Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Malthouse approves residents’ plan to take ownership of Hollamby estate

  • 1 Comment

Kit Malthouse has approved a resident group’s proposal to take over a south London estate at the centre of a long-running battle with Lambeth Council over plans for its demolition

In a rare move, the housing minister has decided that the process to transfer architect Ted Hollamby’s Cressingham Gardens estate in Tulse Hill to the Cressingham Gardens Community (CGC) can begin.

The approval is the first step in the long process of transferring the estate to community ownership, which will still require raising funds to buy the properties, as well as a full development proposal.

Ruling on the request, first made in 2016, Malthouse rejected Lambeth Council’s objections that the stock transfer would have a ’detrimental effect’ on the area’s regeneration.

Instead, he said he agreed with a government-commissioned report on the estate, which found the council had not made enough ‘concrete progress’ on redeveloping the estate for a transfer to have a detrimental impact.

’The outcome of my determination … is that the stock transfer process in relation to the CGC should continue,’ Malthouse said.

Campaigners from the 306-home estate have welcomed the decision, with resident Tom Keene calling it ’‘major news’. 

He added: ‘It has come out of the blue and we’re really pleased. This will transfer the building and land of the estate into a community owned and run organisation.’

He said the next steps included drawing up feasibility proposals and coming up with a development plan which residents will then vote on.

A Lambeth Council spokesperson said: ‘This announcement was based on information submitted in 2016 and we will need time to consider the implications.

‘We are, however, pleased that the government has recognised the council’s plans to rebuild the estate will have a “positive impact on the area covered by the estate” and we remain committed to rebuilding Cressingham Gardens to provide better homes for existing residents and more homes for people on the council house waiting list.’

The Cressingham residents already have their own alternative proposal for the estate, called the People’s Plan and drawn up in 2016 with local architect Variant Office. It includes refurbishing the existing homes and building 33 new homes for social rent.

The decision letter stated that under both the council’s proposals and the People’s Plan, there was likely to be a ‘positive impact on the area covered by the estate’.

‘The scale of potential impacts on the housing supply and local economy is likely to be greater under Lambeth’s redevelopment proposal, as it is proposing to deliver 120 more additional homes compared to the People’s Plan.

‘However, there is not enough evidence to suggest that the difference would have a significant detrimental effect on the local area’.

The socio-economic report on which Malthouse based his decision was completed in December 2017, and it is unclear why the government took so long to come to a decision.

The stock transfer approval is the latest twist in a long-running saga over Lambeth Council’s controversial plans to regenerate the 1960s low rise estate.

The estate was designed by Lambeth’s then director of architecture Ted Hollamby and has been hailed as ‘unique’ by the Twentieth Century Society. It comprises 306 homes interspersed around a series of connected walkways.

In 2015, Lambeth was forced to rerun its consultation on the estate redevelopment after the High Court found the council had broken the law in its consultation with tenants.

The consultation was rerun and in 2017, multidisciplinary consultant Mott Macdonald was appointed to lead the development of the estate, working with architect Conran and Partners. 

But Malthouse rejected a stock transfer request by the West Kensington and Gibbs Green estates, earmarked for demolition by developer Capco. He turned down a bid by West Ken Gibbs Green Community Homes’ (WKGGCH) to take over the estate from Hammersmith and Fulham Council.

Cressingham window

Cressingham window

The Right to Transfer

Under the Right to Transfer local authorities are required to co-operate with a group of tenants that want to explore transferring their housing stock to a new social landlord.

It must then arrange a transfer if proposals are supported by a majority of tenants voting in favour in a ballot.

 Both the local authority and the tenant group can apply to the Secretary of State for a ”determination” to halt or continue the process. The local authority can apply at any time for a determination on the grounds that the proposed transfer will have a significant detrimental effect on the provision of housing services in the area of the authority or regeneration of the area.  

  • 1 Comment

Readers' comments (1)

  • Well we know the difference between this scheme and the West ken and Gibbs Green one, Boris Johnson has no vested interest in Cressingham Gardens Community . However West ken and Gibbs Green sit on the Masterplan of Capco and TFL for earls Court and we know how hard Boris worked to make sure those plans to demolish the exhibition centres (which brought £1 billion per annum to the economy) and the demolition of two estates of social housing all went through, as far as a private table at the then Conservative controlled LBHF planning meeting with champagne whilst it got rubber stamped.

    Meanwhile in RBKC a certain Ms Flight the planning officer threw her arms round Capco planning agents when their permission was passed, hardly the sort of behaviour one expects from a person employed by the council tax payer with an applicant is it ?

    Bow Mr Malthouse passes one scheme but refuses another and lets see, he has had lots of chats with Boris lately and he is backing Boris and when Boris walks in to No 10 Boris will be his boss, a boss who still wants to see 7000+ luxury flats built by his mates (in the fully offshore scheme for tax purposes ) on earls Court and West Ken and Gibbs Green estates . is anyone surprised ? If they are they may do worse than look at how the exhibition centres were refused listing status initially to assist the demolition, who did the report and what connection did they have with Boris friends at Capco ?

    The whole process smells rather nasty

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.

Related Jobs

Discover architecture career opportunities. Search and apply online for your dream job.
Find out more