In one of Gateshead's threatened streets the council workmen turned up for a job on Saturday. Secure a property and board it up. It had been sold to the council. The workmen secured the property but by accident or design didn't quite do it right. Within 20 minutes the house alarm rang and continued ringing.
The concerned next door neighbour rang the police. The police rang Gateshead Council, whose workers had just left, and Gateshead Council denied they owned the property.
For the next few hours the neighbour rang all the emergency numbers and no action was taken. Then she rang the councillors. Only one councillor picked up the phone and gave the poor resident a dressing down for phoning so late in the evening.
The alarm had now been ringing for 5 hours by this time and showed no signs of giving up. Ears were aching because of the noise and children couldn't get to sleep. Environmental health is responsible for noise pollution but in Gateshead they can't be contacted at weekends.
Finally someone from the Chief Executives department called. At last action. They said they didn't own the property. Our perplexed resident asked why council workmen had been boarding up a house they didn't own just a few hours before. This question caused the council official to promise a man would come around.
At 2am in the morning after 8 hours of continual noise council vans screeched into the street like a scene from 70s cop series "The Sweeney". Then the men sat in their van for a while. One man got out and started desperately hammering on the boarding to get it loose so they could gain entry. The alarm was ringing, the men were bashing in the door and the noise was waking up most of Gateshead. Finally the Likely Lads broke in only to find they couldn't turn off the power to the alarm. Back to the van to contemplate the problem. They then dragged out a set of ladders, climbed the side of the building and snipped the two wires attached to the alarm. After 8 and half hours peace was restored.
Could council workers really be so totally incompetent? Most residents believe these plausible accidents happen a little too often in the streets designated for demolition. Noise is being used to drive people out of their own homes. The people making life miserable are Gateshead Council. Instead of asking a court to grant compulsory purchase orders Gateshead Council are taking the easier option of a war of attrition trying to make life increasingly unpleasant for those people who want to keep their homes.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Great Places To Live
The latest issue of Great Places to Live arrived this week in the mailboxes of residents. This is the propaganda journal of BridgingNewcastleGateshead - the undemocratic quango with a license to demolish from government. The object of the colour newsletter is to make demolition paletteable.
This week two stories from our area caught my eye. The first was renovation in the Avenues. The Avenues have great significance in the area. Twenty years ago they were saved from demolition through a campaign led by Mick Henry, our current council leader. The Avenues Project was then established to renovate the area. Unfortunately it ran out of money. So in many respects this is unfinished business. Moreover the Avenues were a personal project of the current leader and some local residents suspect that the 440 proposed demolitions are in fact a trade off for the money the great leader needed to complete a project he began twenty years ago. Easy to demolish 440 homes from hard working families to renovate your neighbours houses and, dare we say it, establish their thanks with their ongoing electoral support!
Meanwhile the Thompsons are grateful for Gateshead Council moving them out of McAdam Street into a new house with a garden. Isn't demolition wonderful. Not exactly. You see what the article didn't mention was that the Thompsons were tenants of a housing association who were legally obiliged to move them. Gateshead Council did almost nothing except omit that detail from the publicity. Other tenants of private landlords simply had their tennacy agreements terminated and joined the ever increasing list of homeless people in the area. Of course having left at the end of an agreement Gateshead Council had no obligation to re-house or pay a re-location fee.
Great Places To Live is an unrelentingly happy newsletter only because it tells half the story. The rest of the story is that demolition is destroying communities and benefiting property investors.
This week two stories from our area caught my eye. The first was renovation in the Avenues. The Avenues have great significance in the area. Twenty years ago they were saved from demolition through a campaign led by Mick Henry, our current council leader. The Avenues Project was then established to renovate the area. Unfortunately it ran out of money. So in many respects this is unfinished business. Moreover the Avenues were a personal project of the current leader and some local residents suspect that the 440 proposed demolitions are in fact a trade off for the money the great leader needed to complete a project he began twenty years ago. Easy to demolish 440 homes from hard working families to renovate your neighbours houses and, dare we say it, establish their thanks with their ongoing electoral support!
Meanwhile the Thompsons are grateful for Gateshead Council moving them out of McAdam Street into a new house with a garden. Isn't demolition wonderful. Not exactly. You see what the article didn't mention was that the Thompsons were tenants of a housing association who were legally obiliged to move them. Gateshead Council did almost nothing except omit that detail from the publicity. Other tenants of private landlords simply had their tennacy agreements terminated and joined the ever increasing list of homeless people in the area. Of course having left at the end of an agreement Gateshead Council had no obligation to re-house or pay a re-location fee.
Great Places To Live is an unrelentingly happy newsletter only because it tells half the story. The rest of the story is that demolition is destroying communities and benefiting property investors.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Demolition In Figures
According to a Parliamentary answer the number of homes demolished under pathfinder in Gateshead are (by ward);
Felling 197
The Bridges 225
These figures are from 2003-4 to 2007-8.
Source: Parliamentary Answer to Jim Cousins MP (Newcastle Central) on 11th Dec 2007.
As yet there have been no demolitions in Saltwell and Bensham. This might be inefficiency on behalf of the bulldozers or a reflection on the campaign to save homes in our area.
During the same period there has been a steady rise in homelessness in Gateshead. Average prices have shot up with the increase in demand. Almost no affordable housing has been built.
Demolition remains the wrong policy as it reduces the number of homes for sale or rent while increasing the price.
Felling 197
The Bridges 225
These figures are from 2003-4 to 2007-8.
Source: Parliamentary Answer to Jim Cousins MP (Newcastle Central) on 11th Dec 2007.
As yet there have been no demolitions in Saltwell and Bensham. This might be inefficiency on behalf of the bulldozers or a reflection on the campaign to save homes in our area.
During the same period there has been a steady rise in homelessness in Gateshead. Average prices have shot up with the increase in demand. Almost no affordable housing has been built.
Demolition remains the wrong policy as it reduces the number of homes for sale or rent while increasing the price.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Go Green With Terraced Housing
Green pundit for our local paper Professor Paul Younger has only positive things to say about terraced housing in his Evening Chronicle answer to a question on green housing on 20th December 2007.
Professor Younger, who is Professor of Energy and Environment at Newcastle University, said:
"Old terraced houses are intrinsically more energy efficient, (and therefore lower carbon), than modern detached houses".
He suggested even greater energy efficiency could come about by adding double glazing but his message was clear - old houses need not be inefficient houses.
Gateshead Council's current plans are to demolish some 440 energy efficient homes in Saltwell and Bensham. They want to replace terraces with around 170 detached homes - hardly a low carbon solution to judge by Prof Younger's comments.
Professor Younger, who is Professor of Energy and Environment at Newcastle University, said:
"Old terraced houses are intrinsically more energy efficient, (and therefore lower carbon), than modern detached houses".
He suggested even greater energy efficiency could come about by adding double glazing but his message was clear - old houses need not be inefficient houses.
Gateshead Council's current plans are to demolish some 440 energy efficient homes in Saltwell and Bensham. They want to replace terraces with around 170 detached homes - hardly a low carbon solution to judge by Prof Younger's comments.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Buy To Leave
After "Buy To Let" we now have "Buy to Leave". The BBC North East Politics Show discovered that just 43 out of 143 luxury appartments built just two years ago in Newcastle was occupied. The rest were bought as investments.
Thus the investments of millionaire speculators are driving the housing market. We are told there is no demand for traditional terraced houses but massive demand for luxury appartments. An estate agent interviewed on the programme gave away the origin of the demand - luxury appartments are bought in lots of 5 up to 2 years before they were built. Sold before they completed.
Meanwhile an ordinary homeseeker in Easington (Durham) is one of the 107,000 people in the region waiting for a home. She said she would take anything that was habitable. Meanwhile the politicians promote the aspirational lifestyle of unreal families pictured in commercials. They talk of family homes costing £170,000 and out of reach of the average Tyneside salary of £19,000. Instead there are thousands of terraced homes that could be refurbished and be affordable.
What wasn't mentioned by the programme was the disasterous similarity with the discredited pathfinder housing programme. Demolish the old and replace with houses built by commercial developers. Both rely on the generousity of private developers who make the most money by building high-density flats or luxury homes. Affordable homes for average hard working families just dont make massive profits.
That is why we have the madness of luxury appartments owned by companies as investments, the demolition of homes people want to live in, starting prices out of the reach or ordinary families and the longest house waiting lists in history. Some would call this a disasterous housing policy designed to make rich speculators even richer. We couldn't possibly comment.
Link
BBC North East Politics
Watch Programme
Thus the investments of millionaire speculators are driving the housing market. We are told there is no demand for traditional terraced houses but massive demand for luxury appartments. An estate agent interviewed on the programme gave away the origin of the demand - luxury appartments are bought in lots of 5 up to 2 years before they were built. Sold before they completed.
Meanwhile an ordinary homeseeker in Easington (Durham) is one of the 107,000 people in the region waiting for a home. She said she would take anything that was habitable. Meanwhile the politicians promote the aspirational lifestyle of unreal families pictured in commercials. They talk of family homes costing £170,000 and out of reach of the average Tyneside salary of £19,000. Instead there are thousands of terraced homes that could be refurbished and be affordable.
What wasn't mentioned by the programme was the disasterous similarity with the discredited pathfinder housing programme. Demolish the old and replace with houses built by commercial developers. Both rely on the generousity of private developers who make the most money by building high-density flats or luxury homes. Affordable homes for average hard working families just dont make massive profits.
That is why we have the madness of luxury appartments owned by companies as investments, the demolition of homes people want to live in, starting prices out of the reach or ordinary families and the longest house waiting lists in history. Some would call this a disasterous housing policy designed to make rich speculators even richer. We couldn't possibly comment.
Link
BBC North East Politics
Watch Programme
Sunday, January 06, 2008
Criminals Cash-In On Pathfinder Madness
Another big winner for pathfinder is petty criminality. When an area is targetted for demolition it is crucial that it takes a long time. The reasons for this are twofold. Firstly it allows local authorities to pressurise residents to sell-up cheaply and discourages the need for compulsory purchase orders. Secondly it helps the local authority gamble on an increase in land prices to pocket the money earned through speculation.
Unfortunately the taxpayer has to pick up the tab for the extra security and policing required as boarded up houses become an invitation for petty criminality. BBC News reports that the cost to Staffordshire's pathfinder is £800,000. That £800,000 could have provided renovation grants but under pathfinder the demolition process means taxpayers money is wasted.
Each pathfinder area, including Saltwell and Bensham, sees the same tired tactic of frightening residents into selling, boarding up houses and a period of delay so the local authority can make a boat load of cash. As this column has previously said the local council, millionaire property developers and now petty criminals benefit. The big loses being the residents and taxpayers.
Link
BBC News
Unfortunately the taxpayer has to pick up the tab for the extra security and policing required as boarded up houses become an invitation for petty criminality. BBC News reports that the cost to Staffordshire's pathfinder is £800,000. That £800,000 could have provided renovation grants but under pathfinder the demolition process means taxpayers money is wasted.
Each pathfinder area, including Saltwell and Bensham, sees the same tired tactic of frightening residents into selling, boarding up houses and a period of delay so the local authority can make a boat load of cash. As this column has previously said the local council, millionaire property developers and now petty criminals benefit. The big loses being the residents and taxpayers.
Link
BBC News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)