Squire and Partners in Lambeth

[editor]

But if your opinion is that chain shops and businesses are of no benefit to the local economy or Brixton as a whole...

Nope. Never said that. Getting a bit fed up with your twisting now.

And can you actually answer this please: what direct benefits do you think this influx of architects will bring to the poorer residents of the area?

 

[T & P]

Nope. Never said that. Getting a bit fed up with your twisting now.

And can you actually answer this please: what direct benefits do you think this influx of architects will bring to the poorer residents of the area?

I have already: the same benefits as any other business moving their HQ to Brixton and bringing hundreds of employees in. Perhaps you could explain now whether you believe chain shops and the people who shop in them do not make any positive contribution to Brixton, or how the employees of S&P are any different from anyone else who works in Brixton.

"influx of architects"

 

[editor]

I have already: the same benefits as any other business moving their HQ to Brixton and bringing hundreds of employees in. Perhaps you could explain now whether you believe chain shops and the people who shop in them do not make any positive contribution to Brixton, or how the employees of S&P are any different from anyone else who works in Brixton.

"influx of architects"

We're specifically talking about the impact of Squire and Partners' arrival into Brixton. You're saying it's a good thing for Brixton, so I've repeatedly asked you to list the direct benefits that this influx of architect's employees will bring to the poorer residents of the area because I'm struggling to think of any.

Can you possibly do that now. please?

 

[Twattor]

We're specifically talking about the impact of Squire and Partners' arrival into Brixton. You're saying it's a good thing for Brixton, so I've repeatedly asked you to list the direct benefits that this influx of architect's employees will bring to the poorer residents of the area because I'm struggling to think of any.

Can you possibly do that now. please?

I'd like to think there's a hefty chunk of business rates which will go into Lambeth's coffers, and which i'd like to think they'd spend on provision of services. Although they'll probably just give themselves a pay rise or something.

 

[T & P]

We're specifically talking about the impact of Squire and Partners' arrival into Brixton. You're saying it's a good thing for Brixton, so I've repeatedly asked you to list the direct benefits that this influx of architect's employees will bring to the poorer residents of the area because I'm struggling to think of any.

Can you possibly do that now. please?

I have three times, and you know very well the answer as well: the same benefits as any other company, of any other kind and regardless of their trade will bring to any area when they bring in several hundred employees to the area every day.

It couldn't be any simpler, really.

 

[ricbake]

You will adore this!
Henry Squire | Architecture Today

 

[Twattor]

You will adore this!
Henry Squire | Architecture Today

Brilliant.

I particularly liked: "People are accepted here, whatever creed or race." Unless, of course you are Squire & Co or the people that drink in the bar below or on the pavement outside. In which case you aren't wanted.

 

[Gramsci]

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 it 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.

I live in Loughborough Junction which still has large working class population. The Eds views aren't that different from what I hear in LJ.

They also aren't that different from what I hear from people I work with. This isn't just a a Brixton issue.

You could term it "reverse snobbery". It could also be termed class based resentment. It's not nice but as London is being polarised its going to happen.

As my partner says ( she being a recent immigrant here) her experience of London is that there are two Londons. One for well off one for less well off.

Which is increasingly obvious in Brixton to her.

It's obvious to me. But thought I would put that in as reality check.

There is an awful lot of resentment in a good percentage of Londons population about what has happened to London. It's obvious to people who have only been here a few years.

You might not like it. But I'm glad my neighbor's aren't blaming immigrants but resenting the well off. If that is reverse snobbery I'm all for it.

 

[T & P]

I live in Loughborough Junction which still has large working class population. The Eds views aren't that different from what I hear in LJ.

They also aren't that different from what I hear from people I work with. This isn't just a a Brixton issue.

You could term it "reverse snobbery". It could also be termed class based resentment. It's not nice but as London is being polarised its going to happen.

As my partner says ( she being a recent immigrant here) her experience of London is that there are two Londons. One for well off one for less well off.

Which is increasingly obvious in Brixton to her.

I don’t think many people would argue about the disparity between the well off and not-so. But I find it very hard to believe that many working class people would see a company restoring an empty building and moving its HQ to Brixton together with a large workforce as a bad thing because one of the new retail units in said building attracts people with the wrong look.

Either businesses moving their HQ to an area is beneficial to that area (however small the effect) or is it not. Trying to make a distinction based on the looks of the customers of one of the retail units seems preposterous to me. Never mind the issue of judging and categorising a group of strangers based on their appearance.

I have not seen any convincing argument so far ITT as to why S&P’s move to Brixton is a bad thing for its people. There might plenty of valid reasons we have not explored yet, but the likes of them being architects or the customers of at one of their retail units looking a bit posh (itself completely subjective of course) are devoid of any merit.

 

[Gramsci]

I don’t think many people would argue about the disparity between the well off and not-so. But I find it very hard to believe that many working class people would see a company restoring an empty building and moving its HQ to Brixton together with a large workforce as a bad thing because one of the new retail units in said building attracts people with the wrong look.

Either businesses moving their HQ to an area is beneficial to that area (however small the effect) or is it not. Trying to make a distinction based on the looks of the customers of one of the retail units seems preposterous to me. Never mind the issue of judging and categorising a group of strangers based on their appearance.

I have not seen any convincing argument so far ITT as to why S&P’s move to Brixton is a bad thing for its people. There might plenty of valid reasons we have explained yet, but the likes of them being architects or the customers of at one of their retail units looking a bit posh (itself completely subjective of course) are devoid of any merit.

I don't think you mix on a daily basis with the people I mix with. Yo don't understand. It's how my life is. What I'm reporting is what is said to me.

I've tried a post that looks at this issue from a different perspective and it got little interest. Post 360.

You might find it hard to believe what I am saying but I can assure you it's what I hear.

 

[Gramsci]

I don’t think many people would argue about the disparity between the well off and not-so. But I find it very hard to believe that many working class people would see a company restoring an empty building and moving its HQ to Brixton together with a large workforce as a bad thing because one of the new retail units in said building attracts people with the wrong look.

Either businesses moving their HQ to an area is beneficial to that area (however small the effect) or is it not. Trying to make a distinction based on the looks of the customers of one of the retail units seems preposterous to me. Never mind the issue of judging and categorising a group of strangers based on their appearance.

I have not seen any convincing argument so far ITT as to why S&P’s move to Brixton is a bad thing for its people. There might plenty of valid reasons we have explained yet, but the likes of them being architects or the customers of at one of their retail units looking a bit posh (itself completely subjective of course) are devoid of any merit.

An anecdote.

I was by Taylor Wimpey the "Edge" development a few days ago. Bumped into a local. Said to me these new flats "aren't for us" . All these new flats and restaurants weren't for "us".

People might not be going on about Squires specifically. But they see these new places and they are seen as not for "us".

This is what is visible to people.

And I stand by my view that I think think this resentment is way better than blaming immigrants for the crap state of London. And more on the mark.

snowy_again do what do you think ?

 

[teuchter]

Class based resentment is completely understandable. But having agreed on that, where to next? Do we propose some kind of planning policy that prevents profitable architectural practices moving their offices to Brixton? Or do we just do stuff that tries to make such companies and/or staff feel uncomfortable about being in Brixton? Do we only target the most visible examples, or also other companies who have offices in Brixton but non-one's really noticed because they haven't done up the buildings they own? Why is there so much more mud slung at Squires compared to Premier Inn who judged by the same criteria also don't seem to bring people to Brixton from whom the local population benefits, yet have done an atrocious job of converting a highly visible town centre building and made an entirely negative contribution to the townscape?

 

[teuchter]

I've tried a post that looks at this issue from a different perspective and it got little interest. Post 360.

You said Squire's weren't "directly" to blame.

I asked if that meant they were indirectly to blame, but you didn't really answer.

The word 'blame' is important I think, because it implies someone could/should have done something differently. In the case of Squires I'd be interested to hear what people think they should have done differently, if they are to 'blame', indirectly or otherwise.

One option would be for them simply to have gone somewhere else. So someone else would have taken on the building and done something different. Your post 360 acknowledges that the "Capitalist System" is behind everything that happens. So, whoever else would have taken on the building would still be operating in that context. Maybe Travelodge could have moved in?

 

[Gramsci]

Class based resentment is completely understandable. But having agreed on that, where to next? Do we propose some kind of planning policy that prevents profitable architectural practices moving their offices to Brixton? Or do we just do stuff that tries to make such companies and/or staff feel uncomfortable about being in Brixton? Do we only target the most visible examples, or also other companies who have offices in Brixton but non-one's really noticed because they haven't done up the buildings they own? Why is there so much more mud slung at Squires compared to Premier Inn who judged by the same criteria also don't seem to bring people to Brixton from whom the local population benefits, yet have done an atrocious job of converting a highly visible town centre building and made an entirely negative contribution to the townscape?

Ive put my considered view in post #360.

And on the "we". "We" aren't in this all together. Many people I know don't have a lifestyle choice about whether for whatever political/ ethical reasons they should use Squires wonderful bar. They can't afford it.

I'm making an observation based on my experience of talking with people I know in Brixton and people I work with who live across London.

I don't really care about Squires. If they just moved there office here that is there business. It's all the other PR crap.

And the Sunday Times interview really.

 

[Gramsci]

You said Squire's weren't "directly" to blame.

I asked if that meant they were indirectly to blame, but you didn't really answer.

The word 'blame' is important I think, because it implies someone could/should have done something differently. In the case of Squires I'd be interested to hear what people think they should have done differently, if they are to 'blame', indirectly or otherwise.

One option would be for them simply to have gone somewhere else. So someone else would have taken on the building and done something different. Your post 360 acknowledges that the "Capitalist System" is behind everything that happens. So, whoever else would have taken on the building would still be operating in that context. Maybe Travelodge could have moved in?

You didn't answer if my post was correct.

I don't really understand what you are going on about.

I try to move the debate away from over personalising it. And you are criticising me for that?

I'm not clear what you are saying.

 

[Gramsci]

Class based resentment is completely understandable.

Not here. Its " reverse snobbery".

And to point out I did say its not nice.

 

[teuchter]

You didn't answer if my post was correct.

I can sort of agree with it in a vague sense.

To say whether I think it is 'correct' I'd want to know exactly what 'blame' means in that context.

You can say capitalism is to 'blame'. To me that doesn't get me anywhere because I'm not someone who thinks they've worked out an alternative system that they can help enact. You could say that economic inequality is to blame for gentrification. That for me is a more useful statement and one I can more clearly agree with, because it's something that I think it's feasible to try and change.

 

[T & P]

I don't think you mix on a daily basis with the people I mix with. Yo don't understand. It's how my life is. What I'm reporting is what is said to me.

I've tried a post that looks at this issue from a different perspective and it got little interest. Post 360.

You might find it hard to believe what I am saying but I can assure you it's what I hear.

I am not doubting you have heard and experienced that. But it also depends on how the conversation came to be, or how a question about the issue was framed.

If someone asks a pool of poor/ working class people what they think of a successful company restoring a local, historically relevant building that had laid empty and deteriorating for years to make it its new HQ and bringing in a large workforce to the area, which would likely provide a welcome cash injection to the local traders, I'd wager most people asked would think it's a positive thing for the people of Brixton, even if by a small degree.

If however you asked them what they thought of a bunch of rich brats catering for the very rich taking over a much loved local landmark that could have been used to house the homeless, and making it a playground for the privileged, very few would have anything good to say. Not suggesting you or your g/f would have done that though..

The truth of course lays somewhere in between. But without knowing how S&P might have come in conversation in any given discussion or how any question about them might have been framed, it is nigh on impossible to reach any conclusions about what the local consensus might be.

 

[snowy_again]

I’ve been drinking at home so am not going to respond fully as it’ll be rambling rubbish

Gramsci - why did you tag & ask me?

On a side observation - I don’t think that the people in Ed’s (slightly creepy captioned) photo are living in luxury squires flats - they look like an average office second jobber millennial wage slave. The inverse snobbery also shows quite a detached perception and lack of understanding of what it’s like to be a 20 something office worker now. I work with lots of the Major / Blair years born people - the baby boomers have stopped their hopes of tenancy security, they work longer hours in less stable jobs and are house sharing until their 30s. Economic & social factors means they seem to drink less, eat out more and take different drugs to those which were common in the nostalgic perception of better Brixton years. They aren’t on the breadline but fall in that bracket of homelessness only being two missed pay checks away.

What narks me is the hypocrisy inherent on here in the perception by older people of them and their ways. Reclaim Brixton this week had a nostalgic moment about the goings on in the disabled loos at Tongue & Groove and how great that time was. I was there too. My experience isn’t unique and I lost six school friends to heroin, Scientology and London flight to the coast to get away from temptation.

Whereas when the next generation do similar (contemporaneous) things they are a bunch of feckless hoorahs. They’re not - they’re just following and reacting to their older peers

Got reminded of this ultimately millennial tune

the rakes 22 grand job - Google Search

 

[isvicthere?]

You will adore this!
Henry Squire | Architecture Today

I should have put him on at the Cabaret Corner.

 

[editor]

Brilliant.

I particularly liked: "People are accepted here, whatever creed or race." Unless, of course you are Squire & Co or the people that drink in the bar below or on the pavement outside. In which case you aren't wanted.

Or the locals who aren't invited into their exclusive bar, restaurant or sumptuous rooftop terrace, sorry, 'pavilion'.

 

[editor]

I’ve been drinking at home so am not going to respond fully as it’ll be rambling rubbish

Gramsci - why did you tag & ask me?

On a side observation - I don’t think that the people in Ed’s (slightly creepy captioned) photo are living in luxury squires flats - they look like an average office second jobber millennial wage slave. The inverse snobbery also shows quite a detached perception and lack of understanding of what it’s like to be a 20 something office worker now. I work with lots of the Major / Blair years born people - the baby boomers have stopped their hopes of tenancy security, they work longer hours in less stable jobs and are house sharing until their 30s. Economic & social factors means they seem to drink less, eat out more and take different drugs to those which were common in the nostalgic perception of better Brixton years. They aren’t on the breadline but fall in that bracket of homelessness only being two missed pay checks away.

What narks me is the hypocrisy inherent on here in the perception by older people of them and their ways. Reclaim Brixton this week had a nostalgic moment about the goings on in the disabled loos at Tongue & Groove and how great that time was. I was there too. My experience isn’t unique and I lost six school friends to heroin, Scientology and London flight to the coast to get away from temptation.

Whereas when the next generation do similar (contemporaneous) things they are a bunch of feckless hoorahs. They’re not - they’re just following and reacting to their older peers

Got reminded of this ultimately millennial tune

the rakes 22 grand job - Google Search

Actually, my point was not about the people but how Squire & Partners have been instrumental in driving gentrification, and turning their strip of Brixton into a posh mini-Clapham, creating even more inequalities in a poor area. I don't like that. How about you?

 

[editor]

I don’t think many people would argue about the disparity between the well off and not-so. But I find it very hard to believe that many working class people would see a company restoring an empty building and moving its HQ to Brixton together with a large workforce as a bad thing because one of the new retail units in said building attracts people with the wrong look.

Either businesses moving their HQ to an area is beneficial to that area (however small the effect) or is it not. Trying to make a distinction based on the looks of the customers of one of the retail units seems preposterous to me. Never mind the issue of judging and categorising a group of strangers based on their appearance.

I have not seen any convincing argument so far ITT as to why S&P’s move to Brixton is a bad thing for its people. There might plenty of valid reasons we have not explored yet, but the likes of them being architects or the customers of at one of their retail units looking a bit posh (itself completely subjective of course) are devoid of any merit.

Do you think moving an upmarket business and its 200+ relatively well off employees - some of whom will no doubt want to live closer to work - into a poor area is going to have a positive or negative impact on locals looking to rent properties near their families? A yes/no answer will suffice.

 

[CH1]

Do you think moving an upmarket business and its 200+ relatively well off employees - some of whom will no doubt want to live closer to work - into a poor area is going to have a positive or negative impact on locals looking to rent properties near their families? A yes/no answer will suffice.

I shouldn't reply for snowy_again type reasons - but I think the danger of Squires staff upsetting the local property market is minimal.
As has been explored on Urban repeatedly the issue about social housing is a national and local government issue.
I also believe that having the former Bon Marche extension used again is good, notwithstanding we need a pillar box outside the relocated Post Office.

 

[T & P]

Do you think moving an upmarket business and its 200+ relatively well off employees - some of whom will no doubt want to live closer to work - into a poor area is going to have a positive or negative impact on locals looking to rent properties near their families? A yes/no answer will suffice.

I think it won’t have any effect whatsoever to rent prices one way or another. I think you’re way overestimating the ‘wow’ factor you believe this company to have.

 

[editor]

I think it won’t have any effect whatsoever to rent prices one way or another. I think you’re way overestimating the ‘wow’ factor you believe this company to have.

I disagree. Luxury development by upmarket flats by showcase offices... it all adds up with others flowing in their wake. If you owned office space opposite Squires, you could almost certainly get more money for it now than before they arrived.

 

[urbanspaceman]

…compared to Premier Inn who judged by the same criteria also don't seem to bring people to Brixton from whom the local population benefits…

It seems to me that, if family visits to residents of Brixton are rendered more convenient and comfortable by the availability of the Premier Inn, then this definitely is of benefit to local people. Here are some quotes about the Premier Inn from Tripadvisor:

We were there because of a family wedding, so we stayed for two nights.

We chose this place to stay for our two nights in Brixton visiting family

I stayed in this premier inn for one night on 28/12/17 to visit family in the area

We stayed at this venue as we were attending a wedding in Brixton.

Location was good for us because family lives nearby,

a short 3 night stay for visiting family

Well situated for visiting family in Brixton

With family nearby we will definitely book here again.

Spent 6 days at this hotel February 2017 for a family wedding. I choose this hotel because the location is close to family

Other people stay at the PI to attend concerts at the O2, and many guests - who did not previously know much about Brixton - speak of what a pleasant surprise Brixton is, and how they eat out locally. The PI and particularly its staff are also usually highly-praised. So overall, I think the PI makes quite a positive contribution.

 

[Gramsci]

I’ve been drinking at home so am not going to respond fully as it’ll be rambling rubbish

Gramsci - why did you tag & ask me?

On a side observation - I don’t think that the people in Ed’s (slightly creepy captioned) photo are living in luxury squires flats - they look like an average office second jobber millennial wage slave. The inverse snobbery also shows quite a detached perception and lack of understanding of what it’s like to be a 20 something office worker now. I work with lots of the Major / Blair years born people - the baby boomers have stopped their hopes of tenancy security, they work longer hours in less stable jobs and are house sharing until their 30s. Economic & social factors means they seem to drink less, eat out more and take different drugs to those which were common in the nostalgic perception of better Brixton years. They aren’t on the breadline but fall in that bracket of homelessness only being two missed pay checks away.

What narks me is the hypocrisy inherent on here in the perception by older people of them and their ways. Reclaim Brixton this week had a nostalgic moment about the goings on in the disabled loos at Tongue & Groove and how great that time was. I was there too. My experience isn’t unique and I lost six school friends to heroin, Scientology and London flight to the coast to get away from temptation.

Whereas when the next generation do similar (contemporaneous) things they are a bunch of feckless hoorahs. They’re not - they’re just following and reacting to their older peers

Got reminded of this ultimately millennial tune

the rakes 22 grand job - Google Search

This post is example why I put up #360. It takes away the personal element.

So do you agree with it?

 

[Gramsci]

I am not doubting you have heard and experienced that. But it also depends on how the conversation came to be, or how a question about the issue was framed.

If someone asks a pool of poor/ working class people what they think of a successful company restoring a local, historically relevant building that had laid empty and deteriorating for years to make it its new HQ and bringing in a large workforce to the area, which would likely provide a welcome cash injection to the local traders, I'd wager most people asked would think it's a positive thing for the people of Brixton, even if by a small degree.

If however you asked them what they thought of a bunch of rich brats catering for the very rich taking over a much loved local landmark that could have been used to house the homeless, and making it a playground for the privileged, very few would have anything good to say. Not suggesting you or your g/f would have done that though..

The truth of course lays somewhere in between. But without knowing how S&P might have come in conversation in any given discussion or how any question about them might have been framed, it is nigh on impossible to reach any conclusions about what the local consensus might be.

The last two times the ongoing gentrification of Brixton has come up ( as a negative) in conversation has been unprompted by me. My last anecdote was unprompted by me. They brought issue up.

I don't think the truth lies in between. Nor is it a nostalga for previous times. I think there are two opposing views. This has happened across London. The two Londons isn't an invention.

On framing the question I've seen this at recent meetings. The Council officers trying to tell people the good things about Pop. Framing it in a more positive light. It has opposite effect. The Council have been trying this for years. To frame a question more positively is Council tried and tested consultation technique. People are wary now of this.

 

[Gramsci]

I’ve been drinking at home so am not going to respond fully as it’ll be rambling rubbish

Gramsci - why did you tag & ask me?

On a side observation - I don’t think that the people in Ed’s (slightly creepy captioned) photo are living in luxury squires flats - they look like an average office second jobber millennial wage slave. The inverse snobbery also shows quite a detached perception and lack of understanding of what it’s like to be a 20 something office worker now. I work with lots of the Major / Blair years born people - the baby boomers have stopped their hopes of tenancy security, they work longer hours in less stable jobs and are house sharing until their 30s. Economic & social factors means they seem to drink less, eat out more and take different drugs to those which were common in the nostalgic perception of better Brixton years. They aren’t on the breadline but fall in that bracket of homelessness only being two missed pay checks away.

What narks me is the hypocrisy inherent on here in the perception by older people of them and their ways. Reclaim Brixton this week had a nostalgic moment about the goings on in the disabled loos at Tongue & Groove and how great that time was. I was there too. My experience isn’t unique and I lost six school friends to heroin, Scientology and London flight to the coast to get away from temptation.

Whereas when the next generation do similar (contemporaneous) things they are a bunch of feckless hoorahs. They’re not - they’re just following and reacting to their older peers

Got reminded of this ultimately millennial tune

the rakes 22 grand job - Google Search

FYI a lot of the people I work with are in twenties or thirties so I'm well aware of all of this.