Out with the Old... Network Rail tell businesses to vacate Atlantic Road arches
- Thread starter :-D
- Start date
SpamMisery
Pretty comfortable here right under your skin
Great twitter feed
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
What were the conditions?
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
There surely must be a case for a live feed (also recorded for later access) in a meeting like this.
Gramsci has done a service in relaying the tone of the meeting.
Had I been on the committee I would have been looking at making conditions to enable the right to return with very slowly escalating rent for the actual tenants. I had not thought about the sub-tenants, this adds a complication in that the actual tenants could be making a mark-up which Network Rail would have like to pocket themselves.
Maybe Gramsci will be able to post more later - from notes. It would be interesting to know who on the committee tried to sort out some acceptable compromise - proposing conditions. Normally it is Bernard Gentry (Con) and Diana Morris (Lab) who have the skills to do this.
Thanks for the info so far Mr G!
Gramsci has done a service in relaying the tone of the meeting.
Had I been on the committee I would have been looking at making conditions to enable the right to return with very slowly escalating rent for the actual tenants. I had not thought about the sub-tenants, this adds a complication in that the actual tenants could be making a mark-up which Network Rail would have like to pocket themselves.
Maybe Gramsci will be able to post more later - from notes. It would be interesting to know who on the committee tried to sort out some acceptable compromise - proposing conditions. Normally it is Bernard Gentry (Con) and Diana Morris (Lab) who have the skills to do this.
Thanks for the info so far Mr G!
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Thank you for that - very comprehensive.
editor
hiraethified
You've done a fantastic job there.
Brixton Hatter
Home is south London mate
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
Who cares about the street art, it's only been there for a few months.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Seedat has the demeanour of nerdy eagerness (from observation at previous planning committees, not last night - I wasn't there).
I sympathise with his sentiment though - Planning is a Quasi-Judicial activity. Not normal to try to intimidate planning committee members - if that was what they were doing. The planning committee is supposed to interpret the law, not deal with the politics.
Seedat also tweeted out some interesting information from the agenda. The very end of this Planning Committee addendum shows how Network Rail really are evicting the existing businesses, and only letting back those who agree to the new terms. A bit like if council tenants were evicted en mass and accepted back as "assured" tenants.
Another point I hadn't realised is that there is a proposal to open up a couple of narrow alley ways between Brixton Station Road and Atlantic Road. All very well for "circulation" as the French would say. But considering the filthy state of the existing area round the Brixton Rail Station entrances it seems they haven't got the resources to clean it as it is.
Are these alleys to be gated to prevent "antisocial behaviour" at night? Or will they be for knee-trembling and dealing? - when they are not being used as a pissoir that is?
Surprised the Police haven't had something to say about that - considering they consider the opening of Windrush Square toilets would be a licence for prostitution and drug dealing.
Here is Cllr Seedat's link. He says there is Equalities stuff in there, but I did't see that in my skim-read
https://moderngov.lambeth.gov.uk/documents/b17763/Addendum Tuesday 02-Aug-2016 19.00 Planning Applications Committee.pdf?T=9
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
At the meeting it was said the new passage ways would only be open during the day and would have gates to close them at night.
The meeting started with advice from Council lawyer. She talked a lot about Equal opportunities. The duties of the Council in promoting them.
So even if it was not covered in report the Council legal adviser thought it was relevant enough to talk at length about.
However during the meeting the Cllrs didn't really pick up on that except in relation to the kiosks.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I did not see any physical attacks.
Straight after the meeting ended the police came into the room. There was a police Van outside. They must have been called before the meeting ended.
There were about six of them. This didn't help to calm things down. At that point it was peaceful but angry. The Cllrs had no problems leaving the room.
The only way out of the Abeng centre is from the front.
A lot of people were staying out side of the meeting. The police formed a line to separate the public from the Cllrs leaving. They got shouted at as they left. "shame on you".
As CH1 says the planning committee is Quasi judicial. It's limited in what it can do. If it takes a decision outside the legal framework it operates in it can be subject to appeal. A lot of the issues that concerned people are not "material" planning issues.
I did try to explain this to people at the meeting. They really find it hard to understand.
Understandably a lot of people think the Council is there to defend communities. It's not how the system works. Which is the real problem here.
This leads to people getting frustrated and angry. If people don't really have a genuine voice in what happens then I think Its totally understandable that they resort to being aggressive and confrontational.
As one of the objectors said there were hundreds of objections. Overwhelming opposition to NR. But this made little difference.
editor
hiraethified
Listen to this deceitful Tory cunt trying to associate last night's peaceful protest with the 80s (ergo, the riots). What proof has he that anyone would be followed? Hysterical twat.
Police raid Brixton arches meeting as councillors are glitter-bombed
Police raid Brixton arches meeting as councillors are glitter-bombed
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Yep. Quite a strange condition. I'd rather there were no shutters or that they were not solid.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
As you say the planning committee can only make their best interpretation of current policy and apply it to the decision making process. If folk really want to stop things like NR being able to increase rent in situations like this then they need to campaign for changes to policy, national or local and planning or otherwise.
It's frustrating when campaign groups or local media sources or whatever encourage people to make objections to planning applications when their objections are about stuff that can't be dealt with by means of planning permission refusal. It's a waste of people's time and they unsurprisingly feel annoyed when their objections and comments aren't even considered by a planning committee because they're out of remit. It happened with the recent 414 thing too.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
What is to be expected of the Standard.
Campaigners did not force there way in after vote. Police came into meeting straight after meeting ended. Ie they were not called in.
The glitter bomb went off near me. I didn't see it go on Cllrs.
I arrived at the meeting at 7. There was a lively demo outside.
When meeting started the first item was held over for next meeting. A lot of people left who had attended for that item. Leaving a lot of seats free.
As NR application was next some one went out to get the people in the demo outside.
There was an argument about letting them in. With people already seated saying let them in. After some argument they were let in.
It was a lively meeting but no more so than some others I've been at
As for Gentry saying about 80s. People are getting shafted as much now as in 80s. So I'm not surprised that its getting like that. I don't blame people for getting really angry.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
I would have thought that whatever Gentry's comment - the Evening Standard headline was irresponsibly exaggerated. Police "storm" the meeting it said.
There is an unforgivable error of fact in the Evening Standard article. The Pawn broker has NOT been given notice to quit as far as I am aware. They are the one arch to be spared forced upgrading.
The background to the report of Cllr Gentry's remarks - made to the Standard itself - is no doubt their mutual desire to tie things going wrong in Lambeth to Jeremy Corbyn/Momentum alleged left wing intimidation.
Such a gloss is only to be expected surely from a Councillor who has been around for many years - and probably remembers all the Lambeth Red Ted stuff and the corruption, being reported on by journalists who are operating from the Daily Mail building in Kensington Hight Street, and no doubt would not be averse to "upgrading" to the Daily Mail itself.
Baron
Active Member
Hi. Not sure if you've heard but terrible news today. One of the traders from the arches who works from one of the stores facing eviction collapsed this morning possibly heart-attack and taken away in an ambulance. Close friends told us it's caused by the stress of devastating news received last night.
Let's all hope he has a swift recovery.
Let's all hope he has a swift recovery.
gaijingirl
Well-Known Member
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I hope someone asked him about these physical attacks, and whether he'd put himself up as a witness to them, to help the police do their job.
That is, if he isn't lying about them.
Poor bloke.
Holding a good thought for him, and the other traders from the arches too.
Brixton Hatter
Home is south London mate
Bless up to your friend. Best wishes to him and everyone.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Good report, was the meeting live on the Internet?
- I noticed that the NR person was careful to say no Multinational chains. So not ruling out chains completely.
- The discussion on toilets. Which went on for a long time was irritating the public present. Feeling that to much time was spent on details. Not the big issue of what was happening to Brixton.
- The officer admitted that the % of bars and restaurants in scheme was contrary to planning regulations. This was valid way to vote against this application. One Cllr said he was not happy with this but still said he would vote for.
- Cllr Simpson the only one to vote against did so on basis of poor design. She made good points on the bland uniformity of the design. There was an interesting disagreement between her and the Council conservation offficer on what constitutes "Conservation". For her the piecemeal alterations to arches over the years by tenants and the street art are representative of a unique Brixton culture and whilst the NR plans will preserve the Victorian architecture something will be lost. I'm extrapolating from what she brought up. It's a different and interesting view of what constitutes "conservation".
- Cllr Matt Parr was not really supporting application but wanted extra conditions. Have notes will try to put them up.
Brixton Hatter
Home is south London mate
This is a classic Progress Labour tactic: to allege abuse (where none is present) and smear opponents who disagree with them.
For example see the various Labour party threads in the politics forum etc.
editor
hiraethified
Statement from Save Brixton Arches:
Save Brixton Arches campaigners respond to Lambeth’s decision to approve refurbishment works
Save Brixton Arches campaigners respond to Lambeth’s decision to approve refurbishment works
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
More detail on what Cllr Matt Parr said (from my notes). He was representing the official Labour group position.
Apart from what you have quoted him saying :
Im not sure on this bit:
He did use the word evictions at one point. Which was telling. Also that himself , Donatus and Hopkins had been talking to NR. Myself I havent heard any particular enthusiasm for the Councils efforts from shopkeepers. Nor was I clear from what Cllr Matt Parr said whether the Council supported or opposed the plans of NR. Why it comes across as (lukewarm) support for application.
Cllr Matt Parr came to the meeting with a list of 6 conditions that he wanted. Which had been decided by the Ward Cllrs . Him and Donatus ( Cllr Rachel is a non person now). These are ( only got five down). He had these in writing and wanted to distribute them to Cllrs. But Chair was not happy with that.
- Temporary alternative trading area for shopkeepers whilst works are going on.
- Kiosks- the sub tenants- should be given first offer on new small units.
- Art work should be moved and displayed elsewhere.
- Customer toilets should be a condition.
- Phased building works.
Nor did any of the Cllrs on the committee refer back to Cllr Parr on his suggestions. They are allowed to ask further questions.
Pretty feeble imo.
Last edited:
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
To add to the bit from the legal advisor. She got applause for it. Deserved. She explained it in detail in a way everyone there could understand. She at end said the "protected characteristic" most relevant here is race. She was pointing them to a way to object to this application. IMO committee didn’t take this up enough. Except for the sub tenants.
It clearly got up the nose of the Tory Cllr Gentry. Who asked that didn’t this just apply to all applications.
Not taking aboard how she was making it specific to this application as an important consideration.She said that Councils have " Public sector equality duty" which applies to all Council activities. Which I didn’t know. They are supposed to have what is called "due regard" to the three things above. The groups who have "protected characteristics" to which this applies include race and gender equality. Also included is "indirect discrimination". Which I think means not outright prejudice but actions that may be unintended consequence. Which I think she specifically mentioned as it could be said of this application- though she herself could not say that outright. But imo she was pointing out to committee they could apply this. Also that Council should look at how to minimise disadvantage of groups with protected characteristics, encourage participation ( in society I assume). That Council must "have regard" to these factors.
Given that the Arches have a large amount of small business run by ethnic minorities the committee could have taken this aboard more.
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
Yep - it's classic Lambeth Labour Progress spin - trying to manage the agenda from voting to evict traders, and shifting to 'abuse' instead.
Knobs.
