True, thanks for correcting me, apologies for implying he changed the post to say something else, it's hard to keep track of things with the amount of spurious twaddle he's been spouting.
Printable View
What made London great is their diverse range of industries which made the economy more resilient. In contrast, the North mainly relied on manufacturing and the economy was less resilient.
The problem with the housing market in London is that our developers are building the wrong sort of housing for the wrong types of people. This problem is made worse through the use of land banking. There is no point in handing more land to the developers when there are still existing land with planning consent for over 200,000 homes. We should not reward developers who have manipulated the housing market with more land.
I think we all should take a stand against the developers for their self serving needs. Us Londoners will have to think whether they have a future in London and their children.
That's the thing, though - You're neither thinking, nor different. You're just pretending... and even that you're doing quite pretentiously.
If you chuck your opinions out there in public, people will challenge, question and make light of every inch them. If you think that constutes bullying, then perhaps you're not ready for the internet?
Actually I didn't choose the name, but well done for not even understanding that properly...
He did not even mention such a thing... So we're twisting your words, but you're somehow allowed to do the same?
But yes, I think you can be so bothered.
It's your opinions people are questioning!!!
Practice what you preach, yeh?
I think he likes to pretend he is, or maybe wants to be.... what with all these estates and residents he goes to speak to all the time. How he manages to fit this in between university courses on AI, film makers, computer games and reading historical academic texts that govern life on other planets is quite incredible. I suspect he walts the waltz in several other dance halls, as well.
Allow me to answer these for you -
Concrete degradation at a crystalline level. - Because I've read stuff, spoken to people and I say so
Claims of "massive overcrowding" on all these estates - See above
Grenfell was originally scheduled to be demolished, then that decision was reversed. - See above
£50m of EU social fund was spent a block near him - See above
Yes this area had quite a bit of small industry, I'm not sure if they moved for cheaper rates, or a changing business model. It also had waste land, and a whole area that was used for chemical storage. So as part of the regeneration they turned that land into playing fields, and they built about eighty houses on the waste and ex factory land. I get the impression that companies are mostly based on Ind Estates nowadays. This system that was in place, the UK pays money into the EU social fund, and they regenerate run down areas. But when we get the money back it comes with conditions, so I have read that particularly Labour councils have disliked that aspect.
I don't know what the answer is with respect to developers, the phrase 'better the devil you now came to mind'. I don't think councils have the capacity to carry out those sorts of projects without resorting to developers. They are nowadays getting in architects who talk to tenants, and then they try to reach some compromise that suits budgets and needs. There's one I posted way back, that has been proposed for the Grenfell Tower estate, so that's a step forward. This country is in a bizarre situation, in terms of housing prices, lack of stock vs demand, foreign investors, greedy developers. Do you have any suggestions?, but it's going to have to be on a large scale or each year demand will get higher. So start by building those 200,000 homes, then what.
Tough time to be a housing developer because of what happened at Glenfell. Lot of projects are now delayed because nobody wants to sign off on them. The requirements are getting harder.
At least with all these calls to demolish social housing they'll end up with plenty of prime real estate for the development of luxury housing in a few years.
Apparently Savills have already given an evaluation on council estates for London's local authorities.
Correct I hadn't. It's a very comprehensive plan though with housing targets for each borough. https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do...-people/policy
I know people are rightly remembering the dead, especially at the beginning of the inquiry. But when you think that 255 people manged to get down this dark stairwell and escape, that's incredible. But I think these days there would need to be two separate escape routes. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/...2rb-xlarge.jpg
Funny, it's been mentioned more than once in this thread. Did you ignore it because it was raised as an example of why your posts have been wrong so far? Glad to see you've finally bothered to look it up.
See ^ right there. It's been mentioned - but presumably because it was demonstrating why your comments were wrong you chose to ignore it.
Yes, yes it is which is why I mentioned it to begin with.
Perhaps you might also want to look up the comparitive studies of the room sizes and amount of daylight, storage and similar in the London plan vs other European cities. And also go back through the drafts and minutes of the GLA to see how a certain Mayor and his compatriots chose to water down the original recommendations, and resulted in the LP still having the most meagre sizes of any European capital. Then you might also want to compare them to the old Parker Morris standards.
Once you've done all that, can you then tell me if you still think people are better off in new buildings, and whether you think Lammy is right to call old buildings hutches when new ones are even smaller.
Really, wonder where you might have got that from...?
It's common knowledge, well for those in the know at least, that Savills have evaluated a number of council stocks across London, particularly within Labour boroughs. But here's one example http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/do...Evaluation.pdf
There are many more examples if you google it. Alternatively, I suggest you contact the South London Communist party who are fully aware in what is going on.
ik9000>look I've told you I just don't bother with you posts and a few others. Any content is buried in all this; calling people liars, passive aggressive nonsense, pedantic nonsense,spin, point scoring, you get the point. I'm not going to wade through all that just to find some whatever. But you and your buddies have fun yattering.
I'm not sure if you saw this earlier but an article said that 1.15 million people were on council/social housing waiting lists. If you add to that families in unsuitable properties(over crowding,etc), then I think it's impossible to only keep building houses around the 290,000 per year figure. Do you know how the Left think it could be solved. I saw TM decided to take over Labour's NHS moral ground today, and developers are saying the only way to solve these sorts of major problems is higher taxes. I'd just like to see Britain positive, modern and providing healthy living conditions. But between local politics, developers and contractors, it's going to take some manoeuvres and a lot of money. Maybe she'll go for that moral ground as well.