YO! Liverpool
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 171

Thread: Housing Mistakes

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Housing Mistakes

    We've had so many mistakes in the past. We were going this way that way. Piggeries, Gardens, Fishing Villages... maybe some of the mistakes weren't even mistakes. Chaos. Everyone scared to do anything or at least anything better.


    ADVERTISING




    Sir Lancelot Keay (Gerard Gardens et al) thought he was doing people a favour (in retrospect maybe he was) but he didn’t dream of asking anyone.

    I’m told to look at the very recent new stuff in Kensington and the like. Any thoughts on living in those?

  2. #2
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    As you are no doubt aware Peter, and the short film documentary 'Homes for the workers' says possibly more than I ever could, the buildings of the 'Gardens' were a vast social improvement on what they replaced. Certain essentials (we've now come to expect as normal, even demand) were hot and cold running water inside the house, gas, electricity at the flick of a switch, indoor toilets and bath, back verandas with planters and a central children's play area. I don't expect he thought the need to ask anybody as they were following an Eastern European tried and tested method of economical housing for the masses.

    Of course they were of their time and things progress though it was as you say on your blog, under investment by subsequent councils that led to their premature demise with some still surviving and doing alright in their various new guises.

    ---------- Post added at 03:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:18 PM ----------

    High rise, yes another utopian concept but alas with a lot of flaws and a lot of floors.

    The Cornish fishing village aka The Radcliffe estate was a right mess. Lasting only a decade, a true disaster and criminal rat run.

    Even other 60s and 70s pebble dash estates such as the Grizedale and Easby were not well planned, not if you were an emergency vehicle driver anyway. They replaced old parallel streets and are themselves being replaced within a couple of generations.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    "...if Liverpool can get into top gear again there is no limit to the city's potential. The scale and resilience of the buildings and people is amazing – it is a world city, far more so than London and Manchester. It doesn't feel like anywhere else in Lancashire: comparisons always end up overseas – Dublin, or Boston, or Hamburg."
    – Ian Nairn, Britain's Changing Towns, 1967

    Ian did go on and mentioned to forget any modern developments in Liverpool.

    The problem with Liverpool is that it became a gigantic Council House estate. The private sector should have been allowed in to build owner/occupier homes. Private residential was excluded from the city centre, yet Council blocks were erected at the end of Byrom St.

    The middle classes moved to the outskirts where they could by their own homes and commute into the city by the electric urban commuter rail network. This left the city a working class enclave.

    Rapid-transit Commuter Rail, with its radial lines from the city centre, enabled people from the outer suburbs, and surrounding small towns, of cities to access the jobs in the city centre. In the specific case of Liverpool, this contributed to the decline of the inner-cities, as people moved to greener, and cleaner, places to live.

    In the case of commuter-rail, and large through roads, as opposed to a meshed metro, there was severe negative affects as commuter rail contributed to inner-city blight.

    The authorities that allowed the construction were unaware at the time. OK, the outer reaches of cities were supposed to be drawn into the city. I doubt they were expecting the city to be drawn out. In Liverpool's case The electrification of commuter-rail lines in the early 1900s drew people away from the inner-cities. The new electric trains were very fast and clean. At the same time large boulevards were built radiating out from the city and a comprehensive tram system was built with trams in the central reservation - John Lennon lived on one of the boulevards. Trams could get people out of the centre pretty fast as well, but not as far, or as fast, as commuter-rail. The clean running, electric, comprehensive tram network closed down in 1957 for some inexplicable reason. The opening of the under-river Mersey road tunnel in the early 1930s, added again to the decline of the inner-city districts as the middle classes moved out, with the poor working class remaining.

    The Liverpool inner-cities were a mixture of working and middles classes. Whole areas of near 200 year old Georgian houses were demolished. OK, some working class houses needed bulldozing for sure, but the people who lived in the inner-cities were disenfranchised. The Georgian houses still are being demolished singularly, as absent landowners allow them to rot. Seeing the success in the USA and Hong Kong, the city was denied to implement Land Valuation Taxation.

    Commuter-Rail sock life out of the inner-cities, but then came Thatcher/Reagan demolishing industry and outsourcing manufacturing to China to compound the problem.

    Rail overall creates economic growth but sometimes shifts wealth from one area to another. Thought out properly, rail does overall create economic growth with no negative effect on any district. Implemented incorrectly rail can have a negative affect on parts of a community. That was the case with Liverpool and also many north American cities:

    1. The outer parts prospered while the inner-cities slumped.
    2. Visitors see the now ugly inner-city districts easily as they circle the city centre.
    3. The city then gets a negative image from outsiders,
    4. The city image suffers
    5. Overall Investment tails off
    6. The city declines


    That is all too famiiar.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  4. #4
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    [INDENT][i]"...if Liverpool can get into top gear again there is no limit to the city's potential...
    I think you'd have to live in a cave to not know that the inner city in Liverpool, like many other 'doughnut' cities has emptied out to the suburbs and the new towns.

    Perhaps you have some thoughts on living in some of the new housing that's gone up in the inner wards in the last decade or indeed very recently?

  5. #5
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    I think you'd have to live in a cave to not know that the inner city in Liverpool, like many other 'doughnut' cities has emptied out to the suburbs and the new towns.

    Perhaps you have some thoughts on living in some of the new housing that's gone up in the inner wards in the last decade or indeed very recently?
    The point is getting them into the inner cities and getting those districts vibrant again. The Echo announced a few days ago HMG is giving money for areas affected by riots. They hope to make Lodge Lane like Lark Lane. If they get an underground station in Lodge Lane and some of the middle class move in I would say that is possible. Wines bars in Lodge Lane? mmmm As now? Nope.

    Liverpool is not a doughnut, it is semi circular. It may be doughnut if Birkenhead is taken into account.

    Most the speculative flats in the centre are like rabbit hutches inside. Many are poorly fitted out with quality lacking.

    But it is step in the right direction. If they expect middle class outsiders to make roots in Liverpool, which the city needs, they had better up the size and quality.

    Read my blog:
    http://www.yoliverpool.com/forum/blog.php?265-Waterways
    Commuter-Rail and Inner-City decline
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  6. #6
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    Read my blog:
    The point and topic of the thread is housing and people's experience of it not your personal interpretation of geographic flux/population movement and Liverpool isn't made of batter either but it's still a doughnut city - it's gorra n'ole in the middle.



    ---------- Post added at 09:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    As you are no doubt aware Peter, and the short film documentary 'Homes for the workers' says possibly more than I ever could...Of course they were of their time and things progress
    You might have seen an interesting programme, 'The Great Estate: The rise and fall of the Council House' http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0109dvs directed by Chris Wilson.

    His argument was that much of council housing had fallen into shocking disrepair not necessarily by virtue of their design but more the politics of the housing acts and the social engineering that created ghettoes of the disadvantaged.

    Places like the Gardens where loved then hated, then loved again (when they'd gone) and even high rise towers now sell as des res.

    I'd be interested to know after all the failures and lessons learnt, whether the lessons have indeed been learned and the current crop of new housing is liked or loathed.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    The topic of the thread is housing and people's experience of it
    We lost a lot of housing in the inner cities.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  8. #8
    Senior Member az_gila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    603
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    ....
    But it is step in the right direction. If they expect middle class outsiders to make roots in Liverpool, which the city needs, they had better up the size and quality.
    ....
    The issue you are not mentioning is that the middle class usually want to have children, and a high rise city centre (most cities, not just Liverpool) is not the best place to raise children.

    Creating families was a great part of the move to the suburbs - the dream of a house with a front and back garden. My 90 year old mum still talks about that being the dream of her life after growing up in Italy. She never ever thought that she would own her own home - and probably will never leave it - she's been in the same house now for 61 years now....

  9. #9
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by az_gila View Post
    The issue you are not mentioning is that the middle class usually want to have children, and a high rise city centre (most cities, not just Liverpool) is not the best place to raise children.

    Creating families was a great part of the move to the suburbs - the dream of a house with a front and back garden. My 90 year old mum still talks about that being the dream of her life after growing up in Italy. She never ever thought that she would own her own home - and probably will never leave it - she's been in the same house now for 61 years now....
    That is a poor defense of inner-city decay - perpetrated by Thatcher and Reagan. Children are only a preserve of the middle class?

    You do not need leafy suburbs to bring up children. You need appropriate facilities and open spaces. Also, many people live alone or in couples and no children. People are living longer. Young professionals, and retired people, prefer to live in vibrant city centres, or near to the centre (inner-cities).
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  10. #10
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    I did see the great estate programme Peter and enjoyed it very much. I was brought up in tenements, first the Eldon Grove style flats that we on Holly Street (pre St Anne Street police station) and then Thurlow House (part of Gerard Crescent) and then 200 yards to Gerard Gardens because we'd at last been allocated the all important extra bedroom (but by then my older bro had moved out anyway)

    I didn't know anything else so thought these were the bees knees. I really enjoyed living in them, the coal fires, the snugness (called compact in todays apartments but really means small) I actually felt a bit sorry for those who I knew that lived in just ordinary streets, even those in the posher suburbs with proper gardens, I mean who needs grass when you've got the square down below which was your footy pitch, your cricket pitch, your tennis court, your hopscotch grid etc etc. Many games were invented and improvised upon including 'spot' or hit the post - both similar but where you took turns to try and hit a certain section of wall with the football or the lamp standard in the middle of the square - you had so many lives then you were out until the last man standing was the winner. 60 seconds was another footy game played by using the blocks stairwell entrance as a goal. Lick the can, a variation of hide n' seek and of course off ground tick and the like.

    What did the poor street dwellers do for bommie night when we had our own enclosed square? No, i'd rather not have lived anywhere else in the 70s that in those tennies. It is true that the council after a mid 70s refurb of new roof tiles and Robinson Willey gas fires did rather let the tennies down and in the 80s they were looking tired but needn't have if they were maintained properly.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Doris Mousdale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    102
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    I did see the great estate programme Peter and enjoyed it very much. I was brought up in tenements, first the Eldon Grove style flats that we on Holly Street (pre St Anne Street police station) and then Thurlow House (part of Gerard Crescent) and then 200 yards to Gerard Gardens because we'd at last been allocated the all important extra bedroom (but by then my older bro had moved out anyway)

    I didn't know anything else so thought these were the bees knees. I really enjoyed living in them, the coal fires, the snugness (called compact in todays apartments but really means small) I actually felt a bit sorry for those who I knew that lived in just ordinary streets, even those in the posher suburbs with proper gardens, I mean who needs grass when you've got the square down below which was your footy pitch, your cricket pitch, your tennis court, your hopscotch grid etc etc. Many games were invented and improvised upon including 'spot' or hit the post - both similar but where you took turns to try and hit a certain section of wall with the football or the lamp standard in the middle of the square - you had so many lives then you were out until the last man standing was the winner. 60 seconds was another footy game played by using the blocks stairwell entrance as a goal. Lick the can, a variation of hide n' seek and of course off ground tick and the like.

    What did the poor street dwellers do for bommie night when we had our own enclosed square? No, i'd rather not have lived anywhere else in the 70s that in those tennies. It is true that the council after a mid 70s refurb of new roof tiles and Robinson Willey gas fires did rather let the tennies down and in the 80s they were looking tired but needn't have if they were maintained properly.
    Us ordinary street-dwellers called it Kick the Can

  12. #12
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doris Mousdale View Post
    Us ordinary street-dwellers called it Kick the Can
    Ha ha a slip of the 'tongue'.

    ---------- Post added at 11:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:21 AM ----------

    I know of people who moved to houses with front and back gardens whose new house was full of mod cons but not full of memories. For the older generation moving out of the city centre where they'd never needed a bus never mind a taxi, being shut off from what they knew was a wrench to say the least. For some, the garden was too much to maintain and they still ventured into town to meet up at their once local watering hole. The landings made for fantastic places to while away the hours just watching the world (or square activities) go by, putting the world to rights and because you had to actually pass other people on the way to your front door, it made for getting to know neighbours - not like the unsociable and lack of community spirit scenario so often witnessed these days.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  13. #13
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    Ha ha a slip of the 'tongue'.

    ---------- Post added at 11:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:21 AM ----------

    I know of people who moved to houses with front and back gardens whose new house was full of mod cons but not full of memories...
    The suburbs were a huge mistake - and not just in Liverpool. Strong fences make for no neighbours. No shops, no middle, no place, poor buildings - make it worse.


    "the Boot Estate in Norris Green, a now-soiled 1920s visionary transformation of farmland into a landscape of roundabouts and boulevards almost absent of cars, serving 1500 houses and gardens, and comparable to innovative housing areas of pre-1945 Germany, and more recent Danish, German and Netherlandish models. It needs now to be demolished due to technical obsolescence" Doug Clelland. EMAP 2008

  14. #14
    Senior Member Brian-P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    67
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    Ha ha a slip of the 'tongue'.

    ---------- Post added at 11:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:21 AM ----------

    I know of people who moved to houses with front and back gardens whose new house was full of mod cons but not full of memories. For the older generation moving out of the city centre where they'd never needed a bus never mind a taxi, being shut off from what they knew was a wrench to say the least. For some, the garden was too much to maintain and they still ventured into town to meet up at their once local watering hole. The landings made for fantastic places to while away the hours just watching the world (or square activities) go by, putting the world to rights and because you had to actually pass other people on the way to your front door, it made for getting to know neighbours - not like the unsociable and lack of community spirit scenario so often witnessed these days.
    You're spot on there Ged.

    Most people nowadays, me included, walk out their house straight into their car on the driveway and drive to, say, the supermarket.

    Years ago they would have had to walk down their street - meeting their neighbours along the way. Go to their local shops - meeting their neighbours. Possibly waiting at the bus stop - meeting their neighbours. Working in the local factory - meeting their neighbours. Going for a pint - meeting their neighbours etc.

    The community spirit for the majority disappeared a long time ago. Very sad.

    On a side note: does anyone have any photos of any of the renovated tenements?

  15. #15
    Senior Member lindylou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,677
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian-P View Post

    Years ago they would have had to walk down their street - meeting their neighbours along the way. Go to their local shops - meeting their neighbours. Possibly waiting at the bus stop - meeting their neighbours.
    Where I live it's still like that. There is always someone to talk to, either your immediate neighbours, or at the local shops or at the bus stop as you say. Our neighbours go into each others houses for a cuppa and a chat, and when the weather is better talk on the doorsteps.

    Sometimes it's like being in a golldfish bowl! -you can't move and someone sees you !! and everyone knows everyone else's comings and goings. .. not complaining really - - we have a great community, there is always someone to turn to if needs be, and still a lot of the original old families hanging in there -- even though many strangers are moving into the area. You never have to be lonely or bored here, there's always a neighbour to chat to.

  16. #16
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lindylou View Post
    Where I live it's still like that. ...
    If you don't mind me asking, where's that (roughly)?

  17. #17
    Senior Member lindylou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,677
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    If you don't mind me asking, where's that (roughly)?
    Anfield. We still have a good community, many established families which have spanned the generations still here. But sadly, for various reasons, the district has been left to deteriorate and the community has been somewhat eroded by the moving in of 'problem families' and other problematic people who have been evicted from somewhere else. Anfield is currently known to be the 'dumping ground' but that's another story.
    I think once a solid community has been chipped away at over a long period, it will eventually disappear never to be replaced.

  18. #18
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lindylou View Post
    ...Anfield is currently known to be the 'dumping ground' but that's another story.
    Maybe it's the story. Chris Wilson (see above) was talking about the grouping of all the problem cases
    in one basket where in the past they might have been spread about a bit and there was less of an 'entitlement culture' (his words).

    BTW what do you reckon to the few new houses that have been built?

  19. #19
    Senior Member gregs dad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    kirkby
    Posts
    2,636
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Default

    People who lived in slum housing and there was plenty of that in the Good Old days would think the Gardens were brilliant,but the ones that moved to Norris Green must have thought that they had died and gone to heaven with their back and front gardens.
    THE BEST VITAMIN FOR MAKING FRIENDS ? B.1

    My Flickr site: www.flickr.com/photos/exacta2a/

    http://flickrhivemind.net/User/exacta2a

  20. #20
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    Imageshack here I come.

    Wavertree Gardens are relatively unspoilt Brian apart from the main arch from the High Street being gated and the new name Abbeygate Apartments being above it. During the renovation, double glazed old style window frame units were put in etc.

    The Bullring looks good with each landing's doors painted a different colour and it's part grassed central area but bear in mind it's student based now so not as wrecked.

    I'll see what i've got to post up.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  21. #21
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    Take a look here Brian.


    http://www.yoliverpool.com/forum/sho...urts+tenements


    .

    ---------- Post added at 12:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by lindylou View Post
    Where I live it's still like that. There is always someone to talk to, either your immediate neighbours, or at the local shops or at the bus stop as you say. Our neighbours go into each others houses for a cuppa and a chat, and when the weather is better talk on the doorsteps.

    Sometimes it's like being in a golldfish bowl -you can't move and someone sees you !! and everyone knows everyone else's comings and goings. .. not complaining really - - we have a great community, there is always someone to turn to if needs be, and still a lot of the original old families hanging in there -- even though many strangers are moving into the area. You never have to be lonely or bored here, there's always a neighbour to chat to.

    Yes lindy, there is no doubt that there are still clusters of neighbourhoods like that. I know for instance that those ex Gerard Gardens community that managed to get houses in their old neighbourhood and so know each other from old are still like that - the same wit the Vauxhall Gardens, Holy Cross, 4 squares community. We also hear so much about incidents in other neighbourhoods where when reporters are interviewing local residents, they say 'nobody really knew him' or 'he kept himself to himself likes lots of people around here' or 'He'd nod when we passed each other but that was about it'

    I've driven into lots of closes on my rounds, especially in winter, where it's like a ghost town and it's a case of coming home from work, straight in the front door and closed, not seeing people from one day to the next, especially in the dark nights and depths of winter. The demise of the high street shops for a jangle and a catch up is not good for this either. That's one thing you could not say about the floodlit tennie squares that were a hive of activity all year round.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  22. #22
    Senior Member lesley1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wirral
    Posts
    86
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Tommy's Mum moved from Addison St, little two up and down terraced off Byrom St. up to new houses off Mile End, most of her neighbours went out of Town, and when we go to visit, once we come out the tunnel all the old neighbourhood's are taken up with student accommodation right up to Burlington Street.

  23. #23
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    Yes, a transient situation.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  24. #24
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default


    georgianeverton_1203051small by Peter McGurk, on Flickr

    Is this a better way of avoiding the mistakes of the past???

    everton valley

  25. #25
    Senior Member Doris Mousdale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    102
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Perhaps if there was a penalty rate imposed on buildings left to rot in the hope of getting a demolition permit things might look a little different. There should be time limit on leaving buildings derilict with the council stepping in to keep the buildings viable with a charge on the owners equity in the building.
    On the otherhand the experiments that have failed was it the housing or the housed that were the problem. I don't reall any Cornish fishing villages with "criminal rat runs" going through them a few smugglers coves, yes, but most are very desirable places to live.
    Same with tower blocks how come they turned into such a heap of crud in such a short time- in terms of property life span, when in other countries around the world they are accepted as inner city housing. If those tower blocks were privatised dwellings would they still be habitable or even proved to be a good investment?

  26. #26
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doris Mousdale View Post
    Perhaps if there was a penalty rate imposed on buildings left to rot in the hope of getting a demolition permit things might look a little different. There should be time limit on leaving buildings derilict with the council stepping in to keep the buildings viable with a charge on the owners equity in the building.
    On the otherhand the experiments that have failed was it the housing or the housed that were the problem. I don't reall any Cornish fishing villages with "criminal rat runs" going through them a few smugglers coves, yes, but most are very desirable places to live.
    Same with tower blocks how come they turned into such a heap of crud in such a short time- in terms of property life span, when in other countries around the world they are accepted as inner city housing. If those tower blocks were privatised dwellings would they still be habitable or even proved to be a good investment?

    You don’t have to go abroad to find successful high-rise blocks of flats - there’s one or two in Sefton Park. But they don’t suit everybody and that’s been a problem - the one size fits all idea.

    And you don’t need a permit to demolition an ordinary house in North Liverpool (or anywhere else) - you need tenants and owners who can afford to keep houses up.

    I’ve lost the link and can’t remember the name... but this ‘fishing village’ was only there for five minutes before being pulled down by council (no doubt on threat of the tenants burning it down) (Trafalgar? Tredegar? Talacre?).

    [Edit: Radcliffe Estate - Ged's got it on his site http://inacityliving.piczo.com/?g=41897456&cr=7 - it lasted about 20 years]

    ***

    There’s an estate in Aintree of more or less the same design as some others. Hedges are clipped. Windows painted. Looked After.

    The others look like Beirut.

    All of the estates (and tennies and flats) started out as aspirational (a "letter from God to get in") and ended up as poor ghettoes.

    Local Authority Housing Estates are the cheapest we can do. As a whole we more or less insist it's that way. We want value for 'our' money.

    Yet, Local Authorities are obliged to house everyone (who can’t help themselves). Those who can, look after themselves and move on and up (or emigrate). Those who can’t, end up in a cheap rate Sink Estate at the back of nowhere.

    ***

    Yes, people are the problem and money is the problem. But what do we do? Re-open the workhouses for the “ne’er-do-wells”?


    .

  27. #27
    Senior Member wsteve55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Crosby
    Posts
    2,199
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doris Mousdale View Post
    Perhaps if there was a penalty rate imposed on buildings left to rot in the hope of getting a demolition permit things might look a little different. There should be time limit on leaving buildings derilict with the council stepping in to keep the buildings viable with a charge on the owners equity in the building.
    On the otherhand the experiments that have failed was it the housing or the housed that were the problem. I don't reall any Cornish fishing villages with "criminal rat runs" going through them a few smugglers coves, yes, but most are very desirable places to live.
    Same with tower blocks how come they turned into such a heap of crud in such a short time- in terms of property life span, when in other countries around the world they are accepted as inner city housing. If those tower blocks were privatised dwellings would they still be habitable or even proved to be a good investment?
    It's a pet hate of mine,to see any building left to to deteriorate,and agree there should be some sort of legal timescale set for it's vacancy! One of the reasons that's been suggested to me for this happening is,that when house owners die intestate,the property goes to the Crown,who then add it to the list of same,and that's it! (can anyone confirm this?)
    As for tower blocks,after renovation,some blocks on Netherfield rd.sold quickly enough,some prospective buyers queuing overnight! There are now,another 2 blocks nearing completion,(Candia,and Crete, towers.) but I've not heard how well they're selling,yet!
    As has been mentioned,there were some tenants who didn't appreciate the(any?)accomodation,and unfortunately,that's all it takes to ruin any block/estate/street,the majority tending to suffer in silence!

  28. #28
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wsteve55 View Post
    It's a pet hate of mine,to see any building left to to deteriorate,and agree there should be some sort of legal timescale set for it's vacancy!
    Look at Harrisburg in the USA - a victim of the Rust belt decline. Ugly, vacant properties were cleared up by imposing Land Valuation Tax. You pay only on the value of the land not the bricks on top (the building). If empty you still pay the same as if the building is occupied, as the building has no bearing on the tax, only the land under. Speculators cannot leave buildings empty as they are taxed the full amount. Most vacant buildings were brought back to use. Harrisburg is great success story and copied by many in mainly PA, USA.

    Liverpool tried to get LVT with the LibDems to clear up the eyesores in the city. Advisors from the USA came over. Whitehall stopped the lot. The Welsh have just debated LVT in the Assembly - it is gaining ground in the UK with even top Financial Times economists such as Martin Wolf and Sir Sam Brittan falling in behind it.

    http://<a href="http://www.youtube.c...go_QoB6OvE</a>

    The first 10 minutes above is a great explanation of LVT.


    Below, largely the transcript. Note the words:
    discourages speculative land holding.
    encourages active use of land, creating more job opportunities and wealth



    A Land Value Tax for Wales
    LTV is a tax which would be levied on the annual rental value of specific pieces of land, where the value is determined by different usages, for example, agricultural and industrial land. It is, of course, an alternative to existing forms of taxation, not an addition to them. At its most radical, a LVT would allow for the abolition of Council Tax, Business Rates and Stamp Duty Land Tax, by introducing a levy on the annual rental value of every site in Wales including all residential, commercial and farming land, as well as privately owned estates. Moreover, LVT is a progressive tax. Council Tax is regressive because it imposes a lower burden on the rich than on the poor – and also a lower burden on rich places than poor places. LVT reverses that proposition.
    The basic idea behind a Land Value Tax is that the supply of land is fixed. As Mark Twain said, when advising people to buy land, they aren't making it any more. As a result, it is inherently scarce. Its price reflects three things: its scarcity value; the value of improvements made by the landowner; and the value of improvements made by other people, especially the public sector. In modern conditions the first and third of these almost entirely swamp the second. Therefore it is right and fair that value created not by the landowner but (mostly) by national and local government should be taxed.
    To give just one practical example: It has been calculated that the Jubilee Line extension to Stratford has raised property values around the stations by £10 billion. If only a small part of this windfall had been taxed, it would have paid for the extension very easily. And, at the same time, while those who benefit from big increases in land values as a result of such development pay more, those whose sites have suffered (such as, for example, housing close to railway tracks which may decline in value because of noise or vibration) would pay less – a form of automatic compensation without any complicated appeals system. In just the same way an LVT could easily pay for many other much-needed infrastructure schemes.
    What, then, are the main practical advantages of a LVT?
    First and foremost, such a tax would be tricky for even the rich to avoid. It's hard to hide land or move it offshore to avoid getting taxed.
    For economists such as the OECD's, who advocate a LVT, there are two other big advantages: land taxes (they argue) increase long-term stability and growth by fostering more productive use of capital; and they stabilise government finances by bringing in revenue efficiently and quickly.
    So, a LTV is:

    • cheap to collect
    • difficult to evade
    • discourages speculative land holding
    • encourages active use of land, creating more job opportunities and wealth and, here in Wales, we already have, in TAN 6, `One Planet Development', a policy approach which is sympathetic to land value principles.


    Is it, then, a practical, political possibility? Well, I don't want to underestimate the problems of tackling taxation, especially in an economic downturn. And the experience of the poll tax remains one which has scarred the collective memory of tax change in the property field.
    Nevertheless, a LVT has an impressive economic and social pedigree. Lib Dem supporters have included both Vince Cable and Chris Huhne. For Labour, Andy Burnham made it a centre piece of his campaign for Labour leadership, describing it as an idea so old-Labour it can be traced back to Thomas Paine. It is the official policy of the Green Party in Scotland where research carried out late in 2010 suggested that a land value tax of 3.16p per pound would generate enough cash to replace council tax and the uniform business rate, while leaving 75% of Scottish households better off in the process.
    But LVT is not simply a policy of the radical left. Free-market capitalists and mainstream economists, such as Martin Wolf and Samuel Brittan, have both argued the case in favour. And, indeed, on the right of the political spectrum, a LVT has gained new traction in relation to problems in Greece. Put simply, it is quite difficult to move an Athens mansion off-shore (or, indeed, one in Belgravia) in order to avoid taxation.
    And here in Wales LVT is also an idea with a strong lineage. Inside the Labour Party, the idea was first seriously advanced by Keir Hardy, in his 1906 Manifesto to the people of Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare. Here is what he said:
    'The slums remain, overcrowding continues whilst the land goes to waste. Shopkeepers and traders are overburdened with rates and taxation whilst the increasing land values that should relieve the ratepayer
    go to people who have not earned them.'
    Three years later, a Land Value Tax was intended to be the centre piece of Lloyd George's `People's Budget' of 1909, but was defeated by the vested interests of the House of Lords and property owners in the House of Commons. Now, in the era of devolution, there may be a chance for their uncompleted work to be brought to a conclusion in Wales.
    Of course, it may be that the current settlement will not make it easy for such a reform to be introduced in the immediate future; but the whole future of responsibility for taxation is very much a matter of current debate. I hope that, by raising this matter, it can be brought to the attention of the Silk Commission so that it can include a consideration, if not of land value tax itself, then at least of the case for providing the National Assembly with powers to reform taxation in Wales, in this way, should it choose to do so.
    Because here, the part of the United Kingdom with the longest tradition of radicalism, we have no difficulty in understanding the notion that land is `common wealth' – that land is a resource in common. As a result of being fixed and fundamental, it should belong to the people; and those who have the privilege of ownership should pay something back for that privilege, through a Land Value Tax. Once this is understood and agreed, the serious work of detailed investigation of its pros and cons and its practical implementation here in Wales can begin.


    http://commissionondevolutioninwales.independent.gov.uk/files/2012/02/Mark-Drakeford-AM-English.pdf


    This is very encouraging. Vince Cable is attempting to get a wealth tax implemented at Whitehall, which is another good sign. Tax wealth not income.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  29. #29
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    'The slums remain, overcrowding continues whilst the land goes to waste. Shopkeepers and traders are overburdened with rates and taxation whilst the increasing land values that should relieve the ratepayer go to people who have not earned them.

    ‘Because here, the part of the United Kingdom with the longest tradition of radicalism, we have no difficulty in understanding the notion that land is `common wealth' – that land is a resource in common.’

    Well this may be true for Wales but it certainly isn’t a common tradition in England, much as anyone may wish it otherwise.

    In England at least there is a rather more rounded view of the issue, or rather it’s place at the heart of a state run by capital. In England’s book, wealth creates prosperity and jobs for all. Indeed the creation of wealth is fundamental to the liberal notion of prosperity for all.

    If you are anti-capitalist well fine, argue your corner but don’t hide behind social(ist) idealism as the only alternative for the common good. Widespread wealth is for the common good.

    This city especially needs wealth-creators - we should not be turning them away with a wealth tax cloaked as a Land Value Tax and we don’t. Not that it would particularly work as wealth tax in any event.

    There was a time when property owners smashed toilets to render empty properties unusable and untaxable. Why? Because there was no market for them. They were empty. No-one keeps property empty where there’s a more economically viable market for it - even ‘arry Hyams (of Centrepoint fame) even as a land-bank. A land-bank simply indicates lack of opportunity, or a lack of potential customers.

    ***

    Business rates and income tax go in part to fund infrastructure. That is, the money that builds CrossRail is pre-taxed from the rates and taxes of the better off. The beneficiaries are the people in general that that infrastructure serves (in helping create greater wealth, prosperity and employment). Is it reasonable for these wealth creators, the risk takers, be taxed again for taking that risk?

    At a real and immediate level, there’s gorgeous period properties in Everton, for example, rotting away - not for want of investment but for want of anyone who can afford to occupy them and pay builders, decorators, plumbers, electricians and shopkeepers ie., the common man to service them. We need wealth.

    ---------- Post added at 05:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:03 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    I have a pet hate for flat roof and so called designer zany shaped roofs that are never going to dispose of rainwater like is needed. You're right in that the architects would never live in these, just try to make selfish personal statements and let some poor other buggers be the guinea pigs.
    Well as an architect, I'm not having that am I?

    There's a bizillion buildings with flat roofs and 'zany' shapes that are all perfectly waterproof. There's many that aren't. Some buildings are built well. Others aren't. Some buildings are maintained. Others aren't. There are almost as many reason for building failure as they are building failures.

    But one thing is certain. If it's the architect's fault he will pay for it. There's not many architects can go bust at the drop of a hat to avoid litigation and many who carry the can for others involved who do.

  30. #30
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    Well this may be true for Wales but it certainly isn’t a common tradition in England, much as anyone may wish it otherwise.

    In England at least there is a rather more rounded view of the issue, or rather it’s place at the heart of a state run by capital. In England’s book, wealth creates prosperity and jobs for all. Indeed the creation of wealth is fundamental to the liberal notion of prosperity for all.
    But in England most of the wealth ends up in the hands of the top few percent.

    If you are anti-capitalist well fine, argue your corner but don’t hide behind social(ist) idealism as the only alternative for the common good. Widespread wealth is for the common good.
    You are very confused. I am a free-marketeer. I never mentioned socialism, you did. The current system is systemically flawed, hence two world-wide crashed in 80 years. As Gillian Tett, the assistant editor of the Financial Times said, changing a few bad apples will not put it all right. The system we use is fundamentally flawed. It can be put right by the Single Tax, Land Value tax - no Income Tax, no Council Tax, no VAT, etc. The average man would be far better off and enterprise promoted. No expensive tax accountant bills for small businesses, no expensive to process VAT and other such nonsense enterprise restricting taxes. More time to devote to enterprise activities.

    This city especially needs wealth-creators - we should not be turning them away with a wealth tax cloaked as a Land Value Tax and we don’t. Not that it would particularly work as wealth tax in any event.
    Land Value Taxes create wealth, it promotes it, especially when income tax is reduced or eliminated, as in Hong Kong. All implementations around the world have done sop. We tax a man's labour via income tax. This is retrograde, as it prevents enterprise. It makes him poorer taking a part of his income at source - income tax was a temporary tax to fund the Napoleonic wars which Tory Land owners got made permanent to push taxes from their lands onto the people. Currently wealth laying idle is not taxed. We tax the fruits of the the labours of those who need least to be taxed - the wealth creators. That is why most wealth of a society ends up in the hands of the top few percent.

    There was a time when property owners smashed toilets to render empty properties unusable and untaxable. Why? Because there was no market for them. They were empty. No-one keeps property empty where there’s a more economically viable market for it - even ‘arry Hyams (of Centrepoint fame) even as a land-bank. A land-bank simply indicates lack of opportunity, or a lack of potential customers.
    Hyman's paid little to no tax on Centre Point in London. At 3/4 finished he turned the contractors off site. He paid no taxes as the building was not being used. The price of land was spiraling, so he left it and got rich in his sleep as the land prices rose - as did those adjacent to the Jubilee Line which they never paid for. Yesterdays London Evening Standard had an article on house/land prices rising dramatically around Crossrail stations - these people never paid for CrossRail, yet they walk off with massive windfalls, we all paid for it with our taxes. In fact the Welsh MP was slightly wrong. The Jubilee Line extension costed £3.4bn while land value rose by 14bn around the line

    Property owners, speculators to be more precise, smashed their properties to render them untaxabale to take advantage of land prices rising. Back to clearing up derelict buildings....Land Value Tax prevents that as many US cities have demonstrated. Liverpool needs it badly.

    Business rates and income tax go in part to fund infrastructure.
    Land Value Tax is the perfect method of funding growth creating infrastructure. Hong Kong built a metro from the taxation of land only. Crossrail was paid for out of UK taxes. The taxes of a man in Cornwall also paid for it. Land Value Tax would mean those who benefit from the rail line would pay for it - via Land Value Tax reclaimed from the land the rail line increased in value.

    Community created economic growth soaks into the land and crystalizes as land values - that is where land values come from, this is economics. Land Value Tax merely reclaims that growth and puts it back into the cycle to fund the infrastructure that aided the creation in the first place. Currently the cycle is cut and a giant sluice takes away that wealth in the form of windfalls in the land market - socially created wealth is privatized. It needs to be 180 degrees the the way. Socially created wealth socialized and privately created wealth privatized. Get it?

    At a real and immediate level, there’s gorgeous period properties in Everton, for example, rotting away - not for want of investment but for want of anyone who can afford to occupy them and pay builders, decorators, plumbers, electricians and shopkeepers ie., the common man to service them. We need wealth.
    The owners of the Everton properties still make money on the land under the decaying bricks. If they paid tax on the value of the land the homes would be renovated or sold off to someone who could renovate. Or fall into the hands of the city who could sell it off or do something with it. Currently they pay zero tax.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Terraced Housing In Liverpool
    By Bob Edwards in forum Bob Edwards' Liverpool Picture Book
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-05-2013, 09:15 AM
  2. Court Housing in Liverpool
    By Bob Edwards in forum Bob Edwards' Liverpool Picture Book
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-01-2012, 11:41 AM
  3. Eldon Grove Housing
    By Kev in forum Buildings and Structures
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 08-14-2011, 11:31 PM
  4. Insanitary Housing Images
    By Kev in forum In My Liverpool Home
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-07-2009, 02:37 PM
  5. cathedral &housing
    By gregs dad in forum Buildings and Structures
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-09-2007, 08:34 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

For daily updates, to support us further or to join in the conversation: Follow us on Twitter @YOLiverpool / Like our Facebook Page: @yoliverpoolpics / Join the Facebook Group: YO! Liverpool Pictures

× Thanks for coming to the web site. Support our future by turning off your Ad-Blocker or consider a donation via PayPal or Credit Card!