Sunday, 13 November 2016

Who was really responsible for the Granville Centre debacle?

Last week I published Cllr Duffy's interchange with Cllr Mashari in which he called for her resignation over the Granville and Carlton Centres in South Kilburn. LINK

Cllr Mashari claimed that the proposals for regeneration  of the sites came under the Property portfolio which Cllr Butt, leader of the council, holds, rather than Regeneration. Property covers council ownership of buildings and sites and Brent Council has a policy to realise the value of these assets to address their financial plight.

The Granville proposal was put to the Cabinet by Margaret McLennan, deputy leader, rather than Butt who chairs the Cabinet.  Other South Kilburn proposals on the agenda at that meeting, Phase 3a and Site 18,  were put by Cllr Mashari.

It has not been possible to find the full list of responsibilities of each portfolio holder including the leader and deputy, as up to date details do not appear to be available on the Council website.

The report about Granville was written jointly by the Strategic Directors for Resources, and Regeneration and Environment.

Philip Grant points out in a comment on the earlier post:
However, both of those Directors, Althea Loderick (Resources) and Amar Dave (Regeneration and Environment) were new to Brent, having taken up their posts in June 2016, having previously been in Waltham Forest and Essex respectively. So they probably knew very little about Kilburn, and may not even have visited the area from their new offices in the Civic Centre before they put their names to the report.
The contact officers for the report were:
Althea Loderick
 Strategic Director of Resources
Sarah Chaudhry
 Head of Property
Tanveer Ghani
 Project Manager
Dale Thomson
 Regeneration Manager
There is only a cursory reference to the Granville Nursery Plus (and not by name) in the report and none to the Granville Kitchen.

 Given the economic deprivation found on the South Kilburn Estate  and the presence of many protected groups the Equality Analysis attached to the report is clearly deficient - particularly the last sentence:

Appendix 4: Equality Analysis Stage 1 Screening Data
What are the objectives and expected outcomes of your proposal? Why is it needed?
The proposal covers the phased redevelopment the Carlton & Granville Centres, Granville Road, London, NW6 5RA to deliver new homes, an Enterprise Hub and additional community use space.
Who is affected by the proposal?
The proposal is relevant to residents in South Kilburn, small businesses in the area and the South Kilburn Trust. As the premises proposed for re- development are largely unoccupied and will shortly be vacated by the remaining users, there is no impact for existing users.
Could the proposal impact on people in different ways because of their equality characteristics?
The proposal will deliver new workspace accommodation for up to 30 small businesses as well as new housing for households in housing need. To the extent that some protected groups are over-represented among households in housing need or seeking employment opportunities, the positive impacts of the proposal may offer particular benefits to these groups.
Could the proposal have a disproportionate impact on some equality groups?
If yes, indicate which equality characteristic(s) are impacted
No, other than as noted above.
Would the proposal change or remove services used by vulnerable groups of people?
The proposal will provide new or improved services that may be used by vulnerable groups.
Does the proposal relate to an area with known inequalities?
Yes.
Is the proposal likely to be sensitive or important for some people because of their equality characteristics?
Yes – although the proposal is not seen as sensitive, it may offer important new opportunities for some protected groups and more generally.
Does the proposal relate to one of Brent's equality objectives?
The proposal relates to the following objectives:
            To know and understand all our communities
            To ensure that local public services are responsive to different needs and treat users with dignity and respect
Recommend this EA for Full Analysis?
No.
Although according to Cllr Duffy, recently  Cllr Butt and Cllr McLennan have met up with him, Kilburn councillors and  Granville and Carlton users, to discuss the situation,  some of the responsibility may rest with them for the original failure to recognise the needs of the community. The potential confusion between the Property and Regeneration roles of Cllr Butt and Mashari, and the involvement of recent Strategic Director appointees, may mean that the resulting consultation failure and furore, may have been more cock-up than conspiracy.

For reference here are the Minutes of the July 25th Cabinet Meeting:



This report updates members on proposals to deliver a new Enterprise Hub and proposes the re-development of the Carlton and Granville Centres as a location for the Enterprise Hub and deliver 95 new home with additional community space.

Decision:
(i)        that approval be given to Option 2 for redeveloping the Carlton & Granville Centres, Granville Road, London, NW6 5RA (the subject site) to deliver 95 new homes, an Enterprise Hub and 3274sqm of additional community use space;
(ii)       that a further update be provided to formally approve final scheme plans and the required capital investment to bring forward the phased redevelopment of the Carlton and Granville Centres and ensure continuity of occupation for the Enterprise Hub within the site;
(iii)      that the site be included within the scope of the South Kilburn Masterplan review to ensure wider place making considerations are incorporated;
(iv)      that the Strategic Director for Resources in consultation with the Strategic Director for Regeneration and Environment, Chief Legal Officer and Chief Finance Officer enter into a legal agreement with the South Kilburn Trust and the GLA to secure their funding contributions in return for project delivery of the Enterprise Hub by March 2018, and setting out Council commitment to underwrite the shortfall in project funds;
(v)       that authority be delegated to the Strategic Director for Resources in consultation with the Strategic Director for Regeneration and Environment, Chief Legal Officer and Chief Finance Officer to oversee scheme development through further viability testing, local consultation, and planning consent;
(vi)      that authority be delegated to the Strategic Director for Resources in consultation with the Strategic Director for Regeneration and Environment, Chief Legal Officer and Chief Finance Officer in respect to any works and/or professional services contracts for scheme development to agree pre-tender considerations, invite tenders and thereafter award the contract.

Minutes:

Councillor McLennan, Deputy Leader of the Council, introduced the report. She informed members that the Cabinet had approved the Strategic Property Plan 2015-19 setting out a presumption for Brent to retain its limited property assets, utilising them to support regeneration, generating revenue savings, and capital investment for new income generation.

Councillor McLennan stated that in January 2016 Brent had successfully secured £1.8m from the London Regeneration Fund (LRF) which was matched funded with a further £2m (£1.5m capital & £500k revenue) from the South Kilburn Trust (SKT) to deliver a new Enterprise Hub as part of addressing the lack of good quality, small workspace provision in the borough and provide a permanent location for the South Kilburn Trust to continue to deliver services and support to the local community within South Kilburn.

She stated that the report updated members on proposals to deliver a new Enterprise Hub and proposed the re-development of the Carlton and Granville Centres as a location for the Enterprise Hub and deliver 95 new homes with additional community space.


1 comment:

  1. Having looked at the available evidence, I think it would be harsh to say that Cllr. Mashari bears sole, or even most, responsibility for this debacle. It is a failure to engage properly with local residents by Senior Council Officers and by the Cabinet, both bodies who are meant to act in the best interests the Brent citizens they have been appointed, or elected, to represent.

    The Council's website tells us that:
    'The Cabinet provides political leadership and strategic direction for the council, both within individual portfolio responsibilities and as part of their corporate responsibilities.'

    It also says:
    'Cabinet members are each democratically accountable to the public and are the public face of the council. As such they act as ambassadors for the council's work in improving Brent.'

    Cllr. Mashari may not have engaged properly with people in Kilburn since taking on her role as Lead Member for Regeneration, Growth, Employment and Skills in May 2016.

    But, as the minutes of the Cabinet meeting on 25 July show, it was Cllr. McLellan (formerly Lead Member for Regeneration, and also criticised in the past for failing to engage with Kilburn residents) who presented the report on the Carlton and Granville Centres to the Cabinet, and presumably invited them to make the decision which they did.

    It is the Cabinet which 'provides political leadership and strategic direction for the Council.' Overall responsibility for the mess which the Council has made over the future of the Carlton and Granville Centres must therefore lie with the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet, Cllr. Butt, aided and abetted by his Deputy, Cllr. McLennan.

    Philip.

    ReplyDelete