Well, the regeneration is definitely a hot topic at the moment, and the latest edition of the Roehampton Voice has a few entries about it. Let’s take a a quick run through…
A Cautionary Tale – page 4
A interesting example of what could happen in terms of the feared “rat run” that could be caused by opening the Danebury Avenue, or maybe even Highcliffe Drive, barriers.
Roehampton Social Audit- 5 Years On – page 6
This article refers to the Social Audit which was done back in 2010 and focuses heavily on the dwindling of community services that will continue as part of the regeneration. Let’s be clear about this, it is a concern especially as it has taken so long for this topic to rear its head? What have our community leaders been doing about protecting this?
At the Roehampton Partnership, this has been mentioned though not much more than that even as far back as the December 3rd meeting. Have a read of the Minutes to see the concern expressed by Hollis Blake.
The report is worth a read for others aspects which are relevant.
Links of interest (click the sentence below for the article)
> Roehampton Partnership minutes 3rd December 2014
> Roehampton Social Audit 2010
Interestingly, this Audit was commissioned by the Holy Trinity Church and the Roehampton Forum, both of whom have roles on the Roehampton Partnership……..
Regeneration News and Views – page 7
There are four articles on this page.
- ARW commenting on its meeting of 29th May
- A message from one of the Voice’s editing team on the regeneration
- An oral historian gawking for thoughts from locals
- A high level timeline of the regeneration
More Regeneration News – page 8
Reverend McKinney provides his 10 reasons for why the regeneration is required. This is taken from his letter published in the Wandsworth Guardian letter section dated 23 April 2015.
What is interesting is that some of these comments contradict the findings of the Social Audit which was referred to earlier, for instance, point 9, states “Environmental improvements will ensure that the Bull Green will become a real recreational facility, rather than a deserted field with a few tracks across it”. The report of 2010, page 20, says leave it alone with 74.8% agreeing to “Green Surroundings- including : open spaces; Trees; landscaping of estate” and the Labour Party report, question 7, which states “Q7. How concerned are you about retaining the green space and trees?” has a 65.1% result which is “Entirely concerned”.
Do not forget that the Reverend was the Chair of the Forum (a commissioner of the Social Audit report) at this time. Makes you think, “why bother responding when it doesn’t appear to count”.
Also, point 1 states “lt is not social cleansing because all freeholders, council tenants and resident I leaseholders, affected will be guaranteed new properties and no financial loss”. Well, at the Alton Regeneration Watch meeting of 2nd June, a couple of leaseholders (one directly impacted by the regeneration) called attention to this comment. Perhaps, the Reverend would like to provide some background as to how this will work, along with expected service charges and Council Taxes?
Information of interest
> Roehampton Social Audit 2010
> Labour survey results 2008 “What Roehampton Wants” : this is where the Question 7 comes from
Email us at – firstname.lastname@example.org – and let us know of any concerns/thoughts you may have or add a comment at the end of the blog entry in the ‘Leave a Reply’ section.
Or email your Roehampton and Putney Heath Councillors at;
Peter Carpenter – email@example.com
Jeremy Ambache – JAmbache@wandsworth.gov.uk
Sue McKinney – SMcKinney@wandsworth.gov.uk
Or email the Wandsworth Council team managing the ‘regeneration’
Team Roehampton – Roehampton@wandsworth.gov.uk