Brent Momentum presses Council on education, regeneration, universal credit evictions and fossil fuel divestment

The latest Bulletin from Brent Momentum reveals areas of frustration with Brent Council policy implementation many of which have been covered on Wembley Matters.

Education is a major issue with the failure of the Council to oppose the academisation of The Village School and the proposals for a free school at the Roundwood Centre, are source of contention. The Bulletin does not refer to the proposals to close Strathcona School but I presume Momentum will support the threatened NEU strike action.

The failure of Brent Council Regeneration proposals to take account of community concerns in Granville/Carlton and Bridge Park is criticised as is the failure to ensure the quality of new build on the South Kilburn Estate.

Momentum strongly support the cross-party Divest Brent campaign which is urging Brent Labour to fulfil its local election pledge to divest its pension fund from fossil fuels.

Muhammed Butt, leader of Brent Council is often accused of making promises and then not fulfilling them, so Momentum is pressing for Butt's promise to not evict Council tenants unable to pay rent due to Universal Credit delays, to be incorporated into official  Brent Council policy.

Cabinet approves most of Scrutiny recommendations on Carlton-Granville but activists fail to win more community space

Brent Cabinet tonight approved the Scrutiny's recommendations on the Carlton-Granville development with just one amendment. Cabinet agreed to alter 'ensure' to 'explore' in point 'a' about the provision of 3 or 4 bedroomed houses:

A series of speakers made the community's case for more community space in the development with the proposed housing built elsewhere. This would maximise the available space when tenants' halls have been closed and the population of the estate is increasing as the result of regeneration.

Their contributions were politely acknowledged but the new housing build on the site will go ahead and community space not increased.  Noise reduction will be addressed at the planning stage but local people are fearful that accommodating homes and a late night community venue on the site will lead to conflict.  There is likely to be some broadening of the Key Stakeholders Group but whether that will satisfy the community remains to be seen.

Matt Kelcher, chair of Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee was unable to attend Cabinet and no one else from the Committee came forward to replace him - so the voice of Scrutiny was missing apart from the written report.

This is a video of community representations made at the Cabinet meeting:

Reaction this morning from the South Kilburn Trust which was criticised last night for being undemocratic and representing the Council rather than the community:

Brent People's Revolt on three fronts

If Muhammed Butt thought that achieving 60 out of 63 seats on Brent Council at the local council election would mean a quiet life with no opposition to his one party rule, he has had a nasty surprise.

He is currently faced with three 'people's revolts', in Stonebridge, St Raphael's Estate and South Kilburn.  Not coincidentally these are three areas of Brent with, to use the jargon, 'disadvantaged' populations:  diverse, ethnic minority and working class.  They feel failed and marginalised by the Labour Council but are organising and fighting back.

Far from accepting Brent Council's back door attempt to remove the Bridge Park Complex from the community, Stonebridge residents have won the first round of a legal challenge in the High Court and mobilised mass support, most evident in the public meeting, covered by this blog, of more than 1,000 people. They have not just mobilised people but have raised funds and attracted professional support in their battle. At the heart of the campaign is  anger at the council's lack of consultation with the community and a disrespect for local people.

Across the North Circular residents on the St Raphael's Estate are also organising with two public meetings tonight on the council's proposals to demolish the estate and rebuild partly financed by private housing. Residents see the proposals as backdoor gentrification which would mean the destruction of the existing solid community and loss of green space. They instead favour a refurbishment of the existing buildings but  fear that this is not really an options as far as the council is concerned. They too have had over-flowing meetings of local residents and are distrustful of the consultation process. Their billing of the meeting as 'by the people, for the people' shows where they are coming from.

South Kilburn has long been a thorn in Councillor Butt's side and having seen off Cllr Duffy he might have thought he was in the driving seat on regeneration proposals. Not so. The crowded public gallery at last week's Scrutiny Committee on the Carlton-Granville proposals, the record number of speakers from the public, and the representation of the community's opposition by two ward councillors was a powerful demonstration of people power. They raised fundamental questions about the council's consultation strategy as well as the lack of democratic accountability of the South Kilburn Trust.

Carlton-Granville comes back to the Cabinet on Monday April 15th with a report on the Scrutiny Committee's recommendations (incidentally not yet available on the council's website).

Both the Bridge Park and Carlton-Granville campaigners have put together well-researched alternative proposals to the council's and St Raphael's residents are developing their own vision for the refurbishment of their estate.

As far as I know there are currently no formal links between the three campaigns but if they came together they would represent a formidable force. Watch out Uncle Mo!

Carlton-Granville debate continues on Twitter

Reactions to yesterday's Cabinet discussion of the Carlton-Granville Centre proposals rumbled on this morning on Twitter.  I am grateful for the partipants copying me into the exchange. Here is a selection:

Granville - the South Kilburn community strikes back - Brent Cabinet urged to reject housing plans

Author Zadie Smith (Left) spoke up for the Granville in November 2016 LINK

These are interesting times in Brent as 'People Power' is exercised in Stonebridge/Bridge Park, St Raphael's Estate and South Kilburn. This is the letter about the Granville Centre plans as featured in this week's Brent and Kilburn Times. LINK

To Brent Council Cabinet:

Please keep the Granville/Carlton site for use by the community and run by the community

The Granville Carlton buildings were built for the purpose of serving the South Kilburn community. The Carlton as a school in 1910, which later became an adult education centre and closed in Spring 2017. 

The Granville was built in 1888 as a community centre and place of refuge, respite and learning for the poor of the area.  The Granville had a strong arts direction from the 1980s. It was well used as part of Brent Youth and Community Service hosting over 800 children and young people a year in arts activities. This service was closed in March 2016.

The building was left to The Otherwise Club and The Granville Community Kitchen to steward. It was filled with community and educational activities, exercise classes, award winning food related activities and fun. In August 2017 the South Kilburn Trust took over responsibility for running the Granville.  After renovations,  the building re- opened in May 2018 as an enterprise hub and community centre.

South Kilburn itself is in the throes of major changes with huge building works with Gloucester site being built, the Peel site about to be started, the Winterlees site in consultation and work on the HS2 vent started. The new buildings do not have community meeting spaces in them as the buildings being demolished did. This leaves Granville/Carlton as the only non-denominational community buildings in the area.

There are 2400 plus new homes planned to be built in South Kilburn. Where are these people going to do an exercise class? Where will they hold their parents 50^th wedding anniversary party? Where can children and young people outside of school go to socialise and learn in a space that’s safe? Where will marginalised groups of people go to a place where they feel welcomed and not judged because they have been in prison, or mentally ill or because they are poor or hungry ? You can see the need for the community space.

The building already functions as a community hub offering social and welfare services which will be greatly affected or lost. 

In this new plan you are being asked to agree to there is a slight increase in square footage but that is a nod to new community space being built, with the 3 community spaces separated by some distance. Nor does it take into account the community hall lost in 2018. The housing aspect of this plan is said by the Regeneration team to be minimal (25-30 homes)and cannot be guaranteed to be social or even affordable housing as there are so few planned now. The cost of building may necessitate that they all be sold on the open market.

How will these two necessary but incompatible uses of these spaces play out into the future? Already South Kilburn Trust, who manage The Granville, have had numerous complaints from residents of Granville New Homes on Granville Road about the noise from the community centre. The community activities had to quieten down as the residents have priority now. Do you believe  the needs of community groups using community spaces on the site will be prioritised above the needs of home owners?

We see this site as a place for community activities only and exclusively. In fact we argue that given the number of new people moving into the area and the loss of community rooms this community space is even more vital.

This housing is likely to be the beginning of the end of community use on the site. If you agree to this plan you are going against a decision you took in December 2016 only two years ago when you voted to save Granville/Carlton as spaces used for the community. 

The Granville/Carlton site must be kept solely for the community in perpetuity. For this reason we would like to present a different scenario for the Granville/Carlton site.

We would like to ask that the Cabinet support the local community and community groups to establish a Granville/ Carlton Alliance run by the community and stakeholders in South Kilburn to oversee these buildings for the community in perpetuity. This would be a self financing organisation which is viable, credible, transparent and accountable to the South Kilburn community. There is precedent for this in other communities.

We would not tear down the wing of Granville built in 2005 that is still perfectly viable with happy tenants. We would not build housing on 2/3 of the Granville building going against cabinet promises made to safeguard Carlton and Granville in 2016. We would return the Granville hall to its rightful place as the centre piece of both these buildings. We would ensure the use of these buildings will support a community to feel proud about itself and glad to be a part of.

We ask you to please reject this plan and work with the communities of South Kilburn towards a long lasting legacy, by preserving the Granville/Carlton site as the heart of the South Kilburn Community.

Yours sincerely,

Leslie Barson The Otherwise Club and Granville Community Kitchen

Deirdre Woods The Otherwise Club and Granville Community Kitchen

Cllr A Abdi , Kilburn, Brent

Sara Callaway, BAME officer, Hampstead & Kilburn CLP

Pete Firmin, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenant’s and Residents Association.

David Kaye , Chair  Kilburn (Brent) Branch Labour Party

These are the options being considered by Cabinet on Monday. Option 3 is recommended by officers.

Carlton & Granville Centres Site – South Kilburn Development Options 1-4

1.0 Option 1

53 units provided meeting a mixture of housing tenure to meet a section of the community which may not be catered for in the existing South Kilburn programme this would include:

9 Family Homes. Affordable Housing for medium to large families


18 units for the New Accommodation for Independent living initiative for those who have extra care or support needs, arranged in 3 co-living clusters.


15 Move-On Homes for single people who are homeless or on the housing waiting list
 

 11 Down-size/accessible homes aimed at elderly residents already in South Kilburn wishing to down-size.

2.0 Option 2

53 units provided all of one tenure.

Having met with the Operational Director for Adult Social Care to discuss the NAIL programme in further detail this site could be ideally suited to accommodate the biggest demand in this service from older people needing extra care.

This NAIL programme is still to deliver 400 of the required homes in a bid to provide a replacement for residential care. This is known to be the biggest revenue savings programme at Brent Council, and something we could accommodate on this site.

External community activity is an excellent fit for these residents and there would be an excellent blend of services in the activities already happening in The Granville for older people and the day time services sought by this section of the community. Benefits may also be found between this and the children’s services on site.

The minimum number of units this scheme would need to provide is 40 plus accommodation for care staff to cover the night time care required.

3.0 Option 3 (Recommended)

Approximately 23 units delivered in response to some of the consultation responses. This option endorses the principle of a less dense scheme whilst still achieving the benefits housing provides on a site, specifically community safety with 24 hours passive surveillance of the outdoor spaces below.

A reduction in housing presented on this option will responds to the community concerns on scale of development and residential impact on this community site. It also resolves technical issues regarding the build and management of the space and should provide a more acceptable level of development as the taller housing element is removed from this option

It should be recognised that viability will have to be worked through and some private housing may be required however the preference is for affordable units.

4.0 Option 4

No housing delivered as part of the longer term plans this option would still require refurbishment of the existing buildings for community and enterprise use. Financial impacts would need to be further considered.

FULL REPORT TO CABINET HERE

-->

Duffy lambasts Brent Council for not holding a special democratic meeting on fire safety in the borough

This is an email sent to Brent councilors today by Cllr John Duffy (Kilburn)

-->

Dear All,

As you know the tragic events that took place on 14th June at Grenfell Tower has cost over a hundred lives has left a mark on our city. Over the years we have seen many similar tragic events, but normally they are in factories (sweat shops) in Bangladesh or a collapse of building on the outskirts (shanty -town) of a South American city. The only difference between this the others tragic events is the fact it happen only a few miles in a neighbouring borough right on our doorsteps do we are one of the wealthiest countries in the world.

In the early hours of 14th June I received two phone calls one from a women who was going down to the fire area to look for friends and offer them a place to stay, and another from a women crying who just wanted to talk about the tragic events she had witnessed on TV. The following day (15th) a friend of nearly 50 years call in on me and told me about his son and family, who live in one of the other twin blocks of Grenfell tower estate and who had witnessed the fire throughout the night, and how his partner was talking to her son on the  phone as the horror unfolded in that long night .

As the days passed it became clear they the fire did not only wreak death and destruction it also exposed inequalities.. Kensington and Chelsea is the wealthiest  area in London (and maybe the world) and has many high rise expensive hotels and private apartment blocks. These high rise hotels have the maximum fire protection  and have been erected using non-toxic building material etc. I do not object these people having the maximum fire protection. What I object to is the different way society treats the so called "Creators of Wealth" who stay in the big hotels and are pampered in comparative way that same society threat the "Orphans of Wealth" who they hide in Tower blocks with insufficient fire protection and there needs are ignored .

John McDonnell the Shadow Chancellor, said that politicians are guilty of murder. I am not sure if he said that just for affect. However it did highlight the fact that politicians are responsible for decisions and I have always believed apathy is not a political decision - its a cop-out. That is why I called for special full council meeting on 3th July .The meeting would have endorse a strategy for officers to follow and the officers in turn would been up-to date with local information from Councillors. Officers would have been able to explain what we're been doing , and the resource implications .This would have ensured councillors were not just observers waiting for the next bulletin, but were local representatives , representing local people. The CEO, Head of Legal, the Leader and the Mayor decided to limit discussion and to kick it to the 11th July. The decision was wrong, anti-democratic and not transparent.

Since the disaster , I have exchanged numerous emails mostly private with Officers and the CEO, here are some of them.

Time line

14th June at 09:22, I wrote  about  the visible deterioration of some of the new blocks in South Kilburn  and tried to identify short -life up  property we  could get up and running . I understand Cllr  Kalwala was doing the same thing  in Stonebridge looking for voids to be ready to help K+C . I am proud of what others and myself did to ensure Brent was ready to support the residents of Grenfell Tower if needs be.

15th June at 4-30PM, I went down to South Kilburn  to have a look  the blocks and ensure the area was cleared of any fire hazard. I understand Cllr Shazard and Cllr Colacicco were doing something similar in Mapesbury. I looked at all the blocks including George and Swift house (which are owned by a housing association) that had been of concern to residents for some time, including  issues about the failing exterior. I informed the CEO of my concerns .The CEO instructed officers to investigate  my concerns about George House.

24th June  at 11-16 AM, I requested an emergency full council  meeting ( which I later changed  to a special meeting ) the requisite number of councillors agreed to call the meeting and the CEO asked The Leader and another officer to discuss with the Mayor.

26th June at 3pm. The CEO wrote to all councillors, misleading all councillors saying that I had not got the 5 councillors you need to requisiteion a meeting naming myself , Cllr Pavey , Stopp , Warren . However the CEO, the Mayors office and the The Leader of the council were well aware that Cllr Chan  and Cllr Hector had also supported the request for a meeting by email to the Mayor, the Leader of the Council and Labour group leadership on the 24th June . 

The CEO then advise the Mayor  that he should not use his powers to call a special meeting , instead we should have a drop-in section, which would not be open to the press or public and would not be minuted, replacing a democratically called meeting. The CEO also promised time to ask questions at the drop -in , but  the Head of Legal said half an hours of questions is enough for councillors to ask questions and she would not agree to officers staying on after the 7pm deadline. 

28TH June at 11-15 am. My fears were confirmed,  just as I had alerted the CEO on the 15th June the cladding at George house failed the fire test. However the FB did not recommend immediate evacuation of the block and 24 hrs wardens are now in place to walk the scheme. 

Now because of the CEO intervention we have not got a Full Council meeting tonight, where we could publicly support and reassure residents in South Kilburn and support officers action. We have a drop-in for councillors and they are only allowed half an hour  to ask questions about the fabric and material, the short term safety,  and medium and long term solutions- while the public are banned. 

This lack of transparency shown by senior officers and the attempt to highjack the democratic process and limit debate is why I will not be turning-up tonight. I have instead arrange a meeting for 2pm tomorrow Tuesday) with the housing association who manage George House which I invite all councillors to. I am also inviting Peter Gadsdon  or one of his colleagues (he and his officers are doing a good job) if he or one of his colleagues is available to attend. I will inform the public meeting tomorrow (Tuesday)  evening (see notice above) about the outcome of the meeting and hopefully will be able to give residents an update.

There are obvious lessons to learn about fire protection, which will emerge, but there are other issues  about  how council meetings and decisions  are conducted and implemented. Over the next few months  the council will have to be more transparent and the CEO and Cabinet will have to start to listen to local councillors. There can be no more mistakes like trying to close the Granville Community Centre without understanding the consequences of regeneration on an area like Kilburn. Poorer areas also need a guarantee that they will retain all the funds they are due from the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) from the related 106 income and it will not passed onto wealthier areas, who have not suffered the from the consequences of the redevelopment/ regeneration programme.

Fairness and transparency is needed if we are going to avoid creating more Orphans Of Wealth .

EDITOR'S NOTE

The Council has tabled an item on the agenda of the next Full Council meeting on July 10th (7pm Civic Centre). There are 17 items on the agenda -Fire Safety in High Rise Towe Blocks is number 15. LINK

'Delay South Kilburn Masterplan until community has reviewed it,' request Granville and Carlton users

Leslie Barson and Deirdre Woods, representing the users of South Kilburn's Granville and Carlton Centres are unable to attend tonight's Cabinet meeting which will consider the Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document. They have submitted the following comments for consideration by the Cabinet and a request that the Cabinet delay acceptance of the plan to enable the community to review what should be their plan.

The South Kilburn Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) is over 180 pages long over 3 sections. The people from South Kilburn were given 6 weeks to comment on this document which lays out the plans for their homes, parks, health, education, small businesses, and community services in the area for the next 10 -15 years. Each site is given 2 A4 pages in the document. The first half of the page gives the details about where the property is with the second half of the same page incorporating a short paragraph about each of these three issues: ‘Description’, ‘Justification’ and ‘Design Principles’. The second page gives a vague shadow drawing of a huge block or blocks in the place of the current buildings. 

1.   Firstly this is not an adequate amount of time or information for the community to read, understand , digest  and examine the implications of such a massive plan. This can be seen by the small number of community responses to the SPD. Surely changes of this magnitude cannot be accepted on the basis of numbers of responses  in double figures when there are over 8000 people living in the area?

2.   Secondly, all the buildings in the chapter called ‘Site Specific Principles’  are to be replaced with new buildings.  Much of the plans arguments for this demolition are simplistic and debatable such as there is a lack of clarity about what is the front or the back of the property” (Crane and Zangwill) or the property “is currently in a prominent gateway position and the current development does not capitalise on this” (William Dunbar and William Saville Houses). This needs to be properly examined, each building on its own merit, before lives are disrupted for years and changed forever.

3.   Thirdly, you are deciding on Monday 19 June 2017 that this SPD replaces the one was developed over some years WITH the South Kilburn Community and then voted on. How can a plan created by the Council and its consultants replace a plan voted on by residents? The 2005 SPD may need updating with changes to law occurring since the first was voted on but the scale and magnitude of the changes make this SPD beyond all recognition of the SK residents plan

                                                                                                             

Therefore I ask the Cabinet to please delay the acceptance of this plan and help support the community  to review THEIR 2005 Masterplan in a long term in-depth manner as befits a document of this size and importance and with such huge ramification for the residents of South Kilburn.

Leslie Barson and Deirdre Woods representing the Users of Granville and Carlton