Demolishing arguments

[Kev]

HUNDREDS of Liverpool residents will be forced to sell their homes so they can be bulldozed and replaced.

The government today rubber-stamped four legal orders issued to homeowners in Wavertree, Anfield and Edge Hill, agreeing there is a “compelling need” for the areas to be regenerated.

But anti-demolition campaigners were claiming a small victory after local government minister Ruth Kelly MP asked for more information about some streets in the Picton area of Wavertree.

They hope it could lead to homes in Smithdown Street and Earle Road being saved from the wrecking ball.

Ms Kelly will make a final decision in 21 days. continues....

[Steven]

A mate of mine spoke to Zak recently and he proposes to have the house taken appart and then re-built. Jeeze ! it would look like a poor man's version of Wothering Heights. Especially now Tescoes are going ahead with taking over the Mecca and making it like the one they have in the Swan.

[taffy]

HUNDREDS of Liverpool residents will be forced to sell their homes so they can be bulldozed and replaced.

The government today rubber-stamped four legal orders issued to homeowners in Wavertree, Anfield and Edge Hill, agreeing there is a “compelling need” for the areas to be regenerated.

But anti-demolition campaigners were claiming a small victory after local government minister Ruth Kelly MP asked for more information about some streets in the Picton area of Wavertree.

They hope it could lead to homes in Smithdown Street and Earle Road being saved from the wrecking ball.

Are these houses between Smithdown Rd and Earle Rd actually in Edge Hill too. I'm sure Max will agree.

[Howie]

Watchdog to probe Prescott demolition scheme
By Charles Clover, Environment Editor
Last Updated: 1:10am BST 09/04/2007

John Prescott's heavily criticised £5 billion scheme to renegerate the inner cities by demolishing thousands of Victorian terrace homes is to be the subject of an official inquiry.

The National Audit Office is to examine the Pathfinder regeneration scheme after Ruth Kelly, the Communities Secretary, last week unleashed the bulldozers on 1,000 terrace homes in Liverpool.


Stephen Ord, far right, and residents of Cantsfield St, Liverpool, which
is threatened with demolition under the Pathfinder scheme

By approving compulsory purchase orders for three inner city areas of the city, Miss Kelly has effectively signalled that she will continue with the policy devised by Mr Prescott in the face of opposition from his own Urban Task Force, led by the architect Lord Rogers.

Similar projects are under way in other parts of the North of England and Midlands.

The swathe of Victorian terraces that will be demolished is the largest clearance in Liverpool since the 1960s.

It is the first phase in the city's plans to clear more than 6,800 Victorian and Edwardian terraces, which is more than the Luftwaffe achieved in five years of war.

The Tories said that the compulsory purchase orders would waste millions of public money and condemn the city to looking like a bombsite next year when it is the European Capital of Culture.

The Government maintains that the demolition and replacement with modern housing will bring about economic and environmental improvements for the areas concerned. Alistair Burt, the Conservative housing spokesman, has been notified that the National Audit Office is to examine whether the £1.5 billion being spent on Pathfinder schemes in the North and Midlands over three years is value for money.

He said: "Yards away from the centrepiece of Liverpool's 2008 celebrations, foreign tourists will now be able to walk around inner city areas in the midst of clearance. It is a programme so centrally planned and controlled that it is not taking account of developments such as rising prices in these areas and growing demand for homes of this kind.

"There is a risk that in the years to come we will look back at the enormous waste and ask why something was not done sooner."

Some of the areas where the houses are due to be demolished are still 80 per cent occupied pitching the Government into a potential battle with those unwilling to move. There have already been successful moves in the High Court to block evictions.

Residents of another area due to be demolished when compulsory orders are served, the Welsh Streets, decked their streets in daffodils in commemoration of Liverpool's 800th anniversary. Stephen Ord, a civil servant who spent £80,000 on a house that is now to be demolished, said: "It is complete madness. It is a total waste of money to turn buildings worth £53 million that are economically viable into landfill.

"The council is saying the reason these terraces need to be demolished is that they are too small. Every single one of the homes planned to replace them is smaller than the ones that currently exist."

Dr Peter Brown, of Merseyside Civic Society, said: "Miss Kelly is allowing clearance of the communities she is supposed to protect. People need to wake up to the alarming precedent this sets.

"A Pathfinder has unwittingly become an asset-stripper's charter, developing techniques which potentially leave nowhere safe from legalised land grab."

Cath Green, the assistant director for neighbourhoods and housing at Liverpool council, said Miss Kelly's approval of demolitions was welcome "because it means we can move forward with investment that will improve the environment and increase housing choice".

Source: Telegraph.co.uk

[Jericho]

I just hope they don't create any more estates like the one at the top of Earl Road or the houses that back onto Spekeland Road or much of the new housing association build in L8. In other words, if it looks 'corpy', they have probaly got it wrong. Great for people who will live in modern homes but less good for social cohesion because no one from outside the area will want to live there, and ten or so years down the line the chances are the tinning up will start. First one, then another. One will be burnt down etc. This pattern will always repeat itself until the city stops creating developments that only one particular section of society is shunted into. People who live in such areas deserve better. They deserve a house they can buy if they want to and a house they can readily sell if they choose to move elsewhere.

[Kev]

RESIDENTS will spend the next two weeks in limbo as they await a final decision on the future of their homes.

Two terraced roads in the Picton area of Wavertree have been left out of a legal order forcing hundreds of Liverpool residents to sell their homes so they can be bulldozed and rebuilt.

The compulsory purchase order (CPO), covering parts of Wavertree, Edge Hill and Anfield, was approved by government minister Ruth Kelly last week.

continues....

[Howie]

Mosque and residents in bid to save derelict houses
Jul 10 2007
by Liza Williams, Liverpool Daily Post

A COMMUNITY is fighting to save terraced houses from the bulldozer.

Hatherley Street Residents Group and the Al Rahma Mosque in Toxteth want to buy houses in the street, which are mostly bricked-up and derelict – and redevelop them.

More...

[kat2]

And how long would these privatly done up homes last? what standard would be reached and how long would it be before they cry foul and ask for council assistance in doing them up? why should the tax payer foot the bill for private housing stock. no parking areas no where for children to play except in the middle of the road where they end up smashing somebodys window. Houses done up dont last long you can only get so much out of a building. I mean what about things like thermal comfort levels? carbon emissions, all these regulations have to be met. dam coursing central heating new water supply new electrics, new roofing timbers (if rotten) and most would have to be treated for fire regulations.
Kat

[Howie]

The only large amount of local tax payers money I'm aware of being used was the couple of million pounds that Liverpool City Council put up to bail out the so far unsuccessful Edge Lane project when they got their sums wrong.

[kat2]

Theres alot of private investment going into edge lane area. The council may well have got its sums wrong but its attracting investment partnerships. Have a look at the edge lane video its out on the net somewhere.
I am not sure why the figures where wrong or whom is to blame, but, the council is thinking of the future, private investment should be encouraged because without it, it leads to deprevation, poor health, people living in damp squallied conditions, poor heating, low thermal value, buildings no longer fit for modern day purpose.
kat

[dioraddict]

argghhh nothing makes me so angry than our unique obsession with demolishing things. there said it feel much better now.

but seriously why are we so keen to demolish perfectly good housing. Just because it's old doesnt make it bad and vice versa. Ok some of these properties are in need of serious investment but all things being equal would you rather live in a large, restored victorian terrace, like those remaining in the Lodge Lane, Granby, Jermyn Street areas or the Wimpey boxes across the road in North Hill Street???

These are just the examples I can think of, off the top of my head - the same principles apply equally to Edge Lane and other areas of the city.

Surely the length of time these properties have stood must say something about the quality of workmanship involved. The money obviously exists surely its up to us to decide where we want to live. Investment and not demolition is the answer. In other parts of the city, we all know that some of these properties are extremely desirable and sell for serious money - Why deny ordinary people the chance to live in comparable properties??

[Howie]

I agree. These properties have stood for a hundred years and many of them would stand for another hundred, (which is probably considerably longer than the new builds that replace them will).

[AK1]

The reason I agree with the demolition of these houses is because there is a genuine rason for doing so. There not just being demolished because they're old, it's because no-one wants them, the road needs to be widened and straightened, the area needs to be made safer and more pleasant, and the area is in desperate need of new facilities. None of this can be done properly while the houses are still there.
If they wanted to demolish them to simply replace them with new properties, then I would also be opposed to the scheme, but the project is much more than that. It will completely transform the area and make it a far better place to live and work. We can't let the minority of people get in the way of something that the vast majority of people want and need.

[Jericho]

Both sides to this debate claim that the majority of people are behind them. Does anyone know how they are evidencing this claim? It's rather like the claim being made by the stop the development of the festival gardens site, apparently the 'majority' of local people are against that, too!

As for Edge Lane, the houses at the top aren't just everyday disposable Victoriana, they are something special and they make this area that is in effect the gateway to the city centre distinctive and special. In London they would fetch close to £1m each - here they are boarded up awaiting demolition to be replaced by a clone dual carriageway with clone housing that could be anywhere in the country. If it goes ahead people will see this as another failure by the city and its incompetent administrators to protect Liverpool's historic and built environment at a time when we should be disuading people from using cars to protect the environment. It's almost as though someone in the planning department is determined to push through the original plans for the inner ring motorway by stealth! It's so dated. If planners are concerned about congestion in the area they should build park and ride schemes near the end of the motorway (and elsewhere, too, if needed). The line from Lime Street to Wigan and Manchester is vastly underused and could easily support an additional ten minute service originating in Huyton or somewhere.

[kat2]

The point is the housing stock was good in its day imagine if our victorian fathers took that attitude all those years ago and decided not to build and to conserve what they had. Most old housing stock doesnt come up to standard its not feasible to bring them up to standard either. Look at the foot print of those buildings alone fine in there day but impractical today too large to expensive to heat and run.No secure parking places, no where suitable for children to play no green spaces. fine in there day yes but we have to move on to build new homes that are more energy efficient take up a smaller square footage of land (population increase to think of). Health surveys done when they have looked at areas of poor housing stock prove that their is a link to the quality of stock and the overall health of the area concerned. Improving health means less money needs to be spent on healthcare, improved areas mean people come back to the area, and employment too.
you have to look at the bigger picture, health, enviromental impact, employment=investment
kat