South Tyneside Council defends Hebburn tower block demolition plans as tenants face being kicked out

The residential tower block dates back to 1974, is now directly managed by the council and is designated for older residents aged over 55, with nearly 70 tenants currently living there despite the building having around 111 flats.

In a letter to affected residents earlier this month, the council said the building was of “non-traditional construction” and only intended to remain for 40-50 years and was therefore, “beyond its intended lifespan”.

Although the building is compliant with all regulations, it is understood that surveys have found the structure requires “significant investment”, which would be “highly disruptive to all tenants” and would not even “guarantee the long-term sustainability of the building”.

South Tyneside Council has already held several consultation events with Durham Court residents and presentations on the future of the tower block went to a number of council committees this month.

While demolition is the preferred option, it is one of three options expected to be presented to senior councillors in May, 2025, with the council’s ruling Labour cabinet having the final say.

The demolition option ‘option two’ is estimated to cost the council £6.6 million, made up of the demolition costs, discounted rental loss over 30 years, ‘home loss payments’ to tenants, the relocation of CCTV and more.

A presentation to councillors on the Housing and Environment Scrutiny Committee on March 20, 2025, confirmed that it would be double the cost to move forward with ‘option one’, which would be “direct investment” into the building of £12 million.

This includes £2.5 million to replace ‘soil stacks’ infrastructure, as well as £9.5 million of additional work covering roof replacement, rewiring, fire alarms, lighting and more.

Council officers told councillors these direct investment costs would have a major impact on “wider housing budgets” across the borough, would mean “significant disruption to tenants” and would “not guarantee lifespan” of the building.

It was also noted that there was a “potential option for [a] capital receipt of estimated £150,000” through the “sale of [the] cleared site.”

The other option on the table ‘option three’ includes the sale of the building to another registered housing provider, such as a housing association, which planning documents state would represent a total council investment of £9.5 million.

Council housing chiefs said they were “uncertain” whether other housing providers would be willing to take Durham Court on, given its condition, and that any transfer would be subject to a ballot by law and could see rent increases for new tenants, as well as the sustainability of the building remaining uncertain.

Council officer Phil Dixon, the council’s head of strategic housing and assets, said the demolition option for Durham Court was the “cheapest” out of the three proposed.

Council officers stressed that all residents affected would be supported with their wishes for future suitable alternative accommodation, with potential moves to new or existing extra care facilities in some cases, subject to individual care assessments.

It was also noted that, if demolition is approved by cabinet and carried out, each resident would be eligible to receive a home loss payment of around £8,100, a figure set nationally.

Councillors were told that it would be a tenant’s choice where they wanted to move to, and that they would be supported throughout the process.

Anna Milner, senior manager for housing strategy and regulation, said it was important to “remember that these are people’s homes and we need to make sure that people are supported throughout the whole process”.

“We have undertaken a number of housing renewal schemes, particularly in Hebburn but across the borough in general, and we know how difficult it is for individuals,” she said.

“We need to make sure that we take tenants with us, they feel supported and that we meet their housing needs as best as possible.”

Council housing officers admitted there was not an “abundance of housing” for tenants to relocate to and that there would be “no pressure for tenants to relocate immediately” in the case of demolition, with the process of relocating residents expected to take years.

Councillors on the Housing and Environment Scrutiny Committee shared their views on the proposals at a meeting at South Shields Town Hall on Thursday (March 20, 2025).

Several councillors were critical of the proposals and the way Durham Court coming to the end of its lifespan was communicated to councillors, including those on the scrutiny committee.

Councillor Neil Maxwell said tenants facing the “forced move” should be given more compensation than they are entitled to, but was told that this could create issues as other tenants facing similar situations had previously received the prescribed payment set out in Central Government rules.

Council officers stressed that residents of Durham Court would be supported with the cost of removals, along with support around decoration or utility changeovers associated with moving.

However, councillor Andrew Guy said the council was “settling with some quite polar options” and asked if council officers had considered an “option four” to demolish the building and to build “111 council properties”.

Council officer Anna Milner said replacing the site on a “one for one” basis would be financially and logistically “very difficult”, but said that there was a “pipeline” of new council housing sites, with efforts under way to “purchase and develop” more properties in future.

Councillor Jim Foreman, cabinet member for housing and community safety, who attended the scrutiny meeting, said that existing Durham Court residents would get the “best support possible whenever they want to move”.

He also acknowledged the wider housing and waiting list challenges in the borough and referenced ongoing council work to build council homes and extra care developments, adding the council was “doing the best we can with what we have.”

In response to questions, council officers also suggested that residents affected by any decision to demolish Durham Court could be given priority for new-build council housing or extra care schemes, depending on their individual circumstances and care requirements.

It was noted that the whole process of re-homing tenants and demolition could take between three and four years to complete and that there were no emerging issues with the building that “needed to be addressed immediately”.

Councillor Andrew Guy said the borough faced a “dire situation” with social housing registers and that he was “upset” that demolition was being recommended without “ample consideration presented to cabinet to build 111 or 70 council properties”.

“As a councillor I feel like I’m being railroaded into accepting that these three are the only options when they’re not, there’s an option four and that is please start building council houses, we need them,” he added.

Council officer Phil Dixon, head of strategic housing and assets, said the council had faced issues around funding for council housing in recent years, but that the Government had now made it an “absolute priority” to build more homes.

He told the meeting South Tyneside Council was progressing new social housing schemes and referenced ongoing developments at Lizard Lane and Reynolds Avenue in the borough, and said more sites were expected to come forward in future.

“We have an ambition as a council to deliver and develop as much council housing as we possibly can within the financial envelope that we’ve got and that will fluctuate over years,” he added.

“That does make it quite difficult to plan and to profile how many houses we’re going to build in any given year, given the changes in our funding and requirements we’ve got to manage around our own housing stock and given the Government’s funding as well.

“We will try and maximise any funding that we can get, whether it be to develop new housing or purchase former right to buy properties, or by any other means that we might be able to generate new council stock.”

Mr Dixon said it was “challenging” for cabinet to consider Cllr Guy’s ‘option 4’ given “uncertainties” around housing sites in the borough, as well as internal and external funding.

Cllr Guy said that “other options were also difficult” and that an option four for cabinet, including identifying sites and build costs for new council homes, was “off the table before it even gets into the political realms.”

Council officer, Anna Milner, added that if there was an option to invest funding to create a “sustainable” tower block at Durham Court, demolition would not have been proposed, given the council’s pressures around homelessness and the housing allocations process.

“We certainly wouldn’t be moving vulnerable old people from their home unless this was the only option,” she said.

“I appreciate Cllr Guy’s point about the replacement […] but the evidence we have, it’s very clear that Durham Court is not sustainable.

“It would be immoral to make any other recommendation than for it to be demolished and for us to support tenants to move in a planned way, rather than a crisis if something happened to that building.

“At the same time, we will be committed to applying for as much grant funding as we can and trying to re-balance some of the challenges we have within our affordable housing stock.”

The same presentation was also given to the Hebburn Community Area Forum (CAF) on Monday, March 24, 2025, where some tenants attended to ask questions and raise concerns, with one speaker noting the “growing mistrust between tenants and the council”.

Questions were raised about existing issues with the building’s ‘concierge’ service, why the council had invested millions of pounds into Durham Court only to propose demolition and the level of help available for tenants ahead of any cabinet decision.

One speaker also said moving elderly residents would have “detrimental” health impacts, as the council “had nowhere to put them and they don’t want to leave.”

Council officers stressed no cabinet decision had been made yet but agreed to take a question away about whether the home loss payment for tenants in the event of demolition was “taxable”, and council officers said tenants would be written to with key information in coming weeks.

Council officers also made a commitment to continue liaising with residents, including regular drop-in sessions at Durham Court throughout April taking place every Wednesday afternoon.

Hebburn Court is the only high-rise residential building remaining in Hebburn following the demolition of other buildings following previous housing renewal schemes.

It is expected that the future of Durham Court will be decided at a South Tyneside Council cabinet meeting in May, 2025, although the date, time and venue are yet to be confirmed.

A previous statement from the council said: “We understand this may be an unsettling time for tenants and they will be fully supported and informed throughout the process.

“A number of meetings are being held and all Durham Court residents have been invited to attend to ask any questions.”