Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Brixton Somerleyton Road development, Ovalhouse and Brixton Green - funding, proposed rents etc

leanderman

Street Party: July 2
A stakeholder is someone who has an interest in, or will be affected by, the development.

This includes local residents, but not all stakeholders are local residents.

It's a fairly common term these days; surprised you are unfamiliar with it.
ghastly word though
 

editor

hiraethified
A stakeholder is someone who has an interest in, or will be affected by, the development.

This includes local residents, but not all stakeholders are local residents.

It's a fairly common term these days; surprised you are unfamiliar with it.
To be honest, I've never been entirely sure what the word means, but even you must be aware of the fact that it's a relatively newfangled biz-speak word that I would imagine some of the older generation and less corporate-savy may find less easy to understand than, say, "local resident."

Notably, the careers service has seen fit to post up something to help people understand what it means:
Have you ever been confused by the words in job ads, job descriptions and person specifications? With all the talk of 'stakeholders' and 'proactive self-starters' it can seem like recruiters are talking in a different language
https://nationalcareersservice.direct.gov.uk/advice/getajob/howtofindajob/Pages/jobads.aspx
 

ChrisSouth

Well-Known Member
To be honest, I've never been entirely sure what the word means, but even you must be aware of the fact that it's a relatively newfangled biz-speak word that I would imagine some of the older generation and less corporate-savy may find less easy to understand than, say, "local resident."

Notably, the careers service has seen fit to post up something to help people understand what it means:

It's been in use in management-speak since circa 1984. It's not that newlyfangled.
 

editor

hiraethified
It's been in use in management-speak since circa 1984. It's not that newlyfangled.
I used the phrase "relatively new fangled" and it is. Most people don't move in management-speak circles and many are unlikely to come across it very often. Either way it's a unnecessarily confusing word to use if you're trying to reach out to a diverse community, IMO.
 

Crispy

The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Who cares about the word? You're a local resident and they want to hear from you, so go to the meeting :)
 

Ms Ordinary

randompointlesschemistry
A stakeholder is someone who has an interest in, or will be affected by, the development.

This includes local residents, but not all stakeholders are local residents.

It's a fairly common term these days; surprised you are unfamiliar with it.
I'm familiar with the word, I've heard it for years.
But until you just spelt it out, I'd generally assumed it meant someone with a financial stake in a project. Unless there was some qualifier like 'emotional stakeholder' (sorry bit of a daft example but the best I can come up this morning).
So I agree it's a confusing word which could lead local residents to assume it didn't include them.

That's leaving aside the point that if people keep using words like 'stakeholder' then I tend to assume that if I turn up, the place will be full of people using words that I'm familiar with to speak in sentences that make no sense to me. Personally, I try to keep that feeling in check & turn up anyway but it really does put a lot of people off (even if it's an unfair assumption that they've made).
 

TruXta

tired
I think while stakeholder has been in use in business circles for years, it was really only in the late 90s when the craze for public consultations on policy started ramping up that the word became more widely used IME.

Anyway - nowadays it pretty much means anyone who has (or should have) an opinion on stuff that might touch their lives. I.e. not very much.
 

leanderman

Street Party: July 2
I care because it's important that a self styled community project uses language that the aforementioned community can understand and relate to.
I kind of agree. I hate the word.

Neighbours would be better

'Local residents' is tautologous!
 

TruXta

tired
Perhaps it is but, again, I imagine most of the target audience would be more likely to think that such a description included them rather than "stakeholders."
The use of the word says a lot about the real audience of this missive they've put out - not the locals, but the local authorities, i.e. the council and other people with political and financial clout.
 
Last edited:

ViolentPanda

Hardly getting over it.
Perhaps it is but, again, I imagine most of the target audience would be more likely to think that such a description included them rather than "stakeholders."
All "stakeholder" tends to mean to me is:
a) A member of a really crap govt-sponsored pension scheme, or
b) A characterisation of a participant in society by Anthony fucking Giddens.
 

teuchter

je suis teuchter
Are locals per se a cohesive community?
Well, we were talking about appropriate wording for inviting people to the "stakeholders" event. For that purpose "locals" does just as well as "local community".

No, locals are not per se a cohesive community. Which is why I would question the use of "local community" in other contexts, because sometimes it's a loaded term used to imply they are, and that they are all part of the community the person using the word feels part of, or wants to co-opt for their own ends.

Tescos are always "supporting the local community" and on the other hand posters on here will express their concern for the wishes of the "local community" to justify their views on one thing or the other.
 

OvalhouseDB

Well-Known Member
will they be right-to-buyable?
No.
Retaining the equity, and keeping the houses for rent is one of the key objectives in pursuing this council-led development model.

More on the finances:

Grant Thornton have generated a vast tool (keep back Manter, that is not a euphemism either!) which enables you to look at the effect of changing any one of about 30 factors - and each factor has about 30 worksheets. So you can see at which number of flats adding Passivhaus* standards of insulation starts to tip the scheme into the red, for example. There are contingencies for all sorts of things - the build cost, for example is £150 extra per Sqm (I think) because of the tunnels underneath.

The plan is for members of the group (and that means anyone interested and turns up) to go on field trips and look at what you can get for different prices, and how far people think the cost:number of target rent flats ratio can be stretched.

*Passivhaus is a German concept, where buildings attract and retain maximum sun / cooling from the natural environment, and are then insulated to a level where they need almost no heating http://www.passivhaustrust.org.uk/what_is_passivhaus.php . In this development it is estimated hat Passivhaus would add £15k to the build cost of each home. Is this a priority? How would it be paid for? By fewer target rent homes? By charging more in rent (because the occupants would enjoy massive savings n energy bills) - this is exactly the sort of thing the group will be invited to advise on.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
There are contingencies for all sorts of things - the build cost, for example is £150 extra per Sqm (I think) because of the tunnels underneath.

The plan is for members of the group (and that means anyone interested and turns up) to go on field trips and look at what you can get for different prices, and how far people think the cost:number of target rent flats ratio can be stretched.
At meeting it was said that the build cost was higher at the north end of site and less at southern end of site due to tunnels.

I did notice that the build cost of the Theatre is assumed to be six and a half million. The Oval site ( part of deal is that the Council will get Oval site in exchange for Theatre coming to Somerleyton) is assumed to be worth £3, 100 000. Where is the rest going to come from? The Theatre is one of the risk factors in the scheme.

In the end it will be up to Council what proportion will be at Target rent.

As I said before if residents choices are limited due to financial constraints of the Council then this has to be made clear and noted.

I’ve done consultation before and am wary of being seen as wholeheartedly supporting a Council scheme. Critical support yes but I do not want to see Council press releases saying this is all agreed with local residents and everyone is 100% happy with outcome. How wonderful the Cooperative Council is etc.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
The plan is for members of the group (and that means anyone interested and turns up) to go on field trips and look at what you can get for different prices, and how far people think the cost:number of target rent flats ratio can be stretched.

*Passivhaus is a German concept, where buildings attract and retain maximum sun / cooling from the natural environment, and are then insulated to a level where they need almost no heating http://www.passivhaustrust.org.uk/what_is_passivhaus.php . In this development it is estimated hat Passivhaus would add £15k to the build cost of each home. Is this a priority? How would it be paid for? By fewer target rent homes? By charging more in rent (because the occupants would enjoy massive savings n energy bills) - this is exactly the sort of thing the group will be invited to advise on.
Passivhaus has been used by Camden Council. I did hear it was about 15% more cost to build this way.

The proposed Code for Sustainable Homes for the Somerleyton road scheme is level 4.

This article says that Camden Council got Passivhaus development built at same price as building to level 4.

Worth a field trip? Or asking Camden Council how they did this?



Passivhaus implemented for free

Yet Willmott Dixon was awarded the contract to build the project after submitting a proposal that made no extra charges for Passivhaus principles.

“We expected a 10 to 15 per cent cost difference, but Willmott Dixon came back with a proposal that did not appear to apply a premium at all”

Ivan Christmas, Camden Council

“We ran two cost plans in parallel,” Mr Christmas says. “One was Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 and the other was Passivhaus.

“We expected a 10 to 15 per cent cost difference, but Willmott Dixon came back with a proposal that did not appear to apply a premium at all.”
 
Top