Shoreditchification

JoeV

Why are rent regulations a stupid concept? Some sort or regulation would make living in this city much less stressful and provide for some stability in people's lives. Current law is skewed totally in favour of landlords. Tenants have almost no rights: eviction without cause, unlimited rent hikes, no decent standards in housing. 

yagamuffin

The problems with rent controls are how you set them. Inflation and interest rates change all the time. What is a fair rent today is unfair for one side or the other tomorrow.<div><br></div>

JoeV

Yes but there's more to rent regulations than just the setting the price of the rent, which can be reviewed yearly, or every other year and adjusted. Germany and France seem to have managed it. New York used to, but it's been essentially dismantled now.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

dion

Yahamuffin. For clarity I was talking about lowish commercial rents. Not about residential which are clearly extortionate!

NorthNineteen

You can quite clearly see which houses were built for the middles classes and which were built for the lower-middle classes (i.e. clerks etc.).  Much of the lower quality stuff was demolished (to make way for the various estates in the area) but the clientale the builders of Fonthill Road was very different to that being aimed on Tollington Park, Ferme Park Road etc.<br><br>Many of the speculative builds heading up towards Hornsey Vale were built with the intention of being single family homes (including space for servants) but the market wasn't there so even as they were being built they were already being converted into flats or even boarding houses.<br>

Papa

Much of Stroud Green was built for the middle-classes - be they upper or lower. <br><br>Difference was back then, they got the whole house. <br><br>Nowadays, they count themselves lucky to have two floors and most can only afford one.<br><br>The discussion of the root of the word begs the question of whether we are suffering  from gentrifixation.<br>

kreuzkav

Good one Papa L.  It's true that most of the houses were built for the upper middle classes around Stroud Green.  It's odd it was the same in Hackney.  Most of Hackney only became poor around the 1930s I think.  I still think Hackney and this area are undergoing a process of gentrification.  It's without a doubt. For good or bad is another debate. <div><br></div><div>Rent controls are not set in stone as Joe said.  They are often inflation-linked and can vary due to other factors. They are a way to take the heat out of rocketing rents.  A rent control department can oversee them.</div>

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

miss annie

I've spent the day working in Richmond. It smells of money, the houses are lovely and everyone has Botox and shiny hair. And there are deer, and Jerry Hall. It is, and as far as I can tell always has been, gentrified. Believe me, Stroud Green has a long way to go before holding a candle to a properly posh place.

Sutent

Richmond has the least poverty compared to any other part of London. 

miss annie

You can tell!

Idoru

Does Richmond count as gentrified though? I thought it had always been a bit posh. I used to live near there. It was nice - like being back in Cambridge.

NorthNineteen

Richmond isn't gentrifying, its always been wealthy.  My point about Stroud Green is that while much of it is very middle class I don't feel the retail offering has always fully represented that - speaking to family members who lived in the area through the 80s and 90s they tended to go to Crouch End/Angel rather than SGR. Now I know if they were still here they'd go to SGR much more. I personally think that SGR has changed a lot in the 5 years I've been here.  Clearly it has a long way to go before being like Richmond, Highgate, Hampstead etc (in fact I think it's safe to say it will never get there).  But if you'd asked me 3 years ago whether we'd have an "excellent" coffee ('hipster') shop, 2 delis, places like Rub I would have thought not. I know it's small changes but I feel the next 3 years will see much more independent shops/restaurants opening which specifically cater for a higher wealth population that the more established SGR businesses - just hopefully the big chains don't pick up on it.

miss annie

They already have - Tesco, Sainsburys x2 (both poor), Costa, Starbucks (imminent). They are all massive chains.

dion

Those chains are only here because they have run out other places to go, not because the area has plenty of money I don't think the sainsburys on black stock road or the tesco on hornsey road or seven sisters (twice) or the costa in the arena retail park are there because of higher wealth. Also costa and Starbucks franchise a lot meaning normally that it is a local businessman who is taking the risk And I think our tescos has been here since the 80s

miss annie

On the way back to Richmond. I thought about this overnight and have decided that the shops that signify a gentrified area are India Jane, Petit Bateau and Farrow & Ball (Little Greene is better). They are a sign that the real money has arrived. Rental tenants don't do F&B.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Papa

The Costa and Starbucks are because of the station. It's when they open on Stroud Green Road proper we need to worry.<br><br>We probably also need to worry when that awful Tesco suddenly improves and consistently manages to have food, staff and open tills.<br><br>One of the keys to having a good high street is shops not being killed off by high rents and business rates - that allows independents to open, flourish and stay open.<br><br>How rich the place is, isn't quite so important. For  example, my family home is just outside Harpenden. It is one of the most expensive places to live in terms of house prices in the country and is getting worse. Rampant house price inflation there is turning it into a rich ghetto and slowly squeezing people out. It's always been pricey, but the character has really changed in the last five years or so. <br><br>The high street is nothing to write home about though. Packed with charity shops and independent shops etc struggle not get squeezed out by very high costs. It was, in fact, much better when I was growing up and the town wasn't so full of very rich people.<br>

Mirandola

Things I have learnt:<div><br></div><div>Stroud Green is gentrified, is not gentrified, is gentrifying, will never gentrify.</div><div>Gentrification is good/bad/neutral.</div><div>Richmond is the only area in London to be properly gentrified.</div><div>Richmond hasn't gentrified, it's always been posh.</div><div>Starbucks is a sign of gentrification.</div><div>Starbucks isn't a sign of gentrification.</div><div><br></div><div>Feeling sorry for lexicographers right now. </div>

JoeV

<font face="Georgia">The problem is that house prices and rents skew the perspective and definition of what is 'wealthy'. This exact discussion - <span style="line-height: 18.200000762939453px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> is gentrified, is not gentrified, is gentrifying -- </span>is being held on the local website back in my old neighbourhood in New York.</font><div><font face="Georgia"><br></font></div><div><font face="Georgia">Because house prices rents have shot up dramatically in the past 5 years and their are loads of new restaraunts and bars and development in general, the perspective is that the area is now 'wealthy' when in fact data shows that average incomes are, well, very average to below average.</font></div><div><font face="Georgia"><br></font></div><div><font face="Georgia">To me, the people who are buying are buying as investments to rent out, not homes. The people who are renting are doubling and tripling up, and spending a higher percentage of their incomes on rent.</font></div><div><font face="Georgia"><br></font></div><div><font face="Georgia">The result: The area is on one level changing, while at the same time on another level remaining the same.</font></div><div><font face="Georgia"><br></font></div><div><font face="Georgia">Also, what I have learnt: </font></div><div><font face="Georgia">Changes that people like are 'good' while changes people don't like aren't 'bad' instead it's gentrification.</font></div>

ChangN4N6

As someone said, the housing stock in non private hands will always put a brake on SG gentrification . So it ain't gonna get like Hampstead or Upper St. I don't mind that , but wish the grot eg Post Office eyesore was erased. Richmond is genteel not gentrified. I hate Starbucks it is not a sign of improvement. The station area is promising but if the new mall is like Wood Green we are doomed. There really should be a steering group on all this, surprised Cllrs so backward on it. The 3 council problem I suppose - a curse. Chang

andy

@joev  - williamsboard? or further out?

JoeV

@andy - neither but Williamsburg is definitely fits the criteria for my definition of gentrification - which has spilled over into Greenpoint and Bushwick. 

andy

Someone pointed out williamsboard to me a long time ago as a potential "twin town" for sg.org. I think it's dead now.

dion

I know. It died when slabber stopped trolling

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

ChangN4N6

A thing of beauty is a joy forever. Chang

dion

Definitely not. Slabber was witty and funny in his mocking of us. Not just annoying