I am proposing the following motion to the Lewisham Deptford Labour Party General Committee.

This CLP resolves to send the following motion to London Regional Conference

“This Conference notes

1. The passing of Composite 5 on Housing at Labour Conference 2017
2. Jeremy Corbyn’s leader’s speech in which he stated “Regeneration under a Labour government will be for the benefit of the local people, not private developers, not property speculators … [&]… councils will have to win a ballot of existing tenants and leaseholders before any redevelopment scheme can take place.”
3. That Lewisham Council Strategic Planning committee approved planning permission to redevelop the Old Tidemills School site involving the redevelopment (destruction) of 16 council houses and the loss of Tidemills Community Gardens.
4. That further planning permissions involving the loss of council houses in Lewisham Deptford have been prepared.
5. That Councils have a duty to follow the direction of the Mayor’s Housing Plan

This Conference calls on the Mayor of London to call in planning permissions granted which involve the destruction of social housing”

This CLP instructs the Secretary to write to the Mayor of London informing him of this motion calling on him to “call in” the Tidemills Planning Application.


6 thoughts on “Tidemill

  1. Dave says:

    The defenders of the planning committee decision argue that it’s a good deal, with 47% affordable housing in the planned build of 209 houses. Given it’s council land, the goal should be higher and arguably the land sale price would seem to be designed to allow a better ratio. I am unclear of the rents to be charged for new residents in the “affordable” houses, but the 53% available to the market will command monthly rents of around £1200 pcm, more for the larger ones. They state that the guarantees to residents to be decanted into the new homes are good and guarantee tenancy and rents. There is some dispute as to what the tenants want to do.

    The counter argument, which may or may not have been well expressed is that the opponents of the current scheme believe we can have the homes and the garden but that developers are not prepared to propose such a solution.

    It’s been pointed out that in theory, and in law, the garden’s use and management regime is temporary, the problem is it’s 20 years temporary. At what point does it become permanent; if there is no rental agreement, occupied land can be acquired after 12 years.

    1. Dave says:

      The affordable rents would seem to be set at below 50% of market rates which is good. There is no some doubt in my mind about the equivalence of terms for the council tenants.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *