What is it that makes an area "nice"?

[Waterbortle]

I live in a town that has a number of council estates, or former council estates. 1960s built, as council homes, but now mostly privately owned.

My own first home in the early 90s was on such an estate. At that point it was about 50/50 private ownership and council. (Ours was bought). It was a nice place to live. People took pride in their homes, whether owned or rented, everything was tidy and people behaved well towards each other, no antisocial behaviour.

Where I live now is a street of detached houses, but the 'vibe' is much the same. A nice place to live.

On my walk to the station I pass through another of the former council estates, that is very different. Houses are scruffy, gardens untidy, rubbish left in heaps, people shouting at all times of day. TBH I'd assumed it's a sign of the times, life is hard, standards declining etc

But, yesterday I walked past my old house. I was in the area and went for a peek. (The hedge I planted is still there, they've changed the front door, but the double glazing is still the quality (😆) stuff we had fitted in 1993.) The estate generally was still lovely, houses and gardens cared for, mostly quiet with children playing nicely in the walkways.

So, why are the two estates, less than two miles apart, so different?

Social class. Bearsden in Glasgow backs onto Drumchapel, they might as well be different planets.

Yes, but these are two "identical" estates. How does one come to have a different social class to the other?

Luck. An area which looks well cared for attracts people, pushing property prices higher, which then starts being self selecting.

A nice area to me is somewhere where people care about the impact of their lives on their neighbours. If you have an estate full of scruffs who couldn’t give a shit about sitting on the front lawn drinking with shite music blasting out all day, it’s probably not a “nice” area. See also kids running around unsupervised wearing nothing but dirty nappies.

Rubbish piled up is another thing.

I think of the area I know that is "rough" its because alot of people dont work, or they are drug dealers and they turn the area into no go areas. Their children run around terrorising the locals, they spray paint bus shelters, houses, shops etc. Just causing mischief and making good honest people move house.

I live in a nice area, houses are sold very quickly. There's a nice community feel, everyone says hello. We have regular litter picks to help the area look nice and people look out for each other.

One has a scattering of problem houses, giving an impression of neglect or social problems, making houses harder to sell, and, if they sell, sell for less, and this hardens over time. And/or landlords buy to rent, and the houses look neglected, or like obvious houseshares, and the people living in HMOs aren't doing upkeep, obviously, and don't invest in where they live because they're transient, so aren't going out on community litterpicks, or neighbourhood stuff. Or you're unlucky with who moves in, and the police are around a lot, or a green or corner is somewhere the local dealer's couriers hang out.

In the other estate, it might start off exactly the same, but a few longtime inhabitants are successful in creating more of a community spirit/fundraising for traffic-calming measures/a new playground/moving communal grass/doing guerrilla gardening etc -- more owner occupiers who are more invested in the area, do more upkeep on their houses so the place is visually more pleasant, get more involved in stuff, get to know neighbours because they're staying longterm etc. The dealers operate somewhere else. Houses prices are higher than in the other estate.

So you start off with two identical ex-council estates, and one goes up and one down.

You only have to mention the little cul de sac next to where my nice PIL live, and taxi drivers won't drop there and every cop in the city knows it.

Always the people. No area or land is inherently good or bad it’s just the people who live there.

A ‘nice area’ is mostly clean and tidy, has tidy decently kept gardens, minimal litter, no graffiti, no or very little dog shit on the pavements, the people don’t behave in an antisocial way, you don’t see litter, broken glass and old vapes in the parks, they have safe green spaces for children to play, teens and yobs don’t hang around around drinking and doing drugs, there are decent amenities (nice shops and cafes as opposed to tanning salons and vape shops and shops boarded up), has good public transport links, good schools, and is usually fairly quiet.

I agree with this as a person who lives near Glasgow. Drumchapel is a shithole. Plenty of good people there, but a shithole nonetheless. I honestly don’t know why the stark difference from nearby Bearsden. It’s historical I’m guessing. Years of poverty and underinvestment. High rises. Any place with high rises tends to be ‘rough’. In fact, sadly (I’m ready to be jumped on!), places with lots of social housing of any kind. Generational poverty and unemployment, social issues and poor mental and physical health.

Civic pride, I guess.
Or in simpler terms, scum breeds scum.

One small thing though. I live on an ex council estate (about 90% owned now) built in 1948. It's still a little bit rough (it's cheap) but there's a huge tree every 6ft along every street, so it gives the impression of being 'leafy' and therefore nice.

It’s either this: clean streets, aesthetically pleasing architecture, friendly people, sense or community. Or it’s an exciting melting pot of people and ideas, where a place feels like it’s everything all at once, as well as constantly evolving, where everything seems possible. I live i Manhattan which falls squarely in the latter category. I don’t think it can be described as “nice” the way a quaint village in the Cotswolds can, but living here is like living a fantasy life.

My late db bought an ex council house years ago and it's still very rough. He had an awful time there. Not all the houses were bought so the housing association took them on and problem families encourage house swaps with their problem relatives and so on! When he bought in the late 1990s lots of people were buying them and people were trying to make them nice. Now if one goes up for sale the housing association often buys them back.

True. Rubbish begets rubbish. I notice this on road verges - there are a few round here which are horrible and others with no rubbish - it makes little sense until you realise that if there are a few bits of rubbish some people's attitude is that it then doesn't matter if they chuck rubbish too.

Few people.

Much nature.

Look up broken windows theory.

I know less social housing is built these days but there is an estate being built in my friends town it’s the site of a lot of old factories. almost all of it will be social housing with some as shared ownership. As points means problems, obviously not always of people’s own making such as a woman fleeing DV it will be interesting to see how this estate ends up after a year or two. They are doing a great job, the houses look really nice and it will all be brand new. I’m seeing her tomorrow so assume it must be much further on with being developed. Close to 200 houses and flats.

Her DS is a Police Officer and when called to any kind of anti social behaviour issue on a newer build estate he says he knows where he is going because the houses always look scruffy even though it’s all built at the same time.

It's always the people. We live in a very nice area, but we have one problem neighbour. He bought a house from an elderly couple and is in the process of rebuilding it. Since he's been here, he has alienated all of the neighbours. He is noisy, abusive and a general pita. He has disregarded all the planning requirements. He and his workmen smoke and deal drugs. They park up and leave vehicles all over the road. We have complained to the council and had the police around. He has had several failed companies and is serial bankrupt. We just want him to sell up and fuck off. Pity the people who will buy these houses as they have been really badly built.

So, it's amazing how quickly and area can be blighted by even one neighbour.

These things ebb and flow in time.
Clifton in Bristol was The place to be in Georgian times. By the 1970s it had become very run down with beautiful townhouses converted into damp, cramped bedsits or in complete dereliction. Move on to the 1990s and it was on the up. Million pound flats, chi chi bars, coffee shops and glitzy shops. 2025 sees it filling up with student accommodation, stag nights and overflowing bins.

One nice gallery, shop or cafe brings an area up e.g. The Tate, St Ives.
On bad neighbour or a loud bar and the area takes a turn.
Nobody wants the house by the stone clad one.

This like where I live.

However it's very rural though. So it's not considered a nice area as such, just a small rural inclusive community. There are people that have lived here all their life but also a lot of people who have move here from all over the UK. Houses usually sell quicky. Cause its small, there isn't the crime of bigger places but there is a surprising number of council houses. Where as most bigger places have the good and bad areas.

I looked with a dd at several ex council properties. We soon wrote off one area, which could have been perfectly pleasant if not for litter, rubbish like old mattresses dumped in front gardens, very loud music blaring out, people yelling and swearing at full volume, etc. The actual houses were well built, reasonably spacious 1950s builds, there were grass verges in the roads. It was a great shame to see what the area had become.

She eventually bought an ex LA in a very quiet road, where none of those off-putting factors applied. Interestingly, the former owners had bought it from the council in 1971, well before Thatcher, for almost exactly 1% of what dd paid. The interior was extremely dated, but it was instantly obvious that the house had been well loved and cared for.

I think this is a really good explanation of how it happens, and how it’s a fine balance between an area going ‘up’ versus going ‘down’. There might also have been other factors like one school had a better reputation that the other, which over the years has influenced people to move there.

I’ve noticed a similar issue where I live. I’m in an area of small terraced houses, quite near the city centre, a couple of nearby supermarkets and some green space. It’s an ok place to live, quite safe, but not a desirable area (which is why we could afford to buy a house here!). On the other side of the city centre, there’s an area of very similar houses that has really gentrified over the past ten years (and has the house prices to match). I think the key difference is that the other area had a small high street with a couple of independent shops and cafes, and has a really nice park very near by. The high street has been boosted and promoted by the local business association over the past decade, and there’s enough of the ‘alternative middle class/ slightly crunchy’ demographic to support the independent shops, and it’s gone from strength to strength. It’s been quite fascinating to watch.

I also agree with another poster than areas with lots of social housing tend to have problems, which can tip the balance of an area over time. It sounds harsh, but due to the reduced amount of social housing available, it’s more likely to be allocated to people who are really in need of it, which includes what you could call ‘problem families’. Then you end up with rundown areas with antisocial behaviour, and it spirals down.

Sometimes it is how the houses are maintained over the years. A family member lives in a part of south London in a Victorian terraced house where along her road the houses have been largely turned into flats, hence lots of short term lets and few large families. Up the road the houses are the same and go for a considerably large amount and those houses belong to families with 3 or more children, arty / professional families, parking is just the same on the road with no driveways due to the hill. The difference is stark. My aunt says that back in the day she predicted the problems of going up and down a hill in her old age, along with ice and snow. The houses were the same in price back then. Children from both roads can apply to a grammar school, the catholic school serves both roads etc. but the simple fact that most of her neighbours are students / short term lets, means that her road and the similar ones are less desirable. The police cruise along her road more often. The gardens are poorly cared after (when looking from the back windows), and the front gardens are not better looked after either. Bins do not always get brought back in. People double park on the road, leave the indicators on and disappear off into their homes for ages, blocking an already narrow road, the list goes on. They all have walking access to a thriving high street including a post office, various take -aways, various grocers, buses. She gets leaflets on a regular basis saying that property developers are interested in her property. There are fewer than 4 houses on her road which are still 3 floor Victorian houses with 2 front doors. Gentrification hasn’t served all areas equally.

For me a nice area is decent sized houses, well maintained gardens and houses, space between houses too, not all crammed in. Quiet.

Tbh, for me a nice area is rural, pretty, postcard villages 🙈 I’m a country girl and dislike towns and cities, though I can obviously appreciate a nice ‘area’ in these places, I just don’t tend to see many when I drive through cities and towns, it all seems a bit….rough

Knightswood was all social housing and has never been as bad. I’m from Drumchapel and live in Bearsden. The amount of rubbish in Drumchapel is disgraceful but tbh the people were so much nicer. It’s a minority that’s ruins it for everyone in Drumchapel

Similar in my town, OP, my mum lived on a lovely mid-sized council estate, trim front gardens, well-kept public space, nice people. As you walked further along the long central road - in both directions - the creeping scruff was noticeable until by the end you had front gardens full of crap and the worst accumulation of dog shit I have ever seen in my life. I concluded it must be a deliberate policy by the council/HA.