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

[cuppa tee]

I'd wager I know more about what was done at that time at the block of flats where I live to make the change. It wasn't just about a gate but it wasn't because the demographics of the area changed over night.

I could be wrong but it seems your gate was a response to a real problem and not part of the design from the off and marketed on the strength of it.

 

[Strangerdanger]

If you ever get the chance to get chatting to some of the 'security/concierges' there, they will tell you how many empty properties lie vacant, owned by investors/speculators who will never live there...
Bounce into the sales office next door and they will tell you they have sold almost all 'residentials' there...
People need homes... Homes need people....
Brixton square highlights all that is wrong with the 'housing crisis' in Brixton and beyond...
End of....

Brixton square has sold out. Some flats are empty as people are still moving in, and a small percentage are BTL. I agree that there is a huge housing crisis but this development has helped me and many others out of that crisis as the flats here were in my opinion very good value for money. Yes they skimped on affordable which was so wrong, but one could argue with so many first time buyers here, what we need is more Brixton squares (but obviously with more affordable units).

 

[Strangerdanger]

I could be wrong but it seems your gate was a response to a real problem and not part of the design from the off and marketed on the strength of it.

I was reading the property section in yesterday's standard and even in places like Fulham they are marketing "gated developments", most notably the one built with a private garden square in the middle. As I observed upthread, I think this is just the newest "trend" in city flats.

 

[quimcunx]

I could be wrong but it seems your gate was a response to a real problem and not part of the design from the off and marketed on the strength of it.

And? If there is a secure parking area or private communal garden of course it's going to be marketed on that basis. And why not design security into a block of flats? No one on here I've seen enjoys having people shitting, conducting business with prostitutes etc on their communal property. however long they've lived here.

 

[quimcunx]

I was reading the property section in yesterday's standard and even in places like Fulham they are marketing "gated developments", most notably the one built with a private garden square in the middle. As I observed upthread, I think this is just the newest "trend" in city flats.

Sandhurst court on Acre lane has an entirely enclosed private garden. Can't even see it exists from the outside. Built in the early 1900s I think.

 

[cuppa tee]

And? If there is a secure parking area or private communal garden of course it's going to be marketed on that basis. And why not design security into a block of flats? No one on here I've seen enjoys having people shitting, conducting business with prostitutes etc on their communal property. however long they've lived here.

I don't recall saying anyone enjoys those things, all I was saying was that the presence of a big steel gate makes it "gated".

 

[quimcunx]

I don't recall saying anyone enjoys those things, all I was saying was that the presence of a big steel gate makes it "gated".

This is what you said.

I could be wrong but it seems your gate was a response to a real problem and not part of the design from the off and marketed on the strength of it.

If I was designing a block of flats one of the things I would take into consideration is security issues in the immediate area and I would include any security measures in the marketing. Not sure what the difference is between an existing block of flats responding to local security issues with some changes and a new block responding to them with design.

 

[teuchter]

I don't recall saying anyone enjoys those things, all I was saying was that the presence of a big steel gate makes it "gated".

This, in fact, is the great insight that this thread has brought to the world. The existence of a gate demonstrates the existence of a gate.

 

[CH1]

Sandhurst court on Acre lane has an entirely enclosed private garden. Can't even see it exists from the outside. Built in the early 1900s I think.

1930s

 

[cuppa tee]

This, in fact, is the great insight that this thread has brought to the world. The existence of a gate demonstrates the existence of a gate.

So logically the new development on the site of the former Cooltan Arts is gated.

 

[teuchter]

So logically the new development on the site of the former Cooltan Arts is gated.

You don't say.

 

[Gramsci]

What is forgotten on this thread is that most of the land that Barratts built on was originally publicly owned land.

As CH1 reminded me recently the original reason for agreeing to the large number of flats on the site was was that it was going to have a high proportion of social housing. That was when "Places for People" had it.

Barratts are not doing anyone any favours here. They are not helping to deal with the housing crisis. Barratts are part of the problem.

So what has happened in the long term?

Public land sold off. Promises of development with high proportion of affordable units. Then Barratts make sure that all comes to nothing.

 

[editor]

Sandhurst court on Acre lane has an entirely enclosed private garden. Can't even see it exists from the outside. Built in the early 1900s I think.

And here's what it looks like:

Not quite the same as this though, is it?

 

[quimcunx]

And? They are two different buildings. They look a bit different. Mine looks a bit different. My friend's council estate in Kennington where you have to go through 3 locked communal doors and past a concierge to get to her front door looks a bit different too. Add security bollards into the mix if you're going there by car. It's a gate. That's all.

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.

Also want to say I'm another who agrees 100% with this. Especially the bolded part. 20 likes. Many more likes than Story's post which got a place in BrixtonBuzz. I might pass this on to be considered for publication.

It has a gate. Maybe stop detracting from the real issues with this development with pages and pages about a poxy fucking gate.

 

[fogbat]

This, in fact, is the great insight that this thread has brought to the world. The existence of a gate demonstrates the existence of a gate.

The first rule of Tautology Club is the first rule of Tautology Club

 

[ViolentPanda]

I dunno, perhaps it's a personal thing then. I just don't see it that way at all.

When I was a Civil Servant my work involved visiting HM Prisons. I saw enough secure architecture to get to know the look and feeling well.

 

[cuppa tee]

You don't say.

This kind of patronising reply probably explains why so much time has been spent on the gate......

Maybe stop detracting from the real issues with this development with pages and pages about a poxy fucking gate.

Ok lets focus on the garden, we've established it's communal, a quick look in most dictionaries tells us this is because it is for the use of a community......
so we have a community with a gate, or a gated community, but dont take my word for it here is someone who should know what he is on about writing on the matter
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2002/jan/30/urbandesign.architecture1
this bit specifically sounds familiar......

After having lived in the East Village in New York where shops, restaurants and dry cleaners were only minute from my apartment I was determined to avoid dreary and featureless streets.
The fruit and veg shops that stay open late in Holloway - and the kebab eateries - were a good reason for moving in.

so no rolling manicured lawns and the need to step outside still exists, but he keeps referring to a "gated community" despite telling us the community spirit leaves a bit to be desired.
heres another piece talking about the pro's and cons of gated communities
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/3360550/Secure-developments-Time-to-close-the-gates.html
this bit in particular again from someone who should know shows why the gate is relevant to discussing more important issues

Gated communities sprang up in the Eighties, says Yolande Barnes, Savills' head of residential research. They were a way to protect "pioneers" venturing into newly gentrified areas.
"The middle classes weren't going to populate the badlands of Docklands unless they were behind gates," she explains.
"You could take the gates off now in places like Battersea that have become far smarter. With the price of scrap metal these days, it's not a bad idea."

....with all the new development about to start that part of Brixton maybe the gate won't be there forever.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Absolute nonsense; in the last few pages I've written a couple of quite lengthy posts trying to explain clearly my point of view, one explaining why I don't think BS comes under the definition of a "gated community" and one trying to explain why it is probably necessary for BS to have a gated rather than a glazed entrance, and neither of these posts resorted to flimsy links from external sources.

Your posts expressed your opinions perfectly, unsupported by even the flimsiest of links.

Which is why it's a little irritating for Editor to come back with his petulant remarks about "sticklers for accuracy" and suchlike instead of actually trying to reply to the various points I have made. Of course, that is entirely business as usual as is your post above. And weren't you going to come back to us with some more details on these studies you talked about, which looked at the effects of gated communities? I believe you had been asked if you could explain what definition of "gated communities" had been assumed in these studies. Apologies if you replied to that and I missed it.

Apology accepted. I gave (IIRC) Rushy a composite definition.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I just love the fact that at Brockwell gate they have big spiky gates, half of which have to stay open for access t the park. There's a logic fail in there somewhere

The "big spikey gates" under the apartments do, however, isolate the parking areas for the apartments nicely.
The street-access gates through to the park were, IIRC, a planning condition that wasn't part of the developers' original intention.

 

[Manter]

The "big spikey gates" under the apartments do, however, isolate the parking areas for the apartments nicely.
The street-access gates through to the park were, IIRC, a planning condition that wasn't part of the developers' original intention.

I know someone who used to live in there and it was designed and built without gates. The resident's committee wanted gates put in because of concerns about crime ( concerns mind you, not actual crime- and there was a small but vocal group of residents strongly opposed as they had all the reservations about gated communities expressed here). Anyway, gates were then put in, but because of rights of way had to include access to the park.

 

[ViolentPanda]

We used to have a car gate that anyone could duck under. Now we have a big steel gate. 20 years in brixton without struggling with the 'more lurid aspects of it that used to be flung around' but I have to say I prefer not lying in my bed at 2am listening to prostitutes and punters as used to happen.

Say it loud, say it proud. My name is quimcunx and I live in a 'gated development'. As do many people in period blocks of flats and in council blocks.

I might start calling it a mews.

The council "gated" a couple of parts of my estate: the underground parking (or the "cockpit"as it was known back in the '90s to the yout' because of the large volume of local prostitutes who serviced their clients there), and the community hall, which because it had a lot of glazing, was easy for vandals, wastrels and scumbags to smash up - fitting a wall, fence and gate around it made that harder.

 

[editor]

Brixton square has sold out. Some flats are empty as people are still moving in, and a small percentage are BTL.

The amount of apartments already offered for rent would suggest that it may be a bigger percentage than you might like to think.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I know someone who used to live in there and it was designed and built without gates. The resident's committee wanted gates put in because of concerns about crime ( concerns mind you, not actual crime- and there was a small but vocal group of residents strongly opposed as they had all the reservations about gated communities expressed here). Anyway, gates were then put in, but because of rights of way had to include access to the park.

Hmm, Greebo and I watched it being built/thrown up, and the fences (i.e. the "feature" wrought iron fencing, not builder's mesh and fence rods) were up before the place was finished, especially at the back, and it's certainly the case that they stuck in the street-access and park access gates pretty late in the day - in the case of the parkside gate they had to pretty much chop out a lump of their fence and then "sculpt" the slip into the park - and I think the Friends of Brockwell Park newsletter had something about a felling licence having to be granted to remove a tree that was in the way.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Sandhurst court on Acre lane has an entirely enclosed private garden. Can't even see it exists from the outside. Built in the early 1900s I think.

So did Thornton Gardens (built by the GLC/its' predeccessor) in the '30s, IIRC). The "private garden" was originally allotments, but then (in the late '50s/early '60s, I think) the GLC removed the wall, leveled the allotments, and built a lowrise block of maisonettes there (overlooking the tennis club).

 

[teuchter]

Apology accepted. I gave (IIRC) Rushy a composite definition.

Is it possible for you to point me to the relevant post?

 

[Winot]

Gategate is getting dull.

 

[editor]

Gategate is getting dull.

And some. But I think I can offer a summary: some people (both on and off these boards) are of the opinion that BS is indeed a gated community, while others think it is not.

Is that about right?

 

[Winot]

And some. But I think I can offer a summary: some people (both on and off these boards) are of the opinion that BS is indeed a gated community, while others think it is not.

Is that about right?

I guess that pretty much sums it up. Cf. Champagne and Fromage.

As someone once said, the world is divided into people who divide everything into two groups, and those who don't.

 

[Manter]

Hmm, Greebo and I watched it being built/thrown up, and the fences (i.e. the "feature" wrought iron fencing, not builder's mesh and fence rods) were up before the place was finished, especially at the back, and it's certainly the case that they stuck in the street-access and park access gates pretty late in the day - in the case of the parkside gate they had to pretty much chop out a lump of their fence and then "sculpt" the slip into the park - and I think the Friends of Brockwell Park newsletter had something about a felling licence having to be granted to remove a tree that was in the way.

I'll ask my mate next time I see him (he moved to Edinburgh!)- I remember him being really angry at some of the conversations about what the residents of the Tulse Hill Estate might 'do'

 

[ViolentPanda]

Is it possible for you to point me to the relevant post?

It is.