Saltwell and Bensham Housing Regeneration | Gateshead | Various | U/C - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > North East England > Newcastle Metro Area

Newcastle Metro Area For Newcastle, N Tyneside, Gateshead, S Tyneside, South Northumberland


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 28th, 2011, 04:51 PM   #1
Newcastle Historian
Moderator and Archivist
 
Newcastle Historian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Posts: 21,613
Likes (Received): 2075

Saltwell and Bensham Housing Regeneration | Gateshead | Various | U/C

Gateshead shops hit by five years of works
by Tom Keighley, Evening Chronicle, March 28th 2011


Pat Hadfield, from Gateshead, whose business is being hit by demolition works in Bensham and Saltwell

SHOPKEEPERS say their businesses have been blighted by a council bid to breathe new life into their area.

About 400 flats are being demolished in the Bensham and Saltwell areas of Gateshead to make way for new homes.

The regeneration started five years ago, with the promise it would be complete within 18 months.

But with no end to the works in sight, shopkeepers in and around the redevelopment area have had enough.

Pat Hadfield runs Maxam clothes shop in Bensham’s Saltwell Road – a business that has been in her family for nearly 40 years.

She said: “The council said there would only be 18 months of tough times while the works went ahead, but that was five years ago.

“We were told the council could help us with art ideas. They suggested painting circles on the road with the names of the shops in them, but what use will that be?”


Read More - http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north...#ixzz1HtzETsnu

.

Last edited by Newcastle Historian; September 6th, 2015 at 12:03 PM. Reason: repaired broken image link
Newcastle Historian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old April 13th, 2011, 06:02 PM   #2
Newcastle Historian
Moderator and Archivist
 
Newcastle Historian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Posts: 21,613
Likes (Received): 2075

Evolution Gateshead to build 2,400 new houses
by Adrian Pearson, Evening Chronicle, April 13th 2011


A THREE-year search ended as the developer to revamp Gateshead was selected.

The council has now chosen the developer which will build new homes on 19 sites across the borough.

Evolution Gateshead, a consortium of Home Group and Galliford Try, will construct a total of 2,400 new houses.

The 19 sites, which are already in council ownership or are in the process of being acquired and include both greenfield and brownfield sites, will be developed over 15-20 years.

Homes will be built at Birtley Northside, the former Rail Freight Depot on the Felling bypass, and sites in Rowlands Gill, Chopwell and Bensham and Saltwell.

In announcing Evolution Gateshead as the preferred developer, the council has brought to a close a two-and-half year search for a development partner to meet the council’s ambitious vision for the borough.


Read More - http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north...#ixzz1JPpT1qhE
Newcastle Historian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 13th, 2011, 05:25 PM   #3
Newcastle Historian
Moderator and Archivist
 
Newcastle Historian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Posts: 21,613
Likes (Received): 2075

Bensham and Saltwell revamp plan unveiled
by Linda Richards, Evening Chronicle, July 13th 2011


An artist's impression of the Bensham area which is to be transformed

THIS IS the first glimpse of the plans to transform land at the centre of a bitter legal battle.

Gateshead Council has unveiled outline proposals for new family homes in the Bensham and Saltwell area and said work could start within 12 months.

The first of 19 major new housing developments, to be built by Gateshead Council’s proposed new housing partner Evolution Gateshead, is likely to be on the recently-cleared demolition site on Saltwell Road.

Evolution, a consortium of Home Group and Galliford Try, proposes to build a range of energy-efficient family homes for sale, rent or part-purchase.

The development includes more than 100 three, four and six-bedroom houses, the majority for sale but with about 12 for intermediate ownership and more than 50 for rent.

The council began demolishing Tyneside flats five years ago but was forced to call a halt because of a High Court challenge by SAVE Britain’s Heritage.

It argued a refurbishment scheme should have been carried out rather than demolishing the buildings. The group secured a High Court injunction preventing demolition of the homes, but that was lifted in November.

New boulevards and tree-lined streets could be created with some blocks arranged around Georgian-style squares.


Read More - http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north...#ixzz1RzlsFZC6

.

Last edited by Newcastle Historian; September 6th, 2015 at 12:05 PM. Reason: repaired broken image link
Newcastle Historian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old July 14th, 2011, 01:48 PM   #4
AngerOfTheNorth
Architect
 
AngerOfTheNorth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,724
Likes (Received): 131

I like the look of those homes a lot... However I agree that there may be need to look more closely at whether we need to be demolishing housing to build new stuff, if the existing stock is in decent and refurbishable condition.
AngerOfTheNorth no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 14th, 2011, 09:33 PM   #5
alf stone
Registered User
 
alf stone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,776
Likes (Received): 475

I hate to say this but I think for once I agree with Gateshead Council and the houses in question were beyond renovation at an acceptable price. The so called inventors streets off Saltwell Road (Stephenson, Trevethick, Watt and many more) were always a mixed bag and the ones that have been demolished were, with a few exceptions, sadly neglected over the last few years although they were never really "des res". I'm sure the new housing will be a vast improvement.

I do take issue once again with the Chronicle's grasp of geography though. The area is in the Saltwell ward not Bensham, the clue is in "Saltwell Road".
alf stone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 14th, 2011, 11:01 PM   #6
Adrian_Swall
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,771
Likes (Received): 178

Quote:
Originally Posted by alf stone View Post
I hate to say this but I think for once I agree with Gateshead Council and the houses in question were beyond renovation at an acceptable price. The so called inventors streets off Saltwell Road (Stephenson, Trevethick, Watt and many more) were always a mixed bag and the ones that have been demolished were, with a few exceptions, sadly neglected over the last few years although they were never really "des res". I'm sure the new housing will be a vast improvement.

I do take issue once again with the Chronicle's grasp of geography though. The area is in the Saltwell ward not Bensham, the clue is in "Saltwell Road".
I was born into the Newcastle West End 'slum' clearances so have seen a lot of this type of development happen. As well the new developments subsequently being knocked down! Looking at the terraced housing I did see a programme about similar terraces in the North West. The house was turned upside down with the living space upstairs, sleeping downstairs. At the back was an elevated walkway with outside terrace area. The back lane was gated. At the front the road was resurfaced and the streetscape tidied. I think you could perhaps go one step further and knock down every other terrace and create proper gardens at the back. The 'footprint' and layout of the area would be retained along with the community spirit. Time will tell whether any lessons learned from the past have been taken on board?
Adrian_Swall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 16th, 2011, 10:52 PM   #7
Adrian_Swall
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,771
Likes (Received): 178

Quote:
Originally Posted by alf stone View Post
An interesting concept but there's nothing new under the sun. In the early 1970s my grandparents were given temporary accomodation in St. Cuthbert's Village (shudder) while their council house was being renovated. The entrance hall (passage) led in to the kitchen which in turn led to the next level down which contained the main living area and finally to the lower level where the bedrooms were. My grandmother found it very difficult to get used to the idea of going downstairs to bed.
That is the traditional layout but is more and more being challenged nowadays. The Urban Splash design seems fine for singles/couples but probably not families. The main point was that wholesale clearance is not always the right solution and innovative design using the existing buildings has a place. Local authorities always seem to favour 'clearances' even when the local communities are largely against - no democracy.
Adrian_Swall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2011, 12:20 AM   #8
alf stone
Registered User
 
alf stone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,776
Likes (Received): 475

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian_Swall View Post
That is the traditional layout but is more and more being challenged nowadays. The Urban Splash design seems fine for singles/couples but probably not families. The main point was that wholesale clearance is not always the right solution and innovative design using the existing buildings has a place. Local authorities always seem to favour 'clearances' even when the local communities are largely against - no democracy.
Adrian, I agree with everything you say and I am all for preserving the past especially as I am part of it but I can find no reason whatsover to preserve the likes of Armstrong Street which was a slum when I was a kid in the 50s. Some people have made a serious effort to improve their properties but the majority remained as slums until their demise. I find it hard to keep defending the council's decision on this as I have disagreed with them so much in the past but on this I think they are right. Is this really worth preserving:

SAM_0938 by alfred stone, on Flickr

I don't know anybody who lived there in recent years but I knew lots of the residents in the 50s and 60s and they all wanted to be out of the place. This is not wholesale clearance but selective clearance, the vast majority of the area is being renovated.

Last edited by alf stone; October 29th, 2017 at 08:16 PM. Reason: replacing photographs
alf stone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2011, 12:20 PM   #9
Rational Plan
Registered User
 
Rational Plan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Slough
Posts: 3,818
Likes (Received): 805

My Auntie used to live on Dunsmuir Grove back in the 80's and the early 90's. I remember coming back to England with my mum and staying with her sometimes. Those flats consisted of a big front bedroom (my aunt never used because of noise from the street, a narrow living room, and back bedroom and an extension with small kitchen and then bathroom on the back. Not particularly nice housing even then. My aunt thought it was getting rougher back then and was glad when she was entitled to a small over 55's flat in Low Fell.

I always thought you combine two flats together into a House, but they would only make a decent two bedroom. I quite like Gateshead scheme of selective refurbishment and some demolition. Certainly on a recent trip a lot of older terraces look a lot more spick and span than I remember them.

It's a good idea to try and create areas attractive to middles class families and stop them fleeing out to Stanley and Burnopfield. Gateshead best chance is ti try and gentrify Shipley and Coatsworth road. God knows Old Durham road, beacon Lough(shudder), Wrekenton and the Leam are not going anywhere. I feel Gatesheads biggest asset is Saltwell Park, I miss a big Victorian Park and down South they are quite rare.

I wish Gateshead had more jobs, for many reasons. But when I visited for the first time in many years, driving through it struck my sister and I how empty the roads were. I mean the A1 and the Felling Bypass was busy, but everything else felt like a Sunday morning, just an occasional car wafting along or a couple of pedestrians. To my eye half of gatesheads streets seemed strangely half empty. We both felt it was quite odd.
Rational Plan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2011, 12:44 PM   #10
Adrian_Swall
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,771
Likes (Received): 178

Quote:
Originally Posted by alf stone View Post
Adrian, I agree with everything you say and I am all for preserving the past especially as I am part of it but I can find no reason whatsover to preserve the likes of Armstrong Street which was a slum when I was a kid in the 50s. Some people have made a serious effort to improve their properties but the majority remained as slums until their demise. I find it hard to keep defending the council's decision on this as I have disagreed with them so much in the past but on this I think they are right. Is this really worth preserving:



I don't know anybody who lived there in recent years but I knew lots of the residents in the 50s and 60s and they all wanted to be out of the place. This is not wholesale clearance but selective clearance, the vast majority of the area is being renovated.
Hello Alf,
The street you have featured does look bad but in the West End of Newcastle some properties were offered for £1 with the proviso that people themselves refurbished and renovated the properties and then had to live in them for a set period. I did also see a programme years ago where people were offered properties on this basis and learned building skills as they went along and all helped each other - a sort of self build scheme. These are different ideas and solutions for different areas. Part demolition is one. As long as the locals are part of the decision making then fine.

Regards. A Swall
Adrian_Swall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2011, 10:07 PM   #11
alf stone
Registered User
 
alf stone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,776
Likes (Received): 475

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian_Swall View Post
At the back was an elevated walkway with outside terrace area. The back lane was gated. At the front the road was resurfaced and the streetscape tidied. I think you could perhaps go one step further and knock down every other terrace and create proper gardens at the back. The 'footprint' and layout of the area would be retained along with the community spirit. Time will tell whether any lessons learned from the past have been taken on board?
I used to live in Kelvin Grove and later Rayleigh Grove just a couple of streets along from RP's aunt in Dunsmuir Grove though 20 years earlier and more. The big difference between those streets was that the south side of Kelvin and the north side of Rayleigh were all owned by the same landlord, originally the Co-op. They were, I believe, built for rental to Co-op workers but as the workforce contracted they were let to others like my family. The last I heard they were owned by Newcastle and Whitley Housing Trust and they came up with a novel solution to the back lane problem:

100_1557 by alfred stone, on Flickr

I would have preferred gardens but it is now as wide as the front street and I quite like it. Of course, it can only happen if somebody owns all of the back to back terraces or the council gets involved. It is certainly an improvement on the dirty back lane that I remember. The Co-op may have had faults as a retailer as mentioned elsewhere but as landlords they were excellent and all the houses were updated in the early 60s with the addition of bathrooms and indoor toilets but I don't think we got central heating at that stage.

Last edited by alf stone; October 29th, 2017 at 08:20 PM. Reason: replacing photographs
alf stone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2011, 10:39 PM   #12
elliott
Registered User
 
elliott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,085
Likes (Received): 338

Until recently I lived just below Saltwell Park and obv spent most of my teens/early 20's only a few streets from Armstrong Street (upper section, lower part is quite nice) and I have no qualms about it being erased from history. The housing stock was poor, would have cost too much to repair. And the top part had a stigma in the area whilst people were still living there as being full of dealers, thieves and vagrants. Some people I know who lived on the lower part of Armstrong Street hated having to walk through it to get a bottle of milk etc.
elliott no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2011, 01:13 AM   #13
Rational Plan
Registered User
 
Rational Plan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Slough
Posts: 3,818
Likes (Received): 805

The problemm is the council obviously wants to attract families and that means in Gateshead back gardens and parking. Now in theory that could easily mean new stone built terraces. I just wonder if that is too much of a leap up for the area. The nicer terraces are near Saltwell park and the Durham road I just wonder how much they can push that Northwards towards Bensham road. Bensham looks much better than it did in the eighties. That hideous council estate is gone and it looks much more built up than it did before. Eventually if the can push towards the town centre from the west and south eventually the town centre won't feel so cut off. Who knows maybe in 20 years time Gateshead town centre will be a functional centre again.
Rational Plan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 1st, 2013, 08:24 PM   #14
alf stone
Registered User
 
alf stone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,776
Likes (Received): 475

I was looking through the latest applications on the Gateshead Planning Portal when I spotted this:

Proposed housing development following demolitions at Saltwell and Bensham - EIA Scoping Opinion (Phase 1 - 130-160 (even) Saltwell Road, 1-39 (odd) and adjacent garages Trevethick St, 2-56 (even) and 3-53 (odd) Brunel St, 1-51 (odd) and 4-54 (even) Armstrong St, 2-52 (even) Macadam St), (Phase 2 - 4-90 (even) Westminster St, 4-66 (even) and 5-83 (odd) Dunsmuir Grove, 1-63 (odd) Kelvin Grove, 166 Rawling Rd and 195-227 (odd) Brighton Rd, 126-166 (even) Hyde Park St, 121-159 (odd) and 122-182 (even) Westminster St, 128-154 (even) and 131-191 (odd) Dunsmuir Grove, 180-220 (even) Rectory Rd) )
Saltwell And Bensham (Phases 1 And 2) Gateshead
Ref. No: EIA/13/003 | Received: Fri 22 Feb 2013 | Validated: Fri 22 Feb 2013 | Status: Pending

The council has been a bit coy about their plans for this area so I was keen to see what their proposals were. I looked at the Documents section to find only this statement:

"No documents found"

I went on to look to see if any comments had been made:

"Sorry, we are not currently accepting comments from the public on this application."

I don't know much about the planning system but I wonder if us lesser mortals could get away with submitting a planning application without revealing the details to the public. Comments on a postcard to Mick Henry, Gateshead MBC.
alf stone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 2nd, 2013, 06:42 PM   #15
Ken O'Heed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,406
Likes (Received): 3918

Proposed housing development following demolitions at Saltwell and Bensham - EIA Scoping Opinion

Quote:
Originally Posted by alf stone View Post
I was looking through the latest applications on the Gateshead Planning Portal when I spotted this:

Proposed housing development following demolitions at Saltwell and Bensham - EIA Scoping Opinion (Phase 1 - 130-160 (even) Saltwell Road, 1-39 (odd) and adjacent garages Trevethick St, 2-56 (even) and 3-53 (odd) Brunel St, 1-51 (odd) and 4-54 (even) Armstrong St, 2-52 (even) Macadam St), (Phase 2 - 4-90 (even) Westminster St, 4-66 (even) and 5-83 (odd) Dunsmuir Grove, 1-63 (odd) Kelvin Grove, 166 Rawling Rd and 195-227 (odd) Brighton Rd, 126-166 (even) Hyde Park St, 121-159 (odd) and 122-182 (even) Westminster St, 128-154 (even) and 131-191 (odd) Dunsmuir Grove, 180-220 (even) Rectory Rd) )
Saltwell And Bensham (Phases 1 And 2) Gateshead
Ref. No: EIA/13/003 | Received: Fri 22 Feb 2013 | Validated: Fri 22 Feb 2013 | Status: Pending

The council has been a bit coy about their plans for this area so I was keen to see what their proposals were. I looked at the Documents section to find only this statement:

"No documents found"

I went on to look to see if any comments had been made:

"Sorry, we are not currently accepting comments from the public on this application."

I don't know much about the planning system but I wonder if us lesser mortals could get away with submitting a planning application without revealing the details to the public. Comments on a postcard to Mick Henry, Gateshead MBC.
Total coincidence on timing of your post Alf as on Friday evening 01/03/13 met up with former work colleague in Bacchus Pub and he said demolition of properties in Phase 2 area to happen shortly - by that means Dunsmuir, Westminster, Brighton, Hyde Park etc (east of Saltwell Rd)

Was involved with the demolition scheme for the whole area before I "escaped from the Council" (April 2011) and the Phase 2 streets of flats have remained standing and boarded up due to cessation of BNG Pathfinder funding - assume money now found from Council coffers to carry out the works

This screen print of Google Map image shows area in question (image hosted on Photobucket)



Some of the properties in question can be seen in these photographs taken by myself (hosted on Photobucket)

These pictures on 02/03/13

Dunsmuir Grove (lower)









Westminster St, south side





Hyde Park St south side



Hyde Park St north side (Westminster St similar) where boundary treatment carried out by BNG Funding, not scheduled for demolition, my picture 15/05/12



Due to steep slope the Phase 2 area, east of Saltwell Rd being 4-90 (even) Westminster St, 4-66 (even) and 5-83 (odd) Dunsmuir Grove, 1-63 (odd) Kelvin Grove, 166 Rawling Rd and 195-227 (odd) Brighton Rd, 126-166 (even) Hyde Park St, 121-159 (odd) and 122-182 (even) Westminster St, 128-154 (even) and 131-191 (odd) Dunsmuir Grove, 180-220 (even) Rectory Rd) ) will be problematic area to redevelop

The Phase 1 area, west of Saltwell Rd, demolished 2 - 3 years back and grassed over = 130-160 (even) Saltwell Road, 1-39 (odd) and adjacent garages Trevethick St, 2-56 (even) and 3-53 (odd) Brunel St, 1-51 (odd) and 4-54 (even) Armstrong St, 2-52 (even) Macadam St) does not have the same steep slope so will be easier area to develop

KEN
Ken O'Heed no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2013, 07:02 PM   #16
Ken O'Heed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,406
Likes (Received): 3918

Saltwell And Bensham Gateshead - demolition of 118 homes and proposed demolition of a further 295 homes and the redevelopment of the three sites

This on Gateshead Planning Portal 30/04/13 as "Pending"

DC/13/00424/OUT

Retrospective demolition of 118 homes and proposed demolition of a further 295 homes in Saltwell and Bensham and the redevelopment of the three sites with a hybrid planning application comprising an outline consent for 158 new homes and full planning consent for 103 new homes on three sites within Saltwell and Bensham, Gateshead, Saltwell Road west, Kelvin Grove and Hyde Park.

Saltwell And Bensham Gateshead Tyne And Wear NE8 4QN


http://public.gateshead.gov.uk/onlin...tion=firstPage

Lot of documentation on there capable of being viewed.

These covered earlier on this tread by myself including last in post # 948 on 02/03/13

Saltwell Rd West = former Armstrong, Macadam, Trevithick streets - the currently grassed area between Saltwell Rd and the railway

Kelvin Grove = Kelvin Grove, Dunsmuir Grove, Westminster St (one side)

Hyde Park = eastern extents of Dunsmuir Grove, Westminster St

KEN
Ken O'Heed no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2013, 09:00 PM   #17
Squipper
Registered User
 
Squipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,241
Likes (Received): 142

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken O'Heed View Post
This on Gateshead Planning Portal 30/04/13 as "Pending"

DC/13/00424/OUT

Retrospective demolition of 118 homes and proposed demolition of a further 295 homes in Saltwell and Bensham and the redevelopment of the three sites with a hybrid planning application comprising an outline consent for 158 new homes and full planning consent for 103 new homes on three sites within Saltwell and Bensham, Gateshead, Saltwell Road west, Kelvin Grove and Hyde Park.

Saltwell And Bensham Gateshead Tyne And Wear NE8 4QN


http://public.gateshead.gov.uk/onlin...tion=firstPage

Lot of documentation on there capable of being viewed.

These covered earlier on this tread by myself including last in post # 948 on 02/03/13

Saltwell Rd West = former Armstrong, Macadam, Trevithick streets - the currently grassed area between Saltwell Rd and the railway

Kelvin Grove = Kelvin Grove, Dunsmuir Grove, Westminster St (one side)

Hyde Park = eastern extents of Dunsmuir Grove, Westminster St

KEN
Wondering if The Stirling House pub is included in that seeing as it falls between two of the streets coming down?
__________________


Squipper
Royal Air Force
Survival Equipment Fitter
Squipper no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2013, 09:34 PM   #18
Ken O'Heed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,406
Likes (Received): 3918

Quote:
Originally Posted by Squipper View Post
Wondering if The Stirling House pub is included in that seeing as it falls between two of the streets coming down?
When still working at GMBC - including preparing documentation for demolition of Dunsmuir and Westminster Streets it seemed then ( 2 years back) that Stirling House was to stay

However things may have changed

KEN
Ken O'Heed no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2013, 09:46 PM   #19
Ken O'Heed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,406
Likes (Received): 3918

Bensham/ Saltwell area of GAteshead- demolition & new build v refeurbishment

Have a look at GVA Grimley Report from January 2006 on http://www.gateshead.gov.uk/DocumentLibrary/Building/Leaflets/neighbourhoodplans/BenshamGVA.pdf on state of property in this and other areas that was utilised in decision making process to determine which streets, terraces:

either have been or will be subject to demolition

Or have been part of refurbishment scheme - walls, fences etc under BNG scheme

KEN
Ken O'Heed no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2013, 10:54 PM   #20
alf stone
Registered User
 
alf stone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,776
Likes (Received): 475

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken O'Heed View Post
This on Gateshead Planning Portal 30/04/13 as "Pending"

DC/13/00424/OUT

Retrospective demolition of 118 homes and proposed demolition of a further 295 homes in Saltwell and Bensham and the redevelopment of the three sites with a hybrid planning application comprising an outline consent for 158 new homes and full planning consent for 103 new homes on three sites within Saltwell and Bensham, Gateshead, Saltwell Road west, Kelvin Grove and Hyde Park.

Saltwell And Bensham Gateshead Tyne And Wear NE8 4QN


Lot of documentation on there capable of being viewed.

These covered earlier on this tread by myself including last in post # 948 on 02/03/13

Saltwell Rd West = former Armstrong, Macadam, Trevithick streets - the currently grassed area between Saltwell Rd and the railway

Kelvin Grove = Kelvin Grove, Dunsmuir Grove, Westminster St (one side)

Hyde Park = eastern extents of Dunsmuir Grove, Westminster St

KEN
Lot of documentation as you say Ken so I got out the popcorn and started to read but when I opened the first document and read the first paragraph I lost the will to live:

Streets at Saltwell and Bensham are knitted into the existing
urban fabric; a gentle hierarchy of spaces ranging from more
traditional streets along existing terraced homes to informal
quiet street types. The public realm design responds to its
wider context and area characteristics, such as the scale
and properties of the Tyneside street-scape and the steeply
sloping site. The masterplan typically retains the established
street pattern, breaking it to introduce small public open
spaces. The resulting legible hierarchy of pedestrian
prioritised streets, generous flush surfaces and shared
communal gardens create an improved pedestrian friendly
neighbourhood.

Is there a translator in the forum?
alf stone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


Reply

Tags
construction, constructions, gateshead, housing, newcastle, project, project - newcastle area, projects

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:34 AM. • styleid: 14


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us