Southwark Plan.

Stop demolitions and requisition empty homes!

Posted by

0

Dear Friend

I hope you have been keeping well during these difficult times.

The Up the Elephant campaign has been working with Latin Elephant and Southwark Law Centre, to help shopping centre traders through the Coronavirus crisis and with their relocation plans. According to Southwark Council 45 traders have now been relocated, with 28 applications rejected. Traders can also draw on two funds – the relocation and transition funds – and Latin Elphant and SLC have been doing great work helping traders with this.

The campaign has also joined with eighteen other groups to send an open letter to Southwark demanding that it Stop demolitions and requisition empty homes to help solve the housing crisis.

There will also be a socially distanced protest to open up empty homes this Thurs 4 June 6pm, outside Pret a Manger
One the Elephant, 1 St Gabriel Walk, Elephant and Castle, London SE1 6SA
FB Event here

This is a socially distanced protest. Please bring a mask or face covering and stay 2 metres apart.

Regards
Jerry
PS We will be having an on-line meeting very shortly – notice and link to follow.

image
Twitter
Facebook
Website
Copyright © 2020 Elephant Amenity Network, All rights reserved.
Our mailing address is:

Elephant Amenity Network

18 Market Place
Blue Anchor Lane

London, Southwark SE16 3UQ

United Kingdom

image

35% Campaign update – Old Kent Rd scheme faces loss of affordable housing

Posted by

0

Old Kent Rd scheme faces loss of affordable housing

May 01, 2020 12:00 am

Berkeley Homes threatens to reduce affordable housing at Malt St –Berkeley Homes is the first developer in Southwark to threaten to reduce the affordable housing in one of its schemes, since the onset of the Coronavirus crisis. Berkeley secured planning permission for the Malt St development, just off the Old Kent Rd, in June 2019, with a promise to build 40% affordable housing. Since then it has joined-up with Peabody, who had a smaller, neighbouring development on Nyes Wharf. Together the two sites will provide 1,569 new homes, with 40% affordable housing (359 at social rent and 222 shared-ownership), delivered by Peabody.

Now a planning committee briefing reveals that this affordable housing is at ‘risk’ because Berkeley intends to mount an appeal that will reopen the question of the viability of the scheme. To prevent this happening, the briefing recommends approval of an unprecedented clause in Southwark’s s106 planning agreement with Berkeley, that could see all the affordable housing lost, should development partner, [Peabody] hit financial trouble.

The Southwark Law Centre has written to the planning committee, objecting to the proposed clause and requesting a deferral, to allow the serious issues it raises to be properly addressed.

Why a Mortgagee in Possession (MIP) clause matters

The planning committee is being asked to approve a so-called Mortgagee in Possession (MIP) clause. Simply put, if a borrower cannot pay their mortgage, then the lender can take legal possession of the property and sell it – they become the ‘mortgagee in possession’ and up until now this has evidently been covered with a clause that keeps the affordable housing affordable ‘in perpetuity’ .

The MIP clause proposed for Malt St is different – it will not secure the affordable housing ‘in perpetuity’ , should Peabody fail. Instead, Southwark or another affordable housing provider would be given the option to take on the affordable housing, but if they do not, the affordable housing can then be sold onto the open market. If Southwark does buy the affordable housing, they would also have to pay anything outstanding ‘under the terms of the relevant security documents, including all accrued principal monies, interest and costs and expenses’ 1.

The MIP briefing is at pains to point out that such a situation is very unlikely to arise, because Peabody is in rude financial health; it has an annual turnover of £630m, an annual profit of £160m and assets of £7.6bn, so the possibility that it will fail is remote. The briefing reinforces the point by noting that no major housing association has ever gone into administration and quotes a GLA document that says ‘there is no known cases of a MIP clause being triggered…..’ 2.

Mayor of London opens the door…

This all begs an obvious question – why replace a MIP clause that protects affordable housing, in all circumstances, even unlikely ones, with a clause that does not?

Part of the answer is that this is what the Mayor of London wants. As Southwark’s briefing explains it, the Mayor wants ‘a consistent approach to MIP clauses across the London boroughs and to secure greater access to funding for RPs (registered providers) to increase the delivery of affordable housing’. The report continues; ‘In order to achieve this, the GLA MIP clause would allow, in certain limited and unlikely circumstances, affordable housing to no longer be “in perpetuity”’ . The briefing notes that Southwark’s own MIP clause is different from the Mayor’s, precisely on this point; Southwark does require affordable housing to remain such ‘in perpetuity’ , should a RP go into administration 3.

Peabody takes advantage

Peabody also wants the GLA MIP adopted, because it would allow them to borrow more money for other projects. To quote the briefing ‘Peabody have funds to deliver this scheme, but given the very large scale of the investment they are only willing to make such a commitment on the basis that they are able to secure additional funding in the future against the asset of the completed scheme’ . The report says that while the Malt St scheme is ‘entirely financed by Peabody from its own investment’ Peabody nonetheless wants more private bank finance and needs to make more of its ‘capital assets’ and the banks consider that the affordable housing ‘asset is not sufficiently liquid’. The briefing reiterates ‘Peabody has confirmed that they cannot proceed as the RP [registered provider] partner in this scheme without this clause’ 4.

Berkeley turns the screw

Berkeley backs Peabody, saying that it cannot, or will not, proceed without them. Berkeley goes on to threaten to reduce the affordable housing in the scheme, if the GLA MIP clause is not agreed, by way of an appeal to the government of ‘non-determination’. Berkeley would argue that Southwark had failed to conclude the s106 legal agreement in the required time, and also reopen the question of the viability of the scheme 5. Berkeley has a track record for such manouvers; this 2018 Guardian report shows that Berkeley has reduced its affordable housing obligations using viability reviews in almost all of its London schemes.

Southwark’s briefing tries to make the best of things; as well as emphasising the unlikelihood of any default, it claims that this decision will ‘not therefore set a precedent for other schemes.’ The Mayor has different ideas – he wants to see his MIP clauses used across London and says they will be used for anything he ‘calls-in’, (such as the Biscuit Factory) and that he ‘will promote their use for other schemes that are referable…and non-referable’ ie basically everything 6.

What we think

A Mortgagee in Possession (MIP) s106 clause that has evidently been perfectly adequate up to now is to be changed, compromising the ‘in perpetuity’ principle of affordable housing. The Mayor hopes that this will help meet his strategic 50% affordable housing target, but Peabody and Berkeley are not proposing 50% for the Malt St site. More generally, the Mayor has published no concrete commitment from developers and registered providers to increase affordable housing, in exchange for the Mayor’s more market-friendly MIP.

So, while it would be easy for Southwark’s planning committee to approve the clause in the almost sure knowledge that it will never be triggered and the affordable housing will remain as such, ‘in perpetuity’ , they should nonetheless reject the Mayor’s new MIP clause. It purports to facilitate a general increase in affordable housing, but there is no evidence before the committee that this will actually happen, either in Southwark or elsewhere. On the other hand, though, the Mayor’s MIP will definitely weaken the ‘in perpetuity’ status of affordable housing

This is the thin end of a very long wedge. These clauses have already been used in Islington, Tower Hamlets and Lambeth. They are being actively promoted by the GLA and the Mayor. Once they proliferate the whole principle of affordable housing being for ‘in perpetuity’ will start to be lost and developers and their registered provider partners will use the same kind of ingenuity that they have used with viability assessments to squeeze real affordable housing out of London 7.

The briefing and its recommendation, will be considered by the planning committee meeting on Monday 4 May, the first to be held online.

Footnotes:

  1. MIP S106 Briefing-Malt St and Nyes Wharf paras 14,1 ↩
  2. MIP S106 Briefing-Malt St and Nyes Wharf paras 19, 17 ↩
  3. MIP S106 Briefing-Malt St and Nyes Wharf para 8, 14 ↩
  4. MIP S106 Briefing-Malt St and Nyes Wharf para 16, 15, 16, 9 ↩
  5. MIP S106 Briefing-Malt St and Nyes Wharf para 12 ↩
  6. MIP S106 Briefing-Malt St and Nyes Wharf para 23, GLA MIP s106 standard clauses, practice note Jan 2019 para 8 ↩
  7. MIP S106 Briefing-Malt St and Nyes Wharf para 24 ↩

Read in browser »
share on Twitter Like Old Kent Rd scheme faces loss of affordable housing on Facebook

image

Support Shopping centre Traders not Delancey

Posted by

0

Dear Friend

We are in the midst of a public health crisis which has impacted severely on people’s lives and livelihoods, forcing shops and businesses across the UK to close. The position for the Elephant shopping centre traders was already serious, with over half having nowhere to go, come the scheduled centre closure in July – now their situation is acute.

A survey conducted by SE1 website forum found that 72% of people wanted the centre to remain open beyond July. In response developer Delancey says that it still intends to go ahead with closure on the 31st July, but pledged that essential food and pharmacy facilities would remain available, if needed.

This is not good enough. All the remaining shopping centre traders need support now if they are to survive.

Southwark Council are due to assume Compulsory Purchase Order powers on behalf of Delancey, at their reconvened Cabinet meeting, this coming Tuesday. With these powers behind them Delancey’s hand in negotiations with remaining leaseholders and stakeholders will be strengthened. Southwark should not be helping Delancey to build a development that puts small traders out of business and does not give us the social housing we desperately need. 

Instead we call on Southwark Council to support the traders. We welcome its recent promise of £200,000 and now call upon them to release this money immediately as cash grants to traders.

We also maintain our demand that the centre is not closed until all the traders have been properly relocated or suitably compensated.

Please share these hash tags;
#supporttradersnotdelancey
#supportelephantnotdelancey

You can also find Up The Elephant on Twitter & Facebook.
You can read more on the 35% Campaign blog.

Regards
Jerry

image
Twitter
Facebook
Website
Copyright © 2020 Elephant Amenity Network, All rights reserved.
Our mailing address is:

Elephant Amenity Network

18 Market Place
Blue Anchor Lane

London, Southwark SE16 3UQ

United Kingdom

image

35% Campaign – Elephant Park – planning committee misled?

Posted by

0

Elephant Park – planning committee misled?

Mar 01, 2020 12:00 am

Lendlease fails to declare public funding for affordable housing -Developer Lendlease failed to disclose at Last week’s planning committee meeting that it was in receipt of public funding, which could have increased the amount of affordable housing at Elephant Park (aka the Heygate estate regeneration).

The meeting was called because of the large number of objections to the final phase (H7 MP5) and the lack of additional affordable housing. We explained in our previous blog how Lendlease have met their 25% affordable housing requirement, while increasing the total number of homes, but without increasing the number of affordable homes or proportion of social rent (3%).

One of the objections, from the 35% Campaign, was that “There appears to have been no effort to take advantage of any public funding”. Southwark responded by saying: “There is no obligation on Lendlease to seek public funds.” (para 282, 283 of the officer’s report)

The planning committee followed this up in their cross examination of Lendlease, who were asked directly by Cllr King whether they had considered applying for grant funding:

 See video clip of committee meeting on youtube here.

In a lengthy reply, Lendlease did not disclose that the Mayor had in fact committed to fund Elephant Park, back in September 2018.

Elephant Park is the very first entry on a list of estate regeneration projects on the Mayor’s website, which have had funding approved since July 2018.

This gives rise to a number of questions:

  1. Why did Lendlease not say that they had received funding when the question was asked?
  2. Why were the committee members not told that Lendlease has received funding in the committee report?
  3. How much money has Lendlease received from the Mayor?
  4. Why has the affordable housing offer not been improved?

We suspect that the answer to this lies in the murky world of viability; Lendlease insisted in 2013 that only 9.4% of the new homes could be viably provided as affordable.

They repeated this at the planning committee meeting last week and would no doubt argue that any money they have received from the Mayor has gone to bridging the gap between what is viable and the 25% being delivered.

Whatever the merits of this argument (and we think it has none) it still leaves open the question of why Lendlease and the officers report did not disclose the grant funding to members.

There is a similarity here to the ongoing dispute about affordable housing in the shopping centre development. Developer Delancey claims that the £11.24m it is also receiving from the Mayor is being used to increase the amount of social rented housing. We showed previously how it was going to Delancey’s bottom line:

Read in browser »
share on Twitter Like Elephant Park - planning committee misled? on Facebook

35% Campaign update – Elephant Park – final phase, final windfall for Lendlease

Posted by

0

Elephant Park – final phase, final windfall for Lendlease

Feb 21, 2020 12:00 am

Last phase of Heygate regeneration set for approval with increase in number of homes but no increase in affordable. -We blogged last year about the final phase (MP5 H7) of the Heygate regeneration.

Lendlease’s application for 424 new homes (15 social rent) in this final phase is now set to be approved by the Council’s planning committee on Monday.

If approved without a viability review it will seal an increase in the number of new homes beyond that approved by Southwark’s planning committee back in 2013, without any increase in the number of affordable homes. This will result in a total of 2,689 homes (220 more than approved in 2013) of which 92 will be social rent.

 Extract from the 2013 Outline application Committee report

This windfall gives Lendlease the revenue of 220 extra homes that were not included in the original viability assessment of the scheme, which was based on 2,469 units. This allowed Lendlease to build 25% instead of 35% affordable housing and to reduce the required amount of social rented homes to next to nothing. Taking account of the 220 extra homes could have improved both the viability of the whole scheme and the affordable housing offer.

Reviewing viability

We noted in our previous blog that Southwark has neglected to carry out any viability review. Monday’s planning committee report reiterates this, stating: “The council has no mechanism to insist on a viability review” (para 129)

However, this looks to be contradicted by the terms of the Regeneration Agreement between Southwark and Lendlease, which provides a mechanism for the affordable housing mix to be reviewed on an annual basis.

If these annual reviews had been taking place it should have been reflected in higher levels of social rented housing. The fact that the tenure mix hasn’t changed suggests that they haven’t.

Grant Funding

We also noted in our previous blogpost that the 2013 planning committee anticipated that the regeneration could benefit from public funding if it became available.

 Extract from the 2013 Outline application Committee report

This was in line with the Regeneration Agreement, which also obliged the parties to seek grant funding:

Such funding has been available since 2016 when Sadiq Khan announced a £4.6bn funding programme, but despite the 2013 planning committee’s intention and the Regeneration Agreement’s obligation, Lendlease has made no funding application.

Also, despite this clear contractual obligation, Southwark nonetheless states in Monday’s committee report for the final phase: “There is no obligation on Lendlease to seek public funds.” (para 283)

Given the clear obligation on Lendlease to seek grant funding, we say that until Lendlease does so Southwark should reject this final phase application.

Southwark should also reject the application unless Lendlease commits to a viability review. There are a number of reasons why this is necessary. Not only was the original viability assessment based on fewer homes than the number actually being built, but also the free-market homes are being sold for twice Lendlease’s viability assessment estimate.

Another significant change to viability since the original assessment has been Lendlease’s recent decision to let, rather than sell homes in the later phases of the scheme.

Monday’s planning committee should also take account of Policy 3.12 of the Mayor’s London Plan, which says that “The maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing should be sought .. having regard to .. individual circumstances including development viability, {and} the availability of public subsidy.”

The Elephant Park development lost Southwark 1,200 council homes. This final phase is Southwark Council’s last chance to (partially) redeem itself by insisting Lendlease abides by its obligations, reviews the viability of the scheme and applies for grant funding.

Read in browser »
share on Twitter Like Elephant Park - final phase, final windfall for Lendlease on Facebook

Resident Involvement Review Update

Posted by

0

Dear all,

I hope this finds you well. Further to Cllr Williams email below please see the following link where you can find the Resident Participation Cabinet report which was published today. You can find the report and appendices under item 8.

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=302&MId=6419&Ver=4

Southwark Resident Participation Framework

Appendix 1 Resident Involvement Consultation Findings

Appendix 2 Resident Participation Implementation timeline

Appendix 3 Areas map

Kind regards,

George Changua

Tenant & Homeowner Support Officer

Southwark Council || Communities Division || Housing & Modernisation

160 Tooley Street || 5th Floor || Hub 3 || SE1 2QH

T: 0207 525 3326 || E: george.changua@southwark.gov.uk || Website: www.southwark.gov.uk

www.southwark.gov.uk/mysouthwark For council services at your fingertips, register online.

 

A success for shopping centre traders!

Posted by

0

Dear Friend

The shopping centre traders’ deputation and protest at Southwark Council’s Assembly on Tuesday was a great success.

Prior to the Assembly, Southwark Council agreed to contribute £200,000 towards traders’ relocation costs. The money will be in addition to the relocation fund of £634,700, paid by Delancey. Southwark also promised a further announcement on the issue. Details of how the £200k wiil be administered are also awaited.

There can be no doubt this was a response to the campaign and the traders determination to get a fair deal.

The deputation’s 6 representatives (from the main centre, market stalls, arches, plus Latin Elephant and Southwark Law Centre) were well received by the Assembly. It presented their seven demands and took questions from the councillors.

A vibrant protest heard speeches from Paul Heron, of the Public Law Interest Unit and Patria Roman of Latin Elephant, amongst others.

A key demand is for more money from Delancey and no centre closure until all the traders are relocated or suitably compensated – sign the petition here!

We will be meeting very soon to see how we take the campaign forward …hope to see you then!

You can read more here and here

Regards
Jerry
Copyright © 2020 Elephant Amenity Network, All rights reserved.

Shopping centre protest tomorrow

Posted by

0

Dear Friend

Just a reminder that the shopping centre traders are sending a deputation to Southwark Council’s Assembly tomorrow evening, Tuesday 28 January.

We will be supporting them with a vibrant demonstration outside Southwark Council HO, Tooley St, SE1 2QH at 6pm – please join us!

These are the traders’ demands;

  1. that the shopping centre is not closed until every independent trader is relocated or receives financial compensation.
  2. that Delancey increases the relocation fund.
  3. that the rent and service charge costs of the relocation options are brought into line with each other.
  4. that the businesses in Arch 7 are fully included in the relocation strategy and can draw from the relocation fund.
  5. that the market traders around the centre are equally and fairly treated and that all traders get the benefit of rent reductions, until the shopping centre closes.
  6. that the independent business adviser, Tree Shepherd, applies the agreed criteria for the allocation of relocation spaces in a fair and transparent way.
  7. that the database of opportunities reflects what was agreed on the approval of planning permission.

    You can read more here

    Regards
    Jerry

image

Copyright © 2020 Elephant Amenity Network, All rights reserved.

Housing Repairs Survey

Posted by

0

Dear All,

I’m writing to let you know about a new survey for tenants and leaseholders on Southwark’s housing repairs service. The survey is being carried out by Southwark’s Housing Scrutiny Commission.

The short survey can be found here:  https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/housing-community-services-department-community-engagement-team/housing-repairs-tenants-and-leaseholder-survey/

The survey is designed to gather data and views about the repairs service since it came back in house in October 2018.

It would be particularly helpful if you could pass this link on to your own contacts who may be interested in providing feedback and by sharing on social media.

The objective of this cross party review is to make recommendations to the cabinet to assist in improving the repairs service for everyone who relies on it.  If you have any questions about the work of the Housing Scrutiny Commission, please just come back to me.

Best Wishes and Merry Christmas,

Gavin

Councillor Gavin Edwards

Chair Housing Scrutiny Commission

 

Up the Elephant Public Meeting 19 Nov 2019

Posted by

0

Dear Friend

Many thanks to everyone who came along and supported the campaign at the Judicial Review. We had great turn-out – over 40 people – many staying on to hear the case itself. Special thanks to Distriandina for a heartening breakfast!

Now we wait for Justice Dove’s decision, which should be in two or three weeks. In the meantime we must talk about what happens next. Whether we win our lose, there will be much to do, supporting the traders and fighting for an inclusive development that benefits local people.

We are therefore holding a public meeting on Tues 19 November, 7pm, Draper TRA Hall, Hampton Street Junction with Newington Butts
(next to the Santander bike stand) SE17 3AN, more details, including speakers, below – please join us!

Regards
Jerry

image

FB event and map here- please share
For updates go to https://twitter.com/UpTheElephant_

Copyright © 2019 Elephant Amenity Network, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you signed a petition and said “I want to help” or you asked to go on our mailing list.

Our mailing address is:

Elephant Amenity Network

18 Market Place
Blue Anchor Lane

London, Southwark SE16 3UQ

United Kingdom