic planning role, another factor in the regeneration equation – London mayors can block or take over large schemes that are not configured as they would like.
A target has been set for 5,000 homes to be built there. Of these, the council says 1,715 affordable properties of different kinds are either completed or in the pipeline. With about 2,200 of its stock in the opportunity area and due to stay, it contends that the social blend it wants is taking shape, along with the general upgrade of the area, and with more affordable homes guaranteed in the Heygate’s locality than there were on the estate. “For us,” says Livingstone, “that was always the most important thing.”A target has been set for 5,000 homes to be built there. Of these, the council says 1,715 affordable properties of different kinds are either completed or in the pipeline. With about 2,200 of its stock in the opportunity area and due to stay, it contends that the social blend it wants is taking shape, along with the general upgrade of the area, and with more affordable homes guaranteed in the Heygate’s locality than there were on the estate. “For us,” says Livingstone, “that was always the most important thing.”
Like much of inner London, Southwark has experienced long-term gentrification, starting with artists moving in in search of cheap properties – film-maker Derek Jarman lived in a squat and shot much of his 1978 punk rock movie Jubilee there – followed by young professionals, then bankers. Planning policies, with housing at their core, can both exploit and regulate these trends. But arguments continue about the trade-offs and choices made.Like much of inner London, Southwark has experienced long-term gentrification, starting with artists moving in in search of cheap properties – film-maker Derek Jarman lived in a squat and shot much of his 1978 punk rock movie Jubilee there – followed by young professionals, then bankers. Planning policies, with housing at their core, can both exploit and regulate these trends. But arguments continue about the trade-offs and choices made.
Jerry Flynn, a former Heygate resident, has told the London assembly’s housing committee that the Elephant & Castle opportunity area will contain too few social rented homes to meet need and that not many ex-Heygate tenants have been rehoused in the area as promised. “For us, the regeneration has not been good news,” he said.Jerry Flynn, a former Heygate resident, has told the London assembly’s housing committee that the Elephant & Castle opportunity area will contain too few social rented homes to meet need and that not many ex-Heygate tenants have been rehoused in the area as promised. “For us, the regeneration has not been good news,” he said.
Nearly 10% of the borough’s council homes are overcrowded, with many young adults still living with their parents as rocketing private-sector prices have further reduced options for moving out. A three-bedroom flat on White’s Grounds, lost to the borough through right-to-buy, recently changed hands for £500,000. Maytum speaks of incomers complaining about “riff-raff”.Nearly 10% of the borough’s council homes are overcrowded, with many young adults still living with their parents as rocketing private-sector prices have further reduced options for moving out. A three-bedroom flat on White’s Grounds, lost to the borough through right-to-buy, recently changed hands for £500,000. Maytum speaks of incomers complaining about “riff-raff”.
The town hall recognises that Southwark’s shifting social landscape creates uneven effects. John says decisions about where the 11,000 new council homes will go will involve “sophisticated ways of measuring the strengths of the communities to make sure the benefits outweigh the problems”.The town hall recognises that Southwark’s shifting social landscape creates uneven effects. John says decisions about where the 11,000 new council homes will go will involve “sophisticated ways of measuring the strengths of the communities to make sure the benefits outweigh the problems”.
While wanting mixed communities, he has examples of them being seen as mixed blessings – there are council houses adjacent to the Globe but some of their occupants do not find the high-end setting ideal, he admits. Platts describes elderly Southwark people living on state pensions who have no use for trendy hair salons or the expensive foodie heaven Borough market has become. “It’s a tension. We have to try to solve it.” It is no simple task.While wanting mixed communities, he has examples of them being seen as mixed blessings – there are council houses adjacent to the Globe but some of their occupants do not find the high-end setting ideal, he admits. Platts describes elderly Southwark people living on state pensions who have no use for trendy hair salons or the expensive foodie heaven Borough market has become. “It’s a tension. We have to try to solve it.” It is no simple task.
How do you solve London’s housing problems?
There are no silver-bullet solutions to London’s housing problem but innovative attempts are being made to address some of the worst aspects.
Islington council, considered by many to be the capital’s most radical local authority in this policy field, is fostering support for intensified council house building by using its local lettings policy to ensure that local people benefit. It is also succeeding in avoiding introducing new, higher “affordable rent” levels brought in by the government, and proposing to use planning policy to impose penalties on “buy-to-leave” owners.
Calls for far higher council tax rates to be levied on such owners have been made by Labour-run Camden council and the London mayor, Boris Johnson. The mayor also subscribes to a strong, cross-party consensus for councils to have more scope to borrow money to build council homes. Some activists would like more social housing taken into community ownership. Walterton and Elgin Community Homes in Westminster is a benchmark example.
In an attempt to improve standards and affordability in the fast-growing private rented sector, several London councils have embraced licensing schemes for private landlords and the idea of no-fee council-run letting agencies as alternatives to the commercial ones.
More profound challenges face councils who want to drive harder bargains with private developers over the provision of community benefits, including low-cost homes. Political will matters, but a developer-friendly mayor such as Johnson can enable this to be bypassed or undermined.
Then there’s the great unmentionable – building on the less sylvan parts of the huge London greenbelt, much of which lies within Greater London. Few politicians have dared advocate what could be the biggest answer of them all.