Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Brixton Rec/central Brixton consultation and the 'Rec Quarter' proposals

boohoo said:
Is this pushing it further and further back in time cos we could? The displacement of communities by the war, The displacement of the poor by the arrival of the railways, the displacement of the poor by the introduction of major new roads such as Regent's street, the displacement of the poor by the enclosure of common land in the late 18th and early 19th century, etc....
Click to expand...

I would listen to you intently boohoo even if you were to argue links back to the flap of a butterfly's wings in the Congo or even the Big Bang. My history is not as good as yours so I am limited to referencing the living memory eviction of the same buildings by same council, a forced change without which the large scale squatting history of Brixton is unlikely to have ever happened.
 
Without going too far back in the time machine, I'd say that the decision to replace the originally proposed blocks of social housing with the private, expensive and 'securely gated' Brixton Square also had an noticeable impact on the area, as did the 'regeneration' of Brixton Village which now usually appears as a major feature in all glossy brochures for new upmarket private housing development in the area.
 
SpamMisery said:
It was sheltered accommodation right?
Click to expand...
If I recall correctly it was a not-for-profit social housing group (Places for People) who were originally going to build something like 150 flats.

Here's something from the u75 blog when Barratts were later wriggling out of their affordable housing commitments, like the scum they are.
Permission was originally given to Places for People to build the ‘Brixton Square’ on the basis of having socially rented housing in 2005. Barratt Homes argue that the economic situation has changed so much it is now not possible to fulfill that promise. However, we note that Barratt Homes bought the site in the knowledge of the Section 106 agreement only last year (well after the 2008 crisis) and that in Brixton specifically the housing market is not deflating.

http://www.urban75.org/blog/barratt...-housing-in-brixton-please-sign-the-petition/
Click to expand...
 
Which facts are wrongs?

I think you're right though, it is a bit negative. I do however consider the barrier to be a terrible terrible mistake
 
SpamMisery said:
Which facts are wrongs?

I think you're right though, it is a bit negative. I do however consider the barrier to be a terrible terrible mistake
Click to expand...
Most of it appears to have been repurposed from my article , but this is definitely incorrect:
The monolithic block was later split into three separate units to break up the pedestrian rat-runs that had perpetuated crime, although they have have limited effect on the drugs and other social problems.
Click to expand...
And this doesn't make sense:
Two inserts at either end of the barrier block are almost reminiscent of East German watch towers, less facilitating access for residents than watching over them
Click to expand...
Not sure what's so " noiseome" about them:
Two noisome corridors on either side lead to the residential estate behind the barrier, but are even less welcoming than the watchtowers.
Click to expand...
And it's actually a very pleasant place to live in.
It’s almost as if the council thinking, this is a bad building, so how can we make it worse, got their wish, and lavished millions less on making it a more pleasant place to live in
Click to expand...
Etc etc.
 
Fair enough although some of that is just personal opinion as opposed to factually incorrect. The bit about splitting the block into three sections sounded like so much of a building ballache, I couldn't believe it was true
 
editor said:
Most of it appears to have been repurposed from my article......And it's actually a very pleasant place to live in. Etc etc.
Click to expand...
As a pedant can I point out that the concierge entrances and stair structures clad with metal panels and screens were designed by Greenhill Jenner architects, at the time in Shakespeare Road now in Islington, and added later.
I think this was a Brixton Challenge scheme, contemporaneous with the concierge schemes on the New Loughborough, by the same architects.
I think these alterations date to the early 1990s.

The style of the article seems to be parodying Ian Nairn or Jonathan Meades. Thought provoking for those who are not connected with the area, but maybe ludicrous or insulting for people who are.

I think the suggestion that the "concrete overhangs" were designed to break up the noise from motorists is spurious.

It is unfortunate that with the internet, some of the factoids in articles like this could come to be accepted as truth when in fact they are speculation or prejudice.
 
CH1 said:
I think the suggestion that the "concrete overhangs" were designed to break up the noise from motorists is spurious.
Click to expand...
I have always assumed this is the case - the idea was that it would reflect noise back to the motorway and disrupt it?

The angle of the Seagram Ark in Hammersmith does that to some extent - unintentionally, mind you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CH1
Rushy said:
I have always assumed this is the case - the idea was that it would reflect noise back to the motorway and disrupt it?

The angle of the Seagram Ark in Hammersmith does that to some extent - unintentionally, mind you.
Click to expand...

A friend's dad architected that.
 
This Brixton Buzz piece on young peoples views on the "Brixton Central" area

Some of the findings make for optimistic reading.

In the eyes of the young folk, Brixton is:

“Multicultural, diverse, lively, vibrant and unique.”

It’s nothing new, but it’s all positive.

There was strong support for Brixton Library and the Rec. Any politician making Brixton Future plans for these vital local services would do well to listen.

The Ritzy (when it is open) was also mentioned as a local highlight.

Interestingly the students stated that the market is “overcrowded” and they avoid it. It is not clear if the market means the outdoor stalls, or some of the more recent additions in the Village.

Foodie places however were not popular.

What does Brixton Central need less of?

“Restaurants, cafes and bars.”​
Click to expand...

There is not a lot for young people in central Brixton. I can see why they think Brixton Central needs less bars etc. The Rec is the only place that is in central Brixton for them.

​
 
Went to the Fluid/AECOM Brixton Central Reference Group Workshop yesterday evening in the Impact Hub - which is actually the former Juvenile Court in the basement of Lambeth Town Hall.

At least 2 other Urbanites attended - we were on the dissenting table and adjourned to the Beehive afterwards to recover.

I am still getting my thoughts together on this workshop - and also looking for plans and illustrations to post up, so hope to give a proper report later.

Suffice it to say for now - pace Editor - THIS is where the slick presentations and mind games occur. Compared to this MUSE were straight amateurs.
 
CH1 said:
Went to the Fluid/AECOM Brixton Central Reference Group Workshop yesterday evening in the Impact Hub - which is actually the former Juvenile Court in the basement of Lambeth Town Hall.

At least 2 other Urbanites attended - we were on the dissenting table and adjourned to the Beehive afterwards to recover.

I am still getting my thoughts together on this workshop - and also looking for plans and illustrations to post up, so hope to give a proper report later.

Suffice it to say for now - pace Editor - THIS is where the slick presentations and mind games occur. Compared to this MUSE were straight amateurs.
Click to expand...

Look forward to your report.

After the meeting I was feeling slightly nauseous. I did not find it an enjoyable experience.

Mind games- this is good way to summarize what it was like.

I was wondering why I was getting more and more uneasy as the slick presentations ( which went on far to long) from officers and Fluid were shown to us.

Part of the problem with the meeting was that half was presentations. A lot to take in and then comment on. It was to rushed. I felt I was being pushed into making decisions on the proposals without proper time for discussion. Also that I was expected to take as given what Fluid/ Council had decided was the way forward based on their reading of previous consultation meetings.

Also starting to irritate me is the inspirational talks from officers and Cllr about Future Brixton that one gets at every meeting. At one point a senior officer was waxing lyrical about the "hot desking" they were experimenting with in the Town Hall.

The consultation is about producing a "development brief" that will entice a developer to take an interest in the site. This skews the consultation process. The Council say that they have not decided on a delivery model yet but this is how it looks to me.

I will say the lady from Fluid at our "dissenting table" was ok.
 
Last edited:
There will be a "pop up" stall in Brixton Station road this Saturday about the Brixton Central Masterplan ( 12th July) between 10am and 4pm

So anyone can give there views and see what is being proposed.
 
Still trying to digest.
We were presented with 2 scenarios.
A. Studios and workspace, outdoor events, potential new cultural leisure and community uses - supported by new housing and shopping
Scenario A - culture leisure new homes.jpg
or scenario B: studios and workspace on Popes Road with an extended indoor market - supported by new housing and shops
Scenario B market shops homes.jpg

Spot the difference is/was my immediate reaction!

We were asked to feedback on all sorts of general aspirations and propositions such as ranking in order of preference affordable housing, local jobs, affordable workspace and retail, refurbished and improved railway station, new public realm (roads? pedestrianised squares?), sustainable employment/retail mix??, town centre parking (seems a divisive issue), culture and community (what that?), local energy network (some sort of combined heat and power idea), enhancing the Rec, an overground station (probably at East Brixton), continued (undefined) community development.

The presentations at the beginning of the meeting went way over time. We heard from Fluid's Steve McAdam, AECOM's Jonathan Rose and perhaps in most detail from Tom Bridgman a senior manager in Lambeth Regeneration, who had so much to cram in, his delivery was very rapid. Not good if your ears are bunged up like mine.

I felt, and still feel that we were being asked to vote on 2 rather similar concepts.

Major differences between the options are these:
International House - scenario A - demolish and build housing
- scenario B - refurbish for employment use

Canterbury Arms - scenario A - proceed with existing planning permission and use Ice Rink site for mix of cultural/educational/housing
- scenario B - seek to incorporate this into a bigger housing scheme for the former Ice Rink site

Car parking - scenario A - underground car park under Ice Rink site
- scenario B - "decked car parking" (mini-multi storey?)

Objections to scenario A: demolishing International House was energy wasteful - not energy saving.
Objections to scenario B: extending the indoor market area was risky - many existing indoor market uses are marginal and only open part of the week it was said.
Also losing some existing railway arch tenants would be foolish - they are situated in the large out-door arches because that suits their businesses.

Maybe Gramsci or others can add other bits they recall?
 
CH1 said:
Spot the difference is/was my immediate reaction!


Maybe Gramsci or others can add other bits they recall?
Click to expand...

Its late but a couple of comments. Excellent you got the pics online.

Spot the difference is a very good point. This is what the meeting was presented with.

There was no discussion on what we actually felt about the options. Whether people liked the options. The attitude was this is what Fluid/officers have come up with. You can say which one you prefer but the consultation is moving on and there is a timeline for a development brief to be finished.

There was no opportunity to give feedback on what had happened at the previous two meetings.

I felt that I was being expected to choose one of the two plus add a few comments about priorities within the option I preferred.

The other good comment made at meeting was that there was no option for incremental change rather than a sweeping redevelopment. The Ice Rink site is empty so is up for redevelopment. The other parts of the area could be improved in a sensitive fashion that does not disrupt the businesses and retains existing uses. This would help to preserve the aspects of the area that people liked.

The more I looked at the plans and what we were being asked to comment on the more cautious I became in making a comment. As I felt it would be used to endorse what the officers/Fluid were presenting.

Several people said that the two options were over development of site (including me). To much being crammed into a small space. Mainly between the railway lines. This, of course , makes the scheme "feasible". At this and at previous meetings I felt that residents were being pressurized to temper their comments/ criticisms by being told the scheme had to be "viable". I do not think this is how it should be done. Residents should be able to raise concerns without that. In the end its up to the Council to decide. They are the local authority. As residents we can comment. I feel the Council/ Fluid do not want comments they want endorsement of they way they are progressing. Its what CH1 says in his first post about mind games and getting people to compromise themselves.

It was also raised that the mixture of uses stacked on top of each other ( retail/ workshops/ housing) would cause problems for those living above all these different uses unless it was managed well. A good point.

I felt that the two options were about maximizing financial returns from development of the site first of all. Which is fair enough way to do it. Its just that I do not have to agree to all of it.
 
Last edited:
Really not sure of the date for this webpage, but there are some familiar themes.

"Lambeth council by trusting commerce and buisness to be the agents of change have failed the community by allowing capital to dictate the reshaping of Brixton."
 
Tricky Skills said:
Really not sure of the date for this webpage, but there are some familiar themes.
"Lambeth council by trusting commerce and buisness to be the agents of change have failed the community by allowing capital to dictate the reshaping of Brixton."
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how far that website is right - the council may not be culpable in some of their examples.

For example the turning of Brixton College of Building in Ferndale Road into flats - this site belonged to GLC/ILEA I think, so was presumably sold off by the people appointed to wind up GLC assets - down to Thatcher etc ultimately.

The replacement of Robils fancy goods shop with Iceland seems not to be Lambeth's responsibility.

Should Lambeth compulsorily purchase shops to determine the type of shops to be available in the high street? Where they did do that we ended up with 4 mobile phone shops in a row and an Argos!
 
I went to the "pop up" consultation in Brixton Station road on Saturday.

Did look like a lot of people were taking an interest.

The largest amount of written comments was that affordable housing was the most important thing the plans for site should provide.
 
questionnaire about the provisional proposals

You can read about these proposals here and feed your comments back via our short questionnaire by Friday 8 August.
Click to expand...

Also:

Your help and next steps
During July we held a community reference group workshop and pop-up stalls around Brixton town centre. This week we’ll be hosting a drop-in exhibition in Electric Avenue on:

  • Tuesday 22 July, 1-7pm
  • Wednesday 23 July, 2-8pm
  • Thursday 24 July, 10am – 4pm
Click to expand...
 
I might prefer the 'employment-led' Scenario A.

Not sure why the market needs to be extended, as in Scenario B.

Anyway, both plans seems plausible.

A tarted-up station would be nice as well as, of course, 'affordable' housing.

Car parking seems to be a necessary evil for the market.

A hotel would be good.

Shame about lack of a link to the orbital railway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

editor
Cyclist killed in Brixton
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
T & P
T & P
blameless77
After work pint in Brixton?
Replies
8
Views
520
story
story
editor
Homophobia in Brixton
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
Tulster218
T
editor
Where to watch England vs Spain Euro 2024 final in Brixton
Replies
6
Views
485
madolesance
M
editor
The depressing growth of people with substance dependency on the streets of Brixton
2 3
Replies
74
Views
6K
DietCokeGirl
DietCokeGirl
Back
Top Bottom