Comments on: Cheek by jowl

By: Stan

Stan — Mon, 11 May 2009 09:38:43 +0000

I agree with Ranter a lot on this. I’m no fan of high rise blocks and I know that some of them are awful designs, but they are not bad places to live per se – what makes them bad are the people who live there. Up near me in Slough is a large housing estate. Most of the homes are semi or terraced, they are decent sizes with decent gardens and there are plenty of green spaces – but it is notorious. Drugs and crime are rife, unemployment is high – and yet it is next door to one of the largest industrial estates in Europe! It’s not the only estate in Slough like that either – but it is quite probably the most green and open of them all.

I agree with you that the best thing to do is to allow conurbations to develop “organically” – particularly, in my opinion, villages. One of the great icons in this great country of ours is the quintessential English village – none of which were the result of careful planning. I want to see it made easier for private individuals with genuine connections to the locality to buy plots of land and build individual homes rather than lumping great swathes of land together and selling it off to large developers whose only concern is making as much money as they can out of it.

By: Philipa

Philipa — Mon, 11 May 2009 09:23:56 +0000

Um I think it was and developers still did what they did. That’s what they do: give us what they want, not what we want. Of course government grants do help the decision process. Buy and sell a few more houses, Blue and you’ll eventually stop asking ‘why on earth did they do that?’. The answer is always: Because it’s cheaper.

By: Ranter

Ranter — Mon, 11 May 2009 05:57:59 +0000

I wish I could share your opinions but I can’t. There will always be those who have no idea how to live properly, nicely and in harmony with their neighbours. Giving them a wad of cash and asking them to choose where to live will mean that wad of cash will be spent on things other than housing vis, fags, booze and puff; and the state will still then have to house them. A growing number actually don’t mind living in ‘sink estates’, it suits them and their lifestyles and officialdom seldom comes calling. There are so many people trapped or imprisioned on huge housing estates and it is really just a small minority who spoil that environment for the many. This needs to be tackled by the criminal justice system, harsh and long sentences so that a new mindset is brought about. There are many families who should be permanently removed from the state housing system and placed in special complexes miles from anywhere…..like prisons. They’ve had chance after chance. I lost count of the times I saw elderly women in Deptford and Rotherhithe sweeping their front steps and the pavement outside. Neat tidy council houses and flats but next door the new generation were busy piling up fridges, bikes, rubbish and god knows what else in the tiny gardens so you knew what the inside was like. inhabited by generally fat, dirty, lazy people who’s only exercise was pushing their card in the slot at the Post Office once a week. Maybe they should stand for Parliament.
There was a mini-series on the Beeb last year about the redevelopment of a tower block in Deptford, bought from lewsiham council by Barratts – stunning river views etc. Snapped up after its makeover, flats cost a fortune PLUS huge maintenance charges and concierge services. Handouts don’t engender respect EVER.

By: john malpas

john malpas — Sun, 10 May 2009 22:43:53 +0000

If you give the poor cash for rent wont they spend it on beer?
If you make them spend it on rent wont that just push up the rental price?

By: electro-kevin

electro-kevin — Sun, 10 May 2009 21:06:13 +0000

Cheek by Jowell would make a wonderful headline somewhere.

By: Blue Eyes

Blue Eyes — Sun, 10 May 2009 18:43:37 +0000

I don’t know P, but if it is, then developers would not build anything else surely. In which case you would be happy Developers did *not* try high-rise in the 60s, the state did. That is my point about social housing. Yes I am proposing a sharp liberalisation of planning laws. I don’t see why land which has already been developed should not generally be re-developed as the owner sees fit.

By: Philipa

Philipa — Sun, 10 May 2009 14:10:48 +0000

Hasn’t it been proved that terraced housing is the most dense housing possible as high-rise need a certain amount of space betwen to allow light (planning laws) and so going up is not the answer? Cause they tried that in the 60′s. I was there. Unless your midset change is code for changing planning laws..