# Squire and Partners in Lambeth



## ricbake (Mar 25, 2017)

Squire and Partners are doing so much in Lambeth, a tremendous amount, they must be establishing a very close relationship with the Council. Building a closer and closer relationship over the past 5 years. Lots of projects seem to get permissions as a matter of course. It isn't just the "Department Store" the new building at the Windmill, towers at Vauxhall, town houses in Clapham. 

The removal of the green dome atop of the Bon Marche extension "Department Store" to be replaced in green glass sounds spectacular but there seemed to be very little debate or discussion. I'm sure it will look spectacular, they are spending a huge amount of money but they are changing Brixton quite dramatically.

They intend to bring ten tons of live oak tree into the middle of Brixton shortly to decorate their new office courtyard!


----------



## CH1 (Mar 25, 2017)

ricbake said:


> Squire and Partners are doing so much in Lambeth, a tremendous amount, they must be establishing a very close relationship with the Council. Building a closer and closer relationship over the past 5 years. Lots of projects seem to get permissions as a matter of course. It isn't just the "Department Store" the new building at the Windmill, towers at Vauxhall, town houses in Clapham.
> 
> The removal of the green dome atop of the Bon Marche extension "Department Store" to be replaced in green glass sounds spectacular but there seemed to be very little debate or discussion. I'm sure it will look spectacular, they are spending a huge amount of money but they are changing Brixton quite dramatically.
> 
> They intend to bring ten tons of live oak tree into the middle of Brixton shortly to decorate their new office courtyard!


Where did you get this information?

I don't recall the removal of the dome being proposed when the applciations started coming though.

Now I go to check those applications - and Lambeth website shows there are no documents available on any of them. What a time to have an IT failure!


----------



## ricbake (Mar 26, 2017)

The glass for the dome was in the original planning but insignificantly considering the affect.

The original planning sketch does actually show it as altered







Have been keeping an eye on them as I work next door - photos here- 

The Oak tree, they have alerted some of the neighbours that they are planning on closing Stockwell Avenue to use a crane to bring it in.


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2017)

ricbake said:


> The glass for the dome was in the original planning but insignificantly considering the affect.
> 
> The original planning sketch does actually show it as altered
> 
> ...


Ooh do you think I could maybe use some of those pics for Buzz feature at some point?


----------



## djdando (Mar 27, 2017)

Looks like they're doing a superb job on that building. No doubt lots of you lot will have a moan when its all done though.


----------



## madolesance (Mar 27, 2017)

Squire and Partners are moving down to Brixton from Kings X cause Brixton is apparently edgier.
300 plus architects are on the way to work, eat, socialise and possibly live in Brixton. 
I sense a huge change a comin.


----------



## happyshopper (Mar 27, 2017)

madolesance said:


> Squire and Partners are moving down to Brixton from Kings X cause Brixton is apparently edgier.
> 300 plus architects are on the way to work, eat, socialise and possibly live in Brixton.
> I sense a huge change a comin.



You are probably right that having more people spending money in Brixton will have an impact. But how do you know they are coming because Brixton is "edgier"? Perhaps it's just because it's cheaper.


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2017)

happyshopper said:


> You are probably right that having more people spending money in Brixton will have an impact. But how do you know they are coming because Brixton is "edgier"? Perhaps it's just because it's cheaper.


Not sure Brixton is particularly cheap these days. All those big chains and hip businesses are going to be sending rents sky high.


----------



## equationgirl (Mar 27, 2017)

editor said:


> Not sure Brixton is particularly cheap these days. All those big chains and hip businesses are going to be sending rents sky high.


We know private residential rents are skyrocketing, so it would seem entirely feasible that commercial rents would increase in a similar way. 

happyshopper there has been so much marketing and hype over the past few years about brixton's 'vibrancy' and 'edgyness' and desirability for those hip and cool enough that I'm not at all surprised companies are buying into it and relocating.


----------



## madolesance (Mar 27, 2017)

happyshopper said:


> You are probably right that having more people spending money in Brixton will have an impact. But how do you know they are coming because Brixton is "edgier"? Perhaps it's just because it's cheaper.



I believe 'Squire and Partners' staited  they wanted to leave Kings x because it was no longer edgier enough for them. Brixton they think will tick all the boxes. They are a global company looking for an edge.


----------



## madolesance (Mar 27, 2017)

happyshopper said:


> You are probably right that having more people spending money in Brixton will have an impact. But how do you know they are coming because Brixton is "edgier"? Perhaps it's just because it's cheaper.



It may be cheaper, but have you seen how much money they are spending on refurbishing the 'Department Store'? It doesn't look cheap. They are are going to be here for the foreseeable future and all the new businesses that are opening in Brixton know that.


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2017)

ricbake said:


> The glass for the dome was in the original planning but insignificantly considering the affect.
> 
> The original planning sketch does actually show it as altered
> 
> ...


Here's how it was looking earlier today


----------



## happyshopper (Mar 28, 2017)

madolesance said:


> I believe 'Squire and Partners' staited  they wanted to leave Kings x because it was no longer edgier enough for them. Brixton they think will tick all the boxes. They are a global company looking for an edge.


I was looking for some more solid evidence than what you "believe".


----------



## shakespearegirl (Mar 28, 2017)

editor said:


> Not sure Brixton is particularly cheap these days. All those big chains and hip businesses are going to be sending rents sky high.



I've just been looking at hiring desk space. Comparing desk space costs at Impact Hubs, Brixton - £275 per month, Kings Cross - £460 per month, you can see why a company of 300 is moving to Brixton. Kings Cross has got hugely expensive in recent years.


----------



## ricbake (Mar 28, 2017)

editor said:


> Ooh do you think I could maybe use some of those pics for Buzz feature at some point?


Help yourself!


----------



## ricbake (Mar 30, 2017)

Ten tonnes of soil has arrived today for the Landscaped garden courtyard - think the oak tree will be here on Saturday...

Squire & Partners heads to Brixton and new home

*Squire & Partners heads to Brixton and new home*
_3 September 2015 | By David Rogers

Practice leaving King’s Cross in 2016

Squire & Partners is moving to new offices in Brixton after its plans to turn a former department store building into its new base were OK’d by Lambeth council.

The 225-strong practice will move out of its King’s Cross home of 14 years to south London by late 2016. Its new home will include a staff cafe, modelshop, cycle storage, showers and landscaped garden courtyard.

The office will cover more than 4,700sq m – over double the 2,000sq m it currently has at King’s Cross – and will be located in the Department Store, which will be refurbished and extended. It will also include a bar and restaurant that will be owned by the architect.

The development also includes refurbishing a former fire station and stables that will include a new post office and new business units.

Partner Henry Squire, son of founder Michael Squire, said: “Brixton has a unique creative community and vibrancy which we are looking forward to being part of._

*They had their own pub in Kings Cross*
Building buys a pint for …

*And here is a recent article about the outlook of Mr Squire junior
*
http://www.designcurial.com/news/profile-henry-squire-5027077/


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2017)

ricbake said:


> Ten tonnes of soil has arrived today for the Landscaped garden courtyard - think the oak tree will be here on Saturday...
> 
> Squire & Partners heads to Brixton and new home
> 
> ...





> _ It will also include a bar and restaurant that will be owned by the architect._


Well that's very nice.


> _Brixton has a unique creative community and vibrancy which we are looking forward to being part of._


What a load of stinking bullshit. It's bland, rich, big businesses like this that are stamping on any lingering embers of 'vibrancy' and turning the place into Anytown UK.


----------



## bimble (Mar 30, 2017)

I can't take it anymore with the vibrancy. Please make it stop.


----------



## ricbake (Mar 30, 2017)

editor said:


> What a load of stinking bullshit.



I don't think it is...

They have to use some form of words to express the fact that Brixton is attractive to them.
But they do have a very different outlook and people that rich are hard to trust!


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2017)

ricbake said:


> I don't think it is...
> 
> They have to use some form of words to express the fact that Brixton is attractive to them.
> But they do have a very different outlook and people that rich are hard to trust!


The "unique creative community and vibrancy" they're blathering about has precious little to do with what their company stands for. In fact, in some respects they represent the _exact opposite_ of the kind of creative ethos that Brixton was (once) famous for.


----------



## bimble (Mar 30, 2017)

Occurs to me that every time I see the word vibrancy it comes in a proposal or a document which seems to be leading to something which (far as I can see) will help to get rid of that very thing which they are trying to describe and be a part of.
Maybe vibrancy is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## ricbake (Apr 3, 2017)

15 meters tall and 8.5 tonnes - the Oak arrives.

https://goo.gl/photos/mBaQESh4hodccgcu5


----------



## CH1 (Apr 3, 2017)

ricbake said:


> 15 meters tall and 8.5 tonnes - the Oak arrives.
> https://goo.gl/photos/mBaQESh4hodccgcu5


Fabulous photos. I guess you must live in the penthouse at Blue Star House!

I don't agree about the emergency though - anything to do with property is an emergency by default. The on;ly way the country keeps going at the moment is the roulette wheel of property speculation.

Squires' ostentatious requirement for oak trees and green domes surely is absolutely vital to their credibility.

I dialled them up on Google myself - but for the most part their images are bland. The best of the modernist designs looks to be the British Council building in Nairobi (2006).

Just to set alarm buildings ringing - there is also a fascinating new Squires-designed modernist church building - St Andrews Church - somewhere in the city. I just thought it would be wonderful if the dilapidated Victorian church of St Andrews Stockwell Green could be done like that. If I were Canon Bowman I'd get round to Squires tout de suite.


----------



## ricbake (Apr 4, 2017)

Got my weather station on the roof of Blue Star House and as I work for the owner of the building can come and go whenever  No penthouse unfortunately its all offices.

Because they hadn't got the proper permissions in advance - someone high up in the Council put pressure - Squire and Partners have become so important locally and it was too late for a regularly planned street closure - so it was described as "emergency tree works"
How the arrival of a crane, several large trucks and vans plus a 15 metre tree can be an "emergency" can only be related to Squire's credibility...

Got this direct message from the contractor

_Good afternoon Blue star house, following your tweet on April the 1st we want to ensure you that all the documentation was in place, I am unsure why Lambeth council did not confirm this however if you would like to check with them our crane license number 12806. regard
Apr 3_


----------



## ricbake (Apr 5, 2017)

Normally there is 10 weeks notice for a road closure so there is plenty of time to put up notices and notify neighbours - No notices for this operation, after various internal communication, an application was made about 3 pm on Friday the 31st, permission granted about 5 pm  and 13.5 hours later the closure was in place.


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2017)




----------



## trabuquera (Apr 5, 2017)

It seems like a giant massive crane for not very much tree - was there really no lower-impact method of getting that sapling in situ and into the ground? like a big trolley and a team of working men / women / donkeys?


----------



## happyshopper (Apr 5, 2017)

Was anyone inconvenienced by the "emergency tree works"?


----------



## urbanspaceman (Apr 5, 2017)

Some businesses just have no shame: not only do they bring 300 jobs to Brixton and execute a high-quality refurbishment of a significant building, but now - the gall of it - they go and _plant a tree_. Yes, plant a tree. I think the sheer effrontery of the act speaks for itself.

And they had the temerity to arrange at short notice to have a minor road closed for a few hours on a Bank Holiday. Is there no end to their depravities ? As Ed's picture suggests, can you imagine how deep the corruption goes ? We should appoint a special prosecutor - and the first thing to investigate, as happy shopper suggests, is the extent of injury, losses, distress and trauma suffered by Urbanites - so speak up everyone.


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2017)

urbanspaceman said:


> Some businesses just have no shame: not only do they bring 300 jobs to Brixton and execute a high-quality refurbishment of a significant building, but now - the gall of it - they go and _plant a tree_. Yes, plant a tree. I think the sheer effrontery of the act speaks for itself..


Yes, you're right. We should hush and be grateful. And if they manage to jump a few hoops and not have to go through the same kind of scrutiny as everyone else, well, that's fine because they doing up a building nicely for themselves.
PS I don't think they're_ creating_ 300 jobs in Brixton. I suspect most of their vacancies are already filled by their existing staff.


----------



## urbanspaceman (Apr 5, 2017)

editor said:


> Yes, you're right. We should hush and be grateful. And if they manage to jump a few hoops and not have to go through the same kind of scrutiny as everyone else, well, that's fine because they doing up a building nicely for themselves.
> PS I don't think they're_ creating_ 300 jobs in Brixton. I suspect most of their vacancies are already filled by their existing staff.


I'm not going to get into the sort of angels-on-a-pinhead pissing match that I keep deprecating. But I did say "bring 300 jobs to Brixton", not "create" and indeed they are. They are bringing (i.e. transferring) the jobs from Kings Cross to Brixton.


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2017)

urbanspaceman said:


> I'm not going to get into the sort of angels-on-a-pinhead pissing match that I keep deprecating. But I did say "bring 300 jobs to Brixton", not "create" and indeed they are. They are bringing (i.e. transferring) the jobs from Kings Cross to Brixton.


But you made it sound like the arrival of a fresh batch of well-heeled young professionals into Brixton is something to celebrate. Why is that a good thing?


----------



## SpamMisery (Apr 5, 2017)

And the money they spend in local shops


----------



## alex_ (Apr 5, 2017)

SpamMisery said:


> And the money they spend in local shops



I expect quite a lot of small business owners are pretty pleased about this.

Alex


----------



## urbanspaceman (Apr 5, 2017)

editor said:


> But you made it sound like the arrival of a fresh batch of well-heeled young professionals into Brixton is something to celebrate. Why is that a good thing?


"Fresh batch" - what a dehumanising way of talking about your fellow human beings. Let's try it on for size with some other identifiable groups: "fresh batch of migrants", "fresh batch of ….". Ah, but I can't go further or I'd be banned.
"Young". Are they young ? Would it be different if they were middle-aged ?
"well-heeled". As far I as know architecture isn't particularly well-paid, until you reach partner level. Would it be better if the new arrivals were poor ?

BTW, I do celebrate more commercial activity in Brixton. It's good for shops and restaurants and generates business rates.


----------



## 3Zeros (Apr 5, 2017)

C'mon Editor. Don't you know you can ignore the negatives of gentrification and forget any questions you may have regarding a developer's relationship with the local council if you just consider how pretty the buildings will be and how much money will be spent in the shops?


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2017)

urbanspaceman said:


> "Fresh batch" - what a dehumanising way of talking about your fellow human beings. Let's try it on for size with some other identifiable groups: "fresh batch of migrants", "fresh batch of ….". Ah, but I can't go further or I'd be banned.
> "Young". Are they young ? Would it be different if they were middle-aged ?
> "well-heeled". As far I as know architecture isn't particularly well-paid, until you reach partner level. Would it be better if the new arrivals were poor ?
> 
> BTW, I do celebrate more commercial activity in Brixton. It's good for shops and restaurants and generates business rates.


"Migrants"?" WTF? That's some really deceitful twisting and projection there. I thought you were above that kind of thing.

And I'm afraid I don't share your enthusiasm for 300 well-off professionals making it their new workplace. I don't imagine they'll be making much use of the traditional businesses that cater to the less well off, with their spending power contributing to the demand for yet more trendy foodie restaurants that are unaffordable to many.  No doubt some of their big workforce will want to move here too, and I can't imagine that'll have a positive impact on local rents. 

And despite the guff on their website, I don't see them adding a lot to the area's "_unique creative community and vibrancy" _in any way at all. Perhaps you could help me out there?


----------



## alex_ (Apr 5, 2017)

3Zeros said:


> C'mon Editor. Don't you know you can ignore the negatives of gentrification and forget any questions you may have regarding a developer's relationship with the local council if you just consider how pretty the buildings will be and how much money will be spent in the shops?



I suspect that Lambeth are keen on them due to the >500k of business rates I reckon they'll be paying every year.

Alex


----------



## djdando (Apr 5, 2017)

urbanspaceman said:


> Some businesses just have no shame: not only do they bring 300 jobs to Brixton and execute a high-quality refurbishment of a significant building, but now - the gall of it - they go and _plant a tree_. Yes, plant a tree. I think the sheer effrontery of the act speaks for itself.
> 
> And they had the temerity to arrange at short notice to have a minor road closed for a few hours on a Bank Holiday. Is there no end to their depravities ? As Ed's picture suggests, can you imagine how deep the corruption goes ? We should appoint a special prosecutor - and the first thing to investigate, as happy shopper suggests, is the extent of injury, losses, distress and trauma suffered by Urbanites - so speak up everyone.



Hahaha. Well said. Such a bunch of nosey NIMBYs this lot.


----------



## djdando (Apr 5, 2017)

It was so inconvenient when I had to dismount my bike and walk past the crane. Fortunately I just about squeezed through but wow it was tight


----------



## sparkybird (Apr 5, 2017)

I used to work in an architects office and i was young..... But that was about all....


----------



## ricbake (Apr 5, 2017)

The Council fees for an "Emergency Road Closure" are about one third of those applied for in the proper timescale.
If you want a street closure for a play day or street party forget it if you don't get your application in time - for everyone else applying for any form of Street Licence scaffold, skip, hoarding or crane the rules are the rules - "no exceptions"

Squire and Partners have a position with the Council that apparently gives them exceptional status

April the 1st isn't a Bank Holiday. Squire and Partners are an existing business moving office, not a job creation scheme

The disruption to Ferndale Rd, Bellefields Rd and Stockwell Ave over the past year has become a pain for people using the streets and those neighbouring the project. Every delivery driver will get a parking ticket around there a bunch of their contractors seem to have impunity. The crane operation was a step further.
Stockwell Ave is a busy cycle and pedestrian route, even on a Saturday morning there is a steady stream of cycle commuters and numerous pedestrians. Last Saturday for 7 hours without notice they reduced the public highway to a narrow corridor hardly wide enough to allow pedestrians to pass each other let alone cyclists or mothers with buggies and shopping. They stopped even that use for some periods closing the road completely for what was a vanity project.

I don't understand why anyone believes it necessary to defend the idea that they should be entitled to this level of privilege.


----------



## lefteri (Apr 6, 2017)

editor said:


> But you made it sound like the arrival of a fresh batch of well-heeled young professionals into Brixton is something to celebrate. Why is that a good thing?



To be honest they won't be _that_ well-heeled, architecture is a notoriously badly paid profession, certainly at junior levels

It could be worse, they could be accountants or lawyers 

But I agree it'll barely create a single job that didn't exist before

And squire's are bland commercial architects, no relation to any previous creative scene in brixton


----------



## alex_ (Apr 6, 2017)

ricbake said:


> The Council fees for an "Emergency Road Closure" are about one third of those applied for in the proper timescale.
> 
> If you want a street closure for a play day or street party forget it if you don't get your application in time - for everyone else applying for any form of Street Licence scaffold, skip, hoarding or crane the rules are the rules - "no exceptions"
> 
> Squire and Partners have a position with the Council that apparently gives them exceptional status



That emergency road closures cost less than regular ones is outrageous.

Bending over backwards to help a large new employer to the borough because they are going to pay a cash strapped council a boatload of business rates and bring people into brixton to spend money with local traders. I'd say they were worth making an effort for.

Alex


----------



## SpamMisery (Apr 6, 2017)

The effect on Ferndale has hadly been excessive. I use that stretch of road several times a day and I can t hink of one occasion (in how many months?) when I had to cross the road to the pavement on the other side because the path was blocked. Anyone would think you lot would prefer the building was left part empty.


----------



## CH1 (Apr 6, 2017)

SpamMisery said:


> The effect on Ferndale has hadly been excessive. I use that stretch of road several times a day and I can t hink of one occasion (in how many months?) when I had to cross the road to the pavement on the other side because the path was blocked. Anyone would think you lot would prefer the building was left part empty.


Yes - they dealt with this professionally. And the men they had to direct the pedestrians looked as though they could pick you up and carry you across the road if you had any doubts!


----------



## ricbake (Apr 23, 2017)

Another very impressive turn around for a permission for Squire and Partners

They did ask for this one with 17 days notice rather than just 17 hours like the last one.
At least it gave the Council time to publish this one on their website

Don't remember seeing any other advanced notice


----------



## ricbake (May 26, 2017)

The dome unveiled

https://goo.gl/photos/dMRaSJtVWxq2zwbH6


----------



## CH1 (May 26, 2017)

ricbake said:


> The dome unveiled
> https://goo.gl/photos/dMRaSJtVWxq2zwbH6


Not that impressed. I think the clockwork mechanism above the master bed above Wahaca really turns me on. Couldn't Squire and Partners have emulated that - and more?

You'll have to take my word for it but you can watch the cog wheels going round above your head in the top floor flat - assuming you've nothing better to do!


----------



## editor (May 26, 2017)

CH1 said:


> Not that impressed. I think the clockwork mechanism above the master bed above Wahaca really turns me on. Couldn't Squire and Partners have emulated that - and more?
> 
> You'll have to take my word for it but you can watch the cog wheels going round above your head in the top floor flat - assuming you've nothing better to do!



Sadly, the innards fro that clock disappeared years ago - I've been up in the tower and there was just a few bits of metal left


----------



## editor (May 26, 2017)

Another pic of that funky dome.


----------



## CH1 (May 26, 2017)

editor said:


> Sadly, the innards fro that clock disappeared years ago - I've been up in the tower and there was just a few bits of metal left


Maybe I need to take one of my tablets - but I could swear there were a couple of axles and gear wheels there in 2014.


----------



## editor (May 26, 2017)

CH1 said:


> Maybe I need to take one of my tablets - but I could swear there were a couple of axles and gear wheels there in 2014.


I saw a few bits and pieces but no real gubbins. The people that squatted it years ago were keen to get the clock going but they realised it was too far gone.


----------



## ricbake (May 27, 2017)

The transformation of Toplin House










https://goo.gl/photos/yK1YBFfSENW8ujbQA


----------



## CH1 (May 27, 2017)

ricbake said:


> The transformation of Toplin House
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't like the look of the new dome from that perspective. Why on earth did they do that - and why did the council give permission.

Did the council give permission?


----------



## SpamMisery (May 27, 2017)

What's wrong with it? I think it looks alright.


----------



## ricbake (May 27, 2017)

CH1 said:


> I don't like the look of the new dome from that perspective. Why on earth did they do that - and why did the council give permission.
> 
> Did the council give permission?





SpamMisery said:


> What's wrong with it? I think it looks alright.



I did read through the original planning application but it was a huge and complicated set of documents and plans. I didn't remember seeing anything referring to this at the time. Learnt about it while discussing last years Design Trail plans. It was included in the original planning application but not so you would notice....


----------



## CH1 (May 27, 2017)

SpamMisery said:


> What's wrong with it? I think it looks alright.


I think you probably liked the "creatures" on Dr Who tonight then.


----------



## SpamMisery (May 28, 2017)

You'll have to show me. I dont watch Dr Who


----------



## SpamMisery (May 28, 2017)

ricbake said:


> I did read through the original planning application but it was a huge and complicated set of documents and plans. I didn't remember seeing anything referring to this at the time. Learnt about it while discussing last years Design Trail plans. It was included in the original planning application but not so you would notice....
> 
> View attachment 107840



What's inside the dome?


----------



## ricbake (May 28, 2017)

Just scaffolding at the moment - they have only just finished building it. Presumably it will be a green room!


----------



## editor (Jun 1, 2017)

Gotta love this spin. Their site states that multi-million development in Brixton will house "an independent bar/restaurant," but then in brackets is adds: (also owned by Squire and Partners).

So not fucking independent at all then, least not by any normal definition of the word.


----------



## editor (Jun 2, 2017)

Most of their developments seem to be for the _super_ rich. 



> Squire and Partners has designed many of London’s “prime presidential” developments  including Chelsea Barracks, One Tower Bridge, Clarges Mayfair, Ebury Square, Netherhall Gardens and The Knightsbridge Apartments, with hotel projects including the five star Bulgari Hotel & Residences in London, the boutique Rockwell Hotel, and the Hilton Liverpool.
> 
> More recently, they teamed up with a private UAE-based fund on a £150 million luxury flats redevelopment in Chelsea, and also created the ‘most expensive luxury apartment to ever come on sale in London’s Marylebone.



Squire and Partners talk vibrancy and show off the shiny dome of their new Brixton Department Store home


----------



## editor (Jun 2, 2017)

Here's the finished tower:


----------



## T & P (Jun 2, 2017)

It looks fucking great.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 2, 2017)

T & P said:


> It looks fucking great.


It looks good - but I still can't come to terms with changing the copper dome to glass.

It looks like it now needs a telescope and a Dr Who laser light thingy for communicating with Moon Base.


----------



## T & P (Jun 2, 2017)

CH1 said:


> It looks good - but I still can't come to terms with changing the copper dome to glass.


 Wouldn't the old dome have been listed or at least enjoyed some kind historical significance status? Or perhaps it would have done but was in too poor state?


----------



## editor (Jun 2, 2017)

T & P said:


> Wouldn't the old dome have been listed or at least enjoyed some kind historical significance status? Or perhaps it would have done but was in too poor state?


Seemed to be in pretty good nick to my eyes, and the opening frame of their time lapse video shows what appears to be an intact structure.

I wish it was going to be an actual 'Department Store' rather than the offices of a global architects firm who specialise in extra-luxury developments for the stinking rich.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 2, 2017)

ricbake thought either the application was so incredibly complicated that this detail was overlooked by the planners - or that this work was not in the application. (see above maybe page 2).

You are right the building is locally listed. Don't know where you get the details - and Lambeth does not have an outstanding record of preserving locally listed buildings intact.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 3, 2017)

editor said:


> Seemed to be in pretty good nick to my eyes, and the opening frame of their time lapse video shows what appears to be an intact structure.
> 
> I wish it was going to be an actual 'Department Store' rather than the offices of a global architects firm who specialise in extra-luxury developments for the stinking rich.



Name a department store which is expanding AND you wouldn't complain about being out of context for the area or contributing towards gentrification.

Alex


----------



## T & P (Jun 3, 2017)

CH1 said:


> ricbake thought either the application was so incredibly complicated that this detail was overlooked by the planners - or that this work was not in the application. (see above maybe page 2).
> 
> You are right the building is locally listed. Don't know where you get the details - and Lambeth does not have an outstanding record of preserving locally listed buildings intact.



It seems to be extraordinarily unlikely that the dome itself was listed or protected and Squire and Partners simply chose to ignore this. Far more likely that the original structure was either not listed, or deemed too damaged or structurally unsound to be kept in its original state. I think Squire and Partners deserve the benefit of the doubt on this one, unless anyone has evidence to suggest otherwise.


----------



## editor (Jun 3, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Name a department store which is expanding AND you wouldn't complain about being out of context for the area or contributing towards gentrification.
> 
> Alex


Why would it have to be "expanding"? Businesses can relocate.  

But I won't play your exciting quiz game because I was just expressing an opinion that I'd rather have a department store that the public can access than offices of architects to the super super rich.


----------



## editor (Jun 3, 2017)

T & P said:


> It seems to be extraordinarily unlikely that the dome itself was listed or protected and Squire and Partners simply chose to ignore this. Far more likely that the original structure was either not listed, or deemed too damaged or structurally unsound to be kept in its original state. I think Squire and Partners deserve the benefit of the doubt on this one, unless anyone has evidence to suggest otherwise.


Have you any evidence that the dome was "deemed too damaged or structurally unsound to be kept in its original state"? I reckon it's more likely Squire & Partners just wanted to provide an advert for their work and had the money to make something snazzy for themselves.

It's not Grade 1 or II listed by the way.


----------



## T & P (Jun 3, 2017)

editor said:


> Have you any evidence that the dome was "deemed too damaged or structurally unsound to be kept in its original state"? I reckon it's more likely Squire & Partners just wanted to provide an advert for their work and had the money to make something snazzy for themselves.


 I think that is rather unlikely, myself. But let's not let conjeture get in the way of trying to find reasons to dislike and criticise this profit-making company.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 3, 2017)

editor said:


> Why would it have to be "expanding"? Businesses can relocate.
> 
> But I won't play your exciting quiz game because I was just expressing an opinion that I'd rather have a department store that the public can access than offices of architects to the super super rich.



I'm assuming John Lewis or Waitrose would have been aok ? worker owned, long standing links with the area.

Alex


----------



## editor (Jun 3, 2017)

T & P said:


> I think that is rather unlikely, myself.


I'm afraid you're completely wrong. The development is very much designed to showcase their work: 


> The Department Store concept is intended to showcase the different elements of Squire and Partners’ work including installations, interior design, product design, illustration, modelmaking and CGI as well as architecture.
> Department Store, Brixton


----------



## CH1 (Jun 3, 2017)

editor said:


> It's not Grade 1 or II listed by the way.


It's on the Lambeth Local List. Not sure what that means - although normally it would be stated as a fact in planning application documentation - just like if it was in a conservation area (which it is).

If you want to see what happens to locally listed buildings in conservation areas try the old St John's School (opposite the site of the former Canterbury Arms). In that case there are roof lights newly inserted that would be big enough to power the Police Station if they were solar panels.

How authentically mid-Victorian can you get than that?


----------



## editor (Jun 3, 2017)

CH1 said:


> It's on the Lambeth Local List.


Local listing is quite different from a fully fledged Grade I and II listing status.



> Whilst local listing provides no additional planning controls, the fact that a building or site is on a local list means that its conservation as a heritage asset is an objective of the NPPF(2) and a material consideration when determining the outcome of a planning application.
> Locally Listed Heritage Assets | Historic England


----------



## T & P (Jun 3, 2017)

editor said:


> I'm afraid you're completely wrong. The development is very much designed to showcase their work:


 That doesn't prove at all, or even suggests for that matter, that they have elected to demolish and replace anything they see fit without due consideration for the existing features. So it's still pure speculation.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 3, 2017)

T & P said:


> It seems to be extraordinarily unlikely that the dome itself was listed or protected and Squire and Partners simply chose to ignore this. Far more likely that the original structure was either not listed, or deemed too damaged or structurally unsound to be kept in its original state. I think Squire and Partners deserve the benefit of the doubt on this one, unless anyone has evidence to suggest otherwise.



Do you have experience of dealing with planning applications?


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 3, 2017)

T & P said:


> I think that is rather unlikely, myself. But let's not let conjeture get in the way of trying to find reasons to dislike and criticise this profit-making company.



How about just criticising them for bring a profit making company? Is that ok by you?


----------



## T & P (Jun 3, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> How about just criticising them for bring a profit making company? Is that ok by you?


Not sure what you mean to be honest.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 4, 2017)

editor said:


> I'm afraid you're completely wrong. The development is very much designed to showcase their work:



What's wrong with this ?

"Oh no, woe is me a large firm of architects  has  decided to refurbish a brixton landmark"

Would you rather it was a pret or soho house hotel ?

Alex


----------



## editor (Jun 5, 2017)

alex_ said:


> What's wrong with this ?


Shame you didn't bother reading the thread before jumping in. I didn't say there was anything wrong with it. I think the glass dome looks rather nice, to be honest.

I was simply correcting T&P's assertion that the new offices weren't designed to be a showcase of their work when their own page specifically confirms that it is.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 5, 2017)

editor said:


> Shame you didn't bother reading the thread before jumping in. I didn't say there was anything wrong with it. I think the glass dome looks rather nice, to be honest.
> 
> I was simply correcting T&P's assertion that the new offices weren't designed to be a showcase of their work when their own page specifically confirms that it is.



Fair enough - a firm of architects designing their own corporate headquarters to not show off their skills would be beyond idiotic

Alex


----------



## editor (Jun 5, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Fair enough - a firm of architects designing their own corporate headquarters to not show off their skills would be beyond idiotic


Indeed. And seeing as they're particularly loaded with cash, they've been able to do a splendid job of that dome. Shame that the rest of Brixton can't share in that new 'social rooftop space expressed as a series of pavilions,' though.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 5, 2017)

editor said:


> Indeed. And seeing as they're particularly loaded with cash, they've been able to do a splendid job of that dome. Shame that the rest of Brixton can't share in that new 'social rooftop space expressed as a series of pavilions,' though.



Looks like just more office space from the exterior photos

Alex


----------



## editor (Jun 5, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Looks like just more office space from the exterior photos


That's how they've described it themselves and you can see it in their illustration. It looks very nice. Champers on the roof!


----------



## alex_ (Jun 5, 2017)

editor said:


> That's how they've described it themselves and you can see it in their illustration. It looks very nice. Champers on the roof!



Tattinger on the terrace surely ?


----------



## CH1 (Jun 5, 2017)

editor said:


> That's how they've described it themselves and you can see it in their illustration. It looks very nice. Champers on the roof!


Let me pose the $64 dollar question:
If you had the choice of Champers at Squires, or Champers at the Shrub and Shutter, which would you choose?


----------



## editor (Jun 5, 2017)

CH1 said:


> Let me pose the $64 dollar question:
> If you had the choice of Champers at Squires, or Champers at the Shrub and Shutter, which would you choose?


I'm afraid neither choice fills me with even a shred of enthusiasm. I'd rather have a pint in the pub.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> I'm afraid neither choice fills me with even a shred of enthusiasm. I'd rather have a pint in the pub.


I'd be keen to get the view at Squires. I suspect this could become a fashionable venue for those sort of events where tables feed back at the end of the session. Only trouble is the tables will probably be full of councillors plotting which zone to regenerate next.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 6, 2017)

I wonder what they're like to work for? A 10 minute commute would be nice.


----------



## Winot (Jun 6, 2017)

Crispy said:


> I wonder what they're like to work for? A 10 minute commute would be nice.



Could you and teuchter get jobs there please and invite us all to drinks in the dome.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

Crispy said:


> I wonder what they're like to work for? A 10 minute commute would be nice.


Oh, their staff are very well taken care of and their perks would be the absolute envy of most Brixton workers. They get loads of freebie office jaunts abroad - Berlin, Rome, Copenhagen etc -  and soapbox racing, Lovebox, Henley Regatta  jollies galore! They must have shitloads of cash to throw around, but given their hyper exclusive, super-rich client list, that's not surprising 



> Squire and Partners reward hard work with a lively social life, providing year-round events including team days out, office football and softball teams, involvement in design festivals and an annual office trip, which has been part of the practice for over 35 years.
> 
> Social | Squire and Partners


----------



## bimble (Jun 6, 2017)

I trust the weather vane is still to come as per the drawings?
Can't make out if its a ship or a cockerell or what but the needle looks silly without it.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> hyper exclusive, super-rich client list,


Can't be any worse than my current employer.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> Oh, their staff are very well taken care of and their perks would be the absolute envy of most Brixton workers. They get loads of freebie office jaunts abroad - Berlin, Rome, Copenhagen etc -  and soapbox racing, Lovebox, Henley Regatta  jollies galore! They must have shitloads of cash to throw around, but given their hyper exclusive, super-rich client list, that's not surprising



Loads of this stuff will be tax deductible, and make up for poor salaries which are not.

Alex


----------



## alex_ (Jun 6, 2017)

CH1 said:


> I'd be keen to get the view at Squires. I suspect this could become a fashionable venue for those sort of events where tables feed back at the end of the session. Only trouble is the tables will probably be full of councillors plotting which zone to regenerate next.



Only as long as the free Krug doesn't run out.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Can't be any worse than my current employer.


Really? This lot have been behind some of the most exclusive and richest private developments in the UK. 



> Squire and Partners has designed many of London’s “prime presidential” developments  including Chelsea Barracks, One Tower Bridge, Clarges Mayfair, Ebury Square, Netherhall Gardens and The Knightsbridge Apartments, with hotel projects including the five star Bulgari Hotel & Residences in London, the boutique Rockwell Hotel, and the Hilton Liverpool.
> 
> More recently, they teamed up with a private UAE-based fund on a £150 million luxury flats redevelopment in Chelsea, and also created the ‘most expensive luxury apartment to ever come on sale in London’s Marylebone.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Loads of this stuff will be tax deductible, and make up for poor salaries which are not.
> 
> Alex


Define "poor salaries" and place them in context of the area please. Thanks.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> Define "poor salaries" and place them in context of the area please. Thanks.



I'm saying that staff jollies can be defined as a business expense, which makes up for below market rate salaries.

Compared to the area it'll all be in the top 5-10%.

Alex


----------



## alex_ (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> Really? This lot have been behind some of the most exclusive and richest private developments in the UK.



They are successful, if they weren't they wouldn't be able to afford an expensive office.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

alex_ said:


> I'm saying that staff jollies can be defined as a business expense, which makes up for below market rate salaries.
> 
> Compared to the area it'll all be in the top 5-10%.
> 
> Alex


Indeed. This lot they're shipping in from north London will be living the high life at work compared to most Brixton workers. Most can only dream of swanning around a "social rooftop space expressed as a series of pavilions" and having nibbles in their own private cafe.

And then there's all those wonderful free trips abroad and office jaunts around the UK. Yep, this lot really are the lucky ones. Shame it's unlikely that many Brixtonites will be invited to join the party.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> Indeed. This lot they're shipping in from north London will be living the high life at work compared to most Brixton workers. Most can only dream of swanning around a "social rooftop space expressed as a series of pavilions" and having nibbles in their own private cafe.
> 
> And then there's all those wonderful free trips abroad and office jaunts around the UK. Yep, this lot really are the lucky ones. Shame it's unlikely that many Brixtonites will be invited to join the party.



I'd imagine their staff live all over London.

They've restored a brixton landmark, will be paying lambeth a boatload of business rates, their staff will be spending money in brixton businesses - this is all good for brixton - what is your beef ?

Alex


----------



## Crispy (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> Really?


Yes really. They're a direct competitor and we have some of the exact same clients.

Times have changed. When I started here, we were doing local authority leisure centres, halls of residence and out-of-town office parks. Now it's all 5 star hotels, Bond Street boutiques and Mayfair apartments. They were the only jobs going during the recession and now it's all we do. It's fascinating work from an architectural POV, but also a sickening view into how the other 0.5% live.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

alex_ said:


> They've restored a brixton landmark, will be paying lambeth a boatload of business rates, their staff will be spending money in brixton businesses - this is all good for brixton - what is your beef ?


I doubt if their staff will be making much use of the traditional Brixton businesses - the market, Afro Caribbean stores etc - and the presence of such relatively well off people moving in will have an impact on rent and rates. It's basic gentrification - great for some (in particular people who already own homes in the area) and devastating for others (people on low paid jobs in rented accommodation). 

Do you own your home around here? I sometimes find that people who do fail to have any understanding of why those at the bottom of the pile don't share their enthusiasm for high end businesses and exclusive restaurants opening up in their neighbourhood.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Yes really. They're a direct competitor and we have some of the exact same clients.
> 
> Times have changed. When I started here, we were doing local authority leisure centres, halls of residence and out-of-town office parks. Now it's all 5 star hotels, Bond Street boutiques and Mayfair apartments. It was the only work going during the recession and now it's all we do. It's fascinating work from an architectural POV, but also a sickening view into how the other 0.5% live.


I'm sorry to hear that. I find all this luxury stuff so depressing and I'm sure that's not what you got in the game for.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 6, 2017)

The hotel suite I'm working on right now has a living room bigger than my entire house.
(I just checked, it's nearly twice as big)


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

Crispy said:


> The hotel suite I'm working on right now has a living room bigger than my entire house.


That's fucking obscene. This madness has to end soon.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> That's fucking obscene. This madness has to end soon.


Time was you could get a decent mob together, storm their gates and loot their houses. Now they live nowhere and everywhere, while their wealth sits on a computer in the Carribean. They're untouchable. The whole system has to collapse before they even feel a tickle of inconvenience.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Time was you could get a decent mob together, storm their gates and loot their houses. Now they live nowhere and everywhere, while their wealth sits on a computer in the Carribean. They're untouchable. The whole system has to collapse before they even feel a tickle of inconvenience.


Yet so many at the top are getting fatter and fatter through this corrupt system. Opposite me - in one of the most deprived wards in London - flats are going up starting at over half a million quid. There's no social housing included and an unspecified amount of (guffaw) 'affordable' homes.

The flats are being flogged off with an advertising campaign drawn on Brixton's reputation as some sort of trendy gritty urban hangout while those struggling to survive nearby can only look on. This development won't improve their lives one jot. It's just another wedge that's going to eventually force them out of the area and their community. Makes me want to cry.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 6, 2017)

That sort of thing is about the "elbow" of the wealth distribution curve, as it starts to pitch up towards the top 10%. Out of reach of all but the top ranks of Squires' employees, if they pay anything like the rest of the industry. (Or those lower down the ranks with help from mum & dad)


If you drew that graph with a continuous line instead of discrete bars, the right hand side would spike right off the top of the screen and start interfering with planes on approach to Heathrow. Those are the people who can afford 160m² living rooms in their hotel suites, separate chaffeured Bentleys for themselves and their shopping, and entire floors of shops dedicated to one-on-one handbag sales.


----------



## lefteri (Jun 6, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Yes really. They're a direct competitor and we have some of the exact same clients.
> 
> Times have changed. When I started here, we were doing local authority leisure centres, halls of residence and out-of-town office parks. Now it's all 5 star hotels, Bond Street boutiques and Mayfair apartments. They were the only jobs going during the recession and now it's all we do. It's fascinating work from an architectural POV, but also a sickening view into how the other 0.5% live.



This is why I'm glad I'm out of the profession, despite my income plummeting- it was clear after the crash that the only clients left were in volume house building, spec offices and super-high end residential refurbishment.  A few practices might get the glittering prizes of well-funded public buildings but even their bread and butter would be in the aforementioned sectors.  At least previously there were some functioning public sector building programmes like new schools, now there's virtually nothing.


----------



## lefteri (Jun 6, 2017)

Crispy said:


> The hotel suite I'm working on right now has a living room bigger than my entire house.
> (I just checked, it's nearly twice as big)


I remember looking at the floor plans for 1 Hyde park which had been stripped down considerably and were posted on the development's website. I was very confused for a while until I realised that what I had assumed to be individual flats were actually rooms, it was that scale of magnitude bigger than what I had got used to in designing layouts for 'normal' apartment buildings


----------



## teuchter (Jun 6, 2017)

I see that someone in the comments under the Buzz article has managed to convince themselves that this practice is stuffed with people earning £66k.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

They were nominated in the Carbuncle Cup for this monstrosity 









> This luxury residential tower may be on the thin side, but its poor design and inappropriate location wreaks urban damage that extends far and wide
> 
> Sadly, London’s River Thames continues to yield a fertile carbuncle harvest with its first nominee this year. One Tower Bridge is a luxury riverside residential development that has been designed by Squire and Partners for Berkeley Homes. Both have Carbuncle form. Berkeley Homes produced 2014 Carbuncle runner-up Vauxhall Tower (another luxury Thames-side development) and Squire and Partners co-designed last year’s nominee the M by Montcalm Hotel. The practice is also likely to receive similar carbuncular recognition when its Shell Centre redevelopment (yet another luxury Thames-side development) completes in 2019.
> 
> However, this robust pedigree is immaterial to this year’s newest candidate which has been nominated by reader Robert Dwek. Moreover, it is only one particular part of the overall development that is being nominated, a preposterous 20-storey tower block opposite the Tower of London christened, with stunning cheek, the Tower.





> This is yet another London architectural tragedy that has bad planning as its roots. And the extent of planning failure is demonstrated by the impact this tower has on important historic views of the Tower of London opposite. When viewed from the north, the Berkeley tower gate-crashes the turreted and pinnacled roofscape of the famed medieval fortress and marks an unwarranted intrusion on to a site of both national importance and Unesco World Heritage significance. Judge for yourself whether a forgettable stack of luxury triplex flats was really worth violating a world-famous townscape vista that has been so integral to the character and fabric of London for almost a thousand years.



Carbuncle Cup: The Tower, Southwark by Squire & Partners


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

Oh and here's another. And fuck is it ugly:








> It’s one of the most aggressive buildings in London. It visually assaults anyone approaching it from Old Street roundabout, and distorts the street view into a time-warp-like perspective with its acutely sharp and unforgiving angle. One wonders if the intention is solely to provoke - not just the passers-by but also the hotel guests with its petty windows


Carbuncle Cup: M by Montcalm hotel


----------



## alex_ (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> That's fucking obscene. This madness has to end soon.



I think we have bigger problems in society than un necessarily large hotel rooms

Alex


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

alex_ said:


> I think we have bigger problems in society than un necessarily large hotel rooms
> 
> Alex


You don't think the growth of the property-grabbing, rent-escalating super-rich is emblematic of any major underlying problems in general society then?


----------



## T & P (Jun 6, 2017)

I was on the same flight once as a group of Squire and Partners employees, and the bloke in front of me on the toilet queue did not use his papel towel to wipe the basin as a courtesy to the next passenger. All wrong 'uns, I tell ya!


----------



## Crispy (Jun 6, 2017)

alex_ said:


> I think we have bigger problems in society than un necessarily large hotel rooms.


They are a symptom of the illness. It's not even in proportion. If the hotel rooms of the ultra rich were scaled in proportion to their actual wealth, they'd be the size of Buckhingham Palace.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

T & P said:


> I was on the same flight once as a group of Squire and Partners employees, and the bloke in front of me on the toilet queue did not use his papel towel to wipe the basin as a courtesy to the next passenger. All wrong 'uns, I tell ya!


Gosh, that's so funny. 

PS: What's a 'papel towel'?


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 6, 2017)

This discussion reminded me I went to the pre planning public exhibition on this development by Squires of the new Brixton HQ.

On hand were people from Squires. They were keen to point out they knew there were concerns about gentrification in Brixton. That they didn't want to be seen as contributing to this. That they wanted Squires, when they moved here , to be a involved in the community. 

I am starting to feel this was all just PR. 

What it does show is that Squires are well aware of the rich / poor divide in this area. That it's an issue.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> You don't think the growth of the property-grabbing, rent-escalating super-rich is emblematic of any major underlying problems in general society then?



Yes, but if I had to pick something to get people to the barricades - "a living wage for all" Might be a slightly better battle cry to rally the troops than "equal sized hotel rooms for all"

Alex


----------



## teuchter (Jun 6, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> This discussion reminded me I went to the pre planning public exhibition on this development by Squires of the new Brixton HQ.
> 
> On hand were people from Squires. They were keen to point out they knew there were concerns about gentrification in Brixton. That they didn't want to be seen as contributing to this. That they wanted Squires, when they moved here , to be a involved in the community.
> 
> ...


How, specifically, would you like them to be "involved in the community"?


----------



## T & P (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> Gosh, that's so funny.
> 
> PS: What's a 'papel towel'?


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Yes, but if I had to pick something to get people to the barricades - "a living wage for all" Might be a slightly better battle cry to rally the troops than "equal sized hotel rooms for all"
> 
> Alex


Way to miss the point, but, whatever.


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> This discussion reminded me I went to the pre planning public exhibition on this development by Squires of the new Brixton HQ.
> 
> On hand were people from Squires. They were keen to point out they knew there were concerns about gentrification in Brixton. That they didn't want to be seen as contributing to this. That they wanted Squires, when they moved here , to be a involved in the community.
> 
> ...


They'll cherrypick a few low-cost, but reasonably high profile local concerns to get involved with, trumpet the news loud and clear to prove they just love the Brixton community, and then sidestep any conversations about what they're doing to integrate with the wider community or why they shouldn't be seen as yet another nail in the gentrification coffin.

They offered one person I know - who ticks all their Brixton PR boxes perfectly - an offer she could barely refuse to move her business into their new premises. 

It's how this thing works these days: super slick, manipulative PR smoke and mirrors, and token gestures slapped all over their puffed up PR releases. I guess some people buy this bullshit.

I've lost count of the times I've heard developers and incomers bandy around the word community and then seen them follow it up with a whole load of nothing.


----------



## T & P (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> They offered one person I know - who ticks all their Brixton PR boxes perfectly - an offer she could barely refuse to move her business into their new premises.


 Is this a bad thing?


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

T & P said:


> Is this a bad thing?


She's being used as a pawn for their PR purposes because her business and that of these architects to the super rich have precisely zero synergy. She'd be there to make them look good (and she was immediately aware of this). 

I told her to go for it if she was comfortable with this scenario and had some long term commitment from them, but I suspect some of her customers may find it an odd marriage. I can;t blame her for taking this opportunity.

But do I like rich incoming companies doing this kind of cynical PR manipulation  so they can _community-wash_ their image? No, I don't.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 6, 2017)

T & P said:


>


Not a papal towel, then?


----------



## snowy_again (Jun 6, 2017)

deleted


----------



## T & P (Jun 6, 2017)

editor said:


> She's being used as a pawn for their PR purposes because her business and that of these architects to the super rich have precisely zero synergy. She'd be there to make them look good (and she was immediately aware of this).
> 
> I told her to go for it if she was comfortable with this scenario and had some long term commitment from them, but I suspect some of her customers may find it an odd marriage. I can;t blame her for taking this opportunity.
> 
> But do I like rich incoming companies doing this kind of cynical PR manipulation  so they can _community-wash_ their image? No, I don't.


What evidence do you have that this was just a cynical PR exercise? How can you be sure, other than a suspicion or gut feeling (which ain't exaclty much proof of anything?

In fact, who the hell gets to decide which actions a business take constitute genuine engagement with the local community, and which are just PR exercises? They are opinions nothing else. A cynic could use the same argument to dismiss most gestures by private businesses as PR, so I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## Winot (Jun 6, 2017)

T & P said:


> In fact, who the hell gets to decide which actions a business take constitute genuine engagement with the local community, and which are just PR exercsies?



I think we all know the answer to that one.


----------



## T & P (Jun 6, 2017)

Rushy said:


> Not a papal towel, then?
> View attachment 108629


Oh, I see what I did there... I was wondering why anyone would have trouble understanding what a paper towel is...


----------



## Rushy (Jun 6, 2017)

T & P said:


> Oh, I see what I did there... I was wondering why anyone would have trouble understanding what a paper towel is...


exaclty


----------



## lefteri (Jun 6, 2017)

T & P said:


> In fact, who the hell gets to decide which actions a business take constitute genuine engagement with the local community, and which are just PR exercises? They are opinions nothing else.



Who do you think?

Hint: they're the ones the attempt to engage with is made


----------



## editor (Jun 6, 2017)

T & P said:


> What evidence do you have that this was just a cynical PR exercise? How can you be sure, other than a suspicion or gut feeling (which ain't exaclty much proof of anything?
> 
> In fact, who the hell gets to decide which actions a business take constitute genuine engagement with the local community, and which are just PR exercises? They are opinions nothing else. A cynic could use the same argument to dismiss most gestures by private businesses as PR, so I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.


Oh I don't know, but I imagine when a company declares that they're opening an "independent bar/restaurant" in their new multi million pound premises but then adds "owned by us" in brackets, I'd say some level of cynicism is richly deserved. And then matching up their PR 'community' spin with reality often yields enlightening results.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 6, 2017)

teuchter said:


> How, specifically, would you like them to be "involved in the community"?



To make it clear. I didn't bring the issue up at the event I attended. They did. 

So the ball is in there court.


----------



## T & P (Jun 6, 2017)

What they should ha


lefteri said:


> Who do you think?
> 
> Hint: they're the ones the attempt to engage with is made


I'm not sure they would be in a better position to judge that unless the company in question has outright told them the only reason they are being offered subsidised space is only because they are trendy and groovy like the company itself. Was that the case here?


----------



## SpamMisery (Jun 6, 2017)




----------



## lefteri (Jun 6, 2017)

T & P said:


> What they should ha
> 
> I'm not sure they would be in a better position to judge that unless the company in question has outright told them the only reason they are being offered subsidised space is only because they are trendy and groovy like the company itself. Was that the case here?


So the local community is not in a position to judge whether attempts to engage the local community are successful or not?

Have a word with yourself


----------



## T & P (Jun 6, 2017)

lefteri said:


> So the local community is not in a position to judge whether attempts to engage the local community are successful or not?
> 
> Have a word with yourself


A single person does not represent the entire local community; nor we know how many other people might have been offered similar deals, and what their thoughts might be. I'm pretty sure there are members of this forum who are members of the local community who might judge offers thus far as genuine attempts to engage the local community. Is their opinion less valid?


----------



## lefteri (Jun 6, 2017)

T & P said:


> A single person does not represent the entire local community; nor we know how many other people might have been offered similar deals, and what their thoughts might be. I'm pretty sure there are members of this forum who are members of the local community who might judge offers thus far as genuine attempts to engage the local community. Is their opinion less valid?


I wasn't talking about any single person - try reading posts instead of assuming


----------



## teuchter (Jun 6, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> To make it clear. I didn't bring the issue up at the event I attended. They did.
> 
> So the ball is in there court.


Your comment



> I am starting to feel this was all just PR.



made it sound like you had changed your mind since the exhibition - ie, at the time you thought it might be feasible that they could have a meaningful involvement in the community but that since then their actions have shown otherwise.

Suggested that you think there are things they could do which they are already not doing, or that they are actively doing things that displease you.


----------



## T & P (Jun 6, 2017)

lefteri said:


> I wasn't talking about any single person - try reading posts instead of assuming


And as I said, unless that person was openly told by the company they were only being offered a subsidised rent because of their perceived trendiness, the opinion of the person is subjective and as likely to be wrong as right.

It seems to me there is a drive to find fault with this firm at all costs and as soon as possible, even regarding actions that most people would consider to be positive. Subsided rent? The badtards!


----------



## lefteri (Jun 6, 2017)

T & P said:


> And as I said, unless that person was openly told by the company they were only being offered a subsidised rent because of their perceived trendiness, the opinion of the person is subjective and as likely to be wrong as right.
> 
> It seems to me there is a drive to find fault with this firm at all costs and as soon as possible, even regarding actions that most people would consider to be positive. Subsided rent? The badtards!


What person are you talking about? There's no relevance in your posts to the ones of mine you are replying to - are you talking to yourself?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 6, 2017)

alex_ said:


> What's wrong with this ?
> 
> "Oh no, woe is me a large firm of architects  has  decided to refurbish a brixton landmark"
> 
> ...



In the context of architecture, "refurbish" usually means "repair to original condition", not "structurally and cosmetically alter" (which is what they've *actually* done), I think


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> Could you and teuchter get jobs there please and invite us all to drinks in the dome.



Heard it referred to as "that bellend" today on the bus.  I didn't agree, but now I've had a good look at the pics, I can see what the old geezer meant.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 6, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Only as long as the free Krug doesn't run out.



Surely you're not implying that Lambeth's Councillors are venal freeloaders?


----------



## T & P (Jun 6, 2017)

lefteri said:


> What person are you talking about? There's no relevance in your posts to the ones of mine you are replying to - are you talking to yourself?


The person Editor refers to in post 129, of course. And you?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 6, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> In the context of architecture, "refurbish" usually means "repair to original condition", not "structurally and cosmetically alter" (which is what they've *actually* done), I think



Actually, in the context of architecture, "refurbish" usually means the latter.

Repairing to original condition would be called "restoration".


----------



## lefteri (Jun 7, 2017)

T & P said:


> The person Editor refers to in post 129, of course. And you?


so you're arguing with editor in replies to my posts which make no mention of any such person - are you ok?


----------



## alex_ (Jun 7, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Surely you're not implying that Lambeth's Councillors are venal freeloaders?



Never !


----------



## T & P (Jun 7, 2017)

lefteri said:


> so you're arguing with editor in replies to my posts which make no mention of any such person - are you ok?


Perhaps you could now enlighten us all and tell us who you think gets to decide which actions a business take constitute genuine engagement with the local community, and which are just PR exercise, as per your claim in post 148.

Unless of of course you were talking bullshit all along and don't know the answer, as your increasingly condescending yet content-free replies would suggest.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 7, 2017)

I think lefteri's point is that it's "the local community" who gets to decide. In other words, it's sufficiently undefinable that we can argue about it here ad infinitum.


----------



## T & P (Jun 7, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I think lefteri's point is that it's "the local community" who gets to decide. In other words, it's sufficiently undefinable that we can argue about it here ad infinitum.


Oh, I would agree it is undefinable, and would add it is a matter of opinion. Which is why nobody really gets to decide the issue, and why lefteri's post was superfluous.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 7, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Your comment
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The exhibition was a very long time ago. As part of the present planning application. 

Now it's almost completed. Several years have passed. I don't see they have done anything further to engage local community.

They are a profit making business. Working on high end developments mainly. I went to the present planning application to look at the plans. Which looked fine to me. On purely architectural view it's a good development. 

I didn't need to hear the PR bollox to judge the plans.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 7, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Yes really. They're a direct competitor and we have some of the exact same clients.
> 
> Times have changed. When I started here, we were doing local authority leisure centres, halls of residence and out-of-town office parks. Now it's all 5 star hotels, Bond Street boutiques and Mayfair apartments. They were the only jobs going during the recession and now it's all we do. It's fascinating work from an architectural POV, but also a sickening view into how the other 0.5% live.



What's happened to architectural profession is reflection of what's changed in society. Post War if you trained as an architect it was likely you would go to work in a public sector team. Lambeth had one. Helping to rebuild post War Britain. Council housing , amenities and the new Universities for example.

The Brixton Rec is an example. Part of the reason it was listed. An example of socialist architecture. This at the time made one part of the mainstream. You could be a socially commited architect and have a job. The architect Finch , who designed the Rec and his wife designed many public buildings. At a time post War when it was felt that ordinary people should have good facilities.

The last thirty eight years since Thatcher have seen the post War consensus dismantled. The end result being that architects now serve the needs of the rich and capital. That's the new consensus.

It's worse than just consensus it's now taken as just how things are. The natural order of things. So complaining appears worthy of ridicule.

Zaha Hadid successor to run her practice forgot PR image to mouth off about "free loading " Council tenants. His unguarded statements reflects the mentality of those at the top of the profession.

Architect blasts 'free-riding' central London council tenants saying they should be moved

I'm not blaming architects further down the food chain. There is a new generation of architects who are now critical if the way the profession has gone. ASH for example.

The architects working on the LJ project are another.

But the political climate is largely against them. Unless some like Corbyn gets into power.

So Squires are a product of the system. They have done a good job on the building. They won't have any relevance to the people on the estate near me.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 7, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> The exhibition was a very long time ago. As part of the present planning application.
> 
> Now it's almost completed. Several years have passed. I don't see they have done anything further to engage local community.
> 
> ...


So you can't give an example of a thing that you'd consider as "engaging the local community". Only note the absence of something. Fair enough: as you say they were the ones who mentioned it. I don't really know what "engaging the local community" actually means though.


----------



## T & P (Jun 7, 2017)

Given that they've all but just landed in the area, perhaps they should be allowed a bit more time before judgement is passed on their community engagement qualities? Not an unreasonable ask I would think.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 7, 2017)

I still like copper domes. Authentic.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 7, 2017)

Gramsci  went to British Association of Local History on Saturday. Picked up a copy of "Space, Hope and Brutalism - English architecture from 1945 - 1975" by Elain Harwood (reduced from £60 to £30). I think you might enjoy a coffee Sable book like that over coffee after the election?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 7, 2017)

CH1 said:


> Gramsci  went to British Association of Local History on Saturday. Picked up a copy of "Space, Hope and Brutalism - English architecture from 1945 - 1975" by Elain Harwood (reduced from £60 to £30). I think you might enjoy a coffee Sable book like that over coffee after the election?


Hefty book that.

Saw her give a talk a couple of months back.


----------



## lefteri (Jun 8, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> What's happened to architectural profession is reflection of what's changed in society. Post War if you trained as an architect it was likely you would go to work in a public sector team. Lambeth had one. Helping to rebuild post War Britain. Council housing , amenities and the new Universities for example.


This is true - I remember reading about Cedric Price - who went into private practice reluctantly because he was passed over by the local authority architects department, which is who he aspired to work for


----------



## Crispy (Jun 8, 2017)

lefteri said:


> This is true - I remember reading about Cedric Price - who went into private practice reluctantly because he was passed over by the local authority architects department, which is who he aspired to work for


tbf, he was bonkers (for the time)


----------



## editor (Jun 8, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> Zaha Hadid successor to run her practice forgot PR image to mouth off about "free loading " Council tenants. His unguarded statements reflects the mentality of those at the top of the profession.
> 
> Architect blasts 'free-riding' central London council tenants saying they should be moved


What an utter scumbag. Fuck you Patrik Schumacher, you worthless piece of shit. 


Gramsci said:


> So Squires are a product of the system. They have done a good job on the building. They won't have any relevance to the people on the estate near me.


Exactly. And cherry-picking a few high profile, PR friendly causes to enhance their 'community' credentials is unlikely to have any positive impact on the wider community. It's all the same rich-company-PR-spin and I've seen it a hundred times.


----------



## editor (Jun 8, 2017)

I quite like the new green glass dome (although I liked the original copper dome too) but I'm not so sure about the big letters making it look like it is an actual department store rather than a showcase for architects to the super rich. But then that is a trend of gentrification: name buildings and businesses after the things that used to be there for an extra slice of authenticity.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 8, 2017)

I just had a look at the building and it looks great, really good job, although I'm not so keen on the "department store" sign.

Doing a proper job on part of the town centre streetscape is a contribution in itself - compare to various massacres carried out by developers who have no interest in contribution to the streetscape other than the minimum the planners will let them get away with. Premier Inn, anyone?


----------



## CH1 (Jun 8, 2017)

editor said:


> I quite like the new green glass dome (although I liked the original copper dome too) but I'm not so sure about the big letters making it look like it is an actual department store rather than a showcase for architects to the super rich. But then that is a trend of gentrification: name buildings and businesses after the things that used to be there for an extra slice of authenticity.
> View attachment 108808


If they wanted refer to the building's history as part of the Bon Marché department store and yet be pretentious why didn't they say something like Bon Marché Annexe?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 9, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> What's happened to architectural profession is reflection of what's changed in society. Post War if you trained as an architect it was likely you would go to work in a public sector team. Lambeth had one. Helping to rebuild post War Britain. Council housing , amenities and the new Universities for example.
> 
> The Brixton Rec is an example. Part of the reason it was listed. An example of socialist architecture. This at the time made one part of the mainstream. You could be a socially commited architect and have a job. The architect Finch , who designed the Rec and his wife designed many public buildings. At a time post War when it was felt that ordinary people should have good facilities.
> 
> ...



The likes of Schumacher - the douchebag from Zaha Hadid Associates - represent the triumph of style over substance, of money over morality.  On a more personal level, any fucker who legs it because a 71-yr old anarchist with a walking stick is hobbling after him, is some sort of chicken-hearted wanker.

Regarding ASH etc, Concrete Action have done some good work, as have "ArchitecturalWorkers", a group of low-ranking architectural workers who want to see the social aspect of architecture come back into focus.  I chatted with 3 of them last week, and like Crispy , they're discontented about working on oligarch and "big money" related projects, rather than on innovative social housing projects.  They realise that without a genuine resurgence of social housing, their jobs will simply become more and more formulaic.


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2017)

Here's how the dome thing looks from the station. I think it seems a bit incongruous on the landscape.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 30, 2017)

I notice from Skyscraper News that Squire and Partners are involved in the development of 71 tower blocks.

One The Elephant particularly irks me. The Unison Headquarters in Camden is by them. But the list contains many schemes either cancelled or just proposed.

Looks like architecture is quite speculative - and I suppose the art must be in producing a scheme which everybody can approve and sign off.
Squire and Partners - Architect, Visualisation Firm
 
One the Elephant. Replacing a council swiming pool and leisure centre, and next to Spurgeon's Metropolitan Baptist Tabernacle, this building has elevated a down-at-heal shopping area to the Metropolitan Elite - don't ya think?


----------



## Crispy (Jun 30, 2017)

Once the shopping centre goes, Elephant will truly be lost. Thankfully, developer/landowner fuckery is keeping it alive for now.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 30, 2017)

I hate that new tower at Elephant. In the fiddly flimsy flim flam style. It's the sort of housing tower that you see in Manchester or Leeds and places like that. It's completely alien to Elephant, or at least the Elephant that was. What Crispy says is right.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 30, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Once the shopping centre goes, Elephant will truly be lost. Thankfully, developer/landowner fuckery is keeping it alive for now.



I use the shopping centre on way home sometimes. The Pound land and Iceland. I can't see it lasting in long term. I've been following some of what's going on 
35% Campaign

Depressing account of how social housing has been whittled down over time in this "regeneration" project.

It's a case of social cleansing of Elephant Castle.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 30, 2017)

When I attended the Brixton Pound awards heard that the Brixton Neighborhood Forum AGM will take place at Squires new offices in Ferndale road. That's going to be interesting. I am planning to go as I attend the Forum meetings.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 30, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I hate that new tower at Elephant. In the fiddly flimsy flim flam style.


The one next door with the triangular balconeys is a bit better (and it appears to have some actually affordable housing attached at ground floor. Someone will tell me it's actually "affordable" now I'm sure...)


----------



## editor (Jun 30, 2017)

Crispy said:


> The one next door with the triangular balconeys is a bit better (and it appears to have some actually affordable housing attached at ground floor. Someone will tell me it's actually "affordable" now I'm sure...)


Affordable, you say?


----------



## editor (Jun 30, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I use the shopping centre on way home sometimes. The Pound land and Iceland. I can't see it lasting in long term. I've been following some of what's going on
> 35% Campaign
> 
> Depressing account of how social housing has been whittled down over time in this "regeneration" project.
> ...


They've been well and truly shafted. Criminally so.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 30, 2017)

CH1 said:


> I notice from Skyscraper News that Squire and Partners are involved in the development of 71 tower blocks.
> 
> One The Elephant particularly irks me. The Unison Headquarters in Camden is by them. But the list contains many schemes either cancelled or just proposed.
> 
> ...



To be fair most architectural practices are "speculative". They enter competitions. Even if they don't get contract they make themselves known. For every scheme that never makes it off the drawing board they get one they actually get go ahead for.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 30, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> For every scheme that never makes it off the drawing board they get one they actually get go ahead for.


More like 10-1


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 30, 2017)

Crispy said:


> The one next door with the triangular balconeys is a bit better (and it appears to have some actually affordable housing attached at ground floor. Someone will tell me it's actually "affordable" now I'm sure...)



In Elephant & Castle its worse. The argument is no longer about affordable but how so
called affordable providers are nothing of the sort.

See this latest article from the 35% campaign. I find reading it mind boggling.

These so called social housing providers are being taken to court by Southwark.

A Signal embarrassment

Provision of social housing is now a game. I find reading about it surreal. It's not fraud it's how so called social housing providers will test the law.  In practice provide no social housing as the ordinary man in the street like me would see as as affordable housing.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 30, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> When I attended the Brixton Pound awards heard that the Brixton Neighborhood Forum AGM will take place at Squires new offices in Ferndale road. That's going to be interesting. I am planning to go as I attend the Forum meetings.


There is an book launch event concerning social housing and gentrification at the Lambeth Accord building basement gallery 6.30 pm Friday 7th July
Big Capital - book launch at 336 Brixton Road


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 30, 2017)

CH1 said:


> There is an book launch event concerning social housing and gentrification at the Lambeth Accord building basement gallery 6.30 pm Friday 7th July
> Big Capital - book launch at 336 Brixton Road



I've read her other book. This one sounds good. A lot of it is known. But worth her putting into one book.

Despite what is happening to London I am optimistic. Housing is a class issue. No one is blaming immigrants. Ordinary people I know understand that London is for "them" not "us". Anger is directed against the rich and powerful. A good sign. See the same attitudes in Brixton and Loughborough Junction.

To add on news being listening to people in Battersea complaining about the Battersea Power station development. Oh and the developers of the Battersea Power station have just managed to reduce "affordable" housing element as it's " financially unviable" for them to do so.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 1, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I've read her other book. This one sounds good. A lot of it is known. But worth her putting into one book.
> 
> Despite what is happening to London I am optimistic. Housing is a class issue. No one is blaming immigrants. Ordinary people I know understand that London is for "them" not "us". Anger is directed against the rich and powerful. A good sign. See the same attitudes in Brixton and Loughborough Junction.
> 
> To add on news being listening to people in Battersea complaining about the Battersea Power station development. Oh and the developers of the Battersea Power station have just managed to reduce "affordable" housing element as it's " financially unviable" for them to do so.



Anna was a member of the panel at the debate ("What is the role of the architect in the housing crisis?") held at the Cressingham Rotunda on Wednesday.  She made the point that anger against "luxury developments" (and their developers!) is very obviously cross-class now, with not just the working class objecting to being priced out and cleansed from their neighbourhoods, but a significant minority of the urban middle classes too.


----------



## editor (Jul 18, 2017)

Some bloke commenting on the Buzz article is actually drawing comparisons between the indifference some feel about this lot arriving in Brixton and the racism and troubles faced by the Windrush generation.



> it’s an improvement on the UKIPpery that smacks of the racism directed at the Windrush generation. I’m old enough to remember Brixton changing in the early 60s, and some of the nastiness directed at the people from Squire is the self-same thing as the rubbish that was directed at the new arrivals from the Caribbean.



And then there's this Norman Tebbit-style lecture: 


> Why so much hatred. Lets not forget that these guys who manage to finally obtain the qualification have not just walked into the job. It takes seven long hard years of studying to become an architect. That is also seven years of dedication and student loan. £66k per year average is money well earned and needed to pay back the loan, which they will be paying for a long time
> Don’t hate. Appreciate or better still, stop bitching about people that are putting back into society and join in.
> Go get your degree (most people with degrees are not born with silver spoons in their mouths, they aspire for better).
> Or don’t get a degree. Your choice. You can still achieve remarkably without one.
> ...




Squire and Partners talk vibrancy and show off the shiny dome of their new Brixton Department Store home


----------



## Reiabuzz (Jul 18, 2017)

What's all this about? It's their offices. Are they supposed to let people just stroll in off the street and just wander around? 



> Their new offices are huge, comprising 4,767sq m of design studio which includes what they’re describing as “a new social rooftop space expressed as a series of pavilions.”
> 
> We assume that this sociability will only extend to their staff and not to members of the public.


----------



## editor (Jul 18, 2017)

Reiabuzz said:


> What's all this about? It's their offices. Are they supposed to let people just stroll in off the street and just wander around?


Then they're not 'social.' They're 'private' and 'exclusive.'


----------



## Reiabuzz (Jul 18, 2017)

I think you're misreading the press release. They're for their staff to socialise with each other. Like any other office. Or maybe you're not misreading the press release and you actually expect this firm to allow members of the public to be able to use their meeeting rooms?


----------



## DietCokeGirl (Jul 18, 2017)

C'mon, it's pretty posh for an office to have its own cafe and private garden and such. Mine doesn't even have enough desks or computers for everyone.


----------



## DietCokeGirl (Jul 18, 2017)

Aesthetically I quite like it, they've made the most of an interesting building (design-wise) and I'm glad they've worked with the original features. I'm relieved it hasn't been turned into luxury flats or a bland TKMAXX-style effort.
Let's hope they invite local schools to teach them about architecture, or hold some interesting exhibitions open to the public in the proposed gallery, or something. They clearly have resources so I hope they use them to benefit as many people locally as possible.


----------



## lang rabbie (Jul 18, 2017)

The £66k "average" salary quoted is from a dubious salary comparison site and based on only two data points. 

Squires are a commercial firm and they have been doing pretty well out of the speculative residential property boom of the last few years.

However, I seriously doubt if the median pay for their staff coming to Brixton will be anything like £66k. 

Probably knock £20k  off that, unless they have suddenly started sharing profits much more widely beyond the partners in the practice?


----------



## editor (Jul 19, 2017)

Reiabuzz said:


> I think you're misreading the press release. They're for their staff to socialise with each other. Like any other office. Or maybe you're not misreading the press release and you actually expect this firm to allow members of the public to be able to use their meeeting rooms?


I'm not misreading anything.

When they said they were building a, "new *social rooftop space* expressed as a series of pavilions," what they actually meant was that they were creating a new posh _private and exclusive_ rooftop for themselves. 

And here's that 'social' thing again when they mean private.


> Owning the entire building, rather than a few floors, represents an opportunity to communicate the practice’s creative and social spirit, which has always been central to our practice ethos.’ [--]


----------



## editor (Jul 19, 2017)

lang rabbie said:


> The £66k "average" salary quoted is from a dubious salary comparison site and based on only two data points.
> 
> Squires are a commercial firm and they have been doing pretty well out of the speculative residential property boom of the last few years.
> 
> ...


I'm sure most of the staff there are doing very nicely for themselves compared to a lot of workers in Brixton, and those at the top are getting a very fat salary. And don't forget there's all those channel-hopping free trips to look forward to for the staff plus jolly team building larks all around the UK too. The lucky fuckers.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 19, 2017)

lang rabbie said:


> The £66k "average" salary quoted is from a dubious salary comparison site and based on only two data points.
> 
> Squires are a commercial firm and they have been doing pretty well out of the speculative residential property boom of the last few years.
> 
> ...


 
Absolutely zero chance that the median pay for their staff will be anywhere near 66k. Knock 25 to 30k off that. And a big chunk of staff who will be earning quite a bit less and who may be earning, by actual hours worked, not much above the London living wage.

Salary guide 2017


----------



## ricbake (Aug 2, 2017)

Canova Hall
They are recruiting staff

New Bar Spy: Canova Hall Brixton London Restaurant Reviews | DesignMyNight


----------



## editor (Aug 2, 2017)

ricbake said:


> Canova Hall
> They are recruiting staff
> 
> New Bar Spy: Canova Hall Brixton London Restaurant Reviews | DesignMyNight


A "A gin distillery, pizza oven and cocktail trolley" - just what Brixton has been waiting for!

And look at the innovation and  imagination that's going into the decor: "exposed brick, Edison light bulbs and quirky vintage furniture."


----------



## editor (Aug 2, 2017)

Good grief. It's for "London's next generation of creatives and the "Millennial working generation."


Albion and East to open Martello Hall, aimed at "Millennial working generation"


----------



## ricbake (Aug 2, 2017)

Canova Hall - from the name one would expect marble entrance and fresco ceilings


----------



## trabuquera (Aug 2, 2017)

"Millennial working generation" is a euphemism with so many implicit red lines baked in, it's almost funny. It means "No wrinkles, no interns, no povs" right?


----------



## editor (Aug 2, 2017)

trabuquera said:


> "Millennial working generation" is a euphemism with so many implicit red lines baked in, it's almost funny. It means "No wrinkles, no interns, no povs" right?


More here: Canova Hall bar and restaurant to serve Brixton’s ‘millennial working generation’ in Squire & Partners building


----------



## CH1 (Aug 2, 2017)

ricbake said:


> Canova Hall - from the name one would expect marble entrance and fresco ceilings


Canova captures the mood of many Brixton residents perfectly I would have thought

By I, Sailko, CC BY-SA 3.0, File:Antonio canova, orfeo, 1777, 01.JPG - Wikimedia Commons


----------



## Gramsci (Aug 2, 2017)

editor said:


> More here: Canova Hall bar and restaurant to serve Brixton’s ‘millennial working generation’ in Squire & Partners building



Some choice comments at end of piece.



> Looks like a decent use of space to me. Bring a bit more activity to that part of town and provides a much needed alternative to the Weathersppons dump over the road.





I use the Beehive. Mixed crowd. The food is cheap. On Saturdays get younger crowd who eat there Saturday afternoon. Says it all refering to Beehive as a dump. 

If it wasn't for the Beehive there wouldn't be an affordable place to go now the cafes in arches have gone.


----------



## lang rabbie (Aug 2, 2017)

A bit embarrassing for a reputable modernist firm like Squire and Partners to have this bar full of retro junk masquerading as "Canova Hall"

Carlo Scarpa's postwar addition to the Gypsoteka & Museo Canoviano in Possagno is one of the greatest small art gallery spaces in Europe.


----------



## Gramsci (Aug 2, 2017)

editor said:


> More here: Canova Hall bar and restaurant to serve Brixton’s ‘millennial working generation’ in Squire & Partners building



Another better comment:



> Whae I was a young sprog we had the Lyons Tea Shop across the Brixton Road from Woolworths where proles could get a cheap cuppa and a snack with mates and take their time. Unlike the outfit which the above Buzz report features.



I remember back in Plymouth regularly being taken to the Lyons. This was in the rebuilt centre of Plymouth. ( bombed in WW2). Back then regeneration was about providing good affordable places for the "proles". Not now. We are supposed to be grateful that Squires have come here and set up cafe for "millennials".


----------



## editor (Aug 17, 2017)

There seems to be some sort of narrative that the building's tower was some sort of semi-derelict wreck before Squire came in and saved the day and added their ostentatious dome : so this photo from 2002 is worth noting.


----------



## bimble (Aug 17, 2017)

I never got a response to my email asking them how come there's no weathervane like in the drawings just an empty spike on top.


----------



## ricbake (Aug 17, 2017)

In May 2015 it looked ok from this angle





And this appears to be the top of the old dome now sitting in one of the roof gardens


----------



## CH1 (Aug 17, 2017)

ricbake said:


> In May 2015 it looked ok from this angle
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well spotted. I guess if people tire of the electrical lightning-effect inside the glass at night we could launch a campaign to have the dome restored!


----------



## editor (Aug 17, 2017)

ricbake said:


> In May 2015 it looked ok from this angle
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not convinced it needed removing at all, but I guess everything has to make way for their show-off vanity dome.


----------



## editor (Aug 22, 2017)

I just took a bit of a look inside and it has to be said there's been no expense spared in the refurbishment. There's even a little courtyard on the ground floor.


----------



## T & P (Aug 22, 2017)

editor said:


> I just took a bit of a look inside and it has to be said there's been no expense spared in the refurbishment. There's even a little courtyard on the ground floor.


 Can anyone come in for a look, or is it by permission only?


----------



## editor (Aug 22, 2017)

T & P said:


> Can anyone come in for a look, or is it by permission only?


Permission only at the moment. I wasn't exactly there in an 'official' capacity so took no pics.


----------



## lefteri (Aug 22, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> Some choice comments at end of piece.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




It's a really nice pub to spend time in with all those booths and the bright rear area


----------



## shakespearegirl (Aug 23, 2017)

editor said:


> I just took a bit of a look inside and it has to be said there's been no expense spared in the refurbishment. There's even a little courtyard on the ground floor.



Surely the 'storefront' of a business that specialises in luxury development is going to reflect that in terms of the finishes and fittings


----------



## editor (Aug 23, 2017)

shakespearegirl said:


> Surely the 'storefront' of a business that specialises in luxury development is going to reflect that in terms of the finishes and fittings


It certainly does that. It's lovely to see such a beautiful building being restored. I just wish it was for all of us. 

I've grown to really dislike that glass dome, by the way. it doesn't fit with the landscape at all and just seems like showing off.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Aug 23, 2017)

Was it ever a public building? It used to be a department store but those are really only freely accessible to people who have money to spend there.


----------



## editor (Aug 23, 2017)

shakespearegirl said:


> Was it ever a public building? It used to be a department store but those are really only freely accessible to people who have money to spend there.


Well, just about anyone can walk around a department store without feeling compelled to buy anything.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Aug 23, 2017)

I'd imagine if it was re-developed as a shopping centre in this day and age, it would be much more 'Selfridges' than 'Morleys'.. 

Hopefully at some point Squires will do something that benefits the community in some way..


----------



## Reiabuzz (Aug 23, 2017)

I think we should allow people to walk around their offices because that's what companies do. That's community spirit.


----------



## Reiabuzz (Aug 23, 2017)

This is a top architectural practice, doing amazing work across london. And we're bitching? This isn't foxton's taking over a building ffs.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Aug 23, 2017)

I'm not bitching, I think it is great they are moving to Brixton. 

I worked many many years ago in a big design business in Kings Cross that had its own restaurant and bar, we still spent money in local businesses.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 23, 2017)

They've done such a good job on the renovation of the exterior of the building that I'm happy enough to enjoy that without feeling that I should be entitled to inspect the interior of a private building at will. It's a positive contribution to the street scene and for an example of a negative contribution you only have to look at what Travelodge have done (I've probably already made this point on this tread).


----------



## editor (Aug 23, 2017)

shakespearegirl said:


> Surely the 'storefront' of a business that specialises in luxury development is going to reflect that in terms of the finishes and fittings













The current portfolio includes some very high end luxury developments for the super rich right across the globe, so I'm sure they can afford it! They must be making a mint.

Some of their stuff looks quite nice but this is awful - a real eyesore. Totally inappropriate for Kensington, IMO.






It does that 'burrowing' thing that is so popular with the stinking rich:


----------



## shakespearegirl (Aug 23, 2017)

That is one fugly building


----------



## sparkybird (Aug 24, 2017)

They have been very helpful to the Friends of Windmill Gardens and our new education/community building - working pro bono and going over and above the call of duty.
I guess they can do this type of work by also doing high end stuff for people who can afford it
I operate on the same basis for my work.....


----------



## ricbake (Aug 24, 2017)

sparkybird said:


> They have been very helpful to the Friends of Windmill Gardens and our new education/community building - working pro bono and going over and above the call of duty.
> I guess they can do this type of work by also doing high end stuff for people who can afford it
> I operate on the same basis for my work.....



Love Lambeth

Brixton Windmill Education Centre


----------



## Gramsci (Aug 24, 2017)

sparkybird said:


> They have been very helpful to the Friends of Windmill Gardens and our new education/community building - working pro bono and going over and above the call of duty.
> I guess they can do this type of work by also doing high end stuff for people who can afford it
> I operate on the same basis for my work.....



Not having a go at Squires in particular here. But the question I ask is why is it up to the largesse of big business to do this? Back in 60s and ,70s architects , employed by Councils, were designing community facilities. Councils were building them. Take the flats by Imperial War Museum. Designed by Finch. With community hall built in. Now gone. Back then post war society had seen redistribution of wealth and power to the working class. Post Thatcher and it's back to the largesse and philanthropy of the well off if one gets things like this. 

Doing the windmill is good PR. I don't believe they do high end work do so they can do community projects. I'm not criticising Windmill charity for getting Squires in. But let's not get carried away. Squires are a business. If Windmill charity can get something out of them all well and good. But let's not be to grateful.


----------



## CH1 (Aug 25, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> Not having a go at Squires in particular here. But the question I ask is why is it up to the largesse of big business to do this? Back in 60s and ,70s architects , employed by Councils, were designing community facilities. Councils were building them. Take the flats by Imperial War Museum. Designed by Finch. With community hall built in. Now gone. Back then post war society had seen redistribution of wealth and power to the working class. Post Thatcher and it's back to the largesse and philanthropy of the well off if one gets things like this.
> 
> Doing the windmill is good PR. I don't believe they do high end work do so they can do community projects. I'm not criticising Windmill charity for getting Squires in. But let's not get carried away. Squires are a business. If Windmill charity can get something out of them all well and good. But let's not be to grateful.


Take your point - but unfortunately we are now in a neo-Victorian era like when the Tates and Carnegies had libraries built.

You might have heard of "The Sage Gateshead" which is a culture centre in Gateshead with concert hall, theatre etc presumably paid for by Sage - the accounting software company.

What pisses me off is how Lambeth Council have completely botched the libraries. Almost like pissing on Andrew Carnegie's grave (not that he was a nice man though).


----------



## editor (Aug 25, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> Not having a go at Squires in particular here. But the question I ask is why is it up to the largesse of big business to do this? Back in 60s and ,70s architects , employed by Councils, were designing community facilities. Councils were building them. Take the flats by Imperial War Museum. Designed by Finch. With community hall built in. Now gone. Back then post war society had seen redistribution of wealth and power to the working class. Post Thatcher and it's back to the largesse and philanthropy of the well off if one gets things like this.
> 
> Doing the windmill is good PR. I don't believe they do high end work do so they can do community projects. I'm not criticising Windmill charity for getting Squires in. But let's not get carried away. Squires are a business. If Windmill charity can get something out of them all well and good. But let's not be to grateful.


It's all about PR. Throw a relatively microscopic bit of cash around to cash-strapped local concerns - and make sure your name is mentioned in dispatches - and let the positive PR roll in.

I'm glad that a handful of local charities are benefiting, but they're a long, long way from being a company that really gives a shit about the area and all its problems.


----------



## sparkybird (Aug 25, 2017)

editor said:


> It's all about PR. Throw a relatively microscopic bit of cash around to cash-strapped local concerns - and make sure your name is mentioned in dispatches - and let the positive PR roll in.
> 
> I'm glad that a handful of local charities are benefiting, but they're a long, long way from being a company that really gives a shit about the area and all its problems.



I've been involved in a fair few corporate sponsorships (not at the windmill) when I worked in the voluntary sector. Some expected huge amounts of PR in return for very little cash. I don't think Squire's even come close. If I hadn't mentioned it, would you have known?
And their input has saved thousands of pounds for this charity.

They seem open to suggestions, so maybe they could be approached for other projects? What could they do to 'give a shit'?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 25, 2017)

Squires very likely do the Windmill because they enjoy it as well as because it's a good turn. It is probably more interesting than doing yet another expensive private housing block. Many or most architects are not primarily motivated by making cash. They would rather do interesting (and/or socially useful) jobs that pay OK than boring jobs that pay better. As Gramsci points out there are not as many of the former type around as there once were. Stuff like social housing is no longer done by councils in house and what there is tends to be done on design and build contracts with budgets cut to the bone. I don't know anything about the bosses of Squires but I imagine they might prefer doing libraries and social housing if there was enough of that kind of work about, and if there was scope in the fees to put proper time into it and have genuine control over the outcome.

This is why making Squires a target is a bit unfair. Yes they do high end work and yes the directors probably do rather well out of it. The bulk of the employees will not be on extravagant salaries. The company has chosen to invest heavily in their building, which means those employees get a good working environment. They are also getting criticism for running annual jollies abroad. Again this seems like something that is done for the benefit of employees. Money that otherwise could go into the bosses' pockets. They appear to be a company who treat their workers fairly well, and who've made a positive contribution to Brixton's street environment.


----------



## T & P (Aug 25, 2017)

sparkybird said:


> I've been involved in a fair few corporate sponsorships (not at the windmill) when I worked in the voluntary sector. Some expected huge amounts of PR in return for very little cash. I don't think Squire's even come close. If I hadn't mentioned it, would you have known?
> And their input has saved thousands of pounds for this charity.
> 
> They seem open to suggestions, so maybe they could be approached for other projects? What could they do to 'give a shit'?


What they should have done is not to have engaged at all with any charities, or do or say anything whatsoever that might suggest they might want to be involved in any way with the local community. That way they can be sure they would never be seen as cynical or doing good deeds only as a PR exercise.

I suspect other businesses thinking of moving into Brixton might come across discussions such as that in this thread and decide it is really not worth the bother to try to engage with the local community at all, given the likely response they might receive for it.


----------



## lefteri (Aug 25, 2017)

Reiabuzz said:


> This is a top architectural practice, doing amazing work across london. And we're bitching? This isn't foxton's taking over a building ffs.


It's a top architecture practice in turnover perhaps but had never had a strong reputation for design


----------



## editor (Aug 25, 2017)

sparkybird said:


> I'If I hadn't mentioned it, would you have known?


It's got a big eight page feature on their own website - plus another page pointing out that their work was in the RIBA Journal -  which of course also helps showcase more of their skills to potential clients. 
And Lambeth ran a feature on it too, so they've enjoyed no shortage of positive PR.

Brixton Windmill Education Centre
RIBA Journal: Brixton Windmill, Education Centre | Squire and Partners
Love Lambeth

I've got nothing against Squire per se - they're just another wealthy company employing modern PR techniques - but I'm not still buying their claim that their presence contributes anything to Brixton's (ahem) vibrancy.


----------



## sparkybird (Aug 25, 2017)

Well the only mention of the pro bono work was in Lambeth's own publication.....
Unfortunately charities couldn't survive without this type of help


----------



## Gramsci (Aug 25, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Squires very likely do the Windmill because they enjoy it as well as because it's a good turn. It is probably more interesting than doing yet another expensive private housing block. Many or most architects are not primarily motivated by making cash. They would rather do interesting (and/or socially useful) jobs that pay OK than boring jobs that pay better. As Gramsci points out there are not as many of the former type around as there once were. Stuff like social housing is no longer done by councils in house and what there is tends to be done on design and build contracts with budgets cut to the bone. I don't know anything about the bosses of Squires but I imagine they might prefer doing libraries and social housing if there was enough of that kind of work about, and if there was scope in the fees to put proper time into it and have genuine control over the outcome.
> 
> This is why making Squires a target is a bit unfair. Yes they do high end work and yes the directors probably do rather well out of it. The bulk of the employees will not be on extravagant salaries. The company has chosen to invest heavily in their building, which means those employees get a good working environment. They are also getting criticism for running annual jollies abroad. Again this seems like something that is done for the benefit of employees. Money that otherwise could go into the bosses' pockets. They appear to be a company who treat their workers fairly well, and who've made a positive contribution to Brixton's street environment.



You are making a lot of assumptions here. You may be right or wrong.

Could be that some architects like working for wealthy clients.  Zaha Hadids successor made some pretty disparaging comments about social housing not so long ago.

Big clients have the money for big projects.  I can see its sexy doing big projects. There is something rather invigorating about the ruthless way capitalism works. Creative Destruction that I can see could appeal to architects. Its one of the ways that it works. 

Im looking at realistic appraisal of how capitalism works.  It could be that Squires get the same kick out of big time capitalist projects as they do small time charity work.

What Ive bern saying in my recent posts is not that unreasonable.  That charities should look at all avenues to get funding.

What Im saying that people shouldn't fall into trap of thinking that they should be grateful for charity.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 27, 2017)

I've not made a lot of "assumptions" - what I say is from direct knowledge.

I've also not claimed that no architects like working for wealthy clients. Absolutely some do and some like high end work and seek it out and would rather do that even if other work was as well paid. 

Patrick Shuhmacher's political views are exceptional for the profession overall - again I tell you this from an informed position.

Nor have I said anything about being grateful for charity. What I object to is the presumption that Squires are only helping out with the Windmill out of cynical self interest. I don't think that's fair. And the idea that they will bring a bunch of employees on fat salaries is fallacious.


----------



## Gramsci (Aug 27, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I've not made a lot of "assumptions" - what I say is from direct knowledge.
> 
> I've also not claimed that no architects like working for wealthy clients. Absolutely some do and some like high end work and seek it out and would rather do that even if other work was as well paid.
> 
> ...



If your refering to your previous post I commented on you said you didn't know anything about the bosses at Squires. Now ur saying you are talking from direct knowledge.


----------



## Gramsci (Aug 27, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I've not made a lot of "assumptions" - what I say is from direct knowledge.
> 
> I've also not claimed that no architects like working for wealthy clients. Absolutely some do and some like high end work and seek it out and would rather do that even if other work was as well paid.
> 
> ...



I talk to architects. Including local ones. My view of Squires is partly informed by them.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 27, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> If your refering to your previous post I commented on you said you didn't know anything about the bosses at Squires. Now ur saying you are talking from direct knowledge.





Gramsci said:


> I talk to architects. Including local ones. My view of Squires is partly informed by them.



I talk from direct knowledge about the architectural profession generally, what tends to be the motivation behind what kind of work is taken on, and how much salaried architects are paid, which is a lot less than some of the bonkers numbers posted earlier in this thread. I would put money on talking more regularly to a much wider range of architects than you do. But I don't know specifically about the bosses at Squires, which is why I was careful to make that clear in my post along with the fact that my speculation about their possible motivations was based on my general knowledge of how architectural practices tend to operate. I was not assuming anything about them. I was not making "lots of assumptions" as you said. I also was not claiming the things your reply implied. Nor was I particularly disagreeing with anything you'd said previously.


----------



## ricbake (Aug 30, 2017)

19 September 2017 - £18
"...hosted by Squire and Partners in their new Brixton office, The Department Store. Providing a platform for the area’s finest creative talent..."

Brixton Design Trail: Craft & Collaboration at The Department Store


----------



## editor (Aug 30, 2017)

ricbake said:


> 19 September 2017 - £18
> "...hosted by Squire and Partners in their new Brixton office, The Department Store. Providing a platform for the area’s finest creative talent..."
> 
> Brixton Design Trail: Craft & Collaboration at The Department Store


£18?!! Well, that gives a pretty clear indication about which kind of locals they're inviting in to their new chichi offices.


----------



## CH1 (Aug 31, 2017)

editor said:


> £18?!! Well, that gives a pretty clear indication about which kind of locals they're inviting in to their new chichi offices.


I was told by an outraged punter that Sam Brooks Brewery tour @ £10 was an outrage (the £10 did not include any beer).

Talking of which has anyone seen the Open House London schedule? Anything interesting actually FREE on 16/17 September?


----------



## sparkybird (Aug 31, 2017)

Brixton Windmill (the one with the sails) is open 16 and 17th and is free
Added bonus is a free Harvest Festival event on the 17th too!

What's on - brixton windmill


----------



## shakespearegirl (Aug 31, 2017)

editor said:


> £18?!! Well, that gives a pretty clear indication about which kind of locals they're inviting in to their new chichi offices.



Alternatively, you could go to this free event at the new chichi offices.

Brixton Design Trail: ART AND SOUL


----------



## snowy_again (Aug 31, 2017)

BDT has a founder from Squire doesn't it, along with Binki & the crafty fox people amongst others.

UNDER/EXPOSED – Brixton Design Trail


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2017)

snowy_again said:


> BDT has a founder from Squire doesn't it, along with Binki & the crafty fox people amongst others.
> 
> UNDER/EXPOSED – Brixton Design Trail


They've taken over the entire PR of the event.


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2017)

shakespearegirl said:


> Alternatively, you could go to this free event at the new chichi offices.
> 
> Brixton Design Trail: ART AND SOUL














Maybe you're OK with it, but I can't help feeling a bit uncomfortable with an event about gentrification being hosted in a place that represents the very essence of gentrification, especially when it's all supposed to be about love, community and diversity.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Aug 31, 2017)

I don't think it does represented the essence of gentrification, it is a commercial building that has been restored and is operating as a business.


----------



## Angellic (Aug 31, 2017)

shakespearegirl said:


> I don't think it does represented the essence of gentrification, it is a commercial building that has been restored and is operating as a business.



Brixton Pound Cafe and BCA Cafe are food partners.


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2017)

shakespearegirl said:


> I don't think it does represented the essence of gentrification, it is a commercial building that has been restored and is operating as a business.


A building owned by a high end firm that caters to the architectural fancies of millionaires and billionaires.

We'll have to disagree on this one.

Incidentally, the Art and Soul talk is brought to you by the people who wanted to build a million pound crowdfunded sculpture of the Bowie ZigZag.


----------



## snowy_again (Aug 31, 2017)

editor said:


> They've taken over the entire PR of the event.



Or if you believe the section here: The BDT team – Brixton Design Trail and click on Julia Nichols it suggests that Julia / Squire has always done the PR for it.

Just noticed 198 Gallery's Jon Daniel's also part of it too.


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2017)

snowy_again said:


> Or if you believe the section here: The BDT team – Brixton Design Trail and click on Julia Nichols it suggests that Julia / Squire has always done the PR for it.


OK, well if that is the case, this year the press releases appear to be more heavily branded. I like the idea of the Design Trail a lot but I am feeling a disconnect between its 'community' aims and a lot of what is being presented.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Aug 31, 2017)

editor said:


> A building owned by a high end firm that caters to the architectural fancies of millionaires and billionaires.
> 
> We'll have to disagree on this one.
> 
> Incidentally, the Art and Soul talk is brought to you by the people who wanted to build a million pound crowdfunded sculpture of the Bowie ZigZag.



We can agree to disagree


----------



## ricbake (Sep 1, 2017)

sparkybird said:


> They have been very helpful to the Friends of Windmill Gardens and our new education/community building - working pro bono and going over and above the call of duty.
> I guess they can do this type of work by also doing high end stuff for people who can afford it
> I operate on the same basis for my work.....



Were Squire and Partners doing the design of the building etc - Did they know the budget? Is the doubling or more of the cost related to poor instruction or over ambitious specification by the architects?


----------



## editor (Sep 1, 2017)

ricbake said:


> Were Squire and Partners doing the design of the building etc - Did they know the budget? Is the doubling or more of the cost related to poor instruction or over ambitious specification by the architects?


Something has clearly gone very wrong in the planning/design process, with the Council admitting, “It has become clear that the current budget is not enough to build the required education centre.”



> The cost for the proposed Brixton Windmill Education Centre has more than doubled. Lambeth Council calculated that £360,000 would be enough to build the centre at Windmill Gardens. It is now looking for a further £393,000 as the total cost has risen to £753,000.


Cost of Education Centre for Brixton Windmill more than doubles to £753,000 as Lambeth Council miscalculates price


----------



## Rushy (Sep 1, 2017)

I reckon their running costs of just over £100pw to run the place sounds very optimistic, although who knows what is actually included.

£5,000 / sqm build cost for what will be a glorified shed is really quite outstanding. I suspect it has a lot to do with the type of approved list contractors the council is committed to using.


----------



## phillm (Sep 1, 2017)

shakespearegirl said:


> We can agree to disagree



I'd like to both agree and disagree with both of you.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 2, 2017)

CH1 said:


> I was told by an outraged punter that Sam Brooks Brewery tour @ £10 was an outrage (the £10 did not include any beer).
> 
> Talking of which has anyone seen the Open House London schedule? Anything interesting actually FREE on 16/17 September?



Cressingham Gardens!


----------



## ricbake (Sep 7, 2017)

Canova Hall opening September 23rd Ferndale Rd / Stockwell Ave

BOTTOMLESS BRUNCH, EVERY SATURDAY & SUNDAY  – _from 11am till 5pm_
Choose from our Bottomless Brunch Bar for £20pp over a two hour sitting.  
Mimosa's, Frizzante or Canova Rum Punch.  

OPEN LATE EVERY FRIDAY & SATURDAY – _Open till 1am_
Pizza to eat-in or takeaway till close.

DJ'S EVERY FRIDAY & SATURDAY – _Open till 1am_

*SATURDAY 23RD - OPENING WEEKEND*
BOTTOMLESS BRUNCH
- _from 11am till 5pm_

DJ TWIGGY 
- _from 8pm till 1am_

*SUNDAY 24TH – OPENING WEEKEND*
BOTTOMLESS BRUNCH
- _from 11am till 5pm_

DJ TWIGGY 
- _from 8pm till 1am_


----------



## Mr Retro (Sep 7, 2017)

Rushy said:


> I reckon their running costs of just over £100pw to run the place sounds very optimistic, although who knows what is actually included.
> 
> £5,000 / sqm build cost for what will be a glorified shed is really quite outstanding. I suspect it has a lot to do with the type of approved list contractors the council is committed to using.


You couldn't run a 3 bedroom semi on £100 a week. You could build the Sagrada Familia for 5 grand a square metre.


----------



## Angellic (Sep 8, 2017)

ricbake said:


> Canova Hall opening September 23rd Ferndale Rd / Stockwell Ave
> 
> BOTTOMLESS BRUNCH, EVERY SATURDAY & SUNDAY  – _from 11am till 5pm_
> Choose from our Bottomless Brunch Bar for £20pp over a two hour sitting.
> ...



Pizzas seem more expensive than Mamma Dough, which are more expensive than 500 Degrees.


----------



## CH1 (Sep 8, 2017)

Why bother with £10-£20 a go when a stone's throw away you can get "one of the unhealthiest" full English breakfast options for a mere £3.59?


----------



## T & P (Sep 8, 2017)

CH1 said:


> Why bother with £10-£20 a go when a stone's throw away you can get "one of the unhealthiest" full English breakfast options for a mere £3.59?


I think you've answered your own question there


----------



## editor (Sep 8, 2017)

T & P said:


> I think you've answered your own question there


Unhealthy can still be very tasty though!


----------



## editor (Sep 8, 2017)

Angellic said:


> Pizzas seem more expensive than Mamma Dough, which are more expensive than 500 Degrees.


The days of affordable restaurants and cafes opening up in Brixton seem long gone, sadly.


----------



## bimble (Sep 22, 2017)

Walked by today on way to the post office. The cafe they've created is (I think) really quite beautiful, I love that sort of 20s glamour the little beaded lamps and all. 
Is that going to be open to everyone when it opens ? Wasn't quite sure whether its a cafe or a workspace.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 22, 2017)

I walked past the other day (also on way to post office) and it seemed to be open to everyone. I noted that the people sitting inside appeared surprisingly unhipsterly, one group obviously fresh out of tk maxx given the pile of shopping bags squaahed against the window.


----------



## bimble (Sep 22, 2017)

I see its this, as posted on the last page.
Canova Hall - Bistro in Brixton
£40 a month to work there with bottomless frothy coffees, might try it.


----------



## CH1 (Sep 24, 2017)

I went past about 7 pm yesterday and it was rammed.
Part of a chain (of two) I see.
"The 4,579sq ft restaurant and bar in Brixton will be designed by Red Deer and split across two levels.
The menu will be inspired by Italian street food and offer fresh pasta and pizza, made with 48 hour fermented pizza dough and cooked in the all-wood oven imported from Modena in Italy.
Customers will be able to choose drinks from a cocktail trolley or be waited on by booking a bartender who will conjure up a mix of creative cocktails for the table.
A still will be shipped from the US to enable the team to make their own gin from the on-site distillery. Small batch Canova Gin and Martello Gin will be on sale in both sites.
Sarah Weir, founder of Albion and East said: “This is such an exciting project with so many amazing people involved. Brixton is a close-knit and vibrant community, like Hackney, and we are privileged to become part of it.”
Albion and East supported by the Imbiba Partnership, a specialist start up investor."


----------



## Rushy (Sep 24, 2017)

I don't get it. Are fresh pizza and pasta Italian street food?


----------



## urbanspaceman (Sep 25, 2017)

At work with Squire & Partners: inside their radical new Brixton HQ

Here's an article with photos of the interior.


----------



## Rushy (Sep 25, 2017)

The place looks utterly amazing. Looking forward to seeing.


----------



## editor (Sep 25, 2017)

CH1 said:


> I went past about 7 pm yesterday and it was rammed.
> Part of a chain (of two) I see.
> "The 4,579sq ft restaurant and bar in Brixton will be designed by Red Deer and split across two levels.
> The menu will be inspired by Italian street food and offer fresh pasta and pizza, made with 48 hour fermented pizza dough and cooked in the all-wood oven imported from Modena in Italy.
> ...


This fucking "street food" hipster bullshit really gets on my tits. It's simply dishonest marketing.



> *Street food* is ready-to-eat food or drink sold by a hawker, or vendor, in a street or other public place, such as at a market or fair. It is often sold from a portable food booth,[1] food cart, or food truck and meant for immediate consumption. Some street foods are regional, but many have spread beyond their region of origin. Most street foods are classed as both finger food and fast food, and are cheaper on average tthan restaurant meals. According to a 2007 study from the Food and Agriculture Organization, 2.5 billion people eat street food every day
> 
> Street food - Wikipedia


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2017)

Not 100% convinced by the exposed-materials/unfinished renovation look. That's a fad that will probably pass. It's fine for bars and other fit outs that will likely be redone once it goes out of fashion. But this seems like a more serious building and a more long-term renovation. It makes it feel a bit like they are saying they are not in there for the long haul.

The bits they've "done properly" - the exterior and the new bits on the roof - look great.


----------



## editor (Sep 25, 2017)

The 'poetry of decay.' Apparently.


----------



## T & P (Sep 25, 2017)

Rushy said:


> The place looks utterly amazing. Looking forward to seeing.


Same here. Very impressed by what is shown on their website.


----------



## Crispy (Sep 25, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Not 100% convinced by the exposed-materials/unfinished renovation look


If nothing else, it'll be a bugger to clean.


----------



## trabuquera (Sep 25, 2017)

The refit is impressive and the staff are nice, but overstretched
Pizzas look OK
Coffee is dire (there's a reason they're offering 'bottomless' supply for so few £)
Some of the things coming out of the kitchen are frankly inedible
It's not fair to judge, because they're only just getting started and from the sound of it having some staffing problems, but my first experience there was shambolic and very disappointing. I'll be back another day to see if they get it together.


----------



## Angellic (Sep 25, 2017)

trabuquera said:


> The refit is impressive and the staff are nice, but overstretched
> Pizzas look OK
> Coffee is dire (there's a reason they're offering 'bottomless' supply for so few £)
> Some of the things coming out of the kitchen are frankly inedible
> It's not fair to judge, because they're only just getting started and from the sound of it having some staffing problems, but my first experience there was shambolic and very disappointing. I'll be back another day to see if they get it together.



Seems very noisy as well.


----------



## editor (Sep 25, 2017)

Angellic said:


> Seems very noisy as well.


#street food authenticity


----------



## Angellic (Sep 25, 2017)

editor said:


> #street food authenticity



Rosie's Thai place is just as bad for noise.


----------



## CH1 (Sep 25, 2017)

editor said:


> This fucking "street food" hipster bullshit really gets on my tits. It's simply dishonest marketing.


I really can't comment. To me street food is fried yam served with coffee with ten sugars beside a main road blocked with traffic in Accra.

Yesterday having attended the music hall star walk in the Lambeth Archives festival I had a few moments to spare, so I went to the Squires building hoping to catch some of the Brixton Design Trail before it finished.

Couldn't see anything design related except for the Crafty Fox Market - 3 postcards of Brixton for £9 sort of thing. (Somewhat up market of the Brixton Society!) 
No evidence of Design trail activity at TK Max either, despite the listing.

What I did want to say though was I went to the fourth floor roof-top restaurant bar at the Squires building. Throbbing with activity - and stunning views across roof-top Brixton. Like a more homely and family-friendly version of the top of the Tate Modern extension.

I hope they keep admission open to all. Can't tell you what the pricing was mind, as I was too knackered to linger.


----------



## editor (Sep 25, 2017)

CH1 said:


> What I did want to say though was I went to the fourth floor roof-top restaurant bar at the Squires building. Throbbing with activity - and stunning views across roof-top Brixton. Like a more homely and family-friendly version of the top of the Tate Modern extension.
> 
> I hope they keep admission open to all. Can't tell you what the pricing was mind, as I was too knackered to linger.


I thought the fourth floor restaurant was for their staff, but I could be wrong. There certainly hasn't been any press releases I've seen advertising a public restaurant.


----------



## ricbake (Sep 25, 2017)

Special occasions only us lowly mortals are allowed to see how the other half live


----------



## bimble (Sep 25, 2017)

oh. i am sad to read that the (bottomless) coffee is bad. No point having beautiful gold lettering and beaded lampshades if your coffee is bad.


----------



## ricbake (Sep 25, 2017)

bimble said:


> oh. i am sad to read that the (bottomless) coffee is bad. No point having beautiful gold lettering and beaded lampshades if your coffee is bad.



They have no excuse to have bad coffee - There is a specialist coffee roasting Company two doors up Ferndale Road...


----------



## bimble (Sep 25, 2017)

It could be just they haven't mastered the art of the coffee machine yet, if it's so new and staffing hasn't been sorted out properly.
Apparently qualified barristas are in very short supply at the moment, someone told me today.


----------



## editor (Sep 25, 2017)

bimble said:


> It could be just they haven't mastered the art of the coffee machine yet, if it's so new and staffing hasn't been sorted out properly.
> Apparently qualified barristas are in very short supply at the moment, someone told me today.


But anyone who's looking for a decent coffee has to be extremely optimistic to expect top notch stuff as part of an on-trend 'bottomless' deal.


----------



## bimble (Sep 25, 2017)

Never thought of myself as an extremely optimistic person before, but yeah I suppose you're right.


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 25, 2017)

bimble said:


> oh. i am sad to read that the (bottomless) coffee is bad. No point having beautiful gold lettering and beaded lampshades if your coffee is bad.



This one also has bottomless coffee.

Caya Coffee on Coldharbour Lane  – a new Brixton cafe and workspace designed for freelancers and meetings


----------



## T & P (Sep 25, 2017)

Oh well, perhaps the coffee will get better once they've been running the place for a bit longer and/or get some feedback about it. But if not, they should certainly vacate the premises forthwith and leave Brixton forever, heads hung in shame, for such unforgivable failure.


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 25, 2017)

urbanspaceman said:


> At work with Squire & Partners: inside their radical new Brixton HQ
> 
> Here's an article with photos of the interior.



" The poetry of decay"

I heard Squires say, a few months back, that they were peeling off layers of the building to reveal its past.

In the video with Squires senior he says at one point it had been occupied by the government. There was unappealing look to it. The false ceiling tiles seen everywhere.

This "poetry of decay" reminds of photos of Detroit. A dying city once the car industry went. Also reminds me of the "follies" built in the grounds of the rich a few hundred years ago.

The past the Squires wrote out of history was when the government occupied it. This building is not about revealing the past. It's a rich man's "folly".

Detroit is a city in decay. This building is made to look as though it's been frozen in a moment of decay. But it's artificial.


----------



## editor (Sep 28, 2017)

The everyday view for the few:











Life At The Top: view from the Squire & Partners new Brixton headquarters


----------



## editor (Sep 28, 2017)

I'm not surprised that they've declined to reveal how much this all cost because it must have been a _fortune_. 



> The most notable addition is at rooftop level, where a new floor has been added with a staff bar, café and restaurant – created by a series of oak-framed aedicule-like pavilions with copper shingle roofs, their massive columns formed of whole tree trunks selected from a French forest.
> 
> Squire and Partners’ new studio is a retrofit of a department store in Brixton


----------



## sparkybird (Sep 28, 2017)

I guess it's like designer clothes. If you need to ask the price, you can't afford it!
Great space for the staff though!


----------



## editor (Oct 2, 2017)

sparkybird said:


> I guess it's like designer clothes. If you need to ask the price, you can't afford it!
> Great space for the staff though!


Does anyone know anything about this member's club that opening up stairs?

I'd love to know how much this project cost because it must have been monster $$$$$!



> Arriving visitors are met by the first of many custom-made elements on which Squires collaborated with a range of other designers. Blown glass lamps by Czech maker Lasvit hang over a reception desk resembling a nineteenth-century haberdasher’s counter, made by Interior iD and Based Upon using a resin/metal composite called Tramazite. On the floor, rugs woven by Laguna feature bespoke patterns by locally-based fashion design company Eley Kishimoto.
> 
> The Department Store | Architecture Today


----------



## ricbake (Oct 2, 2017)

(another restaurant within a new oak-framed upper floor is for the practice’s own use)


----------



## editor (Oct 2, 2017)

ricbake said:


> (another restaurant within a new oak-framed upper floor is for the practice’s own use)


Several people have mentioned this member's club to me, so I guess it takes place in their lavishly kitted out private restaurant, do you think?


----------



## ricbake (Oct 2, 2017)

I understood it to be the offices private entertaining space that privileged guests, clients, suppliers etc could be invited to - a sort of private members club that Messrs Squires might admit you to...

But no membership card as such


----------



## urbanspaceman (Oct 10, 2017)

Grand revival: London's first department store in Brixton restored to former glory with workspaces, shops and restaurants | Homes and Property

A highly favourable piece in the Standard


----------



## editor (Oct 10, 2017)

urbanspaceman said:


> Grand revival: London's first department store in Brixton restored to former glory with workspaces, shops and restaurants | Homes and Property
> 
> A highly favourable piece in the Standard


This still sits uneasily with me: 



> Verdigris colour revealed and graffiti retained from the building’s previous life as a squat, the makeover is teamed with glossy contemporary inserts in black steel and anodised gold, and limited-edition furniture developed with designers Minotti, Samuel Heath and Carl Hanson.


----------



## editor (Apr 13, 2018)

£12 gets you into a backslapping lecture about how Squire took over a building that apparently was falling to bits and saved it with artisans. Hurrah!


> When Squire and Partners embarked on reviving the dilapidated Edwardian department store as their new workspace, they committed to allow the existing fabric and layers of history inform the new design. Once a prominent part of a thriving cultural neighbourhood, the building had fallen into disrepair and lost any relevance to the local community. Recognising the decayed grandeur of the raw space, which revealed an extraordinary commitment to craft by the original artisans of the day, the practice sought to highlight the building’s history in its found state, and introduce a layer of contemporary interventions by a new generation of artisans.



London Festival of Architecture: Reviving The Department Store, Brixton


----------



## alcopop (Apr 13, 2018)

djdando said:


> Looks like they're doing a superb job on that building. No doubt lots of you lot will have a moan when its all done though.


And so it came to pass that moans were had


----------



## editor (Apr 13, 2018)

alcopop said:


> And so it came to pass that moans were had


I think it looks very grand indeed, but at a time when start ups and local independent businesses are desperately struggling to find space in Brixton, this lot sure have hogged a load for themselves, with vast empty rooms retained for award-winning visual effect.

And I'm not quite on board with this narrative they're spinning that suggests that the building was some sort of squat-filled, near-derelict shell either. And if you want to know what gentrification-speak sounds like, this is it: "Recognising the decayed grandeur of the raw space..."

_Raw space_, FFS.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 13, 2018)

alcopop said:


> And so it came to pass that moans were had


Will no-one think of the startups


----------



## alcopop (Apr 13, 2018)

editor said:


> I think it looks very grand indeed, but at a time when start ups and local independent businesses are desperately struggling to find space in Brixton, this lot sure have hogged a load for themselves, with vast empty rooms retained for award-winning visual effect.



Damn that award-winning visual effect. Damn it to hell


----------



## alcopop (Apr 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Will no-one think of the startups


I’m confused now. I thought startups were bad?


----------



## teuchter (Apr 13, 2018)

Who knows. Anyway, to align myself briefly with the moaning - last weekend (in the daytime) I witnessed an awful scene outside the bar on the ground floor; living, walking stereotypes of your worst imaginations, grasping champagne glasses and staggering around on the pavement and making comments at passers by. It's like 300m of West London transplanted onto that street.


----------



## editor (Apr 13, 2018)

alcopop said:


> I’m confused now. I thought startups were bad?


No one has ever said that all start ups are "bad."  You've just made that up, presumably because you think it's clever or something. Please stop.


----------



## editor (Apr 13, 2018)

And for all their talk of being part of Brixton's community, take a stroll past their offices and associated restaurant in the day time and see just how incredibly 'Brixton' it looks.


----------



## T & P (Apr 13, 2018)

Keep throwing mud Ed, I'm sure one day something will eventually stick.


----------



## editor (Apr 13, 2018)

T & P said:


> Keep throwing mud Ed, I'm sure one day something will eventually stick.


I'm expressing an opinion about our rich incomers, that's all. There's nothing I can do to harm multi millionaires and their multi million showcase offices.


----------



## alcopop (Apr 13, 2018)

editor said:


> No one has ever said that all start ups are "bad."  You've just made that up, presumably because you think it's clever or something. Please stop.


I didn’t make anything up. Stop gaslighting.


----------



## editor (Apr 13, 2018)

alcopop said:


> I didn’t make anything up. Stop gaslighting.


Gaslighting? WTF! That's seriously unhinged stuff. Really.

 If you can't back up your claims, just say so. I certainly don't recall anyone here saying that they were against all start ups.


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 13, 2018)

I agree with Teuchter it does now look like west London as I pass by. Completely uninviting imo. It's yet another bit of Brixton I try to pretend is not there as I walk by.

Makes me glad I live in LJ now. Most of the week I don't have to see this.

Though I was up at Exmouth Market today. A depressing sight to see what's happened to it. Sure Squires lovers here would like it. The cheap cafe I used to use went some time ago.

I would not "moan" about the likes of Squires if London left spaces for the likes of me. But that's not happening.

The comments above make me like it even less.

Posters here might all find this amusing. It's not when you are priced out and lose your cheap down to earth places.


----------



## urbanspaceman (Apr 20, 2018)

It looks like they are using that ground floor space:
www.badgersvelvetunderground.com
today 1800-2100 and tomorrow. As far as I can see, it's a "curated" "pop-up" featuring 40 "designers". So it could be good or it could be rubbish. I'll go along tomorrow to have a look at it.


----------



## happyshopper (Apr 22, 2018)

urbanspaceman said:


> It looks like they are using that ground floor space:
> www.badgersvelvetunderground.com
> today 1800-2100 and tomorrow. As far as I can see, it's a "curated" "pop-up" featuring 40 "designers". So it could be good or it could be rubbish. I'll go along tomorrow to have a look at it.


I thought about having a look but then discovered there was a £2 charge to get into what was essentially a shop.


----------



## ricbake (Apr 22, 2018)

happyshopper said:


> I thought about having a look but then discovered there was a £2 charge to get into what was essentially a shop.


It's a shop in a very expensive building - £2 please


----------



## editor (Apr 22, 2018)

happyshopper said:


> I thought about having a look but then discovered there was a £2 charge to get into what was essentially a shop.


Two fucking quid to get into a pop-up shop? I suppose that's one way to keep out the poor riff raff. 

They've managed turn that part of Brixton into something that makes Clapham look rough and ready.


----------



## editor (May 16, 2018)

So their vast self-investment in their multi-million showcase property has reaped loads of client-luring, back-slapping publicity for themselves. Whoopee-fucking-do.


----------



## CH1 (May 16, 2018)

In case anyone is interested in the RIBA description of the Department Store it is here:
The Department Store

I would say it deserves to be recognised. Unfortunately when the space (or part of it) was used by the Refugee Council it was at the mercy of government grant - which no doubt shrank rapidly under Madam May. Didn't notice anyone on here crying even crocodile tears when Refugee Council moved out though.


----------



## Gramsci (May 17, 2018)

CH1 said:


> In case anyone is interested in the RIBA description of the Department Store it is here:
> The Department Store
> 
> I would say it deserves to be recognised. Unfortunately when the space (or part of it) was used by the Refugee Council it was at the mercy of government grant - which no doubt shrank rapidly under Madam May. Didn't notice anyone on here crying even crocodile tears when Refugee Council moved out though.



Quite.

I had a friend who worked for Refugee Council teaching English. She loved the job. And they paid well in comparison to private schools.

This did shrink under Tories. Argument being that why should immigrants get free English classes. 

Example of how immigrant bashing was done in gradual low key way. 

What gets me is that this isn't just May. May could argue that what a lot of public wanted.

Except they didn't want to see effects of it. Like Windrush. "Fair" minded people wanted immigration controls. But didn't want to know how this worked in practice.


----------



## Tricky Skills (May 22, 2018)

Tim Gledstone from Squire and Partners is on the panel at a discussion considering: Regeneration and Growth - Good for Who?

12 June.


----------



## CH1 (May 22, 2018)

Tricky Skills said:


> Tim Gledstone from Squire and Partners is on the panel at a discussion considering: Regeneration and Growth - Good for Who?
> 
> 12 June.


I'm kind of interested but am a non member (£14).
Maybe I should ask about disability or pensioner rates?
Or perhaps they take Ritzy Silver Screen cards - especially as it's a bit infra dig to use them for their intended purpose right now?


----------



## editor (May 22, 2018)

Tricky Skills said:


> Tim Gledstone from Squire and Partners is on the panel at a discussion considering: Regeneration and Growth - Good for Who?
> 
> 12 June.


Given his company's contribution to Brixton, I can't see how he can answer anything but an emphatic 'yes' to the question posed:


> Is the planning and regeneration system operated by the middle classes for the middle classes?



Besides, how many working class people can spunk £14 to watch people chat about changes that they have precious little say in? Why the fuck does it cost so much?

It's just a talk so all they need is some chairs, a table and a small PA.


----------



## Tricky Skills (May 22, 2018)

No surprises that recent Nu Labour convert Dave Hill is involved.


----------



## editor (May 22, 2018)

Squire & Partners can now take credit for creating the quickest and most gentrified strip in Brixton, with the area in front of their showcase, glass dome-topped premises recreating a little slice of Kensington in SW9.


----------



## editor (May 22, 2018)

Tricky Skills said:


> No surprises that recent Nu Labour convert Dave Hill is involved.



I responded: 



> The £14 fee suggests that not many residents in the nearby Coldharbour Ward - one of the most deprived in London - will be in attendance...



So it'll be the well off and privileged talking about what to do with the poor. Nothing changes really.


----------



## bimble (May 22, 2018)

It is really odd every time, walking past to get to the post office it has a discombobulating effect its true like something beamed in from elsewhere.


----------



## CH1 (May 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> It is really odd every time, walking past to get to the post office it has a discombobulating effect its true like something beamed in from elsewhere.


Actually it's odd we still have a Post Office in Brixton. Stockwell and Streatham have closed and the West Norwood one closed about 20 years ago. Camberwell has signs pointing to it but seems to have disappeared into cyberspace.

I reckon there must be a requirement for "occasional" Post Offices to provide work for staff who cannot be compulsorily retired for legal reasons (such as having had their sub Post Office contracts terminated). Serving the public is not really on the menu.


----------



## colacubes (May 23, 2018)

CH1 said:


> Actually it's odd we still have a Post Office in Brixton. Stockwell and Streatham have closed and the West Norwood one closed about 20 years ago. Camberwell has signs pointing to it but seems to have disappeared into cyberspace.
> 
> I reckon there must be a requirement for "occasional" Post Offices to provide work for staff who cannot be compulsorily retired for legal reasons (such as having had their sub Post Office contracts terminated). Serving the public is not really on the menu.



There is definitely a post office in West Norwood. I was in there yesterday.


----------



## CH1 (May 23, 2018)

Tricky Skills said:


> No surprises that recent Nu Labour convert Dave Hill is involved.



Who is he then? 
I noticed he wrote an article in the Observe last October on the HDV/Heygate/estate regeneration issue. It had this picture of the Heygate, which looks almost like a rural idyl compared with now.


----------



## CH1 (May 23, 2018)

colacubes said:


> There is definitely a post office in West Norwood. I was in there yesterday.


Apologies. I must be misremembering a failed attempt to close it then.


----------



## editor (May 23, 2018)

CH1 said:


> Actually it's odd we still have a Post Office in Brixton. Stockwell and Streatham have closed and the West Norwood one closed about 20 years ago. Camberwell has signs pointing to it but seems to have disappeared into cyberspace.
> 
> I reckon there must be a requirement for "occasional" Post Offices to provide work for staff who cannot be compulsorily retired for legal reasons (such as having had their sub Post Office contracts terminated). Serving the public is not really on the menu.


Thanks to Squires, Brixton's post office got shifted and downsized to make way for their multi-million showcase offices that are full of artistic space. The new, smaller Post Office has now introduced the unwelcome concept of _al fresco_ queuing as the queues often snake out into the street, momentarily spoiling the Kensington vista around their offices.


----------



## djdando (May 23, 2018)

editor said:


> Thanks to Squires, Brixton's post office got shifted and downsized to make way for their multi-million showcase offices that are full of artistic space. The new, smaller Post Office has now introduced the unwelcome concept of _al fresco_ queuing as the queues often snake out into the street, momentarily spoiling the Kensington vista around their offices.



Thanks to Squires?!. Sorry, I forgot the Post Office were making decent use of that building previously.


----------



## editor (May 24, 2018)

djdando said:


> Thanks to Squires?!. Sorry, I forgot the Post Office were making decent use of that building previously.


Perhaps you weren't aware that they had a far bigger space with more counters before Squires bagsied the already overcrowded space for themselves. Now people have to queue in the street because the new PO is substantially smaller.

Still, Squires near-empty ground floor is apparently award winning stuff now. So stylish!


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 24, 2018)

Who made the decision to move the post office to a smaller venue? Squires? I really doubt that! You can dislike them all you want but I’m pretty sure the post office chooses their own spaces


----------



## Rushy (May 24, 2018)

The old post office.  All that space and rarely a third of the counters open. Good old days.


----------



## CH1 (May 24, 2018)

Rushy said:


> The old post office.  All that space and rarely a third of the counters open. Good old days.


They did have two letter boxes outside though.


----------



## ricbake (May 24, 2018)

shakespearegirl said:


> Who made the decision to move the post office to a smaller venue? Squires? I really doubt that! You can dislike them all you want but I’m pretty sure the post office chooses their own spaces


Squires and their backers bought the whole property, not sure what Lease the Post Office had on the space they occupied previously. Squires were in charge of the whole development and the Post Office will have ended up with what they agreed. Had they wanted more space, the configuration of Volcano Coffee and Kaboola could have been different but only if they were given options from Squires for more space.

The queue arrangement in the new space isn't much different from before, the Post Office Staff have lost a huge amount of back office space.


----------



## alcopop (May 24, 2018)

CH1 said:


> They did have two letter boxes outside though.


Are there queues for the letter boxes now? Surely people could just post their letters faster?


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 24, 2018)

ricbake said:


> Squires and their backers bought the whole property, not sure what Lease the Post Office had on the space they occupied previously. Squires were in charge of the whole development and the Post Office will have ended up with what they agreed. Had they wanted more space, the configuration of Volcano Coffee and Kaboola could have been different but only if they were given options from Squires for more space.
> 
> The queue arrangement in the new space isn't much different from before, the Post Office Staff have lost a huge amount of back office space.



Obviously don’t know the terms of the post office lease, but if they were mid lease the Post Office would have been in a pretty strong position to negotiate the space they wanted. My experience in recently negotiating a commercial lease is it’s hard for landlords to break them within the agreed term.


----------



## editor (May 24, 2018)

shakespearegirl said:


> Obviously don’t know the terms of the post office lease, but if they were mid lease the Post Office would have been in a pretty strong position to negotiate the space they wanted. My experience in recently negotiating a commercial lease is it’s hard for landlords to break them within the agreed term.


Given the amount of POs that have closed down in recent years I don't imagine they were in the strongest position when the property they occupied was bought, but this is all speculation from me and you. The old PO was shit but the new, much smaller one is probably worse with bigger queues that stretch out into the street and - in my experience - more pissed off customers.


----------



## T & P (May 24, 2018)

It is precisely because the amount of POs that have either closed or reduced their number of customer service positions over the last few years that we know that the Post Office owners are actively engaged in a policy of branch closure/ staff reduction. It is therefore nothing more than wild speculation to suggest the Post Office was either forced by S&P to have smaller premises or that it is not what the Post Office wanted in the first place. Indeed, I'm sure the PO are delighted with the new premises- those in charge that is, not the stuff or the customers of course.

But the bottom line is that to try to place blame on S&P for an action that is an active policy of the Post Office and has been carried out on hundreds if not thousands of other branches across the country seems preposterous to me.


----------



## editor (May 24, 2018)

T & P said:


> It is precisely because the amount of POs that have either closed or reduced their number of customer service positions over the last few years that we know that the Post Office owners are actively engaged in a policy of branch closure/ staff reduction. It is therefore nothing more than wild speculation to suggest the Post Office was either forced by S&P to have smaller premises or that it is not what the Post Office


Speculation is all we've got but gentrification inevitably puts pressure on land and rent, and Squire and their millions have _hyper gentrified_ that stretch of Brixton and turned it into an awful vision of Chelsea.


----------



## alcopop (May 24, 2018)

editor said:


> Given the amount of POs that have closed down in recent years I don't imagine they were in the strongest position when the property they occupied was bought.


That argument makes no sense


----------



## CH1 (May 24, 2018)

CH1 said:


> They did have two letter boxes outside though.


That was not my point. Last time I was at the Post Office there were no post boxes outside - so out of hours you could not post a letter there.

Have they now put a pillar box up then?


----------



## editor (May 24, 2018)

alcopop said:


> That argument makes no sense


If your business is struggling and you're having to flog off assets as quickly as possible, that rarely puts you in the strongest negotiating position.

How do you like the Chelsea Strip, by the way? Do you feel it's an asset for Brixton residents?


----------



## T & P (May 24, 2018)

editor said:


> Speculation is all we've got but gentrification inevitably puts pressure on land and rent, and Squire and their millions have _hyper gentrified_ that stretch of Brixton and turned it into an awful vision of Chelsea.


That might be so, but it still has nothing to do with the claim that S&P have forced the Post Office into smaller premises- a claim which remains the wildest of speculations, extraordinarily unlikely, and flying in the face of the Post Office's policy and actions taken about their branches for the last few years.


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 24, 2018)

It doesn’t at all. If you are within a contracted lease and the landlord decides to sell/develop the site you are in a really strong negotiating position. The last thing they want is to get into a disputed with a tenant like the post office who will have humongous departments who deal with leases. If the post office didn’t want to be in the new space they wouldn’t be


----------



## editor (May 24, 2018)

T & P said:


> That might be so, but it still has nothing to do with the claim that S&P have forced the Post Office into smaller premises- a claim which remains the wildest of speculations, extraordinarily unlikely, and flying in the face of the Post Office's policy and actions taken about their branches for the last few years.


I didn't use the word 'forced' although it would appear that Squire's decision to parachute their staff in from north London and set up a vast showcase building was a contributory factor in the Post Office being shunted out of their previous premises.


----------



## alcopop (May 24, 2018)

editor said:


> I didn't use the word 'forced' although it would appear that Squire's decision to parachute their staff in from north London and set up a vast showcase building was a contributory factor in the Post Office being shunted out of their previous premises.


You didn’t use the word “forced”, you used the phrase “having to” which is synonymous.

How does it “appear” that Squires decision was “ a contributing factor”

Sounds like bullshit to me.


----------



## teuchter (May 24, 2018)

Fact check fun time.

I was curious how much smaller the new post office is than the old one. I measured the area that contains the public waiting area plus the other side of the service counters in each.


----------



## Rushy (May 24, 2018)

When I were a lad all we had were a lump of coal and spittle of speculation.


----------



## Gramsci (May 25, 2018)

shakespearegirl said:


> It doesn’t at all. If you are within a contracted lease and the landlord decides to sell/develop the site you are in a really strong negotiating position. The last thing they want is to get into a disputed with a tenant like the post office who will have humongous departments who deal with leases. If the post office didn’t want to be in the new space they wouldn’t be



In post 346 you said,



> Obviously don’t know the terms of the post office lease.



I thought your argument was that no one knows what the lease arrangements were when Squires acquired property. This post 354 seems to say something different. Why?


----------



## Gramsci (May 25, 2018)

One of the problems with the term "gentrification" is shown here. The way Capitalism works is not like a top down State dictatorship as in say Stalinist states where one has a direct oppressor. Some one to blame directly.

The Squires development is good example in microcosm come to think of it. The Post Office ( and I know someone in it so get good idea what's been happening) has changed from a publicly owned service to creeping privatisation. Squires are beneficiaries of thirty plus years of Neo liberalism. Doing well out of the privatisation of publicly owned space like Scotland yard/ Kings Cross.

Are Squires directly to blame? No. Is the capitalist system that leads to Chelsea style bar/ restaurant replacing post office now relegated to smaller site to blame? In the larger picture yes. I would think that is indisputable.


----------



## teuchter (May 26, 2018)

Are they indirectly to blame and if so what does that actually mean?


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 26, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> In post 346 you said,
> 
> 
> 
> I thought your argument was that no one knows what the lease arrangements were when Squires acquired property. This post 354 seems to say something different. Why?



No one knows the exact terms of their lease. My second post should have been showing quoting another post I meant to reply to.

My point was that if the post office were mid lease they would be in a strong negotiating position to get the space that suited them.. if their lease was ending they could have moved anywhere they wanted, they weren’t forced into the new space. This is the post office, a major lease holding business who regularly negotiate leases.


----------



## happyshopper (May 26, 2018)

I expect that the Post Office was in a position to get a good deal on the new lease and the consequence that users would end up having to queue in the rain was of no significance to the PO’s property department.


----------



## Gramsci (May 26, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Are they indirectly to blame and if so what does that actually mean?



In my post #360 I was trying to move away from the argumentative posting about Squires to non personalised post of the overall problem. Something I was hoping most posters could agree on. For Urban75 it's not that contentious. 

I'm assuming you can agree with it?

Im not saying my post is offering solutions it's positing the problem in non personalised way.


----------



## editor (May 26, 2018)

happyshopper said:


> I expect that the Post Office was in a position to get a good deal on the new lease and the consequence that users would end up having to queue in the rain was of no significance to the PO’s property department.


Or, indeed, of any concern to Squire "we want to be part of Brixton's community" & Partners. But it does piss me off to see all that vast empty space in their vast showcase offices while customers are packed into the new PO or queuing in the rain. But yes, that'as capitalism for you. Money first, people second.


----------



## Gramsci (May 26, 2018)

shakespearegirl said:


> No one knows the exact terms of their lease. My second post should have been showing quoting another post I meant to reply to.
> 
> My point was that if the post office were mid lease they would be in a strong negotiating position to get the space that suited them.. if their lease was ending they could have moved anywhere they wanted, they weren’t forced into the new space. This is the post office, a major lease holding business who regularly negotiate leases.



Is the post office in that strong a position since privatisation?

Quote from Labour MP from a couple of years back.



> The Post Office was split from the profitable Royal Mail business in order to pave the way for privatisation - and all too predictably it is now at crisis point. This year alone it is shedding 2,000 jobs and closing down flagship branches across the country.





> It's sad to say, but the story of Royal Mail's privatisation is a story of our times: the loss of democratic control; the transfer of wealth and power to the richest in society; and the growing pressure on working people to work harder and faster for less.




Three Years On From Its Sale, The Privatisation Of Royal Mail Is A Story Of Our Times


This isn't to blame Squires. Its all part of the last thirty plus years of "free" market capitalist economics.


----------



## editor (May 30, 2018)

Those luxury contracts targeting foreign investors keep on rolling in for Squire: 



> Luxury homes are now available at Garrett Mansions, combining a sought-after Central London address with exclusive lifestyle perks.
> 
> Designed by award-winning architects Squire and Partners, its red brick buildings evoke the period charm of its Maida Vale neighborhood and nearby Mayfair, overlooking a beautifully landscaped private garden.
> 
> ...



Currently on exhibition in Hong Kong. 
West End Gate: classic London living reimagined with exclusive amenities


----------



## editor (May 30, 2018)

Oh, and Mr Squires has a message for us all. 


> To build enough new homes, we need “to be less obsessed with overlooking and rights to light”, says Michael Squire, the chairman of judges at The Sunday Times British Homes Awards.



But he's not including his own home, naturally.


----------



## CH1 (May 31, 2018)

editor said:


> Oh, and Mr Squires has a message for us all.
> _*To build enough new homes, we need “to be less obsessed with overlooking and rights to light”*_
> But he's not including his own home, naturally.


Taylor Wimpey seem to be ahead of him on that one!


----------



## alcopop (May 31, 2018)

London does have very low density housing


----------



## editor (May 31, 2018)

alcopop said:


> London does have very low density housing


 Sorry what is your point here? Do you agree with the multi millionaire architect who thinks people should be "less obsessed with overlooking and rights to light", while he - of course - has plenty of light and space in his luxury house?


----------



## alcopop (May 31, 2018)

editor said:


> Sorry what is your point here? Do you agree with the multi millionaire architect who thinks people should be "less obsessed with overlooking and rights to light", while he - of course - has plenty of light and space in his luxury house?


Yes I agree with him.

You want all architects to live in a one bedroom council flat?


----------



## editor (May 31, 2018)

alcopop said:


> Yes I agree with him.
> 
> You want all architects to live in a one bedroom council flat?


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.


----------



## teuchter (May 31, 2018)

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


----------



## alex_ (May 31, 2018)

editor said:


> 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.



He’s saying dense housing is cheaper, which isn’t rocket science.

More houses per acre less cost per house, especially in urban areas.

Alex


----------



## teuchter (May 31, 2018)

alex_ said:


> He’s saying dense housing is cheaper, which isn’t rocket science.
> 
> More houses per acre less cost per house, especially in urban areas.
> 
> Alex



Fact is that once you get to a certain density you really do have to start compromising on stuff like privacy and access to daylight. 

Agreeing the point at which this starts to become a significant issue *is* something akin to rocket science. Especially when you're not building a whole city anew.


----------



## editor (May 31, 2018)

Of course, one contributing factor to the housing crisis is space-hogging, rent-escalating upmarket developments being built and directly marketed to foreign investors, many of whom are quite happy to leave them empty while they accrue value. Squire & Partners are very much complicit in this trade.


----------



## cuppa tee (May 31, 2018)

alcopop said:


> London does have very low density housing


depends what you are comparing it to....
"Lambeth is one of the most densely populated areas in the country with an average of 12,020 residents per square kilometre; this compares to an average of 5,600 for London, and just 366 for England as a whole"
https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/ssh-demography-factsheet-2017.pdf
Berlin.....*3,944 inhabitants* per km².
Manhattan......10,194/km²
E2a
Mexico City........9,800 per square kilometre
Manila.....41,515 per square km
Reykjavik.....*600 per square kilometer*


----------



## editor (May 31, 2018)

cuppa tee said:


> depends what you are comparing it to....
> "Lambeth is one of the most densely populated areas in the country with an average of 12,020 residents per square kilometre; this compares to an average of 5,600 for London, and just 366 for England as a whole"
> https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/ssh-demography-factsheet-2017.pdf
> Berlin.....*3,944 inhabitants* per km².
> Manhattan......10,194/km²


Well, that crushes his 'argument' into tiny little pieces then. 

What's more, with all the new high rise blocks being built in and around Brixton, the housing density is going to go even higher.


----------



## teuchter (May 31, 2018)

Yes it does depend what you compare it to.

Lambeth average 12,000. Central Paris measures around 25,000 per km2. But one km2 part of that reaches 50,000. The most densely populated km2 of London gets to 20,000.

Outside of zone 2 there are large swathes of housing that are really quite low density (can't find the stats that compare that to outer Paris off hand).

It's quite complicated.

Good article here

Think your country is crowded? These maps reveal the truth about population density across Europe


----------



## editor (May 31, 2018)

However you spin it, Lambeth is very densely populated. Things aren't so densely populated around Mr Squire's house however, where he has a lovely big garden to himself, or in the super-luxury properties he designs for the super rich.

Lambeth is one of the most densely populated places in the country. There are eight boroughs with more than *100 residents* per hectare – all in inner London. Lambeth is the fifth most densely populated borough in the country, with 113 residents per hectare.


----------



## teuchter (May 31, 2018)

London, Berlin, Paris compared.

EU Population 2011 by 1km grid v3

These don't really capture what happens above 10k in the yellow areas though.


----------



## teuchter (May 31, 2018)

High density central london vs high density central paris - dramatic difference more visible here (numbers indicate population in each square km).

EU Population 2011 by 1km grid v4


----------



## aka (May 31, 2018)

Deep down, we are all NIMBYers.  I'm all for a bit of density and tonnes of house building, but /you know/ somewhere else....... No one in London wants a huge towerblock built next to them, blocking out light, peeps fighting for (already) stretched local services (bus, GP etc.) etc.

Move the pull of jobs away from London to brand new towns and e.g. B'ham, Leeds, Coventry (amongst others), and build some fucking low rise houses near there - on brown field.  Not complicated.


----------



## Crispy (May 31, 2018)

Here's a good source for comparisons:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/supp...13.764830/suppl_file/tjom_a_764830_sm0418.pdf


Scale tops out at 25,000 ppl/km²
12 year old data though

Berlin was being compared earlier and what stands out is the uniformity. Mid-level density all the way through.


----------



## teuchter (May 31, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Here's a good source for comparisons:
> http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/supp...13.764830/suppl_file/tjom_a_764830_sm0418.pdf
> 
> View attachment 136847
> ...


These I think are more useful than the ones I posted...which I now realise use a kind of logarithmic scale for the colours which disguises the sharpness or otherwise of dropoff as you move out from the centre.


----------



## alcopop (May 31, 2018)

editor said:


> However you spin it, Lambeth is very densely populated. Things aren't so densely populated around Mr Squire's house however, where he has a lovely big garden to himself, or in the super-luxury properties he designs for the super rich.
> 
> Lambeth is one of the most densely populated places in the country. There are eight boroughs with more than *100 residents* per hectare – all in inner London. Lambeth is the fifth most densely populated borough in the country, with 113 residents per hectare.
> 
> ...


Sorry, was squire talking specifically about Lambeth?


----------



## editor (May 31, 2018)

aka said:


> Deep down, we are all NIMBYers.  I'm all for a bit of density and tonnes of house building, but /you know/ somewhere else....... No one in London wants a huge towerblock built next to them, blocking out light, peeps fighting for (already) stretched local services (bus, GP etc.) etc.
> 
> Move the pull of jobs away from London to brand new towns and e.g. B'ham, Leeds, Coventry (amongst others), and build some fucking low rise houses near there - on brown field.  Not complicated.


For me it's just the notion of some super rich multi-millionaire in a massive house designing massive houses for others super rich multi-millionaires telling poor people they'll just have to suck up overlooked small properties with poor light that offends.


----------



## editor (May 31, 2018)

alcopop said:


> Sorry, was squire talking specifically about Lambeth?


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


----------



## Crispy (May 31, 2018)

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.


----------



## editor (May 31, 2018)

Crispy said:


> 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 (May 31, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (May 31, 2018)

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.
> ...


----------



## editor (May 31, 2018)

alcopop said:


> 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 (May 31, 2018)

Crispy said:


> 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 (May 31, 2018)

*


editor said:



			Oh good god. An exclusive space for rebel creatives.
		
Click to expand...


'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 (May 31, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (May 31, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> 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 (May 31, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> 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 (May 31, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (May 31, 2018)

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 (May 31, 2018)

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 (May 31, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

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


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 1, 2018)

teuchter said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

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 (Jun 1, 2018)

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 (Jun 1, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

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 (Jun 1, 2018)

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 (Jun 1, 2018)

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 (Jun 1, 2018)

ricbake said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

T & P said:


> _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 (Jun 1, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

editor said:


> 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


----------



## editor (Jun 1, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

You will adore this!
Henry Squire | Architecture Today


----------



## Twattor (Jun 1, 2018)

ricbake said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> 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.
> 
> ...


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 (Jun 1, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

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 (Jun 1, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

teuchter said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

teuchter said:


> 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.
> 
> ...



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 (Jun 1, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Class based resentment is completely understandable.



Not here. Its " reverse snobbery".

And to point out I did say its not nice.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 1, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> 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 (Jun 1, 2018)

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? (Jun 1, 2018)

ricbake said:


> You will adore this!
> Henry Squire | Architecture Today



I should have put him on at the Cabaret Corner.


----------



## editor (Jun 2, 2018)

Twattor said:


> 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 (Jun 2, 2018)

snowy_again said:


> 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?
> 
> ...


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 (Jun 2, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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 (Jun 2, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (Jun 2, 2018)

editor said:


> 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 (Jun 2, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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 (Jun 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> …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 (Jun 2, 2018)

snowy_again said:


> 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?
> 
> ...



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

So do you agree with it?


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 2, 2018)

T & P said:


> 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.
> 
> ...



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 (Jun 2, 2018)

snowy_again said:


> 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?
> 
> ...



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


----------



## Winot (Jun 2, 2018)

It’s undeniable that there are two (or maybe more) Londons. The issue is what is symptom and what is cause.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 2, 2018)

Winot said:


> It’s undeniable that there are two (or maybe more) Londons. The issue is what is symptom and what is cause.



Ive made clear my view in post 360.


----------



## urbanspaceman (Jun 22, 2018)

The Department Store

Squires has won RIBA 2018 National and London Awards.

_"This project took an unoccupied and dilapidated former department store from 1906, and reimagined the buildings to create a series of inspiring work and social spaces for a multi-disciplinary architecture and design practice. The brief included a series of units for new and existing local businesses, including a community Post Office, coffee roastery, vinyl record store, delicatessen and bar/restaurant.

A stunning building which has been brought back to life. Exceedingly exquisite and sensitive restoration, filled with beautiful material choice, attention to details and wonderful spaces.

The project honours the existing building's history by keeping graffiti from swatters, revealing original features and removing paint to original colours. All new items added to the building are highlighted in bronze, with an underlying colour scheme of new inserts of gold and black…."_


----------



## alex_ (Jun 22, 2018)

urbanspaceman said:


> The Department Store
> 
> Squires has won RIBA 2018 National and London Awards.
> 
> ...



 Swatters ?


----------



## T & P (Jun 22, 2018)

urbanspaceman said:


> The Department Store
> 
> Squires has won RIBA 2018 National and London Awards.
> 
> ...



*sets deckchair*


----------



## organicpanda (Jun 22, 2018)

T & P said:


> *sets deckchair*


Popcorn sir?


----------



## editor (Jun 22, 2018)

"_Exceedingly exquisite"
_
And, err...

"_The project honours the existing building's history by keeping graffiti from swatters"
_
So kind and honourable of them there rich folks to acknowledge the poor people what lived there in the past, and so nice it adds that little bit of urban edge to their multi million pound showcase offices. I bet their super-rich clients getting their luxury mansions designed there appreciate it too. Keeps it real, man.


----------



## alcopop (Jun 22, 2018)

...and they’re off


----------



## editor (Jun 22, 2018)

alcopop said:


> ...and they’re off


What do you think about a company who make their millions designing super-luxury buildings for the super-rich showing off squat graffiti in their exclusive, private bar and roof terrace-equipped multi-million pound showcase offices? In an area where there is still real deprivation and poverty. 

Any opinion on that, or does that take too much effort?


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jun 22, 2018)

I think there is a big difference between keeping graffiti that was part of the building they moved into vs hiring someone to replicate graffiti. At least they are preserving the history of the building instead of painting it over.


----------



## editor (Jun 22, 2018)

shakespearegirl said:


> I think there is a big difference between keeping graffiti that was part of the building they moved into vs hiring someone to replicate graffiti. At least they are preserving the history of the building instead of painting it over.


"Preserving" to what end? To show off to their rich clients and win swishy awards? "Here! Look what poor people did! Aren't we so connected with Brixton's vibrant and edgy past!"

Did they even ask the graffiti artists if they wanted their work to form a centrepiece of exceedingly exquisite luxury offices?

It's poverty porn.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jun 22, 2018)

editor said:


> "Preserving" to what end? To show off to their rich clients and win swishy awards? "Here! Look what poor people did! Aren't we so connected with Brixton's vibrant and edgy past!"
> 
> Did they even ask the graffiti artists if they wanted their work to form a centrepiece of exceedingly exquisite luxury offices?
> 
> It's poverty porn.



I'm not sure how they would track down the graffiti artists to ask them if they wanted their works used. 

Would you rather it was painted over and destroyed?


----------



## alcopop (Jun 22, 2018)

editor said:


> What do you think about a company who make their millions designing super-luxury buildings for the super-rich showing off squat graffiti in their exclusive, private bar and roof terrace-equipped multi-million pound showcase offices? In an area where there is still real deprivation and poverty.
> 
> Any opinion on that, or does that take too much effort?


I don’t have a problem with it (sure I’ve said that before)


----------



## editor (Jun 22, 2018)

shakespearegirl said:


> I'm not sure how they would track down the graffiti artists to ask them if they wanted their works used.
> 
> Would you rather it was painted over and destroyed?


They painted over everything else there that didn't suit their exceedingly exquisite vision, so it makes no odds. I'm pretty sure the original artists wouldn't have wanted their work employed as an edgy backdrop in a multi million pound showcase office, though. 

If it was my work, I'd be well pissed off. It wasn't painted for the benefit of people designing luxury buildings.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jun 22, 2018)

Who are you or I to determine what the original graffiti artist would have wanted. It was in existence on the internal walls of a private building. When Squires bought the building the graffiti became their's to do with what they wish. They aren't ripping it out and selling it as artwork, or putting it on t-shirts for sale.


----------



## editor (Jun 22, 2018)

shakespearegirl said:


> Who are you or I to determine what the original graffiti artist would have wanted. It was in existence on the internal walls of a private building. When Squires bought the building the graffiti became their's to do with what they wish. They aren't ripping it out and selling it as artwork, or putting it on t-shirts for sale.


If you're OK with with squatter's art being used - without permission - to help luxury, multi million offices scoop prestigious awards, that's fine. We can disagree.  I think it's well fucking wanky though.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jun 22, 2018)

I guess we'll just have to disagree.. If it was in any context other than already being in-situ in a building that the architects had purchased I wouldn't be ok with it. For instance the recent H&M case


----------



## Rushy (Jun 22, 2018)

organicpanda said:


> Popcorn sir?


One pouch of Roux Bros. caramelized ginger and lemongrass flavour, please.


----------



## Winot (Jun 22, 2018)

Rushy said:


> One pouch of Roux Bros. caramelized ginger and lemongrass flavour, please.



Can I get the same but with an edgy ‘tag’?


----------



## Rushy (Jun 22, 2018)

Winot said:


> Can I get the same but with an edgy ‘tag’?


Oh sorry. I thought the Roux Brothers _were_ edgy. Some of their dishes are really quite controversial.


----------



## cuppa tee (Jun 22, 2018)

editor said:


> What do you think about a company who make their millions designing super-luxury buildings for the super-rich showing off squat graffiti in their exclusive, private bar and roof terrace-equipped multi-million pound showcase offices? In an area where there is still real deprivation and poverty?



There are parallels with the colonisers who stole and appropriated the art and creativity of indigineous people's while simultaneously laying waste to their culture


----------



## editor (Jun 22, 2018)

cuppa tee said:


> There are parallels with the colonisers who stole and appropriated the art and creativity of indigineous people's while simultaneously laying waste to their culture


Spot on.


----------



## alcopop (Jun 22, 2018)

cuppa tee said:


> There are parallels with the colonisers who stole and appropriated the art and creativity of indigineous people's while simultaneously laying waste to their culture


Hilarious!


----------



## editor (Jun 22, 2018)

alcopop said:


> Hilarious!


Do you plan on being a dick in every thread from now on? If you don't agree with his point, then make an intelligent counter-point.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 22, 2018)

I think RIBA must have changed a lot over the years. Mr Owen Luder CBE, president from 1981-1983 and 1995-1997 contributed a couple of buildings to the Brixton area, though this is the most notable
 
He is however more famous for this scenario
 
 
 
I know the RIBA article is gushing, but I find the aesthetics of Squires efforts on the Department Store more harmonious than our local lad's office and car park developments.

I know Owen Luder was probably more concerned to throw up his concrete buildings as cheaply as possible, and no doubt did not expect them to last. And they haven't.

Squires have given a new lease of life to an Edwardian treasure - and I leave the politics to you lot!


----------



## alcopop (Jun 22, 2018)

CH1 said:


> I think RIBA must have changed a lot over the years. Mr Owen Luder CBE, president from 1981-1983 and 1995-1997 contributed a couple of buildings to the Brixton area, though this is the most notable
> View attachment 138702
> He is however more famous for this scenario
> View attachment 138703
> ...


Fuck the politics, much prefer to focus on the aesthetics


----------



## editor (Jun 22, 2018)

CH1 said:


> I know the RIBA article is gushing, but I find the aesthetics of Squires efforts on the Department Store more harmonious than our local lad's office and car park developments.


Well of course a lavishly appointed Edwardian department store is going to be more pleasing than some cheaply built brutalist 70s car park!


CH1 said:


> Squires have given a new lease of life to an Edwardian treasure - and I leave the politics to you lot!


Well, they've given it a private, luxurious life. I can think of plenty of other uses I'd rather have seen for the building.


----------



## alcopop (Jun 22, 2018)

editor said:


> Do you plan on being a dick in every thread from now on? If you don't agree with his point, then make an intelligent counter-point.


I assumed he was being funny. Satirically taking the piss. 

If not then you have have my heartfelt apology.


----------



## Angellic (Jun 22, 2018)

CH1 said:


> I think RIBA must have changed a lot over the years. Mr Owen Luder CBE, president from 1981-1983 and 1995-1997 contributed a couple of buildings to the Brixton area, though this is the most notable
> View attachment 138702
> He is however more famous for this scenario
> View attachment 138703
> ...



I've always liked the 336 building even though it's not in a good state. The aircon doesn't help (are they still there?) and the accessible ramp needs a redesign


----------



## Angellic (Jun 22, 2018)

And I just found this online. Not sure of the date tho.

Transforming 336 - we are 336


----------



## Rushy (Jun 22, 2018)

alcopop said:


> I assumed he was being funny. Satirically taking the piss.



I've always thought Cuppa was a she .


----------



## CH1 (Jun 22, 2018)

Angellic said:


> I've always liked the 336 building even though it's not in a good state. The aircon doesn't help (are they still there?) and the accessible ramp needs a redesign


The owners (a charity) keep trying to promote a major revamp. Don't know if any progress. They have at least repainted the front.


----------



## alcopop (Jun 22, 2018)

alcopop said:


> Hilarious!





cuppa tee said:


> There are parallels with the colonisers who stole and appropriated the art and creativity of indigineous people's while simultaneously laying waste to their culture


Th


Rushy said:


> I've always thought Cuppa was a she .


Sorry, my apologies. My bad


----------



## cuppa tee (Jun 22, 2018)

alcopop said:


> I assumed she was being funny. Satirically taking the piss.
> 
> If not then you have have my heartfelt apology.



The parallels are real, a little exaggerated but still more realistic than claiming to have created a youth culture that existed 20 years earlier


----------



## editor (Jun 23, 2018)

urbanspaceman said:


> The Department Store
> 
> Squires has won RIBA 2018 National and London Awards.
> 
> _"This project took an unoccupied and dilapidated former department store from 1906, and reimagined the buildings to create a series of inspiring work and social spaces for a multi-disciplinary architecture and design practice. The brief included a series of units for new and existing local businesses, including a community Post Office, coffee roastery, vinyl record store, delicatessen and bar/restaurant._


I wonder exactly what a "community Post Office" is and how might it differ from a normal Post Office?


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 23, 2018)

I remember when Department Store first opened Brixton Forum had meetings there. Squires junior turned up to say he wanted space to be used for local groups.

At recent meeting of a local community group last week. Seeking places for future events. Department store was mentioned. They are charging now. It's not that affordable for local groups any more.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 23, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> One of the problems with the term "gentrification" is shown here. The way Capitalism works is not like a top down State dictatorship as in say Stalinist states where one has a direct oppressor. Some one to blame directly.
> 
> The Squires development is good example in microcosm come to think of it. The Post Office ( and I know someone in it so get good idea what's been happening) has changed from a publicly owned service to creeping privatisation. Squires are beneficiaries of thirty plus years of Neo liberalism. Doing well out of the privatisation of publicly owned space like Scotland yard/ Kings Cross.
> 
> Are Squires directly to blame? No. Is the capitalist system that leads to Chelsea style bar/ restaurant replacing post office now relegated to smaller site to blame? In the larger picture yes. I would think that is indisputable.



Quoting myself here.

Bickering about Squires and graffiti is all very well.

Above post is trying to move argument on. I elaborated on it in June Brixton chat thread using David Harvey , a geographer, work in urbanisation.

If graffiti is side issue who agrees with my post above?


----------



## editor (Jun 23, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> I remember when Department Store first opened Brixton Forum had meetings there. Squires junior turned up to say he wanted space to be used for local groups.
> 
> At recent meeting of a local community group last week. Seeking places for future events. Department store was mentioned. They are charging now. It's not that affordable for local groups any more.


That's disgraceful.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 24, 2018)

CH1 said:


> I know Owen Luder was probably more concerned to throw up his concrete buildings as cheaply as possible, and no doubt did not expect them to last. And they haven't.



I expect he "threw them up" using whatever budget was dictated to him, and probably did not expect them to be destroyed by philistines.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 24, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I expect he "threw them up" using whatever budget was dictated to him, and probably did not expect them to be destroyed by philistines.


I guess you're in the Jonathan Meades camp?


----------



## CH1 (Jun 24, 2018)

Whilst I'm mucking about on Youtube, see this "appreciation" by Anita Roddick of the original Bon Marché of which the Squires building was a 1908 extension apparently.

Anita seemed to heartily despise the department store as a concept, out of town shoppping, industrial methods applied to retail etc

This short film was made by Ms Roddick as a sort of talking point filler on BBC2 in 1992 - yet she and her husband went on to sell their The Body Shop business to L'Oréal in 2006.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 24, 2018)

editor said:


> That's disgraceful.



Business is business. It surprised me that Squires use of downstairs area is not now that affordable for community groups. Maybe Squires will change there minds again. Its the one of the problems of the increasing need to depend on philanthropy of rich individuals. Its at there whim.

It is not imo how society should be run. But increasingly this is the case.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 25, 2018)

CH1 said:


> I guess you're in the Jonathan Meades camp?


----------



## aka (Jun 25, 2018)

CH1 said:


> Whilst I'm mucking about on Youtube, see this "appreciation" by Anita Roddick of the original Bon Marché of which the Squires building was a 1908 extension apparently.
> 
> Anita seemed to heartily despise the department store as a concept, out of town shoppping, industrial methods applied to retail etc
> 
> This short film was made by Ms Roddick as a sort of talking point filler on BBC2 in 1992 - yet she and her husband went on to sell their The Body Shop business to L'Oréal in 2006.


to paraphrase Mike Tyson; "everyone has a plan [to be socially and environmentally activist] until they get a smack in the mouth [from a large amount of cash]"


----------



## editor (Jun 25, 2018)

aka said:


> to paraphrase Mike Tyson; "everyone has a plan [to be socially and environmentally activist] until they get a smack in the mouth [from a large amount of cash]"


Not everyone. I know people who have turned down large sums of cash because of their ethics.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 25, 2018)

CH1 said:


> Whilst I'm mucking about on Youtube, see this "appreciation" by Anita Roddick of the original Bon Marché of which the Squires building was a 1908 extension apparently.
> 
> Anita seemed to heartily despise the department store as a concept, out of town shoppping, industrial methods applied to retail etc
> 
> This short film was made by Ms Roddick as a sort of talking point filler on BBC2 in 1992 - yet she and her husband went on to sell their The Body Shop business to L'Oréal in 2006.




It's an interesting video.

The retail shopping experience run on a factory system. Its almost a Marxist critique. The socialisation of the means of production. As Capitalism develops it sweeps aside petit bourgeois shopkeeping replacing it with retail stores run like factories. Turning the independent shopkeeper into a proletarian.

Another David Harvey interview I listened to he says the left ( a very loose term for him) should learn / embrace technical change. Department stores aren't bad idea as way to distribute goods. The bad thing was , as Anita implies, the increased explotation of the workers.

The thing about Anita was that she thought her growing empire of shops could all be individually seen like the ye olde corner shop. A fantasy of hers.

Like Lush has recently copied she used her shops to promote good causes. But it was all top down. It was her telling her workers what to do. Lush are the new Body shop.

What she did do successfully was to show that what were niche interests like being against animal testing were profitable.


----------



## editor (Jul 5, 2018)

The website for the vile Brixton Central upwardly mobile lifestyle development has a gallery containing 11 images of Brixton.

No less than* three* of those pictures are of Canova Hall/Squire & Partners. That sums up what a fucking yuppie magnet the place is and the knock on effect this place is having.


----------



## lang rabbie (Jul 15, 2018)

CH1 said:


> The owners (a charity) keep trying to promote a major revamp. Don't know if any progress. They have at least repainted the front.


CH1 I know you used to manage the 336 building in a previous life, but where did you get the information that Luder was the designer when it was built for Coutts?  Is there some plaque in the lobby that I have missed?


----------



## CH1 (Jul 15, 2018)

lang rabbie said:


> CH1 I know you used to manage the 336 building in a previous life, but where did you get the information that Luder was the designer when it was built for Coutts?  Is there some plaque in the lobby that I have missed?


The secretary of the local amenity group - who is of course himself an architect - told me the building was designed by the Owne Luder Partnership. He also pointed out that Owen Luder had designed a house for himself on Herne Hill Road. This appears to be confirmed by Wikipedia Owen Luder - Wikipedia

As regards 336 Brixton Road there is no plaque, and the history is somewhat obscured because the conversion for community use was by another architects - Pellings - and there was a major dispute (before my time). Also bear in mind the building seems to have been designed as a warehouse/distribution centre originally, so the use as a bank mainframe computer hub plus depository for share certificates and the like was itself most likely an adaption. 

If you are seriously interested in the issue Coutts have an archivist (based in Crawley believe it or not). When I was liaising with them in 2008 or thereabouts they seemed very keen to explore their connection with Brixton.


----------



## editor (Aug 20, 2018)

Now That's What I Call Edgy #583


----------



## Angellic (Aug 21, 2018)

Whatever one thinks of S&P they really missed a trick not calling the building The Annexe.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 11, 2018)

May be of interest to some readers of this thread.

Reinier de Graaf: “Architecture is in a State of Denial” - Failed Architecture


----------



## editor (Sep 19, 2018)

Gentrification and elitism in action: 
Squire & Partners demand £240/year to drink in their swanky private rooftop bar in The Department Store


----------



## Angellic (Nov 19, 2018)

Wandered past their offices yesterday and there was some sort of Design Fair in the basement. It's a shame it cost £3.00 to visit.


----------



## editor (Nov 19, 2018)

Angellic said:


> Wandered past their offices yesterday and there was some sort of Design Fair in the basement. It's a shame it cost £3.00 to visit.


It's almost like they don't want their events to be open to all in the community. There's loads of free art/design events happening all over London every day and to charge for an event where people are selling stuff seems particularly parsimonious.

Still, if you're looking for a Christmas gift, you can pop into the Dept Store and pick up a tiny 125mm plant pot for £84, a vase for £108 or perhaps a wonderful Department Store Scarf for a mere £170. Or maybe go all out and bag yourself a glass vase for £1,560. 

Shop


----------



## alcopop (Nov 19, 2018)

Angellic said:


> Wandered past their offices yesterday and there was some sort of Design Fair in the basement. It's a shame it cost £3.00 to visit.


£3 is less than a pint. A mere bagatelle to many people.

I think it’s a Christmas bargain.


----------



## Angellic (Nov 19, 2018)

alcopop said:


> £3 is less than a pint. A mere bagatelle to many people.
> 
> I think it’s a Christmas bargain.



It didn't entice me, a middle-class, middle-aged man.


----------



## editor (Nov 19, 2018)

Angellic said:


> It didn't entice me, a middle-class, middle-aged man.


It seems that the last thing they want is ordinary folk coming in off the street to have a look around their hoity toity showcase premises, so that £3 charge will nicely filter out the 'wrong' faces.

Compare and contrast with actually community-invited  events such as this, and this.


----------



## alcopop (Nov 19, 2018)

Are


Angellic said:


> It didn't entice me, a middle-class, middle-aged man.


 Are the white, middle aged, middle class a monolithic entity?


----------



## T & P (Nov 19, 2018)

So a private business with no obligation whatsoever to offer community events within their premises occasionally chooses to do so, sometimes for a small admission fee. A question comes to mind for those who think this amounts to shunning the community.

The great majority of companies in Brixton and elsewhere have of course never, ever, offered any part of their space for events for the public. So aren’t all these companies that never have opened up their premises for public access events also shunning the local community (much more so than S&P, many would argue)? 

Do people look at businesses where the public wouldn’t be expected to have access to, whether accountant firms, financial institutions and countless others and actually think they have any kind of obligation to offer community events for the locals? 

If so fair enough, but then it is ludicrous to single out S&P- and even more so since S&P at least offer some, small fee or not.

If not, I‘d like to understand how a company that never ever offers their office space for public events is community-inclusive but a company that sometimes does so is shunning the locals.


----------



## editor (Nov 19, 2018)

T & P said:


> So a private business with no obligation whatsoever to offer community events within their premises occasionally chooses to do so, sometimes for a small admission fee. A question comes to mind for those who think this amounts to shunning the community.
> 
> The great majority of companies in Brixton and elsewhere have of course never, ever, offered any part of their space for events for the public. So aren’t all these companies that never have opened up their premises for public access events also shunning the local community (much more so than S&P, many would argue)?
> 
> ...


Why am I not surprised that you're so quick to defend this multi million business?

Mind you, I could have sworn that they blathered on about wanting to be part of the community in their PR blurb when they arrived. Oh wait, here it is:


> “Brixton has a unique creative community and vibrancy which we are looking forward to being part of.”


In fact they love to throw around those #community hashtags:







Of course, being the wild rabid lefty I am, I personally feel that there should be an obligation for massive, wealthy businesses moving into the area to make some effort to engage with the community, especially if they're throwing the #community hashtag all over the place, and own a fucking huge building which has enough empty space to fit a vast amount of local start ups/community activities.

This lot have been very clever with their PR to sucker people in. Like banging on about a free use community space that suddenly starts charging, bribing in a black-owned record store for cred-points and opening a private rooftop bar with 'free membership' for locals - until that runs out a year later and they've out on their arse.

Very clever way of neutering any negative feedback.


----------



## BakeRecords (Mar 7, 2019)

Some news on Squire and Partners. They've just been given planning permission for offices and a bar/restaurant on the site of the annex at the back of Toplin House, right in the middle of Bellefields Rd at the junction with Stockwell Avenue.

A few residents of Bellefields/Stockwell Ave objected in writing and in person at the Planning Applications Committee meeting, but to no avail. Bloody Lambeth recommended that permission is granted, and the Committee unanimously agreed.

That's two fingers from S&P to their neighbours. I find it hard to believe that anyone would think it's a good idea to put a bloody massive pub in the middle of a residential street. Since Canova Hall opened, the antisocial behaviour on Stockwell Ave has gotten worse, not better. Those bottomless brunches are a disgrace - vomit, empty glasses and cigarette butts strewn across the street are commonplace on an early Saturday afternoon, and this new place will make things worse, not better.

Squire turned up at the Planning meeting and gave some nauseating bullshit about how much they've invested in Brixton, how well behaved the members of their private club are, and how their club is totally inclusive. The Committee swallowed it whole. Particularly disappointing from the Councillor for the Ferndale Ward. I'd be interested to know how many people who live on the neighbouring streets are members of their ridiculous club.


----------



## Twattor (Mar 7, 2019)

BakeRecords said:


> Some news on Squire and Partners. They've just been given planning permission for offices and a bar/restaurant on the site of the annex at the back of Toplin House, right in the middle of Bellefields Rd at the junction with Stockwell Avenue.
> 
> A few residents of Bellefields/Stockwell Ave objected in writing and in person at the Planning Applications Committee meeting, but to no avail. Bloody Lambeth recommended that permission is granted, and the Committee unanimously agreed.
> 
> ...


Hang on a sec. Wasn't the Queen's on the corner of Ferndale and Bellefields? A pub that once offered all night boozing and rooms to transient party-goers? 

Are we talking double standards here?


----------



## lang rabbie (Mar 7, 2019)

BakeRecords said:


> Some news on Squire and Partners. They've just been given planning permission for offices and a bar/restaurant on the site of the annex at the back of Toplin House, right in the middle of Bellefields Rd at the junction with Stockwell Avenue.


 Coming back for extra storeys and an A3 use once they already have a consent for the main scheme.  
Squire's greedy behaviour is as bad as Tesco's.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 7, 2019)

BakeRecords said:


> Some news on Squire and Partners. They've just been given planning permission for offices and a bar/restaurant on the site of the annex at the back of Toplin House, right in the middle of Bellefields Rd at the junction with Stockwell Avenue.
> 
> A few residents of Bellefields/Stockwell Ave objected in writing and in person at the Planning Applications Committee meeting, but to no avail. Bloody Lambeth recommended that permission is granted, and the Committee unanimously agreed.
> 
> ...



Thanks for this local residents view..

Found it on the recent planning committee agenda:

Agenda for Planning Applications Committee on Tuesday 5 March 2019, 7.00 pm | Lambeth Council

No minutes on Lambeth website yet. To recent a meeting. 

Definitely looks like extension of Brixton bars to your street from looking at application.

The usual stuff from officers both mitigating disturbance to residents. Which doesn't work in practise as Lambeth haven't resources to enforce conditions.

Yes I noticed in the application several pages of Squires going on about how community minded they are.

This is commercial development. Its got nothing to do with the local community.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 7, 2019)

Twattor said:


> Hang on a sec. Wasn't the Queen's on the corner of Ferndale and Bellefields? A pub that once offered all night boozing and rooms to transient party-goers?
> 
> Are we talking double standards here?



I wondered when the usual suspects would pitch in. 

Nice way to greet a new poster. 

Accusing new poster of hypocrisy.


----------



## Twattor (Mar 7, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> I wondered when the usual suspects would pitch in.
> 
> Nice way to greet a new poster.
> 
> Accusing new poster of hypocrisy.


I'll accept I posted in reaction to a post without having done any research but based on local knowledge. I'll go away and do some digging and come back in a bit.

I still hate the antipathetic response on these forums to anyone that challenges the hive mind.

Also, since when did I become a "usual suspect"? I've always tried to be unusual. And not a suspect. Or at least have a good alibi...


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 7, 2019)

Twattor said:


> I'll accept I posted in reaction to a post without having done any research but based on local knowledge. I'll go away and do some digging and come back in a bit.
> 
> I still hate the antipathetic response on these forums to anyone that challenges the hive mind.
> 
> Also, since when did I become a "usual suspect"? I've always tried to be unusual. And not a suspect. Or at least have a good alibi...



The "hive mind" is all you. Anyone who comes on this thread saying something critical of Squires is liable to get jumped on.

Even when they are new poster. Taking the trouble to post up info from local resident.

The post they put up contradicts the "hive mind" that dislikes criticism of Squires.

No wonder its difficult to get new posters here it this is the reception they get.

You have demonstrated the hive mind that is prevalent in Brixton forum now not me.


----------



## Twattor (Mar 7, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> The "hive mind" is all you. Anyone who comes on this thread saying something critical of Squires is liable to get jumped on.
> 
> You have demonstrated the hive mind that is prevalent in Brixton forum now not me.


I disagree. The majority of the posts on this thread have always been dismissive of squire for their elitist clients (although that includes trades unions), their designs for private accommodation (although they also design social housing) and their appropriation of commercial space in Brixton which was underutilised.

So much irrational prejudice.

I'm not interested in prejudice and hate. Give me facts.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 7, 2019)

Twattor said:


> I disagree. The majority of the posts on this thread have always been dismissive of squire for their elitist clients (although that includes trades unions), their designs for private accommodation (although they also design social housing) and their appropriation of commercial space in Brixton which was underutilised.
> 
> So much irrational prejudice.
> 
> I'm not interested in prejudice and hate. Give me facts.



No its you that is full of prejudice. Jumping on a new poster who lives locally. Who says something that does not fit your views on Squires.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 7, 2019)

BakeRecords said:


> Some news on Squire and Partners. They've just been given planning permission for offices and a bar/restaurant on the site of the annex at the back of Toplin House, right in the middle of Bellefields Rd at the junction with Stockwell Avenue.
> 
> A few residents of Bellefields/Stockwell Ave objected in writing and in person at the Planning Applications Committee meeting, but to no avail. Bloody Lambeth recommended that permission is granted, and the Committee unanimously agreed.
> 
> ...



Thanks for this post. I must apologize for the reception you got.


----------



## Twattor (Mar 7, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> No its you that is full of prejudice. Jumping on a new poster who lives locally. Who says something that does not fit your views on Squires.


Don't be silly. I'm probably far less prejudiced than you are.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 7, 2019)

Twattor said:


> Don't be silly. I'm probably far less prejudiced than you are.



I only started this as you decided to have a go at new poster. Accusing them of double standards. 

That shows prejudice.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 7, 2019)

lang rabbie said:


> Coming back for extra storeys and an A3 use once they already have a consent for the main scheme.
> Squire's greedy behaviour is as bad as Tesco's.



I was wondering about that. The original consent only got through on appeal.


----------



## Twattor (Mar 7, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> I only started this as you decided to have a go at new poster. Accusing them of double standards.
> 
> That shows prejudice.


Rubbish. Apologies BakeRecords you stepped into a silly argument that winds me up and I'm ashamed to say I didn't even look at your name.

Double standards argument still stands against many of the other posters here who'd prefer Brixton to be preserved in aspic circa 2000


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 7, 2019)

Twattor said:


> Rubbish. Apologies BakeRecords you stepped into a silly argument that winds me up and I'm ashamed to say I didn't even look at your name.
> 
> Double standards argument still stands against many of the other posters here who'd prefer Brixton to be preserved in aspic circa 2000



Sorry what are you going on about?

I took issue with you having a go at a new poster.

Now you are justifying yourself by broadening it out to other posters here.

You started this. Not me.

I didn't jump to have a go. I went to see on Lambeth planning if a recent application had gone in and been at recent planning committee meeting.

Far from jumping in to accuse new poster of double standards I went to look up the "facts". And the facts showed an application had been agreed.

I also had a look to see where it exactly was on Bellefields road. To see its possible impact on that part of the street.

All these facts backed up what the new poster was saying about an application by Squires for that site being agreed.


----------



## editor (Mar 8, 2019)

Twattor said:


> Hang on a sec. Wasn't the Queen's on the corner of Ferndale and Bellefields? A pub that once offered all night boozing and rooms to transient party-goers?
> 
> Are we talking double standards here?


It never ever offered "all night boozing." It did, however, have occasional lock-ins, which, by their very nature, had to be quiet or else they attract the attention of the law.

So your 'double standards' accusation is both insulting and nonsense.


----------



## editor (Mar 8, 2019)

Twattor said:


> Double standards argument still stands against many of the other posters here who'd prefer Brixton to be preserved in aspic circa 2000


Stop posting rubbish, please.


----------



## BakeRecords (Mar 8, 2019)

Thanks Gramsci and all. I read this board from time to time to keep up with local news, so I'm aware of the dynamics around here and wouldn't expect everyone to agree that this is a problem.

Squire claimed at the PAC meeting that this new proposal is less profitable than the previous one. He focused on the new office space for start-ups, making the case that this was some selfless contribution to Brixton, and that the pub was simply there to underwrite the costs for this office space. Thanks Mr Squire! What a guy. 

As Gramsci says, all the conditions in the world will make no difference if there are no resources to enforce them. One of the Councillors made the ludicrous claim that a new pub would reduce antisocial behaviour on Stockwell Ave. That is totally contrary to my experience of Canova Hall. At least the people who used to drink at the Brixton Rd end of Stockwell Ave were polite. The punters at Canova Hall can be pretty terrible - spilling out onto the street from the smoking area, shouting, leering, vomiting, etc. I'm not looking forward to more of that on our street.


----------



## Mr Retro (Mar 8, 2019)

BakeRecords said:


> The punters at Canova Hall can be pretty terrible - spilling out onto the street from the smoking area, shouting, leering, vomiting, etc. I'm not looking forward to more of that on our street.


I supported Squire and Partners opening up in Brixton but this sounds awful


----------



## lang rabbie (Mar 8, 2019)

Get the impression from talking to several younger colleagues in the office who have tried eating out there that the management of Canova Hall have given up caring about the food and just looking to push as much booze as possible.

It appears the readers of Tripadvisor agree.


----------



## alex_ (Mar 8, 2019)

lang rabbie said:


> Get the impression from talking to several younger colleagues in the office who have tried eating out there that the management of Canova Hall have given up caring about the food and just looking to push as much booze as possible.
> 
> It appears the readers of Tripadvisor agree.
> View attachment 163899 View attachment 163898



That means it’s pretty rubbish at everything.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 8, 2019)

Quotes didn't work.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 8, 2019)

BakeRecords said:


> Thanks Gramsci and all. I read this board from time to time to keep up with local news, so I'm aware of the dynamics around here and wouldn't expect everyone to agree that this is a problem.
> 
> Squire claimed at the PAC meeting that this new proposal is less profitable than the previous one. He focused on the new office space for start-ups, making the case that this was some selfless contribution to Brixton, and that the pub was simply there to underwrite the costs for this office space. Thanks Mr Squire! What a guy.
> 
> As Gramsci says, all the conditions in the world will make no difference if there are no resources to enforce them. One of the Councillors made the ludicrous claim that a new pub would reduce antisocial behaviour on Stockwell Ave. That is totally contrary to my experience of Canova Hall. At least the people who used to drink at the Brixton Rd end of Stockwell Ave were polite. The punters at Canova Hall can be pretty terrible - spilling out onto the street from the smoking area, shouting, leering, vomiting, etc. I'm not looking forward to more of that on our street.




Thanks. Glad you posted this as someone who has to live near this.

Yes the dynamics her mean that poster like me who wasn't overjoyed about Squires coming to Brixton was given a hard time.

See even one of the great supporters of the Department Store Mr Retro is now having second thoughts.

To make it clear. My position was that Squires are a business who needs premises. They are entitled to buy a building to turn into office space for their company.

Its all the other bollocks I object to. The presenting his commercial venture as a "selfless contribution" to Brixton is typical of how Squires operate.

I'm assuming the Cllr who said this would reduce anti social behaviour was a Labour Cllr?


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 8, 2019)

lang rabbie said:


> Get the impression from talking to several younger colleagues in the office who have tried eating out there that the management of Canova Hall have given up caring about the food and just looking to push as much booze as possible.
> 
> It appears the readers of Tripadvisor agree.
> View attachment 163899 View attachment 163898



Somewhat harsh reviews. Squires came to Brixton and regenerated this rundown scruffy Street. 

A better review is this Time Out one. 

Canova Hall | Bars and pubs in Stockwell, London



> You could see a modern-day Jay Gatsby sipping martinis here.



Every time I go past it its busy. Squires are getting the punters in. 

So makes business sense to have another outlet around the corner.


----------



## cuppa tee (Mar 8, 2019)

> ...a modern day Jay Gatsby



Jay Rayner ?


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 8, 2019)

BakeRecords said:


> Thanks Gramsci and all. I read this board from time to time to keep up with local news, so I'm aware of the dynamics around here and wouldn't expect everyone to agree that this is a problem.
> 
> Squire claimed at the PAC meeting that this new proposal is less profitable than the previous one. He focused on the new office space for start-ups, making the case that this was some selfless contribution to Brixton, and that the pub was simply there to underwrite the costs for this office space. Thanks Mr Squire! What a guy.
> 
> As Gramsci says, all the conditions in the world will make no difference if there are no resources to enforce them. One of the Councillors made the ludicrous claim that a new pub would reduce antisocial behaviour on Stockwell Ave. That is totally contrary to my experience of Canova Hall. At least the people who used to drink at the Brixton Rd end of Stockwell Ave were polite. The punters at Canova Hall can be pretty terrible - spilling out onto the street from the smoking area, shouting, leering, vomiting, etc. I'm not looking forward to more of that on our street.



I had a look at the officers report.

To my surprise the officers are saying that this development is acceptable as it falls within the Brixton Town Centre. Kind of stretching the definition imo.

The bar is big. Sitting right next to Bellafields road. This isn't going to be some small bar. Acoustic glazing will be used on the outside glass windows. Looks to me like the windows will be floor to ceiling to encourage secured by Design passive surveillance of the street. Recipe for disturbance to local residents imo .

Entrance will be on Stockwell Avenue.With a lobby system to reduce disturbance . These don't work that well if a place is busy. Also lobby system inevitably means queues when busy. So that in itself can be a problem.

The officers have put in "mitigating" measures to hopefully deal with disturbance.

Its imo a large entertainment venue right near to residential housing. An extension of Brixton entertainment zone when Council admits its having resource problems dealing with what is already there. So why are officers allowing this? They could have said keep it to business / office space. With non A3 on ground floor. (Its A3 that brings in money for owner of property. )

Brixton doesn't need any more purpose built bars.

BTW the planning officers limitations on opening hours as part of planning permission may be altered later on. For reasons I don't understand licensing may give longer hours. There isnt joined up thinking in Lambeth. So it's worth keeping eye on this. Signs should be publicly displayed if variations to hours are sought.


----------



## BakeRecords (Mar 8, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> Thanks. Glad you posted this as someone who has to live near this.
> 
> Yes the dynamics her mean that poster like me who wasn't overjoyed about Squires coming to Brixton was given a hard time.
> 
> ...



It was Cllr Ben Kind who came up with that nonsense. He was also particularly effusive about the design of the building and the 'contribution' of Squire and Partners. 

As you say Gramsci, the most galling thing about this development is the outrageous and disingenuous #community bullshit. Squire and Partners have shown no regard to their neighbours throughout this process.


----------



## BakeRecords (Mar 8, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> I had a look at the officers report.
> 
> To my surprise the officers are saying that this development is acceptable as it falls within the Brixton Town Centre. Kind of stretching the definition imo.
> 
> ...



Exactly! Brixton doesn't need any more bars like this. Certainly not 2 minutes from Brixtons biggest pub, Pop Brixton. The queue/smoking area on Stockwell Ave has the potential to be a major nuisance to residents.

I also have major concerns about vehicular access. Since Canova Hall opened, Ubers/ private hire taxis  quite regularly drive all the way up the pedestrianised part of Stockwell Ave to drop people off at Canova Hall, and then have to reverse all the way back up the street back to Bellefields Rd. I'm expecting more of that nonsense, plus all the additional deliveries/rubbish collections and the possibility of Deliveroo drivers. Stockwell Ave is meant to be a cycle route!

Thanks for the heads up on opening hours. I will keep a close eye on this. Squire claimed at the meeting that it would close at 9pm on a Sunday, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they pushed for later openings.


----------



## cuppa tee (Mar 8, 2019)

Anyone Who believed squire and sons was going to benefit the wider community must have been tripping or just completely deluded.


----------



## Winot (Mar 9, 2019)

cuppa tee said:


> Anyone Who believed squire and sons was going to benefit the wider community must have been tripping or just completely deluded.



No one did.


----------



## editor (Mar 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> No one did.


I beg to differ. In fact I'm rather astonished by your post because some people here staunchly defended any criticism of the firm.


----------



## CH1 (Mar 9, 2019)

This is the CGI of the proposal on the planning document:


Looks like a clone of Lexadon/Brewdog on the squint.

Meanwhile look what they got rid of at 45 Bellfield Road in 2006.









(Pictures are on Urban75 here: The Queen, 45 Bellefields Road SW9 - lost pubs of Brixton
Personally I'm sick of rotating developers gain wrecking my environment and annihilating local history.

The Squires proposal does nothing to reinstate the Victorian pleasure of the original pub at the opposite end of the terrace, and will no doubt irritate neighbouring residents enormously with wealthy vomiting patrons particularly on Sunday mornings. 

Who wants to step over pools of vomit on the way to mass?


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> No one did.



A lot of this thread has been about those who think Squires coming here is a good thing and those who are sceptical.

Even last couple of pages shows this. I had to stick up for a new poster who said something critical of Squires new plans.

So unless I'm going to have to have to get into argument based on analysing/ interpretating meanings of previous posts I would say that some thought Squires was a good thing. They refurbished an empty building, involved themselves in community. They have been criticised unfairly.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 9, 2019)

BakeRecords said:


> It was Cllr Ben Kind who came up with that nonsense. He was also particularly effusive about the design of the building and the 'contribution' of Squire and Partners.
> 
> As you say Gramsci, the most galling thing about this development is the outrageous and disingenuous #community bullshit. Squire and Partners have shown no regard to their neighbours throughout this process.



Just had a look at Cllr Ben Kind Twitter. On the right of the party. Not happy about all member meetings of Labour party in Streatham for example. Despite this giving ordinary members increased voice in local party. They are the wrong kind of new members.

The New Labour Cllrs like Kind see Squires as example of the kind of entrepreneurial capitalism with added social value they so admire. Its as my old Cllr Rachel said to me the future they see for Brixton.


----------



## Winot (Mar 9, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> A lot of this thread has been about those who think Squires coming here is a good thing and those who are sceptical.
> 
> Even last couple of pages shows this. I had to stick up for a new poster who said something critical of Squires new plans.
> 
> So unless I'm going to have to have to get into argument based on analysing/ interpretating meanings of previous posts I would say that some thought Squires was a good thing. They refurbished an empty building, involved themselves in community. They have been criticised unfairly.



There’s a difference between thinking that (on balance) something is a good thing and thinking that it will be of benefit to the wider community.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> There’s a difference between thinking that (on balance) something is a good thing and thinking that it will be of benefit to the wider community.



So you want to get into an argument about meanings of what posters mean.

I'm not prepared to get out my grammer/dictionary books for close textual analysis.

When I say I support Squires coming here is a good thing one is jumping to conclusions if that is interpreted as meaning that its beneficial for the community.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 9, 2019)

Sometimes I want to give up on Brixton forum.


----------



## cuppa tee (Mar 10, 2019)

Winot said:


> There’s a difference between thinking that (on balance) something is a good thing and thinking that it will be of benefit to the wider community.


Surely an upstanding citizen would consider benefits to the wider community first when deciding if something is a good or bad thing (on balance).


----------



## alex_ (Mar 10, 2019)

Post deleted


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 10, 2019)

I find it distasteful to draw comparisons with Isis on this thread.


----------



## alex_ (Mar 10, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> I find it distasteful to draw comparisons with Isis on this thread.



Apologies. Deleted


----------



## Angellic (Mar 11, 2019)

Does anyone know why it's called Canova Hall? Anything to do with the guy who created this?


----------



## CH1 (Mar 11, 2019)

Angellic said:


> Does anyone know why it's called Canova Hall? Anything to do with the guy who created this?


Surely an even more kitsch Canova is this "neo-clasical" statue of George Washington in the Senate of North Carolina.
 
Surely nothing could be more apt for an up and coming district of hipsters and serfs?


----------



## catriona (May 22, 2019)

I emailed Squire & Partners about the frequent flows of dirty water across Stockwell Avenue from blocked drains at the side of Canova Hall.  To their credit they replied straight away & said it's driving them mad because Thames Water won't fix it or let them do it.  They've also invited me to lunch Upstairs... cunning co-option?  You decide, but obviously I'm going! 
I also did this spot of guerilla gardening around a sapling at Canova Hall's back door - it was sitting in a puddle of grey sludge, being used as a substitute drain/ashtray.  Had to cart a load of homemade compost down the road & felt a bit daft doing it but got lots of positive comments from passers by.


----------



## CH1 (May 23, 2019)

Nobody seem to have spotted this article in Tuesday's Standard.

In a long-running saga going back to 2007 when HRH Prince Charles intervened, the property tycoons "The Candy Brothers" in conjunction with the Emir of Quatar were forced to tone down their proposed carbuncle (designed by Lord Richard Rogers of Pompidou Centre, Gherkin  & wobbly bridge fame).

M'lud Rogers got the boot and guess who - Squire and Partners - were brought in to sort out the mess. Apparently the gardens are now open for public viewing.

No doubt cynics on here will say - not for long!


----------



## T & P (May 23, 2019)

Renowned architect firm is renowned.


----------



## teuchter (May 23, 2019)

CH1 said:


> Nobody seem to have spotted this article in Tuesday's Standard.
> 
> In a long-running saga going back to 2007 when HRH Prince Charles intervened, the property tycoons "The Candy Brothers" in conjunction with the Emir of Quatar were forced to tone down their proposed carbuncle (designed by Lord Richard Rogers of Pompidou Centre, Gherkin  & wobbly bridge fame).



Gherkin and wobbly bridge were Norman Foster projects - not Richard Rogers.


----------



## teuchter (May 23, 2019)

Dunno why you call the Rogers design a carbuncle - it was more interesting than the conservative and po-faced Prince Charles-appeasing Squire scheme that has been built.


----------



## Gramsci (May 23, 2019)

Squires were brought in after Prince Charles personally intervened to stop the previous design. Why I think he should never be King.

Squires are establishment architects. A safe pair of hands. A bit of progressive middle of the ground modernism with enough nods to tradition that make their work sit easily with the centre ground political project.


----------



## CH1 (May 23, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Dunno why you call the Rogers design a carbuncle - it was more interesting than the conservative and po-faced Prince Charles-appeasing Squire scheme that has been built.


That was because Prince Charles was involved. And he was noted for describing modern architecture as such - and intervening with his fellow royal in Qatar to squash the Chelsea carbuncle.

On 13th May 2009 the Daily Telegraph claimed that the Richard Rogers scheme was number 10 on the Prince's hit list of carbuncles. Obviously things have moved on now, courtesy of Prince Charles' intervention and a more traditional approach from Squires and Partners.

*10. £1bn housing scheme at former Chelsea Barracks, London.*

WHAT THE PRINCE SAID: Earlier this year the Prince wrote to Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani, the emir of Qatar whose family are the main backers of a the scheme, calling for the proposed design by Richard Rogers to be scrapped in favour of a more traditional scheme devised by classicist Quinlan Terry.

WHAT HAPPENED: Returning fire, supporters of Rogers, now Lord Rogers of Riverside, signed a round-robin letter calling on the Prince to keep out. "It is essential in a The Prince of Wales will address the Royal Institute of British Architects this week, exactly 25 years after he created turmoil in the industry with his 'monstrous carbuncle' speech to the same audience. modern democracy," they said, "that private comments and behind-the-scenes lobbying by the prince should not be used to skew the course of an open and democratic planning process that is under way ... If the prince wants to comment on the design of this, or any other project, we urge him to do so through the established planning consultation process.

Rather than use his privileged position to intervene in one of the most significant residential projects likely to be built in London in the next five years, he should engage in an open and transparent debate."

The letters was signed by the likes of Lord Foster, Frank Gehry, Renzo Piano, Jean Nouvel, Sir Nicholas Serota. The final design has not yet been chosen. Amanda Baillieu, editor of Building Design and a Stirling prize judge said: "Of course the Prince's intervention is unfortunate, but as a piece of urbanism Chelsea Barracks is not a particularly good scheme, and so far nobody has listened. It's not simply that it'll be a Gucci ghetto, it's that its overall form gives very little back to the city. Anything or anyone that starts the debate over this important London site is to be welcomed – royal or otherwise."

She added: "He has certainly been a significant influence, the question is whether it has been negative or positive. The positive impact has been on the profession that thought it was beyond criticism, was on a pedestal and beyond reproach. The problem was that his first remarks were such a big blow that some architects never really recovered and for a long time we had designs that were safe, particularly in London. My criticism of him is that he often sees buildings and skylines as he would in a painting rather than as someone who uses them. He hates the National Theatre on the South Bank but then he can't exactly pop along and see a play or spend an afternoon enjoying its spaces as a member of the crowd so he doesn't see it as ordinary people might, he only addresses its outside appearance."
---------------------------------------------------
teuchter this blog might be of interest if you enjoy debating planning and carbuncles  The Pock Mark Award : The Carbuncle Awards 2015 : Carbuncles : Architecture in profile the building environment in Scotland - Urban Realm


----------



## CH1 (May 23, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Gherkin and wobbly bridge were Norman Foster projects - not Richard Rogers.


Sorry about that -- you are quite correct. I had the pleasure of hearing Richard Rogers present his proposal for a glass canopy over the Southbank Centre - which Lambeth Planning loved, though I guess it never got funding.

Around the same time Rogers proposed getting rid of the aerial walkway on the National Theatre side. Sir Denys Lasdun was outraged - and even got a petition up from such worthies as Sir John Betjeman. I never thought a hunk of crumbling concrete was that important to the NT.

I guess architects are a bit like Prima Donnas.


----------



## Gramsci (May 23, 2019)

> A new design is being drawn up by Dixon Jones, architects of the Royal Opera House, fellow architects Squire & Partners, and Kim Wilkie, a landscape designer who has proposed a market garden, beehives and nut trees. Ben Bolgar, senior design director at the prince's Foundation for the Built Environment, sat on the judging panel and *Prince Charles continues to be briefed on the design.* Plans are due to be submitted to Westminster council next month.



Prince Charles's role in Chelsea barrack planning row 'unwelcome'

Squires know how to keep the right people happy.


----------



## editor (May 23, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> Prince Charles's role in Chelsea barrack planning row 'unwelcome'
> 
> Squires now how to keep the right people happy.


Rich folks like to stick together.


----------



## Angellic (May 25, 2019)

Better suited to Haringey?


----------



## editor (Jul 19, 2020)

Update: Squire & Partners extend their Brixton empire with courtyard bar/restaurant


----------



## lang rabbie (Jul 20, 2020)

CH1 said:


> Surely an even more kitsch Canova is this "neo-clasical" statue of George Washington in the Senate of North Carolina.
> View attachment 164150
> Surely nothing could be more apt for an up and coming district of hipsters and serfs?


Pedantic side-tracking of thread - that is actually a really bad 1970s copy of the original - which was lost when the State Capitol building in Raleigh, NC burned down in 1831 only a decade after the statue was installed.


----------



## Tulster218 (Jul 13, 2021)

Interview with Michael Squire of Squire and Partners.


----------



## editor (Jul 13, 2021)

Tulster218 said:


> Interview with Michael Squire of Squire and Partners.



"We just loved its decay..." 

"And we _plucked_ Pure Vinyl out of Reliance Arcade. but could have got loads more money from the people " blah blah blah, PR bullshit, blah blah blah.


Fuck him and his exclusive, divisive, vetted, members-only rooftop bar.


----------



## reubeness (Jul 13, 2021)

editor said:


> "We just loved its decay..."
> 
> "And we _plucked_ Pure Vinyl out of Reliance Arcade. but could have got loads more money from the people " blah blah blah, PR bullshit, blah blah blah.
> 
> ...


He’s totally deluded if he thinks his building, ethos or clientele are fitting in with the local Brixton community. Bullshit!!!!


----------



## Gramsci (Jul 13, 2021)

Tulster218 said:


> Interview with Michael Squire of Squire and Partners.




Their is a note of desperation in this. The business model is pre covid. Its like in the video he is trying to sell the building as a great working place.

I note community free use has now gone. Which is something he was bigging up at the start.

WFH during pandemic means the kind of people he was thinking would flock to his workspace/ private members club might think WFH is viable option instead. Why be on his waiting list to join his exclusive members club or pay for a desk? With rules laid down by him? When WFH with a good Internet connection works just as well? And you don't have to follow his rules. Or pay for the privilege.

Coud be that that his business/ architectural model isn't going to work.


----------



## Tron Cruise (Jul 14, 2021)

editor said:


> "We just loved its decay..."
> 
> "And we _plucked_ Pure Vinyl out of Reliance Arcade. but could have got loads more money from the people " blah blah blah, PR bullshit, blah blah blah.
> 
> ...


the man who thought that hosting ‘an evening with the bass player from Dire Straits’ was ‘cool’.


----------



## Tron Cruise (Jul 14, 2021)

Tulster218 said:


> Interview with Michael Squire of Squire and Partners.



The white saviour of Brixton.


----------



## Tron Cruise (Jul 14, 2021)

Tron Cruise said:


> The white saviour of Brixton.


This guy is delusion - ‘we didn’t want anything out of it’ - like building a private pub in a residential street you mean?


----------



## Jimbeau (Jul 14, 2021)

Gramsci said:


> Their is a note of desperation in this. The business model is pre covid. Its like in the video he is trying to sell the building as a great working place.
> 
> I note community free use has now gone. Which is something he was bigging up at the start.
> 
> ...



I've been to the Squires rooftop a few times. The nature of my work (stuff with non-profits in the arts and culture sectors) means that I often need to meet with freelancers and small creative businesses - many of whom are kitchen table operations or are based in co-working spaces and hence need somewhere for working meetings over coffee, etc. Brixton has a fair number of these, the Bon Marche Centre across the road being but one. For them it seems to serve a need, and I understand there are currently 2,000+ members.

I don't like the space very much - it's all a bit too shiny with bad acoustics - and I have no interest whatsoever in being a member, but the next Soho House or Groucho it most certainly is not. Much more like the lobby bar and business centre in a mid-range conference hotel.

I point this out not by way of endorsement, but to illustrate that its business model is evidently working.


----------



## Rushy (Jul 14, 2021)

Tron Cruise said:


> This guy is delusion - ‘we didn’t want anything out of it’ - like building a private pub in a residential street you mean?


I don't object to them like some do but that bit did make me raise an eyebrow. The choice of a cool record shop is clearly very deliberate. Obviously didn't choose a mobile repair shop, nail bar or the seamstress. I don't mind them curating the handful of units in their building but a bit embarrassing to pretend that they didn't want anything out of it.


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2021)

Jimbeau said:


> I've been to the Squires rooftop a few times. The nature of my work (stuff with non-profits in the arts and culture sectors) means that I often need to meet with freelancers and small creative businesses - many of whom are kitchen table operations or are based in co-working spaces and hence need somewhere for working meetings over coffee, etc. Brixton has a fair number of these, the Bon Marche Centre across the road being but one. For them it seems to serve a need, and I understand there are currently 2,000+ members.
> 
> I don't like the space very much - it's all a bit too shiny with bad acoustics - and I have no interest whatsoever in being a member, but the next Soho House or Groucho it most certainly is not. Much more like the lobby bar and business centre in a mid-range conference hotel.
> 
> I point this out not by way of endorsement, but to illustrate the that its business model is evidently working.


I loathe everything about it and their bullshit claims that it's for the 'local community.'  Fuck them and fuck their elitist, carefully vetted £240 a year club.  They contribute NOTHING to the Brixton community I care about.



> Upstairs was opened to friends, family and the local community as a relaxed social space. And the word spread! Due to rapid demand Upstairs launched as a members club in November 2018. We also have Private Dining rooms available for hire to non-members, including an exquisite space beneath our glazed dome.





> If you would like to apply please provide information which demonstrates your ability to make a positive contribution to the Upstairs community








						Membership — Upstairs
					






					upstairsbrixton.com


----------



## Rushy (Jul 14, 2021)

Jimbeau said:


> I've been to the Squires rooftop a few times. The nature of my work (stuff with non-profits in the arts and culture sectors) means that I often need to meet with freelancers and small creative businesses - many of whom are kitchen table operations or are based in co-working spaces and hence need somewhere for working meetings over coffee, etc. Brixton has a fair number of these, the Bon Marche Centre across the road being but one. For them it seems to serve a need, and I understand there are currently 2,000+ members.
> 
> I don't like the space very much - it's all a bit too shiny with bad acoustics - and I have no interest whatsoever in being a member, but the next Soho House or Groucho it most certainly is not. Much more like the lobby bar and business centre in a mid-range conference hotel.
> 
> I point this out not by way of endorsement, but to illustrate that its business model is evidently working.


They told me that its not for business. Is the roof top even open to members in the day?


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2021)

Rushy said:


> I don't object to them like some do but that bit did make me raise an eyebrow. The choice of a cool record shop is clearly very deliberate. Obviously didn't choose a mobile repair shop, nail bar or the seamstress. I don't mind them curating the handful of units in their building but a bit embarrassing to pretend that they didn't want anything out of it.


They essentially bribed Pure Vinyl into the space to provide 'community' PR for themselves. But that's what you can do when you're fucking rich.


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2021)

Rushy said:


> They told me that its not for business. Is the roof top even open to members in the day?


Laptops are banned. 


> We are a social space and have a no laptop policy Upstairs.


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 14, 2021)

What about a TV with the Tour de France on it?


----------



## Jimbeau (Jul 14, 2021)

Rushy said:


> They told me that its not for business. Is the roof top even open to members in the day?





editor said:


> Laptops are banned.


I'm not the best sample here. I've been to meetings in one of their rooms - which was no doubt hired for the purpose, and sessions over coffee both in Canova Hall (which definitely does allow laptops) and on the roof at the end of the afternoon.


----------



## Rushy (Jul 14, 2021)

Jimbeau said:


> I'm not the best sample here. I've been to meetings in one of their rooms - which was no doubt hired for the purpose, and sessions over coffee both in Canova Hall (which definitely does allow laptops) and on the roof at the end of the afternoon.


Yes. Canova has a hot desk subscription. I really wanted to like that place for weekday brunchy breakfast but was really unreliable. Have not been for ages.


----------



## reubeness (Jul 14, 2021)

editor said:


> They essentially bribed Pure Vinyl into the space to provide 'community' PR for themselves. But that's what you can do when you're fucking rich.


I’d love to know what pure vinyl think about being ‘plucked’ from reliance arcade, “Gawd luv you sir for picking us up out of the gutter” 🤣


----------



## BakeRecords (Jul 14, 2021)

Rushy said:


> Yes. Canova has a hot desk subscription. I really wanted to like that place for weekday brunchy breakfast but was really unreliable. Have not been for ages.



I walk past this place regularly, as I live close by. It is an absolute shitshow by 3pm on a Saturday afternoon. Probably a result of those bottomless brunches. Drunken louts spread out all over Stockwell Ave and cigarette butts everywhere.


----------



## Gramsci (Jul 14, 2021)

Jimbeau said:


> I've been to the Squires rooftop a few times. The nature of my work (stuff with non-profits in the arts and culture sectors) means that I often need to meet with freelancers and small creative businesses - many of whom are kitchen table operations or are based in co-working spaces and hence need somewhere for working meetings over coffee, etc. Brixton has a fair number of these, the Bon Marche Centre across the road being but one. For them it seems to serve a need, and I understand there are currently 2,000+ members.
> 
> I don't like the space very much - it's all a bit too shiny with bad acoustics - and I have no interest whatsoever in being a member, but the next Soho House or Groucho it most certainly is not. Much more like the lobby bar and business centre in a mid-range conference hotel.
> 
> I point this out not by way of endorsement, but to illustrate that its business model is evidently working.



I was more referring to the new working space that Squires added to the buiding. Which is mentioned at beginning of the video.

This isn't just a go at Squires.

The Hondo application for office block was supported by Council officers who reckoned Savills report that post Covid office space need to be built was correct.

I'm working around the City and this doesn't seem right to me.

It may be post Covid that people are sick of WFH and desparate to get back to office. One issue being the blurring of work / not work by management. Heard from some WFH that they've been getting emails re work in evenings now they are WFH. In France you couldn't do this. But in this country big business is going to look at the opportunity to get more work out of people.

However some are finding that WFH means no long commute. One I know got stuck on Spanish island and happily worked from laptop for their City company during lockdown.

We Work in central London is fucked at the moment. People sharing hot desks and mingling just doesn't work when a virus is around. I've been to some We Work and they are basically empty.

I think long term people will mix WFH with being in the office. And their will be less need for office space in London.

Their will be need for meeting space. So on that his selective rooftop space may work.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 14, 2021)

It's quite possible there will be an increased demand for rented desk space in more residential areas as opposed to city centre locations. People who have contracts where they go into a central office occasionally but otherwise can work from where they want, and they might not want (or have the space) to work from home but might do so from a rented desk that's close to their home. Maybe some companies will provide this as part of the deal - a desk space in a location of your choosing. We are yet to see what patterns emerge.


----------



## Jimbeau (Jul 15, 2021)

teuchter said:


> It's quite possible there will be an increased demand for rented desk space in more residential areas as opposed to city centre locations. People who have contracts where they go into a central office occasionally but otherwise can work from where they want, and they might not want (or have the space) to work from home but might do so from a rented desk that's close to their home. Maybe some companies will provide this as part of the deal - a desk space in a location of your choosing. We are yet to see what patterns emerge.


This is a distinct possibility, in my view. Just the other day I was at a co-working space in Camberwell with a small organisation that had given up a dedicated office in Clerkenwell. The founders live out this way and decided a Central London office was no longer worth it. 

It's been discussed at my place too - we're a few dozen people in one of those weird bits of Zone 1 that still manages to be 15 minutes' walk from the closest tube station. My colleagues live in Zone 2 and beyond or travel in by rail from well outside London, with another half hour by bus or tube from the station to the office. We have lots of young people in flat-shares who want for a decent place to work and who thrive on social contact, and the nature of our work is such that being together for collaborative sessions is important, but our clients are so far-flung that moving our base a few miles would have negligible impact. There are no longer enough coffee shops to sustain a world with a tenfold increase in laptop warriors.

I'm currently going in to Central London about once a week and am surprised how quiet many of the backstreets are still. I've spent more weekday lunchtimes in Brixton in the past 18 months than the previous 20 years, and many of my neighbours are the same. Some days it has felt busier than ever.


----------



## Rushy (Jul 15, 2021)

Jimbeau said:


> This is a distinct possibility, in my view. Just the other day I was at a co-working space in Camberwell with a small organisation that had given up a dedicated office in Clerkenwell. The founders live out this way and decided a Central London office was no longer worth it.
> 
> It's been discussed at my place too - we're a few dozen people in one of those weird bits of Zone 1 that still manages to be 15 minutes' walk from the closest tube station. My colleagues live in Zone 2 and beyond or travel in by rail from well outside London, with another half hour by bus or tube from the station to the office. We have lots of young people in flat-shares who want for a decent place to work and who thrive on social contact, and the nature of our work is such that being together for collaborative sessions is important, but our clients are so far-flung that moving our base a few miles would have negligible impact. There are no longer enough coffee shops to sustain a world with a tenfold increase in laptop warriors.
> 
> I'm currently going in to Central London about once a week and am surprised how quiet many of the backstreets are still. I've spent more weekday lunchtimes in Brixton in the past 18 months than the previous 20 years, and many of my neighbours are the same. Some days it has felt busier than ever.


My partner's firm had offices of Bond Street with desk space for about 300 I think. They let most of the space go last summer and now have desk space for about one tenth of that plus some meeting rooms. So there is no going back - and they recently confirmed that is their intention. They are starting to look at smaller less central hubs, I believe. 

One of the things that will need real thought with increased WFH is starting new trainees and grads.


----------



## northeast (Jul 25, 2021)

This popped up on a news feed of mine... what caught my eye was the owners of the images, seems Squire and Partners are working on some mighty big homes








						Chinese billionaire given green light to build £500million central London palace
					

Cheung Chung-kiu will convert 2–8a Rutland Gate in Knightsbridge into a vast 5,782 sq metre mansion, extending the property’s basement and adding a glazed dome “halo” roof.  Property experts have said it could become Britain’s most expensive private home,  worth some £500million when  work is...




					uk.news.yahoo.com


----------



## editor (Jul 25, 2021)

northeast said:


> This popped up on a news feed of mine... what caught my eye was the owners of the images, seems Squire and Partners are working on some mighty big homes
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They are architects to the super rich and the elite and for all their blather about community, they give precious little back to Brixton (unless there's some PR in it for them).

Look how they made sure they were fully credited for Pure Vinyl





						Pure Vinyl • Architecture • Squire and Partners
					






					squireandpartners.com


----------



## BakeRecords (Oct 30, 2021)

I think it would be fair to say neighbours haven't yet been disturbed by 'Bellefields' since its opening (mostly because it is always dead, and in fairness, the soundproofing appears to be pretty effective). 

That could be about to change with Henry Squire's application for outside seating on Stockwell Ave. They already have a courtyard out the back and very, very few customers, but apparently they need more outside space. I will be opposing this, as I really don't relish the prospect of braying hordes (like those outside the god awful Canova Hall) metres from my front window - any tips on how to get this rejected would be much appreciated.


----------



## ricbake (Oct 30, 2021)

Comment logged

This major cycle route, is a partially pedestrianised cul-de-sac. It is already obstructed at it's narrowest point outside Canova Hall by their inconsiderately place tables;  by an array of A boards and table outside "Brixton Mall". Also by the illegally parked cars of people working in Brixton Mall. There are numerous deliveries and collections to Blue Star House, Nandos Restaurant, the Fitness First Gym, Upstairs at the Department Store, Bellefields Restaurant, Canova Hall, Brixton Mall etc. These involve numerous vehicle movement which invariably either reverse into or out of the cul-de-sac very rarely with any supervision.
Space needs to be left for vehicle to turn into and drive out of the car park to Blue Star House, restrictions to the width of the roadway here would be unacceptable. The traffic needs some safe management on Stockwell Road and drivers using the space need to understand properly their duty of care when reversing. The parking and other street obstructions should be better policed before further pavement obstructions and street clutter are allowed.


----------



## BakeRecords (Oct 30, 2021)

ricbake said:


> Comment logged
> 
> This major cycle route, is a partially pedestrianised cul-de-sac. It is already obstructed at it's narrowest point outside Canova Hall by their inconsiderately place tables;  by an array of A boards and table outside "Brixton Mall". Also by the illegally parked cars of people working in Brixton Mall. There are numerous deliveries and collections to Blue Star House, Nandos Restaurant, the Fitness First Gym, Upstairs at the Department Store, Bellefields Restaurant, Canova Hall, Brixton Mall etc. These involve numerous vehicle movement which invariably either reverse into or out of the cul-de-sac very rarely with any supervision.
> Space needs to be left for vehicle to turn into and drive out of the car park to Blue Star House, restrictions to the width of the roadway here would be unacceptable. The traffic needs some safe management on Stockwell Road and drivers using the space need to understand properly their duty of care when reversing. The parking and other street obstructions should be better policed before further pavement obstructions and street clutter are allowed.



Thanks ricbake. I've logged a similar comment. Remarkable that they think it's appropriate to have outside seating here until 0030 every night of the week. You're right about vehicular access on Stockwell Avenue... it has turned into an absolute farce over the past year or so.

If anyone wants to comment, you can do it here: Lambeth


----------



## nick (Nov 2, 2021)

Cheeky Buggers. 
I have no beef with Squire (through lack of knowledge on my behalf possibly), but there are cyclists whizzing along there at all hours so as to avoid the A24/Academy corner death trap. 
There are also peds mixing with the bikes, which requires an enhanced level of courtesy from all. Adding drinks to the mix won't end well
Effectively narrowing the passage can't be good (as well as as effectively privatising it) 

Comment made - (hope it was logged, that planning site has a dreadful UX, and doesn't seem to work in Safari for me).
Here is the link, for those that found it difficult to read from the photo above
Lambeth


----------



## Gramsci (Nov 3, 2021)

BakeRecords said:


> I think it would be fair to say neighbours haven't yet been disturbed by 'Bellefields' since its opening (mostly because it is always dead, and in fairness, the soundproofing appears to be pretty effective).
> 
> That could be about to change with Henry Squire's application for outside seating on Stockwell Ave. They already have a courtyard out the back and very, very few customers, but apparently they need more outside space. I will be opposing this, as I really don't relish the prospect of braying hordes (like those outside the god awful Canova Hall) metres from my front window - any tips on how to get this rejected would be much appreciated.



Just make sure you put comment in opposing this however brief in time. Doesn't matter if its two lines.

This means you will get invite to the relevant committee hearing. Where Cllrs decide. This can work.

Speaking at Committee makes a big difference. Cllrs do listen to those who bother to turn up and speak.

Main issue for you is what is termed residential amenity. The potential extra noise and disturbance to nearby residential housing. Affecting your quality of life.


----------



## BakeRecords (Nov 4, 2021)

Gramsci said:


> Just make sure you put comment in opposing this however brief in time. Doesn't matter if its two lines.
> 
> This means you will get invite to the relevant committee hearing. Where Cllrs decide. This can work.
> 
> ...


Thanks Gramsci! I submitted my comments, and I will certainly attend the committee hearing to make my feelings known.


----------



## DietCokeGirl (Nov 24, 2021)

Any update on the outcome of this?


----------



## BakeRecords (Nov 25, 2021)

DietCokeGirl said:


> Any update on the outcome of this?



Not yet - I've received nothing from Lambeth since submitting my comments on the application.


----------



## ricbake (Dec 3, 2021)

Oh but they do care about an area with significant socio-economic challenges....

Coco Cripps
Gabriella Lafor


----------



## editor (Dec 20, 2021)

ricbake said:


> Oh but they do care about an area with significant socio-economic challenges....
> 
> Coco Cripps
> Gabriella Lafor



How does Squire and his rich chums benefit the people in the local estates in any way at all? They're not even allowed into his exclusive, vetted members' only rooftop bar.


----------



## Rushy (Dec 20, 2021)

Another  architect - Boon Brown - has just opened up in Bernay's Grove in the recently renovated Tunstall Hall (until recently a store room for and behind Morleys). Not quite as large - about 40 people. Offices look quite cool.


----------



## editor (Dec 20, 2021)

Rushy said:


> Another  architect - Boon Brown - has just opened up in Bernay's Grove in the recently renovated Tunstall Hall (until recently a store room for and behind Morleys). Not quite as large - about 40 people. Offices look quite cool.


And as diverse as you might expect


----------



## Jimbeau (Dec 20, 2021)

editor said:


> And as diverse as you might expect
> 
> View attachment 302001


----------



## editor (Dec 20, 2021)

Jimbeau said:


> View attachment 302021



I just screen grabbed the first screen I saw, but it doesn't really get much better when you scroll down to those with the more junior jobs, does it?

Mind you, it's no worse than Squire;






						People • Practice • Squire and Partners
					






					squireandpartners.com


----------



## Jimbeau (Dec 20, 2021)

editor said:


> I just screen grabbed the first screen I saw, but it doesn't really get much better when you scroll down to those with the more junior jobs, does it?
> 
> Mind you, it's no worse than Squire;
> 
> ...



I guess it depends on what diversity means and what a good level of it looks like.

If we’re restricting it to observable things like age, gender and ethnicity (and not unobservable things like faith, sexual identity, disability, social background, etc), then looking at the whole group is important.

But yes, architecture is a profession where senior grades are largely older white males.

E2A. I've been pondering this last bit overnight (partly because currently I'm involved in a People and Culture review for my own employer). 

Squires are too small to have done a Gender Pay Gap report - which is only required for companies with more than 250 staff, but looking at their gender representation in professional roles alone:

Partners are 0% female
Directors are 37.5% female
Associate Directors are 45% female
Associates are 47.5% female
Architects are 57.1% female

I think this augurs well for the future. Lots of companies are led by people who are 30 years into their careers. A decade hence I think things will begin to look quite different.


----------



## urbanspaceman (Dec 21, 2021)

Is the implication here that Boon Brown is biased against women and people of colour ? I don't think that's correct. Most architects are white men, and thus, not surprisingly, Boon Brown's staffing reflects the demographics of the profession. It appears that architecture is becoming more diverse, and RIBA is aware of the imbalances; apparently a better mix is now being realised amongst younger architects. But you can't simply magic diverse senior architects into existence - it time-dependent process (that is already under way).









						Grounds for optimism in improving profession’s diversity
					

There are signs of progress towards a better balance of gender, ethnicity and socio-economic backgrounds




					www.ribaj.com


----------



## urbanspaceman (Dec 21, 2021)

And something else I just noticed, Boon Brown's HQ is in Yeovil and the Brixton office is an offshoot. Of the 38 employees who are on LinkedIN,10 are in London, and rest in the vicinity of Yeovil. So it's not surprising that the staff is largely white, since Yeovil is hardly a hot bed of diversity.


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 21, 2021)

editor said:


> And as diverse as you might expect
> 
> View attachment 302001


Boon Brown are based in Yeovil and Yeovil isn't a very diverse place. Even for Somerset it's pretty insular


----------



## Jimbeau (Dec 21, 2021)

urbanspaceman said:


> Is the implication here that Boon Brown is biased against women and people of colour ? I don't think that's correct. Most architects are white men, and thus, not surprisingly, Boon Brown's staffing reflects the demographics of the profession. It appears that architecture is becoming more diverse, and RIBA is aware of the imbalances; apparently a better mix is now being realised amongst younger architects. But you can't simply magic diverse senior architects into existence - it time-dependent process (that is already under way).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good post. I updated my previous on similar lines while you were posting this.


----------



## editor (Dec 21, 2021)

It's just another depressing step of Brixton turning into a more homogenous and more divided place. 

But at least Boon Brown don't seem to be under the illusion that they're somehow a great thing to happen to the local community. They're just moving into a trendy, Clapham-like area and they have enough money to pay for the relatively prestigious office space.


----------



## urbanspaceman (Dec 21, 2021)

homogenous and divided - that's a neat trick
"relatively prestigious office space" - a furniture warehouse on a back street in an inner London suburb


----------



## Tron Cruise (Dec 21, 2021)

Of the 10 or so architects I’ve met 100% of them were utter wankers.


----------



## editor (Dec 21, 2021)

urbanspaceman said:


> homogenous and divided - that's a neat trick
> "relatively prestigious office space" - a furniture warehouse on a back street in an inner London suburb


Sorry, are you suggesting that the arrival of Squires and Boon Brown have made Brixton a more diverse and inclusive space?

And talking of neat tricks, you describing an expensively refurbished former large Victorian hall in a massively trendy part of the capital (sorry, 'inner London suburb')  as a 'furniture warehouse on a back street' is truly priceless.


----------



## CH1 (Dec 28, 2021)

editor said:


> Sorry, are you suggesting that the arrival of Squires and Boon Brown have made Brixton a more diverse and inclusive space?
> 
> And talking of neat tricks, you describing an expensively refurbished former large Victorian hall in a massively trendy part of the capital (sorry, 'inner London suburb')  as a 'furniture warehouse on a back street' is truly priceless.
> 
> View attachment 302124


I think this continuous griping about architects moving to Brixton is missing the point.
Shouldn't you be demanding that these old brick buildings should be flattened and replaced with space-age zero carbon monstrosities?
The way things are going those of us living in Victorian houses will have to think along those lines - the gas bill will shortly be more than half the old age pension!


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2022)

I've just asked them this:



> I note that you have been involved with multiple large projects in Russia. Do you have any ongoing projects in Russia and if so, will you be suspending them -and breaking links with Russian partners -  in light of what's happening in Ukraine?








						Red Side II • Architecture • Squire and Partners
					






					squireandpartners.com
				








						One Trinity Place • Architecture • Squire and Partners
					

Squire and Partners won a competition to design a residential quarter at Trinity Place, a landmark development in the Petrogradsky district on the banks of the Malaya Nevka River in central St. Petersburg, Russia.




					squireandpartners.com


----------



## CH1 (Mar 30, 2022)

editor said:


> I've just asked them this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I always said that the architecture of the Elephant and Castle was worthy of a totalitarian.


----------



## cuppa tee (Jun 8, 2022)

Upcoming event at the Department Store. featuring input from local community  including BID, Brixton project , and Brixton village, ticket includes a town centre walk and networking sesh









						On Location - Brixton
					

This NLA On Location conference presents the community led regeneration of Brixton and will hear updates from Lambeth Council on the new emerging schemes being




					nla.london


----------



## editor (Jun 8, 2022)

cuppa tee said:


> Upcoming event at the Department Store. featuring input from local community  including BID, Brixton project , and Brixton village, ticket includes a town centre walk and networking sesh
> 
> 
> 
> ...


"The vibrancy and history of Brixton is unquestionable."

Oh fuck off.

Oh, and look: the Brixton Project are there.


----------



## cuppa tee (Jun 8, 2022)

editor said:


> "The vibrancy and history of Brixton is unquestionable."
> 
> Oh fuck off.
> 
> Oh, and look: the Brixton Project are there.




...this is not a world I am part of so these things look very elitist.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 8, 2022)

cuppa tee said:


> Upcoming event at the Department Store. featuring input from local community  including BID, Brixton project , and Brixton village, ticket includes a town centre walk and networking sesh
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Brixton’s regeneration has in the past been contested but recently has been spotlighted for its community driven focus on development. Lambeth council has been a driving force in the collective led regeneration and the area has seen an increased investment coming through for schemes.



I'm a bit perplexed at this statement.

Lambeth the driving force for collective led regeneration?

Stop the Tower might disagree.

I was ( and am ) involved in the Rec. Community action stopped Council putting into planning docs that it be replaced. Getting it listed was done with opposition from the Council. Hardly signifies the Council as being a driving force for the community. The opposite imo. 

I'm curious how the Council are going to present themselves as leaders in "collective led regeneration"


----------



## CH1 (Jun 9, 2022)

cuppa tee said:


> Upcoming event at the Department Store. featuring input from local community  including BID, Brixton project , and Brixton village, ticket includes a town centre walk and networking sesh
> 
> 
> 
> ...


DietCokeGirl  was musing on Binki Taylor's thoughts.
They can attend this and ask a direct question - if they have the requisite £158.40 (including VAT)


----------



## cuppa tee (Jun 9, 2022)

CH1 said:


> DietCokeGirl  was musing on Binki Taylor's thoughts.
> They can attend this and ask a direct question - if they have the requisite £158.40 (including VAT)



_“ We reserve a number of free tickets for local community organisations. Please contact morgan.lewis@nla.london if you would like to enquire about these spaces “_

maybe worth a try if anyone here is a member of such a group.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jun 9, 2022)

editor said:


> How does Squire and his rich chums benefit the people in the local estates in any way at all? They're not even allowed into his exclusive, vetted members' only rooftop bar.



By offering them "hyperlocal working", it would appear. Which comes close to Priti Patel recently describing the UK´s "relationship" with Rwanda as "world-beating" in terms of pure, meaningless bullshit.


----------



## Tron Cruise (Aug 12, 2022)

Michael Squire sucking his own dick again:






						The London Society - Journal 2022 | Community Connections
					

The London Society - Journal 2022 | Community Connections




					www.londonsociety.org.uk


----------



## CH1 (Aug 12, 2022)

Tron Cruise said:


> Michael Squire sucking his own dick again:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


as one of Brixton's largest employers - are there facts here, or is this a Truss-like prophetic pronouncement?


----------



## editor (Aug 12, 2022)

Tron Cruise said:


> Michael Squire sucking his own dick again:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> _n this latest piece Michael Squire explains how Squire & Partners' reimagining of a former department store in Brixton has had far-reaching effects on the local creative, business and residential communities_



He actually believes this stinking bullshit? Unless by 'far-reaching effects' he means the part his rich company has done in pushing up rents.
They charge for people to use that 'community space' in their lavish offices, and of course the private members' only club upstairs remains for the elite.


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 13, 2022)

Tron Cruise said:


> Michael Squire sucking his own dick again:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How can people churn out stuff like this with a straight face? Seriously!


----------



## editor (Nov 15, 2022)

So I finally got to visit the exclusive "stunning rooftop dining space, lounge, bar and terrace" offering a "sophisticated level of personal service in a generous uncrowded space," and it's awfully swanky.

I absolutely hate places like this, but is anyone has £240 to spare and fancies spending £7.50 on a Brixton Brewery beer made a mile away, here's how to apply:



> If you would like to apply please provide information which demonstrates your ability to make a positive contribution to the Upstairs community. We are looking for a broad and varied membership database and wish to fill our space with people who will respect other members, our venue and our staff.








						Membership — Upstairs
					






					upstairsbrixton.com


----------



## CH1 (Nov 16, 2022)

editor said:


> So I finally got to visit the exclusive "stunning rooftop dining space, lounge, bar and terrace" offering a "sophisticated level of personal service in a generous uncrowded space," and it's awfully swanky.
> 
> I absolutely hate places like this, but is anyone has £240 to spare and fancies spending £7.50 on a Brixton Brewery beer made a mile away, here's how to apply:
> 
> ...


I bet they don't offer gropings by Tory MPs like the Carlton Club do.
Itys all very well having posh totty - but where is their DANGER?


----------



## editor (Nov 16, 2022)

Luxury!









						In photos: Brixton Chamber Orchestra perform at the exclusive Upstairs at the Department Store rooftop bar, Mon 14th Nov
					

Thanks to an invite from our friends in the Brixton Chamber Orchestra, we were finally afforded a look at the private rooftop bar at The Department Store in Brixton.



					www.brixtonbuzz.com


----------



## cuppa tee (Nov 16, 2022)

editor said:


> So I finally got to visit the exclusive "stunning rooftop dining space, lounge, bar and terrace" offering a "sophisticated level of personal service in a generous uncrowded space," and it's awfully swanky.
> 
> I absolutely hate places like this, but is anyone has £240 to spare and fancies spending £7.50 on a Brixton Brewery beer made a mile away, here's how to apply:
> 
> ...



edit....we must have posted at the same time, thanks for up date


----------

