Scrutiny refer Carlton-Granville plans back to Cabinet for action on key points

There were a record 15 speakers at tonight's call-in of the redevelopment proposals for the Carlton-Granville site in South Kilburn.

Kilburn councillors Faduma Hassan and Rita Conneely presented the reasons why they and fellow councillors had called-in the Cabinet decision. 13 of the 15 public speakers said why they opposed the Cabinet's plans.

After very thorough questioning the Committee agreed to refer the decision back to the Cabinet with a number of issues to be addressed before the project goes ahead. These included:

•  a firm commitment to the 23 housing units proposed for the site to be social housing ('council' was actually stipulated by some councillors)
•  a larger proportion of the units to be for family hosing (this would reduce the total number of units) 
• potential conflict over noise between the new residents and late opening community facilities to be addressed and mitigated 
• the enterprise space to be for projects of social value
• going forward a widened and more representative management structure for the community facilities to be explored.

Most of the speakers favoured the option that would have built no housing on the site with community space, which has already been cut back by structural changes, to be increased instead. They refuted suggestions that this meant they were against providing housing for needy groups - they felt that there was sufficient space elsewhere on council owned land in the massive development to build council homes. One speaker claimed that the council was giving land to developers without ensuring social/council housing was built as part of the deal. They pressed the need for community space on an estate where the population was rapidly increasing through development and where many local projects provided essential services to needy residents to the benefit of the Council.

The referral back to Cabinet will not win abandonment of  the plan for housing on the site. Only two members of the Committee voted against the reference back. Cllr Saqib Butt backed the Cabinet and the Tory, Cllr Kansagra, made a rather confused contribution which I interpreted as being for the Cabinet but judge for yourself by viewing towards the end of the video.

Although Cllr Neal Nerva said there was no hurry to reach a decision Carolyn Downs pointed out that Brent Council needed to safeguard the £65m they had been promised by the GLA. Cllr Tatler (Lead Member for Regeneration) argued that the new nursery build and other aspects of the project including the community hub needed to be built by the end of the year.


When Cllr Tatler stated that the new centre would have more community space than currently, campaigners pointed out that Carlton Granville had already had community space taken away through the 'big hole' made in the Grand Hall for enterprise space. Dee Woods made a passionate plea for the architectural  and social heritage of the site.


Cllr Mashari said that councillors had to take the issue seriously when so many long-established and much respected local organisations were protesting. She pointed to the earlier issue when Granville Carlton proposals had been mismanaged by Brent's property team's 'bad decision' alienating local people and how she had tried to set up a stakeholders' group to win back confidence. She was perturbed that the Council still did not appear to be  ensuring that 'property and community must go hand in hand.'

Questions were raised about the South Kilburn Trust who it was claimed was not representative of the community, had no democratic structure, excluded local councillors and in some cases, including the HS2 vent, had acted against the interests of residents. Cllr Tatler argued that governance was not part of the call-in but Mashari, her predecessor in the post, argued that the Cabinet paper had argued the proposals were being 'community led' so it was a valid consideration.

There was confusion over the 23 proposed housing  units and whether they would be social or council housing (different rents) and  the Committee established that this was an 'aspiration' and subject to viability studies and might even involve private housing.

There was concern that the project co-siting a community centre and housing would have inbuilt conflict between the full use of the community centre with late opening for events and the needs of young families with babies needing to sleep. Adequate soundproofing would be essential and may be so expensive as to affect viability.

Carlton-Granville Centre call-in to be heard by Brent Scrutiny on Wednesday as campaigners launch petition

The call-in of the proposal to build housing on the Granvill-Carlton site on the South Kilburn estate will be heard by the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee on Wednesday. The Cabinet's decision was called in by required 5 non-executive councillors in this case Cllrs Abdi, Chan, Hector, Pavey and Hassan.

This is the protocol for call-ins:

A decision made by the council’s Cabinet or a Cabinet committee, or a key decision by an officer, can be called in for review before it is implemented. Decisions can be called in by five non-executive members or by the Scrutiny Committee. If a Cabinet decision is called-in, that decision cannot normally be implemented until it has been considered by a scrutiny committee. An urgency procedure is in place in Standing Orders for any decision that cannot afford to be delayed.

The Scrutiny Committee is required to meet within 15 working days of the date on which a call-in is accepted as valid. The Committee may decide to refer the matter back to the Cabinet or other decision maker, along with the reasons why the Committee thinks it should be reconsidered. The Cabinet or other decision maker will then decide whether to implement the original decision or review the decision based on the views of the Scrutiny Committee. Alternatively the Committee can decide that the matter should not be referred back to the Cabinet or other decision maker in which case the original decision will be implemented.

-->Meanwhile local campaigners have set up a petition:

Please sign our petition asking Brent Council ...

To not put housing on the Granville and Carlton site
To have only  multipurpose community spaces managed by an alliance of community organisations and local residents.

Background

Granville and Carlton are two community buildings in the heart of South Killburn, in Northwest London. Both buildings were built for the community; Granville as multi-use community spaces and Carlton as a school and later adult education.

In 2016 Granville Communtiy Kitchen and The Otherwise Club with the help of local residents and Councillors were able to change Brent Council's minds about tearing down these invaluable local heritage  buildings. Now in 2019 they have new plans we need to challenge.

Multipurpose spaces are what Granville and Carlton have been for over 100 years! They were used for supporting those in need,  dances, weddings, celebrating and mourning, free advice, youth clubs and exercise classes, learning and socialising.

Please sign our petition to keep these buildings for lots of community uses

Social housing on this site? No thank you!

We want more social housing but not on an amenity site purposely built for social use

The South Kilburn Regeneration Programme is building over 2400 homes in the area. We need more multipurpose community spaces for these new residents!

Please build more social housing but not on the site of the only public community spaces in the area! They are building 308 homes just 10m from the Granville Carlton site with only 42 (14 %) of these being social housing. Make more social housing in the Regeneration Programme but not on the community site.

Please sign our petition to keep these buildings for lots of community uses

We want:

No housing on the site
Multipurpose community spaces managed by an alliance of community organisations and local residents.

SIGN THE PETITION HERE

Scrutiny to consider Carlton-Granville proposals after 7 councillors call-in the Cabinet's decision

Leader of Brent Council, Cllr Butt, confronts David Kaye who was making representations

 about the proposals

The Cabinet decision of 11th March 2019 on South Kilburn has been called in. The Cabinet had approved a scheme to allow 23 social homes to be built on Granville Carlton site and The South Kilburn Trust to be given management of the entire site.

A special meeting of the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee will be held on Wednesday April 3rd at 7pm to consider the call-in. 

Seven councillors made the request for a call-in, including the three Kilburn Councillors, Cllr R Connelly, Cllr F  Hussain and  Cllr A Abdi.

In his request for the call-in Cllr Abdi said:

I would like to suggest that we do not part develop this site. The population of South Kilburn is increasing and this decision risks the future use of the site as a community facility. I am in favour of option 4 of the report presented to the cabinet. 

Any shortfall of social housing can be put right by increasing the number of social homes on the Peel site, which is approximately 20/30 metres from the Carlton-Granville Centre. The proposed number of homes on the Peel site is 308, of which 42 properties  are at social rents.

I suggest that we find alternatives ways of investing and making the Carlton and Granville Buildings fit for purpose.

Residents and campaigners  working to keep Granville Carlton as multi purpose community space run by an Alliance of community organisations have welcomed the  opportunity to present their full arguments against the Cabinet decision to the Scrutiny Committee.

Leslie Barson who has worked in Granville Carlton for over 26 years said:

We are very pleased this decision has been called in with the support of our three councillors. With the population of South Kilburn planned to more than double  and with no new multi purpose community spaces planned  we are determined to keep Granville Carlton site for the community.

Locals challenge Brent Council's 'vision' for South Kilburn regeneration

The Brent Cabinet of June 19th, starting at the earlier time of 6pm, has a full agenda with several items relating to the controversial South Kilburn regeneration. The main item is adoption of a revised South Kilburn Supplementary Planning document. I receommed a full reading of the Officers' responses to representations made by local people (report embedded below) and others but here is a taster:

Leslie Barson and Dee Woods representing users of Granvill Plus Centre and the Carlton Centre

The vision is not the vision of the people of South Kilburn. It is an imposed vision whose prime purpose is to maximize housing. This has no long term benefits for the people of South Kilburn nor does it address the council’s own aims such as “improved public realm” (Masterplan Consultation Website) building for health and happiness. In fact it feels that the views are used to justify the decisions the Council wants with those decisions not necessarily in the interests of those who live and work in South Kilburn. They may coincide but they may not. The document has so many inaccuracies that it is hard to believe the people writing it really knew or were interested in South Kilburn. Its platitudes and disingenuous statements skew the reader to the decision the Council would like to see but don’t show the full picture. Brent Council should sign up to Community Engagement Principles as defined in the National Standards for Community Engagement (http://www.scdc.org.uk/what/national-standards/) putting these into action in South Kilburn to make some recompense for the years of bad practice. 

Officer response

The vision is an update of the original South Kilburn SPD, informed by the New Deal for Communities work. It has been subject to extensive engagement and reflects the opportunities that the area provides taking account of the area’s social, environmental and economic assets within the wider macro context that exists; particularly the need for viable delivery of new social rent dwellings, greater tenure diversity in the area, update of and additional provision of social infrastructure, increased opportunity for residents plus updated London planning policy which requires the efficient use of land.
Identifying that the masterplan has no long-term benefits for the people of South Kilburn is clearly inconsistent with the evidence of what has been achieved so far, including feedback from tenants who have moved into new dwellings, or accessed new/updated facilities. It also ignores the external validation of the work achieved for example by the Mayor of London. The Council recognises that regeneration is more than just a physical process ‘done’ to the local community; it complicated and requires engagement/support/participation and covers a multiplicity of issues. The Council has sought to follow good principles of regeneration wherever it can and for the vast majority of resident’s/local community groups, this is evidenced by a positive feedback. Inaccuracies have not been identified by the respondent and their response contains the type of sweeping generalisations it identifies the Council exhibit in the SPD. The masterplan process since 2005 and regeneration of the estate has quite rightly given the proposed level of change exhibited substantial levels of sustained engagement.

South Kilburn Trust

There is a risk of creating a divided community – on the one hand of people in social housing, set against private housing - very expensive to buy, or at high rents on short tenancies. There are a huge swathe of people in between - people who are working, and can’t get into social housing, but increasingly can’t afford to live in South Kilburn, let alone buy or rent a space big enough for their family. Different tenures and opportunities needs to seriously be considered so as not to end up with community of, bluntly speaking, rich and poor. And so it needs to be considered whether making the most amount of money out of a site is the best thing to do for the regeneration of an area.

Officer response

This scenario is one which officers are well aware of and is recognised in the SPD. The SPD identifies that ideally a wider range of tenures should be provided in the area. Nevertheless, it also identifies that firstly that the Council must make good on its promise to replace the number of existing social rented homes lost to the regeneration.
Unfortunately in the financial climate within the public sector currently, without grant/additional external funds opportunities for provision of alternative tenure types will be very limited. Social rent properties are extremely expensive to subsidise. The only other alternative would be to increase density to create greater subsidy. The Council is not using South Kilburn as a money making exercise; all proceeds are recycled within the regeneration of the area. The Council takes a whole life view of its assets and functions balancing up commercial property values with its role as a wider supporter of the community a significant number of which are reliant on many of the services it provides. 

Residents will be concerned about another proposal on the Agenda which  'appropriates' the green space to enable the redevelopment of Gloucester House and Durham Court to go ahead. A 'quality' replacement is promised:

-->

The redevelopment of Gloucester House and Durham Court site consists of:

·      The demolition of 209 residential units and garages contained within the Gloucester House and Durham Court site 


·      Erection of 236 new residential units - market sale (134 new homes) and affordable social rented (102 new homes) 


·      Relocation and improvement of the public open space and play area at the north of the Site 


·      New public realm and improved routes through the Site 


·      Landscaped private and shared gardens 


·      Basement car park providing 91 spaces 


·      Space for an energy centre for the South Kilburn District Energy System. 


·      Market and affordable dwellings including a range of 1 to 4 bed flats and 3 
and 4 bed duplex family units 


·       

The appropriation includes open space with a public children’s play area, however a new replacement play area will be provided. The Planning Committee Report of 20 August 2014 identified that in order to justify the proposed redevelopment it is important that the replacement facility is of a significantly improved quality. The report found that overall, the proposals appear to be of sufficient quality to justify the redevelopment of the existing play area and inconvenience that will be caused during construction when no play area will be provided. 


It should also be noted that Paddington Recreation Ground is around 330m away, South Kilburn Urban Park approximately 400m away and in May 2016 the new Woodhouse Urban Park in South Kilburn opened which is just over 500m away. 


Zadie Smith speaks our for South Kilburn's Granville and Carlton Centres

Author Zadie Smith, whose novels White Teeth and NW show how well she knows the needs of the local community, spoke in support of the threatened South Kilburn's Granville and Carlton Centres last night.

Smith read extracts from an essay she has written about the defence of local services to an audience of more than 100 people.

Brent Scrutiny Committee has called in the plans for examination at their meeting on Wednesday November 30th, 7pm at Brent Civic Centre. LINK

Scrutiny to examine alleged flaws in South Kilburn Granville consultation

There is to be a Special Meeting of the Brent Council Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee on Wednesday 30th November LINK to examine the situation around the proposals on the redevelopment of the Granville and Carlton Centres in South Kilburn. The issues has been covered extensively on Wembley Matters and the Cabinet discussion was reported HERE

The published reasons for the call-in are:

--> -->

·      That the process has been flawed with mistakes, warnings not heeded and lack of early consultation. 


·      That insufficient notice has been given to the views of the two Centres, local Councillors and other interested parties.

 
A member who has supported the call-in has provided further reasons for the call-in: 


·      The failure of the Cabinet to ensure that consultation took place with the users of the Granville Centre including the Granville Plus Nursery School.

·      The failure of the Cabinet to consider (ignored) warnings from a local councillor, that no consultation had taken place with the local community the Head of a popular local school and the parents who use it. Therefore putting valuable community assets under the unnecessary threat of closure and demolition.

·      The failure of the cabinet to adequately question the officer (consultant) who prepare the report on whether proper consultation had taken place, as it seem likely the consultant ever (sic) visited The Granville /Carlton centres or spoke to stakeholders.

·      The failure of the cabinet to engage with the South Kilburn Trust putting £2 Million at risk for a local employment Hub.

·      The failure of the Lead member for Regeneration to visit Kilburn or talk to stakeholders from May to the present day to re-assure local residents that there would be adequate consultation.

·      The failure of the Lead Member for regeneration to response to email requests for a meeting between Local councillors the Leader and CEO, between July and November.

Granville & Carlton Centre users assured that they will be included in plans for the future of site

I was unable to make tonight's Cabinet meeting where the Granville and Carlton Centre plans  were on the agenda.  However an observer tells me that Cllrs Conneely, Duffy, Jones and Warren spoke for the occupants of the buildings. Lesley Benson, head of Granville Nursery Plus amd Momata from Granville Kitchen also spoke.

Several contributors said that it has been the worse decision making process that they had every seen.

Apparently the Cabinet was contrite and Cllr Butt and Cllr Mashari said that they wanted to reassure the Granville and Carlton users that they would be included as contributers in the future, rather than just consulted.

The Cabinet approved the report. LINK

Cllr Mashari rejects call for her resignation over Granville redevelopment

Kilburn Times story

Cllr John Duffy (Labour, Kilburn) took the unusual step yesterday of circulating an email to all councillors calling for the resignation of Cllr Roxanne Mashari (Labour, Welsh Harp) who is the Cabinet member leading on Regeneration and Employment.

Cllr Mashari promptly rejected the call which was based on alleged incompetence over the redevelopment of the Granville and Carlton Centres in South Kilburn.  After a campaign by residents and users new proposals are to be put to the Cabinet on Tuesday November 15th which include, in Phase 2, proposals for the Granville Kitchen, Granville Nursery Plus and Otherwise Club. These were covered in an earlier post on Wembley Matters LINK.

Duffy wrote after coverage of the issue in the Kilburn Times which reported Zadie Smith's support for campaigners LINK: (Duffy's email appear to have been written in some haste and I have corrected typos)

All Councillors, 

This scandal attached came about because the cabinet agree to knock down a school  in Kilburn  they did not know was there . I know that is hard to believe particularly because it is a Brent school. How could anybody miss a school is beyond me.

Cllr Mashari in true cabinet style, failed to consult the school , the local community centres or local Kilburn Councillors. Her incompetency  put £2million investment in local employment from the  Soth Kilburn Trust and £750k from the GLA at risk. The incompetency also put the school and community  through unnecessary anguish . During the cabinet meeting to knock down the school not one question was raised by the cabinet about the lack of communication and consultation with users of the community centres and Kilburn Councillors.

It was only after the intervention of the local Councillors Rita Conneely, Barbara (Pitruzzella) and myself , where we demanded  a meeting  with the Leader and the CEO, did the leader agree to reconsider change the decision and consider options to ensure the future of the user groups and school.

This is not the first time the cabinet have have put funding at risk , due to their previous incompetence  , they previous nearly gave the street cleansing contractor up to £400k by failing to notice the report said all extra revenue from the green bins should go to the contractor (Veolia) and not the Brent council.

I believe Cllr Mashari should apologies  to the residents of Kilburn for  her breathtaking incompetence and resign  from the regelation portfolio .

Cllr Mashari replied:

Thank you for your email.

The decision on the future use of Granville that went through cabinet earlier this year did not come from Regeneration, but rather through property, which now sits under the Leader's portfolio. I understand that this may be confusing, but I have taken the time to sit down with Cllr Conneely to explain the division of responsibility here.

I understand that the leader has met and spoken about this matter with you on a number of occasions.

As far as the future of the building is concerned, I am now taking forward a paper through regeneration which outlines the next phase of the project in the context of the South Kilburn Regeneration scheme and I assure you that the process will be collaborative going forward.  I am happy to further discuss the upcoming cabinet paper with you and your ward colleagues.

I had also asked that Richard Barrett from our Regeneration team meet individually with each of the tenants and local stakeholders to capture their feedback and concerns. This has been done in addition to several other consultative meetings and exercises.

While I agree that the original decision could have been undertaken more collaboratively with councillors and community stakeholders, you will appreciate that I was not the lead member on this and that myself and Regeneration staff are working hard to establish a more consultative approach to make this project a success now it has passed from Property to Regeneration.

With regards to your assertion that I should resign, I feel this is a wholly inappropriate response on the back of a Kilburn Times article and clearly before you had taken the trouble to check which cabinet member led on the original decision.  

Nonetheless, I am determined to find a way forward for Granville that means all local stakeholders are at the heart of the design and function of the new enterprise hub and I hope that you will continue to work closely with Richard Barrett and myself to ensure that happens.

Cllr Duffy responded thanking Cllr Mashari for her clarification but went on to list the reasons she should resign: (typos and minor corrections)

There are four reasons I think you should  resign and apologise.

(1) It is not about the issue of who made original decision, it's the fact you left the parents and governors of the school  and users of the community centre in limbo , not knowing if the school and community centre would  close.They were left not knowing for over 3 months.During that time  there were many meetings  concerning  the centres both in Kilburn and the CC  (Civic Centre) since the July 25th meeting. You have not even attempted  to visit the school you have not visited the community centre you have not attended SKT or to my knowledge you have not even set foot in Kilburn since you were elected or since the meeting of the 25 July.

(2)Your action to ignore my plea to start consultation put £2.75 million much needed  investment in Kilburn at risk and it was only the actions and pressure of the local community and Rita, Barbara and myself that secured the funding.

(3) You say you have asked officers from the generation team to meet with local stake holders,this is true. Unfortunately you only asked officers to meet with stakeholder this week which is 105 Days after the meeting of the July 25th and 115 Days after I sent you the email outlining the lack of consultation.I find it quite disingenuous for you to  pretend  you have taken actions , when you ignored Kilburn residents for over 3 months. 

(4) I do believe you even bother to read the reports (sic) on the demolition of the Granville and Carlton on the 25th May This is borne out  by your confusion with the dates and believing you were not the lead member at the time.

Cllr Mashari you can try and blame Cllr Butt and Cllr McLennan (Deputy Leader) , but both of those along with Cllr W. Mitchell- Murray  have come to Kilburn to reassure residents while you have ignored them.

I  say again you should resign  as I believe  the residents of Kilburn will not have any confidence in you to deliver regeneration which reflects the needs of their community. 

Hope for Granville Plus Nursery and Granville Kitchen in new Cabinet Report

The Granville Plus purpose built extension - will it survive?

 A new Cabinet report going before the Brent Cabinet on November 15th gives some seeds of hope for those campaigning for the Granville Nursery Plus, Otherwise Club and the Granville Kitchen. LINK

The report admits that there was a negative public reaction to the proposals for the Carlton and Granville Centres:

Key feedback from the consultation and through officer meetings has been that the community has been upset that there has been a lack of consultation prior to the 25 July 2016 report and that they were not presented with options for the site. It should be noted that the 25 July 2016 Cabinet paper was focused on meeting timescales in order to adhere to a tight timescale for the Greater London Authority (GLA) funding (described below). There has been upset that the occupiers were not engaged and that the services which are being delivered were not understood by the Council. There was a large response that would not wish to see the buildings being demolished and for the current facilities to stay within the buildings. The current occupiers, whilst also wishing the building not to be demolished, would be amenable to development as long as they stayed on the site. 



Phase one would be the refurbishment and reconfiguration of the Granville Centre to allow an Enterprise Hub to be established.

Phase 2 would require further consultation and a £1m fee for design and consultancies. Decisions on the plans will be delegated long-term to Richard Barrett, head of South Kilburn Regeneration. The report appears to show that the officers have listened to the concerns of campaigners as put forward on this blog LINK  LINK  LINK but of course there is many a slip 'twixt the cup and lip.

• The work of the design team will also include proactive consultation and engagement with affected stakeholders, service users and residents with protected characteristics such as:  
•  the diverse group of children, the majority of whom are from BAME backgrounds and with English as a second language, attending the Nursery School and Barnardo’s operated Children’s Centre and their parents/families 
• SEND children and service users with disabilities 
 
•   Residents, elderly and economically disadvantaged groups who use the Granville Kitchen and Otherwise Club*

Although is must be remembered that proposals are subject to consultation, discussion with various bodies and a Cabinet decision next year the report outline what they anticipate:

The Council is seeking to review options for Phase2 in light of the consultation provided within this report. The Council would seek to engage with a Design Team to take forward a review of the options for the site and to conduct in-depth engagement with the local community. The Council would envisage that the site would still deliver an Enterprise Hub, Education/Community Space and Housing, with the priorities being: to secure a permanent enterprise hub, to secure the future of the Nursery School, to secure the future of the Barnardo’s operated Children’s Centre (within the South Kilburn area although not necessarily on this site) and to secure the future of the Granville Kitchen and Otherwise Club as being incorporated into the Enterprise Hub space. 


The Council would seek that a Nursery School would remain on site, though the location within the site may change as part of a redevelopment. One important aspect to note in regard to the Nursery School is the importance placed on the external area which, in an urban area such as South Kilburn where a number of the children can be expected to live in flats with no external play area, provides a safe environment for them to explore; it is also an integral part of the educational aspect of the Nursery School therefore the re- provision of suitable external space, if this area is to be utilised in any redevelopment, will be highlighted in the specification provided to the appointed team. 


The Council would anticipate that the Granville Kitchen and the Otherwise Club would integrate within the Enterprise Hub space. The Council would envisage that a Children’s Centre would continue to be operated within the South Kilburn area, but that this may not necessarily be from the Carlton and Granville Centres Site, though the intention at this time is that it would stay on this site until more detailed options are examined. 


Brent Start is due to leave the Carlton Centre in 2017 as they are developing their own property strategy which will see them reduce their permanent physical presence whilst maintaining their offer to residents and a more detailed separate report will be brought to Members in due course to outline this strategy. However for the purposes of this report it is believed reasonable to presume that a future Brent Start function operating within this site is not envisaged beyond mid-2017. As the Concorde Café does appear to be linked with Brent Start, when Brent Start vacates the Carlton Centre, officers would need to consider if the café can continue to operate and it may not be suitable to accommodate this on site. In the longer term the Council would need to consider if a café function is appropriate in this building, especially as a new café is proposed as part of the “Peel” site. Therefore officers will need to enter into discussions with Concorde Café regarding the future of their operation post vacation by Brent Start. 


*The Otherwise Cub is a resource centre for Home Educator families.