Barnsbury residents are divided over plans to redesign the Bemerton Estate, which developers claim will help tackle drug-dealing and prostitution.
An initial questionnaire shows that residents are split over what should happen to their home. 58 per cent of respondents were in favour of full demolition and redevelopment of the estate, while 37 per cent felt no change should occur. Nine per cent wanted a combination of the two, with some new buildings added to those already there.
John Thompson & Partners (JTP), the architecture firm developing a Neighbourhood Plan for the estate, held a drop-in consultation on Tuesday to discuss the matter with residents.
Clare San Martin, of JTP, said: “Very clearly, no one wants to take people away from their homes.
“Obviously we want it to be a relatively quick process so people won’t be in limbo, and it is very important that something is done. There are a lot of problems around the area, and the layout of the estate makes anti-social behaviour very difficult to crack.”
According to the developers, the estate suffers from long-running social problems including drug-dealing and prostitution. The design of the estate makes it difficult to manage and, if left unchanged, developers fear that it will become a focus for vandalism and anti-social behaviour. Other issues affecting the estate are damp and poor sound insulation.
Margaret Cross, 78, who has lived on Bemerton Estate for 50 years, believes that problems exist only in one part of the estate.
“All the trouble is at the other end of the estate,” she said. “The problem is the kids; my kids were never allowed to run mad round the estate. But nowadays the parents are delinquents and they bear delinquent children.
“I moved in when this estate was first built and I do not want to move.”
Mary Lydon, 67, a Bemerton resident of 40 years, does not see the benefits of any of the options: “Mixing in new buildings with old ones would make things more difficult. Where we live is fine, security gates make things safe.”
George Moore, 52, has lived there all his life and feels that people in the “good” end of the estate have been “roped into a vote with people from the rough end.”
He said: “Where I live is quiet, it’s clean, there’s no graffiti. I don’t want any change, none of us do. The people who live around my area organised their own petition against any demolition or work, and only three people didn’t sign, and they are the troublemakers.
“The people causing trouble are the ones in arrears on their rent, and they welcome these plans because the council have said anyone having to move will be paid £4,700 to help them. Well I don’t want £4,700, I want to stay where I am.
“Let them demolish the parts they know are bad, but after all the work we’ve put into our homes, it’s totally unfair to expect us to leave.”
The Council will make a decision on the proposed plans by April.
An initial questionnaire shows that residents are split over what should happen to their home. 58 per cent of respondents were in favour of full demolition and redevelopment of the estate, while 37 per cent felt no change should occur. Nine per cent wanted a combination of the two, with some new buildings added to those already there.
John Thompson & Partners (JTP), the architecture firm developing a Neighbourhood Plan for the estate, held a drop-in consultation on Tuesday to discuss the matter with residents.
Clare San Martin, of JTP, said: “Very clearly, no one wants to take people away from their homes.
“Obviously we want it to be a relatively quick process so people won’t be in limbo, and it is very important that something is done. There are a lot of problems around the area, and the layout of the estate makes anti-social behaviour very difficult to crack.”
According to the developers, the estate suffers from long-running social problems including drug-dealing and prostitution. The design of the estate makes it difficult to manage and, if left unchanged, developers fear that it will become a focus for vandalism and anti-social behaviour. Other issues affecting the estate are damp and poor sound insulation.
Margaret Cross, 78, who has lived on Bemerton Estate for 50 years, believes that problems exist only in one part of the estate.
“All the trouble is at the other end of the estate,” she said. “The problem is the kids; my kids were never allowed to run mad round the estate. But nowadays the parents are delinquents and they bear delinquent children.
“I moved in when this estate was first built and I do not want to move.”
Mary Lydon, 67, a Bemerton resident of 40 years, does not see the benefits of any of the options: “Mixing in new buildings with old ones would make things more difficult. Where we live is fine, security gates make things safe.”
George Moore, 52, has lived there all his life and feels that people in the “good” end of the estate have been “roped into a vote with people from the rough end.”
He said: “Where I live is quiet, it’s clean, there’s no graffiti. I don’t want any change, none of us do. The people who live around my area organised their own petition against any demolition or work, and only three people didn’t sign, and they are the troublemakers.
“The people causing trouble are the ones in arrears on their rent, and they welcome these plans because the council have said anyone having to move will be paid £4,700 to help them. Well I don’t want £4,700, I want to stay where I am.
“Let them demolish the parts they know are bad, but after all the work we’ve put into our homes, it’s totally unfair to expect us to leave.”
The Council must make a decision on the proposed plans in April.
