Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
SarahBell

Sink Estates To Be Demolished -

Recommended Posts

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jan/09/david-cameron-vows-to-blitz-poverty-by-demolishing-uks-worst-sink-estates

The government will inject £140m to rehouse occupants and tear up planning rules to speed up the process. Tenants and homeowners will be given binding guarantees that their right to a home is protected.

Cameron said three out of four rioters in 2011 came from sink estates. “The riots of 2011 didn’t emerge from within terraced streets or low-rise apartment buildings. The rioters came overwhelmingly from these postwar estates. That’s not a coincidence,” he wrote.

The housing developments being targeted reportedly include the Winstanley estate in Wandsworth, south London. Others could include the Lower Falinge estate in Rochdale, Greater Manchester, and Broadwater Farm in Tottenham, north London.

--
They've cleared estates in Manchester and offered 'market price' to those being thrown out of OO homes which is never enough to buy another house on the same estate once they've been rebuilt .. so people have to leave. This moves people on - financially cleansing areas.

And where do you move the real scumbags who make life on some of these estates so awful?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than demolish these places it would it be better to refurb them to a decent standard and rent them out to a different demographic. People who work for a living - for a modest increase in the rent to contribute towards the refurb costs. I suggest low to medium earners who are either at work for the most part or do charity work.They will appreciate the homes more and look after them better. I know I would.

The scum element who cause problems on estates like these (read: too much time on their hands) can be rehoused in some prefab elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Demolish estate, tenants moved into private rented, local authority bill for housing benefit massively increased (they're Labour in the main so hitting them more is a good thing for Tories), housebuilders get a bail out in redevelopments, BTL buy up the new executive rabbit hutches.

In short, the estates are now in areas where the land is valuable and it's an opportunity to give money to the Tory cronies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than demolish these places it would it be better to refurb them to a decent standard and rent them out to a different demographic. People who work for a living - for a modest increase in the rent to contribute towards the refurb costs. I suggest low to medium earners who are either at work for the most part or do charity work.They will appreciate the homes more and look after them better. I know I would

Good idea in principle but there would be two problems with that.

Firstly, a lot of these places just aren't economically viable to refurbish - Lots of the estates in London for example were built pre-war and are literally falling apart. Plus on the whole they are poorly laid out and as ugly as sin

Secondly, you would never get the current tenants out of them unless you demolished them and rehoused them elsewhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some good people living on so called 'sink' estates......victims of circumstance......I would trust some of them more than I would those living in gold plated gated estates.

Awful planning is the problem, not the people necessarily that live in them........put a shit tower block in the city and see how many would put their hands in their pockets to offer big bucks for concrete slab condensed housing cracks covered up with affluence........ ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Demolish estate, tenants moved into private rented, local authority bill for housing benefit massively increased (they're Labour in the main so hitting them more is a good thing for Tories), housebuilders get a bail out in redevelopments, BTL buy up the new executive rabbit hutches.

In short, the estates are now in areas where the land is valuable and it's an opportunity to give money to the Tory cronies.

You're not far wrong I fear. A lot of early post-war estate have a lot of green space that is prime for building on.

There was a council estate near Cardiff nicknamed the Billy Banks, that was demolished and rebuilt is primarily (if not totally) private housing. Number of dwelling units went up from around 200 Parker-Morris standard units to around 400 units.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Demolish estate, tenants moved into private rented, local authority bill for housing benefit massively increased (they're Labour in the main so hitting them more is a good thing for Tories), housebuilders get a bail out in redevelopments, BTL buy up the new executive rabbit hutches.

In short, the estates are now in areas where the land is valuable and it's an opportunity to give money to the Tory cronies.

In London perhaps but somehow I suspect the demand for "Executive Developments" in Rochdale is limited.

Edited by stormymonday_2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a cynic I suspect the design of these estates is just considered too riot friendly and their location too close to urban centres by the authorities. I think they will replace them with housing which will make it easier to control future unrest. In addition those thought most likely to riot are probably going to be dumped furthest away from where they could cause most commercial damage

Edited by stormymonday_2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than demolish these places it would it be better to refurb them to a decent standard and rent them out to a different demographic. People who work for a living - for a modest increase in the rent to contribute towards the refurb costs. I suggest low to medium earners who are either at work for the most part or do charity work.They will appreciate the homes more and look after them better. I know I would.

The scum element who cause problems on estates like these (read: too much time on their hands) can be rehoused in some prefab elsewhere.

But people in that demographic are in a better position to buy. For some reason housing in the UK has to be private debt financed.

I'm moving out of social housing as they are just dishing out vacant flats to druggies, people with something called ADHD (?) probationers. domestic violence abusers and so on as they have a higher band on the waiting list. To be fair the local Housing Officers are getting sick of it, as they have to deal with all the complaints.

Although the bedroom tax had created a dire shortage of one bedroomed accommodation, my local ALMO has been giving a flat each to some 'couples.'

:blink:

Edited by RentierParadisio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw, don`t call social housing social housing....it`s not allowed.

It`s going to be called " hard working housing for thriving peeps"................or the first thing that comes in to Cameron`s mind.

Edited by council dweller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Detroit is virtually 100% large detached family houses...they still have an annual riot (devils night) and a few hundred murders annually to boot.

Its not the houses. Hong Kong had Kowloon Walled city...as slummy as anywhere, and yet little crime.

Of course, Cameron won't talk about this, as it would mean singling out Caribbean and mixed* 'families' where word's like 'father' and 'job' and 'responsibility' are unheard of, and Labour might call him nasty words.

*In London. In some places this will be white 'chavs', but there arent many white kids left in London except in rich compound areas. Hence why about 95% of London rioters were black/mixed.

I suspect when they say 'rehouse' it will be much like Obama's agenda 21 social engineering in the US...some areas arent 'diverse' enough, and non-whites will be bribed to move to 'too white' areas to make everywhere 'equal' Expect there to be a mass moment of non-whites from places like London to places like Lincoln. Of course, thats how they'll frame it. What it is is the London city state exporting its problem children to poorer parts of the UK rather than dealing with them in London. The riots probably riled up the oligarghs who felt the trouble was a bit too close to their investments/properties. Such problems should be inflicted on the poor rural folk, not our wonderful Arab Oil barons, chinese slaveowners or Russian criminals. Nothing is too good for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, more money for the big builders....

They'll be just poorly built 2010s houses/flats rather than poorly built 1950/1960s ones.

Some of the 1950s flats are still nice. I looked at several on the Alton estate by Putney Heath with a daughter, and they were very solidly built, light and relatively spacious, all with balconies, good storage and lots of green space around.

One of the owners told us how she and her family were moved there from a Battersea slum when she was a child, and how fantastic it seemed then, to have a proper bathroom indoors and a modern kitchen.

For space and storage these flats beat most new builds hands down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the 1950s flats are still nice. I looked at several on the Alton estate by Putney Heath with a daughter, and they were very solidly built, light and relatively spacious, all with balconies, good storage and lots of green space around.

One of the owners told us how she and her family were moved there from a Battersea slum when she was a child, and how fantastic it seemed then, to have a proper bathroom indoors and a modern kitchen.

For space and storage these flats beat most new builds hands down.

That's probably the Parker-Morris standard for you, supposedly houses in London should be Parker-Morris +10%. Mind you that probably means that at the PP stage they'll say a flat is for 1 person and then once it is built market the flat a being ideal for a couple.

Edited by olde guto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who wants a bet that these new properties will count towards to Conservative's promise to build X hundred new homes? Rather than being an increasing in the supply of affordable housing many will simply be the replacement of existing housing stock that has come to its serviceable life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   32 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.