 |
|
 |
| |
TEN YEARS AFTER LANGWORTHY COMMUNITY KICKED OUT, CROFTS TO BE DEVELOPED FOR HOUSING
|
|
Star date: 9th August 2019 POSSIBLE 149 PROPERTIES TO BE BUILT ON SEEDLEY AND LANGWORTHY CROFTS Around ten years after the community of Seedley and Langworthy had their homes demolished by Salford City Council, it looks like there may be 149 properties built on the sites covering the old Nansen Street and Harmsworth Street, and Southern Street opposite the Ashley Brook pub. Next week the Council will meet ot decide whether to accept a developer's offer for the two sites, which could be worth over £4million. Full details here...
|
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
click image to enlarge
|
It was around ten years ago when a bitter fight between Salford City Council and residents of Seedley and Langworthy over demolitions and values was finally concluded with some properties saved and others bulldozed. Since the houses were demolished as part of a huge and controversial Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder Programme, the resultant crofts have lain empty. Finally, next week, the Council is meeting to consider a developer bid to erect 149 properties on two sites totalling 2.46 acres covering the old Nansen Street and Harmsworth Street, and Southern Street opposite the Ashley Brook pub. The developer is proposing to build 106 houses and 43 apartments, paying £4,047,842 for the land, less a possible £340,000 if a bid for affordable housing is accepted. The report going to councillors states... "As part of the sale, the Council has submitted an application to obtain grant funding via the Shared Ownership Affordable Housing Program (SOAHP). The funding, in unison with borrowing via the Council's Housing Revenue Account (HRA), is for the provision of 17 units consisting of 9 one bedroom apartments, 6 two bedroom houses and 2 three bedroom houses. The result of the SOAHP application is still awaited. "These units, if the bid is successful, will be purchased at cost from the successful bidder" it adds "In the event that the SOAHP application is unsuccessful then bidders will be required to provide 30% of their schemes as affordable housing. These affordable units could potentially be acquired by Dérive." Together with the SOAHP bid, the report also notes that "there is a provision within the sale for 5 units to be acquired for community led development. These units will be acquired via a Homes England Community Led Development bid and at present discussions are on-going with SALT (Salford and Langworthy Trust) regarding a funding proposal being put forward." The report also adds that the Council would "expect" to receive £1.2million in Section 106 payments.
|
|
|
|
Cody wrote
at 07:15:14 on 20 August 2019 |
|
|
| Rayofsunshine - Yet again you ignore reality and what I've said. I do not dispute that government regulations don't help the Council build more social housing. In fact the Council has both hands tied behind its back, one from national Gov regulations and the other by themselves. The latter you just refuse to accept and instead just throw accusations of Tory support about. I've stated several times I haven't voted Tory and never will, however I've not voted Labour either since the early 2000s because of Blair and our local Council's bumbling rule. You also talk of "40 years of successive Conservative Governments" regarding housing, but you omit the 13 years of Labour national government. Labour at local and national level have made mistakes and you and them refuse to acknowledge it and learn from them. For instance you and the Council refuse to listen to the victims of the Pathfinder Programme, instead citing a Council report (flying in the face of what residents have said) and blaming the Tories. This local Council has knocked down perfectly good social housing or flogged it to developers and have built next to nothing to replace it (Partially because of it's own housing policy and refusal to chase the fees it's owed by developers. Other local Govs have better housing policy which prove it's not just Government regulations holding Salford Council back). And yet you blame me for facilitating that? I'm not the one who repeatedly votes for Salford Labour and validates what they're doing. So I can only assume that you're happy with their housing policy (yes THEIR policy, not national gov which I've already stated doesn't help), the flogging of land to developers and the continuing gentrification of Salford. A Council or Government that refuses to learn from past mistakes and also fails to listen to its people is not fit to govern. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 13:46:34 on 19 August 2019 |
|
|
| Bob the regular, I used the term "Salfordian" as a broad brush concept - anyone who currently resides in Salford. Simples! |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 13:46:26 on 19 August 2019 |
|
|
| Cody,it is people like you who have helped to facilitate the Tory destruction of public housing in
Salford! Confusing victim with perpetrator,you seek to whitewash the role of the Tories.
Over the last 40 years,successive Conservative Governments have rigged the Housing Market and Planning System in favour of private developers. Salford City Council,when it comes to housing,has had one of its hands tied. I repeat,Cody,the only way to solve the housing crisis in Salford is for the council to instigate a major house building programme! |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 08:51:53 on 19 August 2019 |
|
|
| @Rayofsunshine - Firstly it’s Cody, I just forgot to put my name in. Secondly you’ve completely ignored the fact that Salford inflicted it’s own rubbish housing policy upon itself (I’m not talking about the national one). Thirdly, You’ve also ignored the fact the Council is flogging public land and housing to private developers and not collecting all the fees from them or taking them to court for not delivering the social housing they were supposed to. If the Council had collected the fees on previous private builds, kept some social housing and some land instead of flogging it/knocking it down and used the multiple millions to invest in homes for Salfordians instead of buying office blocks, building a garden, supporting a stadium and investing in Manchester airport and other stuff, then maybe we wouldn’t have such a problem. However, it’s people like you that enable them to carry on doing it by consistently voting for them! Staunch Labour voters are defending gentrification and supporting social housing land being flogged to developers. Thatcher would smile and laugh at the sight of Salford Council if she were alive. |
|
|
?
|
bob the regular wrote
at 14:50:43 on 18 August 2019 |
|
|
| "Salford council building houses for Salfordians" as Ray says. What exactly ,and I mean exactly, does our Ray define as being "A Salfordian" for housing criteria.Does it mean, as some local authorities mean being born in Salford, and having lived there all their lives. Will "Salfordians " always be at the top of the housing allocation list? Please tell us Ray ,what a "salfordian" is. I know I am one. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 10:57:36 on 18 August 2019 |
|
|
| @Wrote,complains about "average Salfordians" not being able to purchase new builds from developers!
What did @Wrote expect?? Property developers aren't charities,they're solely in it for the money!!
Things are only going to change when Salford Council is allowed to start building houses for Salfordians. Would,you,@Wrote,welcome such a move? |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 09:39:43 on 17 August 2019 |
|
|
| @wrote 18:27 It doesn’t matter to Ray, as anyone who disagrees with the gospel according to Salford Labour is a brainwashed heathen and most likely a Tory! Ray is literally the modern equivalent of the useful idiot of the past. The type ideological zealot who reported their neighbours to the KGB, to the Stasi in East Germany, Jews to the Gestapo and witches to the witch finder general, because the powers that be know better! You could have him talk to every single person who lost out because of the Pathfinder programme, who would confirm it to his face, and he would still follow and believe Salford Labour’s explanation. It’s still mind boggling to me how people still vote for Salford Labour when they get repeatedly shafted by them in favour of developers, look at the huge neon monstrosities built by the side of the Irwell off the side of the Crescent, on land that was vacant for decades (land banked). Not ONE of them is for the average Safordian, nor are any of the others springing up around East Salford! It seems more private housing is being built than Social housing (for the love Satan’s knackers Ray DON’T just blame the Tories, Salford Council had a hand in it’s own housing policy failure as the Star and many commenters have explained to you), and Social housing is needed here. Yes Saflord Council is working on new Social housing with money from private builds, but that’s a fraction compared to the the private ones going up, and to add to it the Council doesn’t always collect the fees these developers owe! They then say that they can’t afford to take them to court over it, yet they borrowed multiple millions for other projects? They only have to do it a few times to send a message to them. Though one could argue that’s not needed as surrounding areas in Greater Manchester dictate housing policy, why can’t Salford Council? It’s the Tories fault, right? They must let other Councils off then and only apply their corrupt finance system to Salford only, right? |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 18:27:49 on 16 August 2019 |
|
|
| I think Ray should speak to the people who lost their homes due to pathfinder about what they think of the scheme and the impact of it on their lives. |
|
|
?
|
Last man standing wrote
at 12:50:56 on 16 August 2019 |
|
|
| So it all boils down to money , rayofsunshine,
.You really are as as shallow and vacuous as your many numerous comments indicate.my critical facilities are not impaired, I listened to arguments for the pathfinder ideology from groups all over the country. Most of the communities needed a helping hand, not a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
In a few years an academic is going to make his/ her name with a detailed look at the scheme. I fear very few councils or the government of the day is going to come out of it smelling of roses. Did somebody whisper" Poulson" ? |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 12:50:46 on 16 August 2019 |
|
|
| I think Rayofsunshine needs to look into the pathfinder scheme and not just in Salford. People did suffer financially. They received aproximately 40% of what they would have done in an open market, if the scheme had never existed. There have been some tv programs about this over the years. People who had or were near paying off their mortgages, suddenly forced to start again. They did not have the option to stay and ride out any variation in the housing market or to await for the change in an area becoming desirable. Their homes were COMPULSORY PURCHASED.
As Last man standing has stated, surveys showed that the properties were not unfit for purpose. The over riding reason for the demolitons was to clear the land for the developers who were often in partnership with the council!!!
In some parts of Langworthy people were forced out of their homes and offered a share (SHARE!) in another propery, only to then see their formers homes marketed and sold for 2 to 3 times what they received.
That Ray is spending so much time trying to defend this shows that the council propaganda department fear the truth.
Eventually the full truth about the pathfinder scheme will come out and the Labour party will have to apologise for it. I would say "Hang their heads in shame" , but there is not much chance of that. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 06:54:56 on 16 August 2019 |
|
|
| Last man standing,it is clear to me that the trauma you experienced via interacting with Pathfinder has clouded your critical faculties! Did
you actually lose money because of Pathfinder? Is this the source of your bitterness? |
|
|
?
|
Last man standing wrote
at 15:28:11 on 15 August 2019 |
|
|
| Rayofsunshine , The houses in the higher Broughton pathfinder areas did not meet with your definition of " disfunctional" until Salford council acquired them. The agenda for the area was writ large from the first public meetings. Nothing that was said or proposed by the indigenous population was ever given more than a cursory acknowledgment, and then ignored.
Obviously as people left the streets,( housing association tennents first) it reinforced the council's argument. " Look at the empty houses, no one wants to live in this area"Thus forming a self perpetuating raison d"Etre the policy. Conversely within days of builders arriving on site, boards imaginitvly illustrated proclaim this is a highly desirable area to live, put your name down now!.
I must say you are par excellence as an appolgist for Blair's labour government and Salford council in particular. Not on the payroll ? Eh, eh, nudge, nudge, wink, wink. Say no more. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 11:48:34 on 15 August 2019 |
|
|
| Wrote,over time areas can change from undesirable to desirable in terms of people wanting to live there. This is a straightforward operation of the market not the machinations of sic "evil local politicians!" |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 09:20:22 on 15 August 2019 |
|
|
| Thousands of people had a roof over their heads in homes that they had bought or were in buying.
If by using the term "Slum" you are refering to properties owned by "Poor people" then surely the fact that the people are poor suggests they need something "affordable".
The houses were not unfit until the council started to acquire them and let them fall into disrepair, not through natural wear and tear of a house but by the mismanagement of the properties by the council that allowed the properties to be vandalised and stripped of materials by thieves and vandals.
"Financial loss" is when you people were ripped off over the value of the houses, which , without the pathfinder scheme would in all probablity have become "desirable".
Doesnt it seem funny that in all these areas that the people were told that the area wasn't desirable and then once the developers had hold of the land all the properties are suddenly in desirable areas???
Langworthy--upside down yuppy houses.
Littleton road ---riverside
Higher Broughton----well work that one out.
All labour areas where the labour voters were shat on from a great height by the people they voted for. |
|
|
?
|
Carl Williams wrote
at 09:20:09 on 15 August 2019 |
|
|
| I think Ray by your further comments, everyone else can see the point I was making.
|
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 09:01:10 on 15 August 2019 |
|
|
| Last Man Standing,a house can be deemed as "dysfunctional" if it clearly fails existing housing or environmental standards! From what I understand,under Pathfinder,a Cost Benefit Calculation was performed to determine whether a particular property merited further investment for continued use as a family dwelling! |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 09:00:51 on 15 August 2019 |
|
|
| Bob the regular,your latest post mentions alleged "financial loss". What loss is there when the asset in question,in this case,property,had in the view of the market,no value? Remember,Bob,that the value of any asset is set not by intrinsic qualities but by the price that market participants are prepared to pay at any given time! |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 09:00:30 on 15 August 2019 |
|
|
| Bob the regular,rather than trading on rumour or myth,stick to the facts. Properties covered by Pathfinder were de facto slums - the city had to move on! I suspect that your ideal for Salford is some form of L.S Lowry painting preserved in aspic . There's more to our city than "matchstick men and matchstick dogs"! |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 09:00:09 on 15 August 2019 |
|
|
| Carl Williams,precisely,what point are you trying to make? |
|
|
?
|
bob the regular wrote
at 08:34:46 on 14 August 2019 |
|
|
| If half as much financial loss, never mind the upheaval ect, inflicted on Last Man had been put on our Ray, you would never hear the last of it.I forcast that by this time next year he may well wish Labour had not done the damage they have. Last Man says "like an elephant ,he has not forgot". Well, elephants come in herds, and others have not forgot as well. There may be a herd about to charge. |
|
|
?
|
Last man standing wrote
at 20:36:48 on 13 August 2019 |
|
|
| Rayofsunshine, whether I suffered personally or not re the pathfinder project is not the point. The massive shortage of affordable housing ,( an elastic term if ever there was one), cannot be laid solely at the Tory's feet. Who was in power when pathfinder started ? Surely a terraced house is preferable to sleeping on the street. How can a house be dysfunctional ? A roof, walls, utilities, what more is needed ?
I'll let Eddie Ginley have the last word, " All that you did you shouldn't have done to me, but most of all you shouldn't have done it to anybody". |
|
|
?
|
Carl Williams wrote
at 17:41:48 on 13 August 2019 |
|
|
| Regarding Ray of sunshines comments about properties cleared by the pathfinder scheme, I think these quotes from Marx (Groucho, not Karl)sum him up
"This man has the mind of a 4-year old boy..and I bet he was glad to get rid of it" AND
"Now there's a man with an open mind---you can feel the breeze from here" |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 17:41:26 on 13 August 2019 |
|
|
| Last Man Standing,the fact that you personally may
have faired badly under Pathfinder, doesn't necessarily mean that overall it wasn't a good and for the time,a needed project. |
|
|
?
|
bob the regular wrote
at 17:40:55 on 13 August 2019 |
|
|
| Talking through his arse as usual, there again, he is a committed Labourite and that's what these people do in excellence.Like last man standing says , the vast majority of these houses were sound, as were the ones he refers to in the top streets. The council made money charging the pathfinder scheme for knocking peoples houses down. If by any chance Ray is correct, then why did it make sense for Miss Blears to give lots of public money to her close friend to refurb the ones on the other side of langworthy road that should, in my opinion have been knocked down, and for all intents and purposes were apart from the front facade which was saved so grant aid could be given. Tell you what,why don't we ask the guy who knocked these houses down if they were sound? He is a highly qualified structural enginneer as well as a former demolition man. (now retired). He has a good reputation for being an honest and fair guy. I will go along with his better judgement, but I can't see it being much different to mine. |
|
|
?
|
Last man standing wrote
at 05:23:36 on 13 August 2019 |
|
|
| The pathfinder fiasco inflicted upon various areas of the country by the Blair government was at best incompetent and at worst blatent carpetbagging. Remember local councils had the power to c.p.o. the desired properties whist at the same time were in partnership with the developers. The CPO in the higher Broughton area did not find any of the properties unfit. The gradual deterioration of the properties rapidly increased once they fell into the council's hands. The council didn't even pay lip service towards the remaining residents with regard to their duty of care. If anybody is looking back through rose tinted glasses it's you rayofsunshine. Don't pxxx on my back and tell me it's raining. I was there, and like an elephant I don't forget. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 20:52:13 on 12 August 2019 |
|
|
| Yet again,Bob the regular presents a revisionist and therefore false,view of the past! The properties
cleared by Pathfinder were either unfit for human habitation or unsuitable for modern family units,single or retired persons .
Claiming that these clearly dysfunctional properties are worth £100K simply defies reason! |
|
|
?
|
bob the regular wrote
at 19:37:08 on 11 August 2019 |
|
|
| Ray like I tried to point out below,hundreds of families had affordable housing and a XXXXXXX roof over their head before labour sent in the bulldozers. |
|
|
?
|
Chris wrote
at 19:36:37 on 11 August 2019 |
|
|
| This is really good news. That area really needs development. |
|
|
?
|
bob the regular wrote
at 05:10:43 on 11 August 2019 |
|
|
| So who gets the 4 million? I always thought it had to go back to the government who coughed up the pathfinder cash in the first place, now I am not so sure. The council will surely find ways of keeping hold of it. Imagine, years ago if pathfinder had never existed and the council and the methodists housing had not run the area down and put trash in it. Former resident is right in his description of some of these houses, and all were structurally sound. The good people who lived there would have been saved all this misery they have had, and even an unmodernised teraced house here would now be worth 100 grand.Think how all the millions of pathfinder cash could have been spent better more constructive things. Oh well, hindsight is a wonderfull thing. Never mind, just vote Labour. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 05:09:48 on 11 August 2019 |
|
|
| The prospect that some 'affordable housing' may be
made available should be welcomed by all! |
|
|
?
|
wrote
at 08:21:47 on 10 August 2019 |
|
|
| I live on Fram st and my rent is 625 building these houses is going to put me into debt cos obviously my landlord will want to raise the rent cos they can and it's the only green space we have you can't go on chimney pot cos it's full of drug users f***ing council don't give a shit money money money fat b***arse
|
|
|
?
|
former resident wrote
at 08:21:17 on 10 August 2019 |
|
|
| I can guess what your thinking Darren.Some of them old houses were little palaces, I should know, I am a spark and I worked in loads of them over the years. There was one guy, not a joiner, who had done his living room in wood panels like you see in stately homes. It looked fantastic. super workmanship. I bet the council bought it for balls all and knocked it down.Does anyone else remember it? |
|
|
?
|
DARREN . BORN AND BRED. wrote
at 18:56:07 on 09 August 2019 |
|
|
| Half a mile from *MEDIA CITY* we all wonder how much the houses will be. |
|
|
?
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
.jpg)
advertisement
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
Hi Paul I hope you are well, please can you tell me how much it would be to have the George Best Mosaic made? Indeed if you are st... [more] |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am Marjorie Goodwin's grandson. I still have that battered tobacco tin. I don't know what happened to the silver one!
... [more] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I parked here with a disability badge and my back tyre was slightly over line as I suffer with coordination and it says if I appea... [more] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 North Johnson Street, Salford.
My Great Grandfather was the son of Household James Rowlands 68. x2. His wife Frances Rowlands... [more] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lived for many years as a kid in Murray st. Hilda who was mum to John would visit my grandmother and would tell us about what john... [more] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Days |
Hours |
Minutes |
Seconds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Help the Salford Star...
all donations welcome
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.jpg)
(3).jpeg)
.png)
(1).JPG)
