Tonight's Planning Committee is full of controversial planning applications with Mumbai Junction and Kilburn Square returning to the Agenda (there is a Supplementary Report on Kilburn Square HERE) and are expected to have speakers making the case for refusal of planning permission.
You can watch the meeting live online HERE
Also returning to the Agenda is an application to turn two neglected shops on Park Parade, Harlesden into an Adult Gaming Centre (AGC) and reduced size betting shop. Objectors cite anti-social behaviour and the presence of other AGC's in the area as reasons for objection. There is the additional moral and public health case against the exploitative nature of gambling joints in poor areas.
The application is unusual in that it is being opposed by local councillors, community organisations and the police:
60 objections were received in total inclusive of objections from Councillors, Harlesden Neighbourhood Forum and Harlesden Area Action Group, the Police Safer Neighbourhood Team and the Salvation Army.
The following Councillors objected:
Cllr Mili Patel –Harlesden and Kensal Green Ward
Cllr Jumbo Chan – Harlesden and Kensal Green Ward
Cllr Jake Rubin – Roundwood Ward
Cllr Elliot Chappell – Roundwood Ward
Cllr Fleur Donnelly – Jackson – Roundwood Ward
The Police objections are raised in a Supplementary Report that you can read HERE and I post an extract below:
An objection was received from the Met Police Designing Out Crime Officer, noting the following matters:
· That the close proximity of the public house (opposite) and off-licences either side and the nearby pawn shop can create a nurturing habitat for street drinking which in turn can increase the risk of antisocial behaviour (ASB);
· That the alleyway to the rear is not well observed and has poor natural surveillance;
· That the main entrance is recessed and provide a concealment opportunity and could be used as a toilet or to take drugs;
· That there is no mention of security in the proposal or a management plan;
· That the proposal indicates that the AGC won’t be staffed and could therefore be exploited by drug dealers or users. They consider that persons should be vetted prior to entry to ensure they are of suitable age and have not been barred;
· That the windows onto the street need to allow for surveillance into and out from the centre.
They also highlight that the local policing team raised the following concerns:
· That Park Parade has the second highest figures for recorded ASB in the town centre and is a known area where robbery often occurs, and for drug offences (both possession and supply);
· That there are organised gangs of drug dealers in Park Parade taking over and using premises to conduct their activities, and that an unsupervised venue will allow this to happen out of police view;
· That last year, an operation was conducted in the High Street where a betting shop was used by a 20 strong gang to drug deal out of sight;
· That there is a nearby college and school and that their pupils frequent Park Parade on their way to and from the education facility and could be influenced by the venue and its cliental;
· That there is a nightclub and public house opposite;
· That the town centre already has a street drinking problem contributing to ASB , and that the betting shop venues attract street drinkers;
· That there have been 6 Closure Orders in Park Parade relating to premises causing ASB or allowing criminality.
The Met Police advise that they have a number of recommendations should the application be granted, including:
· Security rated entrance doors;
· Video and auto intercom at entrance to ensure potential guests are vetted prior to entry;
· Glazing to main façade meets BSEN standards, with a roller shutter fixed to the exterior;
· That the recessed entrances are removed or have shutters or grills to eliminate this overnight;
· That the rear escape doors are alarmed and that they have a sufficient security rating;
· That the walls and doors of any cash room are security rated;
· That any external mailbox meets specific certification levels;
· That CCTV (with complementary lighting) is provided to specific standards and maintained by certified companies;
· That intruder alarms are installed
· That the applicant liaises with the MPS North West Licensing team.
Officers' comment:
The matters raised by the Met Police are acknowledged.
You might think the evidence supplied by the police is pretty daming but nevertheless planning officers recommend approval:
Recommendation: That planning permission is granted subject to the conditions set out in the report and an additional condition requiring formal Secured by Design accreditation prior to first occupation of the units.
The premises shall not be used expect between the hours of 0800 hours and 2230 hours Sundays to Thursdays and between 0800 hours and 2300 hours Friday and Saturdays without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the enjoyment by neighbouring occupiers of their properties.’
Will Matt Kelcher dare to support the Planners recommendation, and ignore the objection by his wife???
ReplyDeleteBeggars belief.
ReplyDeleteI bet none of the planning officers live in Harlesden
ReplyDeleteThe premises shall not be used expect between the hours of 0800 hours and 2230 hours
ReplyDelete“Expect”? did a level headed person write this? Does this nullify the document or was it purposely written this way to allow the premises to be used outside of those stated hours?
The bottom line is that the council tax paying residents do not want this and I will certainly not go into Harlesden to do my shopping anymore.
This application was rightly refused, despite the recommendation of Planning Officers.
ReplyDeleteThere are other cases in the recent past where applications were recommended for approval, and this has been "rubber stamped" by Planning Committee, despite objectors pointing out good planning policy reasons why it should have been refused.
The difference this time appears to have been because the objectors included members of Brent's Cabinet. That is not how planning applications should be decided!
Thought Cllr Milli Patel was on maternity leave? If you are on leave how can you vote?
ReplyDeleteCorruption at its worst. What logical reason would there be to approve such an awful project? How many gambling dens do we need in Harlesden? This is of no benefit to anyone but criminals and addicts.
ReplyDeleteI may be wrong, but I get the feeling that Brent's Planning Officers are afraid to recommend refusal of applications where the developer might appeal against that decision.
DeleteThey don't have enough staff for their normal work, so would want to avoid the time-consuming extra work of preparing a case for a Public Inquiry.
Not enough staff is no excuse for not doing a thorough job on behalf of council tax paying residents - residents need protection from developers with deep pockets who can buy their way to getting results in their favour.
DeleteAt Planning Committee members are often reminded of the impact on council finances of losing costly appeals. Another presure.
ReplyDeleteProof that these local councillors are not standing up for the public who elected them.
ReplyDeleteVote them out at the next local elections.
The local councillors for Harlesden and Roundwood WERE standing up for residents. Its the ones who voted in favour of the Gaming Centre who should definitely be voted out, along with all the other councillors who don't support their residents when theyre objecting to bad developments.
DeleteHarlesden Councillor Matt Kelcher Chair of Brent Council Planning Committee regularly votes in favour of developments throughout Brent despite passionate objections from affected residents, this includes going against local development plans.
ReplyDeleteHe does anything to retain that big financial allowance
DeleteCllr Matt Kelcher is employed as Head of Public Affairs at a company in the City of London - he gets £12,988 per year in Brent Councillor allowances plus an extra £14,858 per year for being on the Planning Committee = total of £27,846 on top of his work salary.
DeleteHis wife Cllr Mili Patel is employed as Head of Office for a prominent MP in the House of Commons - she also gets £12,988 per year in Brent Councillor allowances plus an extra £30,136 for being Deputy Leader of Brent Council = total of £43,124 on top of her work salary - she also sits on a couple of council committees so probably gets allowances for those too?
Great that they get paid for their council work but do they really have enough time to study and scrutinise all of the important Brent Council documents and actually listen to residents views?
They are both making decisions which affect and impact on all of us Brent residents not just those in Harlesden!
Harlesden Cllr Matt Kelcher Chair of The Brent Council Planning Committee regularly votes in favour of loads of bad developments - he has also encouraged the planning committee to go against locally agreed development plans 😞
ReplyDeleteAnon 23:55 he'd support anything Towerblock Tatler and Butt wants. It helps that he's a very low wattage.
ReplyDeleteLow wattage??? Chair of the Planning Committee and his wife Deputy Leader of the Council - dangerous combination both ignoring what us residents want 😞
DeleteOdd. The Mumbai Junction application was previously refused and came back for the planning reasons to be agreed. It did not come back to be rerun. Very naughty cllr kelcher. Also the committee had different members, ie the ones who met with the developer, ie predetermined
ReplyDeleteIn Wembley High Road between junctions of Park Lane and Ealing Road, there are 4 Adult Gaming Shops, 3 x Silvertime, one at Park Lane and two within about 50 feet of each other between Wembley Central and Ealing Road, the other is Merkur Slots, close to MacDonalds. Along with approx 8 Betting Shops. As Wembley Central also has high rates of Anti-Social Behaviour, never heard of anyone objecting to these.
ReplyDeleteThat's because our Wembley Central Councillors are invisible - they take their allowances but don't engage with residents at all and don't do anything to stop betting shops or alcohol licences.
ReplyDelete25 October 2023 at 09:54 Very good point, I bet Kelcher votes for them - here we are in the London Borough of Bent
ReplyDelete