Squire and Partners in Lambeth

[editor]

London sprawls. If more homes of any kind are to be built, they must be quite a bit denser than those that already exist, to avoid further sprawl.

Let's put up some high rise blocks in Squire's garden. See how he likes it.

 

[alcopop]

England is one of the most densely populated countries in the world. London is also densely populated. You claimed that "London does have very low density housing". You were wrong by any measure.

High-density London: past, present and future

Have you not been looking at the interesting data that has been posted?

You need to develop a more nuanced way of looking at things.

 

[editor]

Oh good god. An exclusive space for rebel creatives.

London nightclub Ministry of Sound is opening a Squire and Partners-designed co-working space and members' club with a bar at its centre to appeal to the "next generation of rebel creatives".

Named The Ministry the workspace and private members club is being built in a former 19th-century printing works near the iconic club in Elephant and Castle, south London.
The members' club, which has been designed by London-based studio Squire and Partners, is set to open in July 2018.

The architects were instructed to design a workspace that incorporates the "premium raw" aesthetic of the Ministry of Sound club.

Ministry of Sound chose to work with Squire and Partners after seeing the practice's overhaul of a department store in Brixton to house their own offices, which has a similar aesthetic.

"Having seen their work on the Department Store we felt like Squire and Partners would be the perfect fit to help us realise this vision," explained Moore.

For the members' club this means that the printworks will be stripped-back to expose the original building's fabric, with simple furniture and plush textiles added to the interiors.

Squire and Partners reveals plans for Ministry of Sound co-working space

 

[editor]

Have you not been looking at the interesting data that has been posted?

You need to develop a more nuanced way of looking at things.

So just to get this clear: you're still standing by your claim that "London does have very low density housing."

Very low, you said. Where is that shown in the 'interesting data'?

 

[teuchter]

London sprawls. If more homes of any kind are to be built, they must be quite a bit denser than those that already exist, to avoid further sprawl.

Population density figures that ignore the actual dispersement of that density are not very useful.

What doesn't get talked about enough in all this is transport policy. Not that you'd expect me to start banging on about cars, but private car use is a cause and result of sprawl. And transport congestion is part of what drives up the demand for central location living. And there's space that's currently used to facilitate things like car parking which could be used for housing without affecting anyone's light or privacy. Especially when you get outside of zone 2/3.

 

[cuppa tee]

Oh good god. An exclusive space for rebel creatives.

'From the start we challenged convention, broke rules, and helped create an entire youth culture," The Ministry's creative director Simon Moore told Dezee".

wtf is this bollocks.....

 

[Mr Retro]

I want people to have decent housing at affordable prices, and I don't like stinking rich architects in massive houses telling poor people that they should put up with dark shitholes overlooked by everyone else.

But he doesn’t make any reference to poor people, he doesn’t say that anybody has to put up with dark shitholes or that they need to be overlooked by everybody else (a physical impossibility by the way) does he? He just says we need to be “less obsessed” with it.

And if you want decent housing at affordable prices he’s fully correct in my view.

 

[editor]

But he doesn’t make any reference to poor people, he doesn’t say that anybody has to put up with dark shitholes or that they need to be overlooked by everybody else (a physical impossibility by the way) does he? He just says we need to be “less obsessed” with it.

And if you want decent housing at affordable prices he’s fully correct in my view.

I'm sure the space-hogging super-luxury housing he's designing for overseas investors is doing wonders for the housing crisis.

His company is part of the problem, not the solution.

But thanks for your sage input, as ever.

 

[teuchter]

But he doesn’t make any reference to poor people, he doesn’t say that anybody has to put up with dark shitholes or that they need to be overlooked by everybody else (a physical impossibility by the way) does he? He just says we need to be “less obsessed” with it.

And if you want decent housing at affordable prices he’s fully correct in my view.

"Less obsessed" could mean a number of things.

He talks about an automatic right to add storeys to C20 buildings. I don't think that would work as an automatic principle. He says some stuff about the 21m rule. He's basically asking for a general relaxation in planning restrictions. Whatever that would actually translate into - it might allow inner parts of London to become a bit more densely populated. I don't buy it that this would make enough difference to bring prices down. Densification of the outer parts of London, and rules that apply to newbuild and/or brownfield sites...maybe that could have a bit more of an effect. I think there are bigger things that would need to be changed though, to really make housing more affordable. Fiddling around with planning rules in already built-up areas - seems a bit simplistic to me.

As far as the work the firm does is concerned - like most architects they'll take on the work that people will pay them for. No-one's paying architects to design mass social housing schemes at the moment. This has all already been gone over earlier in the thread.

I noticed they did design a trade union HQ relatively recently btw.

UNISON • Sustainability • Practice • Squire and Partners

 

[alcopop]

So just to get this clear: you're still standing by your claim that "London does have very low density housing."

Very low, you said. Where is that shown in the 'interesting data'?

Tired of you now

 

[Rushy]

I thought that the example he used of a development which would have been improved by relaxing light and overlooking principles was Battersea Power Station. That's hardly telling the poor to suck it up.

 

[T & P]

61 weeks since this thread was created and more than 400 posts later, I still haven’t read anything remotely objectionable or wrong about Squire & Partners moving their HQ to Brixton.

 

[editor]

61 weeks since this thread was created and more than 400 posts later, I still haven’t read anything remotely objectionable or wrong about Squire & Partners moving their HQ to Brixton.

Not even this?



Bottoms up! Raa raa!

 

[madolesance]

Outside investment comes to Brixton! Is that a 'good or bad thing'? There sometimes is an option it's not good.

 

[Gramsci]

Here's what he said in the interview if anyone is interested

View attachment 136826 View attachment 136827

Comes across as a bit of a shit to me.

I was at Loughborough Junction planning forum last night and co incidentally several of the issues he talks about came up.

I must say his comments " I don't care about conservation areas" "I don't care about the man next door" are pretty crap.

Why did he bring his practice to Brixton? A conservation area with an active Brixton Society that's spent years on protecting Brixton using planning.

Which his article shows a contempt for.

Overlooking and light are important elements in planning applications as the end result of a finished building is something that people have to live with. It's not something that is just put into planning to give architects a hard time.

Im a layman who takes active interest in planning issues and this article really angers me.

 

[Gramsci]

But he doesn’t make any reference to poor people, he doesn’t say that anybody has to put up with dark shitholes or that they need to be overlooked by everybody else (a physical impossibility by the way) does he? He just says we need to be “less obsessed” with it.

And if you want decent housing at affordable prices he’s fully correct in my view.

If all he said he wants in the article is put into planning guidelines that would be the end result.

He says " you can draw the curtains" . Shows a contempt for people ( rich or poor) who would have to live in buildings designed under planning guidelines he is suggesting in his article.

 

[Gramsci]

If people are concerned about density of housing needed a start could be made by doing something about underused buildings in central London.

I see regularly whole buildings in West end/ central London just the housekeeper living there. Homes only used on irregular basis by the rich.

I notice that's not something Squires brings up in his Sunday Times article.

 

[Gramsci]

And if housing is to be more affordable rent controls on landlords and secure tenancies need to be brought back.

Also the Mayor is making moves to stop sales of homes to overseas investors. Good idea.

Lack of affordable housing isn't just down to density.

 

[editor]

If people are concerned about density of housing needed a start could be made by doing something about underused buildings in central London.

I see regularly whole buildings in West end/ central London just the housekeeper living there. Homes only used on irregular basis by the rich.

I notice that's not something Squires brings up in his Sunday Times article.

He's too busy making money out of designing such homes for the disgustingly rich and foreign investors.

Still we have to thank them for graciously 'bringing life to Stockwell Ave'


*doffs cap in gratitude to millionaire life-bringer of Brixton

 

[Gramsci]

Thing about Squires is the defence here is that he is just a hired hand. He doesn't make the rules. Just gets on with his job.The Sunday Times article shows him pontificating on how the planning system gets in the way. Incidentally a common complaint from some sections of Tories who are chummy with property developers. Though not all as "relaxation" of planning guidelines hits some Tory voters.

 

[editor]

Imagine how many people could be housed - or workspaces created - in their opulent, private bar and rooftop-equipped, extraordinarily spacious Brixton showcase offices:

The Department Store | Architecture Today

 

[ricbake]

Michael Squires has lived in Clapham nearly 35 years - one of his reasons for moving the office to Brixton -
A home fit for an architect | Great . British . Design

 

[editor]

Michael Squires has lived in Clapham nearly 35 years - one of his reasons for moving the office to Brixton -
A home fit for an architect | Great . British . Design

No mention of that in his interview.



His Clapham luxury residence is worth around £7m.

While they are undoubtedly “wow” homes they don’t look out of place and don’t overshadow or bully any of the neighbouring properties

Well, that's nice.

At the top of the building, three storeys up, a top floor media room have balconies on either side of the building, below it are six bedrooms, three of which have balconies. The master suite is luxuriously generous in size with a large, dressing area and a vast en-suite bathroom where Filetto marble combines with large porcelain tiles by Domus to create a serene, contemporary-but-not-too-cool finish.

Lots of light too, I bet. Oh yes indeed:

A separate, glass-sided staircase leads downstairs and is a taste of what to expect. Once downstairs you arrive at an entirely open-plan super-room that houses the kitchen, dining room, family snug, and a light-filled garden living room,

 

[T & P]

Not even this?

View attachment 136863

Bottoms up! Raa raa!

Especially this. Do you harbour so much hatred towards the social group you think the individuals shown in that photograph belong to that you object to their very presence in Brixton?

 

[editor]

Especially this. Do you harbour so much hatred towards the social group you think the individuals shown in that photograph belong to that you object to their very presence in Brixton?

I don't hate anyone in that picture, so why make up such nonsense? However, I am not keen on the gentrification, privilege, exclusivity and displacement that comes in the wake of such upmarket developments, especially when it's taking place in one of the poorest areas of London. Doesn't it bother you in the slightest?

 

[T & P]

I don't hate anyone in that picture, so why make up such nonsense? However, I am not keen on the gentrification, privilege, exclusivity and displacement that comes in the wake of such upmarket developments, especially when it's taking place in one of the poorest areas of London. Doesn't it bother you in the slightest?

A business renovating a semi delerict building and move its HQ together with hundreds of employees to a poor area is, by any concieveable measure, something good not bad

As for the hatred part, your post #403 certainly suggests that you seem to dislike people of a certain appearance enough to suggest that if a company opening premises in Brixton is likely to attract such people, those are good grounds for opposing the said company moving in.

Reverse snobbery at its grandest.

 

[editor]

A business renovating a semi delerict building and move its HQ together with hundreds of employees to a poor area is, by any concieveable measure, something good not bad

As for the hatred part, your post #403 certainly suggests that you seem to dislike people of a certain appearance enough to suggest that if a company opening premises in Brixton is likely to attract such people, those are good grounds for opposing the said company moving in.

Reverse snobbery at its grandest.

Several people have shown a similar lack of enthusiasm for how that strip has changed here, but strangely you've not seen fit to comment when they posted.

But you're OK with gentrification and all the inequalities that follow in its wake, yes? Because this strip of freshly imported Clapham street culture is a shining example.

Oh and what benefits do the poor people of Brixton directly enjoy from hundreds of employees being shipped in from Kings Cross (apart from an increased squeeze on rent in the area)? I'm struggling to think of any, unless you own a trendy bar or restaurant.

 

[T & P]

Several people have shown a similar lack of enthusiasm for how that strip has changed here, but strangely you've not seen fit to comment when they posted.

But you're OK with gentrification and all the inequalities that follow in its wake, yes? Because this strip of freshly imported Clapham street culture is a shining example.

Oh and what benefits do the poor people of Brixton directly enjoy from hundreds of employees being shipped in from Kings Cross (apart from an increased squeeze on rent in the area)? I'm struggling to think of any, unless you own a trendy bar or restaurant.

The fact that you think the employees of S&P would only considering visiting 'trendy' bars and restaurants in Brixton says it all, really...

 

[editor]

The fact that you think the employees of S&P would only considering visiting 'trendy' bars and restaurants in Brixton says it all, really...

I'm sure they'll visit all manner of shops and businesses (TK Maxx, H&M, Village and Pop etc), but the vast majority will be chains because they have no long term connections to the area, so I can't see then queuing up to spend their money in some of the lesser-known, traditional small businesses in the area.

But you didn't answer my question: what direct benefits do you think this influx of architects will bring to the poorer residents of the area?

 

[T & P]

I'm sure they'll visit all manner of shops and businesses (TK Maxx, H&M, Village and Pop etc), but the vast majority will be chains because they have no long term connections to the area, so I can't see then queuing up to spend their money in some of the lesser-known, traditional small businesses in the area.

Whereas I can see them being every last ounce as likely to as anybody else who works in Brixton. Why wouldn't they be?

But if your opinion is that chain shops and businesses are of no benefit to the local economy or Brixton as a whole, why restrict your protestations to S&P? Imagine how many homeless people we could house at M&S or Tesco; how many local community space for local street projects and artists could be made available at the many chain mobile phone shops or fast food joints.

But you didn't answer my question: what direct benefits do you think this influx of architects will bring to the poorer residents of the area?

The same one as any other company that moves its HQ here and brings hundreds of employees to the area, of course