Professionals send Brixton property prices surging by 15%

[Gramsci]

Some did. Some others moved for work, or like my step-mums family - because the council house they were offered in Carshalton had facilities and space they couldn't have dreamed of in Battersea.

fair point. I was a bit irritated at Millwalls post.

New Towns like Milton Keynes offered good standard of housing for people from inner city London. So you are right that was a reason to move.

 

[Ms Ordinary]

One positive, and perhaps under-appreciated, development in this debate is Lambeth's new restriction on the conversion of houses into flats.

Such conversions have wrecked many streets, including mine, by encouraging transience.

I'm probably missing a huge point about why this a good idea - it may be in some respects - but surely only really quite rich people can afford to buy or rent a whole victorian terrace house just for one family to live in these days. So an area will be quite one-dimensional if that's all you end up with.

It does make sense for some of those houses to be split into flats for less wealthy families. Eg the Dalberg / Rattray Road area between Effra Rd & Railton Rd - which is just ordinary 2 storey terraces not huge victorian piles - seems to have a healthy mixture of flats & houses, & plenty of the flats do have families who have been there for years, children in local schools etc (ie not transient).

I'm less familiar with Leander Rd, you may well be right about the negative effects of conversions there. I do recall looking round a newly converted flat off Josephine Avenue, & I couldn't believe how many poky flats they'd managed to squeeze into one house - and these were freshly painted, nice looking flats, just absolutely tiny. If I'd had to move in there, I don't think I'd have stayed long.
The flats I'm thinking of, round Dalberg area - I think some are housing association, i.e. decently sized conversions.

 

[Diamond]

The free market in action.

This thread is pathetic. This website essentially paved the way and cheer lead every aspect and forerunner of BVM and then rails agains it more or less exclusively because it drives up prices.

The area is in demand, partly because you made it so, and then that is a bad thing? Why? A bad, thing bringing in businesses and consequent employment? A lot of this stuff seems to be about "real Brixton", which is total nonsense. Why is this "area" any much more yours than theirs, especially when they have risked capital on that very fact?

I never lived in Brixton. I lived in Loughbourough Junction, in an area most in Brixton wouldn't even consider going to, but the one thing that really hacked me off was the peeps who thought they were doing Brixton a favour by living in the general area. That their colourful lives of quite frankly "typical" anti establishment harmlessness justified their general inability to grasp the most basic principles while still exhorting the most crude imitations of the very same.

Brixton is changing. In the very greatest part for the better.

Forget your past.

It's long gone.

In the largest part, for the better.

 

[editor]

The free market in action.

This thread is pathetic. This website essentially paved the way and cheer lead every aspect and forerunner of BVM and then rails agains it more or less exclusively because it drives up prices..

I didn't cheer on £257,000 one-bedroom Barratt Homes developments on Coldharbour Lane, and I don't think there's much on this site that would have sent the buy-to-let brigade hurdling down SW9-way either.

In the largest part, for the better.

Unless you're being priced out of your own home and community, of course. Ain't the free market grand?

 

[paolo]

Best way of avoiding other people liking the area where you live, is to live somewhere unremittingly shit. Try Thamesmead. There's a place that won't be overrun by *anyone at all* any time soon.

Brixton's great. In fact it's so good it kicks the arse of supposedly 'better' neighbourhoods like Clapham. And hey, surprise surprise, people have realised that.

It would be convenient to think that times are changing solely because of parasitical BTL landlords, or a single bland and opportunistic Barratts development, but the reality is less contrived. Brixton has fuckloads of good stuff going for it, and people* are now finding out.

 

[lighterthief]

I didn't cheer on £257,000 one-bedroom Barratt Homes developments on Coldharbour Lane, and I don't think there's much on this site that would have sent the buy-to-let brigade hurdling down SW9-way either.

Running a website that actively celebrates/discusses what is happening in Brixton is a (small) step in the overall process, though (not that I am blaming you for doing so), as is anyone supporting new cafes, shops, small retailers, markets etc (not that I am blaming them, either). The sharp end of gentrification is indeed ugly to see, but it doesn't appear one day out of thin air.

 

[fortyplus]

I'm probably missing a huge point about why this a good idea - it may be in some respects - but surely only really quite rich people can afford to buy or rent a whole victorian terrace house just for one family to live in these days. So an area will be quite one-dimensional if that's all you end up with.

It does make sense for some of those houses to be split into flats for less wealthy families. Eg the Dalberg / Rattray Road area between Effra Rd & Railton Rd - which is just ordinary 2 storey terraces not huge victorian piles - seems to have a healthy mixture of flats & houses, & plenty of the flats do have families who have been there for years, children in local schools etc (ie not transient).

I'm less familiar with Leander Rd, you may well be right about the negative effects of conversions there. I do recall looking round a newly converted flat off Josephine Avenue, & I couldn't believe how many poky flats they'd managed to squeeze into one house - and these were freshly painted, nice looking flats, just absolutely tiny. If I'd had to move in there, I don't think I'd have stayed long.
The flats I'm thinking of, round Dalberg area - I think some are housing association, i.e. decently sized conversions.

Big houses don't have to be lived in exclusively by families, they work very well as shared houses. The regulations on HMOs discourage this, but it is an efficient way of providing relatively affordable housing in the private sector and the best shared houses (ideally with a live-in landlord imo) create lasting friendships, and wide networks of friends who can be as supportive and enduring as any family. Brixton had quite a number of these, particularly in the 1990s, because it had escaped the rash of conversions that destroyed most of the large houses in Clapham and Wandsworth during the 80s property boom.

 

[Frumious B.]

The free market in action.

This thread is pathetic. This website essentially paved the way and cheer lead every aspect and forerunner of BVM and then rails agains it more or less exclusively because it drives up prices.

The area is in demand, partly because you made it so, and then that is a bad thing? Why? A bad, thing bringing in businesses and consequent employment? A lot of this stuff seems to be about "real Brixton", which is total nonsense. Why is this "area" any much more yours than theirs, especially when they have risked capital on that very fact?

I never lived in Brixton. I lived in Loughbourough Junction, in an area most in Brixton wouldn't even consider going to, but the one thing that really hacked me off was the peeps who thought they were doing Brixton a favour by living in the general area. That their colourful lives of quite frankly "typical" anti establishment harmlessness justified their general inability to grasp the most basic principles while still exhorting the most crude imitations of the very same.

Brixton is changing. In the very greatest part for the better.

Forget your past.

It's long gone.

In the largest part, for the better.

There's nothing hypocritical about promoting the area then complaining when you are forced out. What you are overlooking is the underlying problem, which is the gulf between rich and poor. Your argument is indistinguishable from the one US Republicans make when they argue for tax cuts for the rich: "if you can't afford a decent life, it's your fault." You need to realise that not everyone can be rich. Somebody always has to do the low paid jobs, or be unemployed or disabled or old. If we had a fair society, like many of the ones in Western Europe, the fans of Brixton Village would not have that sinking feeling about their rent becoming unaffordable just because all the hipsters are coming here for a burger on Saturdays.

 

[MillwallShoes]

There's nothing hypocritical about promoting the area then complaining when you are forced out. What you are overlooking is the underlying problem, which is the gulf between rich and poor. Your argument is indistinguishable from the one US Republicans make when they argue for tax cuts for the rich: "if you can't afford a decent life, it's your fault." You need to realise that not everyone can be rich. Somebody always has to do the low paid jobs, or be unemployed or disabled or old. If we had a fair society, like many of the ones in Western Europe, the fans of Brixton Village would not have that sinking feeling about their rent becoming unaffordable just because all the hipsters are coming here for a burger on Saturdays.

even with a fairer society, people would still be priced out of places that they want to live.

 

[Kanda]

New Towns like Milton Keynes offered good standard of housing for people from inner city London. So you are right that was a reason to move.

They offered boxes with rooms in. There was fuck all there back when they were forcing people from inner London to move there. They just built an initial 3 or 4 estates with a local shop and plonked various London overspill in them, that didn't go well...

 

[Frumious B.]

even with a fairer society, people would still be priced out of places that they want to live.

Some would, in some areas. But what we're facing here in Brixton is most of the residents being forced out of a fairly humble area. This isn't exactly Knightsbridge or St Tropez. But it's fast becoming just as out of reach.

 

[MillwallShoes]

i do agree with violent panda's comments about people-centered flight instead of market centered flight. good point.

 

[Manter]

I'm probably missing a huge point about why this a good idea - it may be in some respects - but surely only really quite rich people can afford to buy or rent a whole victorian terrace house just for one family to live in these days. So an area will be quite one-dimensional if that's all you end up with.

It does make sense for some of those houses to be split into flats for less wealthy families. Eg the Dalberg / Rattray Road area between Effra Rd & Railton Rd - which is just ordinary 2 storey terraces not huge victorian piles - seems to have a healthy mixture of flats & houses, & plenty of the flats do have families who have been there for years, children in local schools etc (ie not transient).

I'm less familiar with Leander Rd, you may well be right about the negative effects of conversions there. I do recall looking round a newly converted flat off Josephine Avenue, & I couldn't believe how many poky flats they'd managed to squeeze into one house - and these were freshly painted, nice looking flats, just absolutely tiny. If I'd had to move in there, I don't think I'd have stayed long.
The flats I'm thinking of, round Dalberg area - I think some are housing association, i.e. decently sized conversions.

the issue Lambeth were trying to address was that huge levels of subdivision means huge stress on infrastructure in the area- rather then one family, you squeeze three or four per house- you are potentially tripling demand on medical services, transport, roads etc. To try and avoid gentrification taking the form of speculators buying housing stock cheap, splitting it as far as possible and then renting it out on short lets, they have tried to restrict some activity so there is a mixture, gentrification was slowed. that avoids (or mitigates the severity of) Brixton becoming Clapham Junction, and gives the local infrastructure a chance

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Big houses don't have to be lived in exclusively by families, they work very well as shared houses. The regulations on HMOs discourage this, but it is an efficient way of providing relatively affordable housing in the private sector and the best shared houses (ideally with a live-in landlord imo) create lasting friendships, and wide networks of friends who can be as supportive and enduring as any family. Brixton had quite a number of these, particularly in the 1990s, because it had escaped the rash of conversions that destroyed most of the large houses in Clapham and Wandsworth during the 80s property boom.

Well, there was a lot of this in social housing too in the 1980s under the GlC Mobility Scheme when hard-to-let flats were let to groups of young people. I was living in a tower block and very few flats above the fifth floor were occupied. It could be argued that gentrification happened when that scheme happened. I suddenly had one of a group of young actors knocking on the door asking if they could borrow a coffee filter.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Two of them went on to become quite famous.....

 

[Ms T]

Street events aren't really the mark of a community like Brixton's though, surely. There are/were numerous creative venues on the doorstep, plus impromptu mobile sound rigs once were the order of the day. Somehow all that jubilee party and street art stuff seems more forced than an expression of a vibrant community

If you google my street, you will find a newspaper article from 1977 about our street parties. In recent years they have been revived by a guy who originally moved here from Tonga. He tried really hard to make it inclusive, but it was mostly te middle class types who got involved. He was really upset at a meeting to be accused of excluding the poorer elements of our street.

 

[Rushy]

the issue Lambeth were trying to address was that huge levels of subdivision means huge stress on infrastructure in the area- rather then one family, you squeeze three or four per house- you are potentially tripling demand on medical services, transport, roads etc. To try and avoid gentrification taking the form of speculators buying housing stock cheap, splitting it as far as possible and then renting it out on short lets, they have tried to restrict some activity so there is a mixture, gentrification was slowed. that avoids (or mitigates the severity of) Brixton becoming Clapham Junction, and gives the local infrastructure a chance

Where did you hear that? I don't think that's the reason for the streets under conversion stress strategy. The core strategy which that policy is part of can be found here. They have an obligation to provide a number of extra homes every year. What they wanted to do was avoid doing so at the expense of family sized homes. I think the policy is a good one but a bit too late for a lot of areas. Families generally did not want to move to Brixton so there was not huge pressure on houses, but now they do and there are very few good sized houses available so the prices have rocketed over the past couple of years (Mervan Road, don't expect to pay under 750k for a place needing work - would have been 500k a couple of years ago). There used to be a policy that houses under 120sqm could not be converted into flats (still exists but has been increased to 150sqm and largely overtaken by the conversion stress policy). This was to protect family sized homes. This worked well in areas where there were a lot of small houses (e.g. Horsford Road) and as a result there are strong communities of families. But there are few areas like this.

 

[zenie]

Well, there was a lot of this in social housing too in the 1980s under the GlC Mobility Scheme when hard-to-let flats were let to groups of young people. I was living in a tower block and very few flats above the fifth floor were occupied. It could be argued that gentrification happened when that scheme happened. I suddenly had one of a group of young actors knocking on the door asking if they could borrow a coffee filter.

Made me chuckle that bit

This thread just gets more and more depressing.

 

[editor]

Running a website that actively celebrates/discusses what is happening in Brixton is a (small) step in the overall process, though (not that I am blaming you for doing so), as is anyone supporting new cafes, shops, small retailers, markets etc (not that I am blaming them, either). The sharp end of gentrification is indeed ugly to see, but it doesn't appear one day out of thin air.

Funnily enough, I used to get emails from people complaining that my photos were showing Brixton off in a "bad light"! Not sure that's been an awful lot of "celebrating" nu-Brixton here, either. Much of the comment here is critical, not that I think this site has had much influence on encouraging the well heeled to move here anyway. I've certainly seen no mass increase in punters in the Phoenix Cafe, for example, and I've been praising that place for years.

I'd say that if any media resource has had any influence - and I don't think many have - it would be more likely to be the Brixton Blog who have overall been far more welcoming of Brixton's changes and, in particular, the Village. I stopped taking pictures of the place ages ago.

 

[editor]

Best way of avoiding other people liking the area where you live, is to live somewhere unremittingly shit. Try Thamesmead. There's a place that won't be overrun by *anyone at all* any time soon.

Brixton's great. In fact it's so good it kicks the arse of supposedly 'better' neighbourhoods like Clapham. And hey, surprise surprise, people have realised that.

It would be convenient to think that times are changing solely because of parasitical BTL landlords, or a single bland and opportunistic Barratts development, but the reality is less contrived. Brixton has fuckloads of good stuff going for it, and people* are now finding out.

Yeah, that's true. Trouble is that people coming in to enjoy it are actively changing it for the worse as clubs and bars, not unsurprisingly, respond to the new opportunities.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

This thread just gets more and more depressing.

Well, some bits of gentrification haven't been awful. When I first came to Brixton there were so many empty plots or semi-derelict buildings surrounded by fences of corrugated iron. This general area of South London really copped it in the Blitz and you could actually trace areas where a line of bombs had fallen, leaving streets like a row of rotten old teeth with gaps.

 

[Manter]

Where did you hear that? I don't think that's the reason for the streets under conversion stress strategy. The core strategy which that policy is part of can be found here. They have an obligation to provide a number of extra homes every year. What they wanted to do was avoid doing so at the expense of family sized homes. I think the policy is a good one but a bit too late for a lot of areas. Families generally did not want to move to Brixton so there was not huge pressure on houses, but now they do and there are very few good sized houses available so the prices have rocketed over the past couple of years (Mervan Road, don't expect to pay under 750k for a place needing work - would have been 500k a couple of years ago). There used to be a policy that houses under 120sqm could not be converted into flats (still exists but has been increased to 150sqm and largely overtaken by the conversion stress policy). This was to protect family sized homes. This worked well in areas where there were a lot of small houses (e.g. Horsford Road) and as a result there are strong communities of families. But there are few areas like this.

It was a council building officer- I had him round to look at a house we were thinking of buying that had some odd stuff going on with it- we wanted to know if they would object us reinstating it as a single house and what the building regs implications were of some interesting extensions at the back, that we suspected were illegal and wanted to knock down, but replace with the same footprint. Plus issues with a room with a 6ft ceiling. One ofthe local estate agents (Martin Barry I think, but don't quote me- the one that has all the old houses that are quietly falling down on their books) said something similar

Incidentally, we didn't get the house because a property developer gazumped us- he has done the absolute minimum and it is back on the market for 70k more

E2A just looked on rightmove- it's sold. even more speechless

 

[Rushy]

It was a council building officer- I had him round to look at a house we were thinking of buying that had some odd stuff going on with it- we wanted to know if they would object us reinstating it as a single house and what the building regs implications were of some interesting extensions at the back, that we suspected were illegal and wanted to knock down, but replace with the same footprint. Plus issues with a room with a 6ft ceiling. One ofthe local estate agents (Martin Barry I think, but don't quote me- the one that has all the old houses that are quietly falling down on their books) said something similar

Incidentally, we didn't get the house because a property developer gazumped us- he has done the absolute minimum and it is back on the market for 70k more

E2A just looked on rightmove- it's sold. even more speechless

Building control don't know anything about planning strategy. Nothing at all (to be fair, they don't need to).
And agents just pick up little tit bits here and there and confuse them. Some know more than others but it takes ages to find out who actually knows what they are talking about so it is best if you largely ignore them too.

[What road?]

 

[ViolentPanda]

The free market in action.

This thread is pathetic. This website essentially paved the way and cheer lead every aspect and forerunner of BVM and then rails agains it more or less exclusively because it drives up prices.

The area is in demand, partly because you made it so, and then that is a bad thing? Why? A bad, thing bringing in businesses and consequent employment? A lot of this stuff seems to be about "real Brixton", which is total nonsense. Why is this "area" any much more yours than theirs, especially when they have risked capital on that very fact?

I never lived in Brixton. I lived in Loughbourough Junction, in an area most in Brixton wouldn't even consider going to, but the one thing that really hacked me off was the peeps who thought they were doing Brixton a favour by living in the general area. That their colourful lives of quite frankly "typical" anti establishment harmlessness justified their general inability to grasp the most basic principles while still exhorting the most crude imitations of the very same.

Brixton is changing. In the very greatest part for the better.

Forget your past.

It's long gone.

In the largest part, for the better.

Piss off, you daft "anarcho-capitalist" gobshite!

 

[ViolentPanda]

There's nothing hypocritical about promoting the area then complaining when you are forced out. What you are overlooking is the underlying problem, which is the gulf between rich and poor. Your argument is indistinguishable from the one US Republicans make when they argue for tax cuts for the rich: "if you can't afford a decent life, it's your fault." You need to realise that not everyone can be rich. Somebody always has to do the low paid jobs, or be unemployed or disabled or old. If we had a fair society, like many of the ones in Western Europe, the fans of Brixton Village would not have that sinking feeling about their rent becoming unaffordable just because all the hipsters are coming here for a burger on Saturdays.

He doesn't give a fuck about the underlying problem. He's interested in wealth, not in wasting his energy on people who aren't like him, and don't want the same thing as him (money, lots of it, and no pesky morality tied to how you get it!).

 

[ViolentPanda]

Some would, in some areas. But what we're facing here in Brixton is most of the residents being forced out of a fairly humble area. This isn't exactly Knightsbridge or St Tropez. But it's fast becoming just as out of reach.

And they're being forced out because for the last 20-25 years, with the deliberate reduction in social housing stock through RtB and the non-replacement of sold-on stock, housing supply has not kept pace with housing demand in London (or many other cities and counties, frankly). While this has been a bad situation for people who want a roof over their heads, it's been a great time for developers, who've found that they can sell their plasterboard catboxes for silly money to people desperate to get their feet on the first rung of the housing ladder or, much worse, buy-to-letters who will sweat their asset through high rents.

 

[Manter]

Building control don't know anything about planning strategy. Nothing at all (to be fair, they don't need to).
And agents just pick up little tit bits here and there and confuse them. Some know more than others but it takes ages to find out who actually knows what they are talking about so it is best if you largely ignore them too.

[What road?]

Hayter road, between Bonham and Branksome.

Just got v distracted on rightmove- there are somelovely houses on there that need love- one on Leander, one on Arodene.... But VP's point about churn/not stayingto be part of the community is so true, two on there we looked at just over a year ago in an unrenovated state have been stripped and flipped-for huge markups in 12 months too.

 

[Red Cat]

I'd quite happily give them some love if someone would give me the money to buy them.

 

[MillwallShoes]

He doesn't give a fuck about the underlying problem. He's interested in wealth, not in wasting his energy on people who aren't like him, and don't want the same thing as him (money, lots of it, and no pesky morality tied to how you get it!).

you know a lot about someone you've never met.

 

[Manter]

I'd quite happily give them some love if someone would give me the money to buy them.

you me both