Say hello to Barratt Homes' 'Brixton Square' on Coldharbour Lane (old Cooltan site)

[Nedrop]

Agree with Teuchter, i have family in both Seville & Faro, countless blocks of flats in those towns with a small square and entrance gate, can't see the issue to be honest

 

[Crispy]

Two thousand posts in and people are still rattling on about "gated communities", based on the pathetically simplistic premise that because this development has a gate, it is therefore a gated community and subject to the criticisms (quite reasonably) aimed at the kind of communities that that term refers to in common parlance when discussing urban development and design.

The kind of gated communities that operate as enclaves designed to isolate their residents from their surroundings, that are studied as indicators of massive wealth disparity, the privatisation of urban space and so on, are not blocks of flats with a modestly sized residents-only communal area. A block of flats with a modestly sized communal area only accessible to its residents is a long-established and common arrangement in cities across the planet, and certainly not unusual in any way in London. It's an arrangement that is common in many types of housing from social housing through to private developments and through many different eras.

A true gated community is one where the residents simply do not need to engage with the area outside their gates, either because (a) within the gates there are various amenities such as shops, leisure facilities and so on, or (b) because they enter and exit from it in the safety of their car which can take them directly to amenities elsewhere. Or some combination of (a) and (b). In other words it's an arrangement that effectively allows people to circumvent the need to use "public" space (except perhaps whilst in their car on a public highway) if they so wish.

That is obviously not the case here, and it's pretty disingenuous to try and hijack the terminology of "gated communities" in an attempt to make this development seem much more sinister than it is. The residents of this development will be coming and going by foot, via that notorious gate, and passing directly onto the street just like anyone else living on Coldharbour Lane, whether they live in the Barrier Block, in a mansion/tenement flat, terrace house or whatever. When they want to go to the shops, go for a drink, get the bus, get the tube to work, they will step onto the street just like anyone else. They aren't living in some segregated world with no need to venture beyond their own privatised amenities. If they were slipping in and out of a giant underground carpark in fancy cars (or any cars), then it would be a bit different, and then perhaps the term "gated community" would be a little more apt. But that's not what this is.

In fact I would argue that someone with a car living in a semi-d somewhere in suburban zone 6 would have much greater capacity to live the "gated community" lifestyle than anyone living in this development; a much greater likelihood to ignore their local area and the facilities within it.

The fact that the private courtyard looks like it's going to be actually quite pleasant seems to be taken as a target for criticism...how dare these people have a pleasant communal area? It feels to me like it would draw less ire from some on here if it was just a utilitarian car park - which is a pretty bog-standard feature of lots of housing developments. It's ok to gate off the courtyard at the back of the legoland building, apparently, because it's a car park and it's uncontroversial to have a private parking area (never mind the fact that it's also blocked to pedestrians). If there's going to be a courtyard I'd rather it was one designed to be a pleasant area for the shared use of residents than something to facilitate private car ownership and all the harm that does.

By the way it goes pretty hard against my grain to be defending the design of a Barratts development, given some of the stuff they do, both in terms of their general approach to design, and all the business with dodging the affordable housing requirements in this particular case.

It's right that people should make a noise about the changes to the planning conditions that they pursued and Lambeth allowed. If people google Brixton Square and find out about that history, and it deservedly tarnishes Barratts reputation, that's good. But it's a bit embarrassing that half the thread is just going round in circles with this simplistic notion that it's a "gated community" and giving the impression that's what people are, or should be, het up about. Get a grip urban75.

I agree with every single word of this excellent post.

 

[Winot]

I agree with every single word of this excellent post.

Absolutely, and I'm sure it will put to bed the issue once and for all.

 

[Rushy]

Absolutely, and I'm sure it will put to bed the issue once and for all.

There's no need for sarcasm at this time of the morning.

 

[SarfLondoner]

Two thousand posts in and people are still rattling on about "gated communities", based on the pathetically simplistic premise that because this development has a gate, it is therefore a gated community and subject to the criticisms (quite reasonably) aimed at the kind of communities that that term refers to in common parlance when discussing urban development and design.

The kind of gated communities that operate as enclaves designed to isolate their residents from their surroundings, that are studied as indicators of massive wealth disparity, the privatisation of urban space and so on, are not blocks of flats with a modestly sized residents-only communal area. A block of flats with a modestly sized communal area only accessible to its residents is a long-established and common arrangement in cities across the planet, and certainly not unusual in any way in London. It's an arrangement that is common in many types of housing from social housing through to private developments and through many different eras.

A true gated community is one where the residents simply do not need to engage with the area outside their gates, either because (a) within the gates there are various amenities such as shops, leisure facilities and so on, or (b) because they enter and exit from it in the safety of their car which can take them directly to amenities elsewhere. Or some combination of (a) and (b). In other words it's an arrangement that effectively allows people to circumvent the need to use "public" space (except perhaps whilst in their car on a public highway) if they so wish.

That is obviously not the case here, and it's pretty disingenuous to try and hijack the terminology of "gated communities" in an attempt to make this development seem much more sinister than it is. The residents of this development will be coming and going by foot, via that notorious gate, and passing directly onto the street just like anyone else living on Coldharbour Lane, whether they live in the Barrier Block, in a mansion/tenement flat, terrace house or whatever. When they want to go to the shops, go for a drink, get the bus, get the tube to work, they will step onto the street just like anyone else. They aren't living in some segregated world with no need to venture beyond their own privatised amenities. If they were slipping in and out of a giant underground carpark in fancy cars (or any cars), then it would be a bit different, and then perhaps the term "gated community" would be a little more apt. But that's not what this is.

In fact I would argue that someone with a car living in a semi-d somewhere in suburban zone 6 would have much greater capacity to live the "gated community" lifestyle than anyone living in this development; a much greater likelihood to ignore their local area and the facilities within it.

The fact that the private courtyard looks like it's going to be actually quite pleasant seems to be taken as a target for criticism...how dare these people have a pleasant communal area? It feels to me like it would draw less ire from some on here if it was just a utilitarian car park - which is a pretty bog-standard feature of lots of housing developments. It's ok to gate off the courtyard at the back of the legoland building, apparently, because it's a car park and it's uncontroversial to have a private parking area (never mind the fact that it's also blocked to pedestrians). If there's going to be a courtyard I'd rather it was one designed to be a pleasant area for the shared use of residents than something to facilitate private car ownership and all the harm that does.

By the way it goes pretty hard against my grain to be defending the design of a Barratts development, given some of the stuff they do, both in terms of their general approach to design, and all the business with dodging the affordable housing requirements in this particular case.

It's right that people should make a noise about the changes to the planning conditions that they pursued and Lambeth allowed. If people google Brixton Square and find out about that history, and it deservedly tarnishes Barratts reputation, that's good. But it's a bit embarrassing that half the thread is just going round in circles with this simplistic notion that it's a "gated community" and giving the impression that's what people are, or should be, het up about. Get a grip urban75.

Of course there is a wealth disparity between the people of Brixton square and many other parts of brixton, I would also suggest that you will get a decent sized house in zone 6 compared to a 1 bedroom box flat in the now trendy Brixton.

 

[editor]

Of course there is a wealth disparity between the people of Brixton square and many other parts of brixton...

Indeed there is, and you only have to look across the road to see that.

 

[leanderman]

Of course there is a wealth disparity between the people of Brixton square and many other parts of brixton, I would also suggest that you will get a decent sized house in zone 6 compared to a 1 bedroom box flat in the now trendy Brixton.

There's a Zone 6?

 

[editor]

There's a Zone 6?

Indeed there is, full of faraway places like Chelsfield, Crews Hill,Purley and Theydon Bois.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stations_in_London_fare_zone_6

 

[teuchter]

Of course there is a wealth disparity between the people of Brixton square and many other parts of brixton, I would also suggest that you will get a decent sized house in zone 6 compared to a 1 bedroom box flat in the now trendy Brixton.

Correct on both counts, although I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by stating the obvious.

 

[leanderman]

Indeed there is, full of faraway places like Chelsfield, Crews Hill,Purley and Theydon Bois.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stations_in_London_fare_zone_6

I might break this monitory news to my children, to scare them into doing their homework

 

[Strangerdanger]

Two thousand posts in and people are still rattling on about "gated communities", based on the pathetically simplistic premise that because this development has a gate, it is therefore a gated community and subject to the criticisms (quite reasonably) aimed at the kind of communities that that term refers to in common parlance when discussing urban development and design.

The kind of gated communities that operate as enclaves designed to isolate their residents from their surroundings, that are studied as indicators of massive wealth disparity, the privatisation of urban space and so on, are not blocks of flats with a modestly sized residents-only communal area. A block of flats with a modestly sized communal area only accessible to its residents is a long-established and common arrangement in cities across the planet, and certainly not unusual in any way in London. It's an arrangement that is common in many types of housing from social housing through to private developments and through many different eras.

A true gated community is one where the residents simply do not need to engage with the area outside their gates, either because (a) within the gates there are various amenities such as shops, leisure facilities and so on, or (b) because they enter and exit from it in the safety of their car which can take them directly to amenities elsewhere. Or some combination of (a) and (b). In other words it's an arrangement that effectively allows people to circumvent the need to use "public" space (except perhaps whilst in their car on a public highway) if they so wish.

That is obviously not the case here, and it's pretty disingenuous to try and hijack the terminology of "gated communities" in an attempt to make this development seem much more sinister than it is. The residents of this development will be coming and going by foot, via that notorious gate, and passing directly onto the street just like anyone else living on Coldharbour Lane, whether they live in the Barrier Block, in a mansion/tenement flat, terrace house or whatever. When they want to go to the shops, go for a drink, get the bus, get the tube to work, they will step onto the street just like anyone else. They aren't living in some segregated world with no need to venture beyond their own privatised amenities. If they were slipping in and out of a giant underground carpark in fancy cars (or any cars), then it would be a bit different, and then perhaps the term "gated community" would be a little more apt. But that's not what this is.

In fact I would argue that someone with a car living in a semi-d somewhere in suburban zone 6 would have much greater capacity to live the "gated community" lifestyle than anyone living in this development; a much greater likelihood to ignore their local area and the facilities within it.

The fact that the private courtyard looks like it's going to be actually quite pleasant seems to be taken as a target for criticism...how dare these people have a pleasant communal area? It feels to me like it would draw less ire from some on here if it was just a utilitarian car park - which is a pretty bog-standard feature of lots of housing developments. It's ok to gate off the courtyard at the back of the legoland building, apparently, because it's a car park and it's uncontroversial to have a private parking area (never mind the fact that it's also blocked to pedestrians). If there's going to be a courtyard I'd rather it was one designed to be a pleasant area for the shared use of residents than something to facilitate private car ownership and all the harm that does.

By the way it goes pretty hard against my grain to be defending the design of a Barratts development, given some of the stuff they do, both in terms of their general approach to design, and all the business with dodging the affordable housing requirements in this particular case.

It's right that people should make a noise about the changes to the planning conditions that they pursued and Lambeth allowed. If people google Brixton Square and find out about that history, and it deservedly tarnishes Barratts reputation, that's good. But it's a bit embarrassing that half the thread is just going round in circles with this simplistic notion that it's a "gated community" and giving the impression that's what people are, or should be, het up about. Get a grip urban75.

Couldn't have said it better myself. You are spot on.

 

[Strangerdanger]

Of course there is a wealth disparity between the people of Brixton square and many other parts of brixton, I would also suggest that you will get a decent sized house in zone 6 compared to a 1 bedroom box flat in the now trendy Brixton.

The amount you would pay in travel costs would be eye watering though. There's a difficult balance to be struck when working in London and moving further out to keep costs down.

 

[SarfLondoner]

Correct on both counts, although I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by stating the obvious.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Agree with Teuchter, i have family in both Seville & Faro, countless blocks of flats in those towns with a small square and entrance gate, can't see the issue to be honest

The difference being that they're only a recent feature in the UK, but a long-established feature across most of the other EU member states.
If you can't see the issue, then I recommend a trip to SpecSavers.

 

[thatguyhex]

Another pile-on thank-you-I-agree for teuchter. Very, very well said.

The other day I walked past Arlington Lodge, on the corner of Baytree Road and Brixton Road. It's, roughly speaking, an E-shaped building with private space between the wings - equal to or possibly more than Brixton Square has. Entrance to the complex is through a gate. The gate itself is only waist-high, and not locked; but you would have just as little reason to pass through it as a non-resident as you would have to pass through the gate of Brixton Square. Yet I don't see it coming under fire. Is that because a) it's a council estate; b) it's not new and "trespassing"; c) the open space adjoins the street rather than being surrounded by buildings on all sides; d) the gate isn't tall and locked, e) all of the above? (It also has a private rear alley for parking in, which does have a tall, locked gate, on the Brixton Road side.)

Really, the criteria that some here appear to be selecting for their definition of "gated community" appear to be fairly arbitrary.

 

[editor]

Whatever you want to call it, it's definitely got a big ugly gate separating it from the local community and providing the only access.

The building encroaches further onto Coldharbour Lane than its neighbour (which despite being very similar still manages to have an accessible front door) .

I hate everything that Brixton Square represents, even down to its shitty name.

 

[teuchter]

Whatever you want to call it, it's definitely got a big ugly gate separating it from the local community and providing the only access.

The building encroaches further onto Coldharbour Lane than its neighbour (which despite being very similar still manages to have an accessible front door) .

I hate everything that Brixton Square represents, even down to its shitty name.

It has a substantial difference from its neighbour, by which I assume you mean the block immediately to its east, in that that development has access from a side street, Valentia Place. The Brixton Square only has access from the front, and I'm guessing here, but it's very likely that because of this, the internal courtyard has to be accessible to firefighting vehicles (because that's the only way to reach the block that's up against the railway line). So, it is probably unavoidable that there needs to be vehicle access to the courtyard, hence the gate entrance instead of a glazed pedestrian-only entrance. Of course, they could have made a glazed entrance *as well as* the gate, but I suspect the gate would have to be there anyway (this I brought up in the questions you avoided answering a couple of pages back). The glazed entrance would only have been able to serve the front block though, and it would take up space where instead there will be a street-facing apartment with its own entrance. The rear blocks would still have had to be accessed via the gate, and then their own entrances, unless you made an enclosed entrance right through the front block at ground level, which would take up even more floorspace that could be used for accommodation, and would be somewhat illogical given that it would be entirely duplicating the gated through-way (which has to be there anyway) as a means of access into the courtyard. Furthermore, for residents of the rear blocks it would involve going through a glass door, then out throiugh another one into the courtyard, then into yet another one into their own block.

So the arrangement which has been chosen, ie. that everyone goes through the gate, then into the courtyard, then into their own block entrances, seems pretty sensible and is based on making the circulation work in an efficient way without taking up floorpsace that could otherwise be used to provide accommodation.

 

[leanderman]

There goes my hope that this argument was over.

It's about as useful as the one over grammar schools.

 

[SarfLondoner]

The amount you would pay in travel costs would be eye watering though. There's a difficult balance to be struck when working in London and moving further out to keep costs down.

I agree but saving maybe 100k on a place by moving further out is a big difference to saving £120 month.

 

[Strangerdanger]

I agree but saving maybe 100k on a place by moving further out is a big difference to saving £120 month.

Yeah that's true

 

[Strangerdanger]

It has a substantial difference from its neighbour, by which I assume you mean the block immediately to its east, in that that development has access from a side street, Valentia Place. The Brixton Square only has access from the front, and I'm guessing here, but it's very likely that because of this, the internal courtyard has to be accessible to firefighting vehicles (because that's the only way to reach the block that's up against the railway line). So, it is probably unavoidable that there needs to be vehicle access to the courtyard, hence the gate entrance instead of a glazed pedestrian-only entrance. Of course, they could have made a glazed entrance *as well as* the gate, but I suspect the gate would have to be there anyway (this I brought up in the questions you avoided answering a couple of pages back). The glazed entrance would only have been able to serve the front block though, and it would take up space where instead there will be a street-facing apartment with its own entrance. The rear blocks would still have had to be accessed via the gate, and then their own entrances, unless you made an enclosed entrance right through the front block at ground level, which would take up even more floorspace that could be used for accommodation, and would be somewhat illogical given that it would be entirely duplicating the gated through-way (which has to be there anyway) as a means of access into the courtyard. Furthermore, for residents of the rear blocks it would involve going through a glass door, then out throiugh another one into the courtyard, then into yet another one into their own block.

So the arrangement which has been chosen, ie. that everyone goes through the gate, then into the courtyard, then into their own block entrances, seems pretty sensible and is based on making the circulation work in an efficient way without taking up floorpsace that could otherwise be used to provide accommodation.

It has a substantial difference from its neighbour, by which I assume you mean the block immediately to its east, in that that development has access from a side street, Valentia Place. The Brixton Square only has access from the front, and I'm guessing here, but it's very likely that because of this, the internal courtyard has to be accessible to firefighting vehicles (because that's the only way to reach the block that's up against the railway line). So, it is probably unavoidable that there needs to be vehicle access to the courtyard, hence the gate entrance instead of a glazed pedestrian-only entrance. Of course, they could have made a glazed entrance *as well as* the gate, but I suspect the gate would have to be there anyway (this I brought up in the questions you avoided answering a couple of pages back). The glazed entrance would only have been able to serve the front block though, and it would take up space where instead there will be a street-facing apartment with its own entrance. The rear blocks would still have had to be accessed via the gate, and then their own entrances, unless you made an enclosed entrance right through the front block at ground level, which would take up even more floorspace that could be used for accommodation, and would be somewhat illogical given that it would be entirely duplicating the gated through-way (which has to be there anyway) as a means of access into the courtyard. Furthermore, for residents of the rear blocks it would involve going through a glass door, then out throiugh another one into the courtyard, then into yet another one into their own block.

So the arrangement which has been chosen, ie. that everyone goes through the gate, then into the courtyard, then into their own block entrances, seems pretty sensible and is based on making the circulation work in an efficient way without taking up floorpsace that could otherwise be used to provide accommodation.

You're correct. Inside the courtyard is-
1. A pathway
2. Hoses and water access in a little housing in case of fire.
3. 2 disabled parking spots
4. Bicycle storage
5. Approximately 7-9 trees
6. A small garden area with 2 benches

Hardly a "community".

 

[Chilavert]

I hate everything that Brixton Square represents, even down to its shitty name.

That much has been patently obvious for some time.

 

[editor]

I know some people here are a stickler for accuracy, so it should be noted that estate agents are also referring to Brixton Square as a gated development. Brixton Blog describes it thus, too.

Brixton Square, Brixton, SW9
Split level
Gated new development
Modern new build
http://homes.trovit.co.uk/index.php/cod.frame/url.http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mouseprice.com%2Fproperty-for-rent%2Fref-24561894%3Futm_source%3DTrovit%26utm_medium%3DCPC%26utm_campaign%3DPremium/id_ad.12y1Jvah1Ph/what_d.brixton square/type.2/origin.2/section.1/section_type.1/pop.1

Depressing to see how many properies are already up for rent in the Square and at eye-wateringy high rents, even before the place is finished. That'll be all those buy to letters looking to cash in on Brixton, then.

 

[teuchter]

Oh yes, you can tell a dedicated stickler for accuracy by their unquestioning acceptance of the authority of estate agents and internet bloggers.

 

[peterkro]

"This spectacular two bedroom apartment is set within the Brixton Square development. A superb collection of new apartments on Brixton's famous Coldharbour Lane, Just a few minutes walk from the tube station, this one bedroom flat will please all".

Do they even read the shit they write.

 

[editor]

Oh yes, you can tell a dedicated stickler for accuracy by their unquestioning acceptance of the authority of estate agents and internet bloggers.

The "unquestioning acceptance..." bit is all in your rather imaginative head, I'm afraid.

I was simply pointing out that the properties are indeed being advertised as being in a 'gated development'. That is a simple statement of fact, regardless of your opinion.

 

[editor]

"This spectacular two bedroom apartment is set within the Brixton Square development. A superb collection of new apartments on Brixton's famous Coldharbour Lane, Just a few minutes walk from the tube station, this one bedroom flat will please all".

Do they even read the shit they write.

It's awful. Almost as awful as the ski high prices these fucking BTL leeches are demanding.

 

[Strangerdanger]

I know some people here are a stickler for accuracy, so it should be noted that estate agents are also referring to Brixton Square as a gated development. Brixton Blog describes it thus, too.
Depressing to see how many properies are already up for rent in the Square and at eye-wateringy high rents, even before the place is finished. That'll be all those buy to letters looking to cash in on Brixton, then.

I looked through a few pages and found about 20 properties on there, and some were duplicated. I'm no btl apologist by any means, but given the number of flats in the development I don't think that's a huge amount.

 

[cuppa tee]

the properties are indeed being advertised as being in a 'gated development .

A 'gated mews' even, nonetheless the gate is a selling point otherwise why mention it ?

 

[Strangerdanger]

The "unquestioning acceptance..." bit is all in your rather imaginative head, I'm afraid.

I was simply pointing out that the properties are indeed being advertised as being in a 'gated development'. That is a simple statement of fact, regardless of your opinion.

My old flat was advertised as charming with a garden. It was cupboard sized with a shared garden which was about a mile away from the flat (and down 2 flights of stairs). Letting agents spew rubbish.