Wednesday 13 December 2023

The inexorable march of tall towers down Wembley High Road to continue at Planning Committee tonight

 

The view from down Wembley High Road - emerging developments are the thin blue lines in he distance including the former Copland School site

 

Brent planners are recommending that the Planning Committee tonight approve two new towers on Wembley High Road wedged between the Chiltern railway line and the existing buildings at 390-408 High Road (also due to be redeveloped).

 


The two towers are 20 and 22 storeys high (up from a previous application of 13 and 17 storeys in May 2023) and will provide 639  student beds.  None will be available but Brent planners suggest settling for £3.98 million in lieu (c£6,2050 per bed) :

No affordable student accommodation is proposed. Instead, the applicant is proposing a £3.958 million cash payment in lieu towards the borough’s affordable housing programme. Absence of affordable student accommodation is contrary to London Plan Policy H15. However, a payment in lieu would enable the scheme to contribute towards addressing the need for low cost rent affordable housing, for which there is a great need at a local and strategic level. Further clarification and discussion is required to confirm how the payment would be spent to ensure net additional affordable housing as well as the expected delivery timescales. GLA officers are scrutinising the applicant’s Financial Viability Assessment  to ensure that the cash payment represents the maximum viable financial contribution that the scheme can support.

 The applicant claims to have consulted widely but the consultation resulted in only 6 written comments:

A newsletter was sent to c.2, 400 residents and businesses, inviting them to two organised public exhibition events (held nearby at Patidar House on 5th and 8th July). The events were also publicised in theBrent and Kilburn Times, to ensure maximum visibility and a dedicated on-line community hub was launched at wembleygreenway.co.uk, to enable interested parties to view the proposals and leave feedback online. Freepost and project email addresses have also been publicised to facilitate options for further feedback. Six written responses were received from residents and local businesses, with a summary of their comments contained within the Statement of Community Involvement. (SCI)

 

The Brent Planning Portal does a little better with 8 objections, including this one:


I strongly object to proposed 2 storey block of Student Housing on Wembley High Road.


The proposed development will bring no additional benefit to local residents. There is already an extreme lack of affordable housing and this proposed development will do nothing to alleviate the problem. Instead this will exacerbate it, as well as put a significant strain on already over stretched local services, traffic and primary health care, council services as well the water & sewage network.


Wembley High Road is in the 91st percentile for High Air pollution with the WHO limited exceeded on PM 2.5, PM 10 and NO2 (source: https://addresspollution.org/results/66e0177a-b70b-4179-8e76-8b78463618e2). This proposed development will only increase the levels with no mitigations in place to reduce the traffic, air, dust and noise pollution for local residents whilst these works are due to take place.


This development does not address:


1. Affordable and secure housing for residents of Brent.


2. Traffic management and impact to clean air. Action to reduce air, dust and noise pollution. When construction is taking place there are no mitigations in place to actively reduce the affect on air pollution.


3. Mitigations to overstretched local services such as schools, GPs, Dentists, Youth services and sports clubs, Council services etc.


4. Ensuring that disruption is kept to a minimum. Maintaining footpaths, roads, bus stops so that local residents can go about their daily business safely and without it being impeded by works.

Building works in such a tight spot, off a very busy road,  are likely to be a nightmare and over a considerable amount of time as building commences on that site and the buildings fronting the street. The developer intends that most deliveries to the students units from a High Road bay rather than to the building itself.

 

There is a gesture towards greening in the provision of a Green Way from the Uncle Building to the site:

 

How long will the trees to the right of the site survive?

Planning officers are keen to prove the necessity of student accommodation to meet growing needs and their report is full of detailed statistics.  LINK. Together with the other site there will be 988 student bedrooms in this small area.

Concerns over tall buildings and densification are dismissed as this is a designated tall building zone (Local Plan) in an urban environment. Reduction in daylight is to be expected in such circumstances and sufficient separation between the buildings is claimed.

Planning officers conclude (my highlinghting):

The proposed development would make efficient use of the land in a sustainable location, in line with the NPPF, and is an appropriate form of development within Wembley Town Centre and Wembley Growth Area, consistent with the aims of the site allocation policy. This is identified as an appropriate location in the Borough where tall buildings can be located, and the proposed scale, massing and appearance of the buildings would relate well to the existing and emerging context. As the report acknowledges, owing to the constrained nature of the site and dense urban pattern of development in the locality, both existing and emerging, there is expected to be some adverse impacts on daylight and sunlight conditions to some existing residential properties, as well as others coming forward in the immediate vicinity. 

 

As the report acknowledges these adverse effects would be noticeable in some cases, but commensurate with development of this form within the high density urban environment that is both existing and emerging in the locality, and such impacts which are to be expected, as well as other planning harm identified (i.e. net loss of trees) must be balanced against the overall planning benefits of the proposal. Whilst the proposal is not in accordance with London Plan policy H15, due to the absence of affordable student accommodation on site, the payment in lieu that will be secured (£3.958m) which is agreed as the maximum viable, and which is to be utilised for the delivery of additional C3 affordable homes in the Borough, for which there is the greatest need at a local and strategic level, offers greater public benefit to the Borough.

 

Overall, and on balance, the impacts identified that are to be associated with the proposed development would it is considered be clearly outweighed by the overall planning benefits that would follow, including the provision of student accommodation to meet identified demand and this contributing positively towards the housing targets within the Borough, wider economic benefits, provision of the new east to west pedestrian route (as per the site allocation policy), new public realm, urban greening measures, sustainable drainage, sustainable transport contributions and biodiversity net gain (including off-site contribution)

 


15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Building up is better for the environment than building out.

This is a city, people need homes.

Paul Scott said...

https://planapps.london.gov.uk/planningapps/23-2811

Anonymous said...

So you live in a tower block do you? Bet you don't.

Would you feel safe knowing that the fire service cannot cope with tower blocks?

Have you forgotten what happened at Grenfel???

Anonymous said...

These aren't homes Anon 13 Dec @16:21, these are high profit margin student properties that don't meet the room size criteria of flats and pay no council tax. Pray tell, how are these good for anyone? Also I'm surprised that they are going ahead as the government is cutting back on students coming into the country?

Why is building up better? The cost goes up per unit for a start.

Just hoping that the £3.958 million cash payment for affordable housing is utilised for Social Housing and not Brent staff housing or any of the unaffordable (for Brent residents) products that the council often boast of as 'council housing 'in their constant propaganda.

Anonymous said...

The £3.958million will be wasted by Brent Council and does not equate to the damage that this development will create in Wembley High Road, particularly pollution during construction works.

Don't forget that Brent Council gave £17.8million of our NCIL money, which was supposed to be spent on vital local projects, back to multi-billion pound developers Quintain for their 'vanity project' steps outside Wembley Stadium - that money should have been spent on vital local projects.

Anonymous said...

Have you forgotten what happened at the Great Fire of London? No tower blocks there, yet fire still happened. Thankfully, we have the fire brigade now.

People in countries over live in apartment blocks. You live in London, not Kansas.

Anonymous said...

If these new homes were actually helping to solve the Housing Crisis in Brent they might be acceptable. But they don't - they simply create overbuilding, over population and overcrowding of the area.

How much student accommodation does Brent actually need - and should not other parts of London provide homes for students closer to their respective Universities?

Student accommodation places extra burden on Brent services without contributing anything to the Council Tax pot. So what exactly is the true benefit to Brent? Can the Leader of Brent Council answer and make the case.

Martin Francis said...

Planning Committee members asked some of these questions last night. I hope to post a report later today.

Anonymous said...

Where there research falls down is that most students having spent the first year in these places, make friends and decide they'd be better off living in a shared house with outside space and no rules. It's much cheaper and better for them. They should go and ask the current companies that run the Student Blocks in Wembley Park. How many move out after the first year? I personally know of a group of 12 Students who have rented 3 x 3/4 bed houses in Kingsbury and Kenton for the very same reasons.

Jaine Lunn said...

I cannot fathom why they think Student Accommodation is suitable in this area especially since they have gone from 300+ to 900+. The question that they will bring nothing to the local economy makes no sense, with Wetherspoons across the road open from 9.00 am to get a cheap full English breakfast, and Nando's and KFC just a short hop from the front door, the High Road is a Takeaway Heaven for a quick snack for to spend their student loans for the ones that can't cook. Oh the joys of student life, slogging it into central london via the overcrowded public transport in rush hour. Experience the delights of the No.18 Bus which rarely has any seats in the morning or the Bakerloo Line from Wembley Central which must hold the record for one of the most noisy,dirtiest,unreliable, knackered old trains,disgusting line in London.

Anonymous said...

Will they end up as bedsits for those who can't afford rents in larger places or air b&bs for stadium events?

This must be stopped!

Anonymous said...

First we have heard about these revised proposals - who exactly did they consult???

Paul Scott said...

People can still object to the Greater London Authority about this planning application on various social, environmental, public health and fire safety grounds as they have to approve it as well.

Anonymous said...

Students are people too

Anonymous said...

Students deserve nice housing in properties that support their needs not an isolated lonely shoebox in a tower block!