Fascism or regeneration? The two concepts might sound remote to readers of EG, but to some council tenants asked to move out of their homes to make way for estate regeneration, the private developer has become synonymous with “social cleansing”.
“Lebensraum“, the Nazi policy used during WWII to conquer territory outside Germany, was the word used by one heckler in the public gallery of Haringey council last night during a cabinet meeting to approve the appointment of Lendlease as development partner for the £2bn Haringey development vehicle. The joint venture aims to see 5,000 new homes and a new town centre developed in the next 20 years.
“I’ve now heard you evoke the language of Hitler,” warned Claire Kober, leader of Labour-run Haringey Council, as she told the heckler he would have to leave the building if he interrupted the meeting again.
Emotive language
Sound familiar? Emotive language has become a common feature of regeneration proposals involving public land, and developers often find themselves in the middle of a heated row.
While the council says the HDV is the only way the borough can deliver the homes it needs, campaigners have labelled it an “unprecedented” privatisation of public land and assets.
“This is a community that I think has been sold down the river by Labour councillors who are just selling off to developers,” says Jenny Sutton, a Tottenham resident for more than 30 years.
“Homes for who? The problem is, once you give public land to the private sector, they will build homes in order to make a profit, they will build homes at astronomical prices which local people can’t afford.”
Concerns raised around the vehicle have centred on the percentage of affordable housing delivered, whether the council will be able to hold its own against a big private development company and whether councillors have carried out necessary due diligence on the partnership.
Do they have a point? In 2008, Croydon council announced it was establishing a “pioneering” 28-year 50:50 partnership with John Laing.
The asset-backed Croydon Council Urban Regeneration Vehicle (CCURV) was designed to realise the council’s regeneration ambitions for surplus sites around the borough. However, the vehicle was wound up in 2016 and consented plans for the redevelopment of the former council headquarters at Taberner House into 420 residential units were never delivered.
In November 2012, a similar 50:50 joint venture between John Laing and Tunbridge Wells was dissolved, which the partners put down to the “economic downturn and subsequent public sector spending cuts agenda following the government’s last comprehensive spending review.”
Generating income
Alan Strickland, cabinet member for housing, regeneration and planning, says the Haringey jv will be “very different”. “We’re building homes and hopefully more business properties that will generate an income, and that’s completely different from saddling yourself with a building and running up a massive debt which you will have no prospect of paying back,” he said.
The council will now continue to have discussions with Lendlease about how the joint venture should be established and managed.
A final decision on whether to establish the HDV is due to be made by the council’s cabinet in the summer. Lendlease says it recognises the “long-term commitment and responsibilities” inherent in the JV, and is “looking forward to working with the council to follow the necessary process over the coming months to finalise agreements and establish the HDV.”
Consultation
Can the JV win more public support? A common issue with many regeneration projects is a perceived lack of consultation and public education.
One resident I spoke to said he thought Haringey was putting £2bn into the scheme. In fact, the £2bn refers to the estimated gross development value of the total regeneration, of which Haringey will share a 50% profit. One councillor asked the cabinet why it wasn’t building its own homes. Strickland had to explain that the council does not have staff who build houses.
“I think consultation generally in our industry is pretty poor,” says Martyn Evans, owner of property company Uncommon and former creative director of U+I. “I think it’s partly because property has never had to be good at it in an industry where the supply of product doesn’t outweigh demand.”
He thinks developers who do make more of an effort can carry public support with them, and deliver better place. Although he admits you are unlikely to be able to please everyone. As the public-private development vehicle trend gathers pace, getting communities onside will continue to be a challenge.
• To send feedback, e-mail Louisa.Clarence-Smith@estatesgazette.com or tweet @LouisaClarence or @estatesgazette
