Headache for the new Brent Council as opposition builds to 25 storey care home and co-living proposal on Holiday Inn car park

 

A campaign is building up over a developent planned for the space outside the Holiday Inn near Wembley Stadium Station. 

 

 

 

The Holiday Inn, Wembley

 

 The view from above (Google Earth)

 

The proposal: 

Clearance of site and construction of an interconnected building ranging from 8 to 25 storeys in height to provide a Care Home and Co-Living Accommodation, together with associated car and cycle parking (including within existing basement), hard and soft landscaping and communal amenity space.

There have been concerns about 'warehousing elderly people in the sky' as well as over-development and lack of amenity and infrastructure.  So far there have been 43 objections on the Brent Council Planning portal. This objection summarises some of the issues:

 I wish to formally object to planning application 26/0967 relating to the proposed development on land adjacent to the Holiday Inn, Empire Way, Wembley.

My objection is based on the following concerns:

The proposed height and scale of the development are excessive for this location. A building of up to 25 storeys would add further overdevelopment to an area of Wembley that is already experiencing significant density and pressure. The scale and massing of the proposal would negatively affect the character of the surrounding neighbourhood and place additional strain on existing infrastructure.

I am also concerned about the impact on local services and community infrastructure. The development would significantly increase the local population without clear evidence that GP services, hospitals, schools, public transport, or other community services will be expanded to support this increase. Existing services in the area are already under considerable pressure.

Parking and traffic are already major problems for local residents. The proposal does not appear to provide sufficient parking for the scale of the development, particularly given the combination of co-living accommodation and a care home. Increased visitor, staff, resident, delivery, and service vehicle traffic would place additional pressure on surrounding residential streets.

In addition, the application does not clearly explain the operational nature and long-term functioning of the proposed care home use. If residents require regular carers, transport services, adapted vehicles, medical visits, deliveries, or frequent visitors, this could create further congestion and parking difficulties in nearby streets.

I also have concerns regarding the suitability of a very high-rise building for vulnerable elderly residents and whether sufficient evidence has been provided to justify this approach on public health and wellbeing grounds. While large-scale developments may increase capacity, there appears to be limited evidence demonstrating that a 25-storey care home environment provides better outcomes for elderly residents, particularly those with dementia, mobility limitations, or cognitive impairment, when compared with smaller-scale and lower-rise care settings.

Research and professional guidance relating to later-life and dementia-friendly environments often emphasise the importance of accessibility, ease of navigation, social connection, reduced institutional scale, and access to appropriate communal and outdoor space. The application does not appear to demonstrate clearly how these resident wellbeing considerations have been addressed within a development of this scale and height.

Given the vulnerability of many potential residents, I believe the public health and quality-of-life implications of this proposal require far greater scrutiny before permission is considered.

Overall, I believe this proposal represents overdevelopment and would have a harmful impact on the quality of life of existing residents, local infrastructure, traffic conditions, parking availability, and the character of the area.

I therefore respectfully request that Brent Council refuse planning application 26/096  

The Planning Statement for the developer from Carney Sweeney makes the case for not making any contribution in lieu of providing affordable housing:    

The [viability] assessment identifies that the scheme currently generates a deficit of approximately 22%.

 

However, the accompanying sensitivity analysis demonstrates that viability improves where co-living rents increase in 5% increments and construction costs reduce by 5%, with the scheme moving into a positive viability position under these scenarios. Given the rapidly changing economic environment, this sensitivity testing is considered a reasonable metric for illustrating the scheme’s potential deliverability.

 

Notwithstanding this, the scheme remains financially challenging due to the aforementioned inflationary and geopolitical pressures. In light of these sensitivities, a residential payment in lieu of on-site affordable housing is deemed unviable. As an alternative, the provision of discounted market rent for the care element of the scheme has been explored with Brent Council’s Adult Social Care team, who have expressed support for this approach. At this stage, the applicant proposes that 15% of the C2 care home units be made available at a discounted rate to Brent residents. This provision would be secured through the Section 106 agreement.

 

Given the current economic climate, this approach is considered appropriate and would deliver additional planning benefits as part of the scheme.

Here are some images from the Design and Access statements which give a general idea of the proposed scheme:

From Wembley Hill Road

 

Current view  from a street opposite the development

 

 View incorporating the proposed development

 

Holiday Inn on left and new development including care home and co-living on the right

The proposal to 'green' the site including terraces on upper floors 

 

 The rather meagre greening at ground floor level

 

 

An imaginative view of the 16th floor co-living terrace after dark!

 

The developer has had at least one meeting with members of the outgoing Planning Committee and a number with Brent planning officers ahead of the submission of this application. The new Planning Committee will be confronted with the constraints of the Local Plan with its tall building zones, as well as  those of the London Plan and a Governmenrt committed to reducing local councils' and citizens' say on planning applications.

 

LINK to this planning application on the Brent Planning Portal where you can make a comment in support or opposition to the application.

Contact your councillors over who should run the new Council!

Guest post by Philip Grant in a personal capacity

The Brent Council election results in seats.

 

There have been many comments under Martin’s recent posts about the local election results, with people giving their views on how the new four Party / no overall control Council should be run. The formal decisions on this will be made at the Full Council’s Annual Meeting next Wednesday, 20 May, beginning at 6pm.

 

If you feel strongly about something, why not let the decision makers know your views? It is something which I have often done, and it is something you have every right to do, by emailing the recently elected councillors for your Ward. You can check who they are, and get their Council email addresses on Brent’s “Find Your Local Councillor” web page. Even if you did not vote for them, they are your elected representatives for the next four years, and should be interested in what the residents in their Ward think on matters affecting the Council.

 

The choice of ways to find your local councillor on Brent’s website.

 

I happen to live in Queensbury Ward, which now has three Conservative councillors, so as I was concerned to see rumours that Cllr. Muhammed Butt might be trying to court that Group, I sent this email to them, with a copy to their fellow Conservative councillors, on 13 May:

 

‘Dear Queensbury Ward councillors,

 

Kanta and Jayanti have already come across me as a politically independent resident of your Ward, and I am writing to you, with a copy to your fellow Conservative members of the newly-elected Brent Council, to share my views on an important matter ahead of next week's Annual Meeting.

 

It may not be correct, but it has been rumoured online that Cllr. Muhammed Butt has been in contact with your Conservative Group, with a view to retaining the position of Council Leader for the next four years. If that is the case, I hope that no agreement has been reached with him.

 

I have observed, and interacted with, Cllr. Butt on a number of local issues for the past twelve of his fourteen years as Leader of Brent Council. I have watched, investigated and experienced a number of his abuses of power, to the detriment of Brent residents and the Council's reputation, and can provide detailed examples if you would like the evidence (although some of you will have witnessed this for yourselves).

 

I can imagine that Cllr. Butt will have offered inducements, such as the Leader of the Opposition role, nominations for Mayor, Chairs or Deputy Chairs of Committees. Please do not succumb to his temptations. Another four years of Muhammed Butt as Council Leader would do further damage to our borough, and facilitating it would be seen by many as unforgivable. 

 

I am also writing to the Leaders of the LibDem and Green Party Groups. If the Conservative Group stays strong, and votes with these two other Parties against any Labour proposal that Cllr. Butt should continue as Council Leader, he cannot be elected to that position of power. 

 

As Labour has the largest number of seats, but no overall majority, it is entitled to seek to have one of its councillors as Council Leader; but as Labour candidates only received 30% of the total votes cast in the 7 May Brent Council elections, the other three Parties can rightly ask the Labour Group to propose a candidate for the role who will work cooperatively with all three of them. That candidate is NOT Muhammed Butt!

 

In my view, as a long-term resident who prefers to take an independent view on any particular issue, a fair way forward for Brent Council over the next four years would be for positions of responsibility to be shared. That would be a condition which a prospective Labour Council Leader would need to agree, although they would be free to appoint their own Cabinet. 

 

If the three "opposition" Groups cannot agree on who is best suited for the role of Leader of the Opposition, I would suggest that the Leaders of each of the Conservatives and LibDem Groups should each have the role for two of the four years. The Green Party's candidates received more votes across the borough than either of those two, so the Green Group Leader should have the choice of Chairing one of the main Council Committees, such as Planning or the two Scrutiny Committees, with the other two opposition Groups nominating the Chair of the remaining two.

 

As there are now four Parties with at least nine seats on the Council, it would not seem unreasonable that each should nominate one of their councillors to serve as Mayor during the four years to 2030. I would suggest: for this coming municipal year, a Labour Mayor with a Conservative Deputy; for 2027/28, a Conservative Mayor with a LibDem Deputy; for 2028/29, a LibDem Mayor with a Green Deputy; for 2029/30, a Green Mayor with a Labour Deputy.

 

I hope that you, and your Conservative colleagues, will seriously consider my views and suggestions, along with your fellow councillors from other parties, particularly my strongly held belief that Cllr. Muhammed Butt should not be allowed to continue as Council Leader, Thank you. Best wishes,

 

Philip Grant.’

 

 

Cllr. Muhammed Butt refusing to respond to a Point of Order I raised, as a petitioner at the May 2024 Cabinet meeting, when he declared his preferred option agreed, despite no Cabinet members raising their hands or speaking, and without even seeking a vote on the second option in the Officers’ Report. (Screenshot from the Brent webcast recording)

 

You may not agree with what I wrote, and will probably not wish to go into as much detail, but if you have a view on who should (or should not) be Leader of Brent Council for the next four years, or how the new Council should be organised so that the views of the 70% of residents who did not vote for Labour candidates are properly represented, you have just as much right as I have to let your councillors know what you think. I hope that at least some of you will.

 

As I said in my email above, I have also written to the Leaders of the Lib Dem and Green Groups on the new Council, and have heard back from both of them (although I have had no response yet from my Conservative councillors, or any of their colleagues). Cllr. Anton Georgiou let me know what his Group’s position is, and said I could share it publicly:

 

‘To be absolutely clear, the Lib Dem Group that I lead will never make any deals or arrangements with Cllr Butt’s Labour Group. The time has come for Cllr Butt to vacate the position of Leader of the Council and allow fresh, new leadership in Brent. That is what residents voted for last week.’

 

Cllr. Mary Mitchell asked me not to share the details of the Green Group’s position publicly, but in general terms they believe that the Brent’s voters have demanded change. They want to see that change brought about in the way decisions are made, including genuine collaboration, scrutiny and accountability. 

 

The Lib Dem Leader has already shared his views publicly with our local newspaper, as you may have seen on the front page of this week’s “Brent and Kilburn Times”:

 

The front page story in Thursday’s local newspaper.

 

Will Cllr. Butt still be smiling after next Wednesday evening’s meeting at the Civic Centre? We may not have a vote at that Annual Meeting, but we have the chance to influence the outcome, if we share our views with our councillors!

Philip Grant.

Twenty years ago: Lib Dem-Tory Coalition takes over Brent Council

 

Last week's Brent Council election result re-called the 2006 election that also resulted in No Overall Control. In the 2006 case Labour did not want to go into coalition with anothe party after losing 14 seats.  There was an interregnum when officers ran the council and eventually a Lib-Dem Tory Coalition was formed with Paul Lorber (Lib Dem) as leader and Bob Blackman (then leader of Brent Conservatives) as deputy leader.

Today's situation is different with multiple parties but there are also similarities.  In 2026 Brent Greens won a higher percentage of aggregate votes than Lib Dems or Tories but fewer seats. 20 years ago Labour won a higher perceptage of votes than the Lib Dems but fewer seats.  This comes from their vote being more widely spread across the borough rather than concentrated in a few seats.

In 2006 there were only three main parties jockeying for position  but this year there are five. A Lib Dem - Tory coalition this year would not produce a majority council (22 councillors againt Labour's 26). If Greens joined them they would have a majority (31against 26), alternatively a Labour-Conservative coalition (one has been rumoured from several sources without any evidence) would have a majority (37 against 20)

Other arrangements, short of a formal coalition, are also possible but concerns over the stability of the council over a 4 year period would arise. 

The Annual General Meeting of Brent Council is timetabled for Wednesday May 20th when leadership and committee positions will be decided.

 

 

Lib Dems elect Anton Georgiou as new leader of the 11 strong Lib Dem group on Brent Council succeeding Paul Lorber

Lib Dem campaigners after the count

The Brent Liberal Democrat Group grew by 8 Councillors at this election, taking them to 11 in total. The result means they are now the joint second largest party on Brent Council.

Following what they termed an exceptionally successful election for Liberal Democrats in Brent, Paul Lorber has stood down as group leader.

At a meeting today Liberal Democrat Councillors unanimously voted for Anton Georgiou to succeed Paul Lorber.

Commenting on the decision Paul Lorber said:

 

The Liberal Democrats have had an incredibly successful election, winning in 8 seats from Labour, and playing a key role in Labour losing their majority. I take great pride in my contribution to this success and feel this is the right time to hand over the leadership.  Among our 11 strong Liberal Democrat Group we have many talented people.

I am pleased that Anton Georgiou was elected unanimously to take over from me and to tackle the new challenges facing our area. He will lead a confident group that will challenge Brent Council to deliver much more for our residents.       

New Brent Liberal Democrat leader, Anton Georgiou said:
 

This election has been a milestone for my party. We have more than trebled Liberal Democrat representation in Brent and have a team of great Councillors who are dedicated to being real champions for their communities.

I want to pay tribute to Paul, who has been a mentor and friend for well over a decade. His commitment, over many years, to working in the interests of local people and to holding Brent Council to account, will continue with the Brent Liberal Democrat team that I proudly now lead.

 

In other news there are whispers that Muhammed Butt has been talking to Brent Tories.

The new Green Group elected to Brent Council pictured

 

Kilburn: Cllrs Paul Ryan, Suzanne Gallagher and Stephen Malonga

 

  

Wembley Park: Cllr Najib Warsame  and  Cllr Iman Ahmadi Moghaddam

 

 

Northwick Park: Cllr Keith Perrin and Cllr Nisha Vakani

 

Harlesden and Kensal Green: Cllr Amandine Alexandre 

 

 Willesden Green: Cllr Mary Mitchell

Two interesting talks at your Local History Societies in May

    Guest blog by local historian Philip Grant in a personal capacity.

Jeremy Waxman’s book about the letters.

 

Although the London Borough of Brent was created more than sixty years ago, there are still two Local History Societies in the borough, covering the areas of covered by the previous local councils of Wembley and Willesden. Many residents do not even know that they exist, but as they both have illustrated talks this month which may appeal to a wider audience, I’m taking this opportunity to let you know about them.

 

Wembley History Society’s meeting next Friday, 15 May at 7.30pm, welcomes Kingsbury High School’s former Head Teacher, Jeremy Waxman, who will share stories from his book “Letters to Miss Baker”:-

 

 

Daisy Baker was a teacher at Kingsbury County School from 1927 (before it moved to Princes Avenue!) until 1954. During the Second World War, she kept in touch with several hundred former students who were serving in the forces, and received more than 500 letters from them. These letters were rediscovered by Kingsbury High’s Head Teacher in 2017, when he was searching for archive material to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the school becoming a comprehensive (combining the former Kingsbury County Grammar and Tylers Croft Boys and Girls Secondaries). The first-hand wartime feelings and experiences included in the letters were an important piece of history, which Jeremy has brought together in his recently-published book.

 

Whether or not you are a former KHS student, this will be a very interesting talk. It is taking place in the church hall just behind St. Andrew’s New Church in Church Lane, Kingsbury. Wembley History Society welcomes anyone to its talks, and invites adult visitors to make a £3 donation, to help meet the cost of hiring the hall. Jeremy will also have copies of his book available to purchase at the meeting, which begins at 7.30pm on Friday. There are very good bus routes to this venue (including the 83, 182 or 297 from Wembley Park station – see details on poster above), and there is a small car park in front of the church if you can’t use public transport.

 

Willesden Local History Society’s monthly meeting, on Wednesday 20 May at 7.30pm, brings the past and future together with Irina Porter’s talk “Brave New World – Step into the past with AI”. She writes: ‘AI opens up a new historical world – are you brave enough to step into it? Watch the streets of Willesden come alive on screen!’

 

 

A postcard of Chapter Road from c.1900, transformed into colour using AI.

 

Irina continues: ‘Artificial intelligence is transforming historic photographs into colourised moving films, bringing hundred-year-old local streets and people into motion. Seeing the past move can be powerful, emotional, but at times unsettling. This presentation explores the promise of this new technology, as well as the moral issues associated with it and the risks it poses to historical accuracy and interpretation.’

 

Location map for Willesden Local History Society meetings. (Based on Google Maps)

 

The meeting is taking place at St. Mary’s Parish Church Hall, next door to Willesden’s historic St. Mary’s Church in Neasden Lane, London NW10 2TS. Again, this venue is easily reached by public transport, with the 297 bus stops at Wharton Close very close to the hall, and the 260 and 266 buses to Willesden Magistrates’ Court just round the corner. It is only a five-minute walk from Neasden Station on the Jubilee Line (or one stop from the station on the 297).

 

Like its Wembley counterpart, Willesden LHS also welcomes visitors to its meetings, in return for a small donation, so if this subject is of interest to you, please come along by 7.30pm on Wednesday 20^th.

Philip Grant.

Road closures and bus diversions from 11am tomororow for Promotion Final at Wembley Stadium. Kick Off 3pm

 

FINAL: Brent Labour lose council seats to Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Greens. No overall majority.

Source: Wikipedia

Labour has lost control of Brent Council though still the biggest group on the council. They now have 23 seats fewer compared wit 2022 (26/49). They lost to Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Greens. Greens were elected for the first time and gained 9 councillors. Conservatives and Liberal Democrats both increased their number of councillors.

Notable Labour losses were  Deputy Leader Mili Patelt, unseated by Green Amandine Alexandre in Harlesden and Kensal Green, Cllr Krupa Sheth (Cabinet member for Environment)  in Tokyngton, Cllr Neal Nerva (Cabinet member for Adult Social Care) in Queens Park,  Cllr Rita Conneely (Chair of Scrutiny, Resources and Public Realm)  in Kilburn and Cllr. Ketan Sheth (Chair of Scrutiny, Community and Wellbeing) in Wembley Central.

Greens took all 3 seats in from Labour in Kilburn and Lib Dems from Labour in in Queen's Park. Greens won both Northwick Park seats with veteran ex-Labour councillor and cabinet member, Keith Perrin, one of the victors. Reform and independents won no seats, though the latter achieved some substantial votes.

Only two of the five Labour councillors who defected to the Greens won their seats although the results were close apart from a large personal vote for current Mayour Ryan Hack in Brondesbury Park.

 

The Kilburn Declaration 

 

 

Brent Council Twitter posts of results

 

and after

And after recounts: