Demolishing arguments

[Waterways]

Homes reprieved as mass demolition plans frozen
Jul 20 2006
By Larry Neild, Daily Post

LIVERPOOL'S plans to bulldoze 3,000 terraced houses as part of the biggest clearance programme for 40 years, lay in tatters last night, jubilant critics claimed.

They say a decision by Local Government Secretary of State Ruth Kelly to freeze plans for a massive regeneration programme, would spell the end of the strategy.

But council officials insisted that the plans for Anfield, Breckfield, Edge Hill and Picton areas of the city, have not been shelved.

They say the minister has called for more information about the plans before deciding whether there should be a public inquiry.

In the meanwhile, the minister has issued a formal notice to the council banning them from granting any planning approvals without authorisation from the Government.

More...

The bulldozers should move in.

The averaged sized new home in the UK is a paltry British 76 square metres, while in Germany with a similar population density new homes are 109 square metres, nearly half as much again in size. In Australia the average sized new home is 205.7 square metres, in the Netherlands 115 square metres and in Denmark 137 square metres. Danish rooms are twice as big as the hutches now on offer in the United Kingdom. In Japan, a country once notorious for small homes, the average sized new home is now 140 square metres.

The averaged size living room in the UK is a miniscule 13 foot by 15 foot; a room which has to function as TV room, children’s play room, entertainment room and relaxation room. If the averaged sized man stands in the middle of a typical British living room and stretched out an arm he will hit either a wall or ceiling.

The housing charity, Shelter, estimate 500,000 households are officially overcrowded.

The UK has the smallest, pokiest most expensive houses in the developed
world. The old housing stock has a high carbon footprint, despite the illness such cold and damp homes bring on. The only way is to demolish and build eco homes - some are being built near Brunswick Dock.

[Kev]

How does it effect the Edge Lane Scheme now? Will that stop too?

[Howie]

How does it effect the Edge Lane Scheme now? Will that stop too?

No, I don't think it affects the Edge Lane scheme though it does have implications for the rest of the Community Seven / Kensington Regeneration area.

[Waterways]

No, I don't think it affects the Edge Lane scheme though it does have implications for the rest of the Community Seven / Kensington Regeneration area.

Keeping old inadeqaute expensive to heat houses is a total waste of time. None of these house are of architectural merit. There are no positive points about them.

[Howie]

Keeping old inadeqaute expensive to heat houses is a total waste of time. None of these house are of architectural merit. There are no positive points about them.

The point is that I own one of these inadequate Victorian terraces (which has stood for over 100 years and which would probably stand for another 100 years) and that if it gets demolished I won't. Neither will I own one of the new builds that you promote, as the pittance offered in compulsary purchase (due to the reduction in market value resulting from the regeneration activity) will not pay for a replacement and I am too old to get another mortgage. I will consequently have to move out of the area and probably pay out rent that I do not currently pay to live somewhere even less adequate. I will lose my home that I have paid for and some other wealthier person will move into the new build that replaces it. If it was a case of 'a-home-for-a-home' then I would have no argument with you. As it is, this is not my idea of regenerating a community but rather replacing it ('gentrification'). I personally do not think this is right and won't be going without a fight!

[wallasey]

The point is that I own one of these inadequate Victorian terraces (which has stood for over 100 years and which would probably stand for another 100 years) and that if it gets demolished I won't. Neither will I own one of the new builds that you promote, as the pittance offered in compulsary purchase (due to the reduction in market value resulting from the regeneration activity) will not pay for a replacement and I am too old to get another mortgage. I will consequently have to move out of the area and probably pay out rent that I do not currently pay to live somewhere even less adequate. I will lose my home that I have paid for and some other wealthier person will move into the new build that replaces it. If it was a case of 'a-home-for-a-home' then I would have no argument with you. As it is, this is not my idea of regenerating a community but rather replacing it ('gentrification'). I personally do not think this is right and won't be going without a fight!

I hate seeing terraces boaded up and falling into decay. But what we need to ask is "What is wrong with these areas?". As previously said, they are in great locations (most of the time) and thats if you don't own a car too! These terraces are what make the city what it is and I think it is an absolute insult to both the city and it's forefarthers to say that they are past it and have no place in modern society. These terraces are well built, very presentable and normally brimming full of archutechtural merit.

Modern 'boxes' dont have anything going for them most of the time and if the situation in Gillmoss and Crokky Park is anything to go by, they are not built to last! Some of our worst crime hotspots are in Modern estates and developpments, need I remind us about Stockbridge Village back in the days when it was Cantrill Farm? (no offence Cannie farmers!).

I say keep the terraces. They look great (especially with a lick of red glaze!) and are suitable for those who are on the go all the time and only go home to eat, sleep and cleanse.

Thats all I have to say.

[Waterways]

The point is that I own one of these inadequate Victorian terraces

You poor sod.

They are still crocks, and need demolishing for superior homes befitting the 21st century.

[Waterways]

I hate seeing terraces boaded up and falling into decay.

I like seeing them opulled down. Appalling homes .

But what we need to ask is "What is wrong with these areas?". As previously said, they are in great locations (most of the time) and thats if you don't own a car too!

The locations are fine. It is just people don't like living in crap houses.

These terraces are what make the city

You are having a laugh.

what it is and I think it is an absolute insult to both the city and it's forefarthers to say that they are past it and have no place in modern society. These terraces are well built, very presentable and normally brimming full of archutechtural merit.

You are having a laugh. Architecture? Where? They were emergency 1800s homes as people flocked into the cities from the countryside. They look like barracks, as that was what they really were.

Modern 'boxes' dont have anything going for them most of the time

What a stupid comment.

and if the situation in Gillmoss and Crokky Park is anything to go by, they are not built to last!

I'll have snip the rest as it is too turgid. This attitude is typical of why Liverpool has stayed a crock of a 3rd rate city for 50 years. No ambition, no foresight, no nothing.

[Howie]

You poor sod.

They are still crocks, and need demolishing for superior homes befitting the 21st century.

That would be fine if I could afford one of them, but as a low-waged public sector employee...

[wallasey]

What is your location Waterways? Do you live in a terrace?

[Howie]

Live and let buy

Some MPs and local authorities are calling for controls on what they see as the damaging buy-to-let market. However, the mortgage industry has hit back hard to counter this stance.

The recent call by MPs for more controls on buy-to-let, claiming that it is ‘distorting’ the property market, forcing up prices and crowding out local buyers, caused something of a flutter in the mortgage and property market.

The all party Housing Select Committee’s report on 'Affordability and the Supply of Housing' (420KB pdf), urges government to give local authorities more powers to limit the amount of buy-to-let properties in certain areas.

The report stated: ‘In some areas the housing market is distorted by significant levels of buy-to-let investments, which have driven up prices and not created stable communities. In these areas, the fact that housing offers a higher return on capital investment than equities has driven up prices artificially and is making home purchase unaffordable for local buyers, forcing them into rented accommodation.’

The Welsh Street Homes Group in Liverpool, one of many local authorities to give evidence to the Committee, warned that, ‘the increased borrowing power available to Southern, or Irish property owners has enabled the purchase of buy-to-let property in Northern cities. This has affected supply, and the cost of buying and renting accommodation in Liverpool.’

More...

[Waterways]

What is your location Waterways? Do you live in a terrace?

Terrrace? Not if I can help it. They are a blight on the landscape.

[Waterways]

Live and let buy

Some MPs and local authorities are calling for controls on what they see as the damaging buy-to-let market. However, the mortgage industry has hit back hard to counter this stance.

The recent call by MPs for more controls on buy-to-let, claiming that it is ‘distorting’ the property market, forcing up prices and crowding out local buyers, caused something of a flutter in the mortgage and property market.

The all party Housing Select Committee’s report on 'Affordability and the Supply of Housing' (420KB pdf), urges government to give local authorities more powers to limit the amount of buy-to-let properties in certain areas.

The report stated: ‘In some areas the housing market is distorted by significant levels of buy-to-let investments, which have driven up prices and not created stable communities. In these areas, the fact that housing offers a higher return on capital investment than equities has driven up prices artificially and is making home purchase unaffordable for local buyers, forcing them into rented accommodation.’

The Welsh Street Homes Group in Liverpool, one of many local authorities to give evidence to the Committee, warned that, ‘the increased borrowing power available to Southern, or Irish property owners has enabled the purchase of buy-to-let property in Northern cities. This has affected supply, and the cost of buying and renting accommodation in Liverpool.’

More...

All they have to do is drop the Stalinist Planning system (it is based on quota, not market [demand] driven) and open up land to the free market to build on. Prices will drop and the housing problem will evaporate.

Read the article I posted on here: How Land Affects the Average Person. That covers most of it.

The government is constantly involved in housing - we have a perpetual housing problem. You never see them involved in washing machines do you? Housing is rigged and washing machines are open to the free market. ......and washing machines are cheap too.

[Waterways]

Live and let buy

Some MPs and local authorities are calling for controls on what they see as the damaging buy-to-let market. However, the mortgage industry has hit back hard to counter this stance.

The recent call by MPs for more controls on buy-to-let, claiming that it is ‘distorting’ the property market, forcing up prices and crowding out local buyers, caused something of a flutter in the mortgage and property market.

This is total tripe. All they have to do is open land up to the free market and the situation will disappear. They allot a certain amount of land for building in each council area – the Local Plan - which is never enough. At times no land at all. It is rigged to keep land and house prices high, which cascades down to pokey overpriced rubbish that is being served up. The free market should dictate the land and house prices, not governments or councils. Rigging land availability is not the way. We are all being ripped off good style with the big construction companies and large land owners raking it in.

[wallasey]

This is total tripe. All they have to do is open land up to the free market and the situation will disappear. They allot a certain amount of land for building in each council area – the Local Plan - which is never enough. At times no land at all. It is rigged to keep land and house prices high, which cascades down to pokey overpriced rubbish that is being served up. The free market should dictate the land and house prices, not governments or councils. Rigging land availability is not the way. We are all being ripped off good style with the big construction companies and large land owners raking it in.

If I have got the right end of the stick, this would be a very good idea for Town/City Centre sites that need to be developed. Birkenhead for example, has loads of bare patches around Conway Street that would be great for Commercial/High spec apartment developments!