Wood Green - The Plan

padington

Regarding desirability and past performance of the borough generally here's from homes and property from the standard ....


Hackney and Haringey were today named London’s two greenest boroughs thanks to acres of open space, clean air and dedication to recycling. The research by Chestertons estate agents reveals that homes in the greenest locations in the capital regularly outperform grubbier neighbours when it comes to house price growth, too.

Prices in Hackney, east London, have shot up by almost 749 per cent in the past two decades to an average of £629,821. Its winning performance is thanks to low levels of carbon emissions and the fact that 90 per cent of its residents live within a short walk of open space.

Haringey, which takes second place, has enjoyed price rises of just over 544 per cent in the past 20 years to an average of £525,403. Some of the north London borough’s green credentials include a household recycling rate of 36 per cent and the fact that 69 per cent of residents live within easy reach of open space.

cells

padington wrote: »

Regarding desirability and past performance of the borough generally here's from homes and property from the standard ....


Hackney and Haringey were today named London’s two greenest boroughs thanks to acres of open space, clean air and dedication to recycling. The research by Chestertons estate agents reveals that homes in the greenest locations in the capital regularly outperform grubbier neighbours when it comes to house price growth, too.

Prices in Hackney, east London, have shot up by almost 749 per cent in the past two decades to an average of £629,821. Its winning performance is thanks to low levels of carbon emissions and the fact that 90 per cent of its residents live within a short walk of open space.

Haringey, which takes second place, has enjoyed price rises of just over 544 per cent in the past 20 years to an average of £525,403. Some of the north London borough’s green credentials include a household recycling rate of 36 per cent and the fact that 69 per cent of residents live within easy reach of open space.

putting old cans of baked beans in one bin rather than another has nowt to do with it nor do the large parks that are mostly deserted (eg hackney marshes)

the proximity of hackney to the city of London and the growing population making commuting more difficult and less pleasant and the old industries like textiles in Hackney going bankrupt and being replaced by expensive flats

also a general diluting of hackney social homes size from a bit over 50% to a bit over 40%. A smaller proportion of poorer folk meant the place is a bit more desirable. If the social homes stock was sold down towards the 18% level which is more the England average then Hackney would be even more expensive.

and maybe there is also a general improvement of social home tenants. What was a family of say two jobless parents and three hooligan kids might now be a far more quiet two pensioners. So places that are high social homes (eg hackney and haringey) might have improved more so than other areas will less social homes

padington

cells wrote: »

sure it was putting old cans of baked beans in one bin rather than another what did it

nowt to do with the proximity of hackney to the city of London and the growing population making commuting more difficult and less pleasant nor anything to do with the old industries like textiles in Hackney going bankrupt and being replaced by expensive flats

Hoe much people recycle does say something about what the people around you are like.

MARTYM8`

padington wrote: »

Hoe much people recycle does say something about what the people around you are like.

It actually says more about how many people live in flats or houses. If you live in a flat with communal bins they cannot track you down if you don't recycle - if you live in a house they can.

Bexley had the highest recycling rates in London last year - and it has the cheapest house prices bar Dagenham - but most of the property is houses on suburban streets.

https://london.greenparty.org.uk/news/2014/11/20/recycling-rates-drop-in-almost-half-of-london-boroughs/

More exclusive Hammersmith, Wandsworth Kensington and Westminster were near the bottom despite having the highest house prices!

chewmylegoff

padington wrote: »

Hoe much people recycle does say something about what the people around you are like.

So does how many times they mug you on the way home from the station. Personally I would rather live somewhere with much lower crime (eg my area has 20 odd 'thefts from the person' in the last 12 months vs. over 700 reported in Wood Green which has a similar population) and a terrible recycling record but each to their own.

cells

padington wrote: »

Hoe much people recycle does say something about what the people around you are like.

interesting point but I don't think it is at all relevant to house prices. Last time I checked Hackney was ~20% owner occupied the other 80% were renters. So the parks and recycling isn't really pulling in owners.

Whats happened is that inner London has become an area for younger people who probably don't want to pay a lot for transport so z2 areas where they can walk/cycle to work is better than a z4/z5 area with £180/£210 monthly tube ticket not to mention the maybe 1h transport vs 20 mins walk/cycle.




of course more importantly is whats going to happen over the next 20 years rather than what happened over the last 20 years. Will inner London become more and more the young working renters paying higher rent to drive higher prices by displacing the older folk there already? I think so but there will be a limit


EDIT: Also of course the increase in student numbers over the last 20 years will have driven the rise in younger 18-22 age group in London and especially in inner London. And once they study in the inner London areas they probably look for and find jobs in inner London boosting the 25-35 group in inner London.

This makes a lot of sense to me and I had not considered the difference in demographics between inner and outer london

padington

chewmylegoff wrote: »

So does how many times they mug you on the way home from the station. Personally I would rather live somewhere with much lower crime (eg my area has 20 odd 'thefts from the person' in the last 12 months vs. over 700 reported in Wood Green which has a similar population) and a terrible recycling record but each to their own.

Each to their own, personally I would prefer to live somewhere right now that I can get to the party (and work) back easily or my guests can come to the party and get back home easily with most things available to buy or do at a stones throw away (literally) and a great price trajectory for when I want to sell up and move to my log cabin in the woods.

Regarding crime, London is much of a muchness and the police crime stats prove it. In a matter of fact robberies in muswell hill and crouch end is pretty damn high whilst on my road in Wood Green we've only had one handbag nicked in over 15 years ( according to neighbours that have been here that long ).

However I accept that London has hirgher crime rates than places where there are much less people.

Who would have thunked it.

padington

Regarding the relationship between population and crime, this is a must watch ...

https://www.ted.com/talks/geoffrey_west_the_surprising_math_of_cities_and_corporations

padington

cells wrote: »

interesting point but I don't think it is at all relevant to house prices. Last time I checked Hackney was ~20% owner occupied the other 80% were renters. So the parks and recycling isn't really pulling in owners.

Whats happened is that inner London has become an area for younger people who probably don't want to pay a lot for transport so z2 areas where they can walk/cycle to work is better than a z4/z5 area with £180/£210 monthly tube ticket not to mention the maybe 1h transport vs 20 mins walk/cycle.




of course more importantly is whats going to happen over the next 20 years rather than what happened over the last 20 years. Will inner London become more and more the young working renters paying higher rent to drive higher prices by displacing the older folk there already? I think so but there will be a limit


EDIT: Also of course the increase in student numbers over the last 20 years will have driven the rise in younger 18-22 age group in London and especially in inner London. And once they study in the inner London areas they probably look for and find jobs in inner London boosting the 25-35 group in inner London.

This makes a lot of sense to me and I had not considered the difference in demographics between inner and outer london

Hackney are Haringey are explained to me by the demise of industrialism and the end of the need to be near key resources (to manufacture them) and the rise of the digital age and the need to be near the new key resources ( computer coders and other key related experts in order to manufacture the new virtual world ).

The Irony being the seeds of the new virtual world are best nurtured face to face over a pint of beer in the real world (and that requires the key people hanging out in the same places).

chewmylegoff

padington wrote: »

Each to their own, personally I would prefer to live somewhere right now that I can get to the party (and work) back easily or my guests can come to the party and get back home easily with most things available to buy or do at a stones throw away (literally) and a great price trajectory for when I want to sell up and move to my log cabin in the woods.

Regarding crime, London is much of a muchness and the police crime stats prove it. In a matter of fact robberies in muswell hill and crouch end is pretty damn high whilst on my road in Wood Green we've only had one handbag nicked in over 15 years ( according to neighbours that have been here that long ).

However I accept that London has hirgher crime rates than places where there are much less people.

Who would have thunked it.

Except as I said the populations are comparable. On your other points I suppose I do live out of zone now and it is difficult to get home late, but then I have kids now so am not particularly interested in the party. When I was, I still wouldn't go anywhere near wood green personally...

I tested your crime stats theory by looking at the crime stats for Lambeth which has 2.5 times the population of wood green, the same total number of crimes and only about 60% of the number if muggings. Lambeth contains some truly horrible areas as well. Wandsworth is basically the same but with a lower level of muggings. Richmond has 50% more people and half the crime. A lot of this is probably because the SW postcodes don't have the N22 post code gang in them.

Basically wood green is ok as long as you don't live anywhere near it and never have to go there. I suppose if you live on the Alexandra Palace side and nowhere near lordship lane in might be bearable.