Affordable Housing

[BigMouth]

Whalsa said

"Your ignorance astounds me "Big Mouth". Who is stopping paying council tax?

The Yell ferries were built in 2002. That is 15 years ago. What about the Whalsay service or the Unst service? Ageing, regulation breaking vessels and crumbling terminals which become more of a liability every year that passes. 

Money being sucked away from the majority, the opposite is true. The majority sucks the money away from the rural areas where the vast majority of money is actually generated. 

You also repeatedly refer to closeness to jobs, there are PLENTY of jobs which are located outside Lerwick. SVT and SGP for example, not to mention all the salmon and mussel farms. 

Simply put you are clueless about what keeps Shetland going, as well as about what would solve the housing problem (hint, offering everyone from the outer isles first choice in social housing would not improve matters!!!)."

END

 

No need to be rude!  No-one is stopping paying council tax.  Perhaps I could have made it more simple for you.  SIC should stop collecting it from those absorbing Shetland's wealth with their lavish service expectations.

 

On the ferries, yes , I took a leaf from your book and cherry-picked what suited the argument.

 

SVT is on the mainland, and the vast majority of the salmon and mussel farms are around the mainland.  Jobs are only of use if you are qualified to do them, and often know the right people too.

 

Clueless, no, forward thinking.  Come back here in 20 years and if people are still living on the outer isles, they will be poorer, with the possible exception of Fair Isle.  Meanwhile the mainland will be thriving, the nearer to Lerwick the better off they will be.  You are of the old school of thought.

[BigMouth]

Suffereof1crankymofo said

 

"The precise figures aren't available but during the last lot of council new builds, it was reported by some of the new tenants that they were on the list because they lost out when bidding for private buys.

It isn't so easy to get a mortgage on a self-build given that quite often you have to buy the land first, etc.  You basically need to be self-funding, which is fine if you have family willing to chip in.

Wrong re Housing figures.  For starters, they've never made it clear whether they count each application or the individuals listed on each application, plus folk can choose more than one area; the detail is in their 'spin' (or lack of it) when they do press releases.  Somebody already housed isn't necessarily up for a transfer or living in social housing but they are, nevertheless, on 'a list'.

You're forgetting to factor in for roads ... look at the cost of the last council new build.

Blooming heck, will ya wind ya neck in a tad with your totally off-the-wall assumptions!  I DO live in a council abode.  It's not bleeding snobbery, it's FACT.  If you're up here repairing the airport runway for three months, you rent locally, you don't join the housing waiting list!  And quite often, the same houses are rented to tourists as are rented out to others outside of the tourist season."

 

AND went on to say

 

"Stop receiving council services?!!!! Well for starters, out in the sticks we do NOT get the same services as in town; for example, we don't get the pavements swept."

END

 

If the number on the housing list concerns you enough just write and ask them how they arrive at their figures.

 

Thank you for the information on self-build.  It is not a process that I have had any part in.

 

Yes, roads seem to be incredibly costly to build here.  I remember applying for a job at one of the companies involved in this sort of thing and the starting pay was £40,000 for what is known locally as an muckle sphincter job.

 

You protest too much on the snobbery angle I fear.  Everyones halo slips from time to time!

 

The majority should benefit.  Minorities get far too much say in our society.  Perhaps encourage people to put their litter in the bins, and the streets will need sweeping less.  In the meantime sweep where people are most concentrated.

[Urabug]

There is one thing for sure a large amount of housing in Shetland has been built on good agricultural land,this is probably more to do with the cost and ease of building,but nevertheless this should have been managed better .

 

If one goes abroad to places like the Canary Islands,Madiera ect houses are built on the hillsides nearly all have a view,not like here in Shetland where they build them so that only a few (meaning mainly council types ) are left with any decent view .Be interesting to see how they position the proposed new houses on the Staneyhill,one will likely be looking into the face of the other,when they all should and could have a good view.

 

When all is said and done it is all about money,if you have the means you can build mansions if not,sleep on the street. That the way it has always been and not likely to change anytime soon.

[BigMouth]

This is certainly true. I recently stayed on an estate of executive houses and the houses were turned so that none looked directly into the other's house, but as you say it is all about costs, hence why they all had drives and double garages. In social housing you can on the whole expect arrow slit windows, directly facing your neighbours and living on top of each other. This looks particularly incongruous in places where there is a good deal of empty space around. Stukka in Hillswick comes to mind, a Hjaltland HA estate where some of the houses must have stunning views, and others less so, but are crammed into a small space. I wonder if anyone considers how one's housing affects one's quality of life? I doubt it, I remember when Hjaltland HA we're building properties near Grantfield and insisting that residents weren't allowed to own cars!

[Urabug]

The main objective of local authorities is to provide housing,the fact they have no view or where or how they are situated is probably of little interest to those who have to find somewhere for someone to live.

 

Think the planning departments should be the ones who make sure that houses are better located and not just "huddled" together.

 

Folk  i'm sure  look after and respect  properties that provide a reasonable view and pleasant surroundings better than those that don't.

[Ghostrider]

I don't think that public housing built to the conventional street style, broadly speaking has far less neighbours disputes and are generally better appreciated and cared for by their occupants, than those in clustered together in some irregular fashion around some sort of central 'square' of some sort.

 

Somewhere a long time ago some academic type 'decided' building around a central 'square' would promote a sense of 'community' (whatever the hell that is), and they've stuck with that theoretical concept ever since. Ignoring the fact that in reality building around a central 'square' means everybody is tripping over every else and nosing in to their business continously, which would be fine if everybody were shiny, happy people. They're not, anyplace, typically the vast majority can't stand each other, and then the fight started....

 

It results in the very opposite of 'community', with pretty much everybody living in near isolation on their own little patch of grass, plotting their escape, and not giving a toss who is over what fence, as long as them and their's stays on the other side, nor what anything is like as they're not planning to be there any longer than they really must.

 

At least a conventional street layout reduces the number in your face to just the neighbour either side, and maybe the one across the street, which in turn helps minimise the chances of meeting continously someone you'd happily put in the ground and hang for if they so much as look at you the wrong way.

Edited September 20, 2017 by Ghostrider

[BigMouth]

There has always been a drive for social cohesion, but the closer people are rammed together the less the cohesion works. Problems are amplified, someone parks in somebody's space, someone's lifestyle is loud around others that want peace and quiet, axes at dawn. It doesn't help when governments and the media promote ill feeling against sections of society. The Tories and the Daily Hate are past masters of this. Not a day goes by without mention of the latest story about council tenants living in the lap of luxury with flat screen TVs at the tax-payers expense. Even if it were true the fiddles at the bottom cost considerably more than the fiddles at the top. I often wonder if council tenants are supposed to sit with all the electricity off until they have been “cured”. All of this keeps our minds off the real issues though.

 

Bread and circuses.