leanderman
Street Party: July 2
And, on cue, the Evening Standard chips in with a two-special on Brixton as a property hotspot:
Will jerk chicken give way to Boho chic?
Will jerk chicken give way to Boho chic?
Brixton's Club 414 - closure, news, discussion
- Thread starter Rushy
- Start date
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
"Brixton used to be a cheap alternative to Clapham"
FUCK OFF
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Pretty sure I read that it did go to committee. Truth is there was not a valid objection in planning terms. Can't really blame the planning department. There is an explanation of the planning decision, including responses to objections, amongst the online documents.
DJWrongspeed
radio eros
if there's an closing party it needs to include the walls coming down.........
Well if it went to committee know one knew or were invited to attend. There were a few policies quoted that were ignored and not sure why. Thank you for pointing out that there is an explanation in the document section on the planning site. Without you we would not know anything. We will read these now.
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
The Portuguese deli under the arches. Another Brixton institution being forced out.
David Clapson
Well-Known Member
It's far too early to give up on the 414. Now the challenge is to persuade the landlord to renew the 414's lease. The landlord also owns Market Row and Brixton Village. There are lots of measures available to persuade them.
I think he knows where it is, but was surprised to hear of somewhere so popular being in trouble.
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
I know it as the Portuguese deli. Always forget it's called A&C
Similar here, because I don't need to know the name, just what the outside of it looks like, what it sells, and where it is.
editor
hiraethified
Could you share some of them here? Given the fucking greed that's running rampant over Brixton, I can't say I'm too hopeful.
David Clapson
Well-Known Member
Probably best if I talk to Tony first. It does look bleak. Putting the brakes on capitalism is like King Canute vs the sea. But let's not go down without a fight.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Yep. Was going to suggest this. Check there is nothing else going on.
editor
hiraethified
The piece on Buzz about the 414 has already been shared on Facebook 1.1k times, so it's clear that there's a lot of interest in this.
Twattor
Well-Known Member
that's all well and good, but if someone who owns something decides they don't want to keep it in the existing format then why should they be dictated to by others with no interest other than memories? if individuals without an interest are concerned about these institutions then unless there are grounds for objection on the basis of policy, the best recourse is trying to get them listed as a community asset.
I spoke to someone a couple of weeks ago who told me they'd been instrumental in obtaining planning permission resulting in the closure of an institution much lamented on these boards, but who expressed surprise that there had been virtually no meaningful objection during the year or so leading up to the grant of planning permission. These things need to be approached tactically - the people trying to obtain permission engage experts and do their best to ensure policy is complied with thus reducing grounds for refusal; anyone objecting also needs to refer to policy to identify the breaches. There was an excellent post somewhere here a few days ago which demonstrates exactly how to go about these things and which i'd love to link to, but can't for the life of me find it.
editor
hiraethified
Maybe because the people they now want to throw out on their arses were the very same people who had constantly and consistently generated income to fill their bank balance for the past 30 years when no one else wanted to touch the place?
It's all about unfashionable concepts like loyalty and looking after the people who have looked after you rather then the current Thatcherite 'what's in it for me/cash in quick' ideology. It's not just 'memories' either: the 414 has an active and loyal community who have all invested time and money into the place. They deserve better than this.
Oh and why no "no meaningful objections"? That's because ordinary people have no fucking idea how the planning system works, so it's completely stacked up against them from the start. But I'm sure your mate knows that and feels suitably smug about it if he's profiting from it. Why hasn't he piped up to help people here?
....Please you must excuse me with the way I am trying to word this reply....BUT...if Lambeth Planning Database for objections were to have 'Key Words' to flag where a policy might be used...would be very helpful for them to see when non planning people use a valid remark but can not quote a policy reference ...by which I mean...'loss of an amenity', 'night time economy', 'culture heritage', 'visitor attraction' 'community asset','local landmark.....I could go on...
As I have gone through all the objections lodged, I see out of the 443 objections a few have quoted these 'Key' words which could be related to policies. Along with a few that have quoted the policy reference, to what they are saying.
I must add in closing that all the objections, to us, were very 'meaningful', and a big thank you goes out to each and everyone who took time to post them.
As I have gone through all the objections lodged, I see out of the 443 objections a few have quoted these 'Key' words which could be related to policies. Along with a few that have quoted the policy reference, to what they are saying.
I must add in closing that all the objections, to us, were very 'meaningful', and a big thank you goes out to each and everyone who took time to post them.
19sixtysix
Life as viewed from a Gay Gorbals Garret
Has anyone started the "asset of community value" process. Its seem like the first measure in protection of places these days.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
You are right about this, but this application is somewhat like the one for Canterbury Arms, where a developer has spotted a large capital gain could be made. I do not think that even with clear understanding of Lambeth's retained UDP policies there was a straightforward way to block this development. The best argument I heard was the one to do with turning the 414 into residential would then jeopardise the Albert's use as an entertainment venue.
This possibly might have gone down with planning committee councillors - there are precedents elsewhere, though not in Lambeth I think.
The report shows no evidence that ward councillors were opposed to the scheme, or had asked for the case to go to committee, at least as far as I can see. http://planning-docs.lambeth.gov.uk/AnitePublicDocs/00588254.pdf
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Like some other posters here I could not see any clear grounds to oppose the application in this case.
Having some experience of planning issues I think planning policy is limited in helping local communities have influence on what happens to there area.
Personally I think planning policy should be strengthened up so property owners can be dictated to.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Yep. I've heard this too. Although no one seems to have any idea what the grounds might be.
editor
hiraethified
I'd be in to organise a benefit to help out, like I would for just about all of Brixton's old school pubs and clubs,
Tolpuddle
Cooperative council-my arse.
Grant of permission was made by officers under delegated powers despite high levels of public interest;
whether the loss of the existing nightclub use was a consideration that should have been taken into account; and
whether the issue of noise impacts from licensed premises was dealt with properly.
A while ago there was a development planned close to the ministry of sound, this was likely to result in noise complaints etc from the new residents. Boris allowed the development but it was written in such a way that any residents will not be able to complain and will be made aware, in advance of the existence of the club.
Because they are applying for a JR it doesn't mean it will happen, a judge has to be convinced of the merits of the case & decides whether to allow it to go ahead or not.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Is a high level of interest grounds for it to have to be heard by committee? And then isn't it ultimately up to the committee chair to decide whether it goes before committee? IIRC they concluded that despite the volume, none of the objections were on valid planning grounds.
ETA ultimately, if the application were refused based on public opinion but there were no valid planning reason, it would get overturned at appeal and costs awarded against the council.
ETA ultimately, if the application were refused based on public opinion but there were no valid planning reason, it would get overturned at appeal and costs awarded against the council.
Last edited:
