What are the social consequences faced by a displaced Newham community, from the plan to improve the by thomaswhite_96

What are the social consequences faced by a displaced Newham community, from the plan to improve the borough during and after the 2012 Olympics?

A case study of the Carpenters estate revolution

RE-

Thomas White 1500889

RE-

Contents

Introduction -’Right to the city’ (Harvey,2012:5). -’Social cities’ (Gehl, 2011:15)

Page 1-2

Chapter 1: The Olympic effect -The Shoreditch ‘urban idyll’ (Hoskins, G & Tallon, A ,2004:374) - The Olympic legacy (Bernstock 2014:5).

Page 3 Page 4-5

Chapter 2: The Displacement controversy -The Stratford metropolitan masterplan (Newham council, 2011) - Clays lane: supportive network (Guardian, 2008) -Clays lane: compulsory purchase order (Compulsory Purchase Act,1965) - The Carpenters estate: Surplus vs Human rights (United Nation, 2017) - Interactions of a social housing community (Gehl,2011:129) - Involuntary displacement -Focus E15 activists -BBC and Al Jazeera temporary occupation of the estate -The Carpenters estate revolution -”The beginning of the end to the housing crisis” (Roberts, 2015).

Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9-10 Page 11-12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17-18

Chapter 3: The Consequences of The Olympic displacement -The UCL proposal -UCL East revealed -The C.A.R.P protest -UCL student’s community respond -Bulldozing a community: an academic backlash (Edwards, 2012). -’Separate territories’ (Hall, 2014:524) -Indecisive victory?

Page 19

- “The Sheriff of Newham Robin the poor” (Focus E15, 2013) -The ‘Provisional’ Voluntary displacement -The Essex ‘Separate Territory’ (Hall, 2014:524). -The Consequences of ‘Provisional’ voluntary displacement

Page 24-25 Page 26-27 Page 28-29 Page 30-31

Conclusion: Re-Newham

Page 32- 33

Bibliography List of illustrations Appendicies

Page 34-38 Page 39-41 Page 42-47

Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23

RE-

Introduction

The topic being addressed is the social consequences of displacement in London’s council housing. The dictionary definition of displacement is ‘the enforced departure of people from their homes’ (Simpson, 1989:235). This in terms of London social housing is the removal of residents from their existing homes, where the council place them elsewhere in other available social housing. The council will then use their ownership to decide what is best for the property (Gov.uk, 2016). This process can have devastating effects on social housing communities, as they are broken up and dispersed elsewhere in the city and in worse cases throughout the country. The displacement process is usually associated with one of two factors; regeneration or redevelopment. These factors are used by the council to tackle many problems seen in social housing be it; deprivation, refurbishment, funding or disrepair (Gov.uk,2016). However, it is shown that when analysed further, there are unrevealed reasons to why the council decide to displace social housing residents. This regeneration process particularly affected the Carpenters estate in the London borough of Newham. This will be assessed as a case study of how the process of displacement affected the community of the estate, with the idea of ‘regeneration’ in mind.

‘Right to the city’ (Harvey,2012:5). The idea of the right to the city is the public taking control of the decisions made by the government (Harvey,2012:5). He states ‘We live in a world, after all, where the rights of private property and the profit rate trump all other notions of rights one can think of.’ (Harvey, 2012:3). This shows economic gain is the main concern in property and when applied to social housing, it is also the case. Newham council being funded for the Olympics created the possibility of economic expansion and targeted the most vulnerable parts for economic gain (surplus) (Harvey,2012:3). Therefore, meaning in terms of Harvey’s theory, Newham residents should take control back from the council and make the decisions on the future of their social housing. ‘Social cities’ (Gehl, 2011:15) This also arises the idea of social cities discussed by (Gehl, 2011:15) and the spaces which influence social interaction. The communities established on social housing estates are interrupted by displacement and therefore stopping social interactions. Thence creating isolating and unfamiliar feelings in the newer displaced area. Consequently, making it harder to establish these social cities. This overall shows that the

councils intention to gain surplus has consequential social effects on the communities they displace, through the splitting of communities. This study will be investigated through three chapters: The first being the Olympic effect, looking at East London in the lead up to the Olympics. The Displacement controversy, looking at the Olympics development plan and the effect it had on Stratford’s closer context, and the start of the displacement process of Carpenters residents. and finally, Consequences of The Olympic displacement, which looks at the outcomes produced by the displacement, as well as the reactions to it and the current situation. This will bring a unique insight in to the study of the Carpenters estate as the first-hand account will provide the contemporary situation of the exresident’s and how they have been affected. This study will therefore examine the displacement process in its wider and smaller context and will assess the social consequences, alongside those suggested by (Gehl,2011:15). Social housing can therefore be a step towards democratic decisions, through a political activist approach against the currently established system.

RE-

Fig.1 Map showing most displaced London Boroughs (2015)

RE-

Chapter 1: The Olympic effect

RE-

The Shoreditch ‘urban idyll’ (Hoskins, G & Tallon, A ,2004:374)

The first step was to establish a connection to the disconnected east end through transportation. This was achieved through the extension of the east London line. ‘In 2005, it was announced there’d be funding for the East London Line Extension, […] Shoreditch High Street: a portal for the rest of London and droves of tourists here to see an internationally renowned street art locale.’ (Estate office, 2012). This therefore, made the area increase in value by being made part of zone 1. These new residents are described in Hall’s (2014:459) reiterated idea of the ‘urban idyll’ (Hoskins, G & Tallon, A ,2004:374). This class is described as ‘drinking expresso, soy latte, or the finest bottle of Belgian beer, these people are part of a new British metropolitan bohemia’ (Hoskins, G & Tallon, A ,2004:25). These people consisted of the young higher-class, who were seen to bring ‘cultural’ benefits to the once run- down areas (Hall,2014:459). This benefit of course was economic surplus, as they could be marketed towards to buy, unlike the past residents of the area. This created opportunity for developers as they chose Shoreditch, Tower hamlets a vulnerable deprived area close to the City of London and used it to their advantage to gain surplus profit. This pushed many residents out of their council homes to make way

Fig. 2 The East London line extension bridge. (2014)

for unaffordable private property. Therefore, adding to the problem of a social housing crisis ‘revealed as 35,000 people sit on waiting lists for 10 YEARS’ (Daily Mirror, 2017), by moving people elsewhere. This caused many protests and branded Shoreditch the figurehead of gentrification. This is shown in the Shoreditch protest 2015, postOlympics when the process had been fully identified. ‘One protester who was at the demonstration said the Cereal Killer Cafe was targeted as a “symbol of gentrification”’ (Guardian,2015). The protest was run by the anarchist group Class war where the group targeted the Cereal café to highlight that “the Local authorities are coining it in, in a short-sighted race for cash by ‘regenerating’ social housing.” (Guardian, 2015).

This means that the gentrification of Shoreditch can be seen to have a short-term economic gain, but a longer-term problem once the economic opportunities dry up (Berry 1973: 28).

Fig. 3 Cereal killer café targeted (2015).

This shows that the displacement of residents prior to the Olympics caused a backlash once the damage had already been done. Highlighting peoples anger with unaffordable developer- led investments that isolate the working class from the middle class (Guardian, 2015). This Displacement is described by gentrification Theorist Berry (1973:28) as an ‘islands of renewal in seas of decay’ (Berry 1973: 28). RE-

The Olympic legacy (Bernstock 2014:5).

This example of displacement in Shoreditch is all too apparent as Bernstock (2014:20) highlights in many of the previous Olympics hosts. They show recurring trends of ‘displacement: utilization of the athlete’s village, trends in property price and treatment of the homeless groups during the games’ (Bernstock 2014:5). This is studied from 1992 in the Barcelona, Atlanta, Sydney, Athens, Beijing, and Vancouver where this process of displacement caused property prices to increase, as the new profit opportunities appeared. Therefore, showing that the buildup to the Olympics and the gentrification of East London, when compared with these other hosts is an iterative process.

in the way. Therefore, highlighting the true Olympic legacy and not what Newham council describe. (Bernstock 2014:5).

Fig. 4 Early construction on Centennial Olympic Park, Atlanta (2016).

One prime example is the Olympics in Atlanta, 1996, where ‘public-only housing schemes were replaced with ‘mixed tenure’ schemes’ (Bernstock 2014:8). This meant that there was a ‘lack of concern for low income (mainly Black) sections of the population and poor treatment/ criminalization of the homeless.’ (Bernstock 2014:7). Therefore, pushing the current working-class population out to make way for ‘regeneration aimed at attracting inward investment into the city’ Bernstock 2014:7). This seems to come with the bid to win the Olympics and affects the existing infrastructure on the Olympic site, as well as anything else that stands

RE-

Fig. 5 Map of Olympic hosts (2012)

RE-

Chapter 2: The Displacement controversy

RE-

The Stratford metropolitan masterplan (Newham council,2011)

The Stratford metropolitan masterplan proposed by Newham council, Claimed it will provide â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;46,000 new jobs and 20,000 new homes.â&#x20AC;&#x2122; (Newham council,2011). The plan aimed to regenerate: Chobam farm, Stratford Old Town, The greater Carpenters neighborhood and sugar house lane. Controversially however these areas were some of the most affected by displacement and the increasing housing prices. The key areas that will be studied are Clays lane estate now known as East village in the Chobam farm area and the Carpenters estate.

Fig .6 Straford metropolitan master plan strategy (2011).

RE-

Clays lane: supportive network (Guardian, 2008)

The Clays lane estate was the first to suffer the effect of the master plan, as the Chobam farm area was going to house to the Olympic village. This made the former council estate a key area of interest. However, the area was in scope long before it was announced, raising key issues of the functionality of the estate and how strategic the displacement was. This is shown through the 400 residents who were housed on the estate ‘50 people living in the estate were vulnerable people – now their network of support has gone.’ (Guardian, 2008). This support network is shown as’ The estate was laid out as a series of courtyards, so people would sit outside and chat to their neighbors as they walked past – it was very sociable’ (Guardian, 2008). This meant that a vulnerable group were about to be removed from a supportive positive environment. This established a community and support group of residents through the architectural arrangement and social environment Gehl (2011:15) theorizes, therefore providing a social support neighborhood.

Fig. 7 Clays lane courtyard garden example (2012)

RE-

Clays lane: compulsory purchase order (Compulsory Purchase Act,1965)

The majority of residents were employed but had low payed jobs, because of the extremely low rent prices (Guardian, 2008), this allowed even the vulnerable residents to have part time jobs. However unbeknownst to the residents this affordable housing venture was only temporary. Once told they were going to be evicted, they highlighted that they were not given a decant notice ‘without decant status the chances of getting a good property are very poor.’ (Guardian, 2008). This meant that the residents were alerted at the last minute and had less chance of gaining council property, as they did not have time to prepare for the moving process. Therefore, forcing many residents to inquire in to temporary accommodation. Residents were also notified very late about the temporary accommodation as they “was only offered temporary accommodation two weeks before we moved.” (Guardian, 2008). This meant that residents were left uncertain and unprepared, when they were the ones being forced from their homes. The council however did not see it this way, as they reclaimed the site under a compulsory purchase order (Compulsory Purchase Act,1965) meaning they reclaimed what they saw was theirs through physical ownership. Taking authority over the decisions made on the homes from those who are most vulnerable.

Fig .8 The clays lane estate demolition (2007).

The estate was later demolished and is currently the East village where properties range from £500,000£1000000 (Rightmove,2017). Making the redevelopment once again benefit the capitalist developer (Harvey, 2012:3) and makes the property unaffordable for the lowincome residents who once inhabited these spaces. Therefore, pushing theses residents out with little chance of return, and disrupting the social environment that the estate provided. ‘gentrification represents a significant historical geographical reversal of assumed patterns of urban growth intimately connected to a wider frame of politicaleconomic change.’ (Smith,1997: 72). Therefore, highlighting the intentions of Newham council, to use this gentrification framework to transform social housing in to a private investment, under the assumption that it will benefit the area economically. This does not, as highlighted previously benefit the past or present inhabitants. consequentially prompting the need to ‘Reclaiming the City for Anti-Capitalist Struggle’ (Harvey, 2012:115).

Fig. 9 The east village (2013).

RE-

The Carpenters estate: Surplus vs Human rights (United Nations, 2017).

The Carpenters estate was the next move in the masterplan for Newham council. This next step however was a much more extensive task and of a much larger scale. The estate consisted of three twentythree story tower blocks: Lund point, Dennison point and James Riley point and a low-rise development named Doran walk. The councils first tactic used on the Carpenters estate was Involuntary displacement. This would transform a low economic investment in to a high surplus return, through a Compulsory purchase order (Compulsory Purchase Act,1965) . Involuntary displacement is the nonconsensual removal of residents, which was used by the council to target the most vulnerable of the estate, as well as the shorter-term residents. This is highlighted in the protection from Evictions Act (1977) ‘If any person unlawfully deprives the residential occupier of any premises of his occupation of the premises or any part thereof, or attempts to do so, he shall be guilty of an offence’ (protection from Evictions Act,1977). The council saw these residents as a liability and in need of much more help, making the residents a burden to their plan. This would result in the transformation of the estate from a low-income investment to a high economic profit, as the removal of residents would allow the council to use the empty

Fig .10 The whole estate in context (2017)

estate as an open opportunity for investors. Therefore, producing an unlawful ground, as they used the excuse of the estate being ‘beyond disrepair’ (Gaurdian,2015), to evict residents without revealing their true intentions. Thence when assessed in terms of human rights, forced evictions is a grey area. This is because it is all too common to affect the ‘economically vulnerable and marginalized sectors of society, especially women, children, minorities’ (United Nations, 2017) similar to this estate which targets the interviewee who is a young woman and her child. This can be seen to be a breech to human rights, as the ‘“practice of forced eviction constitutes a gross violation of human rights, in particular the right to adequate housing” (United Nations, 2017). This is also demonstrated further by the fact that the resident was, made homeless. This is shown in the ‘International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (art. 11, para. 1)’ (United Nations, 2017) to be a breach of human rights, as the involuntary displacement of residents needs to provide an alternative adequate replacement (United Nations,2017). Therefore, highlighting the injustice encountered by the Carpenters estate residents, as the council’s

pursuit for economic surplus led to a breach to the resident’s human rights and quality of living.

RE-

Fig .11 Mapping showing the Carpenters estate (2017)

RE-

Interactions of a social housing community (Gehl,2011:129)

( In reference with Appendix A)

The interview was conducted with former resident and activist Chloe Philipson, who is also a family member. This time period created great difficulty, as my father was employed by the council to refurbish ‘disused flats’ on the estate not knowing the council’s true intention. This made two family members a part of either side of the spectrum, as the refurbishment of the flats was before the displacement of Chloe, making both family member oblivious until much later in their involvement. This interview discusses the estate from Chloe’s point of view and perspective. TW: “To start off the interview could you explain your experience of Lund point on the Carpenters estate and how you came about living there?” CP:” I was living on the 21st floor of the tower block at the age of 21 and was there for a year with my child, I was unemployed at the time and was on benefits and was struggling to support myself as well as my child.” TW: “What was your experience of the estate?” CP: “It was very welcoming and I had other single mums living on my floor who were going through the same situation and knew how I felt, which allowed us to set up an informal social support group, where

Fig .12 The access pathway to the estate (2017)

we would try and support each other as well as the pure company of each other. I had no one else, no family but had my friend on my floor and others from the block and around the estate, who I just started chatting to on my journeys through the estate. It was very welcoming and the residents were very approachable, and the sense of all feeling ‘In the same boat. We established a strong friendship and I actually felt a sense of belonging when walking round the estate, you know that feeling of everyone knowing everyone, it was actually really nice, not what people perceive of a council estate, you know what I mean? I never felt anymore sense of belonging.” TW:” How did you feel when you were told your borough would host the Olympics?” CP:” It was actually a very positive feeling and was on everyone’s lips around the estate, every conversation was ‘are you going, what you going to see’ etcetera. We were even told that Newham residents could apply for free tickets, I thought this was a great opportunity for my daughter Casima to go and watch the Olympics, my balcony even provided a perfect view over the Olympic park and I watched the construction of it in excitement and anticipation.” (Philipson,2017). RE-

This account of the estate before the process describes a social support network for an otherwise isolated individual in society, this means the social element of the estate can be argued to be more beneficial to this individual, as the need for social interaction becomes much more necessary. This is argued By Gehl and his idea of ‘spaces for walking, places for staying’ (Gehl,2011:129) to be the most important factor in architecture. The estate provides examples of this, as its walkways and pathways provide an opportunity for residents to interact, as the varying parts of the estate share access routes. Therefore, making the circulation area the estates social area. In this case Chloe’s child was the prompt for the interaction similar to those depicted by Gehl.

opportunity for social interactions for the resident to experience as a community.

Fig.13 “contact at a modest level- but definitely contact”. (2011)

This also relates to Perec’s (1997:57) idea of a ‘Neighbourhood’ (Perec,1997:57). He describes a neighbourhood as ‘The portion of town you can get around easily by foot or, to say the same thing in the form of a truism’ (Perec,1997:57). Thence, the estates replacement of car circulation with pedestrian streets, means that the estate had a neighbourhood feeling, as it encouraged people travelling through it to socialise, as they were on foot and part of the same community. Therefore, showing that when compared to Gehl and Perec’s idea, the estate creates an

RE-

Involuntary displacement

The estate was then as highlighted in the Stratford metropolitan plan, due for demolition and redevelopment, as the estate fell in to disrepair ‘The current state of repair and the extensive costs of refurbishment have prompted the council to demolish Dennison Point, Lund Point, James Riley Point and 28-74 and 80-86 Doran Walk.’ (Newham council,2011). This development was to have ‘Up to 1,900 new and refurbished homes with some student housing from 20,000m2 new office or work space, 500-1,000m2 new shops 1,000 – 2,500m, 2 new community and health space, At least 1,000 new jobs’ (Newham council,2011). This promise however when assessed alongside the past examples, seems unlikely to benefit the original council residents. TW:” When did you hear the speculations about the estate being demolished?” CP:” It was circulating around the estate as gossip and no one really believed or took notice really, until the council started posting their notices to people explaining the idea to demolish and redevelop the whole estate. This was mainly happening around Doran walk in the low-rise part of the estate. People were slowly being moved from the estate and I was seeing less and

Fig. 14 Devastating consequences of Grenfell tower (2017)

less people as I walked through the estate.” TW:” I’m guessing it wasn’t long until it caught up with you as well?” CP:” Yes, exactly I received my notice in 2011 and was told that because of asbestos, we had to vacate the estate so that it could be removed and be redeveloped. This left me homeless with my daughter, on the street with nowhere to go or contact. I visited the council housing offices and they suggested Focus E15 hostel at Brimstone house quite close to the estate.” (Philipson,2017) Newham Council argued that these estates are running in to disrepair (Newham council,2011) hence why they need to be demolished. However, this loss of care can have extremely devastating consequences, as shown in Grenfell tower. The residents established Grenfell action group and warned the council before the tragedy ‘We have blogged many times on the subject of fire safety at Grenfell Tower and we believe that these investigations will become part of damning evidence of the poor safety record of the KCTMO’ (Grenfell action group,2016). This resulted in the loss of many lives due to the council’s decision to cut corners by choosing a cheaper option ‘Flameretardant cladding could have been

fitted to Grenfell Tower for just £5,000 extra’ (The Telegraph,2017). This in relation to the Carpenters estate groups, Focus E15 and C.A.R.P, shows that the continuous residents outcry, even though somewhat successful, is ignored and the refurbishment of the estate would solve many issues faced by both parties. This is shown by the council’s early decision to use ‘The current state of repair and the extensive costs of refurbishment’ (Newham council,2011), as an excuse to demolish the estate. However, the current situation of an ever-growing social housing problem described as ‘an affordability crisis that has caused home ownership among the young’ (Gaurdian,2017). Thence, showing that the continuous growing house prices of the capital make it even harder for a young person like (Philipson,2017) to afford a mortgage let alone buy it.

RE-

Focus E15 activists

Focus E15 was the next chapter in Chloe’s displacement experience and began as a negative short-term experience and ended as positive long-term effect. The hostel itself did not aid her socially however it prompted activism that Harvey speaks about in the right to the city and the idea of the resident/ public reclaiming decisions from the authorities (Harvey,2012:5). TW: “What was Focus E15?” CP:” Focus E15 was a temporary hostel for vulnerable young people who were homeless, this included single parents and people with no family or relatives.” TW:” Could you explain your experience at Focus E15?” CP:” To be honest it was pretty grim. It was like a prison style system, with sign in sign out entrance and exit and there was a curfew. However, we managed to establish a network specifically of single mums, some I knew from the estate and others were from elsewhere in the borough.” TW:” So, you actually re-joined with Carpenters residents?” CP:” Yeah, it was actually nice to see them again and that feeling of getting by was re-established, with those I knew and those I had met.”

Fig. 15 Focus E15 hostel at Brimstone house (2016).

TW:” How long was you there?” CP:” I was only there for a few months when we were all told that the funding for focus was being cut. I had that heart sinking feeling once again, we were all very uncertain on our fate. The workers of Focus told us we would be rehoused in other temporary hostels around the country. However, they were only available in Hastings, Birmingham and Manchester. Once again, we would be split up and our community broken.” (Philipson,2017) The displacement process created a trickle-down effect, pushing those with little money out of the city and in to areas in the country, showing the failure of the process once again by not removing poverty just placing it elsewhere and that land ‘is a fictitious form of capital that derives from expectations of future rents[…] low- or even moderate-income households out of [...] London over the last few years, with catastrophic effects on class disparities and the well-being of underprivileged populations.’ (Harvey, 2012:29). This is shown in the examples across the city where the deadlines of provisional accommodation, were used as an excuse by the council to displace single mothers. ‘councils

are currently moving homeless mothers and children out of their boroughs at a rate of close to 500 families a week’ (Independent,2015). The council therefore targets these homeless mothers, and places them outside the capital when their provisional accommodation runs out similar to Chloe’s situation(Philipson,2017). Thence displacing them when they are in the way of an economic return. Even in the instance of Focus E15 where the funding was cut as it was not gaining profit, meant that it could be transformed in to privately owned property. Therefore, showing that profit return as stated previously is put before humanity (Harvey,2012:7). Meaning that the system was not working and that the public should take it in to their own hands, to solve the issue.

Fig.16 A protester holds a sign at the ‘March for Homes’ rally outside City Hall (2015).

RE-

BBC and Al Jazeera temporary occupation of the estate

The council then authorised permission on the 29th of March 2012 for the BBC and Al Jazeera to use Lund point and Dennison point to broadcast the Olympics (Insidehousing,2012), because of its views over the Olympic park as highlighted by the resident (Philipson,2017). This created controversy and prompted an outcry from the residents. TW: “How did you respond to this?” CP:” I had actually been told by others from our group that Lund point and Dennison point had been given to the BBC and Al Jazeera to broadcast the Olympics, removing remaining residents from their homes and occupying the top five floors, one of those flats were mine. This led to our anger and outcry that we had been removed from our homes, not for the reason we were being told.” TW:” Did this lead to the establishment of the Focus E15 group?” CP:” Yes exactly, we took it in our own hands to establish a group to protest, we started by protesting outside, you know um Stratford centre?” TW:” Yeah.” CP:” Yeah and then we visited the

Fig. 17 Focus E15 hostel at Brimstone house (2016).

estate and were actually refused access by the big security guard out the front of my own flat.” TW: What was your aim by visiting the estate?” CP: “We was actually going to visit one of the last few residents in Lund point, speak and find out more really.” TW: “So, you weren’t even allowed in to see people living there?” CP: “No, apparently no one was allowed in or out when the BBC was broadcasting.” (Philipson,2017) This use of authority created clashes between the functionality of the Tower block, as it had now become a business. Harvey states ‘resources instead channeled to dynamic "entrepreneurial" growth poles.’ (Harvey,2012:29) meaning that property has been instead become a way to gain profit, rather than to house people. The residents were therefore considered as second rate and profit return being put before their well-being. This shows that this short-term occupancy caused negative outcomes for the residents, and suggests that it was the councils intention to get rid of hangers on (Bernstock, 2014:30).

RE-

The Carpenters estate revolution

The newly established Focus E15 group then took it in to their own hands to try and reclaim the estate back and in doing so sparking a revolution for change and awareness. The event however became bigger than originally planned, underlining the importance and support of the cause. TW:” What was your next plan of action?” CP: “We wanted to make a statement, something that would actually get attention, our other attempts did but really all for the wrong reasons. We wanted to originally occupy Lund point however as shown by the last attempt, it was proven difficult to gain access, as well as stay there a long time. We finally all come to the decision to occupy Numbers 60-68 of the vacant Doran walk to establish a social centre for our group, as well as others who wanted to visit.” TW:” How did you do this?” CP:” We gained access using builders we knew, who supported our cause. We did this on September 21st and aimed to stay there as long as it took to raise awareness of this disused estate.” TW:” What was in the social centre?” CP:” We created a free shop,

Fig .18 The occupation of Doran walk (2014).

which was like a food bank really, we wanted to bring together the remaining residents of the estate, to fight back against this awful experience that Newham council and Sir Robin Wales was putting us through. We actually received loads of stuff from people and the support from the community was amazing, they helped supply our group and children with toys, food and clothes.” TW:” Could you explain these spaces in further detail?” CP: “Yeah like it had a play room for the children, bedrooms, areas to create banners and to discuss things, the place was even fully functional, it had running water even functioning power showers!” TW: “What were the aims and outcomes of all this?” CP: “Well just to prove that there were fully functioning homes that were going to waste on the estate and that we were removed from our homes and then our hostel for a short-term occupancy of the estate from the BBC, which caused a long-term effect on the community, by shifting them throughout the country, we wanted our estate back and couldn’t see why we couldn’t have it! We had also been lied to

by the council and felt victims of the gentrification process, taking place throughout East London.” TW:” What publicity did this gain?” CP:” We received news coverage and even a visit from Russel Brand! (laughs). It just showed that people cared and wanted to support us. We all saw it as very successful, even when the council failed an attempt to evict us, the judge was in our favour and said we had little notice under squatter’s rights. We saw this as well as other stuff, as an overall victory against the council and Sir Robin Wales.” TW:” When did you actually leave/ get evicted?” CP:” We actually left on our own accord, on the 7th of October, having felt we had achieved our goals.” TW: “To end the interview could you summarise this victory?” CP:” Well we actually sparked the repopulation of some of Doran walk by the request of Sir Robin Wales himself. We brought the suffering community back together and established a long-standing network in Focus E15 and have worked on many other social injustice cases.

RE-

“The beginning of the end to the housing crisis” (Roberts, 2015).

It’s funny the council even bought focus back last year to provide social care for vulnerable people.” (Philipson,2017) The excuse to demolish the estate as it was running in to disrepair (Newham council,2011), is also challenged by Focus E15. This is shown through their occupation of the estate which had “the place was even fully functional, it had running water even functioning power showers!” (Philipson,2017). Therefore, highlighting that the accommodation was still in good use. The Establishment of the social centre by Focus E15 also created a temporary ‘urban commons’ (Harvey,2012:67). Harvey definition of a common is the ‘utilization of common property resources’ (Harvey,2012:68). This is shown through the “play room for the children, bedrooms, areas to create banners and to discuss things” (Philipson,2017) which provided a space for the mums, the community and its supporters to share and help each other. This therefore produced an ‘urban commons’ (Harvey,2012:67) of activists, fighting against the council’s centralization of decision making. Meaning that the commons would produce a platform for the community to reclaim their estate. Thence fighting for the ‘Right to the city” (Harvey,2012:3), and returning the control of the estate back to the residents.

An architectural academic who studied this process (Roberts, 2015), raised awareness of it in the architectural community. The Real estate’s exhibition documented the activists from Focus E15, as well as their processes as a time capsule of the protest, highlighting its significance as the exhibition described it being “the beginning of the end to the housing crisis” (Roberts, 2015). This study shows an example of how displacement was intercepted and the possibilities of a revolution that causes a shift in decisions made on social housing. This study also highlights the possibility of using social interactions as a weapon to address the issue, by becoming united and using Gehl’s concept of social cities, as a manifesto for change. Therefore creating “entry point for anti-capitalist critique and political activism.” (Harvey, 2012:67). This overall shows some significance, however it is only a starting point, as the battle for Carpenters is a long process. But for now, has left the estate untouched by the developers.

RE-

Fig. 19 The Focus E15 part of the exhibition (2015).

RE-

Chapter 3: The Consequences of The Olympic displacement

RE-

UCL EAST | FINAL DRAFT MASTERPLAN

SUMMER 2016

04 | OVERVIEW OF THE MASTERPLAN Carp

ente

UPDATES TO THE MASTERPLAN The Final Draft Masterplan presents the latest design proposals for UCL East. Since the Stage 2 consultation in February, the masterplanning team have been developing the masterplan proposals further and looking at how the key issues raised through consultation can be addressed or responded to.

Changes to the public realm

There are a number of important changes that have been made which we hope to discuss and gather your feedback on.

A level change between the Plaza and the Terrace will provide a clear defnition for both spaces, and transform the Western Bank into a more accessible and usable space.

rs R oad

Changes to massing strategy The aim is to form a coherent skyline across the Cultural and Education District with markers to help encourage views into the Park.

Cit y M

Str eet Poo l

er Riv

r ive sR ork rw ate W

ill

POOL STREET EAST

POOL STREET WEST

To the right an overview of the key elements and changes to the proposals is presented. The bottom border outlines the masterplanning themes and where further information can be found in this exhibition.

he tR oa d

The UCL proposal

reet

St nton

on t

Thor PLOT 1

OM PR

Changes to layout

EN AD E

PLOT 2

There have been changes to the layout of the Marshgate site to create better defnition of external spaces. The resulting plots are also more regular in shape, making better use of the site.

MARSHGATE

PLAZA

W ar

PLOT 3

St re et

TERRACE

Ro a

ng s

PLOT 4

to n

Student residences on Marshgate

Changes to massing on Plot 3

Student residences introduced on Plot 3 will increase activity on Marshgate after hours, positively influence the character of Sidings Street, and provide the residents with a good connection to Pudding Mill Local Centre.

A change to the massing confguration creates an animated edge along the railway and allotment. It also accommodates student residences whilst offering flexibility in the future. N

KEY THEMES OF THE MASTERPLAN The masterplan has been presented under three key themes that relate to the planning process and the strategic objectives of LLDC and UCL. The key themes also reflect the issues raised by the community in the previous stages of consultation.

UCL East revealed

ACCESS & INCLUSION: MOVEMENT & CONNECTIVITY

See board 05

New and enhanced pedestrian and cycling connections between the Park, surrounding developments and the community through the UCL East sites.

ACCESS & INCLUSION: PUBLIC SPACE & ACTIVITIES

See board 06

Public realm that offers an exciting and attractive opportunity for the creation of engaging spaces with the potential for learning, innovation and enterprise to occur.

FORM & IDENTITY: LAYOUT, SCALE & FORM

See board 07

Layout, scale and form that embraces connections, views and the context surrounding the site to deliver human-scale and inviting public-facing buildings.

FORM & IDENTITY: CHARACTER, LOOK & FEEL

See board 08

The character of the site is derived from the openness of the proposals. The academic offering and future events and activities will help shape UCL East's identity.

Fig. 20 The Focus E15 part of the exhibition (2015).

As the councils, temporary use of the estate to broadcast the Olympics was coming to an end, the council decided to reveal its future long-term plan for the Carpenters estate. It was Announced that the University College London was working in partnership with Newham council to build a £1bn campus on the Carpenters estate site (UCL, 2011), therefore demolishing the existing. This promised ‘significant economic and social benefits […] and raise aspiration for higher education’ (UCL, 2011). This running parallel to the buildup of the displacement process and the supposed inadequate living conditions, questioned the council’s true intentions and began to heighten residents anger. Therefore, constructing an intentional bigger picture, which the council kept from residents.

RE-

SUSTAINABILITY: ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL & ECONOMIC

See board 09

At the heart of the UCL East Sustainability Vision is a desire to create a great place for students, staff and the wider community.

The C.A.R.P protest

In response to the estates growing controversy, the residents established a community group called C.A.R.P (Carpenters Against Regeneration Plans). This group worked with Focus E15 to protest and â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;campaigning for a fair deal from Newham Council, who are planning to remove the residents and demolish the estateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; (C.A.R.P, 2011). After many discussions with the council at the community centre, the group took it in to their own hands and protested outside Newham town hall, against the UCL proposal. Mary Finch who was a resident on the estate for 40 years became a key member of the group and had attended every event associated with the estate and decided to speak at the protest. "It's been a dreadful year. The Olympics should have lifted our spirits, but we felt neglected.â&#x20AC;? (BBC, 2012). This protest and speech gained publicity, and highlighted the effect the regeneration plan had on a long-standing community, and aimed to reach out to a wider set of communities.

Fig. 21 C.A.R.P protest outside Newham town hall (2012)

RE-

UCL student’s community respond

This attracted the attention of students and alumni from UCL, who understood the injustice their own institution was creating by pursuing this proposal. Students from the existing Bloomsbury campus protested within the institution, by occupying ‘the Garden Room in the Wilkins Building [..] events were put on there with a Carpenters Estate resident.’ (AFLondon, 2012). The universities governing board responded with a zero-tolerance approach and threatened the students with ‘£40,000 worth of costs and served with a court order and injunction’ (AFLondon, 2012). This forced the students and resident to remove themselves from the room, because of the consequences faced. The university later released a list of names in an injunction paper, which had over 300 names of students who had supported the group on a Facebook page (Left futures,2012). Therefore, highlighting the UCL student support gained from the protest and the conflict that the university had created not only with residents of the estate, but with its own students. This injunction paper only heightened tensions within the institutions as it engaged academics and alumni.

Fig. 22 UCL student occupy the Wilkins building (2012)

RE-

Bulldozing a community: an academic backlash (Edwards, 2012).

This created an open debate event on the 31st of October 2012 titled ‘UCL Stratford: Bulldozing a Community?’. This was led by Michael Edwards who had worked at the institution for 42 years (UCL,2012), he had witnessed the undemocratic decisions made by the university. In his opening speech, he stated “UCL is not a very democratic institution, it’s rather “managerial”: some choices are imposed on the students” (Edwards, 2012). He was highlighting the student’s response to the proposal as a way of showing that the decisions were made without the students being involved and that this resulted in a large outcry against the injustice it caused.

therefore use part of the large site to integrate social housing with student housing. Therefore, replacing the supposed decaying estate with better housing, and integrating them with a new academic community.

Fig.23 “UCL Stratford: Bulldozing a Community?” Poster (2012)

Michael had worked on housing and social regeneration in London with other colleagues (UCL,2012) and had worked with the mayor to create policies against social housing injustice. “Policies were created to resist the loss of housing. unless replaced with better quality buildings with the same capacity.” (Edwards,2012). He saw this proposal as not only unethical but unlawful, and believed that if the social housing wasn’t replaced, the university could face a lawsuit. Edwards also suggested an alternative to the proposal “If 1/4 of the area UCL wants to build on is used for social housing, the 700 unities can be preserved” (Edwards,2012). This would mean

RE-

‘Separate territories’ (Hall, 2014:524).

Edwards worked with Peter Hall in the housing and social regeneration department who stated that ‘the degeneration of many such areas has now gone so far that they are in effect “separate territories”’ (Hall, 2014:524). This definition of ‘separate territories’ refers to a study by Archbishop of Canterbury’s Commission on Urban Priority Areas (1985) of the segregation of the working social housing class from the higher classes. This in relation to the prestigious University College London, shows the council put the economic gain before its social housing residents (Harvey: 2012:7). Therefore, separating this class and community by not only dismissing their involvement, but removing them from the equation all together. Consequently, referring to the Carpenters estate as an unsolvable ‘separate territory’ (Hall,2014:524) outside their capitalist surplus agenda (Harvey: 2012:7). This class being referred to by Karl Marx as the ‘surplus population’ (Marx, 1867:345), who believes that the working class is not only the driving force behind surplus gain, but also those who are victimized by the capital when in the way. By stating ‘This is the general law of capitalist accumulation’ (Marx, 1867:346). This therefore shows that the Carpenters estate residents are being made the “separate community”, who are the burden to Newham council, as they fall in the most vulnerable category

of the ‘surplus population’ (Marx, 1867:345). This in consequence seeing the residents as the problem, rather than seeking a solution that Edwards and Hall suggest. Indecisive victory? After the objections from its students and alumni, as well as the estates residents the university decided to withdraw the proposal. A UCL spokesperson said, ‘the process of intensive and lengthy examination has led us both to conclude that we cannot reach a commercial agreement.’ (Newham recorder, 2013). This was therefore another victory for the revolution, but as shown in the words of the spokesperson, the withdrawal was still unapologetic from both UCL and the council. This therefore providing another victory in an uncertain battle for the future of the residents.

RE-

Fig. 24 Current state of vacant Dennison point (2017)

RE-

“The Sheriff of Newham Robin the poor” (Focus E15, 2013)

In response to the withdrawal announcement Sir Robin Wales aimed to reassure residents on their uncertain future. “You find people who say it’s their chance to move to Southend” (Newham recorder, 2013). This began yet another astounding point in the resident’s fate, who had overcome one obstacle and were faced with another. This also blatantly highlighted the denied displacement process of the residents who were voluntarily displaced outside the city. This shows that the mayor saw a displaced community, as a better alternative than as he repeated an “inadequate decaying estate” (Newham recorder, 2013). Voluntary displacement was the second tactic used by the council to vacate the estate. This was used to act as a better alternative offer for the residents in comparison to their current (Bernstock, 2016:29). The estate was seen to be ‘beyond disrepair’ (Newham council,2011), therefore prompting them to take the offer. This was however misleading as residents were moved to accommodation outside of London, far from the amenities that the city offers. Therefore, dispersing the community in London’s neighboring counties and separating them geographically from each other, as well as their home city. This process of voluntary displacement took place during the broadcasting

Fig. 25 Focus E15 protestors holding banner stating, “The Sheriff of Newham Robin the poor” (2014)

occupation and is revealed in the contemporary situation of a resident who took this option. This will be described through the interview with former resident and family friend Lee Crandle. Lee discusses the estate from his point of view from a past and present perspective in his provisional Essex accommodation.

Fig. 26 Sir Robin wales giving a speech (2011)

RE-

The ‘Provisional’ Voluntary displacement

(In Reference with Appendix B)

TW: “Where did you live on Carpenter Estate? And what was your experience there like?” LC: “I lived in Dennison Point on the 18th floor for 17 years with my family (Mum and 4 sisters). I had grown up there from birth, along with my sisters. We were long term residents there and were quite known in the block/estate.” TW:” Could you elaborate on that experience and social element of the estate?” LC: “yeah, of course. As I said, me and my family were known and common faces on the estate and I pretty much knew everyone from Doran Walk to Lund Point. I went to the local Carpenter Primary School and had many friends who lived on the estate and we used to play in the parks and football cages on the estate as well as on the many staircases and walkways and was a child’s heaven! With many opportunities to play and pretty much be mischievous, you know all the stuff that kids do.” TW: “How did you feel about the Olympics when it was announced that your borough and area was hosting it?” LC: “We were over the moon, all of us played in the cages, used to dream about taking part in it,

Fig. 27 Football cages Lee once played at in Dennison point (2017)

even just being able to watch it, the estate was very sport oriented with everyone wanting to be able to be the next Bobby Moore or David Beckham.” TW: How long was it until the speculations of the estate had been circulating? LC:” To be honest it was more the older generation really, I was only a kid, I didn’t really get it and just wanted to play out, however it started to sink in when my mates from Doran Walk weren’t around to play football anymore.”

LC: “Of Course! our nan lived in Essex, so we saw it as a good opportunity to being able to be close to her as she was getting older. We also saw it as a good opportunity to escape the city to a life of tranquillity (laughs). Our mum finally made the decision in 2011 and that was it, we were in the car on our way to the new estate.” (Crandle,2017)

TW: “I am guessing it wasn’t long after this that you were approached by the council?” LC: “Actually, we were one of the last to be given a notice, but I do remember that when we did get the letter it sold us that dream of a brand-new estate in the country side, that was available, you know stuff that inner city kids and families dream about and never experience in the close-knit walls of a city or even on the estate. The council even claimed it was unsafe and incapable of sufficient living and that the block needed to be redeveloped.” TW:” So, I’m guessing this new estate sparked interest?” RE-

This excuse is all too apparent in many housing estates and can have devastating effects on the residents. This is evident in the neighboring Robin Hood Gardens in Poplar. The excuse of disrepair was also used to remove residents and demolish the estate. The building was also denied listing and was seen by the local politician Fitzpatrick as “well past its demolition date, and should be brought down ASAP in my view.” (Dezeen,2015). Therefore, showing that a key brutalist piece of architecture, has been allowed to run in to disrepair and could not be listed because of this (Gaurdian,2016). Creating the argument that if the estate was renovated or well-kept by the council, it could have been a celebrated piece of architecture for social housing residents rather than private. It could also be argued that the council purposely let the estate deteriorate, as the future for the estate promised ‘214 homes with 1500 in a phased ten-year programme. Half of these are designated ‘affordable’ (Robin Hood gardens, 2016). Therefore, underlining the council’s true intentions, to transform another council estate in to a private investment for high economic gain.

Fig. 28 Robin hood gardens demolition (2017)

Fig. 29 “Sorry the lifestyle you ordered is currently out of stock” Banksy graffiti near Robin Hood gardens (2011)

RE-

The Essex ‘Separate Territory’ (Hall, 2014:524)

The Essex ‘Separate Territory’ (Hall, 2014:524),

Fig. 30 Lee’s current Basildon, Essex accommodation (2017)

Lee and his family had now voluntarily moved to an alternative ‘provisional’ accommodation, while they waited for the estate to be developed. This reiterates Hall’s idea of a ‘Separate territory’ (Hall, 2014:524), as the relocation of this working-class family, has removed them from the city and placed them in an Essex separate territory. Therefore, moving this family under ‘voluntary’ terms with a promise of return, but instead replacing them with a private property class who can afford to buy property on the estate, which the family cannot. This therefore creates a no man’s land within the county as Hall (2014:458) describes that ‘many of whom themselves moved out not so many years before, who wanted to pull up the drawbridge and preserve what they saw as their rural way of life’ (Hall,2014:458). This describes the local residents feeling that these displaced communities are invading their rural life, which they moved to escape from the city. Therefore placing these council house residents between an unwelcoming county and an unaffordable city. Therefore determining a ‘no man’s land’ of isolation between the two.

call it (laughs). It was a little cul de sac and we were the end house, it was supposed to be much more spacious with all of us having a room, compared to us all sharing 3 rooms with bunk beds back in Dennison Point.”

TW:” where was this estate?” LC: “Basildon/ Bas-Vegas as they

TW: This all seems great, how long was this supposed to last? LC:” well the council actually told us that this was temporary, we saw it as like a holiday, as the council told us that once the redevelopment of the estate was finished or when the next new one was available we could have it. not considering how long this process could really take.” TW: “So, you were talking about the estate and your first impressions of it?” LC:” Yeah, we drove in the front of the drive and was taken back, it was huge, very spacious, large garden, sitting room and kitchen and there were no arguments with my sisters.” TW: “You compared it to a holiday, how was it and how was the area? “ LC:” The house was great and it all seemed brilliant … for… about 10 minutes, it didn’t take long to realize that there was nothing going on in the area and not much to do, with

only a small high street which we quickly got bored of after a while, and to make matters worse I don’t know anyone, I did get talking to the other kids down my road who ended going to my school and I found out that they were also from east London in hackney. We instantly clicked, however my mate later told me he had been there for a year longer than me which later made me realize that we were already there longer than we planned and could stand Basildon. “ TW: “Was the experience short lived?” LC:” Yeah, like we started to get used to it but it just wasn’t the hustle and bustle of the city and the fun walkways and staircases I once loved.” TW: “When did you hear about the council’s permission to give Al Jazeera your tower block to broadcast from?” LC:” My mum found out from one of the families we knew on our floor who stayed there while they were broadcasting and they described the experience as noisy and hostile as the security would ask questions about visitors and the noise from the studio could be heard from the above floor.” RE-

TW:” what happened to this family?” LC:” they were later moved out by the council and they are currently in Southend, Essex, the block as well as the two others remain vacant.” TW: “How did this make you feel when you found out that Al Jazeera were using your tower block to broadcast from? “ LC:” Neglected and lied to. I felt that we were shifted away to make way for the money opportunity that Al Jazeera would bring. It raised the questions that if they could broadcast the Olympics around the clock, then why was it insufficient to live in!” TW:” Exactly, it raises serious questions on the real intentions of the council to remove the residents. What was your response to this?” LC:” We contacted the council and they pretty much told us that it was not our decision on where we are put and that we didn’t have a say on the place. “ TW:” What do you mean? Could you elaborate?” LC: “Well, they claimed that because it was social housing, they could place us wherever and that we had voluntarily moved but unknowingly that we would be stuck here and

forgotten about. They said they would get back to us when the next Newham property is available.” TW:” Have they got back to you?” LC: “As you can see, we are still here, 5 years later with no response, we will keep pestering them however, it seems to be getting nowhere.” (Crandle,2017) This isolation of a ‘no man’s land’ estate in Essex has left the family stuck and forgotten about, therefore highlighting their involvement of a separate territory. This is also evident in the other residents on the estate, most coming from east London and have been displaced ‘provisionally’ under their borough council. This shows relation to the early appearances of gentrification in the 1850’s- 60’s in Paris. This was caused by ‘Baron Haussmann’s destruction of working-class Paris and its monumental rebuilding’ (Smith,1996:32). This period showed the start of the process of gentrification, as Paris slums were cleared and replaced by Hall’s (2014:459) reiterated idea of the ‘urban idyll’ (Hoskins, G & Tallon, A ,2004:374).

Fig. 31 Pathway of the Basildon, Essex estate (2017)

of Paris slums ‘it is a house where only people who are not like us can go’ (Baudelaire,1947). This describes a working-class family looking in on the ‘urban idyll’ (Hoskins, G & Tallon, A ,2004:374), who know that they will never be able to afford the area in which they once lived. This relates to Lee’s situation, as they have been moved out of the city from an area which they could once afford, and will be replaced by ‘urban idyll’ (Hoskins, G & Tallon, A ,2004:374), who will bring economic surplus. Therefore, highlighting the isolation of the family who are part of the ‘surplus population’ (Marx, 1867:345) from the ‘urban idyll’ (Hoskins, G & Tallon, A ,2004:374). Therefore, forming a physical and metaphorical ‘separate territory’ (Hall,2014:524) between London and Essex, which the family witness but cannot be involved in.

This divide in class is captured in a poem from the era titled ‘Eyes of the poor’. It describes the transformation of Paris slums “it is a house where only people who are not like RE-

The Consequences of ‘Provisional’ voluntary displacement

TW:” What is the current situation?” LC: “We are with a private housing association related to Newham council, who are pretty much the middle men of us to communicating with Newham council.” TW: “What are your next moves in trying to get back to Newham?” LC:” We’re aiming to take it to the council physically and possibly court, whatever it takes to get back in the borough. “ TW:” Well I hope you do get back and that the process is successful, thank you for the interview.” (Crandle,2017) voluntary displacement created devastating consequences for the family, leaving them in limbo with Newham council 25 miles from home in provisional accommodation. The estate remains currently vacant with no certain future on what it will be replaced with. However, it is almost certain that it won’t be replaced with a comparable amount if not any social housing. This raises alarming questions of the success of the council’s plans, as well as the estates current wasted use, showing the failure of a capitalist fueled agenda and the ‘surplus population’ (Marx, 1867:345) who are most affected. Harvey (2012:30) describes this idea of a capitalist

agenda to push the working- class in to the suburbs and replace them with the ‘urban idyll’ (Hoskins, G & Tallon, A ,2004:374). ‘Roll on endless suburbanization that is both landand energy-consuming way beyond what is reasonable for the sustained use of planet earth for human habitation!’ (Harvey, 2012:30). This depicts the idea of a continuously growing city which leaks in to the surrounding counties creating a ‘no man’s land’ of ‘separate territories’ (Hall,2014:524) in the suburbs.

Fig. 32 Road in context of Basildon, Essex estate (2017)

This eviction process has therefore used both voluntary and involuntary displacement to remove hundreds of residents from their homes and has broken a community. Consequently, the strong sense of community that is devoted to the estate aim to fight until they receive a ‘fair deal from Newham Council, who are planning to remove the residents and demolish the estate’ (C.A.R.P, 2011).This idea of fighting back is shown in Lee’s current decision to take the council to court, which will be the next step in the battle for the Carpenters estate. This will at the very least bring the injustice before the courts and hopefully opens a door to reclaim what is left of the scattered community’s hope. Therefore, continuing the Carpenters revolution from the Essex ‘separate territories’ (Hall,2014:524).

RE-

Fig. 33 The Essex accommodation current state (2017)

RE-

conclusion: Re-Newham

In conclusion, the 2012 Olympics’ had devastating social consequences on the Carpenters estate community. The £9 billion funding (Newham.gov, 2013) should have produced great opportunities for everyone in the borough. Instead the council chose to gentrify the host area through the ‘“ Disneyfication” against the barbaric homelessness, lack of affordable housing, and degrading urban environments’ (Harvey, 2012:35). This would therefore push the working class out of the area and attract the foreign ‘corporate capital and the upper classes’ (Harvey, 2012:23), that are visiting the games for more than just the sport, but instead foreign investments. This would create economic surplus return, which the council saw as an opportunity to ‘improve’ the area. This put economic surplus before its social housing residents, and raised question on human rights. Harvey eludes to this by stating ‘where the rights of private property and the profit rate trump all other notions of rights one can think of.’ (Harvey, 2012:3). This is shown through the private investments of the BBC/ Al Jazeera occupation of the estate, as well as the UCL proposal. This also creates questions about the better use of the £9 billion funding (Newham.gov, 2013), which as requested by the carpenter’s residents could have

been renovated. This would provide a greater outcome for the council, as the estate would be inhabited and there would be some relief from the ‘3,515 people on its list’ (Daily Mirror, 2017). This therefore only adds to the growing housing problem in London where countless social housing estates are being demolished such as the example of Robin Hood Gardens. This example as well as the Carpenters estate shows how the local council put the opportunity for private investment before the relief of the growing social housing waiting list. The establishment of the Focus E15 and C.A.R.P social centre, also denounced the councils claims that the estate was running in to disrepair (Newham council,2011). This form of ‘urban commons’ (Harvey,2012:67) created a growing radical influence of commons, throughout the many media platforms but also the academic platform. This is shown in the Real estate’s exhibition (Roberts, 2015), the UCL students protest and the “UCL Stratford: Bulldozing a Community?” debate. These are all examples of “urban commons” (Harvey,2012:67) that were influenced by the Carpenters estate revolution, as they provided platforms for its participants to share information, debate and take action as a collective. Thence triggering further injustice in their own institution. This therefore sparks

Fig. 34 Current boarded up windows of Dennison point (2017)

the revolution in both the institution and on the estate, of their ‘Right to the city’ (Harvey,2012:3) and the democracy of decision making. This ‘urban commons’ (Harvey,2012:67) that was created by Focus E15 was what Perec describes as a rich neighbourhood because of the re-appropriated approach it took as ‘all the Jews in the Rue de Rosiers, all the students in Latin quarter […] all the blacks in Harlem?’ (Perec, 1997,59). This meant that the re-appropriation of Doran walk created a better democratic alternative than what was in place when the estate was vacant. Therefore, showing that the estate can be seen as something much more than housing. It is a thriving neighbourhood outside of the council’s classification of social housing.

RE-

This idea of the alternative brings about the idea of ‘spatial agency’ (Awan, Schneider, and Till, 2011:35). As the architect’s aim is to be a ‘contributor to the creation of empowering spatial, and hence social, relationships in the name of others’ (Awan, Schneider, and Till, 2011:38). This is shown in the Carpenters estate, as it was used as a tool for revolution and therefore, empowered others. This depicts the start of a revolutionary change in the democracy of social housing and the possibilities that can be achieved. This produces an environment for a collective decision-making, with the guidance of a spatial agent (Awan, Schneider, and Till, 2011:35). This is shown in the example of Curitiba, Brazil, where ‘Jaime Lerner is an architect and urban planner who was mayor of Curitiba […] transformed Curitiba in to one of the greenest cities in the world’ (Awan, Schneider, and Till, 2011:167). This shows on a much larger scale that the creation of these commons can produce a city of ‘Autogestion’(Awan, Schneider, and Till, 2011:166). This is the ‘self-organized and managed through autonomous, grassroots and democratic decision making.’ (Awan, Schneider, and Till, 2011:166). Underlining the significance of the Carpenters revolution, as not the answer but the start of a manifesto for Re- Newham.

Fig. 35 “Urban solutions are more than theory, they are a living reality in Curitiba” Jaime Lerner (2000).

RE-

Bibliography

AFlondon (2012) “Carpenters solidarity” [online blog] At : https://aflondon. wordpress.com/tag/ucl/ (accessed on 24.12.17) Archbishop of Canterbury’s Commission on Urban Priority Areas (1985) Faith in the city: A call for Action by the Church and Nation. London: Church House Publishing. Awan, N., Schneider, T. and Till, J. (eds.) (2011) Spatial Agency, Other ways of doing architecture. London: Routledge. Baudelaire, C. (1947) Paris Spleen, New York: New Directions. BBC (2012) “Carpenters Estate residents ‘face uncertain future” In: BBC news [Online] at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20762286 (accessed on 23.12.17) Berry, B. (1973) The Human Consequences of Urbanization, London: Macmillan. Berry, B. (1980) “Inner city futures: an American dilemma revisited,” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers NS 5, 1:1–28. Berry, B. (1985) “Islands of renewal in seas of decay,” in P.Paterson (ed.) The New Urban Reality, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Bernstock, P (2016) Olympic Housing: A Critical Review of London 2012’s Legacy. London:Routledge. Bingham-Hall, J (2016) Future of Cities: Commoning And Collective Approaches to Urban Space. Theatrum Mundi. LSE Cities, London School of Economics and Political Science. Calder, B (2016) The Beauty of brutalism: Raw concrete. London: William Heinman. C.A.R.P (2011) “Save carpenters” [online blog] at: https://savecarpenters. wordpress.com/about/ (accessed on 25.12.17) Compulsory Purchase Act. (1965) Elizabeth II. Ch. 4. London: HMSO. Crandle , Lee (2017) [Interview by author 23rd October 2017] Cultural Hijack: http://www.culturalhijack.org Daily Mail (2012) “From barren wasteland to sports metropolis: As London welcomes the world, stunning images show the seven-year transformation of Stratford’s Olympic Park” In: The daily Mail [Online] At: http://www.dailymail. co.uk/news/article-2179912/London-2012-Stunning-images-showing-sevenyear-transformation-Stratfords-Olympic-Park.html (Accessed on 23.10.17)

RE-

Daily Mirror (2017) “Depth of housing crisis revealed as 35,000 people sit on waiting lists for 10 YEARS” In: Daily Mirror [Online] At: http://www.mirror.co.uk/ news/uk-news/housing-crisis-10-year-waits-9634385 (Accessed on 29.12.17) Dezeen (2015) “Politician calls for immediate demolition of Robin Hood Gardens after listing bid fails “ In : Dezeen [Online] at https://www.dezeen. com/2015/08/05/politician-calls-immediate-demolition-robin-hood-gardenslisting-bid-fails-historic-england-brutalism/ (accessed on 19.12.17) Edwards (2012) UCL “proposed new campus at Stratford, replacing the Carpenters Estate” In Michael Edwards. Org [Online] at : https:// michaeledwards.org.uk/2012/11/01/ucl-proposed-new-campus-at-stratfordreplacing-the-carpenters-estate/ (accessed on 23.12.17) The Economist (2015) “What have the Olympics done for east London?” In: The Economist [Online] At:https://www.economist.com/news/britain/21659766what-have-olympics-done-east-london-going-bronze (Accessed on 13.09.17) Estate office (2012) 50 years of Shoreditch [Online blog] At: http://estateoffice. com/blog/50-years-shoreditch (Accessed on 23.09.17) Field (2009) Volume 3. Agency and the Praxis of Activism. University of Sheffield School of Architecture. Focus E15 (2012) “ Focus E15 campaign: social housing, not social cleansing”. [Online blog] At: https://focuse15.org/ (Accessed on 13.09.17) Footprint 4 (2009). Agency In Architecture: Reframing Criticality In Theory And Practice. Delft School of Design Journal. Gehl, J. (2011) Life Between Buildings. Using Public Space. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Gov.uk (2016) “Estate Regeneration National Strategy” In: Gov.uk: Guidance [Online] At: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/estate-regeneration-national-strategy (accessed on 13.09.17) Grenfell action group (2016) “KCTMO – Playing with fire!” [Online blog] At : https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/11/20/kctmo-playing-with-fire/ (Accessed on 28.11.17) The Guardian (2008)” Displaced by London’s Olympics” In: The Gaurdian [Online] At: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/jun/02/olympics2012 (Accessed on 30.10.17) The Guardian (2012) “Housing policy Newham style: Let residents make way for UCL campus” In The Guardian [Online] at : https://www.theguardian.com/ commentisfree/2012/nov/07/housing-policy-newham-ucl-campus (accessed on 25.12.17)

RE-

The Guardian (2016) “Live brutalism: Portraits from the Robin Hood Gardens housing estate” In: The Guardian [Online} At: https://www.theguardian.com/ artanddesign/gallery/2016/oct/22/lived-brutalism-portraits-from-robin-hoodgardens-housing-estate-in-pictures (accessed on 19.12.17) The Guardian (2017) “Theresa May’s £2bn for social housing unlikely to solve problem” In: The Guardian [Online] At: https://www.theguardian.com/ society/2017/oct/04/theresa-mays-2bn-for-social-housing-unlikely-to-solveproblem (accessed on 19.10.17) Hall, P (2014) Cities of Tomorrow. Oxford: Blackwell publishing. Harvey, D. (2012) Rebel Cities. London: Verso Hoskins, G & Tallon, A (2004) Prompting the ‘Urban Idyll’: Policies for city Centre living. Aldershot: Ashgate. IDEA Journal (2014) Design Activism. Developing models, modes and methodologies of practice. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. Inside Housing (2012)” The BBC’s presence at a council-owned block of flats overlooking the Olympic Park is having a big impact on residents’ lives. Martin Hilditch reports” In: Inside Housing [Online] At: https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/ insight/insight/broadcasting-house-32549 (Accessed on 18.10.17) Left Futures (2012) “Victimization of students forces UCL occupation to withdraw” In: Indymedia [online] at https://www.indymedia.org.uk/ en/2012/12/503473.html (Accessed on 18.12.17) Lydon, M., Bartman, D., Woudstra, R. and Khawarzad, A. (2011) Tactical Urbanism: Short-term action Long-term change (Vol. 1). New York City. The Street Plans Collaborative. Lydon, M., Bartman, D., Garcia, T., Prston, R. and Woudstra, R. (2012) Tactical Urbanism: Short-term action Long-term change (Vol. 2). New York City. The Street Plans Collaborative. Marx, K (1867) Capital. Volume I: The Process of Production of Capital. Hamburg: Verlag von Otto Meissner Newham Council (2011) Stratford Metropolitan plan. London: Urban initiatives. Newham Recorder (2013) “UCL and Newham Council axe £1bn campus deal for Carpenters Estate, Stratford In Newham recorder [online] at: http:// www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/politics/ucl-and-newham-council-axe-1bncampus-deal-for-carpenters-estate-stratford-1-2183978 (accessed on 20.12.17) Perec , G (1997) Species of spaces and other pieces. London: Penguin Classics.

RE-

Philipson, Chloe (2017) [Interview by author 23rd October 2017] Protection from Evictions Act. (1977) Elizabeth II. Ch.4. London: HMSO. Rightmove (2017) East village property. At:http://www.rightmove.co.uk/propertyfor-sale/East-Village-e20.html (Accessed 5.11.17) Roberts,D (2015)Real Estates. London: Peers gallery. Robin Hood Gardens (2016) “ Robin hood Gardens: Future” In: [Online] at: Robin Hood Gardens http://www.robinhoodgardens.london/future/ (accessed on 19.12.17) Simpson, E. S. C., & Weiner, J. A. (Eds.) (1989). The Oxford Encyclopaedic English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Smith, N (1996) The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the revanchist city. London: Routledge. Stalker Manifesto (S.D) “STALKER TROUGHT THE ACTUAL TERRITORIES”[Online blog] At: http://www.osservatorionomade.net/tarkowsky/manifesto/manifesting.htm (accessed on 25.7.17) OpenDalston (2016) “Residents win court battle” [Online blog] At: http:// opendalston.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/dalston-resident-wins-court-battle-to. html(Accessed on 13.10.17) The Telegraph (2017) “Grenfell Tower refurbishment used cheaper cladding and tenants accused builders of shoddy workmanship” In : The Telegraph [Online] At:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/16/grenfell-towerrefurbishment-used-cheaper-cladding-tenants-accused/ (accessed on 29.11.17) UCL (2011) “ UCL East masterplan [Online press release] at : https://www.ucl. ac.uk/ucl-east/getting-involved/Stage_3_FINAL__Exhibition_Boards_web_ small (accessed on 23.12.17) UCL (2011) “ UCL to explore plans for additional campus in London Borough of Newham” In: UCL news [Online] at : http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/staff/staffnews/22112011-additionalcampus (accessed on 23.12.17) UCL (2012) “UCL Stratford: Bulldozing a Community?”. [Online press release] at : http://studentsunionucl.org/campaigns/save-carpenters-estate#bulldozing (accessed on 23.12.17) United Nations (2017)” Housing: Forced Evictions” In : United Nations [Online] at : http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Housing/Pages/ForcedEvictions.aspx (accessed on 19.12.17)

RE-

Venturi, R (1972) Learning from Las Vegas. London: MIT press. Whyte, I (1982) Bruno Taut and the Architecture of Activism. Cambridge University Press. York,M (2017) “Focus On Dalston: City workers flock to the home of the hipster – but a slice of warehouse chic will cost over £500k” In: CityAM [Online] At:http://www.cityam.com/263591/focus-dalston-city-workers-flock-homehipster-but-slice (Acessed on 13.10.17)

RE-

List of illustrations

Fig.1 White, T (2017) Map showing most displaced Boroughs. [ Diagram] In possession of: The author: London Information (2015) At: http://novaramedia. com/2015/05/27/8-key-findings-into-council-administered-social-cleansing-inlondon/ (Accessed 12.09.17) Fig. 2 The East London line extension bridge. (2014) [Photograph] At: http:// www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/image_galleries/railbridge_gallery.shtml (Accessed on 25.09.17) Fig . 3 Cearal killer café targeted (2015). [Photograph] At:http://www.dailymail. co.uk/news/article-3251961/We-driven-tsunami-wealth-Hipster-hating-gangattacked-trendy-east-London-cafe-plan-new-protest-against-Jack-RipperMuseum.html (Accessed 14.10.17) Fig . 4 White, T (2017) Map of Olympic hosts. [Diagram] In possession of: The author: London Information (2012) At: http://www.ict.mic.ul.ie/nialllarkin/pages/hosts.html (Accessed 18.10.17) Fig. 5 Early construction on Centennial Olympic Park, Atlanta (2016) [Photograph] At: http://artsatl.com/photo-essay-iconic-and-seen-images-1996summer-games/ (Accessed 18.10.17) Fig .6 Newham Council (2011) “Straford metropolitan master plan strategy”. In: Newham Council (2011) Stratford Metropolitan plan. London: Urban initiatives. Fig. 7 Clays lane courtyard garden example (2012) [Photograph] At:http://www. gamesmonitor.org.uk/node/1792 (Accessed 23.10.17) Fig .8 The clays lane estate demolition (2007). [Photograph] At: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/towers-make-way-for-olympic-park-6663441. html (Accessed on 28.10.17) Fig.9 The east village (2013). [Photograph] At:https://www.easternism. co.uk/?p=4 (Accessed on 3.11.17) Fig .10 White, T (2017) The whole estate in context. [Photograph] In possession of: The author: London. Fig .11 White, T (2017) Mapping showing the Carpenters estate. [Diagram] In possession of: The author: London. Fig .12 White, T (2017) The access pathway to the estate. [Photograph] In possession of: The author: London. Fig.13 Gehl, J (2011) “contact at a modest level- but definitely contact”. In: Gehl, J. (2011) Life Between Buildings. Using Public Space. Van Nostrand Reinhold. New York.

RE-

Fig. 14 Devastating consequences of Grenfell tower (2017) [Photograph] At: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/if-grenfell-families-move-ill-10679395 (Accessed 25.11.17) Fig. 15 Focus E15 hostel at Brimstone house (2016). [Photograph] At: http://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/focus-e15-hostel-bought-by-newhamcouncil-to-help-most-vulnerable-residents-1-4504605 (Accessed 8.11.17) Fig.16 A protester holds a sign at the ‘March for Homes’ rally outside City Hall (2015). [Photograph] At: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ over-50000-families-shipped-out-of-london-in-the-past-three-years-due-towelfare-cuts-and-soaring-10213854.html (Accessed 20.11.17) Fig. 17 BBC studio set up in Lund point (2012) [Photograph] At: https://www.flickr.com/photos/belowred/sets/72157631505092238/ (Accessed on 10.11.17) Fig .18 The occupation of Doran walk (2014). [Photograph] At: http://now-here-this.timeout.com/2014/09/26/help-focus-e15-mothers-fight-thehousing-crisis/ (Accessed 10.11.17) Fig. 19 The Focus E15 part of the exhibition (2015). [Photograph] At: http:// davidjamesroberts.com/exhibition/real-estates/ (Accessed on 10.11.17) Fig. 20 The UCL East masterplan proposal (2011). [Diagram] At : https://www. ucl.ac.uk/ucl-east/getting-involved/Stage_3_FINAL__Exhibition_Boards_web_ small (Accessed on 24.12.17) Fig. 21 C.A.R.P protest outside Newham town hall (2012) [Photograph] At: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20762286 (Accessed on 24.12.17) Fig. 22 UCL student occupy the Wilkins building (2012) [Photograph] At: http://mylondondiary.co.uk/2012/11/nov28-01.htm (Accessed on 27.12.17) Fig.23 “UCL Stratford: Bulldozing a Community?” Poster (2012) [Poster] At: https://unitone1213.wordpress.com/2012/10/ (Accessed on 27.12.17) Fig. 24 White, T (2017) Current state of vacant Dennison point. [Photograph] In possession of: The author: London. Fig. 25 Focus E15 protestors holding banner stating, “The Sheriff of Newham Robin the poor” (2014). [Photograph] At: https://www.theguardian.com/ commentisfree/2014/sep/23/real-politics-empty-london-housing-estate (Accessed on 24.12.17) Fig. 26 Sir Robin wales giving a speech (2011) [Photograph] At: https://www. standard.co.uk/news/politics/veteran-newham-mayor-sir-robin-wales-backedfor-fifth-term-a3414171.htm (Accessed on 24.12.17)

RE-

Fig. 27 White, T (2017) Football cages Lee once played at in Dennison point. [Photograph] In possession of: The author: London. Fig. 28 Robin hood gardens demolition (2017) [Photograph] At: https://www. architectsjournal.co.uk/news/in-pictures-robin-hood-gardens-demolitionbegins/10023056.article (Accessed on 20.12.17) Fig. 29 “Sorry the lifestyle you ordered is currently out of stock” Banksy graffiti near Robin Hood gardens (2011) [Photograph] At: https://streetartnews. net/2011/12/banksy-new-mural-in-london.html (Accessed on 20.12.17) Fig. 30 White, T (2017) Lee’s current Basildon, Essex accommodation. [Photograph] In possession of: The author: London. Fig. 31 White, T (2017) Pathway of the Basildon, Essex estate. [Photograph] In possession of: The author: London. Fig. 32 White, T (2017) Road in context of Basildon, Essex estate. [Photograph] In possession of: The author: London. Fig. 33 White, T (2017) The Essex accommodation current state. [Photograph] In possession of: The author: London. Fig. 34 White, T (2017) Current boarded up windows of Dennison point. [Photograph] In possession of: The author: London. Fig. 35 “Urban solutions are more than theory, they are a living reality in Curitiba” Jaime Lerner (2000). [Photograph] At: http://www.museumofthecity. org/project/curitiba/ (Accessed on 30.12.17)

RE-

Appendices

Appendix A: Philipson, Chloe (2017) [Interview by author 23rd October 2017] TW: “To start off the interview could you explain your experience of Lund point on the Carpenters estate and how you came about living there?” CP:” I was living on the 21st floor of the tower block at the age of 21 and was there for a year with my child, I was unemployed at the time and was on benefits and was struggling to support myself as well as my child.” TW: “What was your experience of the estate?” CP: “It was very welcoming and I had other single mums living on my floor who were going through the same situation and knew how I felt, which allowed us to set up an informal social support group, where we would try and support each other as well as the pure company of each other. I had no one else, no family but had my friend on my floor and others from the block and around the estate, who I just started chatting to on my journeys through the estate. It was very welcoming and the residents were very approachable, and the sense of all feeling ‘In the same boat. We established a strong friendship and I actually felt a sense of belonging when walking round the estate, you know that feeling of everyone knowing everyone, it was actually really nice, not what people perceive of a council estate, you know what I mean? I never felt anymore sense of belonging.” TW:” How did you feel when you were told your borough would host the Olympics?” CP:” It was actually a very positive feeling and was on everyone’s lips around the estate, every conversation was ‘are you going, what you going to see’ etcetera. We were even told that Newham residents could apply for free tickets, I thought this was a great opportunity for my daughter Casima to go and watch the Olympics, my balcony even provided a perfect view over the Olympic park and I watched the construction of the it in excitement and anticipation.” TW:” When did you hear the speculations about the estate being demolished?” CP:” It was circulating around the estate as gossip and no one really believed or took notice really, until the council started posting their notices to people explaining the idea to demolish and redevelop the whole estate. This was mainly happening around Doran walk in the low-rise part of the estate. People were slowly being moved from the estate and I was seeing less and less people as I walked through the estate.” TW:” I’m guessing it wasn’t long until it caught up with you as well?” CP:” Yes, exactly I received my notice in 2011 and was told that because of asbestos, we had to vacate the estate so that it could be removed and be redeveloped. This left me homeless with my daughter, on the street with nowhere to go or contact. I visited the council housing offices and they suggested Focus E15 hostel at Brimstone house quite close to the estate.” TW: “What was Focus E15?” CP:” Focus E15 was a temporary hostel for vulnerable young people who were homeless, this included single parents and people with no family or relatives.” TW:” Could you explain your experience at Focus E15?” CP:” To be honest it was pretty grim. It was like a prison style system, with sign in sign out entrance and exit and there was a curfew. However, we managed to establish a network specifically of single mums, some I knew from the estate and others were from elsewhere in the borough.” TW:” So, you actually re-joined with Carpenters residents?”

RE-

CP:” Yeah, it was actually nice to see them again and that feeling of getting by was re-established, with those I knew and those I had met.” TW:” How long was you there?” CP:” I was only there for a few months when we were all told that the funding for focus was being cut. I had that heart sinking feeling once again, we were all very uncertain on our fate. The workers of Focus told us we would be rehoused in other temporary hostels around the country. However, they were only available in Hastings, Birmingham and Manchester. Once again, we would be split up and our community broken.” TW: “How did you respond to this?” CP:” I had actually been told by others from our group that Lund point and Dennison point had been given to the BBC and Al Jazeera to broadcast the Olympics, removing remaining residents from their homes and occupying the top five floors, one of those flats were mine. This led to our anger and outcry that we had been removed from our homes, not for the reason we were being told.” TW:” Did this lead to the establishment of the Focus E15 group?” CP:” Yes exactly, we took it in our own hands to establish a group to protest, we started by protesting outside, you know um Stratford centre?” TW:” Yeah.” CP:” Yeah and then we visited the estate and were actually refused access by the big security guard out the front of my own flat.” TW: What was your aim by visiting the estate?” CP: “We was actually going to visit one of the last few residents in Lund point, speak and find out more really.” TW: “So, you weren’t even allowed in to see people living there?” CP: “No, apparently no one was allowed in or out when the BBC was broadcasting.” TW:” What was your next plan of action?” CP: “We wanted to make a statement, something that would actually get attention, our other attempts did but really all for the wrong reasons. We wanted to originally occupy Lund point however as shown by the last attempt, it was proven difficult to gain access, as well as stay there a long time. We finally all come to the decision to occupy Numbers 60-68 of the vacant Doran walk to establish a social centre for our group, as well as others who wanted to visit.” TW:” How did you do this?” CP:” We gained access using builders we knew, who supported our cause. We did this on September 21st and aimed to stay there as long as it took to raise awareness of this disused estate.” TW:” What was in the social centre?” CP:” We created a free shop, which was like a food bank really, we wanted to bring together the remaining residents of the estate, to fight back against this awful experience that Newham council and Sir Robin Wales was putting us

RE-

through. We actually received loads of stuff from people and the support from the community was amazing, they helped supply our group and children with toys, food and clothes.” TW:” Could you explain these spaces in further detail?” CP: “Yeah like it had a play room for the children, bedrooms, areas to create banners and to discuss things, the place was even fully functional, it had running water even functioning power showers!” TW: “What were the aims and outcomes of all this?” CP: “Well just to prove that there were fully functioning homes that were going to waste on the estate and that we were removed from our homes and then our hostel for a short-term occupancy of the estate from the BBC, which caused a long-term effect on the community, by shifting them throughout the country, we wanted our estate back and couldn’t see why we couldn’t have it! We had also been lied to by the council and felt victims of the gentrification process, taking place throughout East London.” TW:” What publicity did this gain?” CP:” We received news coverage and even a visit from Russel Brand! (laughs). It just showed that people cared and wanted to support us. We all saw it as very successful, even when the council failed an attempt to evict us, the judge was in our favour and said we had little notice under squatter’s rights. We saw this as well as other stuff, as an overall victory against the council and Sir Robin Wales.” TW:” When did you actually leave/ get evicted?” CP:” We actually left on our own accord, on the 7th of October, having felt we had achieved our goals.” TW: “To end the interview could you summarise this victory?” CP:” Well we actually sparked the repopulation of some of Doran walk by the request of Sir Robin Wales himself. We brought the suffering community back together and established a long-standing network in Focus E15 and have worked on many other social injustice cases. It’s funny the council even bought focus back last year to provide social care for vulnerable people.”

RE-

Appendix B: Crandle ,Lee (2017) [Interview by author 23rd October 2017] TW: “Where did you live on Carpenter Estate? And what was your experience there like?” LC: “I lived in Dennison Point on the 18th floor for 17 years with my family (Mum and 4 sisters). I had grown up there from birth, along with my sisters. We were long term residents there and were quite known in the block/estate.” TW:” Could you elaborate on that experience and social element of the estate?” LC: “yeah, of course. As I said, me and my family were known and common faces on the estate and I pretty much knew everyone from Doran Walk to Lund Point. I went to the local Carpenter Primary School and had many friends who lived on the estate and we used to play in the parks and football cages on the estate as well as on the many staircases and walkways and was a child’s heaven! With many opportunities to play and pretty much be mischievous, you know all the stuff that kids do.” TW: “How did you feel about the Olympics when it was announced that your borough and area was hosting it?” LC: “We were over the moon, all of us played in the cages, used to dream about taking part in it, even just being able to watch it, the estate was very sport oriented with everyone wanting to be able to be the next Bobby Moore or David Beckham.” TW: How long was it until the speculations of the estate had been circulating? LC:” To be honest it was more the older generation really, I was only a kid, I didn’t really get it and just wanted to play out, however it started to sink in when my mates from Doran Walk weren’t around to play football anymore.” TW: “I am guessing it wasn’t long after this that you were approached by the council?” LC: “Actually, we were one of the last to be given a notice, but I do remember that when we did get the letter it sold us that dream of a brand-new estate in the country side, that was available, you know stuff that inner city kids and families dream about and never experience in the close-knit walls of a city or even on the estate. The council even claimed it was unsafe and incapable of sufficient living and that the block needed to be redeveloped.” TW:” So, I’m guessing this new estate sparked interest?” LC: “Of Course! our nan lived in Essex, so we saw it as a good opportunity to being able to be close to her as she was getting older. We also saw it as a good opportunity to escape the city to a life of tranquility (laughs). Our mum finally made the decision in 2011 and that was it, we were in the car on our way to the new estate.” TW:” where was this estate?” LC: “Basildon/ Bas-Vegas as they call it (laughs). It was a little cul de sac and we were the end house, it was supposed to be much more spacious with all of us having a room, compared to us all sharing 3 rooms with bunk beds back in Dennison Point.” TW: This all seems great, how long was this supposed to last? LC:” well the council actually told us that this was temporary, we saw it as like a holiday, as the council told us that once the redevelopment of the estate was finished or when the next new one was available one was ready we could have it, not considering how long this process could really take.” TW: “So, you were talking about the estate and your first impressions of it?” LC:” Yeah, we drove in the front of the drive and was taken back, it was huge, very spacious, large garden, sitting

RE-

room and kitchen and there were no arguments with my sisters.” TW: “You compared it to a holiday, how was it and how was the area? “ LC:” The house was great and it all seemed brilliant … for… about 10 minutes, it didn’t take long to realize that there was nothing going on in the area and not much to do, with only a small high street which we quickly got bored of after a while, and to make matters worse I don’t know anyone, I did get talking to the other kids down my road who ended going to my school and I found out that they were also from east London in hackney. We instantly clicked, however my mate later told me he had been there for a year longer than me which later made me realize that we were already there longer than we planned and could stand Basildon. “ TW: “Was the experience short lived?” LC:” Yeah, like we started to get used to it but it just wasn’t the hustle and bustle of the city and the fun walkways and staircases I once loved.” TW: “When did you hear about the council’s permission to give Al Jazeera your tower block to broadcast from?” LC:” My mum found out from one of the families we knew on our floor who stayed there while they were broadcasting and they described the experience as noisy and hostile as the security would ask questions about visitors and the noise from the studio could be heard from the above floor.” TW:” what happened to this family?” LC:” they were later moved out by the council and they are currently in Southend, Essex, the block as well as the two others remain vacant.” TW: “How did this make you feel when you found out that Al Jazeera were using your tower block to broadcast from? “ LC:” Neglected and lied to. I felt that we were shifted away to make way for the money opportunity that Al Jazeera would bring. It raised the questions that if they could broadcast the Olympics around the clock, then why was it insufficient to live in!” TW:” Exactly, it raises serious questions on the real intentions of the council to remove the residents. What was your response to this?” LC:” We contacted the council and they pretty much told us that it was not our decision on where we are put and that we didn’t have a say on the place. “ TW:” What do you mean? Could you elaborate?” LC: “Well, they claimed that because it was social housing, they could place us wherever and that we had voluntarily moved but unknowingly that we would be stuck here and forgotten about. They said they would get back to us when the next Newham property available.” TW:” Have they got back to you?” LC: “As you can see, we are still here, 5 years later with no response, we will keep pestering them however, it seems to be getting nowhere.” TW:” What is the current situation?”

RE-

LC: “We are with a private housing association related to Newham council, who are pretty much the middle men of us to communicating with Newham council.” TW: “What are your next moves in trying to get back to Newham?” LC:” We’re aiming to take it to the council physically and possibly court, whatever it takes to get back in the borough. “ TW:” Well I hope you do get back and that the process is successful, thank you for the interview.”

RE-