Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
PropertyMania

Gentrification Fails / degentrification

Recommended Posts

2005: "The flat is ex-council and not very nice, but this is a really up and coming area. By 2015 it will be like Notting Hill"

OK, so everywhere in London is vastly more expensive than in 2005, but which areas were (relatively) supposed to do much better and just didn't - or even de-gentrified? One place that springs to mind is Holloway - it always seems to be on the cusp of gentrification (Angel is nearby, good transport etc) but remains a perma-dump. And where do you think the same mistake is being made today - i have friends buying in Walthomstow, New Cross etc who all expect gentrification. Surely they will be disappointed - vast majority of London is crap and always will be. 

PS I;m new and LOVE this forum - great voices here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walthamstow's a weird place - rough around the edges, but lots of middle class young professional families moving in because they're priced out elsewhere. 

Tbh, I think you're wrong about it de-gentrifying - its improving fast and that will continue - even if prices fall. Way to much development and improvement for that to change. Not saying that prices won't fall though! Personally, they appear static right now and dipping if anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing with 'gentrification' is that it actually takes an age to work right through an area in London before the majority are the new incomers e.g. Islington started in the mid 1980s and on the average street of terraces it took around 20 years to get to that level, while of course away from those streets of terraces you still have all the social housing that was always there.

The recent Walthamstow, New Cross, Lewisham, Forest Gate, etc. movers are mostly a product of being very quickly priced out during the (latest) London house price bubble, since 2012-13.  If you look at Land Registry sales there are maybe 1-2 houses per 50 in any given street in those areas that are being sold each year, so it will take a bloody long time before the areas really change, and that assumes no HPC in London.

Based on plenty of work colleague observations, it also seems to me that most of those 'new incomers' who seem to buy in those crap areas are non-Londoners who only came to London after graduating, are overly obsessed with tube zones, and have no idea about how proximity to tube stations has no bearing on whether an area is desirable in residential terms. 

So they then end up paying a small (now large!) fortune to buy next door to chavs and spend the next 10 years worrying about getting mugged on the way home from the station, while publicly pronouncing they like the area because its 'real' or 'edgy', and convincing themselves that they are in the 'new islington' because 1) the estate agent told them that and 2) their whole financial future relies on that fantasy.

Disclaimer: London born-and-bred, live in leafy SW London, old (and lucky) enough to have bought before the first bubble, on HPC to hope my kids can still buy in London before I die and they inherit (which is not how it should be...).        

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem for gentrification is that people expect it to engulf whole areas of London and that just doesn't happen.

Leaving aside the recently gentrified areas for a while, imagine taking someone from the north of England to Worlds End part of the Kings Road in Chelsea and walking with them to Clapham Junction station. I doubt they'd think that the parts of Chelsea and Battersea they had just walked through were particularly 'gentrified' even if the area as a whole is.

It is exactly the same in any of the decent parts of London I can think of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying Walthamstow is degentrifying at all, just that although London is wealthier as a whole (although much of it with dodgy foundations), for every area that improves there must be another that gets worse as lower income earners move there.

Interesting point about slow turnover,  konig. And stamp duty is much higher today than in the 1980s so turnover probably  even slower now. 

Also, yes the tube stop obsession is all wrong. Hampstead Village is proper psoh with terrible transport links, whereas Kings Cross was always a dump and only just starting to improve. The London OVerground is a clever trick  many fall for. It's just some new trains, stations repainted orange and a bit of increased frequency. Hopefully mass driverless cars as a service will be as cheap as a bus fare now and change the game completely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, PropertyMania said:

Not saying Walthamstow is degentrifying at all, just that although London is wealthier as a whole (although much of it with dodgy foundations), for every area that improves there must be another that gets worse as lower income earners move there.

 

The problem is that lower income earners are now being priced out of London as a whole and it is convenient for the Government to forget about them as over-leveraged higher earners move into their houses.

It can't continue forever, of course because the money (debt) will run out at some point, but it has defied gravity so far so could carry on a while longer yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i grew up in walthamstow in the 1980s and still visit family there regularly. believe me, there is no doubt it has changed for the better. anyone who says otherwise is either lying or has some seriously rose tinted glasses on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   68 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.