How much say should St Raphaels' residents have in Brent Council commercial lettings on their estate? Off-licence or childcare & tuition centre?

 

Lilburne Walk, St Raphael's Estate 

An applicant who applied to run a childcare and tuition centre in a Brent Council shop front property on St Raphael’s Estate  was told that her application “very strong” and “came a close second”, to another proposal.  That proposal was chosen because it “aligned more closely” with Brent’s strategies and objectives. That application was for an off-licence.

 

The unsuccessful applicant said she was struggling to see how this was a better strategic fit than a family run  childcare and education service business. The Metropolitan Police had initially raised concerns about the succesful application, highlighting risks to all four licensing objectives.

 

Her application outlined a safe, community-focused offer including childcare, tuition, school pick-ups and holiday activities. Residents are now raising serious concerns about the impact of an off-licence between two playgrounds, beside a mosque and opposite a community centre.

 

She asked:

 

What strategic criteria were used to assess the bid?

 

How an off-licence was deemed more aligned with those priorities than a childcare/education use?

 

Whether Social Value scoring or likely licensing impacts were considered?

 

 

Her concerns and call for transparency have now been taken up by the community group st Raphael's Voice who have issued a formal complaint to the Brent Council:

 

FORMAL COMPLAINT AND STRONG OBJECTION TO THE COMMERCIAL TENANCY DECISION FOR 67 LILBURNE WALK, ST RAPHS ESTATE,NW10 0TW

 

 

I am writing to register a formal complaint and express my profound disappointment and strong objection to the decision regarding the tenancy at the commercial premises at 67 Lilburne Walk, St Raphs Estate.

 

This letter serves as notice that the community demands a comprehensive, independent review of the commercial tender process itself, entirely separate from the alcohol licensing application process.

 

The community asserts it was fundamentally failed by the council's initial process due to a distinct and unacceptable lack of meaningful engagement with residents during the critical decision-making phase of the tenancy agreement.

 

The formal licensing application process, while a necessary stage, was a retrospective measure to address concerns, not a proactive consultation on the type of business that would best serve our estate. This approach is a clear failure in due process and community engagement, as a community we have battled with years of ASB, drink and drug fuelled violence. This could potentially undo much of the hardwork we have done to ensure we create thriving communities, give our children the best start in life, and live healthier lives.

 

Our objections are rooted in specific, tangible risks to public safety, public health, and the failure to secure community social value, all of which are material considerations that appear to have been inadequately weighted against pure commercial viability.

 

1.Public Safety and Crime & Disorder Hotspot:

 

St Raph's Estate is a historically identified "crime and disorder hotspot," an area that has been contending with significant alcohol and drug-fuelled antisocial behaviour, including (VWAG) violence towards women and girls. The introduction of an off-licence, one of four in the immediate vicinity, directly undermines the council's own stated priority of community safety and has the potential to exacerbate these existing issues, particularly given the premises' proximity to two playgrounds, a place of worship and community centre. These material concerns were raised by multiple "responsible authorities" including local residents, the Metropolitan Police, residents association, local foodbank, St Patricks church, local mosques, and youth club. The council appears to have disregarded the professional and local expertise on this critical issue.

 

2. Failure to Prioritize Social Value and Council Objectives:

 

The alternative proposal for a childcare and tuition centre would have directly and demonstrably supported the council's social objectives outlined in the Brent Borough Plan: Prosperity and Stability in Brent, A Cleaner, Greener Future, Thriving Communities, The Best Start in Life, and A Healthier Brent. By prioritising an off-licence, the council has bypassed a vital community asset that aligns with these strategic goals, failing to give social value, public health, and public safety equal weight to commercial considerations.

 

3. Demand for a Separate, Independent Tender Review:

 

The community formally requests that the decision-making process for the commercial tenancy at 67 Lilburne Walk be subjected to a separate, independent review. This review must scrutinise:

 

• The criteria used in the tender selection.
• How community and stakeholder input was gathered and, critically, utilised before the tenancy decision was made.
• The weighting given to social value and public safety over commercial viability.

This must be a distinct process from the ongoing or completed alcohol licensing application, as the tenancy decision and licensing decision are separate legal matters, each requiring independent scrutiny.

 

We urge the Council to act transparently and responsibly by reviewing this flawed decision-making process to ensure that robust community engagement is a fundamental, early, and decisive step in all future commercial tenancy agreements. We expect a formal response outlining the steps the council will take to initiate this independent review

 

Yours Sincerely,

 

Asif Zamir