Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

It absolutley kills me to discover that Hyndburn is the 51st most deprived borough in the country, out of a list of 354!

How did we get into this state????????

Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

Is it like a hard lump that doesn't go away when you massage it? .

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

Hi Bob,

Hi Graham & Bob,

As someone who when not in Church, works & resides in the 1st & 2nd most deprived boroughs in the country (Hackney & Tower hamlets respectively), I would like to make the following observations in response to the comments below:

I don't think HBC admisnister education, thats LCC. In reality though government dictat on curriculum along with independent schools, primarliy church, means LCC have very little control over educational standards.

Yes....LCC is the LEA for Hyndburn. And Yes,their role is simply to enforce & monitor central government guidelines and the common cirriculum within Lancashire. However, other than any role in managing at a local level HM Schools Inspectorate, I really don't see what useful job they have, other than play at bureaucrats. The best schools are quite simply those which have less interference from bureacrats - either independant, or as the statistics prove conclusively, where the Church (Anglican or Catholic) - is involved

I agree with Housing and would add this: we are about to pull down allegedly slum terraced housing and rather than build spacious green, larger houses to mix the tenure and household type we are going to build more shoeboxes. In which we are encouraging previous residents to move back in; the same poor people, or new poor people [in general], who can only for the most part afford shoe box housing. And we are building to almost the same density with, in most cases, lower quality build than the old terraced. You then have to question whether the small open spaces created in the new developments will also be quickly ravaged by nature and problematic individuals and lack of maintenance.

I have not yet seen any 'New Build' property in relation to the Elevate project, so I can only on speculation, agree and say that on past evidence the new properties going up will be of substancially lesser quality than what could have been done with the older terraced stock. Unfortunatly, the housing problem has been with us for years & at a local level, neither Labour or Conservative administrations have shown any imagination or possible solution to that problem. What appears to be hapening now is a tawdry repeat of the big city slum clearances of the 1950's & 60's. Everyone is aware of estates that replaced them and all the social and economic problems which arose.

I don't think we are breaking the spiral of decline [and knock on ill health etc..]. As market forces kick in and the economically mobile move outwards and upwards to fulfull their dreams, the new areas will be for those at the bottom of the ladder. We are in dannger of building the slums of tomorrow today in my view

Yet the property price rise in Hynburn was the 2nd largest in England, according to the Halifax a few months ago. Accepted,it started from a very low base level, but now that the average property price is £100,000 or thereabouts that is a simple reflection on supply and demand,on peoples incomes and their expectations on the long-term value of their property. So it can't be all that bad.

Low paid employment is much harder. Its a question of basic economics. If Hyndburn is lacking in educational attainment then we produce things at a greater cost and less efficiently. Less ability to enterprise, less new business's, less creative or cutting edge business's, less profit, less money, lower wages, more brain drain, higher costs because we are away from the Franco/German/Benelux economic heart/centre. If you made the new Techonolgy Park successful at Whitebirk then those people coining it in over there would then simply use their new wealth to live in the Ribble Valley and shop in Manchester, certainly not Hyndburn. We get a halo effect possibly. Hyndburn's only major employment market historically is to work harder for less. Two words; Express Gifts. Of course it would be great to break the mold but our neighbours in Burnley have the lowest IQ in the country supposedly and we're right next door. The answer lies somewhere between better education facilities, a quality university for East Lancs, attracting large scale inward investment with employers who build up a skilled workforce, and making people believe in Hyndburn as a cutting edge place, a place to live and work.

I really would not spend much time contrasting ourselves to the Franco/German Economic model. With the former currently going up in flames & the latter with 9% unemployment and both with a per capita GDP lower than the UK, there ain't much there to shout about. The simple fact, though, is that Hyndburn's economy - with above average numbers working in manufacturing - more closely resembles the failing French or Germany economies than the highly successful English South Eastern economy or even other micro economies within the North of England.

Twenty miles south-east of Accy is Hebden Bridge, which in recent polls and based upon various economic and social criteria was voted one of the best places to live in the world! Yet 30 years ago the place had much in common with Accy...a declining manufacturing base, rising unemployment,poor quality housing. Wht went right there and what went wrong here? Maybe it might be worth taking a charabanc of councillors over there one day to find out.



As long as kids believe smashing up bus stops and dossing all night is creative then there is little hope of creating wealth which is dependent not on a few people earning a lot but a lot of people earning more. And as long as people slag off destructive kids and wider youth, authenticating destructive behaviour as an acceptable sub-culture to those within it, instead of helping, then the longer Hyndburn stays at the poorer end of the scale.

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

.

........................................

Originally Posted by chav1

Unfortunatly, the housing problem has been with us for years & at a local level, neither Labour or Conservative administrations have shown any imagination or possible solution to that problem. What appears to be hapening now is a tawdry repeat of the big city slum clearances of the 1950's & 60's.

Yet the property price rise in Hynburn was the 2nd largest in England, according to the Halifax a few months ago. Accepted,it started from a very low base level, but now that the average property price is £100,000 or thereabouts that is a simple reflection on supply and demand,on peoples incomes and their expectations on the long-term value of their property. So it can't be all that bad.

I really would not spend much time contrasting ourselves to the Franco/German Economic model. With the former currently going up in flames & the latter with 9% unemployment and both with a per capita GDP lower than the UK, there ain't much there to shout about.


:D

Originally Posted by graham jones

Would that be libel then?

Originally Posted by harwood red

I think he's quite chuffed that it made him sound quite intelligent and very un chav like ;) :p

Originally Posted by chav1

i dunno but two can play that game :D

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

As it happens, I was down there this morning and just happened to have the camera with me....

Originally Posted by cashman

a-b don't mean this nasty,but what a waste of good film lollll

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

Just a couple of responces:

We did build spacious council housing which has avoided slums being replaced with slums. Where we didn't build spacious Social Housing, and it was built cheaply and to a higher density, it now has much less appeal and accordingly suffers more in my view. Its an interesting comparison on social build.
Is that not the thoughts of the office of the deputy prime minister, build houses of a higher density, more houses per acre, is this not why some developers are including blocks of flats in their schemes now.
Probably! Obviously the circumstances are different in teh south and three storey build is becoming common, even 4 storey with underground garage. High density housing may pass in London, but it will fail in Hyndburn in my view. Modern slums for modern people! People aspire to space, green spaces and a sense of community.

If you build poorer housing you attract poorer people and paint a picture of which includes all the problems of poor urban areas of your area.
I would not say poorer houses, but cheaper houses aimed at the lower end of the market
I meant that, your right, cheaper houses. Poorer in terms of the poorest people will inevitably have a high occupancy. I am on the Prefered Developer Partner Selection and my view is that we should try to avoid building to the lowest cost, highest density, most profit.

The property price rise isn't based on housing supply and demand. Hyndburn has an over supply of about 2000 [out of 33000] so prices shopuld go down, not up.
Are HBC not taking care of that with the property being knocked down, some of which could have been refurbished to meet the current standards
I mentioned this elsewhere. Property is not linked to supply and demand of tenants/purchasers but like pieces of art, the perceived value tomorrow, next month, next year and with so much private capital in surplus post 9/11 shake down of investors, selling shares for the security of property, all estate agents in Hyndburn have had the 'anonymous investor/speculator call'; "Can you buy me £2million pounds of housing in Hyndburn, any will do!". Price speculation was soaring 12 months before John Prescott even thought about a slum clearance program for the likes of East Lancashire.

Originally Posted by garinda

I think the high density housing that is, and has, been demolised, ie: traditional stone built terraced housing, is preferable to some shoddy new builds set in green spaces, that aren't cared for by their tennants/owners

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

Originally Posted by garinda

Park I'm all for new builds on brown field sites.

Old reservoir = good.

Site where good terraced houses have been demolished = bad.

Originally Posted by garinda

Glasgow is full of 'high density' housing. A blond or red sandstone appartment in the west end of the city will setyou back well over a quarter of a million pounds. That's if you manage to snag one, with the strange Scottish property law of 'offers over'.

They are still selling like hot Bridie cakes.:)

Originally Posted by park381

Originally Posted by Graham Jones
Probably! Obviously the circumstances are different in teh south and three storey build is becoming common, even 4 storey with underground garage. High density housing may pass in London, but it will fail in Hyndburn in my view. Modern slums for modern people! People aspire to space, green spaces and a sense of community.
Graham, in the south you say, look no further than Huncoat. The 3/4 storey houses apartment blocks are all ways of complying with Prescotts directive, more houses, living space per acre and cheaper.

Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

What seems to be missed is that as the planning authority surely the council has some say in determining housing density, materials used and standards of workmanship. If they don't, what use are they? What is the point of having a planning committee when developers are allowed to chuck together any old shed and call it a house?

Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

I agree with what you say about identikit housing estates, whether private or council; being surrounded by them, I live with the consequences every day.

What seems to be missed is that as the planning authority surely the council has some say in determining housing density, materials used and standards of workmanship. If they don't, what use are they? What is the point of having a planning committee when developers are allowed to chuck together any old shed and call it a house?

Originally Posted by garinda

I think the high density housing that is, and has, been demolised, ie: traditional stone built terraced housing, is preferable to some shoddy new builds set in green spaces, that aren't cared for by their tennants/owners, and have to be demolished some twenty years down the line.

Originally Posted by Less

An example of new build 'shoddy houses', already being knocked down can be seen on the estate near the Church traffic lights. Were they shoddy? I don't know, but I and a few others wondered why it was decided they should be knocked down rather than refurbished rumour has it they are to be replaced by larger detached houses as the area is to get a face lift.

When you consider that they were only built in the seveties it shouldn't have needed to much imagination or cash to bring them up to a decent standard for lower priced rented accomodation or first time buyers.

Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J

The decision must have come down to cost and the life expectancy of the housing after they were refurbished.

Originally Posted by Less

When you consider that they were only built in the seveties it shouldn't have needed to much imagination or cash to bring them up to a decent standard for lower priced rented accomodation or first time buyers.

Originally Posted by park381

Graham in reply, all new property normally carries the NHBC stamp, and to do so must comply with the current building regulations.
On the housing density please check this link in particular the item
Housing density in the pathfinder site
http://www.elevate-eastlancs.co.uk/s...amework_3.html
This talks about gov. guidance. As with other authorities HBC work under the guidance of central gov.
On regional matters try this link, it shows that the ODPM is responsible
http://www.odpm.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1139476

Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

Surely once the recomended density for an area has been determined, the design, materials and quality of the build is determined by the customer. I always thought that was what asking for tenders was all about.

Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J

There are pro's and cons on this wether it be council built private built or a joint initiative. At the end of the day the buildings have to be of the right standard a competetive price wether for sale or rent.