pf08-014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

(��inpichcn,��c �i�i_hh�mrh�a�J Studicc Chai;icicriiin� Dcclinc the overcrowded tenements with the high-rise blocks; and cons[ruction of large, peripheral housing estates on [he edges of the city (5cottish Development Agency (SDA) 1987, p. 60). The SDA summarised the dynamics of the peripheral estate decline in Glasgow (ibid.). First, there was rapid construction of the estates in the 1950s and 1960s to house people displaced by inner city redevelopment. The provision of shopping, Ieisure, and education facilities was not a priority. The es[ates soon became unpopular, as [hey were often used to house problem tenants that were likely to be poor, unskilled and anti-social. This started a spiral of decline. High turnover rates, a lack of community cohesion and a very poor external image made the estates even more unpopular. Housing design problems, a mismatch between house and family size, inadequate management and maintenance, and poverty of the residents isolated these estates from the wider socio- economic system. Problems on the estates were made worse by an overall oversupply of council housing, resulting from dectining population in Glasgow. Low levels of investment in the peripheral areas during the 1970s and early 1980s that reflected the national policy agenda with an emphasis placed on the inner cities, contributed to the peripheral estate decay (ibid.). Carley (]990) reports on four peripheral housing estates that were constructed at Drumchapel, Pollok, CasUemilk and Easterhouse. These estates were built quickly to house people from the city centre, but very soon reliable tenants started transferring out again and by the late sixties the estates were difficult to let. The combination of poor design, geographical isolation and severe economic and social deprivation characterize the curcent condition of the estates (ibid.). By the 1970s the estates had high levels of the population who were unemployed and dependent upon state benefits; a large proportion of single parent families and young singles; an unbalanced social mix, with few people in professional and non-manual groups and high proportions of unskilled workers; poor environmental quality caused by bad housing design and estate layout a lack of social, recreational and leisure facilities; and a poor image, both wiCh tenanCS and the outside world (SDA 1987, p.l). Some common features of these areas in 1980s included: male unemployment in some neighbourhoods was as high as 40 per cent, and much higher levels of youth unemployment in some areas; high overcrowding, seven times the British national average; on some estates infant moRality was almost five times the national rate; and there was serious shortage of social and community facilities (Carley 1990). Power and Mumford (1999) examined housing demand in British inner-city areas. The main focus of the study was on NewcasUe and Manches[er, two cities experiencing long-run decline and concentrated multiple deprivation, which is far more severe in the inner neighbourhoods. Between 1971 and 1996, Manchester lost 22 per cent and NewcasUe 16 per cent of its population. Inner-city areas lost more people and jobs than outer areas, and male jobs did much worse tha� female (ibid.). .-. 13