OT Apauling waste

[harryagain]

[polygonum]

Any relation of Linus?

[Nightjar]

Exactly what is wasteful about destroying asbestos packed tower blocks that have come to represent the worst of 1960s high rise developments?

Colin Bignell

[meow2222]

The destruction of over 4000 flats is incredibly wasteful. They could provi de thousands of business premises, and be a hive of productive activity, pe rhaps with retail on the bottom floor, offices above, and relatively quiet light production further up. What idiot decided to demolish them instead.

NT

[Sam Plusnet]

Blowing up _anything_ which is packed with asbestos seems like a particularly bad idea.

Especially if you live downwind.

[Andrew Gabriel]

Good luck. There are loads of empty business premises, some of it brand new and not occupied for years. There are loads of empty shops, some available rent-free (although you still have to pay rates).

[meow2222]

rovide thousands of business premises, and be a hive of productive activity , perhaps with retail on the bottom floor, offices above, and relatively qu iet light production further up. What idiot decided to demolish them instea d.

New premises remain empty mainly because rent exceeds value. when you're fa ced with demolition, the tower block value is land value less demolition co st, making them cheap.

NT

[Nightjar]

I suspect the Glasgow Corporation will know that and will have removed the asbestos first.

Colin Bignell

[Nightjar]

That is assuming that anybody wants that many small business properties / offices in that area, converted from flats built to the distinctly poor 1960s Scottish building standards. Much better to demolish the lot and put modern housing that is actually needed in their place. Glasgow does not have a particularly good record for the quality of its urban redevelopment, but at least they are now getting rid of one of the more serious mistakes.

Colin Bignell

[Tim Streater]

Appalling spelling, more like.

[Johny B Good]

The only appalling thing with this post is the appalling spelling in its subject title.

[F]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Appalling spelling.

And yet another appalling waste of electrons with Harry once again using uk.d-i-y as his OT personal blog.

[meow2222]

rovide thousands of business premises, and be a hive of productive activity , perhaps with retail on the bottom floor, offices above, and relatively qu iet light production further up. What idiot decided to demolish them instea d.

There are many small business ideas that dont take a huge amount of skill t o run, and are attractive to people on low incomes. Of the ones that do wan t to do better financially, too many really dont know what opportunities ex ist, and can afford very little in the way of startup costs. Offering a pac kage of easy in easy out space, with maybe one person employed to promote t he scheme in various ways, including presenting business ideas and open bus iness basics teaching sessions, could attract many looking to get out of po orness to the area.

Surely better to build those houses elsewhere, plus use the tower blocks fo r the benefit of a great many people - businesses, ratepayers, and people i n the area.

To be honest, if you look at the history of these places, its not so much t heir construction that was the big mistake, as the break up of local commun ities and the long running inadequate maintenance that was their downfall. There are many place where you can buy high rise flats at high prices and t heyre very desirable, unfortunately in Britain we have had a policy of turn ing them into sink estates, there lies the problem. As potential small busi ness premises they would do fine.

When life gives you a lemon, make a pancake. This could be a huge pancake.

NT

[www.GymRatZ.co.uk]

Perhaps the media controlled masses MIGHT just realise the bizarre similarity between this televised controlled demolition and the the other televised controlled demolition of the Twin Towers / WTC buildings of 9/11

Although I expect THIS demolotion to be far less accurately orchestrated.

[Peter Johnson]

The asbestos was removed several years ago.

[Nightjar]

Those are likely to be among the 1 in 3 that close within three years of starting up.

If they can't find that out, it increases the chances of them being in that 1 in 3 and of not being among those who choose to close.

Perhaps, but why would they need so many? A local industrial estate was built specifically to cater for start-up businesses. There are probably less than a hundred units on the estate and the start-up limitations were removed decades ago, because there were not enough people interested.

Without the housing, there is not going to be anybody to run the thousands of start-up businesses you envisage. Better to do what they are doing near me and build housing and commercial property on adjacent sites. Both will get modern buildings that are designed for their purpose. Even half century old purpose built commercial property is usually hopelessly outdated by modern standards.

Colin Bignell

[dennis]

You can't blow up asbestos packed flats so they aren't asbestos packed now.

You can do what they have done around here, insulate them, fit modern heating and fit door controls and give OAPs a decent place to live.

As long as you don't put families in them they should be fine.

[Nightjar]

On 04/04/2014 12:14, dennis@home wrote: ...

Provided the lifts will accept wheelchairs (which I wouldn't bet on in a

1960s tower block) and actually work. OTOH, you can blow them up and build modern housing in their place.

Colin Bignell

[Dave Plowman (News)]

It depends. There comes a time when it costs more to bring an unsuitable building up to modern specs than to demolish and replace it.

[Nightjar]

I would have been surprised had it not, but I like a bit of hyperbole.

Colin Bignell