Out with the Old... Network Rail tell businesses to vacate Atlantic Road arches

[technical]

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.

If the NR representative really did say multinational chains (rather than multiple retailers) then the commitment given is meaningless

 

[ska invita]

sad news but sadly exactly what would be expected.
Is there anything else that can happen now, short of occupying the arches and stopping anyone else in?

 

[editor]

If the NR representative really did say multinational chains (rather than multiple retailers) then the commitment given is meaningless

Like the whole 'consultation.'

 

[SpamMisery]

If the NR representative really did say multinational chains (rather than multiple retailers) then the commitment given is meaningless

NR website says the following:

Of the 4,000 businesses in our London estate, fewer than 20 are let to national chains and nationwide, 98% of our arches are rented out to small local businesses.

I'd imagine the emphasis was heard rather than said, but it'll be interesting to see the list of shops post refurbishment to see if any chains are involved. Although as we know, the definition of the word "chain" is hotly debated on here... as is the word "local"

 

[editor]

Look at all that violence! It's like the 80s riots all over again! Probably worse.

 

[editor]

Guardian piece: Police called as council meeting hit by protests over Brixton's 'gentrification'

Most of the comments are as idiotic as ever.

 

[Rushy]

Can't really say "no chains or multiple retailers" as there are already both in there. Even the carpet place was or is a chain of four, iirc.

 

[Gramsci]

If the NR representative really did say multinational chains (rather than multiple retailers) then the commitment given is meaningless

Multinational chains was the exact words he used. Wrote it in my notes. As it surprised me he said that.

 

[editor]

Multinational chains was the exact words he used. Wrote it in my notes. As it surprised me he said that.

It's such a fucking wriggly dishonest cop out.

 

[Gramsci]

After the planning meeting I was in the Portuguese cafe. One person said to me "Where will we go once all these (affordable) places go?"

Cheap places to hang out are going. That stretch of arches by the Rec is important for a lot of people.

 

[Gramsci]

I was also told Sue Foster OBE who now has the job title Strategic Director / Delivery , whatever that is, was at the back of the meeting taking a lot of notes.

Foster is one of the Councils top Regen officers. Worked with Tessa MP on the Olympics before Lambeth. For which she got her OBE.

One thing that was mentioned in passing at the meeting was the Brixton Central Masterplan. Which was being consulted on when NR decided suddenly to start evicting the arches.

The BCM area covers the Rec, Pop and arches around Popes road and Brixton Station road.

The consultation ,which halted when NR decided to go ahead with its plans anyway, was supposed to be an exercise in Coop Council style Co-production of a masterplan for this area. Between the landowners Lambeth, NR and the local community.

Heard recently that the consultation will restart in September.

At the consultation meeting I went to people said they wanted to keep the shops and the unique character of Brixton.

The Council could have told NR after what they did to the arches they will break off talks with them on future redevelopment of the area. They haven’t.

As far as I can gather Lambeth and NR are still discussing the Brixton Central Masterplan site (minus the local community). I expect the date for future consultations on the BCM was pushed back as Council/ NR hope that by that time things will have calmed down.

The Council could have taken a much harder line with NR.

So "Sleeping with the Enemy" is rather accurate.

 

[Brixton Hatter]

I totally get the stuff about Planning Committees being "quasi-judicial" and only being able to take decisions on specific matters. However the reason it doesn't wash with me is because the council appear to have fully supported Network Rail from the start. Their decisions all over the borough for the past 5- 8 years demonstrate their strategy. The council/Jack Hopkins apparently [http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2016/01/...-regeneration-plans-as-early-as-august-2014/] kept the NR plans quiet for many months. The council could have campaigned for local businesses and put the pressure on NR, but it doesn't look like they did, instead attempting to justify the proposals. They hide behind the planning rules now. They want money in Brixton. They are sweating their property assets. All the stuff about local masterplans and protecting the community is bollocks imo.

 

[Gramsci]

Excellent piece here: The vote to redevelop Brixton Arches: smear campaigns, doublethink and foregone decisions

The contributor is right to point out :

While the planners continuously shut-down objections on the grounds that they did not constitute “material planning considerations”, the range of considerations which are deemed “material” is significantly reduced, and this is an issue much bigger than Brixton.

The way the system works is not in the interests of the little people. The people who need affordable places to go and small family run business like the Portuguese cafe on Brixton Station road.

This is yet another example of "regeneration" being about profit making. NR is acting like any private developer.

And I agree with Brixton Hatter the Council in practise want NR to "regenerate" Brixton.

 

[Gramsci]

All the talk in the papers about the protesters. Its NR who are the villains. Its them who are putting the shopkeepers through hell.

 

[editor]

After the planning meeting I was in the Portuguese cafe. One person said to me "Where will we go once all these (affordable) places go?"

Cheap places to hang out are going. That stretch of arches by the Rec is important for a lot of people.

That stretch is vital to the character and the community of Brixton.

 

[Gramsci]

On the planning issue. After the meeting one person said to me he did not see the point of going to these meetings ( including Council consultations).

There is a real danger that, and this is happening across London, that people will feel the have no real say. Saw the Leader of the Council complaining about "Mob Rule" at the planning committee meeting.

What she should think is why are so many people in Brixton are so angry and frustrated. What the Labour party locally and nationally should be doing to support ordinary peoples concerns about how they can have real influence on what happens to there areas.

 

[CH1]

Guardian piece: Police called as council meeting hit by protests over Brixton's 'gentrification'
Most of the comments are as idiotic as ever.

Surely this cannot be right: "Network Rail’s director of commercial estate, Alan Muir, said: “This is an £8m investment that will benefit the whole of Brixton and provide traders in the area with excellent facilities"?

If he has his arithmetic right that is over £200,000 per arch for a refurb. How could any amount of rent rise pay for that?

 

[CH1]

I was also told Sue Foster OBE

Was a bit taken aback by this - but then so was the "Hackney Independent" in 2007 Jolly good show! Sue Foster wins award in Hackney

 

[snowy_again]

I was also told Sue Foster OBE who now has the job title Strategic Director / Delivery , whatever that is, was at the back of the meeting taking a lot of notes.

Foster is one of the Councils top Regen officers. Worked with Tessa MP on the Olympics before Lambeth. For which she got her OBE.

One thing that was mentioned in passing at the meeting was the Brixton Central Masterplan. Which was being consulted on when NR decided suddenly to start evicting the arches.

The BCM area covers the Rec, Pop and arches around Popes road and Brixton Station road.

The consultation ,which halted when NR decided to go ahead with its plans anyway, was supposed to be an exercise in Coop Council style Co-production of a masterplan for this area. Between the landowners Lambeth, NR and the local community.

Heard recently that the consultation will restart in September.

At the consultation meeting I went to people said they wanted to keep the shops and the unique character of Brixton.

The Council could have told NR after what they did to the arches they will break off talks with them on future redevelopment of the area. They haven’t..

NR may be a quango but they're still streets ahead of Lambeth & other LAs when it comes to business planning & negotiating.

Despite our rows and different perspectives, I suspect that Brixton forum posters could together concoct a more inclusive and sustainable response to NRs opportunistic land grab.

 

[CH1]

I totally get the stuff about Planning Committees being "quasi-judicial" and only being able to take decisions on specific matters. However the reason it doesn't wash with me is because the council appear to have fully supported Network Rail from the start. Their decisions all over the borough for the past 5- 8 years demonstrate their strategy. The council/Jack Hopkins apparently [http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2016/01/...-regeneration-plans-as-early-as-august-2014/] kept the NR plans quiet for many months. The council could have campaigned for local businesses and put the pressure on NR, but it doesn't look like they did, instead attempting to justify the proposals. They hide behind the planning rules now. They want money in Brixton. They are sweating their property assets. All the stuff about local masterplans and protecting the community is bollocks imo.

You are right. But then Network Rail's regeneration was all part of Lambeth Council's plan all along. Some of us went to Central Brixton consultation meetings where we played tiddly winks at our tables and put up flip chart pages to present to the assembled multitude.
Co-ordinated by consultants of course - Fluid I seem to recall

Not much has happened though - except Pop Brixton and the now approved annihilation of the traditional Brixton arches.

 

[teuchter]

Assuming Lambeth Council wanted to protect the existing businesses - is there actually a way they could impose rent caps selectively to certain locations? Because that's basically what would have to happen in order to achieve what people want, isn't it?

 

[CH1]

Assuming Lambeth Council wanted to protect the existing businesses - is there actually a way they could impose rent caps selectively to certain locations? Because that's basically what would have to happen in order to achieve what people want, isn't it?

Surely rent caps could have been imposed as a planning condition. They do that sometimes for the "affordable" parts of housing developmnets (e.g. Brixton Square, Higgs). So why not for business premises in railway arches?

 

[teuchter]

Surely rent caps could have been imposed as a planning condition. They do that sometimes for the "affordable" parts of housing developmnets (e.g. Brixton Square, Higgs). So why not for business premises in railway arches?

The housing thing is written into london wide policy though isn't it? In other words (in theory at least) it's something that any housing developer has to accept. Is it legally possible for Lambeth to impose rent caps on selected commercial premises? How would they justify it? If I was Network Rail I'd ask why it didn't apply to the units on the other side of the road in different ownership. If I was a tenant across the road I might ask too. If there's a good reason to impose rent caps, which there might well be, then surely it has to be applied as a general policy, with clear criteria about where it does/doesn't apply, rather than as an ad hoc thing where certain redevelopments happen to catch public attention.

 

[Gramsci]

Surely rent caps could have been imposed as a planning condition. They do that sometimes for the "affordable" parts of housing developmnets (e.g. Brixton Square, Higgs). So why not for business premises in railway arches?

From what I remember the Brixton Society comment on the NR planning application did mention a policy about affordability that BS said this application did not fulfil.

 

[Carpet man]

Would there be any point in applying for an appeal ? Any help out there would be greatly appreciated as the evictions are 2 weeks today !

 

[Greebo]

Would there be any point in applying for an appeal ? Any help out there would be greatly appreciated as the evictions are 2 weeks today !

At this point, it's probably worth a try; what more do you stand to lose?

 

[teuchter]

Would there be any point in applying for an appeal ? Any help out there would be greatly appreciated as the evictions are 2 weeks today !

I don't think the planning process is going to offer you any way to prevent an eviction. I think you would be wasting your time. I don't know of any mechanism to appeal against a planning permission in the space of two weeks, and as far as I can see it's NR's decision whether or not they evict people regardless of the planning decision.

You need to find a way of appealing against the eviction process itself, I would have thought. You need someone to advise you what your rights as a tenant are. Unfortunately I am not that person but there may be others on here who can help.

 

[teuchter]

At this point, it's probably worth a try; what more do you stand to lose?

Valuable time.

 

[editor]

Update: Brixton Arches campaigners react angrily to Lambeth’s “smear campaign”

 

[Gramsci]

The library campaign group "Defend the Ten" in News from Crystal Palace blog

They are also critical of Lambeth Press statement. Which is not just about the Arches planning meeting. The Lambeth press statement is trying to say a series of meetings have been disrupted by the "same group" a "small hardcore mob". The smear campaign by the Council is also directed at other groups.

The Lambeth press statement is trying to argue that :

It is many of the same group that has repeatedly sought to disrupt full council and cabinet meetings and planning and licensing committees in recent months.

And the Council leader Lib Peck is quoted:

“However a small hardcore mob seem intent on disruptive, aggressive behaviour and it simply will not be tolerated.”

As Defend the Ten point out there isn’t a small hardcore mob. Defend the Ten quote what Cllr Rachel said about the way the Council operates:

The one councillor who has spoken up for residents’ interests – Rachel Heywood – has been suspended from the party.

She pointed out, very politely, that in Lambeth: “Any challenge or difference of opinion is interpreted as an attack, and debate experienced as a direct assault. “The elite, inside their castle, or town hall, can lose sight of what real life is like outside the walls whilst the people on the outside can no longer see or understand why certain things are being done to them.”

Rachel has been shown to be right. And the "people on the outside" are getting more angry.

This is all getting pretty nasty. Trying to make it appear its just a small group who are just intent on disruption is rubbish. Council should have realised this when they almost lost a seat to the Greens.