What is the Vauxhall Business Improvement District and why is Kennington excluded? - KOV meeting writeup - Part 4

Continuing our series of "unofficial minutes" from Kennington Oval Vauxhall Forum (KOV) meeting (last month), today's write-up concerns the Vauxhall Business Improvement District (BID). The Means regeneration agency spent a spokeman, Mr Giles Semper to inform us of the proposed Vauxhall BID.  The Means promotes itself as "a regeneration and 'smarter travel' consultancy" and they like to think they're "good at making town and city centre areas better places to live in, work in and move around".  So, it's official... If the announcement of the rather expensive and ludicrously tall St George Tower hasn't regenerated the area and turned it into Voho, then we will be VoHo by the time we've been "improved".  This, of course, might not be such a bad thing.  Vauxhall is clearly the naughty school boy of the Thames who needs extra tuition and a good caning to show improvement and it does look a little rough around the edges at times (I blame the interchange), but couldn't the wider Kennington area benefit from this initiative?

I wondered from whence this sudden Business Improvement District enthusiasm in Vauxhall had emerged.  It seems that it's a Lambeth Council initiative, and Lambeth Council commissioned The Means to run a feasibility study on the matter. Anyhow, Giles Semper has a lengthy history working in the area (from 1997 - 1999), first co-ordinating the Vauxhall Employer's Group and working to regenerate St Peter's Church/Heritage Centre, which then hosted "Vision for Vauxhall" meetings.  The Means might be set to benefit from such an enterprise because they currently run the Better Bankside BID in London Bridge/Blackfriars.

On the face of it, a Business Improvement District sounds like a great idea.  Kennington Association, some months ago, tried to put Kennington businesses in touch with one another in a network, to keep in touch with the Council etc and to encourage a greater degree of co-operation. So, Lambeth Council's foray into this area should be encouraged, surely?  Maybe.  For local businesses, this promises to be a relatively mixed blessing (there's a question of cost versus benefit).  My concern is that the entire endeavour appears to be rather partisan, and biased in favour of regeneration of the Thames (favouring visitors rather than residents), rather than improvement of the area overall.

The problem is that the area which has been chosen for the BID is rather exclusive, and drawn up so as to include certain businesses that would be capable of large contributions.  Notice how the map that The Means have drawn up for the Council (marked by the orange line) stretches itself to include the Oval and Tesco, but fails to include any of the blue lines (drawn on by me) which are local and much valued shops used by local (and much valued) people.

The very long blue line, drawn at the top of the map, represents Lambeth Walk, a street that cis sadly neglected, but would be a fantastic place (especially the south end) to develop a joined up strategy for improvement.  The blue T-shape in the middle of my map indicates Vauxhall Street and Jonathan Street, that contains the Post Office which our community successfuly retained.  On those streets exists a mini cab firm, a hairdresser, a convenience store, and indeed, our very own butcher (P J Frankland) as well as other shops!  The lowest blue line on the map includes all of the busineses on Kennington Road (many estate agents and restaurants), and heads downwards to include Kennington Road post office, Barclays Bank, a funeral parlor, barber, insurance broker, a solicitor, a betting shop and several convenience stores.  Why are we not able to look at a business "improvement" district that includes Kennington?  The Oval is the Kennington Oval, not the Vauxhall Oval, and if the thing is going to extend down Kennington Lane to encompass Tesco, why wouldn't it go any further down?  Finally, the line at the bottom of the map shows where Kennington Park Road lines up with Clapham Road, and illustrates another parade of shops containing, amongst other, The Oval Lounge.  Why is the Oval cricket ground included when those businesses are not?  Essentially, because it would pay for the BID.  But the Oval's inclusion in a Vauxhall BID potentially excludes the possibility of its inclusion in a Kennington one, and thus the money is all directed at the Thames.

The following is a shortened version of what Giles Semper had to say:

"A BID is a company owned and led by businesses in a specific area, and it tries to improve that place as a commercial location.  A BID can only be set up if all businesses in the area vote in favour of it at a referendum. The organisation is funded by a tax which the businesses impose on themselves, which is a compulsory payment after a successful ballot.  Everything that the BID company does has to be extra to services provided by statutory providers such as police and council.  There are successful examples of BIDs down the South Bank; Team London Bridge, Better Bankside, Waterloo Quarter Business Improvement District; covers The Cut, Lower Marsh etc."

"The Means have spoken to 85 businesses (day and nigh time economy) in Vauxhall to discover the key issues in the area. The issues are similar with the night time businesses having additional issues to contend with.  4 key issues have been identified in the area:

1.  Protecting the area (fear of crime, environmental problems).
2. Engaging Vauxhall (bringing businesses together with residents around common themes, perhaps creating new opportunities for children and young people).  The businesses are keen to engage residents.
3.  Promoting the area as a visitor destination.  Historically, Vauxhall has been cut off from the rest of the South Bank.
4.  Transforming Vauxhall:  The traffic interchange and the environment around it.  The businesses are keen to work with other partners to see a better environment in Vauxhall."

"The tax on the business is based on the rateable value of individual commercial properties.  It's usually a percentage (1% or 1.5%).  The Means think that 250 of the largest businesses in Vauxhall could generate about £600k - £700k per year of investment, or £2.5 million to £3 million over the 5 year life of the BID."

"The Means have learned through experience at Baknside that any BID which thinks it can be parachuted in without reference to the residents has got a nasty shock coming. There are two resident board members in Bankside and desk space is gievn to the Bankside residents' forum.  The residents sit on all of the "theme groups" and the businesses are very active in a range of community engangement projects, some of which are very successful."

Tbere then followed an extended period of time for questions:
Q: Could you describe something that has been achieved in another area by a BID?

Giles Semper : 'There are 105 BIDs in UK and 25 in London and they're all different.  Most  BIDs tend to start with cleaning, greening and safety.  In Bankside, a team of dedicated cleaners have been put in place (seen in pink vehicles).  The cleaners tackle the kinds of problems that the Council's cleaners don't tackle eg. cobbled streets, tree pits, gum and jet washing.  Many BIDs operate some kind of uniformed service on the streets eg. rangers or wardens.  In Bankside, we have 7 wardens who operate 12 hours per day.  In Bankside, our best known project is the Bankside urban forest which is a design framework for the public realm between Bankside and the Elephant & Castle.  It's a partnership between the Council, the BID, Tate and some of the land owners, and challenges anybody that wants to develop to improve the standards of the public realm and develop to a high quality.'

Q: If a BID is set up, and is succesful in years 1 to 3, and businesses think it's great, but in the latter years, the businesses don't think it's good value for money.  What mechanism is there for them to end the agreement? 

Giles Semper: "The renewal ballot has to happen after 5 years.  The maximum term for any business on one ballot is 5 years.  Then follows a renweal ballot. The lesson from the US where these things were dreamed up is that they're usually more popular than less popular on renewal (and there hasn't been an unsuccessful renewal ballot in the UK yet)."

Q: Does it include Kennington businesses?

Giles Semper: "We haven't yet talked to the Kennington businesses to find out whether we should be one big thing, rather than two smaller ones."

Q: It's great that you consulted 85 businesses, with their different priorities.  At least some of the businesses want to get rid of homeless people and beggars, but the centre of Vauxhall is the centre of some major homelessness charities.  How will you link with those, rather than having the BID be a way of cleansing the area of people who live there?

Giles Semper: "The Bondway, Big Issue and other homelessness providers would be members of the Business Improvement District.  They would have as loud a say as any other party.  Our experience on the issue of homelessness in Bankside is that residents sharing their specific view that they don't want the homeless purged from the streets.  In that case, we work very closely with the Council's street population outreach team, and the approach is about housing people, and helping people, and not about kicking people out.  I do take your point though, because that's an endemic issue for Vauxhall.  The Chief Executive of the Big Issue did say to us, "do we not risk being the problem, rather than part of the solution?"  Those issues are on the table."

Q: I live quite close to Thames Reach.  I see homeless people who defecate in the corners of our parks.  I can't understand the idea of /not/ wanting to purge the streets of homelessness.

Giles Semper: "There are people who can address this issue with more knowledge than I can.  The Mayor has been trying to address the issue of homelessness pan-London."

Val Shawcross:  "One of the biggest problems we've got is that the E10 accession nationals; Eastern European workers who came to Britain to work, are not entitled to public funds or help.  So, when they fall homeless, they are not entitled to be given public housing, support or social security.  Lambeth has a contract with Thames Reach, Southwark with St Mungos, and there is some good professional work trying to outreach to Eastern European nationals, and where possible, to give them proper support to be repatriated and get into work, and deal with their problems.  People do not want to be living like that.  It's not just a housing issue, but an economic crisis."

Q: If new companies started in the Vauxhall area, would they have to sign up to being part of the BID, and are costs dependent on size of the business?

Giles Semper: "They would be brought in automatically. The businesses with bigger premises pay more than those with smaller premises.  A shop on Kennington Lane would pay £300 - £400 per year to the BID.  The police, the biggest employer in Vauxhall, would pay £80,000 - £90,000 per year.  Our largest payer in Bankside is Royal Bank of Scotland, who pay about £90,000."

Q: Would the developers building the big towers be contributing to the pot of money? 

Giles Semper: "It's currently the occupants, rather than owners who pay.  It's the other way around in the States...  The legislation to create land owner BIDS is being consulted on, and the mechnaism to tax owners, rather than occupiers may soon be available.  It would be a good one for Vauxhall!"

Q: Do you get more votes in the ballot if you have a larger rateable value?  If you're Tesco, do you get more votes? 

Giles Semper: "You have to win the BID ballot on two counts.  It's all on turnout, rather than constituency.  you need 51% of turnout by number and by aggregate rateable value.  So you add the rateable values together, and you need to get 51%.  So, the larger occupiers will have more influence on that part of the vote."

David Boardman (Kennington Association Planning Forum Chair) made a few comments and asked some questions: 

"1.  Is there any prospect of raising additional moeny for the BID in the Vauxhall area?  Is it amenable to Section 106? 

2.  People are clearly worried about crime in the area.  If I were the businesses, I'd be talking to the Borough Commander to say "put your resources where the crime is", and I wouldn't need to pay for extra wardens.  When the Council has had money in the past for Park Rangers, they've decided to give the money back to the police because they provided a better service for security.  Wouldn't it be better to pay for your own police, rather than wardens? 

3.  Kennington has its own Business Network so one doesn't need to have to have a BID to get businesses to talk. I'm not clear that the benefits of a BID are significant, from the 1%-1.5% raised, without drawing in extra funds. 

4. The main problem of Vauxhall is the gyratory.  Interesting that TfL will talk to businesses, but doesn't have the bottle to come and talk to the people.  We are concerned that TfL won't speak to the people who have the problem with it.  It should come to this forum for the community's views. 

5.  I have some reservations about the geographical coverage.  Why is the Oval inside, save for rateable value?"

Unfortunately, the Chair noted that there was no time to answer those questions (it was a very full agenda), but I'd be happy for anybody with knowledge about the proposal to add some comments to this post.  So, there we have it.

The two faces of Vauxhall

The Evening Standard article naming Vauxhall as the "Knightsbridge of the South" raised a few laughs on Twitter a few weeks ago.  "Which PR agent dreamt that up?" was the inevitable response of @thelondonagent, a central London estate agent.  And the rest of us chortled away merrily, unconvinced that a new Pret a Manger was quite enough to elevate our beloved Vauxhall  to the splendid(?) heights of a Knightsbridge or a Chelsea.  The reason for the silly comparison was the news that the Penthouse flat in the new St George Tower (which looks to be several years away from being finished, even if it's erected at the same rate as Strata aka "the Lady Shave") is to be worth £50 million. 

The article also informs readers that "Vauxhall was known for decades as a rundown area... but is now being gentrified." Most folk who have been reading this blog will know that I favour a gentle regeneration for Vauxhall; the provision of new property that will include social housing, the removal of the gyratory, the addition of diverse shops, and improvements to the landscape. What we're likely to get is a new city, the size of Welwyn Garden City, between Battersea and Vauxhall. But that's another story. The point is, Vauxhall could use some work. We all know that. The clubs around Vauxhall have turned Vauxhall and Kennington into a bit of a residential gay mecca, even for those that never frequent them, but we wouldn't want to be entirely rid of them in the name of gentrification, even if their presentation and noise leaves something to be desired:

(Credit to @markvauxhall for this recent image over the Bank Holiday)

More importantly, Vauxhall is home to people who live in flats that have views like this:

(Credit to Moving Space for the image)

and flats that look like this:

(Credit to Luxury Apartments for the image)

as well as views like this:

(Credit to the Guardian's article on the Improving Face of Vauxhall for the image)

and flats that look like this:

 (Credit to Boidus for this image)

We are an area, a city even, of the "haves" and "have nots".  For better or worse, in a somewhat acrimonious marriage, we are forced to live alongside one another.  I can't see that changing, £50 million penthouse or otherwise.  But what does seem to be happening is that the "haves" are able to afford goods that would previously have been shared by a community as common goods.  £50 million might buy you the best flat on the block, and access to "an infinity pool taking up all the ground floor", but it would also pay for a public leisure centre.  There will always be disparities in income and access to resources, but must they always be such large disparities?  I've supported the nebulous entity of "political liberalism" for some years, but I'm not alone in wondering whether our current form of economic liberalism might have had its day.  And no, I don't have an alternative system.  I'm not envious or jealous of the £50 million flat owner.  Having that much money, I suspect, might lead to one living quite a lonely existence.  Being able to afford anything from anywhere or pay for every service from everybody means that one is no longer dependent on anybody.  You might be able to swim in peace and quiet in the early mornings, but you'll never see a child make their first splash or watch an elderly person swim more gracefully than they can walk. 

A very expensive flat and trappings will probably mean that you never need to walk past the front of Vauxhall Station or use the tube, but perhaps you won't quite be able to escape the alcoholic fumes of those who are not so fortunate.  Just across the road from your luxury penthouse (which I don't doubt, you've worked hard to own) exist a number of sanctuaries for the homeless.  Vauxhall is privileged to house Vauxhall Cross - Centrepoint (accommodation for 27), Graham House - ThamesReach (accommodation for 69) and St Mungo's, who sometimes set up an emergency winter shelter in Vauxhall. At the station, the familiar logo of the Big Issue offices bears down upon those who wait for the buses.
 

That there are issues with alcohol in Vauxhall is apparent to those who are in the habit of night time wandering. Readers might be forgiven for wondering (looking at the picture above) whether those issues are present inside or outside our clubs. That's not a non-sequitur. The pursuance of the previous government's liberal social policy has resulted in 24 hour pub opening and the ever-increasing availability of cheap booze. For some gay folk, that liberal social policy is important. It keeps the clubs open and the alcohol flowing. But the head of Thames Reach is concerned to highlight the other side of the picture.  Homelessness is far less sexy than housing, so whilst plenty of articles mention up-and-coming VoHo, they don't usually acknowledge the presence of those that don't have shelter.  The little known issue of super-strength alcohol in Vauxhall hasn't had as wide a mention as the £50 million pad, but nevertheless, still causes the Guardian to produce headlines such as "Super strength alcohol is killing more people than crack and heroin". 

Thames Reach are currently running a campaign to increase the price of cheap, high alcohol drinks.  These are not drinks that many discerning folk would order from the bar on Saturday night, but they are the drinks that are killing the homeless, our homeless.  Mike Nicholas, spokesman for Thames Reach said in the Guardian, "the vast majority of homeless people living in Thames Reach's 59-bed hostel in Vauxhall, south London, are there because of problems with super-strength alcohol.".  Jeremy Swain, the chief executive of Thames Reach noted, "Of course, alcoholism among the homeless is hardly new. But what is different is the speed of the deterioration caused by the super-strength drinks. Consuming them is akin to pushing the fast forward on your life.".  A can of super strength cider can be bought for as little as 59p and contains 4.5 units of alcohol.  Consequently, Thames Reach are campaigning to persuade the government to increase the prices of super-strength alcoholic drinks (not anything that would affect small cider distributors, since most super-strength cider doesn't go near real apples), and despite considering myself a broad defender of the aforementioned political liberalism, I think I support them.  As I was chatting to a new Vauxhall barber last week, asking him how he liked South London, he lamented "I'm forever being bothered by people asking for 20p or £1, or requests to buy alcohol for somebody who has been banned".

We can't have been the only party to have our sumptuous feast at the Vauxhall Tavern sports day crashed by a couple of homeless folk.  And why should the homeless not be party to the celebrations within the area?  We had enough food and drink and were happy to share.  The event was free, and anybody could walk in the park.  But as we were all sitting there enjoying the sun, I wondered whether those folk would still be around in a few years time.  Might they have pushed the "fast forward" button on their lives through super-strength alcohol?  I don't have an answer or the perfect policy to balance paternalism with liberalism, but I think it's important to keep pointing out the presence of those who are homeless, damaged through addiction and those who are poor.  It matters that we live alongside one another or we'll just end up with ghettos on the edge of central London for those we'd rather not see.  So welcome, £50 million flat buyer, whoever you are, to London's second Knightsbridge.  Your existence might well never be disturbed by the poor, but that does not mean that the poor should not be disturbed by your existence.