Brixton planning watch: planning applications and decisions listed

Discussion in 'Brixton' started by editor, Sep 20, 2017.

  1. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    As CH1 pointed out this was a Brixton Challenge project. I believe the upstairs was to be retail. But for whatever reason this didn't happen. I think the site was compulsory purchased. Developed then reverted back to private sector. Interesting comments in the design and access statement of how this is a conservation area and this present architecture is negative addition. That planning officers see this application as improvement. Begs the question what planning officers were doing when this regeneration development went through Brixton Challenge. Asleep at their desks? Or afraid of upsetting a Council led project?

    I've now read the design and access statement.

    At several times says historically Electric lane has been a "quiet back street". Compared to Atlantic road and Electric Avenue. Is this really a problem? That needs solving by adding yet more A3? Are local residents clamouring for more "active frontage" on this lane? No they aren't.
    Residents in Electric Avenue are asking for the opposite.

    The design and access statement isn't about improving "dead frontage". It's about making money.

    Agree with Rushy better use of this space would be offices or work units.

    To me this doesn't appear as great place for restaurant.
    editor likes this.
  2. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    If officers wanted more active use of Electric lane they could tell London Underground to reopen the passageway ( which had shops and cafe) going from Electric lane to the underground station.
    CH1 and editor like this.
  3. organicpanda

    organicpanda cat herder extraodinaire

    when did that appear? they maybe modest to you but they are going to butt right up to my bedroom while the people in the basement will lose all light at the back. I knew the slimy toe sucker would creep around and go back on his word to keep us informed
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2017
    editor likes this.
  4. organicpanda

    organicpanda cat herder extraodinaire

    and he's a lying twat as well, we like the back as a reminder of what was and a bit of space now we are surrounded by ever taller buildings with no character or indeed any redeeming features. He knows we have a 93 year old living here (who he has threatened in the past) and now he's going to create 2 houses right next to her bedroom which will involve excavating down to create basements, a lovely way to spend your last years!
    wurlycurly and editor like this.
  5. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    I only saw one bit of paper stuck to a lamppost. You'll need to get in quick as the deadline is today. And you're right - it sucks that they never bother telling anyone.

    I know I've been lucky to have a great view over Brixton but every day it's slowly disappearing as that fucking awful The Edge luxury development edges higher and higher.
    organicpanda likes this.
  6. organicpanda

    organicpanda cat herder extraodinaire

    I've kept an eye out for this for the last few months and I think I would have spotted it if it had been put up on the 29th September
  7. organicpanda

    organicpanda cat herder extraodinaire

    many thanks for spotting this, it enabled us to get 5 separate objections registered, fingers crossed it has an effect
    Gramsci, snowy_again and editor like this.
  8. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    Good luck with it - and glad I could help!
    organicpanda likes this.
  9. organicpanda

    organicpanda cat herder extraodinaire

    planning refused,:D I owe you a drink
    wurlycurly, editor, Gramsci and 2 others like this.
  10. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    I've just put in objection:

    oppose this application on basis of loss of residential amenity. People living in Electric Avenue and central Brixton have been complaining about late night and evening noise and disturbance. Allowing yet another restaurant/ bar will only increase the over saturation of central Brixton with late evening and night entertainment. I note directly opposite and behind this proposed restaurant there is residential housing.

    A better use of this site is office/ workshop space.

    There are plenty of restaurant/ bars in Brixton. No need for any more spaces to be converted into this use.

    Plus the proposed occupant us likely to run this place as bar / restaurant with music. Not just a quiet restaurant.
  11. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    I see Brixton Society have put in good objection in last few days. Appears they were not notified about this application. Which is piss poor of Lambeth Planning as Brixton Society are statutory consultees.

    It's likely Brixton Society saw this thread.
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2017
    editor likes this.
  12. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    See Brixton Society objection has my concerns that plant related to this proposal is not put in application. That the closed passageway should be reopened.

    Also in polite language Councils obsession with making Brixton a destination for upmarket eating and drinking. Fuck those who live here. And no real interest from Council in having a balance of retail/ bars/ restaurant/ night life.
  13. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    Btw the Lambeth Planning website/ portal is still shite to use.
    organicpanda and editor like this.
  14. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    Looking at the other thread on what sort of night life do you want where there is ilnk to unpublished Council commissioned report on evening and late night "entertainment" I see the officers support for this application as coming from that report.

    In pre application meeting officers gave positive feedback to this application. How is it that the unpaid volunteers of Brixton Society found planning issues that question this application?

    Is it that Council officers have mindset that this kind of development is good for Brixton? Inward investment in upmarket "entertainment" is taken as good.
    editor likes this.
  15. CH1

    CH1 "Red Guard"(NLYL)

    This is so. Curiously one of the members who live adjacent to this Electric Lane site raised another site:
    The person concerned was completely unaware of the Electric Lane restaurant proposal - which suggests Lambeth's consultation on planning is as duff as ever!
    Interestingly, one of the public comments on the Coldharbour Lane link above says that the application is not in the town centre - and that they enjoy all the drinks bars available!
    Gramsci likes this.
  16. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    As a follow up on the Argos building restaurant application where Brixton Society mention the long closed walkway with shop units going from Electric lane to underground station entrance a couple of photos. Bizarrely the lights are always on despite being closed. The people who run the flower stall in front of Underground station used to have a cafe there. 20171028_175132.jpg 20171028_175120.jpg
    trabuquera, T & P and editor like this.
  17. CH1

    CH1 "Red Guard"(NLYL)

    For real planning nerds - there are three Rush Common planning applications to be considered by the Corporate Committee of Lambeth Council on Wednesday 29th November at the Karibu Centre 7 pm.
    Agenda for Corporate Committee on Wednesday 29 November 2017, 5.00 pm | Lambeth Council

    These are for 35 Helix Gardens, 237 Brixton Hill and Saltoun Road/Windrush Sq south side.

    Regulars might know that the Rush Common Act has certain stipulations about the land designated as "Rush Common". Formerly the GLC had oversight of planning applications in case Lambeth Council were reckless and wanton in approving inappropriate development.

    It would appear that currently the Corporate Committee of the council is now the regulator set over Lambeth Planning. Sounds like a case of going though the motions. However the issues at hand are:
    Erection of a bicycle docking station for Boris Bikes (Saltoun Road)
    Rearrangement of a vehicle sales forecourt (237 Brixton Hill)
    Replacement of garden wall and creation of a rubbish storge area (35 Helix Road)

    Also on the agenda is a report on Fire Safety in tower blocks in Lambeth.

    Plus loads of stuff on Social Care

    Last but not least is the council's Audit Report. This makes no mention at all of the issues raised in the People's Audit, as publicised by Brixton Buzz.
    Pity we were not operating under Ted Knight rules, where members of the public were allowed to ask questions!
  18. teuchter

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    Boris bikes are finally coming to Brixton then.
  19. Crispy

    Crispy The following psytrance is baṉned: All

    re: that station passageway- Do I have the right story in my head? It was going to be opened up for public use, but the TfL offices upstairs needed to pinch a bit of space from it, thus cutting it in two. Is that right?
  20. CH1

    CH1 "Red Guard"(NLYL)

    Hadn't heard that - but I'm not on these transport development committees etc.

    Maybe they had to use some of the shopping space thereby making it "unviable" as developers now say?
  21. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    I definitely recall a general assumption that it was going to reopen after the refurb works. Not sure if that had been officially stated though.
  22. ViolentPanda

    ViolentPanda Hardly getting over it.

    Were you aware that the Corporate Committee, via Democratic Services, have actively worked to stop a member of The People's Audit raising "public notice questions" (as I believe they're called) before the committee?
  23. Rushy

    Rushy AKA some / certain posters

    The corporate committee is a bit of a joke. Unlike regular planning applications there is supposed to be an express presumption against approving Rush Common applications. It's up to applicants to demonstrate that their development does not adversely affect the open nature of Rush Common. Yet they seem to allow applications which make no such arguments and which don't even bother to produce a plan showing the extents of Rush Common in relation to their proposed development.

    Any idea what the outcome was?
  24. colacubes

    colacubes Well-Known Member

    I think it was the original intention, but I think part of the corridor now houses comms stuff for the tube so it probably isn’t possible iirc.
  25. CH1

    CH1 "Red Guard"(NLYL)

    I didn't know about the express procedure - but in any event the actual meeting to rubber stamp will be on 29th November.

    Maybe the reports themselves, which are online, give a steer as to the outcome. I imagine lobbying would not be permitted, as these planning matters always seem to be "quasi-judicial".
  26. CH1

    CH1 "Red Guard"(NLYL)

    No - but it isn't really surprising. The use of the word audit by the council seems to imply generating confidence in the council's systems through self-anaysis.

    In the case of the People's Audit it refers to analysing the facts to see where it all went wrong.

    Consider the case of Enron which employed Arthur Anderson to give a public assurance that what they were doing was bona fide.
    Of course it turned out that Enron was on the fiddle, went bust and took Arthur Andersen - one of the big five "Auditors" with it!

    I would say that by batting off the people's audit the council administration is not increasing confidence - rather it is giving rise to concern that all is not well
  27. aka

    aka Brixton Hill

    Off topic a bit. It was a glorious/strange day when Andersen's finally got caught out (well apart from all the people losing jobs and pensions getting shafted and the actual Arthur's name being dragged in to the mud). It was a long time in the making - it wasn't just Enron that did 'em, more a decades long series of blindeyes and greed for juicy consulting monies. In the 90's the Andersen trainee scheme seemed to churn out an arrogant bunch of identikit 'androids' as they were known. Poor Arthur, one of, if not 'the' best auditor ever. Great (seriously) write up on it >>

    The fall of Andersen
  28. CH1

    CH1 "Red Guard"(NLYL)

    Someone brought up about the Dogstar roof terrace on the main Brixton thread (April 2018).

    There is another application as well for replacing the side smoking area (if it still is) with a restaurant and 2 flats above.
    The effect being to change this:
    389 existing.jpg
    into this:
    389 proposed.jpg
    Now I'm fairly relaxed about this from the point of view of the frontage - it represents a tidying up.

    But there are other issues:
    1. does it affect the Dogstar as a music venue?
    2. how about the bin and bin area at the back. Seem to recall this was a major issue with residents in the flats behind last time round.
    3. over-concentration of restaurants/takeaways. Have we given up the gost on that?

    Just leave these thoughts. Technically the consultation deadline is today.
  29. Crispy

    Crispy The following psytrance is baṉned: All

    You'll have to give us the planning ref. cos links to the planning website always come out broken :(
  30. editor

    editor Forked with electrons

    As far as I know, they've given up on the roof idea for now.
    CH1 likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice