Altamira and the Morland Gardens delay – Brent Council’s response.

Guest post by Philip Grant in a personal capacity

 

From Brent Council’s adopted Local Plan Historic Environment Strategy.

 

Last week Martin published a guest post with the text of an open email I had sent to Brent’s Director of Property and Assets (Morland Gardens – (Happy?) Anniversary Brent! Why the delay?). I promised to let readers know what the Council said in reply, and here is the full text of the email I received on 18 November, with the names of Council Officers replaced by their job titles.

 

‘Dear Mr Grant,

 

RE: New Service Request: 1 Morland Gardens, NW10 - What are Council Officers' recommendations and when will they be published?  

 

Thank you for your open letter dated 10 November 2025, and note that [the Director of Property and Assets] has asked me to respond on the queries raised:

 

1. Please let me know the date by which Council Officers intend to make their detailed recommendations to Cabinet for the redevelopment of 1 Morland Gardens.

 

As you state in your open letter dated 10 November 2025, Cabinet approved the facility mix at Morland Gardens for affordable homes and youth facilities in June 2025. Please note that establishing the youth provisions/requirements is a crucial enabler to bringing forward a vision for the site that aligns with the Cabinet approved facility mix. The Council has therefore been liaising with a range of youth service providers to better understand what/how they would seek to use the building/site to meet the needs of young people living in Stonebridge and across the borough.

 

In relation to affordable housing, the Council is currently unable to deliver 100% social rent tenure due to the economic climate we are now operating in with regards to increased borrowing costs, construction inflation, and compliance with new/enhanced building safety standards. The Greater London Authority (GLA) has recently issued its new Social and Affordable Homes Programme (SAHP) 2026 – 2036 and the Council will be reviewing this funding prospectus to see if it can provide the Council a viable route to bring forward affordable housing schemes on sites such as Morland Gardens. The SAHP funding window opens in February 2026 and closes in April 2026, so the Council will be able to confirm after this date if a grant bid for Morland Gardens has been included.

 

With the work currently being undertaken, the Council cannot confirm a date by which officers intend to make detailed recommendations to Cabinet for the redevelopment of 1 Morland Gardens until we are able to lock in the proposed youth service provisions for the site and the affordable homes funding opportunities through the SAHP.

 

2. Please also let me know (as some decision on this point must surely have been reached after two years of review) whether those recommendations will include retaining the heritage Victorian villa building, Altamira, as requested in the Willesden Local History Society petition which was presented to September's Full Council meeting, and supported then by councillors from across all three political parties.

 

As per the response to the petition from the Willesden Local History Society, no decision has been made on the retention or not of the Altamira building. Any decision will be based on the outcome of the above (youth provision identification, housing scheme requirements) for Cabinet to make a considered decision.

 

Thank you once again for your open letter, should you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

Regards

 

Head of Capital Delivery’

 

The response says why Brent is not currently building many new homes, and these words in the answer to point 1 are of more general interest: ‘In relation to affordable housing, the Council is currently unable to deliver 100% social rent tenure due to the economic climate we are now operating in ….’ The reference to ‘social rent tenure’ is another example of the misrepresentation of “social housing” terms frequently coming from the Council’s Officers and members.

 

The only new genuine Social Rent level homes which Brent Council provides go to existing tenants who are moved to new homes because the Council wants to demolish their existing home. If you want to understand the different types of affordable housing, please read my November 2022 guest post Brent’s Affordable Council Housing – figuring out Cllr. Butt’s reply.

 

Illustration from Brent’s March 2025 Council Tax leaflet.

 

While I’m on the subject of the Council’s misleading information about affordable housing, you may remember my guest post from last April: How many affordable homes did Brent Council deliver in 2024/25? - Was it 530, or 434, or just 26? It was in a leaflet sent to every Council Taxpayer in the borough, including a letter to residents from the Council Leader saying how well they had done. And the answer to the question of how many affordable homes Brent Council had actually delivered itself in 2024/25 was 26, not the 530 they wanted us to believe!

 

You will also notice from the response above that the proposed affordable housing at Morland Gardens may well depend on Brent getting financial help from the GLA’s Social and Affordable Homes Programme 2026-2036. But I can’t help wondering - what happened to the £107m of funding which Brent trumpeted that it had been promised from the GLA’s Affordable Homes Programme 2021-2026? 

 

From the GLA’s affordable homes website.

 

How much of that promised £107m was spent by Brent Council, and how many new affordable homes were built with that money? Wasn’t it meant to be helping to fund the regeneration of St Raphael’s Estate (see this June 2021 post: Cllr Butt addresses St Raphael's residents on the delays in fill-in/rebuild development of the estate. Is it the full story?)? How many new homes have been built so far as part of the long-promised St Raphael’s regeneration? (I don’t know – perhaps someone can give the answer in a comment below, please.)

 

Brent’s original 2020 Morland Gardens scheme was meant to use £6.5m in funding from the GLA’s Affordable Homes Programme 2016-2021 (extended to 2023, because of Covid). That money was lost, but it could have been used instead for a Council redevelopment at Twybridge Way, which received planning consent before Morland Gardens in 2020, and would have provided 67 affordable homes. That project could not go ahead because of the flawed Cabinet decision to move Brent Start to a “temporary home” in the former Stonebridge School Annexe on that site. You can read the details in my October 2021 guest post: 1 Morland Gardens and Twybridge Way – Brent’s response challenged.

 

It was hard not to get distracted by some of the contents of the Council’s response above, but I must get back to the main point of this guest post. Should I just accept what the Council Officer was saying, or should I reply? I chose the second option, and this is what I wrote:

 

‘Dear [Head of Capital Delivery},

 

Thank you for your email, in response to my open email of 10 November to [the Director of Property and Assets]. As the text of my open email was made public, both online and in the "Brent & Kilburn Times" (see below), I will seek to make the text of your reply, on behalf of Brent Council, publicly available.

 

The information given at point 1 is helpful in understanding the continuing delay, although this will mean another winter when the empty property can suffer further weather damage. That is not good stewardship of a valuable heritage building!

 

I am disappointed with the response to point 2, because it suggests that the only factors which will be taken into account in deciding whether Officers should recommend either retaining or demolishing the heritage building will be what is required for the proposed youth provision and housing scheme. That approach ignores the requirements of Brent Council's heritage planning policy BHC1, and its adopted Historic Environment Strategy, which both signal the importance of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets in proposed developments affecting them.

 

I have referred to the section on "Valuing Brent's Heritage" before, but these words from it need repeating:

 

'Once a heritage asset is demolished it cannot be replaced. Its historic value is lost forever to the community and future generations and it cannot be used for regeneration and place-making purposes.'

 

The historic value of "Altamira" is huge. This was the landmark building at the entrance to an 1870s estate named Stonebridge Park. It was in at the birth of that district of our borough, and with its distinctive belvedere tower, it was one of the few original Victorian villas left standing when most of the street called Stonebridge Park was demolished to make way for the 1970s Stonebridge Park Brent Council estate.

 

Many of those 1970s buildings were demolished after less than 30 years, but "Altamira" is now 150 years old, and still in good structural condition, as well as being a beautiful example of Italianate architecture. It will be part of the Morland Gardens regeneration site, and it can be used for place-making purposes, helping to share the story of Stonebridge Park with young people, and the wider community, now and for future generations. That is why it should be retained, and why you and other Council Officers involved should decide to recommend its retention as part of your detailed submission to Cabinet.

 

Please keep me updated on progress with your review, and let me know if you need support from me (and the wider local history community) for an SAHP funding bid which includes retaining the heritage building. Best wishes,’

 

 

Philip Grant.

 

New plans for hotel opposite the Wembley Stadum Olympic Steps and beside the Brent Civic Centre

 

In the summer I got wind of plans to build a hotel on the Samovar Space adjacent to Brent Council's Civic Centre. I asked Quintain what was planned and they responded with a statement published here in August 2025 LINK.

 

Cherries in blossom outside the side entrance to Brent Civic Centre (Photo: Wembley Park)

The Samovar shell had been removed without any notice and was later found in a corner of Union Park.  Locals, shoppers and fans, will be familiar with the orange benches and cherry trees presently occupying the open space (above) and the markets held opposite the Civic Centre and Sainsbury. Quintain said that this space was always meant to be temporary.

Revised plans to go to Brent Council in February or March 2026 lower the proposed building slightly and is less dense that originally proposed. It could be either office space or a hotel. As Brent Council has had little success in letting its own surplus office space a hotel sounds more likely.

The 'public' space (owned by Quintain), renamed Samovar Square, will be smaller than at present and images indicate that the Civic Centre will be hidden from some perspectives. Residents of the nearby Landsby East building may fear they will be overlooked by hotel bedrooms. The pedestrian route will lose some of its current unique quality.

Quintain have put up an A5 notice on the site with a link to their plans but clearly the proposals need wider publicity and I hope this post will help. 

Quintain announcement on their wesbitesite LINK where a presentation can be found.

• Date of planning submission February/March 2026.

• Planning determination will take around 3 - 4 months and if approved construction will not commence until end of 2026 at the earliest.

• Construction likely to take 2 - 3 years.

• If you wish to make any comments or have any questions on these proposals, please

send them to :

Development@wembleypark.com

 

Here are some extracts from the presentation:

You will need to look carefully but on the above the thin blue dotted line shows the original proposal for height and density. The grey is the current proposal.

 

New plans for

The Civic Centre disappears when approaching along Olympic Way from Wembley Park station

 

The smaller area covered by Samovar Square can be seen from above illustration and that below

 

 The current space with Engineer's Way at the top and market  stalls at the bottom.

 

 

There will be some tree removal and some retention and relocation of trees

 

 In an attempt at reassurance over the loss of the larger space Quintain puts forward three examples of how the smaller space could be used.

 

In the proposal, what was the 'every day' route to Sainsbury's and the Civic Centre is re-routed via the front of the hotel. Other routes go across Samovar Square which raises questions about congestion when events take place in the square.
 

Government underfunding means council tax increase, higher council rents and increased charges as Brent Council faces £30m budget gap by 2028-29

 

 

I wrote a while ago that which ever party (or parties) win the May local election in Brent will be faced with a challenging financial situation. They will inherit the 2026-27 budget currently going out to consultation after approval at Monday's Cabinet Meeting.

Although there was plenty of mutual praise anomf Cabinet members there was no disguising the serious financial situation with increasing costs of homelessness accommodation, the Housing Revenue Account  coping with the cost of repairs required by the Social Housing Regulator, increasing costs in Adut and Children's Social Care and the soaring demands on the High Needs Grant for children with SEND, In addition 65% of Brent Council maintained schools are forecasting in-year deficits and facing restructures of staff to reduce costs.

 Meanwhile the Labour Government is still to decide the local government funding settlement and the current confusion over the Budget offers little realistic hope. Green MP Carla Denyer said, 'Local councils continue to be underfunded by the UK Government, and I will keep pushing Labour to give them the funding they need.'

The Brent budget gap is due to rise to £30m by 2028-29:

Apart from growth through increased demand there is also the additional inflation cost;

 To bridge the £10.4m 2026-27 budget gap savings/cuts are proposed to be decided at the Budget Setting Meeting in February 2026:

A 4.99% Council tax increase is proposed (2.99% general, 2% social care) and a 4.8% council rent increase, increased service charges and increased borrowing to bring the Housing Revenue Account into balance:

 

Among proposals to close the budget gap are a saving through challenging procurement costs of £3m, digital including AI innovation £1.43m, service efficiencies of 1% £3.2m, staffing reduction £400k, increased fees and chages £500k, self-service web-forms rather than email £655k, lane rental increase to utility companies £350k , off-street parking charges increased to market rates £130k.  There also be less tolerance of bad debt and an effort to get maximum market rent from Brent properties other than council homes.

Spending currently underway ahead of the May election on roads and tree planting is largely financed as a one-off by the Neighbourhood Community Infrastructure Levy. 

Savings/Cuts proposed 

Hover mouse over foot of extract to enlarge.

 

 

Brent Council has launched a consultation on the proposals: 

Councillor Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council, said: 

Many councils continue to operate under severe financial duress. Brent isn’t immune to these challenges, but we have continued to manage our finances responsibly over many, many years, allowing us to protect the frontline services that matter most. 

We are now accelerating our programme to transform the way we work so we can continue to protect essential services. This isn’t an easy task but I’m pleased that most of our £10million financial plan will come from working more efficiently and effectively. If you live or work locally, I urge you to have your say on the proposals. 

Residents, businesses and local partners can share their views on the council’s 2026-27 budget proposals until 30 January 2026.

How much say should St Raphaels' residents have in Brent Council commercial lettings on their estate? Off-licence or childcare & tuition centre?

 

Lilburne Walk, St Raphael's Estate 

An applicant who applied to run a childcare and tuition centre in a Brent Council shop front property on St Raphael’s Estate  was told that her application “very strong” and “came a close second”, to another proposal.  That proposal was chosen because it “aligned more closely” with Brent’s strategies and objectives. That application was for an off-licence.

 

The unsuccessful applicant said she was struggling to see how this was a better strategic fit than a family run  childcare and education service business. The Metropolitan Police had initially raised concerns about the succesful application, highlighting risks to all four licensing objectives.

 

Her application outlined a safe, community-focused offer including childcare, tuition, school pick-ups and holiday activities. Residents are now raising serious concerns about the impact of an off-licence between two playgrounds, beside a mosque and opposite a community centre.

 

She asked:

 

What strategic criteria were used to assess the bid?

 

How an off-licence was deemed more aligned with those priorities than a childcare/education use?

 

Whether Social Value scoring or likely licensing impacts were considered?

 

 

Her concerns and call for transparency have now been taken up by the community group st Raphael's Voice who have issued a formal complaint to the Brent Council:

 

FORMAL COMPLAINT AND STRONG OBJECTION TO THE COMMERCIAL TENANCY DECISION FOR 67 LILBURNE WALK, ST RAPHS ESTATE,NW10 0TW

 

 

I am writing to register a formal complaint and express my profound disappointment and strong objection to the decision regarding the tenancy at the commercial premises at 67 Lilburne Walk, St Raphs Estate.

 

This letter serves as notice that the community demands a comprehensive, independent review of the commercial tender process itself, entirely separate from the alcohol licensing application process.

 

The community asserts it was fundamentally failed by the council's initial process due to a distinct and unacceptable lack of meaningful engagement with residents during the critical decision-making phase of the tenancy agreement.

 

The formal licensing application process, while a necessary stage, was a retrospective measure to address concerns, not a proactive consultation on the type of business that would best serve our estate. This approach is a clear failure in due process and community engagement, as a community we have battled with years of ASB, drink and drug fuelled violence. This could potentially undo much of the hardwork we have done to ensure we create thriving communities, give our children the best start in life, and live healthier lives.

 

Our objections are rooted in specific, tangible risks to public safety, public health, and the failure to secure community social value, all of which are material considerations that appear to have been inadequately weighted against pure commercial viability.

 

1.Public Safety and Crime & Disorder Hotspot:

 

St Raph's Estate is a historically identified "crime and disorder hotspot," an area that has been contending with significant alcohol and drug-fuelled antisocial behaviour, including (VWAG) violence towards women and girls. The introduction of an off-licence, one of four in the immediate vicinity, directly undermines the council's own stated priority of community safety and has the potential to exacerbate these existing issues, particularly given the premises' proximity to two playgrounds, a place of worship and community centre. These material concerns were raised by multiple "responsible authorities" including local residents, the Metropolitan Police, residents association, local foodbank, St Patricks church, local mosques, and youth club. The council appears to have disregarded the professional and local expertise on this critical issue.

 

2. Failure to Prioritize Social Value and Council Objectives:

 

The alternative proposal for a childcare and tuition centre would have directly and demonstrably supported the council's social objectives outlined in the Brent Borough Plan: Prosperity and Stability in Brent, A Cleaner, Greener Future, Thriving Communities, The Best Start in Life, and A Healthier Brent. By prioritising an off-licence, the council has bypassed a vital community asset that aligns with these strategic goals, failing to give social value, public health, and public safety equal weight to commercial considerations.

 

3. Demand for a Separate, Independent Tender Review:

 

The community formally requests that the decision-making process for the commercial tenancy at 67 Lilburne Walk be subjected to a separate, independent review. This review must scrutinise:

 

• The criteria used in the tender selection.
• How community and stakeholder input was gathered and, critically, utilised before the tenancy decision was made.
• The weighting given to social value and public safety over commercial viability.

This must be a distinct process from the ongoing or completed alcohol licensing application, as the tenancy decision and licensing decision are separate legal matters, each requiring independent scrutiny.

 

We urge the Council to act transparently and responsibly by reviewing this flawed decision-making process to ensure that robust community engagement is a fundamental, early, and decisive step in all future commercial tenancy agreements. We expect a formal response outlining the steps the council will take to initiate this independent review

 

Yours Sincerely,

 

Asif Zamir

 

Greens call on Brent Council to scrutinise proposed reduced hours (21 hours per week) at Central Middlesex Urgent Treatment Centre

 

The PFI funded Central Middlesex Hospital - are its services being gradually run down?

 

From Brent Green Party

 

In 2014, Central Middlesex hospital A&E department closed following a decision from the then Conservative Heath Secretary Jeremy Hunt. At the time, we were told that the opening of an Urgent Care Centre at Central MIddlesex hospital would mitigate the loss of the A&E department. However, in 2019, the hours of the Urgent Care Centre were reduced  when the overnight service was withdrawn.

 

Six years down the line, we are faced with yet another reduction of the now named Urgent Treatment Centre (UTC) at Central Middlesex hospital. The Centre currently closes at midnight but, if London NW University Healthcare Trust go ahead with their proposal, it will close at 9pm.

 

The curtailing of the services at the Central Middlesex hospital is even more incomprehensible because it runs contrary to the evolution of the demographics in Brent. The Brent population went up by 9.2% between 2011 and 2021. This is a significant increase which is both higher than the population rise in England (+6,6%) and the population of rise London (+7.7%). How is Brent's growing and ageing population supposed to cope with a reduction in urgent care treatment?

 

Brent Green Party is therefore firmly opposed to a further reduction of the NHS services that will undoubtedly put more pressure on Northwick Park Hospital A&E and its Urgent Care Centre and will lead to fewer people getting the required medical attention as quickly as necessary, in the best-case scenario.

 

We call on the current plans to reduce the Urgent Treatment Centre hours by 3 hours each evening to be added as an urgent item to the Agenda of the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee taking place on Wednesday November 19th. Failing this an Extraordinary Meeting should be called to consider the issue as the next Scrutiny will not be until January 2026 – too late to affect the decision.  We note that the 2019 proposals were considered by that Committee on July 9^th 2019 setting a precedent for the views of the Council and residents to be represented.

 

The reasons for the reduction in hours put forward this time are almost the same as previously, gradually taking away the service from Brent and nearby boroughs.

 

Zengha Wellings-Longmore, Green Party candidate for the Harlesden and Kensal Green council ward said:

 

The cut is now proposed at a time when the Urgent Care Centre and A&E at Northwick Park Hospital are encountering heavy demand with extremely long waits outside the recommended parameters.

 

At the same time the local population is expanding through developments at Old Oak and Park Royal Development Area, Grand Union, Neasden Stations, and Alperton. Alongside this are potential critical incidents at Wembley Stadium, Wembley Arena and on the Park Royal Industrial Estate.

 

It is vital that the impact of the reduction in service be considered and that the cost and long-term benefits of upgrading late night resources at the UTC be considered instead.

 

We note that the closure of the Hydrotherapy Pool at Northwick Park Hospital recently took place without any Scrutiny by Brent Council.

 

 

 

 

Celebrate, Educate, Empower: Brent Islamophobia Awareness Month Experience Islamic art, food, dance, and culture on 25 November from 5:30-7:30pm.

 

 

Celebrate, Educate, Empower: Brent Islamophobia Awareness Month

 

Experience Islamic art, food, dance, and culture on 25 November from 5:30-7:30pm.

Join us for Brent Council’s Islamophobia Awareness Month event on Monday 25 November, an evening dedicated to celebrating Islamic culture, educating against Islamophobia, and bringing communities together in solidarity and understanding.

 

Held in the Civic Centre Grand Hall, the event will feature a vibrant mix of live performances, interactive stalls, and a thought-provoking panel discussion. From traditional Nasheed and Sufi music to calligraphy and henna art, attendees will experience the richness and diversity of Islamic heritage.

 

A highlight of the evening will be a panel discussion chaired by Councillor Teo Benea featuring barrister and broadcaster Hashi Mohamed, human rights lawyer and former Secretary-General of the Muslim Council of Britain Zara Mohammed, and a representative from the Met Police. Together, they will explore lived experiences of Islamophobia and discuss how Brent can continue to stand united against hate while celebrating the borough’s rich diversity.

 

Hot food will be available, and stalls will showcase local initiatives, health services, and cultural contributions from across Brent. Whether you're coming to learn, connect, or celebrate, this event promises to be an engaging and inclusive evening for all.

 

Tickets are Free HERE 

LETTER: Q: 'When is a Brent Council fire door, not a fire door?' 'When it's ajar and they will only be "in touch" within the next 7-10 days!'

 

 In fact it is the front door - both fire and security.

Dear Wembley Matters

You recently posted on Brent Council's plans for dealing with problems in social housing. Included was: "Emergency hazards (for example, dangerous electrical faults, damaged external doors or windows, or major leaks) will be investigated and made safe within 24 hours."

 

One of the external doors in Gorefield House in South Kilburn has been damaged (and reported) for some time. (see photo) Since nothing has happened, I went online and reported it again this morning. This is the email I have just received from Brent Housing Management: 

"Dear PETER FIRMIN,

Thank you for contacting us. Your query has been reviewed and passed to the relevant specialist team to look further into and they will be in touch with you within the next 7-10 working days. Should you need to follow up on this case, please contact us by replying to this email."

 

nuff said.

 

Pete Firmin

Brent Council: End the Silence: Stand Together to Stop Violence Against Women and Girls 16 Days of Activism. DON"T STAND BY: REGISTER

 

Image: Women's International League for Peace and Freedom

Brent Programme

From Brent Council

 

Violence against women and girls affects us all, and it’s time to come together as a community to stop the abuse.

 

During the global 16 Days of Activism (25 November – 10 December), Brent is joining forces with community partners to host a powerful series of workshops, panel discussions, and events designed to raise awareness, support survivors, and create safer communities for everyone.

 

These events, both online and in person, and are open to people ready to learn, engage and take action.

 

Cllr Harbi Farah, Cabinet Member for Community Safety, Jobs and Skills, urges everyone to get involved. 

 

Violence against women and girls is a serious, widespread crisis that impacts people from all backgrounds. By recognising the signs, supporting survivors, and holding perpetrators accountable, we can make a real difference. Now is the time for all of us to join the conversation and take action.

 

Topics include honour-based abuse, forced marriage, domestic abuse, sexual exploitation, and how violence affects mental health and children. Workshops will also cover trauma-informed language and effective multi-agency responses.

 

A highlight event on 2 December at St Raphael’s Family Wellbeing Centre offers residents a unique chance to speak directly with local police, gender abuse experts, and community leaders  about women’s and girls’ safety, concerns, what support is available and how we can work together as a community to increase the safety of women and girls while bringing perpetrators to account.

 

Brent’s 16 Days of Activism also features the Prisoners’ Liaison Information Advisory Service (PLIAS) in-person Summit on 28 November spotlighting the connection between mental health, domestic abuse-related deaths, and the criminal justice system.

 

Don’t stand by – register now to join Brent’s 16 Days of Activism and help build a safer future for women and girls.