Brady's, Brixton (Railway Hotel): history, chat and plans

[editor]

Thanks! Can't really help, but just wanted to say that this is exactly what is needed. Bad publicity for the council never hurt.

And once the story is up, I'l be happy to run it on the urban75 blog/BrixtonBuzz site etc., and hopefully we can collectively whip up some sort of unified campaign and get people involved/signing petitions/pressurising the council etc.

 

[publican]

The planning for the flats seems to have gone through now. The developer has already done quite a bit of work. The ground floor will almost certainly be let, just not as a bar, pub, or music venue as this wouldn't work with the new residents. As it is in such a prime location it is likely to be a restaurant.

 

[editor]

Fuck. Nice one Lambeth. Thanks for listening.

Oh, and good luck to the new residents living with the house-shaking rumble of the trains going overhead. Better nail down your crockery.

 

[Rushy]

Are you sure? Still says 'pending decision'.

 

[Gramsci]

Are you sure? Still says 'pending decision'.

I am "tracking" the application. Just logged into the planning database and it still says "pending decision".

You must have done the same Rushy.

 

[publican]

The planners have decided to approve the application. Because of 'devolved powers' they can decide the application within the department (larger developments need to be decided by a committee).
They have presumably told the developer that they are approving it. The only delay is apparently that they are waiting for a parking permit application which is with the legal department.
I guess if they change their minds now, having told the developer that they have approved it, they might be vulnerable to legal action.
CAMRA felt the best way to object to the loss of the pub was that Lambeth hadn't demonstrated that the pub was not viable as a pub (as discussed in previous posts) or may not have been sold for the best price to the developer: 'Section 123 of the 1979 Local Government Act which requires local authorities to sell their assets at the best achievable price in the open market unless there are compelling reasons why not.'
Unfortunately CAMRA also feel that we came to this too late. If we had tackled it when the planning application was first made things could have been different.
CAMRA thought there was a chance - 'the Planning Superior might yet be persuaded to escalate the final decision on the application to elected representatives, given that planning officers’ actions have not followed applicable planning policies and that reputational damage could well result now that people know what has been going on.'
But I guess the planners would have to balance this against possible legal action from the developer. They probably feel that people will be happy with a restaurant and will not miss the pub/music venue as it has been closed for so long.
The developer is certainly proceeding as if he is definitely getting planning for the flats above.

 

[Rushy]

I guess if they change their minds now, having told the developer that they have approved it, they might be vulnerable to legal action.

Im pretty certain that this is incorrect.

 

[publican]

Yes, I do not know if they might face legal issues with the developer if they don't go ahead with the planning, sorry if this sounded like fact, just thinking out loud.

Spoke to one of the agents yesterday and they said that there might be a delay on the planning for the flats, so perhaps the pressure on the planning department from the emails sent has made a difference. Perhaps they have decided to push the decision up to a committee - once again, just thinking out loud.

 

[teuchter]

Publican, what is it that leads you to believe the planning has gone through already?

 

[publican]

Just before Christmas I spoke to the planning officer, he told me that they they had decided to approve planning for the flats and were just waiting for a parking permit from the legal department. He told me that until just before Christmas they had had no objections. Because of 'devolved powers' they can decide the application within the planning dept.
I spoke to CAMRA who advised that the planners might still push the final decision up to a committee if they thought it was contentious, or if it might lead to 'reputational damage' because they had not followed their policy of establishing wether the pub was viable.
When I went to the site I saw that the developer has already done quite a bit of building work, putting in new stairs up to first floor and a new ceiling separating ground from first floor, it is a complete shell, with most things ripped out and new steels inserted to support the new flats.

 

[LambethWeeknder]

Hello all, am going to run a story on this in the next Lambeth Weekender (out Feb 8) because the Brixton Community Trust and Brixton Society are going to the local gov Ombudsman about how the council have behaved with regards to Brady's and the wider regeneration of Electric Avenue. The gist of what they are saying is that the council disregarded the community in favour of making money when they sold Brady's, and that's what they are still doing in that bit of Brixton.
Obviously the sale happened a year ago, but they are asking for compensation for the Princes Trust and others who worked up the proposal for a community centre there, and they would also like for the building to now become a pub rather than anything else.
I am meeting members of the BCT and Brixton Society at Cafe Max, opposite Brixton Rec, to do a photo for the paper on Thurs Jan 24 at 10am - anybody who wants to come and show support and be in the picture is very welcome.
A council spokesperson said planning permission is not needed to change A4 to A1/A2/A3 - but the council did say this:

The property is a locally listed building and is in a conservation area, which means that its design and appearance is protected via policies 46 and 47 of the UDP and policy S9 of the Core Strategy. It sits within the Brixton Major Centre Primary shopping area where we would seek to protect A class uses (retail, financial & professional services and food & drink) or D class (community facilities or leisure) via policy 4 of the UDP and S3 of the Core Strategy. Although this property has not been in active use for a number of years, it is considered that the lawful use of the property is as an A4 unit, therefore policy 27 of the UDP would also apply which resists the loss of public houses to a non A-class use.)

 

[editor]

Great work!

 

[editor]

Posted on BrixtonBuzz too:
http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2013/01/...g-brixton-bradys-pub-as-a-community-resource/

 

[Brixton Hatter]

Motman just wanted to draw your attention to this thread

 

[publican]

I have contacted CAMRA south west London to ask them to put the word out about the Lambeth Weekender meet and photo.

 

[editor]

Did anyone get down to the photo op today? I was all set to go but I'm ruddy well stuck indoors waiting for my knackered PC to be picked up and a new - hopefully working - one to be delivered.

 

[Paul Hill]

The outline of the Bradys saga is this:

Building derelict. Community bid for community centre. Benefits to community and Lambeth since activities will create self-supporting people thus lightening burden on Lambeth Social Services.

Went through all the hoops Lambeth imposed. Will pay valuer's estimate of building's worth. Four years' work and £80k public money spent.

Despite promises, Lambeth sold building to offshore property speculator.

A year later Lambeth applies for charity grant to pay back the purchase price to property speculator; in effect giving him the building, and, what is more, Lambeth claims the money on the grounds that it has talked to the community about its plans and the community just loves the idea.

In other words: That the very community which fought so hard for for four years to buy the building has now given its blessing to Lambeth giving away the building to an off-shore property speculator

 

[el-ahrairah]

it's a nonsense isn't it.

 

[editor]

...and, what is more, Lambeth claims the money on the grounds that it has talked to the community about its plans and the community just loves the idea.

I must have somehow missed that.

 

[Rushy]

A year later Lambeth applies for charity grant to pay back the purchase price to property speculator; in effect giving him the building, and, what is more, Lambeth claims the money on the grounds that it has talked to the community about its plans and the community just loves th

Never heard about this. Any more INFO?

what price did the valuer put on it?

 

[editor]

This whole thing stinks.

 

[TruXta]

It's tempting to ask if there are grounds to mount a legal challenge against the council.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

It's tempting to ask if there are grounds to mount a legal challenge against the council.

Indeed. This:

A year later Lambeth applies for charity grant to pay back the purchase price to property speculator; in effect giving him the building,

sounds just like something that might happen if there was some pretty blatant corruption going on. If it did happen as described of course.

 

[Winot]

I'm sure a council as competent as Lambeth would have checked to make sure this didn't fall foul of anti-money laundering rules.

 

[TruXta]

Aha! HAHA! HHHHHHAHAHAHAHAH!

 

[leanderman]

The outline of the Bradys saga is this:

Building derelict. Community bid for community centre. Benefits to community and Lambeth since activities will create self-supporting people thus lightening burden on Lambeth Social Services.

Went through all the hoops Lambeth imposed. Will pay valuer's estimate of building's worth. Four years' work and £80k public money spent.

Despite promises, Lambeth sold building to offshore property speculator.

A year later Lambeth applies for charity grant to pay back the purchase price to property speculator; in effect giving him the building, and, what is more, Lambeth claims the money on the grounds that it has talked to the community about its plans and the community just loves the idea.

In other words: That the very community which fought so hard for for four years to buy the building has now given its blessing to Lambeth giving away the building to an off-shore property speculator

Seriously? It was given away? That would be incompetent, or criminal.

Is it not a matter for some kind of ombudsman - or the courts, or something?

 

[editor]

As far as I know, Paul Hill is taking the matter up with the ombudsman. I wish his every success.

 

[Brixton Hatter]

The outline of the Bradys saga is this:

Building derelict. Community bid for community centre. Benefits to community and Lambeth since activities will create self-supporting people thus lightening burden on Lambeth Social Services.

Went through all the hoops Lambeth imposed. Will pay valuer's estimate of building's worth. Four years' work and £80k public money spent.

Despite promises, Lambeth sold building to offshore property speculator.

A year later Lambeth applies for charity grant to pay back the purchase price to property speculator; in effect giving him the building, and, what is more, Lambeth claims the money on the grounds that it has talked to the community about its plans and the community just loves the idea.

In other words: That the very community which fought so hard for for four years to buy the building has now given its blessing to Lambeth giving away the building to an off-shore property speculator

Thanks for the info Paul. I didn't know about the grant application - a really important bit of info.

welcome to Urban75 by the way

And do come back here if you need help/support re: Bradys....

 

[Giles]

How much was it actually sold for?

Giles..

 

[Brixton Hatter]

How much was it actually sold for?

Giles..

about £800,000 iirc.