Monday, 30 June 2014

Revised plans for Cricklewood Library


Hot on the heels of the Kensal Rise plamming application, revised architect plans for Cricklewood Library have been drawn up (above). The plans show that the community space has been increased slightly bu 30m2 to 180m2. The  library internal space of the current building was almost 300m2 on the ground floor with additional upstairs storage.

The revision includes outside space to the front and rear of the new development and includes a possible 'picture window' facing on to the landscape space.

One apartment has been deleted leaving one at the rear of the ground floor, two  each on the 1st and 2nd floors and one apartment only on the 3rd floor.

The Friends of Cricklewood Library Committee will be meeting soon and the plans are likely to be lodged with Brent planning today.
 
In October 2013 developer Andrew Gillick withdrew plans at the last minute LINK after campaigners said the community space was too small.

Police investigations are continuing into fraudulent emails supporting Gillick's previous planning application for Kensal Rise Library.

8 comments:

  1. Seems to be pushing his luck in terms of pushing forward regardless of the possibility Planning Commitee May still vote to delay application of Kensal Rise pending outcome of fraud investigation.

    Serious Fraud Office obviously have been busy with phone hacking case, and hopefully we might now get some movement. Given the excessive profits that can be made in securing planning permission SFO should give this top priority in terms of investigating.

    Furthermore planning committee should accept the need for a delay.

    Perhaps if eventually the developer used fraudulent activity, a judge might punish the crime by requesting the buildings be donated back to the community ?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Andrew Gillick - who certainly appears undeterred by the ongoing police investigation into the fraudulent email case surrounding his original planning application for Kensal Rise Library (KRL) - has doubtless been enboldened by the effective support he's been receiving from those councillors who publicly admit aiding 'negotiations' between him, All Souls College and FKRL. A quite extraordinary situation, surely? Should elected members really be liaising with a developer one of whose applications might yet be involved in criminal charges?

    Brent's Anti-fraud and Bribery Policy, compiled in June 2013, has been drawn up to deal with financial fraud, theft and corruption, but the following policy statements would surely rule out any such contact by councillors, to whom they're specifically addressed:

    'Our Members [councillors] are expected to act in a manner which sets an example to the community whom they represent and to the staff of the council who implement their policy objectives, such as the Planning Code of Practice'; 'Members must not place officers under inappropriate pressure to alter properly made decisions other than through the formal process, and should not use their position for the personal benefit of themselves or any other individual in their dealings with the council'.

    The policy document continues: 'We will ensure that the processes that are particularly vulnerable, such as planning, licensing, disposals and tendering are adequately protected through internal control mechanisms and proactive reviews of member interests'.

    It's clear that either no 'internal control mechanisms' were in place to protect one of those 'particularly vulnerable' 'processes', namely planning, or that they failed when, in August 2013, some 70 out of 78 fraudulent emails supporting Andrew Gillick's original planning application for KRL appeared online. The Anti-fraud and Bribery Policy was drawn up just weeks before - link here

    http://www.brent.gov.uk/media/3409933/Anti fraud and bribery policy.pdf

    Is it possible that in 'negotiating' with Mr Gillick, councillors were hoping to deflect attention away from the lack of protection for planning which should already have been in place, thus rescuing the council's reputation as architect of the email scan? 'Personal benefit' can take many forms, and would, for example, surely include political preferment?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am very disappointed that Friends of Cricklewood Library are not being subjected to the abuse, innuendo, slurs that FKRL were.
    Let's be fair and also attack them - after all, they seem to be doing a deal with the developer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've no doubt that the Friends of Cricklewood Library will be criticised if they're found to have a done a deal with Andrew Gillick while a live police investigation is underway around his original KRL scheme. From the above, there is no suggestion that this is what's happened.

      If Mr Gillick really has the interests of local residents at heart, he'll voluntarily withdraw his plans for both Cricklewood and Kensal Rise until the police have finished their investigation into the fake email scandal. With property prices rising across the borough, he won't be losing out financially, and such a move can only improve his reputation which is currently, rightly or wrongly, blemished by the email affair. 'Clearing the air' before proceeding further can only be a good thing.

      Delete
    2. Unsure what 'abuse, innuendo, slurs' the poster at 21.40 above is referring to. From a reading of this and related blogs, those who believe Andrew Gillick's latest planning application should be deferred until Brent police have finished their investigation have presented their arguments clearly, it seems to me.

      Delete
  4. It would be nice if Cricklewood friends made a statement suggesting they would support a delay of planning application pending the outcome of fraud investigation.

    This is why FKRL lost the community support as they thought it would be expedient to simply accept developer demands.

    It is hoped Cricklewood friends will accept the. Public need to be open in accepting a delay would be beneficial in securing community support and not just a few individuals.

    Enough said, so speak up Cricklewood Friends.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What would be even better would be a joint statement by Cricklewood Friends and FKRL asking the developer to withdraw both his planning applications for the two former libraries until Brent police have completed their investigation.

      Delete
    2. Second such a proposal.

      Delete