In a strange move Gateshead Council have published a newsletter in the area they have blighted with their demolition proposals. The newsletter, marked issue number 1, declares itself able to counter misleading statements about council policy. Given Gateshead Council's record the reaction from the first residents to receive the newsletter was "this ought to be good!".
Newsletter number one begs the question that, after 3 years of sentencing central gateshead to mass demolition, why it has taken so long to produce issue one. Could it be the intense campaign of residents against demolition? Perhaps it was the 1400 signature petitions that moved the council to write? Whatever the reason residents should be at least grateful that after 3 years the council believes it should finally communicate!
The newsletter is also curious in it's colour. Gone is the unmistakable Gateshead Council bold red. Instead the newsletter looks like a party political leaflet in Conservative blue.
The meat of the exercise was the fact that Gateshead Council had unlawfully carried our demolition after failing to carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment. Normally breaking the law is considered to be a serious matter, particularly for a public authority that ought to know better. Instead of an apology we are told that breaking the law will only "delay" the council plans.
Gateshead Council complain that a group that campaigns nationally against pathfinder took them to court. As if this fully explains their unlawful actions. The facts are a somewhat different. SAVE Britain's Heritage is in fact a national charity. Their objectives are the preservation of the best of Britain's built environment. They have been campaigning for 30 years and their website documents many successes in saving buildings.
SAVE did a report on pathfinder which anyone can read. Other people have reported on pathfinder too. The National Audit Office and a select committee of MPs. None have actually said that pathfinder was value for money. SAVE is certainly not unique. Professor David Byrne of the University of Durham, a man with a special interest in urban development, has condemned pathfinder in Saltwell & Bensham.
SAVE have visited the area and have been shocked by the damage caused by Gateshead Council. SAVE wrote to the council asking them about an environmental impact assessment. Our residents group has mentioned this several times without the courtesy of a reply. Prof Byrne has raised this issue at our public meetings where local councillors were present. Doing an environment impact survey is even part of planning law. Gateshead Council have only themselves to blame for breaking the law. They waited until someone took them to court before admitting their error. This is the second time in 12 months they have been successfully defeated in court over demolition.
Gateshead Council would like to suggest that people are "enthusiastically" offering their homes for sale. The current street which has been demolished illegally was mostly owned by Gateshead Council having purchased around half in 2002 for "refurbishment". Once demolition money was available these houses were then labelled as "uninhabitable". There has now been 3 years of blight imposed on the area by Gateshead Council. By degree the council have made the place unpleasant to live in using the tactic of boarding up aquired property to give a feeling of insecurity and abandonment.
There is no "pent up demand" to sell but rather desperate home owners not knowing what the future holds having to sell to Gateshead Council because of the stress of the uncertainty over council proposals. This suits the council well as, according to the Rowntree Foundation, pathfinders offer some £35,000 below real market prices in these blighted areas. One 74 year old owner said at a public meeting that he didn't want to lose his home and hoped he would pass away before being pressured into a sale.
Sheila Johnson, Gateshead Council's Director of Development, said at a public meeting with over 100 residents in 2005, that Saltwell and Besham Residents Association would be involved with proposals in the area. Since then we have heard nothing from her to facilitate communication. Instead this newsletter announces the existance of a residents reference group to help the council. The fact is that the residents reference group is a "top down" organisation created by Gateshead Council to nod through the demolition proposals. When it first met the council used Planning Aid North, a group funded by the same department as the pathfinder demolition programme, to put on design workshops that were teaching basic principles of design. They stressed that this was principles and not about Gateshead. However on their last seminar the keynote speaker from Gateshead Council was introduced and he highlighted the council vision. In other words Planning Aid were used as a trojan horse to build up a supporters group for demolition. At a later Council Planning Meeting it was suggested that mere attendence at these design events was a vote of confidence in the demolition programme.
Then the was the grass. If only SAVE hadn't taken the Council to court the area would be a green space fully grassed over according to the newsletter. Until last week there was grass growing in place of peoples' homes. Unfortunately this week the environment has been spoilt by the creation of a "builders yard" on the new green area. Gateshead Council didn't have to dump half a tonne of aggregate over green grass but it has. Not a good advertisement for their green credentials.
So we loved reading the newsletter unfortunately it told residents almost nothing of the real story.
0 comments:
Post a Comment