Canterbury Arms, Brixton to be turned into flats - planning application
- Thread starter colacubes
- Start date
clandestino
no llevar papel
editor
hiraethified
So fucking sad:
2 days later...
Brixton’s Canterbury Arms reduced to rubble, luxury private flats to come – in photos
2 days later...
Brixton’s Canterbury Arms reduced to rubble, luxury private flats to come – in photos
editor
hiraethified
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
You can't even muster a decent comment, can you? It's all just one liner stuff to provoke/annoy.
editor
hiraethified
He's not going to trash this thread, so off he goes.
Nanker Phelge
Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.
Yes, it's illogical for people to feel strong emotions over the loss of venue that many people cared about, that some of us here had a direct involvement with, and knew the family who were displaced from their home of 20+ years, and the customers that were a genuinely tight knit group of friends and relations who used that pub as a place to come together and share all sorts of occassions.
What an illogical twat I am to feel sad and want to lament.
I should just be a contrary cunt and just pop to the beehive and forget all about the Canterbury....there are other pubs afterall...ffs
editor
hiraethified
Just taking the piss now:
Developer asks for extra units for luxury apartments on the site of the old Canterbury Arms boozer
Developer asks for extra units for luxury apartments on the site of the old Canterbury Arms boozer
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
Nanker Phelge
Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.
In idiot terms what exactly has occured here?
clandestino
no llevar papel
Does that mean the flats aren't being built after all?
mrchristopher
Well-Known Member
I've just read through this.
My understanding is that Lambeth are proposing to 'swap' some land with the developer. The result would be that Pope's Road would be widened, and the development would move back to take in the traders' car park located behind instead. The car park would be rebuilt under the flats. It looks like it would still be built by the private developer, not Lambeth.
As a result they will probably be able to build significantly more flats, in part because in planning terms it would allow a taller building as it would be set back from the road. So we should expect another planning application.
Lambeth would get a share of the additional value created from the development, plus it would probably benefit their future plans for the POP Brixton and International House sites. It will also lead to more homes, presumably some 'affordable'.
(Trying to present this in as neutral a way as possible, understanding most people would prefer this development not to be taking place at all).
My understanding is that Lambeth are proposing to 'swap' some land with the developer. The result would be that Pope's Road would be widened, and the development would move back to take in the traders' car park located behind instead. The car park would be rebuilt under the flats. It looks like it would still be built by the private developer, not Lambeth.
As a result they will probably be able to build significantly more flats, in part because in planning terms it would allow a taller building as it would be set back from the road. So we should expect another planning application.
Lambeth would get a share of the additional value created from the development, plus it would probably benefit their future plans for the POP Brixton and International House sites. It will also lead to more homes, presumably some 'affordable'.
(Trying to present this in as neutral a way as possible, understanding most people would prefer this development not to be taking place at all).
mrchristopher
Well-Known Member
This map might explain it - https://moderngov.lambeth.gov.uk/do...mbeth and May Developments Ltd Appendix 1.pdf
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I looked at the docs on the link that Tricky Skills posted up.
The developers who owns the old Canterbury Arms site has planning permission to build flats on that site.
The Council own land surrounding that site. (Pop and to the east of developers site).
Its a bit more complicated than a land swap.
Land swaps can make sense to put together a piece of land to have a single coherent site. Its like me swapping something with someone else - we both end up equal but have something more useful after the swap.
This however is a bit more complicated.
The Council is also doing a deal with May Developments ( the owners of Canterbury site) to so that May Developments become the lead developer of the combined site.
The swap would mean that land next to Popes road owned by May Developments would go to Lambeth to become part of the (proposed) widening of Popes Road. May would get land to the east which is owned by the Council.
I get a bit lost of financial stuff but it looks like the Council will have some kind of profit share with May Developments on sale of private homes that May builds on what was Council land plus part of its original land. As well as selling the land on a lease in a complicated ( to me) deal which the officers are confident will produce a good value for Council.
So its not just a land swap. Its the Council working up proposals with a developer for this important site in Brixton Central area.
Of course this all depends on a new planning application for the combined site which May Developments will put in being agreed. So to answer clandestino question- if Council and May have there way flats will be built- private ones for sale. No mention of affordable housing in the docs.
May Developments as lead developer for the site will take the risk and apply for planning permission.
From the docs looks to me that May Developments and senior officers have been working up plans and discussing this for some time.
Its a good deal for May Developments. They get there hands on more land and Council support.
The map showing what land is swapped and officers report here
There are issues here. I attended the consultation on the Brixton Central Masterplan some time ago. It ground to a halt with Network Rail unilaterally deciding to "refurbish" the arches.
However even the officers report says the consultation is not finished. The officers imo are jumping the gun here. Assuming the next round of consultations with the community will support this land swap. When in fact community will be presented with it as a fait accompli. The officers report (5.3) says as much.
The officers report also says
Yes well that is big a risk I would say.
mrchristopher
Well-Known Member
Gramsci and I crossed over with our posts but I think our understanding from the documents is the same...
It's all a bit early to see the implications, but I do imagine it could be a much bigger development.
It's all a bit early to see the implications, but I do imagine it could be a much bigger development.
editor
hiraethified
I can barely think for all the alarm bells ringing in my head. I have zero trust in Lambeth's motives or abilities to deliver anything other than the usual luxury apartment-fest.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I do wish the Council would take consultation more seriously. This is important site and the Council officers are ploughing ahead with appointing lead developers, deciding on widening road and disposing of Council owned land for private development.
Its all being decided with little consultation. And this Council is big on doing "Co-production".
One bit of report concerns me as well.
The resulting more "uniform" parcel of land after the swap (2.4) is considered good by officers as it will lead to,
ie more profitable for developer.
Is this what is really wanted? No consultation has been done. Larger unit implies a big chain rather than keeping smaller shops in the market area.
Its all being decided with little consultation. And this Council is big on doing "Co-production".
One bit of report concerns me as well.
The resulting more "uniform" parcel of land after the swap (2.4) is considered good by officers as it will lead to,
ie more profitable for developer.
Is this what is really wanted? No consultation has been done. Larger unit implies a big chain rather than keeping smaller shops in the market area.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I agree. As usual the officers report is over optimistic.
If I was May Developments I would celebrating.
Similar threads
