Massive private tower block proposed next to Stockwell Skate Park

Discussion in 'Brixton' started by editor, Nov 25, 2014.

  1. wtfftw

    wtfftw melting like a toastie

    It's not even active at night is it? I used to eat my JB's there on the way home.
  2. FOSS

    FOSS Well-Known Member

    Not really active after dark much, a bit on the rare warmer nights but that's about it. Partly though that's because of a lack of light. It will be better lit at night after they build their yuppie plaza... If they do...
    Greebo likes this.
  3. Winot

    Winot I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint

    Sounds like you are on the case FOSS - excellent work.

    Is there a fighting fund? Would be happy to donate.
    Greebo, Favelado and mango5 like this.
  4. Twattor

    Twattor Well-Known Member

    Did the skate park get scheduled as a community asset?
  5. Twattor

    Twattor Well-Known Member

    Could "active elderly" simply mean over 50s housing? (although I know a few over fifties who may be a bit unhappy about this generic description). Irrespective of the specifics, older people and the noise of skateboards crashing around rarely mix well.
    Greebo likes this.
  6. Manter

    Manter Lunch Mob

    I think you do them a disservice tbh. For a start a modern triple glazed flat will keep that noise out almost completely, but I also don't think it's fair to say 'older' people are less tolerant of noise than, say, someone studying, or parents of your children.
    Gramsci likes this.
  7. Twattor

    Twattor Well-Known Member

    Acknowledged, but you'll only get triple glazing where the pre-planning noise reports have identified a noise nuisance and the planning department specify performance as a condition, which basically is only if you live over a dual carriageway. A 24 hour adjusted survey will show no discernable noise from the skatepark. It will come down to complaints over intimidation, drug use etc.; things difficult to pin down but which will require police response and which in turn will discourage use.
  8. FOSS

    FOSS Well-Known Member

  9. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    It'd be the ultimate disgrace if it goes. It has always seemed a great place and a chilled out one at that. You'd get more noise & 'trouble' out of a tea room than you would there.
    FOSS and Greebo like this.
  10. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    If you manage to finish that piece for Buzz, we can add a plug for the t-shirts at the bottom.
    Gramsci and Greebo like this.
  11. FOSS

    FOSS Well-Known Member

    Sweet. I'm on it boss!
    Greebo and editor like this.
  12. Tricky Skills

    Tricky Skills Well-Known Member

    Genuine question: who currently lives at Thrayle House, and where will they live once the new development is built? Council tenants?
    Greebo and leanderman like this.
  13. FOSS

    FOSS Well-Known Member

    Nobody lives there now they all got moved on. I've really no idea what's to become if the ex-residents. I've not seen any promises of rehousing here like they keep mentioning regards Cressingham. There are 70 odd flats in Thrayle now. Pretty sure some were in private ownership at least at some point, I saw titles mentioning the sale of one of them. I get the impression they moved most of the longer term tenants a while ago and that it was mostly short term tenants left t the end of it but I could be wrong. There were a couple if not more squats right at the end too If I'm not mistaken, I saw someone on twitter mentioning accompanying police to an eviction there. It was that CoE guy that writes in the Guardian... I'm seeing someone later who'll know much better about this. They're questions we raised but never got answered.
    Gramsci, Greebo and Tricky Skills like this.
  14. FOSS

    FOSS Well-Known Member

    Greebo likes this.
  15. FOSS

    FOSS Well-Known Member

    Planning is back on the table, validated Nov 17th, notices posted Dec 3rd, objection due just a week today.

    Basically the plans are the same but with bigger buildings now.

    We're currently getting mugged off at every turn.

    Details here, more to follow:

    15/04500/FUL | Redevelopment of Thrayle House for residential-led mixed use development up to 20 storeys, comprising 177 homes (Class C3), and 1,358 sq m of flexible retail (Class A1 and A2) and community space (Class D1). | Thrayle House Benedict Road London SW9 0XU

    Please comment and keep any objections relevant to your position... thanks
    Greebo and editor like this.
  16. Crispy

    Crispy The following psytrance is baṉned: All

    Some key facts:

    affordable units: 81, total ~5,500m²
    private units: 96, total 6,000m²

    tenures break down like this:

    Social: 16x1bed, 17x2bed, 2x3bed, 6x4bed = 41 units
    Active Elderly
    (1 or 2 bed): 40 units (I don't know what this means)
    Market: 58x1bed, 29x2bed = 87 units
    FOSS and Greebo like this.
  17. DietCokeGirl

    DietCokeGirl All lost in the supermarket

    Objection added.
    FOSS likes this.
  18. FOSS

    FOSS Well-Known Member

    Active elderly - old folks without nurses basically. Whether that counts as social or not I don't know. It would be interesting to know as the Community Interest Levy payment that the developers have to pay Lambeth is based of the floor area of residential buildings but we don't know what that is. That CiL money is promised to the skatepark. Thanks for all the objections so far.
    Gramsci likes this.
  19. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    Bit confused here. Is this actual social - as in council tenancy rates - or the permanently vague 'affordable'?
  20. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    Does anyone fancy writing a piece for Buzz about this?
  21. Angellic

    Angellic Well-Known Member

  22. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

  23. Angellic

    Angellic Well-Known Member

    It would seem so.
  24. Crispy

    Crispy The following psytrance is baṉned: All

    The developer is a HA, and all ex-residents are eligible to return on the same council tenancy. The planning statement expllicitly says the intention is to provide social housing for Lambeth's list. Pitchforks on standby, but this one looks much better than most.
    Angellic and editor like this.
  25. FOSS

    FOSS Well-Known Member

    No it doesn't.
  26. Crispy

    Crispy The following psytrance is baṉned: All

    Planning statement, page 10 (11 of the PDF)

    That accounts for all 41 Affordable units as listed on page 19 (23 of the PDF) of the Design Statement. 16x 1bed, 17x2bed, 4 houses and 4 duplexes.

    The Active Elderly Affordable units are ambiguous to me. Quite what they're for I don't understand - Council or HA or subsidised market rent? I don't know. Someone with more experience of the HA sector needs to weigh in here.
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2015
    Greebo likes this.
  27. Angellic

    Angellic Well-Known Member

    I wonder what happens if the original residents don't return.
  28. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    Older people are not subject to the benefit caps. So basically you can charge a lot knowing it will be paid through benefits if needed.

    Social rent is not the same as Council target rent. If existing households keep there right to social rent the effect could be same as at Guiness Trust. With new tenants paying the higher "affordable" rent.
    Greebo and Angellic like this.
  29. Crispy

    Crispy The following psytrance is baṉned: All

    *hefts pitchfork*
    Greebo, Gramsci and snowy_again like this.
  30. BigMoaner

    BigMoaner Don't kill the lion

    sorry, got to ask, what's JB?
    Greebo likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice