Poor poor

[Malachite]

Some developers are starting the same trend in NYC, not only having different doors for those who are getting the low rent units, but the amenities are being limited. Residents are being refused to use the gyms, rooftop pools etc, Poorer residents are even being denied the option to pay extra for such amenities. The developers are exploiting a loophole in the contract they have with the government. Developers are getting big time tax break on property and real estate taxes in exchange of securing X number of affordable units for city residents. Now the local government is scrambling to close the loophole. Some developers want to have their cake and eat it. Well there are strings attached to using public funds and developers should know better.

Damn, that's cray... There it looks it's done to get tax breaks for providing "affordable" housing. Without the tax break the "poor" units wouldn't exist. Does London do something similar? Is there a requirement to provide a certain percentage of lower cost units?

[Malachite]

Gentrification is real but this is an odd example. Here in Canada, you'll find government housing beside homes that retail for 250-300k easily. You'll also find construction for new condos in sketchy/ghetto places. However; you'd never see a building with a "rich" and "poor" side with separate entrances.

Interesting, how are the housing affordability in Vancouver?....Moi has been thinking about this for a while and it looks like I would certainly get my future house iN Van-city

[Cherine]

This is exactly why I hate London. Full of snobs. The only city in the U.K where you will find someone proud to call a closet a home just because it's in the "right" area. Never mind that you can't swing a cat in there let alone a couple of humans...but as long as it's in Kensington, Chelsea, Wimbledon etc..i have the right to stick my san right up in the air and look down upon all you poor people.

[thehappyone]

Although this article isn't about social housing, they shouldn't have social housing in rich areas in the first place. I don't understand how some qaxootis from Somalia, Afghanistan who arrived couple years ago is given a flat in chelsea, Kensington, the uk's most desireable locations at taxpayers expense. The government should sell these plot of lands to UAE royals for billions and build 50x as much housing for asylum seekers in Stoke or Wigan.

[sovlsworn]

Who would feel flattered by using the rich door?

Same people who get coloured rims and own designer umbrellas.

[Malachite]

Although this article isn't about social housing, they shouldn't have social housing in rich areas in the first place. I don't understand how some qaxootis from Somalia, Afghanistan who arrived couple years ago is given a flat in chelsea, Kensington, the uk's most desireable locations at taxpayers expense. The government should sell these plot of lands to UAE royals for billions and build 50x as much housing for asylum seekers in Stoke or Wigan.

true, The real issue is the removal of affordable housing to make way for luxury flats and the cynical, token way in which affordable housing is integrated into it in a way that tries to hide it away from their real residents

If architectural innovations are going to make a wealth based version of the City, why don't they simply build high rise accommodation for the wealthy and put the morlochs in underground flophouses hidden away in the basement? Bit too distasteful for champions of divisive inequality?

[Sophisticate]

Although this article isn't about social housing, they shouldn't have social housing in rich areas in the first place. I don't understand how some qaxootis from Somalia, Afghanistan who arrived couple years ago is given a flat in chelsea, Kensington, the uk's most desireable locations at taxpayers expense. The government should sell these plot of lands to UAE royals for billions and build 50x as much housing for asylum seekers in Stoke or Wigan.

true, The real issue is the removal of affordable housing to make way for luxury flats and the cynical, token way in which affordable housing is integrated into it in a way that tries to hide it away from their real residents

If architectural innovations are going to make a wealth based version of the City, why don't they simply build high rise accommodation for the wealthy and put the morlochs in underground flophouses hidden away in the basement? Bit too distasteful for champions of divisive inequality?

Sounds alot like glorified gentrification.

[Malachite]

This is exactly why I hate London. Full of snobs. The only city in the U.K where you will find someone proud to call a closet a home just because it's in the "right" area. Never mind that you can't swing a cat in there let alone a couple of humans...but as long as it's in Kensington, Chelsea, Wimbledon etc..i have the right to stick my san right up in the air and look down upon all you poor people.

They can buy where they want. You only have to look around to see that the rich tend to gather together in enclaves. I would assume London's better than most places for avoiding ghetto-ization

[Malachite]

Soph, a lot might be wrong with it, but developers, in turn are leveraging the rules to ensure they make as much money as they can. I can see where they're coming form

[Lillaahiya]

Gentrification is real but this is an odd example. Here in Canada, you'll find government housing beside homes that retail for 250-300k easily. You'll also find construction for new condos in sketchy/ghetto places. However; you'd never see a building with a "rich" and "poor" side with separate entrances.

Interesting, how are the housing affordability in Vancouver?....Moi has been thinking about this for a while and it looks like I would certainly get my future house iN Van-city

Ditoore oo faankuufar degan You are my #1.