Lunch in Brixton with children [Archive]

Boom_Sounds

18-02-2004, 18:20

Wiskey,

You've hit on an interesting topic here and one which has finally got me off my arse to post on this website. You could try the following:

Hope and Anchor on Acre Lane. Great for kids in the garden. Standard pub grub at OK prices;
Cafe at top of brixton hill just up from the video shop;
Bug Restuarant;
Nandos;
Duke of Edinborough.

The bottom line is Brixton is pretty dire for kids and dining. We've lived around here for 10-15 years and both my kids were born here. I'd recommend you go to the more poncey areas (Clapham/Dulwich etc) regularly slagged off by most contributors on this website. Try Tootsies on Abbeville Road - you can walk there from Brixton.

An interesting related point is how so many of the contributors on this website rant on about maintaining the diversity of Brixton i.e. oppose the gentrification. I'd trade in the most of the dodgy geezers and dogs on strings type Trustafarians for some yuppies anyday. At least they move out of your way on the high street and consider the needs to the rest of Society. Frankly, I wouldn't mind a Pret a Manager or half decent Restuarant where I could take the kids during the day. I'd like more places for families and a few more people on this website to stop thinking about their own peer groups and think what other long term Brixton residents e.g. families might actually want/need. My wife and I still quite like it round here but it's a struggle bringing up a family. Bring on Harlem!

Boom Sound

aurora green

18-02-2004, 18:51

Blimey, thats a just a tad provocative Boomsound.
I mean, I actually agree that theres not much for families around these parts but...as for Pret a manager...please...
People fighting against gentrification are fighting against bland mono-culture.
I dont want, and cant afford, Brixton to become another Clapham.
I want Brixtons diversity and uniquness preserved, and I certainly dont think its' salvation lies with the introduction of more yuppies. Greater gap between rich and poor, haves and have nots, will make thing much worse and make this a far less pleasent place to live.

wiskey

18-02-2004, 18:57

boom sounds - i've lived in and grown up in brixton for the majority of the last 23 years. i agree its pretty soul-less when it comes to kids

but i would much prefer something that was fun and suitable for kids than a pret anyday.

wiskers

oryx

18-02-2004, 22:04

Try Tootsies on Abbeville Road - you can walk there from Brixton.

A couple of my friends took their kids in there & were treated so rudely by the management that one of them ended up writing a stroppy letter & got an apology. Don't have personal experience of it though.

My niece & nephew really like Nando's on Clapham High St when they come to stay - the Brixton one is probably just as child-friendly although I've only been there the once.

hatboy

18-02-2004, 22:53

Boom Sounds said:

"Bring on Harlem!"

Yes, I've heard Harlem's nice now. :rolleyes:

Tenants Protest Gentrification in Harlem (http://www.tenant.net/Tengroup/Metcounc/Nov00/harlem.html)

hatboy

18-02-2004, 22:58

Baub

19-02-2004, 08:46

:confused: I don't get this Clapham thing - it's not Kensington or Chelsea by any stretch of the imagination and has plenty of council estates and is populated by the same mix of people as in Brixton.

Scotland/Wales/Ireland v England, North England v South England, North London v South London, Brixton v Clapham...

Anyway, that sort of thinking is too limiting and narrow-minded for this forum surely :cool: .

Anna Key

19-02-2004, 09:37

At least they (yuppies) move out of your way on the high street and consider the needs to the rest of Society.
Ah yes. The great unselfish band of yuppies. Spreading joy wherever they go. Looking after their neighbours. Driving old ladies to the hospital. Oozing social solidarity.

Presuambly you've seen or read American Psycho, the great yuppie dream novel?

Aitch

19-02-2004, 12:03

Bloody amazing a simple thread about where to take kids for lunch quickly turns into the Brixtongentrification to laminate or not to laminate discussion. :rolleyes:

hatboy

19-02-2004, 12:03

I go on holiday to Clapham sometimes. It's a nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there.

;)

Anna Key

19-02-2004, 12:15

Bloody amazing a simple thread about where to take kids for lunch quickly turns into the Brixtongentrification to laminate or not to laminate discussion. :rolleyes:
Ah but it's the absence of Yupps, and their citadels such as pret a manger, which is torturing the poor Brixton kiddies.

Combined with the extreme selfishness of U75 posters such as yourself:
I'd like more places for families and a few more people on this website to stop thinking about their own peer groups and think what other long term Brixton residents e.g. families might actually want/need.
Pret a Manger For The Kiddies!

Whiskey, just think. Your children are positively deprived.

hatboy

19-02-2004, 12:32

Originally Posted by Boom_Sounds:

"I'd like more places for families and a few more people on this website to stop thinking about their own peer groups and think what other long term Brixton residents e.g. families might actually want/need".

That really is crap by the way. There's quite a few posters here with families. They just haven't all come to the naive conclusion that a "Pret a Manger" will save Brixton. That whole paragraph of "Boom Sounds" sounds quite self-satisfied really.

Why do you need a Pret anyway? When you can have a one-off place like Lounge? (which is already a smart new venue and child-friendly) A Pret would probably kill Lounge.

IntoStella

19-02-2004, 12:42

Pret a Manger For The Kiddies! There already is a Pret a Manger for the kiddies. Run by one of its major shareholders.

It's called McDonalds. :(

If I had to feed a bunch of kids on a budget then I would take them to McD's rather than Pret, which has nothing for kids and a very child-unfriendly menu of sushi and challenging*, expensive sandwiches. I certainly wouldn't want to take them to either, given a choice.

*Ie crayfish and roquette. Only for the highly precocious. :eek:

More choice for parents would be great but I suspect the problem is them ole market forces. Eateries won't do the child friendly thing unless they think it will boost their profits by bringing a sufficient number of families in, rather than diminish them by driving away those who either don't have kids or are trying to have a grown up night out without them.

hatboy

19-02-2004, 12:45

Maybe this was a troll. It does sound pretty snotty. Taking it in parts:

"An interesting related point is how so many of the contributors on this website rant on about maintaining the diversity of Brixton i.e. oppose the gentrification. I'd trade in the most of the dodgy geezers and dogs on strings type Trustafarians for some yuppies anyday. At least they move out of your way on the high street and consider the needs to the rest of Society."

I don't think they're are many "trustafarians" in Brixton. If there are I don't know them anyway.

"I'd trade in the most of the dodgy geezers.... for some yuppies anyday"

So what you're saying basically is "poor people get out of the way". It's not your decision to "trade" in people tho is it? Nor to decide who is "dodgy".

"Frankly, I wouldn't mind a Pret a Manager or half decent restaurant where I could take the kids during the day. I'd like more places for families and a few more people on this website to stop thinking about their own peer groups and think what other long term Brixton residents e.g. families might actually want/need".

My peer group includes people with families, thanks. I am a long-term Brixton resident.

"My wife and I still quite like it round here but it's a struggle bringing up a family".

Fair point - we need more kids facilities... for everybody... not just "my wife and I" in Pret A Manger.

"Bring on Harlem!"

Harlem's been placticised and sanitised. Result: poorer residents being levered out. See above link to the American site "tenants.net" protesting gentrification.

:)

Ol Nick

19-02-2004, 12:56

*Ie crayfish and roquette. Only for the highly precocious. :eek:

Only because British parents tend to feed shit to their children. There's nothing "challenging" about "crayfish and roquette": it's quite bland.

More choice for parents would be great but I suspect the problem is them ole market forces. Eateries won't do the child friendly thing unless they think it will boost their profits by bringing a sufficient number of families in, rather than diminish them by driving away those who either don't have kids or are trying to have a grown up night out without them.
There's certainly scope for restaurants to be family-friendly at lunchtime and grown-up-only friendly at night. However I suspect that the biggest is problem is that most Brixton restaurant-attendees with children bugger off to ClaphamWandsworthPutneyGuildford in order to reproduce.

Anna Key

19-02-2004, 13:01

Returning to Wiskey's orginal question, the Albert's child-friendly, especially in warm weather when the garden's open (as is the lovely Effra garden).

There's a long tradition of children running about the place on Saturdays until about 6pm.

I get the impression NewPat's seemlessly carried on the tradition.

But of course a Brixton branch of Pret a Manger would be infinately preferable. Better to introduce the kiddies early on to colonising US consumer capitalism.

aurora green

19-02-2004, 13:07

Well, pubs in the summer's a whole different story. There's the Duke with its lovley garden, and even the Hobgoblin's nice to sit outside on a warm sunny day.
Ah...I cant wait for it to be summer.

miss minnie

19-02-2004, 13:10

i've seen plenty of families eating out in the portuguese caffs and bars down south lambeth road. :)

Anna Key

19-02-2004, 13:31

Don't want to de-rail this thread but I sat through a Lambeth licensing committee meeting on Tuesday which was relevant to this discussion.

The deep and seemingly unbridgeable divide between gentrifiers and locals came out very strongly at the meeting.

A late bar, attended mainly by black locals (but all others welcome - I spoke to the owner during a break and he's obviously a nice man) has been operating down Stockwell Road for years.

A group of people (all white) have bought flats in a private new-build block near to the bar. They came to the committee to object to the late licence.

They said quite clearly that the bar was lowering their property prices. One said he'd been "tricked" into buying his flat: the previous owner had said the bar wasn't "a problem." ( :D )

And that's the power of the yuppie mentality. Local working class traditions conflict with the yuppie values of individualism and the God of house price inflation. Usually the yuppies win. What could be more important than money?

I'm pleased to report they lost at licensing committee on Tuesday.

This doesn't mean that loud bars keeping people awake at night should be tolerated. It's just the idea, displayed perfectly by Boom_Sounds (welcome by the way) that yuppie values are the "great white hope" for Brixton.

They're not. They're Brixton's death-knell. Fortunately many, many people - including members of Lambeth Council licensing committee - agree with me.

Sorry Wiskey. Back to your day out. :)

Mr Retro

19-02-2004, 13:55

Returning to Wiskey's orginal question, the Albert's child-friendly, especially in warm weather when the garden's open (as is the lovely Effra garden).

Depends what you define as child friendly. The huge amount of passive smoking they would endure in the Albert would not be good for their little lungs. The loud, ineffective, rattling air conditioning doesn't seem to make a dent in the fug.

Bit disapointed in the Albert these days, tables are always sticky, ashtrays unemptied, floors dirty. Maybe just been catching it at off times but the standard of clenliess has dropped drastically ime

newbie

19-02-2004, 14:02

They said quite clearly that the bar was lowering their property prices. One said he'd been "tricked" into buying his flat: the previous owner had said the bar wasn't "a problem." ( :D )

Which means that bar did not lower property prices...and they'll presumably sell with much the same story, so the market price won't be affected. Their argument is absurd, as well as being very selfish.

What the bar might do is reduce the quality of life for those living nearby, whether recent incomers or longer term residents. In that sense it doesn't matter whether the flats are private or social; peace & quiet is a different, and more pertinent, issue. But a hard one: three or four people in a bar with very loud music at 1am keeping 50 residents awake would as be utterly unreasonable as 3 or 4 new residents depriving 50 longterm locals of a bar they use nightly.

I don't know about the bar in question, but it's pretty clear that refusing a late license based purely on a claimed effect on property prices would be very wrong. So Hurrah for Lambeth Council (& there's a phrase you don't come across very often :) )

Ol Nick

19-02-2004, 14:05

W But a hard one: three or four people in a bar with very loud music at 1am keeping 50 residents awake would as be utterly unreasonable as 3 or 4 new residents depriving 50 longterm locals of a bar they use nightly.
House prices aside, would 100 locals in a bar with very loud music nightly at 1am keeping 1 resident awake be reasonable or not? Is it the "yuppie mentality" to suggest this is unreasonable?

newbie

19-02-2004, 14:13

My view, yes, that's a reasonable impact, but only if the revellers are also local. I tried to draw extremes which were pretty clear. But whether 30 people in a bar keeping 30 people awake is reasonable is a very different matter.

Particularly in an area not focussing on entertainment: but even then... there are a lot of people live on Soho, which has a very active nighttime economy. Balancing the respective rights of residents against revellers isn't easy.

LDR

19-02-2004, 14:32

I go on holiday to Clapham sometimes. It's a nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there.

;)

It's a nice place to work but I wouldn't want to drink there. ;)

IntoStella

19-02-2004, 14:49

Only because British parents tend to feed shit to their children. There's nothing "challenging" about "crayfish and roquette": it's quite bland. I don't equate Pret-a-McD with good food. I think their selection is expensive, pretentious, monotonous and most importantly, their sandwiches don't actually taste very nice. Rocket (which they insist on calling 'Roquette' :rolleyes: ) is not good food. Rocket is a foul-tasting WEED!! :D

Besides, kids don't like bland food. They like things with a bit of oomph, or so I'm told. I was once found, aged 18mths and having been dressed by my Grandmother in head-to-toe white broderie anglais, sitting in a coal scuttle and munching enthusiastically on a bulb of garlic. Apparently this (the garlic bit, at least) is not unusual. There's certainly scope for restaurants to be family-friendly at lunchtime and grown-up-only friendly at night. You're right; I meant to say night or lunch. After all, there is also demand for child friendly places in the evening and kid-free places for lunch. But whether 30 people in a bar keeping 30 people awake is reasonable is a very different matter. Blimmin' 'eck! It's angels dancing on the head of a pin time! :eek: :eek:

I too was at that five hour Ents licensing cttee and the case in question took up three of the five hours. It was certainly instructive. Needless to say the decision-making process was far, far more complex than any mathematical ratio of local revellers to sleepless yuppies, property prices or how ''local'' everyone concerned was based on mitochondrial DNA swabs or something. :eek:

wiskey

19-02-2004, 15:45

ANYWAYS AS I WAS SAYING . . .

We went to the Lounge for lunch in the end, and they were great. both the kids seemed to like the food and the atmosphere - it wasnt too busy either. The food went down well, even if the little one did take an infinate amount of time to eat half a pannini :rolleyes:

The two girls who work there were charming as ever and privided a doggy bag for the remains of the small ones lunch (which he can bloody well have for dinner).

best of all 5 people ate lunch with drinks for £22.90 :D

we will be going back.

wiskers

carry on with your arguements

christonabike

19-02-2004, 16:06

That place don't sound half bad fer adults there wiskey!

:D :D

IntoStella

19-02-2004, 16:08

best of all 5 people ate lunch with drinks for £22.90 :D That's impressive. :cool:

Given the absolutely unbelievable number of people popping out sprogs lately (what is going on :eek: ??), more places would clearly be wise to follow the Lounge's example.

Or they might find themselves jabbing big pins repeatedly into their own persons and involuntarily walking under buses, like in the Midwich Cuckoos. :eek: ;)

lang rabbie

19-02-2004, 17:16

Lounge has no problem with kids - in fact, you can see some in the pics I took on the brixtonlounge.com site!.

Mike - when the venue also holds art exhibitions, is a menu option of Gallery the obvious one to click on to find out that kids are welcome? :confused:

And, without wanting to turn Urban75.com completely into Suburban75.com
now that so many of your dangerous anarchist readers have offspring, perhaps the Brixton cafe/restaurant listings could include something on each venue's attitude to children?

Boom_Sounds

19-02-2004, 17:29

Nice one Wiskey, I'll try out the Lounge after your recommendation. I forgot to add Verz Cruz which does an OK fish finger sandwich plus Cafe on the Hill for a fry-up.

I'm a bit surprised by the level of emotion over a few casual comments about Pret a Manager. I'll put my hands up - I don't really like Pret myself and it was poor choice of language. The last thing I would want is for Brixton to become sterile and bland. If you read my original post you'll notice that I said
'I wouldn't mind a Pret a Manager or half decent Restuarant where I could take the kids during the day'. I didn't say 'I would really love a Pret a Manger and won't sleep until Brixton gets one' or 'I would like the whole of Brixton Market to be replaced by high street chain stores'. I was simply trying to make the point that people have different needs/wants and desires. The general discussion in this forum makes regular reference to Brixton's diversity and that strength is underpinned by tolerance of others. I'm surprised by the level of intolerence shown just because I may have a different view.

Hatboy - you've mis-understood me and twisted words to fit your own agenda. I don't recall coming to any conclusion that "Pret a Manger" will save Brixton. When I referred to dodgy geezers I meant junkies and dealers who make life with young children in Brxiton a perpetual struggle. I wouldn't treat a poor person any differently to you or I. :confused: .

Streathamite

19-02-2004, 17:56

House prices aside, would 100 locals in a bar with very loud music nightly at 1am keeping 1 resident awake be reasonable or not? Is it the "yuppie mentality" to suggest this is unreasonable?
yes, it is, actually. If you don't know brixton's a loud and lively place within hours of first arriving here, then your head - or your ears - need radical remedy. Also, the 100 come before the one. If you want trappist silence, move to f-ing Hove.

wiskey

19-02-2004, 18:30

And, without wanting to turn Urban75.com completely into Suburban75.com now that so many of your dangerous anarchist readers have offspring, perhaps the Brixton cafe/restaurant listings could include something on each venue's attitude to children?

i actually agree with that, i dont often have children to visit and it might be useful to show where accepts them and whats geared up for them.

i'll do a bit of research if i can borrow some more kids.

wiskers

hatboy

19-02-2004, 19:43

yes, it is, actually. If you don't know brixton's a loud and lively place within hours of first arriving here, then your head - or your ears - need radical remedy. Also, the 100 come before the one. If you want trappist silence, move to f-ing Hove.

That's how I feel Mr Red. I've always said that when the "turn your stereo down brigade move to Brixton it will be fucked"... well... they're here now for sure. I do believe very much in mutual respect, but some people think they own the neighbourhood as soon as they get here. I think it's important to get to know the place and how it works a bit, then you can get things done by co-operation rather than trying to boss people. And yeah, basically, this is a noisy, vibrant (most cliched word to describe Brixton?) area. And I do resent people who want to kill that. It's a bloody cheek. Like new Notting Hillites trying to kill the carnival - what the fuck did they move into NH for anyway? Don't tell me, cos they read it was cool. :rolleyes:

Boom sounds - you sound more reasonable now, but that was a pretty provoking first post.

:)

PS That Cafe Pushka might be OK for kids. Clean and smoke free.

corporate whore

20-02-2004, 07:16

Interesting thread - though I don't have children, it's made me think about how people in different domestic circumstances move in different circles, and need different things from their locality.

For all its faults, I reckon The Wimpey was probably the best place to take a child for eats. You'd have to dress 'em up a bit to get 'em into Plan B, though, especially at the weekend ;) How about the organic cafe on CHL? Used to be in the market, but is now 2 doors up from The Albert - is it still there? Quality smoothies...

On the Pret, er, tip, it not extremelely likely they'll ever open in Brixton - so much of their business is about the office lunch rush, and I don't think there's the demand.

Why anyone would take their kids to Pret, I'm not sure - there's nowhere to sit! Though beware! This is coming (and look! It's Jay Rayner again!) (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,11913,1146770,00.html)

:p

editor

20-02-2004, 08:58

Mike - when the venue also holds art exhibitions, is a menu option of Gallery the obvious one to click on to find out that kids are welcome? :confused:
Err, I meant that if you clicked on the gallery page of brixtonlounge.com you'd see a picture of a couple holding a baby on the sofa there - thus illustrating that they're 'child friendly'!

I'm happy to include child friendly listings - in fact, I'd be happy to have an entire 'Brixton for Kids' listings - if someone can be arsed to compile it!

Ol Nick

20-02-2004, 09:57

For all its faults, I reckon The Wimpey was probably the best place to take a child for eats.
Wimpey's were great. Waiters and waitresses, real plates and cutlery, Knickerbocker Glory, Banana Split (I have no memory of any main courses.)

On the Pret, er, tip, it not extremelely likely they'll ever open in Brixton - so much of their business is about the office lunch rush, and I don't think there's the demand.
I agree. I think it would be nice to be able to get sandwiches as nice as at Pret -- and they're better than most "traditional" grease and chicken parts sandwich merchants -- but in a proper local cafe.

As for noise, bits of Brixton have been loud for a while. Most bits are residential and quiet. AK and the others have been campaigning against the Living Bah on the issue of the noise it generated. I'm sure people living on Rushcroft Road knew that CHL is a noisy place before they moved there.

I'm all for a bit of give and take if it's done with respect. Otherwise how am I going to persuade my neighbours to let me have a party till 4am once in a while? But I don't think anyone has a right to make enough noise to keep their neighbours (and their neighbours' children, let's remember) up past, say 10. There's no automatic right; there has to be give and take.

lang rabbie

20-02-2004, 09:59

Err, I meant that if you clicked on the gallery page of brixtonlounge.com you'd see a picture of a couple holding a baby on the sofa there - thus illustrating that they're 'child friendly'!

Maybe I'm becoming an obsessive non-smoker :eek: (too much socialising in medical research charity circles), but I read the home page image with the cigarette at the centre of the composition as meaning 'smoker friendly' - which too often = 'child unfriendly'.

I know that the Lounge isn't usually some smoke filled room, but first impressions count if a website is being used as a promotional tool.

CK1977

20-02-2004, 10:11

Brixton needs more places like the Lounge IMHO. The Lounge seems to cater for all age groups and the staff are extremely friendly and welcoming.

IMHO The Lounge is streets ahead of all these new "style" bars/cafes/dining concepts.

Us mere mortals...don't ask for much in Brixton...but a few more places like The Lounge would certainly cheer me up!

Streathamite

20-02-2004, 13:13

Which means that bar did not lower property prices...and they'll presumably sell with much the same story, so the market price won't be affected. Their argument is absurd, as well as being very selfish.

What the bar might do is reduce the quality of life for those living nearby, whether recent incomers or longer term residents.
So Hurrah for Lambeth Council (& there's a phrase you don't come across very often :) )
umm, as the bar's been there for years, how can it 'reduce the quality of life'?
but yer right about the council-I had to read that sentence twice! ;)

Streathamite

20-02-2004, 13:17

This is coming (and look! It's Jay Rayner again!) (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,11913,1146770,00.html)

:p
are yer startin', then? d'yer want me 'n' 'Stella to 'ave a word, like? :p

hatboy

20-02-2004, 13:25

"I'm all for a bit of give and take if it's done with respect. Otherwise how am I going to persuade my neighbours to let me have a party till 4am once in a while? But I don't think anyone has a right to make enough noise to keep their neighbours (and their neighbours' children, let's remember) up past, say 10."

No, 12 at least. 2am at weekends. You can't complain here before that. If you do you need to live in Hove, actually.

:)

IntoStella

20-02-2004, 13:25

This is coming (and look! It's Jay Rayner again!) (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,11913,1146770,00.html)

:p Oh please! Not with the hangover I've got right now! :rolleyes: ;)

I'm sure Mr Rayner is far too busy dining for free on distended goose testicles to suffer Pret's limited and monotonous fare day after day after tedious day, unlike a lot of poor sods who, unless they bring in their own butties, have bugger all choice because there's a Pret every 10 yards and nothing else.

Their bread absolutely sucks and who wants to eat sushi every single day apart from idiots who want to believe they're in Sex and the City? (And who can afford it..)

Admittedly their noodles were nice but they stopped doing them after about two months.

lang rabbie

20-02-2004, 14:04

"No, 12 at least. 2am at weekends. You can't complain here before that. If you do you need to live in Hove, actually.
:)

That's bollocks HB and you ought to know it[:) or no :)] - despite gentrification, your neighbours in social housing in Brixton are far more likely than a suburbanite to include someone who has to get up at 4.30 or 5.00 in the morning to work as a bus driver, cleaner, or in any of the service industries which members of the new leisure classes take for granted.

The old all-night drinking dens down the road generally didn't keep them awake. Unthinking neighbours blasting 100 watts per channel past midnight, because no-one expects them to function before 10am, do. :mad:

editor

20-02-2004, 14:15

.... but I read the home page image with the cigarette at the centre of the composition as meaning 'smoker friendly' - which too often = 'child unfriendly'.
Can't say I make that association myself, but the Lounge has a smoking and a non-smoking area. But I'll mention your comments to the owner and maybe he'll update the site to reflect your concerns.

Ol Nick

20-02-2004, 14:18

hatboy

20-02-2004, 14:29

What I'm saying is that quiet is not automatically superior to loud. My response to some people who'd say "you're too loud and over-the-top" is to say "you're not loud enough and under-the-top".

And bollocks to you Lang! :) But seriously I have excellent relations with my neighbours.

How did you know I got 100 watts per channel btw?

Ol Nick

20-02-2004, 14:41

How did you know I got 100 watts per channel btw?
I've got lightbulbs more powerful than that.

But if you've got excellent relationships with your neighbours, that's just how it should be.

But suppose you adopted some children. And they needed to sleep from 8 or evey night. And the noise from next door stopped them. Would they have to move to Hove? Maybe this discussion is getting a little arid.

IntoStella

20-02-2004, 15:40

I've got lightbulbs more powerful than that. You made me spit water all over my keyboard then.
:D

Brixton Hatter

20-02-2004, 15:57

Though beware! This is coming (and look! It's Jay Rayner again!) (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,11913,1146770,00.html)

:p
I almost spat water all over my keyboard when i read the truly saddening story about how Jay Rayner couldnt get a decent coffee in the UK until starbucks came along :rolleyes:

Streathamite

20-02-2004, 16:06

I've got lightbulbs more powerful than that.

But if you've got excellent relationships with your neighbours, that's just how it should be.

But suppose you adopted some children. And they needed to sleep from 8 or evey night. And the noise from next door stopped them. Would they have to move to Hove? Maybe this discussion is getting a little arid.
right Ok. first off, as this all started witha point about whether a local pub's grooveability rights should precede an incomers snoozeability rights, that's a bit of a straw man. relations with neighbours are as much an individual thing in SW2 as elsewhere.
but....the answer is there'd have to be mutual give and take. and no, if you choose to adopt kids, you can't suddenly insist that everyone in a 500 yard radius turns into dormice. just as you can't suddenly move into an area and shove your lifestyle down its' throat

IntoStella

20-02-2004, 16:15

I almost spat water all over my keyboard when i read the truly saddening story about how Jay Rayner couldnt get a decent coffee in the UK until starbucks came along :rolleyes: There is something seriously wrong with that man's tastebuds. I'd be really worried if I was the Observer.

IntoStella

20-02-2004, 16:20

Maybe this discussion is getting a little arid. The moral of this story, as the doughty burghers on planning and licensing cttees will surely tell you, is that you absolutely cannot generalise. Each case has to be taken on its individual merits. This is one reason why it is such a long and often unbelievably tedious process. These people take their work extremely seriously. And some of them (Cllrs Parry, Grigg and Fewtrell) are on Ents Licensing AND Planning! :eek: :eek:

Gramsci

20-02-2004, 17:58

yes, it is, actually. If you don't know brixton's a loud and lively place within hours of first arriving here, then your head - or your ears - need radical remedy. Also, the 100 come before the one. If you want trappist silence, move to f-ing Hove.

I have lived here for 22 years in Central Brixton.Whilst their were always a lot of pubs it has changed.For example I lived near the old Atlantic.This was a pub on the ground floor which played music which was not heavily amplified.It was mainly a black pub-though i used it every know and again before it got out of hand.The first floor was used for meetings etc and the top floor was a flat.It closed at 11.

When it was changed into the "Dogstar" with Brixton Challenge money it became a three floor later night club with powerful sound systems.It was complaints by residents that stopped it getting an upstairs entertainments licence(Dogstar won on appeal).

This reduced the quality of life for residents who lived nearby.These people were not "yuppies" or people who had just moved into the area.

Gramsci

20-02-2004, 18:13

Coming back to Wiskeys original post this does fit into the "entertainment" "gentrification" discussion.Brixton Challenge-a government funded regeneration project-decided to spend money on Brixtons "entertainment" sector.

I get frequent complaints from people that Brixton is not child friendly.I agree-and I dont have children.Brixton Challenge,instead of regenerating Brixton to also make it good for those with kids,Put money into "entertainment" projects that encouraged the "yuppification" of Brixton.

Their are plenty of people with kids around Brixton and they are not neccessarily that well off-they arent going (in the mind of business led regeneration) going to input a lot of money in the local economy so they get fuck all.

What Brixton needs for kids are:

1)Decent public toilets with baby changing facilities.
2)A good supervised playground/creche for people shopping in Brixton.
3)A space/small park with a cafe and seats.This should be a adults with kids only space to stop drunks and dealers taking it over.

Perhaps 2 and 3 could be combined.

Of course this wont bring in big bucks so it will never happen unless its Council/Government funded.This despite the fact it would do the shopping centre good.

editor

20-02-2004, 18:18

What Brixton needs for kids are:
3)A space/small park with a café and seats.This should be a adults with kids only space to stop drunks and dealers taking it over.I say: reclaim Tate Gardens!

It's a drunks/junkies/dodgy geezer-infested shithole at the moment and as a result woefully under used by the community.

Imagine if there was an outdoor café there, the toilets replaced and the space more closely linked to Windrush Gardens... (another woefully underused resource)

Gramsci

20-02-2004, 18:23

I was going to suggest the Tate Gardens but didnt want to get into an argument about were the street drinkers etc go.Unfortunately that might have to happen.

Streathamite

20-02-2004, 18:52

I have lived here for 22 years in Central Brixton.Whilst their were always a lot of pubs it has changed.For example I lived near the old Atlantic.This was a pub on the ground floor which played music which was not heavily amplified.It was mainly a black pub-though i used it every know and again before it got out of hand.The first floor was used for meetings etc and the top floor was a flat.It closed at 11.

When it was changed into the "Dogstar" with Brixton Challenge money it became a three floor later night club with powerful sound systems.It was complaints by residents that stopped it getting an upstairs entertainments licence(Dogstar won on appeal).

This reduced the quality of life for residents who lived nearby.These people were not "yuppies" or people who had just moved into the area.
v fair point, IMHO. yes, there has to be balance, and give and take (as I've said before). Yes brixton SHOULDN'T be partycentral to the detriment of residents.
My point was however, about Henry & Jocasta coming in, and then trying to rewrite the communal rulebook for their convenience
The dogstar is - at its' worst - a first class example of the place being packaged and sold up to weekend trustafarians for their dose of 'safe' trendily edgy Brixton living

hatboy

20-02-2004, 18:55

Fair enough Gramsci. Except of course reggae - in my opinion that should be played at a legally enforceable minimum volume.

"Oi you - turn that racket up or you're nicked!" Yeah :)

William of Walworth

20-02-2004, 20:22

v fair point, IMHO. yes, there has to be balance, and give and take (as I've said before). Yes brixton SHOULDN'T be partycentral to the detriment of residents.
My point was however, about Henry & Jocasta coming in, and then trying to rewrite the communal rulebook for their convenience
The dogstar is - at its' worst - a first class example of the place being packaged and sold up to weekend trustafarians for their dose of 'safe' trendily edgy Brixton living

Excellent post Jezza :)

William of Walworth

20-02-2004, 20:23

Fair enough Gramsci. Except of course reggae - in my opinion that should be played at a legally enforceable minimum volume.

"Oi you - turn that racket up or you're nicked!" Yeah :)

I'll vote for that!!!! :D :cool:

editor

20-02-2004, 20:29

The dogstar is - at its' worst - a first class example of the place being packaged and sold up to weekend trustafarians for their dose of 'safe' trendily edgy Brixton livingBut - to be fair - it's also an excellent late night quaffing venue for Brixtonites in the week and in its latest, post-Merrit incarnation - it has got a lot more involved with local community stuff, hosting local campaign meetings for free, for example.

'Tis a bag of shite on weekends tho'.

aurora green

20-02-2004, 21:49

1)Decent public toilets with baby changing facilities.
2)A good supervised playground/creche for people shopping in Brixton.
3)A space/small park with a cafe and seats.This should be a adults with kids only space to stop drunks and dealers taking it over.

Such good and simple ideas.
Would bring such an improvement to town.
I agree also, it would be great to use Tate gardens. The loos are already there. And Editors's so right, it's just unpleasant to walk through right now, a definate no-go area for kids really, it could be lovley, right outside the library, loads of good stuff could go on.

hendo

21-02-2004, 09:35

The mystery to me is why the council and the police haven't brought their multi agency approach to bear on Tate Gardens. Councillors and officers alike must be able to see it through their windows.

Ol Nick

21-02-2004, 10:21

The mystery to me is why the council and the police haven't brought their multi agency approach to bear on Tate Gardens. Councillors and officers alike must be able to see it through their windows.
I imagine the problem is deciding what to do with the people who use the area now. Do you shoo them off or offer an alternative?

hatboy

21-02-2004, 17:53

At some point the whole of Tate Gardens and Windrush Square are due to be remodelled into one public space. Maybe send your ideas to the Town Centre office.

Gramsci

22-02-2004, 18:41

I did send my ideas in some time ago.The Town Centre Mge hired a consultant.The consultants report suggested several planning layouts for the area-not all of them needing the closure of Effra Rd.Also the Raleigh hall,after a lot of consultation,was in the report planned to be a centre reflecting the multicultural nature of Brixton.

The consultants report was largely shelved by the Town Centre Mge of the time.

IMO what is needed is not grandiose plans/projects.The Council/Town Centre Mge attitude is the usual "this will put Brixton on the map" mentality.Thanks aurora green I meant my ideas to be straightforward and simple.What people really need is good basic services before anything else.

Take the Tate Gardens.I remember when it was refurbished.It might not be an architectural gem but it was OK.Over the years its gone downhill mainly due to lack of maintenance.Every ten years or so Brixton looks run down and money is thrown at it.In between nothing is spent.It would be better to maintain land and buildings on a regular basis as this would save money in the long run.

For example in the Tate Gdns the toilets could be refurbished.Perhaps including a small shop/cafe above it(their is an example in Notting Hill) and a full time Gardener for Tate Gardens/St Matthews meeting place with his/her own hut like they have in Westminster gardens.The Gardener would have funds for new plants etc.This would make it more child friendly and safer with someone their all the time.

So instead of spending a lot of time and money on plans/consultations for some "project" just do simple things that work.

Hendos right you would think as the Council look out on it they would want to do something about it.What Im saying is this doesnt have to cost a fortune or be on a large scale.Just look after whats their already properly.

Im supposed to be a loony lefty in the councils eyes(among others)but sometimes the Council waste so much time and money when the actual answers quite simple.

As Ol Nick says their is an issue of who has the right to use the square.I dont know how to resolve that.The thread started out about children in Brixton.I cant see parents using the Tate Gdns at present.And its one of the few open spaces in Central Brixton where you can sit down.

editor

22-02-2004, 19:04

I imagine the problem is deciding what to do with the people who use the area now. Do you shoo them off or offer an alternative?Drunks usually have a remarkable knack for finding places to hang out with fellow drinkers, so I don't think there'd be any point in offering them an Approved Drinking And Shouting Zone.

lang rabbie

22-02-2004, 19:42

As well as a lack of funds in Lambeth Council, I think that the first plans for a "pavilion" with cafe on the site of the disused toilets were partly stymied by someone who shouted "It's part of Rush Common - you can't build anything there".

IIRC correctly, someone from the heritage lobby then started rambling on about a breach of the terms of Lady Tate's will, and wanted Tate Gardens returned to its Edwardian appearance (http://www.urban75.org/brixton/history/tate1.html)

pooka

22-02-2004, 19:55

I imagine the problem is deciding what to do with the people who use the area now. Do you shoo them off or offer an alternative?

Perhaps a wet day centre is what's needed?

Old Steine Day Centre, Brighton
The Old Steine Day Centre in Brighton was opened as a wet centre by Equinox in September
1998. Street drinking had been a problem in Brighton town centre from the early 1990s. A multi-
11
agency forum, the Alcohol Partnership for East Sussex, was established to examine alcoholrelated
issues, and the absence of a ‘wet’ facility was identified as a major gap in local service
provision. A ‘Drink Crisis Planning Group’ was convened, and a needs assessment undertaken to
identify the size and location of the street drinking population, and to audit existing service
provision. The Planning Group identified the need for a ‘low-threshold’ specialist day care
service that offered an alternative to street drinking and access to other services. The
recommended principles were that: (i) the service should not insist upon a high level of
motivation and commitment to eventual abstinence as a precondition of access; and (ii) there
should be a co-ordinated response by all relevant services to the needs of street and inadequately
housed drinkers, which took account of their reluctance to stop drinking, their chaotic lifestyles,
and their social isolation (Squires and Measor, 1999).
It took four years from the identification of a need for a wet centre in Brighton to its
establishment. Equinox agreed to manage the centre and spent more than a year in an
unsuccessful search for premises. The organisation eventually informed the Counc il that they
would have to withdraw if a building could not be provided. The Council offered a rental
building which used to be a bank and is adjacent to the Royal Pavilion gardens. This location
immediately raised concerns from local people, but the police who were represented on the
Planning Group supported the proposal. A three-year funding package was secured, comprising
money from the Single Regeneration Budget (SRB2), the National Lottery, Brighton and Hove
Council, the Department of Health Specific Grant, and the Tudor Trust. An evaluation of the
centre was carried out in 1999 by a team from the University of Brighton (Squires and Measor,
1999).

Source: Wet Day Centres in UK (Kingsfund) (http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/pdf/wetcentre.pdf) (slow loading pdf file)

lang rabbie

22-02-2004, 20:27

Thanks for the link Pooka. I agree this is what is needed, but as always the difficulty will be agreeing premises. Existing "dry" centres in Lambeth for homeless people with a disproportionately large number of (former) street drinkers among their clientele are not popular with their neighbours because of the frequency of "lapses" by users who are then seen in nearby open spaces.

Finding suitable premises and gaining the necessary approvals and permissions for their use as a facility for homeless people is not easy. The usual difficulties are compounded when setting up a wet centre given the generally negative public reputation of the client group, and the possibility that the centre will attract street drinkers to a new location.
The centre should be in neither a residential area nor adjacent to schools, children’s playgrounds or other sensitive facilities, nor should it be in or next to a shopping or tourist area with high pedestrian densities and many visitors. Some users will inevitably drink in the street on their way to or from the centre, and a high frequency of problematic behaviour will be noticed and brought to the attention of the police, who will be obliged to intervene. Areas should also be avoided that already have extensive provision for other social problems, such as hostels for homeless people or for ex-offenders, and that are very run down, uniformly depressing or the ‘back of beyond’. The location should be accessible, which means principally that it is in walking distance from the town centre for the great majority of the likely clients. In summary, the ideal area should be an unremarkable part of the inner city in which ‘life goes on’ but there is not a high density of residents.

Any suggestions? [And I don't think Lambeth Primary Care Trust is going to buy out the KFC.]

hendo

22-02-2004, 21:44

I don't know if the place the TGDAG should go to should be either dry or wet, but in the four years I've lived in Brixton the place has been a deficit rather than an asset. I'd dearly love for it to be sorted; partly because TG could be really excellent, as posters here have described.

The earlier posts by Gramsci and Lang R have really got me thinking. Imagine TG as a place where you could go and sit on a warm afternoon and play chess, look at flowers, meet friends away from the traffic's roar. That sort of thing does go on in some cities, why can't it go on in ours?

No matter what the difficulties may be in dealing with long term alcoholics and the weed merchants I don't see why they're allowed to dominate such an important part of our space. I think the time has come for the rest of the community's needs to take precedence. I don't think we should be distracted by arguments about gentrification here; we all of us have a right to use that space and it should be reclaimed for all of us.

Nobody actually lives round there, so nobody votes, and I think that's why nobody in office wants to bother taking responsibility. I think laws probably exist that could be enforced in that area but suspect Brixton's cops consider the place largely lost; although they sometimes park the mobile police station in that area.

I feel ashamed of the impression visitors get about Brixton from TG. I think its one of the reasons why people get the wrong, negative, impression about the place.

And I wonder if the local shopkeepers who serve the the high octane lager to the usual suspects really consider they're doing their community a service. Perhaps they think Brixton deserves to be pissed on.