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

Discussion in 'Brixton' started by :-D, Feb 4, 2015.

  1. Mr Bim of Bar

    Mr Bim of Bar Well-Known Member

  2. Mr Bim of Bar

    Mr Bim of Bar Well-Known Member

    Brickwork has now been touched up and still not a great job
  3. editor

    editor hiraethified

    So you're actually positing that Gramsci wants all these developments to look - in your words - "cheap and tacky" - so that the whole strip of shops look a bit shit? And that poor workmanship would have been a "great outcome" for him?

    Jesus. What a fucking shit argument. And, as he says, needlessly personal too.

    I could be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure he - like me - would have loved the units to be finished to a very high standard and populated by all the pre-existing businesses paying affordable rents.
    muscovyduck, Gramsci and blameless77 like this.
  4. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    A bit late to this party which I had thought had long ended. But since you raise the issue, there are been several instances in this forum disussing proposals (or finished projects) of improvements, redesigns or refurbishments of public areas in Brixton. And Gramsci has been one of the posters who have often been skeptical about- if not openly opposed to- some of such improvements, on the basis that they are likely to result in further gentrification of the area.

    So yes, given that issues such as pedestrianation of a shopping street to make it more pleasant, or even traffic rerouting through some residential areas to make them safer have been firmly opposed in here, apparently for nothing more than we can't risk to have anything looking too nice around here lest the area attracts even more gentrifiers, forgive my surprise when suddenly I hear a complaint that a forthcoming refurbishment project is not looking as nice and pretty as the pristine and hipster-friendly archers at King's Cross.

    And as I explained several times to Gramsci at the time in this thread, my post was in direct response to his first post on the matter, in which there was no mention whatsoever of the problem being a discrepancy between the plans and the finished product. So no, it wasn't personal by any stretch of the imagination.

    And to tell the truth I'm getting extremely fucking sick and tired of disagreeing opinions with the prevailing views in this forum now being invariably described and dissmissed as personal attacks, 'ganging up' on members, the author being a cheerleader for the Tories or powerful corporations, or similar suchlike garbage. Some instances of it might have been the case; but many, many others were definitely not.

    But then again it could be that getting posters with differing/ off-message opinions sick and tired of posting in the Brixton forum might have been the idea all along. If that's indeed the case, it has clearly worked wonderfully in the last couple of years.
    Khmer likes this.
  5. editor

    editor hiraethified

    If that was the case, there are several people I could think of who I would have taken the greatest delight in kicking off years ago rather than putting them on forced ignore.

    Yet they're still here, happily posting away and only sustaining temp bans when they really take the piss with personal shit (see the current Brixton thread for some very fresh examples).

    All this personal stuff is fucking tiresome, disruptive and has put an awful lot of people contributing. Looks like you feel you're getting a flavour of what I've had to put with for years. It's not nice, is it?

    Good thing is that the solution for everyone is simple: stuck to the topic and leave the ad hominems at home.

    Oh, and where did this quote supposedly come from? Who on earth complained about the lack of hipster-friendliness of this development?
    Gramsci likes this.
  6. lang rabbie

    lang rabbie Je ne regrette les gazebos

    As I think Ms T posted on another thread a year ago, the main reason why A&C Deli were finding things difficult - even without Network Rail's threatened rent hike - is because the supermarkets (both at the bricks and mortar Sainsbury's nearby and more recently online delivery from Waitrose etc) now sell almost all of those interesting store cupboard items that you used to only be able to get in the Deli and can do so cheaper.
    muscovyduck and Winot like this.
  7. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    You are really winding me up.

    I thought this has been dealt with.

    I post up what I thought was reasoned response to how the actual works have been finished. Looked at the the original planning application.

    To my mind there is a discrepancy between the works agreed by planning committee and the finished works.

    My view based on the facts.

    I have put in a query to the planning enforcement which they have acknowledged and are looking into.

    So I really object to my reasoned response to the NR works, going through the legitimate channels being undermined by your accusations. Which I can only interpret as trying to undermine the validity of my response to the NR finished works.
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2019
  8. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    You are being personal towards me.

    I'm sick and tired of having to deal with poster like you.

    I don't have to deal with this in my everyday off internet connections with people I know in Brixton.
  9. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

  10. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    quotes don't work again.
  11. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    Thing is you saw my first post on the matter and then took it as opportunity to lay into me. Didn't see my second post. It was personal attack on me as poster. Your still doing it now.

    What have my views on pedestrianisation got to do with wanting works done in a conservation area to be done to a high standard?
    editor likes this.
  12. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    All of the above does neither prove that my post to Gramsci was personal in any way (and I certainly would like you to clarify what could possibly make you think otherwise), or justify the fact (or at least my claim) that all differing opinions to the likes of you or Gramsci are now routinely being shut down under the excuse of being personal attacks.

    Interesting to see that instead of contesting that my claim about all off-message opinions now being routinely shut down is wrong, you mention past personal attacks you have experienced. How is that relevant to this case, or any other individual post? I’m not denying personal attacks take place. The issue is about dismissing all disagreeing posts as personal attacks when some of them clearly are not.
  13. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    Erm, for starters it was Editor who resurrected this, not me.

    And I pointed out to you on three separate occasions that I wrote my reply to your first post before I saw your subsequent post. On posts 1821, 1824 and 1826. You couldn't possibly have missed them all. Let's be clear about this: the post I replied to made no mention whatsoever about any discrepancy issues. Do you agree on that point?
  14. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    Is simply disagreeing with or querying a particular opinion expressed by a poster on an internet form actually amount to being a personal attack in your view? Really? I mean, wtf? In which way could my post have been a personal attack? :confused:
    snowy_again likes this.
  15. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    Yes you had a go at me.

    The whole thrust of your posts, which you have started again, is about discrepancy on my part. Now its my views on pedestrianisation as compared to my putting in complaint to planning about NR works. Its in my view a personal attack on me as a poster here.

    This post is mealy mouthed way to say you tripped yourself up, You thought you could have a go at me and it didn't work out.
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2019
  16. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    Go back and read post 1834.

    You started all this in the first place. I didn't.

    Now you are trying to claim its not personal.

    Now you are trying to portray yourself as the victim.
  17. T & P

    T & P |-o-| (-o-) |-o-|

    If you think pointing out a perceived discrepancy amounts to a personal attack, we'll just have to agree to disagree there. Though I find such viewpoint bizarre in an Internet forum, frankly. I could be right or I could be wrong. Discussing the possibility with you does not amount to a personal attack by any reasonable standard.

    I find it interesting that you have changed the theme of my alleged personal attack from deliberate misinterpretation of your post to an attempt to show you up as being inconsistent in your beliefs. AFAIK Iam de facto being accused of lying, and have a far stronger claim of being the one under personal attacks here.

    Frankly I don't care that much about it and, believe it or not, I have no desire to upsor anger anyone. But you have repeatedly pushed the angle of me misrepresenting your views after I made it clear no fewer than four times that your first post, which was the only one I based my reply on, never made any mention of your concerns being about NR failing to deliver the standards proposed in their plans. Either you managed to miss all four clarifications, or do not believe I am telling the truth. Either way, it's just not on.

    This is exactly the kind of shit I was referring to. Unjustified accusations of perfectly polite disagreeing opinions as constituting a personal attack are now the norm in here.
    Winot and Mr Retro like this.
  18. editor

    editor hiraethified

    They explained it in some detail here: Brixton’s A&C Deli: the inside story of a small business destroyed by gentrification, Network Rail & Lambeth Council

    I think the title clearly lays out who they think was to blame.
    Gramsci likes this.
  19. editor

    editor hiraethified

    "Resurrected"? I responded to a post of yours from just over a week ago, FFS.
  20. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    This all started out with making a reasonable post on the quality of works done by NR.

    Its you who started this not me.

    The last few pages of your posts have derailed this thread from what had been interesting to me.

    Your posts here are example of why some posters have Brixton forum on ignore.

    I could go on but your not worth bothering with.
  21. northeast

    northeast Well-Known Member

    The fact that the pawn brokers has stayed in place around all the upgrades and still looks exactly the same shows this project could and should have been approached a lot differently.

    Attached Files:

    muscovyduck, Gramsci and editor like this.
  22. editor

    editor hiraethified

    Indeed. If the health and safety issues all vanished for them, why not for other businesses who ended up being forcefully evicted?
    muscovyduck and Gramsci like this.
  23. northeast

    northeast Well-Known Member

    I wholeheartedly agree that building work should be completed to the standards in the planning application. If anyone has tried to do work on a property they will know how they can be penalised for not matching the approved plans. And at great financial cost, a large corporate should not be allowed to get around these regulations.

    Even if it does end up looking a little like the sanitised kings cross refurbishment it will hopefully mean the buildings will stand the test of time for longer. Meaning future refurbishment work is a long way off.
    Gramsci likes this.
  24. Lambeth Boy

    Lambeth Boy Active Member

    The work wasn’t carried out for any other reason than a money making exercise ! Way back when NR served notice they had no intention of allowing any of the existing Traders back it was all down to the amazing Save Brixton Arches campaign & the fantastic local support which made NR face a huge PR hiding nothing else !
    muscovyduck, editor and Gramsci like this.
  25. editor

    editor hiraethified

    Here's a look inside one of the cafe arches on Station Road (by Brixton Road). It's pretty basic.

    Gramsci and trabuquera like this.
  26. CH1

    CH1 "Red Guard"(NLYL)

    Which is the improvement? The plate glass?
    muscovyduck and Gramsci like this.
  27. Lambeth Boy

    Lambeth Boy Active Member

    For the new Landlord the higher rents and the face saving exercise !

    For the returning tenant the expensive refit , the ‘ reduced rent’ ( at least double to start ! ) on what you had been paying ! , the higher rates , starting your business again after 2 1/2 years with the extra competition etc
    muscovyduck and Gramsci like this.
  28. Gramsci

    Gramsci Well-Known Member

    I was walking by yesterday. I agree its pretty basic yet rents will be increased.

    As a landlord they should be doing upkeep of properties anyway. This looks to me like long overdue overhaul. It doesnt justify rent increases.

    From what I've heard from business that is that they put a lot of there own money into maintaining the arches.

    The last time the arches got significant funding was by Brixton Challenge. Post riot grants to improve Brixton.

    NR have done little over the years that wasn't helped by public funding.
    muscovyduck likes this.
  29. Lambeth Boy

    Lambeth Boy Active Member

    I see the Religious Book shop moved back into their Arch after nearly 3 years gone which is nice as they’re good people I’m just surprised that NR , Lambeth , BID , Uncle Jacko and any other of the glory hunters didn’t have a big PR event cutting the tape etc ?
  30. northeast

    northeast Well-Known Member

    you would have thought they would have removed the plants growing on top of the arches, i personally like them but i cant imagine its doing the brick work any good. No doubt in near future will require attention / cost / aggravation.
    Gramsci 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