Argenta House tower application returns to Brent Planning Committee next week with added storeys and housing units

 

The proposed building - it will not stand alone, look carefully to the right and you will see the grey shape of another planned development

This is a better view of the densification
 

A reminder of the Argenta House the block replaces

 

A revised plan for Argenta House, opposite Stonebridge Park Station,  comes to Brent Planning Committee next week. Readers may remember the floods that resuted from the blocking of the Wembley Brook that runs through the site when groundworks took place. The pilings remain but there was pause.

The new application replaces a 26 storey 141 housing unit block with a part 27 storey, part 30 storey block  180 housing units plus commercial space.

The new application qualifies for fast-tracking  as it claims to be 100% affordable. 88 social rent and 92 shared ownership. The latter's qualification as affordable is debated with the Brent Poverty Commission suggesting that it is not affordable for the people of Brent in need of housing.

 The site's position between Wembley Brook and the River Brent was an issue previously when fears of flooding as a result of climate change induced severe heavy rains were raised. But the mitigations included in the application have been deemed acceptable.

 The site outlined in red. The River Brent continues culverted alongside the North Circular

 From the Flood Risk Assessment

The overall aim of a Flood Response Plan will be to ensure that the development will not place an additional burden on the emergency services. It is envisaged that the facilities management company for the development will be required to train and ensure that Flood Wardens are available when the buildings are occupied. Flood Wardens will be responsible for implementing the requirements of the Flood Response Plans.
 

The objective of the Flood Response Plan would be to assist people to leave the building before the onset of flooding but if timings did not allow, safe refuge can be found in the residential homes (starting at an elevation of 41.375 mAOD, over 15m above the design flood level). The operation is summarised below: 

• On receipt of a Flood Warning all occupants are warned of the risk of flooding.
• On receipt of a Flood Warning all vulnerable occupants are identified and their needs assessed.
• Vulnerable occupants are assisted to leave the building first, within two hours, followed by all other occupants.
• A register of occupants in the building is compiled following the receipt of a Severe Flood Warning.
• At the onset of flooding all members of the community are asked to remain in the building.
• No return to the building will be permitted unless it is safe to do so.

 Hmm.

The Wembley Brook will be re-routed but the information is confusing. Some illustrations show the brook beside the building and others beneath.

 

 

Another confusing aspect is the 'Play Nest':

 Julie Hughes, Brent's Primcipal Tree Officer makes some pithy comments in her report:

I would like to see some new tree planting as part of the proposals to ensure that equivalent tree cover is provided to the trees and vegetation that has been removed to accommodate the development.

Proposed landscaping shows some indicative tree planting in the Landscape Proposal General Arrangement Plan, seems to show indicatively around 20 trees to be planted. This does not really seem to be much for such a large building and I would expect to see more details as to species etc... I would expect to see plans which show more of a strategic approach to soft landscaping.

In the DAS the ‘Play Nest’ appears to be very green in its approach, however I am not sure exactly what is intended here. Details need to be provided to demonstrate that it would work, noting that much of the planting (including the nest and brook terraces) would be predominantly in shade. It is also not clear which of these areas has public access. It looks like ‘The Nest’ does, but not the terraces? This needs to be very carefully considered as will potentially impact quite significantly on the visual amenity of the whole scheme.

The tree strategy at 5.16 of the DAS (22) appears to be poorly thought out. We need to be sure that the trees proposed will thrive at the site. I am not sure that Beech will thrive and I am not sure that multi-stemmed Beech or Hornbeam are readily available. Given the rather sparse numbers of proposed trees, I would rather see large-canopied trees planted wherever they can be accommodated, supplemented by other trees which will establish well in the urban environment.

 Two illustrations to show Argenta House in the context of the overall Wembley Point Master Plan, reemembering of course that a tall development is due on the other side of the North Circular on the Uniys site and further into the future possible tall buildings on Conduit Way LINK :