Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

teuchter

je suis teuchter
View attachment 164380 View attachment 164381looks like NR aren't finishing arches in line with planning conditions. All adopted planning drawings show the existing really nice polished mosaic tiling being cleaned and repaired. Looks to me like they've repaired and painted instead. Must have saved NR some cash I guess. When do you think they'll be pulling out the shrubbery as well, which also forms part of the planning documents.
While I can see legitimate reasons that the shrubbery might be pulled out later, if its true that the mosaic is in breach of their planning permission, report this to lambeth planning enforcement and post their response here.
 

editor

hiraethified
View attachment 164580
Well here’s another FOUR, It nowhere near as bad as you’ve reported so far that’s EIGHT
Perhaps you missed the earlier post which cited their own website which reported that only a minority of businesses are returning, in stark contract to their original claim of "75%" of businesses returning (which conveniently didn't include any of the sub-let businesses who will not be returning).
 

Mr Bim of Bar

Well-Known Member
And your evidence for this cheery claim?

You can start with the A&C deli.
They already said that that business was bad and that they were were not making money, NOTHING TO DO WITH NR they would have closed anyway, they quoted Brindisa as a reason, and Brindisa are no longer there, let’s get real about business and the economic climate.
 

editor

hiraethified
They already said that that business was bad and that they were were not making money, NOTHING TO DO WITH NR
Oh dear, you really are a bit out of touch here.

Perhaps you missed this article? It was written by the owner of the deli.

Brixton’s A&C Deli: the inside story of a small business destroyed by gentrification, Network Rail & Lambeth Council.

With Network Rail wanting everyone out by October and Lambeth Council sheepishly declaring it wasn’t anything to do with them, it was a landlord/tenant dispute.

We realised that the reason that their hands were behind their backs, wasn’t because they were tied, it was because their hands were holding a big “APPROVED” rubber stamp, ready to use on the planning application.

Eight months later and we’re still being dragged over the coals.

Everyone’s business is in limbo, we don’t know if and when we’ll be evicted, we don’t know how long any refurbishment will take. We don’t know where we’re supposed to go whilst it happens.

What we do know is that Network Rail aren’t interested in listening and have no regard for the loss of goods and services to our community that these evictions will result in.
Anyway how about all these other evicted businesses that are supposedly thriving elsewhere?
 

Baron

Active Member
News flash.

Old traders didn’t want to leave. They were forced too.

New arches come empty so any new trader can come in and occupy them.

Rents are now 3-4 times more.
Rates will also be 3-4 times more.
Plus Lambeth charges for rubbish and outdoor signage and seating.
Plus the brilliant Brixton BID levy.


Anyone who thinks it’s a good move for Brixton, get ready for your £5 bread.

Enjoy.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
They already said that that business was bad and that they were were not making money, NOTHING TO DO WITH NR they would have closed anyway, they quoted Brindisa as a reason, and Brindisa are no longer there, let’s get real about business and the economic climate.
I used the deli.

What you are saying is an insult to a hard-working family run business.

Some people work hard and bust there gut to provide a service to customers. Stand on there own two feet and make a living.

All you can say is get "real".

NR destroyed there business.

Get real about business and the economic climate? NR help make this economic climate

Your post is up there with Retro they should have tried harder and made sandwiches nonsense.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
I've been out and about in LJ and Brixton today at community meetings.

The right wing nonsense I see posted here has no relation to what residents in LJ and Brixton say to me. That is the residents I deal with and know.
 

editor

hiraethified
I see there's another new restaurant going to move into the arches. It's obvious that these new, expensive eateries are going to have an impact on the area and attract an entirely different crowd. Can anyone really think all these changes aren't going to have a negative impact on the existing businesses?
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
View attachment 164380 View attachment 164381looks like NR aren't finishing arches in line with planning conditions. All adopted planning drawings show the existing really nice polished mosaic tiling being cleaned and repaired. Looks to me like they've repaired and painted instead. Must have saved NR some cash I guess. When do you think they'll be pulling out the shrubbery as well, which also forms part of the planning documents.
I was in Brixton Station Road today. So had a look. Its not completely finished yet. I was surprised at how cheap and tacky the finish is. Unless some extra work is to be done over next weeks I'm not impressed. Its not to the standard of work at Kings Cross for example.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
IMG_0193.JPG mafalda got me looking at the planning application.

Here is how it was supposed to look:FB_IMG_1552686389083.jpg

It say remove tiling and make good brickwork below. What has happened is the tiling has been left on and painted black. Other arches have no tiling and arch has been painted black. The brickwork has not been made good.

This is cheaply done version of what was presented to the planning committee.

The drawing shows something much nicer than what has been done.

To borrow mafalda image to see the difference:
 
Last edited:

T & P

|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
I was in Brixton Station Road today. So had a look. Its not completely finished yet. I was surprised at how cheap and tacky the finish is. Unless some extra work is to be done over next weeks I'm not impressed. Its not to the standard of work at Kings Cross for example.
If the finish of the units had been akin to the sanitised, tidy, pristine exposed brick look of the units in King's Cross, can you honestly say you would have not rejected it as a negative development due to concerns it might likely cause to further advance the gentrification process in the area?

Before anyone starts making accusations of being a cheerleader for NR, attempting point scoring or ganging up, I'm not having a go at you. But given the usual opposition expressed here to proposals to improve public areas in Brixton or make more aesthetically pleasing for fears of indirectly promoting gentrification, I'd have thought giving the units a cheap and tacky look would have been a great outcome in your view. And that the polished finish of the King's Cross units would have been about the last thing you'd wanted.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
If the finish of the units had been akin to the sanitised, tidy, pristine exposed brick look of the units in King's Cross, can you honestly say you would have not rejected it as a negative development due to concerns it might likely cause to further advance the gentrification process in the area?

Before anyone starts making accusations of being a cheerleader for NR, attempting point scoring or ganging up, I'm not having a go at you. But given the usual opposition expressed here to proposals to improve public areas in Brixton or make more aesthetically pleasing for fears of indirectly promoting gentrification, I'd have thought giving the units a cheap and tacky look would have been a great outcome in your view. And that the polished finish of the King's Cross units would have been about the last thing you'd wanted.
This is point scoring.

A cheap shot that.

And you are having a good at me.

My post above shows the discrepancy between what NR said they would do and what they have done. The actual facts. After what mafada posted I thought I'd have a look at the original drawings.

Do you think its ok for a developer to present quality work to planning committee and then actually do something that looks different?
 
Last edited:

T & P

|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
This is point scoring.

A cheap shot that.

And you are having a good at me.

My post above shows the discrepancy between what NR said they would do and what they have done. The actual facts. After what mafada posted I thought I'd have a look at the original drawings.

Do you think its ok for a developer to present quality work to planning committee and then actually do something that looks different?
No.

No.

And no.

In fact, it has become all but impossible in the last year or so to simply express a differing opinion in here without being accused of hidden agendas, ulterior motives, or of being right wing and on the side of corporations. It is stifling all debate in this forum as well as, in this case and many others, completely untrue.

As to the question in your post, the answer is of course 'no'. But then again that issue was not mentioned at all in the post I replied to, and I posted my reply before I had seen your subsequent post. So I had no way of knowing you were talking about apparent shortcomings in the developer's finished product.

The post I replied to was purely and solely about aesthetics and compassions with the arches at King's Cross. So it would be nice to be granted the benefit of the doubt from time to time when expressing a differing opinion, instead of dismissing me or my comments as dishonest or agenda driven.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
No.

No.

And no.

In fact, it has become all but impossible in the last year or so to simply express a differing opinion in here without being accused of hidden agendas, ulterior motives, or of being right wing and on the side of corporations. It is stifling all debate in this forum as well as, in this case and many others, completely untrue.

As to the question in your post, the answer is of course 'no'. But then again that issue was not mentioned at all in the post I replied to, and I posted my reply before I had seen your subsequent post. So I had no way of knowing you were talking about apparent shortcomings in the developer's finished product.

The post I replied to was purely and solely about aesthetics and compassions with the arches at King's Cross. So it would be nice to be granted the benefit of the doubt from time to time when expressing a differing opinion, instead of dismissing me or my comments as dishonest or agenda driven.
Having to deal with posts like yours is why I find it difficult to keep posting on the Brixton forum.

It doesn't matter how I post up.

If I'm posting a straightforward opinion you take that as an opportunity to have a go.

My last couple of posts have been looking at the arches myself after what mafalda posted ( and I notice that went unremarked by you. Only when I post up does it become an issue), and posting up what I think. Looking up the plans to see if there are discrepancies between the plans and the actual finished product.
 
Last edited:

Lambeth Boy

Active Member
What’s been forgotten is all the double standards that NR have gotten away with
1. Why are William Hill & HT Pawnbrokers still trading especially WH in a really run down Arch ?
2. Why weren’t the existing traders leases not ‘ frozen ‘ during the refit ?
3. What did Bid & Lambeth do to help the traders cause ?
4. What happened to the rest of the traders & why aren’t they returning ?
 

T & P

|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
Having to deal with posts like yours is why I find it difficult to keep posting on the Brixton forum.

It doesn't matter how I post up.

If I'm posting a straightforward opinion you take that as an opportunity to have a go.

My last couple of posts have been looking at the arches myself after what mafalda posted ( and I notice that went unremarked by you. Only when I post up does it become an issue), and posting up what I think. Looking up the plans to see if there are discrepancies between the plans and the actual finished product.
I am sorry you feel that way but not only I am not having a go in any way or form, I genuinely struggle to understand how you could possibly have reached reach that conclusion from my post, in particular after I had made it clear that I had not seen your follow-up comment when I posted my reply.

Not everyone is out to get you for simply engaging in a discussion with you in an Internet forum-at least I am not, anyway.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
I am sorry you feel that way but not only I am not having a go in any way or form, I genuinely struggle to understand how you could possibly have reached reach that conclusion from my post, in particular after I had made it clear that I had not seen your follow-up comment when I posted my reply.

Not everyone is out to get you for simply engaging in a discussion with you in an Internet forum-at least I am not, anyway.
You did post up quoting my posts. So its hardly surprising if I think its directed at me.

Saying "not everyone is out to get you" is just annoying. That is to make me appear like I'm paranoid. Its to deflect that you started this.

You posted up quoting my posts taking issues with what I said. That is what happened. I was not arguing with you. You started it not me.
 

T & P

|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
You did post up quoting my posts. So its hardly surprising if I think its directed at me.

Saying "not everyone is out to get you" is just annoying. That is to make me appear like I'm paranoid. Its to deflect that you started this.

You posted up quoting my posts taking issues with what I said. That is what happened. I was not arguing with you. You started it not me.
It was directed at you. I was replying to you at the end of the day- a natural and commonplace occurrence in a message board. But my post was not malicious, offensive, personal or aggressive in any way whatsoever; I was commenting on a single post (just one) you had made. So I started nothing, or nothing detrimental or negative anyway.

If you still believe my reply to your post no.1817 in isolation, bearing in mind I had not seen any subsequent posts from you or any else on the thread when I wrote and posted it, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

I'll leave it at that. I have no desire to get embroiled in arguments about semantics, or get the last word in on this.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
View attachment 164618 mafalda got me looking at the planning application.

Here is how it was supposed to look:View attachment 164616

It say remove tiling and make good brickwork below. What has happened is the tiling has been left on and painted black. Other arches have no tiling and arch has been painted black. The brickwork has not been made good.

This is cheaply done version of what was presented to the planning committee.

The drawing shows something much nicer than what has been done.

To borrow mafalda image to see the difference:
Ive put in a query to planning enforcement about this. So will see what happens. Whether planning see it as an issue.

That is as long as the online process works. I have a reference number. Just don't trust Lambeth IT as working that well.
 

CH1

"Red Guard"(NLYL)
They already said that that business was bad and that they were were not making money, NOTHING TO DO WITH NR they would have closed anyway, they quoted Brindisa as a reason, and Brindisa are no longer there, let’s get real about business and the economic climate.
There was an article in the Standard moaning about the devastating effects of business rate hikes in London generally. How are these poor sods supposed to make a living with the government forcing up business rates AND the arches imposing rising rental contracts?

I reckon retail is becoming a mugs game. Very soon everyone will be "sitting in their lonely room" ordering pizzas via Deliveroo and groceries from Ocado!
 

madolesance

Well-Known Member
There was an article in the Standard moaning about the devastating effects of business rate hikes in London generally. How are these poor sods supposed to make a living with the government forcing up business rates AND the arches imposing rising rental contracts?

I reckon retail is becoming a mugs game. Very soon everyone will be "sitting in their lonely room" ordering pizzas via Deliveroo and groceries from Ocado!
I liked this post cause it’s so very true. Uber and Delivero are enabling folks to exit, but not have to interact with anyone.
 

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
There was an article in the Standard moaning about the devastating effects of business rate hikes in London generally. How are these poor sods supposed to make a living with the government forcing up business rates AND the arches imposing rising rental contracts?

I reckon retail is becoming a mugs game. Very soon everyone will be "sitting in their lonely room" ordering pizzas via Deliveroo and groceries from Ocado!
Bim of Bars commonsense of how capitalism works forgets outside of the sole trader just getting by big business like Deliveroo can operate on small margins because the "market" and therefore big investors plough money into it. Deliveroo has loads of investment behind it. But looking at it its speculative investment. Deliveroo isn't that great a business. A lot of big capitalism works on fictitious speculation. Its that the "market" see long term potential for profits. Very long term in some cases like Uber.

The little guy running a local shop doesn't have this. Despite how useful it may be to local community.

Personally I don't like living in a society where "getting real about business and the economic climate" is how societies work. This means people losing their jobs and livelihoods. Treating economics like its a natural event like the weather. When its man made. It doesn't have to be like this.
 
Last edited:
Top