"Young professionals" to infest flats above Iceland

[guinnessdrinker]

These will not be luxury apartments - but what do you expect the planning application to say? "Shoddy workmanship and skimping on detail will be at the core of our design, as will the cheapest of components we intend to to deploy."??

Personally I would have preferred a housing association to have made use of this building years ago, but we have this instead. Shite flats going to anyone daft enough to want to live above Iceland.

there will be marketed as luxury apartments, but having had recent dealings with a planning application, I strongly suspect they won't be. and yes, it should have been used for council/HA housing.

 

[hendo]

I only know of one of those four that you mention oldslapper and when I was last drinking with him in the Albert he was not wealthy, young maybe yes but not wealthy.

This is it. The worthwhile points about the evils of the housing market are coupled with offensive labelling and name calling. It degrades the argument.

 

[guinnessdrinker]

By the way, the plans for this infe... much-needed private capital investment-in central Brixton for the benefit of the WHOLE community can be viewed at:



And yes. The flats are small as buggery. And there's nowhere for the yupps to park. Poor dears!

apparently, the lack of parking in a planning application can't be used to argue against it. and I am talking about a new building from scratch, not a conversion on a busy high street.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

This is it. The worthwhile points about the evils of the housing market are coupled with offensive labelling and name calling. It degrades the argument.

agreed, hendo <....edited out as it'll upset someone it isn't intended to......>



I am having to walk away from the keyboard before I get into some choice name calling meself.....

 

[William of Walworth]

I resent them, I resent the policy, I resent the market and I resent all the fucking whining that takes place on their behalf when people like me are less than fucking chuffed about it.

You should get a better job, or find another way of earning more money, rather than just whinging about how you can't afford stuff. What do you want, that some "committee of proper prices" tell people what they can buy and sell things for?

Giles..

That's shite on a stick Giles. Justin does a job which is of great worth. He's a 'backroom boy' on poor pay but without him, there'd be no Doctors. Hope you never get ill mate, with or without health insurance.

Justin is spot on, Mrs Magpie is spot on, Giles is talking offensive shite. 'Get a better job' my arse!!

Have you any idea what librarianship pays, Giles??

Get a better job eh?

I'm in the same trade as Justin, and the only reason I'm any better off than him is that I've been doing it for a lot longer (in the Civil Service too, even though my pay is still shite relative to a lot of professions). Also, I was extremely fortunate enough in 1991 to be offered a council flat, even more luckily on a good estate. Such escape from the tyranny of overpriced (obscenely priced) housing only happens to a very lucky few. And I've had my share of misplaced resentment directed at me by people who think social housing should only be allowed to be offered to the extreme poor (which it should, but in a better society there'd be enough social housing for EVERYONE who couldn't afford, or didn't want to shackle themselves to, a crippling mortgage).

Justin is right to be angry, right to be resentful. And he knows perfectly well that there are plenty around even worse off in housing terms than him.

 

[Pickman's model]

You should get a better job, or find another way of earning more money, rather than just whinging about how you can't afford stuff. What do you want, that some "committee of proper prices" tell people what they can buy and sell things for?

Giles..

one line of trade - or profession - i've occasionally toyed with going into is that of gravedigger.

if i do, i'd be honoured to have you as an early interee.

 

[William of Walworth]

I only know of one of those four that you mention oldslapper and when I was last drinking with him in the Albert he was not wealthy, young maybe yes but not wealthy.

This is it. The worthwhile points about the evils of the housing market are coupled with offensive labelling and name calling. It degrades the argument.

Just for information, the four Urbanites named by Old Slapper were named by him in an entirely piss taking way -- he knows perfectly well that Drew, Vic, etc. are hardly made of money. Whatever else he said in other posts, he wasn't at that point calling them yuppies as some here seem to have wrongly misconstrued ... OS was being ineffectually satirical.

Just for a correction like. I have some sympathy with some of hendo's other points.

 

[Giles]

Justin is spot on, Mrs Magpie is spot on, Giles is talking offensive shite. 'Get a better job' my arse!!

Have you any idea what librarianship pays, Giles??

Get a better job eh?

I'm in the same trade as Justin, and the only reason I'm any better off than him is that I've been doing it for a lot longer (in the Civil Service too, even though my pay is still shite relative to a lot of professions). Also, I was extremely fortunate enough in 1991 to be offered a council flat, even more luckily on a good estate. Such escape from the tyranny of overpriced (obscenely priced) housing only happens to a very lucky few. And I've had my share of misplaced resentment directed at me by people who think social housing should only be allowed to be offered to the extreme poor (which it should, but in a better society there'd be enough social housing for EVERYONE who couldn't afford, or didn't want to shackle themselves to, a crippling mortgage).

Justin is right to be angry, right to be resentful. And he knows perfectly well that there are plenty around even worse off in housing terms than him.

I can understand resentment against "the system" that has caused prices to be so high in London, but why does this always seem to translate into resentment of anyone who does buy their own place? This is what I find annoying. It's as if the people who buy are somehow to be held responsible for the fact that others can't afford to, when its not their fault.

And you choose your own career in the end.

Giles..

 

[ViolentPanda]

I can understand resentment against "the system" that has caused prices to be so high in London, but why does this always seem to translate into resentment of anyone who does buy their own place? This is what I find annoying. It's as if the people who buy are somehow to be held responsible for the fact that others can't afford to, when its not their fault.

And you choose your own career in the end.

Giles..

People's reaction doesn't "translate into resentment of anyone who does buy their own place", it very obviously translates into a focused dislike of a certain type of housing development aimed at a fairly specific group (the homebuyers looking for 1 and 2-bed flats, and the developers). Why? Because those of us who live in social housing know that, amazingly enough, that's the sort of social housing that's most desperately needed. It's galling to see these places and know that, unless you come into money, even such basic private housing is beyond your reach. There's possible resentment of the buyers, but usually that's nothing compared to the dislike of property developers, because such people have only one principle; maximise the bottom line.

I expect you'll now attempt to sell me a yarn about the hidden philanthropy of property developers.

 

[editor]

In the future though, 'Old Slapper' if you really feel like that about me and the people like me, don't speak to me. Infact, tell me to fuck off, in order that I'll know where I am. Really - a little honesty is called for, if this is how you really feel.

You have my sympathies.

I know exactly how you feel.

 

[chegrimandi]

so do people here honestly think that :

a) the flats in a prime location for going out AND public transport won't be aimed at sale to the prime end of the market - wealthy young people with vast disposable income at extortionately inflated prices

b) the vast majority of people that buy the newly developed flats 3 minutes from the tube in edgy, trendy Brixton will NOT be wealthy yuppies with scant regard for brixton, the people of brixton and the history and culture of Brixton. Surely most people that didn't fit into that category would get better value for their hard earnt money, further out of London in a less prime 'trendy' location....

honest answers without agenda please....

maybe the word infest was a bit strong but I totally agree with the sentiment behind oldslappers post. And after all essentially all 'infest' means is to take over....and Brixton WILL be yuppified and taken over by developers and the residents they bring.....old poorer residents driven out. It's inevitable so the use of the word isn't really strictly incorrect IMO.

 

[William of Walworth]

Top posts Violent Panda and chegrimandi ....

Giles. I'd actually agree that the anger is best focussed on the underlying causes not on the people who buy these places, but VP's post above sums up how I feel ...

 

[Pie 1]

When I'm on my way to work from Brixton at 6 in the morning there's a pile of people on their way to a myriad of workplaces in this city of ours. They come from all over the world to work here and make themselves a future. Those are the people I respect. They will not give up. I won't either. Must you?

I'm not responsible for the shitty housing market, the appalling estate agents, or capitalism generally. I'm just doing as best I can like everyone else.

A supurb post, hendo.

 

[Ms T]

Owning a one-bedroom flat is hardly an unreasonable goal - as unattainable as it may be for most of us.

I think that's it in a nutshell. Fortunately I bought a flat in Brixton in 1995 when prices were as low as my income was then -- and thank god -- because I wouldn't be able to buy it back now. The fact is that the majority of people do not qualify for social housing, so they have no choice but to save like fuck and buy into the property market, or resign themselves to giving a large portion of their income every month to a private landlord.

 

[dogmatique]

The fact is that the majority of people do not qualify for social housing, so they have no choice but to save like fuck and buy into the property market, or resign themselves to giving a large portion of their income every month to a private landlord.

Damn yuppies.

 

[oryx]

so do people here honestly think that :

a) the flats in a prime location for going out AND public transport won't be aimed at sale to the prime end of the market - wealthy young people with vast disposable income at extortionately inflated prices

If you think that tiny one-bed flats above a shop are attractive to "the prime end of the market" you need to take a reality check. Any wealthy young person with "vast disposable income" is not going to look twice at this development. I used to get (until I put a "no junk mail" sign on my door recently) a rainforest load of estate agents' shit & for those with that sort of money there are far more "desirable" places. To those type of people, anyway. I'm not knocking Brixton - I'd far rather live there than some sterile Sloane wasteland like Fulham, but that's the sort of area the vastly wealthy you speak of will look at.

I reckon it will attract people who will mortgage themselves upto the hilt & will be very vulnerable if any property crash occurs. Flats above shops are notoriously hard to obtain a mortgage on.

TBH, I feel sorry for the people who'll buy there if there's a property crash. I'll be happy to stand corrected if the scheme fills with Fulham overspill called Miles & Camillla, but I think people will buy there because they have it rammed into them that they MUST get onto the property ladder, that you're a loser if you rent & other such shite.

Re. affordabilty - you only need to be a couple at junior management level in the public sector with maybe a small deposit you have saved for.

It stinks that prices for small one-bed flats are this high. But there is such a property-owning obsession in this country that people will buy them, and what stinks even more is the utterly shameful lack of affordable & decent rented housing, which pushes people into buying ludicrously over-priced shit like this.

BTW, I'm curious as to what is the definition of a "yuppie". It started out being an American acronym for "young, urban, professional", didn't it? Weren't they the vanguard who moved, 20 or so years ago, into inner city areas because the area was cheap & they were prepared to put up with its shortcomings? By that definition, a goodly contingent of people on U75 are yuppies! I do think I know the sort of people Old Slapper means though - not really young urban professionals anymore, but trust fund kids & overpaid City workers.

@ Giles. What an ignorant & patronising attitude you display to Justin's posts on this thread. Don't you know anything about the public sector - including the fact that some people like working for the good of others & not just to make money?

 

[behemoth]

Four derelict houses near me have just been renovated for sale around £130,000, way beyond the means of most Medway locals in the current market. But it's better than having them rot away for years (over 15 years in one case). Even if they become buy-to-let, they will probably be rented by a young couple on modest means rather than "Yuppies" (what a ridiculous 80s term). Only in Brixton could this be seen as a bad thing.

A question for the original poster and anyone opposed to this scheme. How long have you lived in Brixton? What the hell gives you the right to move into an area, deprive a genuine local of housing, and then try to dictate who else can join you there? Bloody hypocrites.

 

[pooka]

Who owns this property? The council? If not, is the suggestion that it should be compulsorily purchased for social housing or simply that planning permission should be refused on the grounds that 'yuppies' will live there? Would such a suggestion have even a glimmer of political realism about it?

This thread is so much a re-run of 'Selling Central Brixton to Yuppies' of a couple of years back. Like that thread, it translates into 'Keep my immediate environs the way it is for me and my mates'.

The various calculations in this thread, about who could and who couldn't afford to buy one of these flats, ignore the fact that many people buying property are also selling property, and so will not need mortgages to the full value.

 

[Bob]

More likely it's prejudice against most local authorities' seeming inability to hire good architects who don't design shit-poor housing.

A case in point: Where I live a mate (an architect and civil engineer) took a look at my flat and said "great ideas, but it's been put together to look good, not to live good". He was especially unimpressed by the lack of eaves (the roof having flush guttering, pleasing on the eye but not very good at it's job), which meant that heavy rain overflowing the guttering ran straight down the walls and windows, causing very bad damp problems. A simple problem to solve, but my flat had received 27yrs of this before the council remedied this particular design fault.
The same sort of inattention to the fact that people were actually going to (in all their sweaty glory) live in a lot of these places is writ large across a lot of urban social housing.

Depends on the design doesn't it? As far as I can see the stuff built in the 50s - 70s was rubbish because the government was trying to reach politically set targets for building hundreds of thousands of flats a year - so did everything on the cheap. But the 1930s LCC red brick stuff is very well built indeed - and Lambeth has huge amounts of this (though not much in Brixton). And the 1980s and 1990s stuff from what I know is not bad either.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

This thread is so much a re-run of 'Selling Central Brixton to Yuppies' of a couple of years back. Like that thread, it translates into 'Keep my immediate environs the way it is for me and my mates'.

No it doesn't and you should know better than to say so. You're well aware that gentrification is a real issue and not a matter of NIMBYism and you're well aware that the inability of many working people to find adequate housing of any sort is a very serious political issue. You might care to deal with those real issues rather than use terms like "translates" which mean "I'm not going to deal with your real argument so I'm going to caricature it so I don't have to".

Personally, I'd argue that the peple who really want to keep things the way they are are the people who are comfortable with the process of gentrification because they are not adversely affected by it.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

What a pile of repetitive tripe this thread is. Legitimate concern about the shortage and cost of homes is used to mask foaming hard-left hate of anyone daring to get off their bottom, luck out in the jobs market, work themselves to the bone, scrape together a deposit and actually, sin of sins, buy a home.

can I assume that this means people like me [haven't actually got off our bottoms and worked. Isn't this the problem with some people who become homewoners, that they start reckoning that the people below them in society are there because they don't want to work? Wold it be reasonable for me to, er, resent that implication?

I understand what you and Justin have posted about exclusion, and have some sympathy

What use is sympathy here, please? And can I actually detect any of this "sympathy" when it is cast among terms like "foaming-left hate"?

but don't you think the manifest hate for those who've managed to sort themselves out (to some degree) tends to degrade the principle of your position?

This is bollocks, isn't it? Can you not tell the difference between hatred and resentment? If you cannot, can I propose you ask a librarian to help you round a dicitonary? Could you also get them to explain to you what "manifest" means?

Isn't it also bollocks to suggest that the people towards whom any resentment is directed are "people who've managed to sort themselves out? Isn't it blindingly obvious that resentment is actually directed at people who haven't had to sort themselves out, people who actually have huge advantages in life?

And isn't it the case that if when you write off people's genuine grievances in the way that you do, you actually increase their justified grievance? Have you any idea how it actualyl comes across? Are you aware that whether you mean to or not, it comes across to someone like me as "fuck you"? That it comes across as "I've got my house and my car and I've worked hard for it and if you haven't then it's mostly down to you so shut up whinging"?

And so forward, to the General Election of 1979...

 

[Juice Terry]

And after all essentially all 'infest' means is to take over....and Brixton WILL be yuppified and taken over by developers and the residents they bring.....old poorer residents driven out. It's inevitable so the use of the word isn't really strictly incorrect IMO.

What about all the older poorer residents who bought their 3 bedroom terraces for 10/20k in 1970 and have now sold them for 400/500k and moved to cheaper areas. Its not just property developers who are making a killing out of all this "yuppification".

 

[Donna Ferentes]

What about all the older poorer residents who bought their 3 bedroom terraces for 10/20k in 1970 and have now sold them for 400/500k and moved to cheaper areas.

It's an interesting point. The bloke who sits opposite me at work - a bloke currently resident on Brixton Hill, and just part-buying a shared ownership place in Hammersmith - has parents who have lived in Shepherd's Bush for decades. Their home has gone up in price by some phenomenal figure over that time, from bugger all to about half a million or something insane like that. There's no doubt that many people are doing precisely what you describe - using their house price to finance a move, often on retirement, so somewhere much cheaper like Cornwall or whatever. There's an interesting debate to be had about the limits and consequences of that. But I do very much doubt that people in that situation are moving into flats such as those which are the subject of this debate, such as it is.

 

[editor]

But I do very much doubt that people in that situation are moving into flats such as those which are the subject of this debate, such as it is.

Why not? I could imagine someone who has just sold a house (after their last parent died, for example) wanting to move away from their sleepy village/town into somewhere lively like Brixton. Naturally, their buying power would be considerably reduced, so somewhere like the Electric Avenue apartments could be suitable for their needs.

I've certainly met a few folks in Brixton who moved here under those circumstances and I wouldn't call them "infesting yuppies".

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Why not? I could imagine someone who has just sold a house (after their last parent died, for example) wanting to move away from their sleepy village/town into somewhere lively like Brixton. Naturally, their buying power would be considerably reduced, so somewhere like the Electric Avenue apartments could be suitable for their needs.

Hmm. Well, if you think that's a statistically significant demographic trend than I won't contradict you.

 

[Giles]

maybe the word infest was a bit strong but I totally agree with the sentiment behind oldslappers post. And after all essentially all 'infest' means is to take over....and Brixton WILL be yuppified and taken over by developers and the residents they bring.....old poorer residents driven out. It's inevitable so the use of the word isn't really strictly incorrect IMO.

I don't see how making some little flats in a long-unused empty space over a shop and then selling them to whoever, actually causes anyone to be "driven out". And who do you think actually built most of Brixton, if not "developers"? (apart from the council estates, obviously)

Giles..

 

[editor]

Hmm. Well, if you think that's a statistically significant demographic trend than I won't contradict you.

I didn't make that claim. But it shows up that only a bigot would dismiss anyone and everyone who buys property in Electric Avenue as an "infesting yuppie".

 

[tarannau]

This thread is so much a re-run of 'Selling Central Brixton to Yuppies' of a couple of years back. Like that thread, it translates into 'Keep my immediate environs the way it is for me and my mates'.

A question for the original poster and anyone opposed to this scheme. How long have you lived in Brixton? What the hell gives you the right to move into an area, deprive a genuine local of housing, and then try to dictate who else can join you there? Bloody hypocrites

I think both of you strike the nail exactly on the head. I was born locally, lived in Brixton nearly all my life, yet I don't feel the seeming need to see nearly every new restaurant, shop or housing development as worthy of criticism or undesirable sign of yuppie activity. Brixton's always changed in the 30 years I've been here - it seems some poeple just want their version of the past to be preserved in time, regardless of the fact they were once likely attracted by the vigour and non-NIMBY vitality of the place.

Gentrification is a serious issue, as Justin suggests, but suggesting that someone buying a space-limited flat above secluded and glamorous Iceland is likely to be some cash-rich yuppie hellbent on despoiling the neighbourhood is both reductive and ridiculous. They're just likely to be average working people, trying to get on the property ladder in some form of other.

Truth is, I'm nowhere close to acquiring a flat in the area I grew up either, as much as I'd love to. I earn reasonable money, yet pay far too much out in rent to save a workable deposit. I'm never going to qualify for social housing either, so I'm equally stuck Justin. I'll just keep plugging along, paying the rent ... secure in the knowledge that if one day I do save enough to buy a house in my home town I'll have some professional smartarse and self-appointed Brixtonite accusing me of being a yuppie for having the temerity to work and want some security...

 

[Donna Ferentes]

I don't see how making some little flats in a long-unused empty space over a shop and then selling them to whoever, actually causes anyone to be "driven out". And who do you think actually built most of Brixton, if not "developers"? (apart from the council estates, obviously)

I'm sure you can see how rising property prices cause demographic changes in given parts of the world. And that if developments of a certain sort are rife in a given part of the world, then that contributes both to said demographic changes and to said rising property prices. These are commonly remarked social phemomena, they're not the invention of foaming hard-left bulletin board posters.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Gentrification is a serious issue, as Justin suggests, but suggesting that someone buying a space-limited flat above secluded and glamorous Iceland is likely to be some cash-rich yuppie hellbent on despoiling the neighbourhood is both reductive and ridiculous. They're just likely to be average working people, trying to get on the property ladder in some form of other.

Truth is, I'm nowhere close to acquiring a flat in the area I grew up either, as much as I'd love to. I earn reasonable money, yet pay far too much out in rent to save a workable deposit. I'm never going to qualify for social housing either, so I'm equally stuck Justin. I'll just keep plugging along, paying the rent ... secure in the knowledge that if one day I do save enough to buy a house in my home town I'll have some professional smartarse and self-appointed Brixtonite accusing me of being a yuppie for having the temerity to work and want some security...

This strikes me as wrong and unfair on several counts.

1. Where do you get "hellbent on despoiling the neighbourhood"?
2. Do you really believe that 'they're just likely to be average working people, trying to get on the property ladder in some form of other'? Do you think the developers think that?
3. Do you ever think that if current trends continue you will ever save enough to buy a house in your home town? Is it not self-evident that this is becomingnharder and harder, and will continue to do so unless action is taken to prevent it, action which will be predicated on the assumption that present trends are undesirable? Do you not see then that just saying "it's all right" not only does not help, it actively makes things worse?
4. Can you really not distinguish between what the critics are actually saying about certain trends and some sort of straw-man resentment of all home ownership? If not, why not?
5. Have you ever read The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists?