Above Ballymore's description from their company accounts
Brent Cabinet on October 12th will be asked to approve the appointment of Ballymore Ltd as the single developer of the remaining regeneration of the South Kilburn Estate.
The company was in competition with Mount Anvil and St George. The appointment of a single developer followed dissatisfaction with the lack of coherence and other issues associated with multiple developers.
The following are extracts from the Lead Member and Officers' Report to Cabinet:
In a small number of developments... residents have experienced build quality issues. Elsewhere multiplicity of landlords arising from the current site by site development model has resulted in the inconsistent and variable standards of management and maintenance of their homes and the public realm. This inconsistent approach has also restricted the full placemaking potential and social value impact of a comprehensive regeneration programme.
The community is also experiencing noise, dust, traffic disruption and increased anti-social behaviour, the inevitable consequences of large-scale, long-term regeneration and construction programmes. This experience has been exacerbated due to programme delays arising from viability challenges and tough economic conditions.
Thus far:
.... the programme has delivered (including under construction) a total of 1,954 homes including 1,239 (63%) social rent homes. In line with the South Kilburn Promise 933 South Kilburn tenants have moved into modern, comfortable, spacious, well insulated and award-winning homes that meets their housing needs. 225 tenants are currently remaining to be rehoused,120 of which are being rehoused at NWCC, Peel, C&G and in new and existing council homes across the borough.
You will notice a deficit of 105 tenants to be rehoused.
The 'viability challenges and tough economic conditions' mentioned above are likely to impact on what single developer is able to deliver. However, the report to Cabinet sets out some of what officers see as the positives in Ballymore's bid:
• their approach to placemaking supported by specific commitments, standards and delivery mechanisms to practically deliver a coherent, integrated sustainable and high-quality South Kilburn neighbourhood with a distinct identity.
• their street activation strategy including culture, leisure, retail, community and workspace uses supported by commitments to affordability, creating opportunities, supporting enterprise and community-capacity building.
• their proposals for a network of streets and open spaces which is well managed, climate-resilient, supporting biodiversity, active travel, play and inclusive community life.
• their commitment to adoption of design standards and design approach that positively affects health, well-being, comfort and convenience of living in South Kilburn.
• their processes and protocols for designing, commissioning, monitoring and evaluating robust and durable build quality and building performance and their commitment to the highest level of aftercare and resident satisfaction.
• their approach and commitment to environmental sustainability, climate resilience and adaptation.
• their strategy for meanwhile uses which effectively manages a neighbourhood in transition and delivers visible, tangible social and economic benefits for residents from the outset including how this will contribute to the long-term placemaking of South Kilburn.
• their approach to providing a full range of residential tenures - private and affordable to create a mixed, inclusive and resilient community; including their approach to delivering 50% affordable housing across the masterplan.
• their approach to long-term, unified estate management and stewardship for South Kilburn, in coordination with the earlier phases including their proposals for resident and tenant/occupier involvement in future routes for community voice in decision-making.
Readers will note the difference in the highlighted 63% social rent homes and 50% affordable housing - the latter is a slippery concept and viability issues may affect the proportion of affordable homes and their tenure.
Brent officers were also impressed by Ballymore's approach to social value:
The preferred bidder’s proposals for delivery of social value in response to criteria relating to Empowered Communities is based on their understanding of South Kilburn community’s needs, aspiration and ambition for the regeneration. The response includes the following:
• their 10 year social value strategy alongside a social value action plan for the first two years addressing identified areas of need of the South Kilburn community including Young people, Cost of living crisis, Community capacity building, Community voice and Climate emergency.
• their suggested list of activities, initiatives and events, commitment to resources and demonstration of their skills and expertise alongside their approach to working with the network of South Kilburn VCSE, the council and other institutional and statutory service providers in a complementary manner to address each area of need.
• their suggested mechanisms to measure demonstrable impact through KPIs, quantitative proxies and qualitative assessment to provide a rigorous, professional, transparent and evidence-based reporting framework to measure, monitor and report delivery impact.
• their suggested governance structure to oversee the delivery of social value and how they will ensure a “review, refine and revise” approach to understanding local needs, designing initiatives, monitoring progress and measuring impact.
Meanwhile a resident was not impressed by Brent Council's poor communication regarding the Ballymore appointment itself:
Fun fact. Brent Council directly informed various organisations about this decision. One which it didn't is the South Kilburn Residents Panel, which supposedly had a tiny part in the decision. Surprised? Not in the least.
The name Ballymore may ring a bell with readers. It has come up on this blog as one of the developers of the controversial canalside Ladbroke Grove Sainsbury site that Kensal Green Residents Association have been campaigning against:
https://www.keepkensalgreen.com/ https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2023/05/campaign-launched-for-low-rise.html
Six years ago they hit national headlines over allegations that their own employees were writing enthusiastic reviews of the company's developments on Trust Pilot' LINK
More seriously there has been great concern over a series of fires at its luxury New Providence building near Canary Wharf:
New Providence Wharf had everything — until the fires started
15 comments:
Comment received by email: Hi Martin, by the end of 2028 there will still be149 tenants waiting for a new home with 93 of them at both Dunbar & Saville Houses.
The remaining 56 tenants are spread over the other 7 blocks.
There will be 109 homes available on the Hereford & Exeter scheme in 2029 (according to the council) leaving just 40 tenants waiting for a new home anytime from the 2030's onwards.
The council also say that the Hereford & Exeter scheme will be developed in 2026, as soon as the contracts are signed.
Further note from above: Hi Martin, exactly one month ago (2/9/26) there were 227 tenants and 36 leaseholders still residing in the remaining 9 blocks.
72 tenants were due to move to the NWCC scheme this Autumn, leaving 155, with another 7 set to move to the Peel Plaza leaving 148 by end of 2026 .
Finally another 18 tenants will be allocated homes on the Carlton/Granville scheme in 2027 leaving a total of 130 tenants waiting for a new home to be delivered by the sole partner.
Important not to forget all the other 'sites' that want to cash in on becoming towers in the South Kilburn Flood zone. OK Club, St Mary's R.C. School, Albanian Mosque, Post Office sorting office, Mint Coaches, the Falcon site, QP station car park, Iranian Cultural and Educational Centre, Job Centre.....
No wonder the actual residents of this 47 years special operation are total excluded. They just pay the rents, service charges and council taxes.
It's Ballymore Town as Kilburn doesn't want to know and excludes.
Ballymore can be successful such as the Eurovea development in Bratislava. This was built on actual brownfield industrial land and so not on an existing architect designed social housing estate community though. Eurovea is a large shopping mall, with housing on top, including towers and a generous scale new park all along the banks of the Danube which the entire city's population now enjoys. More in the sprit of Paddington Basin or new King's Cross in London, re-development with a human place maker focus.
Ballymore will surely work out where South Kilburn local is located in terms of Central London's growth. The bit-by-bit Wembley LOCAL approach of 25 years never did do that. South Kilburn is nearer to the UK Parliament than to Brent Civic Centre, FACT!
Rumour has it there is a regular competition in Brent Tower (aka Civic Centre) to see how much BS can be crammed into one Council statement. Occasionally these efforts get published to show how skilled they are at this “art”.
This announcement https://democracy.brent.gov.uk/documents/s160795/07.%20Authority%20to%20award%20contract%20for%20Single%20Delivery%20Partner.pdf about the single developer for the next phase of South Kilburn regeneration certainly shows off their skill at its best.
Whoever wrote “In line with the South Kilburn Promise 933 South Kilburn tenants have moved into modern, comfortable, spacious, well insulated and award-winning homes that meets their housing needs. “ definitely deserves at least a “best effort” award.
That would the same homes which are by and large smaller and more expensive than the demolished ones, virtually all of which have been plagued by damp and mould. Homes which have scaffolding up for years with 24-hour fire watch until flammable cladding is removed. Homes which have had emergency heating, roofs which leak. Not to mention the 2 blocks which have to be completely refurbished because building them was such a botch job. Yes, there have been awards – by planners and architects to planners and architects for the designs. Ask those living in them what they are like? God forbid.
This gets described as “In a small number of developments however residents have experienced build quality issues.”. That would be pretty much every new block.
Then we read “Significant investment has been made in delivering amenities and social infrastructure including a medical centre, pharmacy, affordable workspace studios. A purpose-built community facility including an enterprise hub, nursery, family wellbeing centre, community halls, community kitchen and café is being built at Granville and Carlton Centres. Sustained investment in public realm including tree planting, landscaped courtyards, pocket parks and play areas has been made across the redeveloped sites in the neighbourhood. These amenities and infrastructure are having a profound impact on community life and has been transforming the South Kilburn neighbourhood.” Perhaps the author couldn’t be bothered to refer back to what was promised at the start of the regeneration of South Kilburn – 2 new medical centres (we have one, delivered many years after it was promised), a new community centre (no sign of that, not sure why the rebuilding of the already existing Granville and Carlton centres should be seen as fulfilling that promise), a new youth centre (no sign) and – yes we do remember – “no more tower blocks”.
You either laugh or cry when you read “The community is also experiencing noise, dust, traffic disruption and increased anti-social behaviour, the inevitable consequences of large-scale, long-term regeneration and construction programmes. This experience has been exacerbated due to programme delays arising from viability challenges and tough economic conditions.” Not at all exacerbated by Brent’s neglect of the area, leaving it to be seen as a prime area for anti-social behaviour, or Brent’s failure to predict that empty blocks awaiting demolition would get squatted. Noise, dust and traffic exacerbated by Brent persuading HS2 to build in the middle of the estate and never, ever, communicating with those affected by this.
When you come on to their priorities you really do know they are taking the p***. “These priorities are • Delivering high-quality affordable housing. • Co-ordinated approach to management and maintenance of the neighbourhood. • Delivering at pace and managing a neighbourhood in transition. • Delivering social and public infrastructure and creating a place with a distinct identity and character. • Delivering social and economic regeneration. • Community collaboration and participation. • Affordable and deliverable programme”
They know well that “affordable housing” means nothing – legally up t 80% of market price. Amongst the other waffle little recognition that one of the main achievements of the regeneration to date is to destroy a sense of community with people being removed from long-standing neighbours, people being moved several times while waiting for new homes. What community collaboration and participation exists and will emerge from the rubble, is despite Brent’s efforts, not because of them.
Perhaps the best illustration of Brent’s commitment to involving the community in its plans is its insistence that the Granville Rec must be built on despite the opposition of the community.
South Kilburn residents can hope that the next phase of regeneration is an improvement on what has happened so far, but Brent falls a long way short of persuading us that it will be so.
Wembley has become Quintain city.ingle developer Will South Kilburn which already has green spaces and squares made private, become Ballymore Estate?
Ballymore City FC
Ballymore in debt
Let's hope the other 6 out of 8 not totally corporatist-led Growth zones of Brent are watching this.
How are residents interests, rights and voices safeguarded and respected in such fully corporates-led Brent brownfield zones of impunity? A bleak new England has arrived.
What's wrong with the Greens being anti this new feudalism.
4.2.6. Salient points of the legal agreement and commercial structure are as follows:
• A Partnering Agreement (‘PA’) governing the overarching partnership -
where the SDP is responsible for leading on design, delivery and funding
of the redevelopment of the sites including delivery of programme wide
meanwhile use and social value strategy, and the Council is responsible
for managing the decant of existing tenants and securing vacant
possession of the sites.
• Site Development Agreement(s) (‘SDA’) governing the development of
each site. Drawdown of each site is subject to Site-Specific gateway at
Partnering Agreement level such as the land value test and council
approved delivery strategy, followed by satisfying pre-conditions such as
detailed planning consent at the Site Development Agreement level.
• Hereford & Exeter to come forward first among the seven SDP sites.
Council and SDP to enter into the Partnering Agreement and H&E SDA
simultaneously.
• Construction and sales risk to be transferred to the Single Delivery Partner
following Site Development Agreement going unconditional at which point
the final land value of the site due to the Council to be agreed.
• Default and termination provisions alongside KPIs provide meaningful
contractual leverage affording protection to the Council, against matters
such as poor performance, failure to meet key milestones such as Start
on Site and Practical completion, failure to comply with material terms of
the contract, instances of insolvency and activities bringing disrepute to
the council etc.
Climate Change and Environmental Considerations
Brent Council's commitment to addressing the climate and ecological emergency is central to the South Kilburn regeneration project. South Kilburn is a designated Green Neighbourhood, and therefore the procurement of a Single Delivery Partner is a strategic move that will embed carbon reduction, climate resilience, and holistic environmental best practices throughout the remaining phases of the programme. The SDP will play a crucial role in co-ordinating and implementing these measures, integrating them into the project from the outset.
A designated green neighbourhood refers to a specific area within a local plan or neighbourhood plan that has been designated as a Local Green Space. This designation is made to protect green areas of particular importance to a local community from development.
South Kilburn a designated green neighbourhood. Is the SDP being forced by Brent to protect and enhance all the 25 years of chaotic bit-by-bit destruction surviving estate green spaces remaining in South Kilburn? With car-free sky houses towering of so many existing buildings happening towards 2050 that would make human, health, community and wellbeing good sense. Maintenance plans for green neighbourhood green spaces would also be useful and safeguarding best practice.
The report to Cabinet reads as if Brent corporate is the community in relation to the new SDP. What then are the 15,000 people living in the brownfield corporatist-led zone if that is the case?
Ballymore developments are at Embassy Gardens, London City Island and Goodluck Hope E14, The Brentford (awful) TW8, Riverscape, Royal Wharf Royal Dockside E16 and Bishopsgate Goodsyard.....
Of note
a) They tower high too /way more sites than 7 are in the zone. Doubt the new BLP will be transparent on that full scale either.
b) This is the first time the brownfield land involved is in reality an in year 25 community-led regeneration of an existing social (council) housing estate. Grim.
Wonder how this extreme social policy gymnastics will play out? A massive council tax take already inside Ballymore town in Brent, but will any council social infrastructure survive in what was South Kilburn as community payback by Brent for that tax take or will it be a 'pay for nothing Brent zone' for young people and new immigrants to be kept exiled from full citizenship and civic rights enjoyed in the other country outside this corporatism only zone?
No wonder Brent councillors are silent, heads bowed down in shame. The Labor-a-Tory coalition is making sense.
In climate denial zoned South Kilburn....
"At pace" taller tighter packed towers is the only definite.
Will Brent negotiate a tower height limit in Ballymore Town?
Is every open area or non-tower in Ballymore Town a 'meanwhile' and in effect a future tower pending, as is the case at Paddington Basin No Final Plan? Wembley Park No Final Plan. There is an alarming 20 storey new tower at Paddington Basin being built on next to nothing, in effect mainly over various entrance ways down into the main station.
Local and National Government has responsibilities to South Kilburn people established with the 6000 social estates building and subsequent new deal to grow its population with generous negotiated safeguards built in. South Kilburn unlike Paddington Basin was and is not a brownfield waste land of corporatist impunity zoned. Has Brent as told Ballymore that?
How is the New Deal become the No Deal in year 25 of its delivery?
Post a Comment