Brent Council and the MIK (K-Pop) Festival: 'You couldn't make it up!'

 Guest post by Gaynor Lloyd

 

Regarding Paul Lorber's comment at 17:02 on 13 February on the latest blog on the MIK Festival  LINK

 

Oh, Paul, it is much, much worse than that. At the Licensing Hearing, we were told by Magic Sound’s event organisers that Brent Council had "identified" Northwick Park Playing Fields for these events.  In fact, in the earliest report by Magic Sound to the Arts Council, who are giving grant funding for this as part of a "levelling up" agenda for culture in boroughs deprived of culture, Brent is listed as getting 2 days of Magic Sound activity. And the date of that report? July 2023. 

 

Of course, residents and even then, in only a few roads in the Northwick Park Ward side only heard by circular letter just before Christmas 2024. Magic Sound's event organisers had to tell the Council to let their own very long-standing tenants in the bungalows by the pavilion know that their homes would be around 80 metres from the stage of the K-Pop event, before they received the Magic Sound circular letter.  

 

 Seems a bit extraordinary really - were some of us old cynics not of the view that everything Brent Council does in our area is conducted in absolute secrecy. After all, as I said at the Licensing Hearing, we are just at the northern most outpost of Brent - Harrow, really. 

 

But we outpost residents still need protecting from nuisance. Noise, for instance. The Licence does have some conditions but mainly it's what to do if we feel the festival is too loud. But there have been no onsite decibel sound tests taken at different angles, under various weather conditions.  Bear in mind the site is right next to the hospital as well as surrounded by residential properties, and a care home at the entrance. Windows will be open; the festival will be in warmer weather.   Decibel data should be available, and residents understand in practice what the Council's environmental officers view as "acceptable" - so we know when to ring up the one dedicated noise complaints number manned by Magic Sound for someone to trot out and measure, and possibly find our complaint is valid - and the odd adjustment made.

 

Traffic to our narrow heavily parked roads - oh well, maybe a temporary CPZ. That went down well...Then, apparently, TfL had just agreed that Northwick Park and South Kenton tubes with their narrow, restricted tunnel entrances and narrow platforms might not be an ideal exit strategy for 15,000 /20,000 of this young demographic at 10:30pm having been on their feet all day at the concert. So Magic Sound suggested they might provide up to 150 stewards to guide the 10–24-year-olds unfamiliar with our area leaving the concert at 10:30pm to walk through the University, across Watford Road and in long crocodile the 2.5 km to Harrow on the Hill Station - the "hub" transport asset for the festival goers. (One of the Committee asked if the motorcycle inhibiting barriers which inhibit passage through the tunnels could be removed to facilitate easier egress... well, no, as they are there for the other 362 days of the year safety for the station users...)

 

You couldn't make it up. But the fact is that Magic Sound now has the Licence. The conditions do not reflect the various suggestions made to placate the tsunami of reasoned and serious protests and representations made on valid licensing grounds of nuisance, public safety by over 170 residents. To be honest, the conditions couldn't. They must be limited to activities within the actual licensed area - OK, 2/3rds of our playing fields but not dealing with litter and traffic and public safety issues outside that area in our surrounding streets or en route to Harrow on the Hill. 

 

It was obvious from the Hearing that the application was made too early with plans only in formulation. Yet Brent Safety Advisory Group (BSAG) had passed it even with many questions unanswered. Of course, BSAG will be our protectors once the final details of each festival are available (31 days before), when they make the final recommendations beyond the conditions. Some of us - call us old cynics if you will - don't see that as very much protection. Indeed, all due respect to the undoubtedly serious members of BSAG - and not for one moment doubting their integrity - based on what they OK'd for the Hearing (and on which the Committee said it was relying), the words "chocolate" and "teapot" spring unbidden into - at least - my mind.

 

So, whatever discussions take place with the applicants going forward, as indicated, e.g., by Cllr Kennelly, we are confronted with an approved application with inadequate conditions. Forever.  So, as things stand, these Festivals will happen, with no further resident involvement or opportunity to make representations. Unless things go horribly wrong.

 

There has been a total disregard by the Council of its obligation to its own tenants of the bungalows to give them quiet enjoyment of their homes. A similar total disregard of residents using the fields for recreation. A complete failure even to notify its regular formal sports hirers of the proposal, let alone consult them. The placing of the stage over the Gaelic Football pitches used for practice and League games over decades - and, as the set up is scheduled to sterilise the ground for up to 10 days before the festival, and 5 days after, effectively wrecks the Gaelic Football's season. The event organiser at the consultation event days before expiry of the consultation deadline admitted it was the residents who had told them of the existence of the Gaelic football pitches. The Council had not even given them details of any hirings at all.

 

From the event organiser's extensive experience of events in fields like ours, they acknowledged the likely damage to the pitches from compaction of the ground, and that the ground would have to be restored after the event - with a longer period therefore of unavailability. They even acknowledged that the pitches may not recover at all. At the consultation, we were told that the work of restoration would be covered by a financial bond. At the Hearing, there seemed to be a pulling back from that. Of course, there is nothing in the Licensing conditions - it isn't covered by any of the licensing objectives, which is all the Licensing Committee look at.

 

 

As to restoration, I remind myself that events in parks were "consulted upon" in Brent's Budget Approval in February 2024. 2 pages (2024-25 – RS 13), presented by Cabinet Member Krupa Sheth. [above] Note "There would be no impact on service users” and " there is a risk that more events in parks may impact the natural fabric of the park and it would require organisers to undertake full risk assessments in that regard and for the Council's approval process to fully account for any risk"

 

I only knew about the "consultation " because Brent Friends of the Earth had been invited to comment, an n we trawled through the numerous pages for anything affecting our environment and natural spaces. Brent FoE even responded to that consultation - reflecting some deep concern about the effects of more events in parks - which comments we thought had resulted in the final recommendations. Note "It is also important that any events calendar should provide space and time between events for grounds to recover and a proper rotation of sites to be used would be most appropriate."  Now having the evidence of this first "event" in the new policy, is it any wonder I am worried? And just who are residents and pitch users to rely on to believe in full and timely restoration of our playing fields at Northwick Park?

 

 

I would just finish by saying that, at the entrance to Northwick Park is a prominent sign advertising the charitable funding for the park by the Football Foundation. When I look this up, I find that there is a Brent Plan dated August 2024 and, lo, Northwick Park playing fields are Priority Project 4.

 

Does the left hand not know what the right hand is doing? Or is the money from Magic Sound just the only thing that matters? I would say "You couldn't make it up" - but, heck, this is Brent Council.

Full Licensing decision notice on K-Pop Festival at Northwick Park. Details on how to Appeal.

 The decision notice from the Licensing Committee contains full details of the representations made and the conditions imposed at Stage 1. There is now time for those who oppose the Committee's decision to support the application at Stage 1, to appeal.

EXTRACT

MIK, 133 The Fairway, Wembley, HA0 3TQ - Hearing Decision Notice This is the decision notice for the hearing held on 4 February 2025 for the above application. Please note that an appeal against this licence decision may be made by the applicant, a person who made relevant representations or the Chief Officer of Police as applicable, to the magistrates' court at: Willesden Magistrates Court, 449 High Road, Willesden, London NW10 2DZ, Tel: 0300 303 0645 within 21 days from the date of receipt of the notification of the decision.

 

Were the odds stacked against K-Pop Festival objectors?

 Northwick Park

That was certainly the feeling amongst objectors when they left the Brent Council Licensing Sub-Committee yesterday and perhaps that had to be expected when the Brent Public Safety Officer withdrew their concerns before the meeting.

It is notoriously hard to prove applications fail to meet the criteria specified for objections: preventing crime and disorder, public safety, preventing public nuisance and protecting children from harm. The councillors who objected, local residents and a barrister made a pretty good fist of it but were not helped by aggressive questioning from committee members who seemed to be much easier on the applicants.

Other issues emerged during the meeting including that Brent Council had sought appplications for festival organisers to hire Brent parks and that they has suggested Northwick Park when Fryent Country Park was deemed unsuitable. There was even a hint from the organisers that a contract was already in place.

The consultation with residents was late in the process and took place in the winter festival period. One observer likened finding out about the application to the scene in Douglas Adan's  Hitchhiker's  Guide to the Galaxy when Arthur Dent was complaining that he had not heard about the plans to blow up the earth to make way for an inter-galactic highway:

“But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”

The issue of how much Brent Council was going to be paid by the organisers is a close secret. Documents were restricted and press and public removed while this part of the agenda was discussed. Reports suggest a sum somewhere between £100,000 and £200,000. Brent Council would argue that this will be to the benefit of council tax payers.

Conditions were not good for public accountability and transparency with no livestream of the meeting, no microphones used and barely audible mumbling by committee members. I resisted a move to make me stop recording the meeting and delete the recording I had made. In the absence of livestreaming recording was essential in reporting the meeting.

The lack of public representation by Northwick Park Hospital  to the Committe, amidst concern about the impact of the event on hospital patients, staff in the nearby housing, access to the hospital by patients and ambulances puzzled the objectors. They were told that a Working Group with the hospital had been set up by the festival promoters.

When asked about the posibility that festival goers would camp in the park and concern for their wellbeing, the promoters said this was unlikely but they would risk assess with the police if this happened and provide welfare support and water. They were seeking to cover all contingencies.

It was confirmed that festival goers would be expect to walk to the venue from Harrow-on-the-Hill  tube station and residents' familiarity with the area came into play. The promoters had said the expected audience was three-quarters female and aged between 10 and 24. There were concerns about the safety of women and young girls walking in the dark for 2.5km over two busy roads and through a pedestrian tunnel.  

Cllr Daniel Kennelly (Preston ward) reminded the hearing that the Betfred Challenge Cup Final was taking place the same weekend as the Festival. He expected the same 'Gold Standard' for security and welfare for the Festival as provided for Wembley events.

The event including set up and  clearing would take place over 17 days but organisers were going to try and reduce this to 14. There was concern that this would put sports pitches out of use for the period but even worse, that the damage would make them unusable for longer. Residents gave example of events elsewhere in Brent where remediation of damage was poor and took a long time. The promoters said they would pay Brent to hire sub-contractors to do the work.

It should be noted that the licensing application also covers future and longer events in Northwick Park so this aspect will need proper oversight, something residents said was missing elsewhere in the borough.

A barrister represented 3 local residents individually, two of whom lived just 50 yards from the festival stage, and Sudbury Court Residents Association. Addressing the Sub-Commiitte he said:

You are told a professional noise impact assessment is being carried out over the coming weeks (in other words it hasn't happened yet);  a full security and crowd management plan will be developed (in other words it hasn't been developed); we will work extensively with TfL to manage the ingress and egress of people through the stations to the park (in other words they haven't done it yet - it is an unknown quantity.

If you look at the plans you will see there's a gate close to Northwick Park tube station and [another] very close to South Kenton station but the applicant says Northwick Park station will not be used,  'discussions are underway with TfL to identify which station access should be used . It is anticipated that the primary transport hub will be Harrow-on-the-Hill.'

'Anticipated' we are told, 'discussions are underway' we are told.

The position is totally unclear and a recipe for chaos, I would submit.

He reminded the hearing that there would be a combined total of more than 100,000 on the Saturday of the festival in a comparatively small area. 

(Not to mention the roadworks and public transport diversions!)

I have already published the concluding statement of the Sub-Committee but here it is again so it can be read in context:

The Sub-Committee has made its decision irrespective of any political considerations. 

Regarding the view of one resident that the application be declared void, the Sub-Committee do not consider it should be voided. They consider that sufficiuent documentation had been provided and had been made available to all parties and time given for representations to be made.

Therefore the Sub-Committee do not agree that the application should be voided.

The Sub-Committee had regard that they should make a decision that is proportional and justified by the evidence presented to it.

The Sub-Committee listened carefully to the represenations made by the parties at the heaing and have taken full account of every representation.

The Sub-Committee are aware of the fact that this application is Stage 1 of a two stage process. The Brent Safety Advisory Group (BSAG) still has to give the go-ahead taking into account what has happened at this stage. That go-ahead has NOT been given as yet.

Further the final timing and the duration of the event [K-Pop Festival] will be dependent on what that final determination is.

So the role of this consultation is to determine the impact of the event on the licensing objectives and that is the only role that the Sub-Committee plays today.

The Sub-Committee notes that the applicant has met with residents and plan to continue to meet them, especially for a debrief, prior to this year's and future events.

The applicant has confirmed that they will provide a [dedicated]  telephone mumber for residents to use for any concerns they have when the event is taking place.

The Sub-Committee has taken full account of the fact that the applicant has agreed to adhere to all the conditions set by the licensing officers, the [inaudible] consultants and public safety officers - in other words, the responsible authorities.

In the circumstances therefore the Sub-Committee have decided that it is indeed appropriate to grant the licence, in short, subject to the conditions agreed and any additional conditions given by BSAG (Brent Safety Advisory Group).

The Sub-Committee are also of the view that adherence to these conditions, and other undertakings that were given by the applicant, do promote the licensing objectives.

A more detailed decision will be issued shortly and once that decision is with you, you will have 21 days from the date of the decision notice to appeal the decision of the Sub-Committee if you are not in agreement.

That  appeal must of course be made to the Magistrates Court.

This is a shortend version of the decision and a more detailed version will be sent in due course.

Brent Licensing Committee approves Stage 1 of Northwick Park K-Pop Festival with conditions. Further conditions possible at Stage 2 and 21 days for Appeal to Magistrates Court

 Today's Licensing Sub-Committee was a lengthy process with plenty of detail that I will cover in a later blog post.

After the Sub-Committee convened in private (no press or public) they issued the folowing statement. Audibility was poor in the Boardroom (no microphones) but this is the gist of what I recorded in the statement that was given verbally.

The Sub-Committee has made its decision irrespective of any political considerations. 

Regarding the view of one resident that the application be declared void, the Sub-Committee do not consider it should be voided. They consider that sufficiuent documentation had been provided and had been made available to all parties and time given for representations to be made.

Therefore the Sub-Committee do not agree that the application should be voided.

The Sub-Committee had regard that they should make a decision that is proportional and justified by the evidence presented to it.

The Sub-Committee listened carefully to the represenations made by the parties at the heaing and have taken full account of every representation.

The Sub-Committee are aware of the fact that this application is Stage 1 of a two stage process. The Brent Safety Advisory Group (BSAG) still has to give the go-ahead taking into account what has happened at this stage. That go-ahead has NOT been given as yet.

Further the final timing and the duration of the event [K-Pop Festival] will be dependent on what that final determination is.

So the role of this consultation is to determine the impact of the event on the licensing objectives and that is the only role that the Sub-Committee plays today.

The Sub-Committee notes that the applicant has met with residents and plan to continue to meet them, especially for a debrief, prior to this year's and future events.

The applicant has confirmed that they will provide a [dedicated]  telephone mumber for residents to use for any concerns they have when the event is taking place.

The Sub-Committee has taken full account of the fact that the applicant has agreed to adhere to all the conditions set by the licensing officers, the [inaudible] consultants and public safety officers - in other words, the responsible authorities.

In the circumstances therefore the Sub-Committee have decided that it is indeed appropriate to grant the licence, in short, subject to the conditions agreed and any additional conditions given by BSAG (Brent Safety Advisory Group).

The Sub-Committee are also of the view that adherence to these conditions, and other undertakings that were given by the applicant, do promote the licensing objectives.

A more detailed decision will be issued shortly and once that decision is with you, you will have 21 days from the date of the decision notice to appeal the decision of the Sub-Committee if you are not in agreement.

That  appeal must of course be made to the Magistrates Court.

This is a shortend version of the decision and a more detailed version will be sent in due course.

Brent Safety Officer withdraws objections to K-Pop Festival after additions to conditions

 The Brent Safety Officer has withdrawn their objections LINK to the K-Pop Festival planned to be held in Northwick Park after the organisers put forward additions to the licence conditions. 

Amagalmated conditions are HERE. Changes are in Red.

Further changes are likely after discussion with the various parties.

K-Pop Festival licence application to be heard Tuesday February 4th 10am Brent Civic Centre

 The controversial application will be heard at the Licensing Committee on Tuesday. at 10am.  Currently it is not going to be livestreamed so interested residents will need to attend Brent Civic Centre in person.

Documents

Here are two key maps as background. Click X at bottom right corner for full view.:

 

Many of the documents related to the Licence Application have been restricted from public view by Brent Council. These will relate to the financial arrangements between the Applicant and Brent Council which are of obvious interest to Brent residents. 

 

Brent Public Safety Team raise significant concerns over safety at proposed K-Pop Festival in Northwick Park

 The papers for the licensing of the K-Pop Festival in Northwick Parl released earlier noted that representations from the Brent Council Officer were still outstaning.

Their concerns have now been released via an email to the organisers and reveal significant concerns.

Please see below updated comments from the public safety team.

·       The emergency evacuation I raised my concerns regarding the evacuation towards red gate (Northwick Park station) in the BSAG [Brent Safety Advisory Group) and how you can have 4 exits (50% of the exits) directing approximately half the capacity in this direction, the walk way to the station is very narrow and would cause a bottleneck for the large amount of people attempting to enter in this direction and potentially dangerous situation. It was discussed about using another station and not Northwick park station but I have not seen any amended documentation to support this.

·       The PUDO (Pick Up Drop off) site location I also raised the comment that this could also be an issue in the event of an emergency evacuation this would have vehicles waiting to collect people and would block and or restrict blue light services from gaining access to the event.

·       On the 7th June Wembley stadium have a major event, this may impact on your event (Ingress/egress) what are your plan of actions for this.

·       Have you consulted with the proposed stations about use of their station and the platform capacity? And how many persons will potentially use this as the preferred transport method?

·       In the scenario that your customers arrive the night before you open to camp, how will you manage them and provide welfare?

 

 

 

 

A long march for K-Pop fans if Festival goes ahead. Harrow-on-the-Hill to become main station for the event?

 

I understand that Harrow-on-the-Hill station on the Metropolitan and Chiltern line has been put forward as the main station for the proposed K-Pop Festival in Northwick Park.

There had been serious concern that the nearer stations at Northwick Park (Met line) and South Kenton (Bakerloo and overground) would not be able to cope with up to 15,000 fans due to accessibility issues. Northwick Park is the main public transport link for Northwick Park hospital and Westminster University's Brent campus.

Fans would face a long walk if the plans go ahead, along a busy road and large roundabout system. 

Stewards would be required along the route, presumably adding to event costs. It is unclear how fans would be stopped from using the alternative stations.

The 5 supporters of the licence application for Northwick Park K-Pop Festival

 The Brent Council report records 5 supporters of the granting of a licence to for a K-Pop Festival in Northwick Park. These are set out below:

MIK Festival Resident Support

Supporter 1
This is a great opportunity to make the area a destination, to support the local economy, community spirit, and safety by bringing in positive community activities into the park which will deter unsavoury and criminal activities and individuals.

Supporter 2
This is a very good opportunity for the community to get together, and also for the more under-represented demographic (e.g. East Asians) to showcase their cultural practices. Having a community event such as this will also mean that relationships can be closely fostered within the area, especially amongst the residents. There is a lot of positivity to be had out of this, given that the Northwick Park area is prone to anti social behaviour.

Supporter 3
I was very excited to hear about this proposal. This will be a wonderful event for different cultures to come together and will mean a lot to the East Asian community and beyond. My young nieces would love to see this event go forward, so this message of support is for them too. How I wish something like this happened when I was younger and growing up in Brent. Representation matters!!!

Supporter 4
I’d like to support this incentive. It will boost the local economy and will be an exciting addition to the community. Music and the arts is always a positive thing.

Supporter 5
Another venue for entertainment around this area must be a good thing to promote the area.

 

 

Residents' Association and Network Housing object to K-Pop Festival licence

As it is not practical to publish all 173 objections to the granting of a licence to the organisers of the proposed Korean Pop Festival in Northwick Park I publish below two that are representative of the range of objections:

 

Licensing Objection by the Sudbury Court Residents’ Association,

and supported by our elected representative Cllr Diana Collymoore regarding

Application Number:  33756 made by Magic Sounds Ltd dated 17^th December 2024

 

Firstly, we wish to state that we, and other stakeholder in Northwick Park and the surrounding areas have not been informed of this proposal in a timely manner, therefore not allowing us to contribute to the discussions between the Council and the Applicant until the last moment.  As a consequence, the Applicant has walked into several unanticipated problem areas which have been highlighted by local stakeholders by posted objections and mainly the Public Consultation Event on the 10^th of January 2025.

 

Furthermore, the timing of the Licensing Application, being over the holiday period has made it very difficult to make accurate and reasoned responses to the Licensing Application after consulting with partners and stakeholders. We have great sympathy for the event organisers having to re-evaluate their proposal at such a late stage due to the surprises that have been sprung upon them since the proposal has become public. There was a general feeling at the Public Meeting, that the organisers and non-council stakeholders have been terribly let down.

 

Additionally, we stakeholders are extremely disappointed at how the application has been presented on the Brent Licensing Website. Basically, the application detail and proposed conditions are decidedly unreadable. This is because the application wording is presented as a completely unformatted form, making it almost unintelligible and requiring a substantial amount of time downloading and formatting.  Surely, this is not an acceptable practice and requires urgent resolution for future licensing applications.

 

Premises Licence

 

The Description of the Premises License includes the following parts which we will comment on in relation to the Licensing Objectives, and we will continue with this methodology throughout this objection.

 

The proposed premises sit within Northwick Park, a large public greenspace situated between Harrow and Kenton, with Watford Road to the west and Norval Road to the south. Northwick Park Hospital sits to the west of the site alongside the University of Westminster, Harrow campus.

 

·      this is a fair description of the location; however, it omits points such as:

·      the park is actually Playing Fields

·      It has limited access

·      is almost totally surrounded by residential properties

·      is flanked by hospital housing which includes shift workers

·      is almost flanked by a large hospital serving two boroughs and is always under immense pressure

·      there are two residential units right next to the event area

·      there is a Care Home at the entrance to the park

·      the event area currently sits on top of a cricket pitch, a floodlit training area and most importantly a Gaelic Football pitch.

·      there is a Mental Health unit at the hospital.

·      The hospital postcode contributes to the majority of crime in the Ward.

 

Which Licensing Objectives would be affected by these issues? A case could be made for all four, given access to a good Licensing Barrister, which because of the timescales of costs is unavailable to us as stakeholders.

 

Taking the limited access first, the organisers were no doubt surprised by the lack of public transport capacity, mainly limited because of the narrow tunnel entrances at the two local stations. At the Public Event, the organisers admitted that they did not know what the capacity and throughput would be. They admitted that they would be reliant on holding (hopefully compliant) crowds back by utilising the Disney Method of crowd control, as in, make them walk a very long way to cover a short distance, and stopping them occasionally. The analogy is, if people are moving, they don’t get annoyed.

 

Another worrying point was getting the crowds onto the platforms and trains. Various methods were suggested during the event. 1. Hold the crowd back until the passengers get off the tube and leave the station and then let the crowd onto the platform. This was later dispensed with by the organisers as they said they couldn’t delay the trains. The next method suggested by the organisers was by preloading the platforms with up to 1,000 passengers and (somehow) holding them back while passenger got off the trains, REALLY! Basically, they seemed to clutching at straws, especially as they had no information from TFL and other relevant stakeholders about the station’s capacities. We hold heartedly believe that two proposed stations do not have the capacity to clear 15,000 attendees in under one and a half hours.

 

Since the organisers and other members of Brent’s Safety Advisory Group (BSAG) have become aware of our worries, various other options seem to have been suggested, such as bus use, of which there is a low capacity on the Watford Road of circa 120 places per 12 minutes, one would necessitate quite a long walk. The 223 from Northwick Avenue was also suggested, but would not be accessible as it is on the other side of the two tube stations. Harrow on the Hill station has been suggested, it is some 2.5km away, and requires crossing of two London Distributor Roads, one of which carries in excess of 30,000 vehicles a day. Both are prone to regular accidents. This destination would necessitate passing through the hospital grounds. Really, this opens up the Licensing Objectives again regarding Public Nuisance, Public Safety, Protection of Children and Preventing Crime and Disorder. And then through residential roads.

 

Other options have been muted such as utilising Kenton Station, unfortunately this would require utilising the restricted access at the local stations or a very long walk through residential areas.

 

In Summary, access to transport is a real issue for this event and should not be taken lightly and without substantive proof that it will work successfully and in a reasonable length of time, and without causing a nuisance and putting the crowd, which is full of youngsters in jeopardy for so many reasons.

 

The use of private vehicles must be resisted as the area is known to be heavily parked and at risk of gridlock.

 

The Premises Licensing Headings - Plays, Films, Live Music, Recorded Music, Performance of Dance and Other Activities.

 

We believe that the hours requested for these listed activities are excessive at potentially an eleven and a half hours duration. For instance, taking the Licensing Objective of Preventing Public Nuisance, if the noise levels are regulated as we expect them to be, (and were detailed in the (incorrectly posted) EMP V1), for say three hours, then one could ‘possibly’ consider this to be reasonable. However, to have this level of Nuisance being possible for much longer periods than that, (it is proposed for eleven and a half hour), it is definitely unreasonable and must be considered a substantial Public Nuisance in such a residential area which includes accommodation of hospital shift workers, and not forgetting the nearby care home and the two residential bungalows right next to the event area.

 

The Northwick Park area has recently suffered previously by an event at Sudbury Cricket Club where the sound equipment had to be confiscated, also a property on Nathan’s Road that was finally quelled by the issuing of a Noise Abatement Notice. Neither of these events were for durations longer than four hours, but no one can deny that they didn’t cause a Public Nuisance, with Brent’s ENS Team and Local Police being called in on several occasions.

 

We would request that the licenced hours for the above uses are shortened, to say 2pm to 10pm (with an agreed possible overrun of thirty minutes) with a one-to-two-hour break in the middle, say around 6pm to 7-30pm.

 

Supply of Alcohol

 

The supply of alcohol can almost certainly be a contributing factor to Crime and Disorder, Public safety, Public Nuisance and Protecting Children from Harm, we don’t think any of the parties to this Licence Application would disagree, and it is why we have Licensing Objectives to guide us.

 

Some of our members attended the Public Consultation Event on the 10^th of January and were reassured that the organiser appears to know what they are doing, however, none of those at the Public Consultation Event, nor those we have conversed with outside the event can see the need, nor agree that licensing the sale of alcohol for eleven hours is in anyway promoting the four Licensing Objectives. We believe that a substantially reduced period for the sale of alcohol would be more appropriate to the Licensing Objectives.  Perhaps the sale of alcohol could start later, perhaps 4pm until 9.30pm at the latest.

 

Currently the end time is proposed to be 10pm, dependant on over runs. This could force people to quickly consume recently purchased drinks and leave quickly, putting in jeopardy the four Licensing Objectives for obvious reasons. For example; you consume say a half litre of beer swiftly because you are being requested to leave, and within half an hour you need to urinate. You are in a crowd of say 7,500 people with 60% children and the toilets are at capacity and the crowds are not moving because of the Disney Method of crowd control. You must have a picture of this by now, and that it puts several of the Licencing Objectives in peril because of the event location. The organisers will tell you they can control this, really?

 

We would request that the licenced hours for alcohol sales are reduced to 4pm until 9pm, or at the latest 9.30pm to Promote the Four Licensing Objectives.

 

Application Wording

 

Now we move to the Application text which we have had to download and formatted to make it comprehensible.

 

As the many documents/plans mentioned in the Application are not yet available, it is impossible to comment on this application regarding the four Licencing Objectives, so how can the committee rule on it, nor the officers advise correctly on it?

 

The most worrying omission areas are “Security and Crowd Management”, “Transport and Traffic Plan”, “Ingress and Egress Plan”, “Drugs, Search and Eviction Policy”, “Noise Management Plan”, “Child Welfare Plan Risk Assessments “

 

Security and Crowd Management & Ingress and Egress Plan

 

The entrance/access tunnels at Northwick Park and South Kenton Stations are very narrow. South Kenton’s tunnel being 2.4 metres wide and Northwick Park’s 1.3 metres wide. The access to both station’s platforms is further restricted by cycle barriers, turnstiles and steep narrow staircases that lead to narrow platforms, parts of which can only just cater for a single standing person and one traversing the platforms length, these platform bottlenecks are right at the entrance to the platforms. The main issue here is that access to the platforms at both stations is basically restricted to single file, and that is not taking account of counter direction movements. At Northwick Park one can witness at almost any time, people stepping aside to let people going the other direction pass.

 

The now removed Event Management Plan stated that at their emergency exits they expected a flow of 66 persons per minute per metre. The plan went on to say that because of the demographic of the expected audience, this throughput would be less!

 

What does this mean in the real world? Nortwick Park Station, assuming throughput of 66 persons per minute and not taking any account of getting any counter direction traffic, or from the platforms it would take at least 113 minutes to get 50% of the crowd onto the platforms. As well as coping with counter traffic, the platforms would fill to capacity while waiting for the next train. This platform preloading of up to 1,159 persons (being to train’s maximum capacity) would no doubt create a Public Safety Issue on such narrow platforms. Getting 1,000 people on to the platform would take, at a generous 66 per minute, would take at least 15 minutes, however, account must be taken of passengers alighting and persons utilising the tunnels as pure pedestrians. Of course, then there are the delivery bikes using the tunnels on a regular basis.

 

Obviously extra tub trains can be brought into service, however, the Met-line’s capacity at peak times 8am-9am for Northwick Park, in both directions is 18 trains. However, allowing for passenger getting off onto over-crowed platforms and then 1,000 getting onto the trains, the timetable would be disrupted.

 

At the moment, we are not at all convinced that Northwick Park station can cope with numbers of users at anything like those necessary to clear the crowd in an acceptable timeframe. The organisers themselves have said at the Public Consultation Event that clearing the crowd in over an hour is unacceptable.

 

At South Kenton station the access is via a 2.4-metre-wide tunnel, with cycle barriers and stairs restricting the flow to single file and in one direction only. The difference between this station and Northwick Park is that there is potentially less counter traffic and there are no platform turnstiles. Northwick Park does not have a mainline and therefore trains can be delayed which would be helpful, but at South Kenton the platforms utilise the only available track and therefore any delays at the platform will hold up the Bakerloo Line timetable. Most other issues would be replicated from Northwick Park’s figures.

 

Having consulted the Bakerloo timetable, South Kenton’s Peak Service is ten trains between 8am and 9am, each with a capacity of 851. So, in essence, the throughput at South Kenton would no doubt be lower than at Northwick Park, and therefore it should be expected that it would take longer than the 113 minutes projected at Northwick Park to clear 7,500 persons.

 

Suggestions have been made that attendees could be directed to Kenton Station, unfortunately the access is via Northwick Park Station or a long walk via residential streets of at least a mile. The 223 Bus was proposed from Windermere Avenue; however, it is infrequent and again is accessed via the stations. More recently, Harrow on the Hill Station has been proposed as a solution, unfortunately this station lies some 2.5 kilometres away and across two very heavily trafficked London Distributor Roads. The Harrow on the Hill station is well known for ASB and large crowds at the weekends therefore its use for such large numbers is untried and fraught with dangers, it is also on the same line as Northwick Park, and therefore the trains may already be at capacity when arriving at Harrow causing crowd frustration and a likelihood of Public Disorder, especially on a Saturday night (it is a known ASB hotspot).

 

The organisers believe that they can ‘police’ these many routes, which several kilometres, however, we believe this is unlikely, especially when the use of the 182 and 483 buses on Watford Road could be added, this would require walking across fields and unlit passageways, or along residential roads.

 

All the above must surely come under Public Nuisance, Public safety, Protection of Children and Preventing Crime and Disorder? How moving these crowds utilising the available Public Transport infrastructure can be considered to be promoting the Licensing Objectives must be hard if not impossible to prove.

 

Transport and Traffic Plan

 

The use of Public Transport has been substantially covered above and is obviously a substantial problem area with no current resolution being presented other than “we will manage this”.

 

We believe clearing 15,000 or more attendees is probably impossible to achieve in less than an hour due to the lack of Public Transport capacity, and therefore the safety of the attendees and local residents would be in jeopardy. Basically, the locale was never designed for such numbers, and such numbers have never been tested in over 100 years since the tube lines were laid down to serve the residential area.

 

Unfortunately, it is highly likely that many attendees will utilise private vehicles and hire vehicles to arrive, and more importantly leave the venue as was suggested recently by a council officer. One only needs to walk the streets surrounding Wembley Stadium after an event to see the number of private vehicles and taxis lining the streets and disregarding all traffic controls, so parking across property entrances, double parking and many other anti-social intrusions will no doubt take place regardless of any Event Security Staff interventions.

 

It is well known throughout the area that the local roads are narrow and heavily parked due to being located near to the hospital, university and the local stations. Basically, the local streets are made into single lane throughout the area and heavy vehicle often struggle to get through many locations. It is highly likely that Blue Light vehicles will struggle to gain access to the event site, or other locations in the locale.

 

The set up and tear down phases for the concert will require heavy vehicles to access the site. When Byron Court School was being expanded the council, through planning system and the building contract required that their traffic had to follow a one-way system and also implement yellow lines at the various strategic pinch points. It was also a requirement that the vehicle phoned ahead to make sure they could gain access to the site. We would ask that a similar system is implemented for theses licensed events during all phases, and that fines are imposed as they were with Byron Court for any contraventions. If these rules are not followed, there will be Public Nuisance, Public Safety, Protection of Children and Preventing Crime and especially Disorder.

 

It should also be mentioned at this point that part of the planning consent for the Byron Court School expansion was that the Pavilion Car Park be utilised for parent parking at school run times and a walking bus be employed to get children to and from the school. Several thousand pounds were spent on building a shelter in the park and a footpath to facilitate the Walking Bus. We request that the concert traffic should not be allowed through the park during term time school run times, whether the walking bus is active or not. Public Nuisance, Public Safety, Protection of Children.

 

Noise Management Plan

 

It is interesting that a Noise Management Plan has been suggested, however, it hadn’t surfaced in time for the public or stakeholder to comment on before the licensing consultation period ends. We believe the plan, when it does surface will state that everything will be very rosy and compliant with the law. However, local residents and stakeholders whom we have discussed this with are not convinced. In the past local events have exceeded acceptable levels and neither the Police not the Brent Noise Team managed to reign in the offenders within three days. We therefore have no confidence that the noise levels can be enforced in a timely manner, no matter how many hot-lines there are.

 

We also have extreme noise concerns regarding some of the nearby properties: the two bungalows by the concert area, the hospital housing within a few yards of the concert area. The hospital and mental health unit, the care home at the entrance to the park to name a few who will be affected badly by the 11 hours of loud noise from the event. Also, there will still be within the exam windows for our local children who will be revising at home.  The BBC website states: “GCSE exams in 2025 start from the week commencing Monday, 5 May and finish on Friday, 20 June”. This is a considerable Public Nuisance issue to be considered, and could ruin the life chances of those affected, all for a concert in a park! It should be considered under the Licencing Objective of Protecting Children from Harm.

 

Drugs, Search and Eviction Policy & Child Welfare Plan Risk Assessments

 

The Northwick Park Metropolitan Police Safer Neighbourhood Team (SNT) has as one of its three priorities ‘The use and supply of drugs in the area centred on Northwick Park Pavilion and enabled by the two tube stations which due to the extremely narrow access tunnels are ideal escape routes, especially at South Kenton Station’.

 

Obviously, this no doubt heavily advertised event, and will permeate the local and not so local drug networks who may infiltrate the event locale due to the openness of the area giving many opportunities for trades. The event organiser’s security representative stated that this would be controlled. However, we are yet to be convinced, especially as we have no detail of how or the numbers being deployed, nor the locations. The security representative offered having a Police Patrol Car in the Pavilion Car Park for a for evenings and night to deter the drugs pushers and users. How we wish we residents could have that sort of presence on a regular basis! As it is, the residents of the Park Bungalows are frightened of the persons (be they users or pushers) who frequent the car park in the evening and night, who can often be seen climbing onto the roof of the pavilion, performing doughnuts in the car park to name a few activities. One only needs to visit the pavilion car park to witness the evidence of what goes on at that location. Preventing Crime and Disorder

 

 

Additional Conditions

 

B.  We see no need to have a Licence in Perpetuity, we believe that if the Licence it granted against our wishes it should be revisited regularly, and it most definitely must be revisited before the second year, taking full account of events from the first year.

 

C. At the Public Consultation Event, the organisers were open that they personally don’t want a second weekend, they added it at the behest of the University who would like to utilise the infrastructure from the K-Pop concert for their own events the week after. The ambition of the university should be of concern here, surely any university events would be catering for a completely different demographic, and if Freshers were anything to go by, not an event that be considered ………….

 

D: To agree to levels as high as 20,000 without any of the Management Plans been presented is implausible. Even at the Public Consultation Event the organisers were not keeping back that they thought over 15,000 was not advisable, nor manageable.

 

I. As the Premises License Holder will be invited to the BSAG, surely a representative of the public representing the Residents Associations and other Stakeholders, especially the Safer Neighbourhood Ward Panel Chairs should be allowed to attend and contribute at BSAG?

 

Alcohol Related Conditions

 

We would add a condition as follows

·      No Irresponsible Drinks Promotions

·      No games or other activities which require or encourage drinking

·      No drinks served above standard measures,

(i) beer or cider: ½ pint;

(ii) gin, rum, vodka or whisky: 25 ml or 35 ml; and

(iii) still wine in a glass: 125 ml;

·      No provision of drinks for groups

·      No alcohol presented as prizes or rewards

·      No alcohol adverts

·      Free water is readily available on site

·      require individuals who appear to the responsible person to be under 18 years of age (or such older age as may be specified in the policy) to produce on request, before being served alcohol, identification bearing their photograph, date of birth and either—

(a) a holographic mark, or

(b) an ultraviolet feature.

Public Safety

 

A.   Refers to access for emergency services access to the site. As previously mentioned, the local streets are narrow and heavily parked, therefore, the predicted and expected private vehicles and pubic hire vehicles, especially at the egress time and before may well block access to the site, it is therefore imperative that a specific route is kept clear at all times and that information is provided to all Blue Light services. Public Safety. Referring to Wembley events, this is most likely unachievable at this event location.

 

 

The Prevention of Public Nuisance

 

A.   Although details of the available public transport and taxi numbers are to be provided, we are not aware of how the crowds of such large numbers will be managed so that all the attendees don’t arrive at the same exit hub, or even a large proportion. There is so far no meaningful plan available as to how this will be managed with a potential attendance of 15,000 persons. It will not be until tickets have been sold that the organisers will be able to work out which Public Transport routes will be the most heavily used, and by how many.

B.    Clear notices of travel instructions are all very well, but there is no explanation of how to stop 15,000 attendees arriving at the same exit hub.

E.    Although vehicle access and exit routes and dedicated parking zones will apparently be controlled by event staff, there is no evidence that this will be effective. Various local hostelries already show that it is impossible to control these issues. We do not wish to name those hostelries at this time. However, having no police presence in the area in the evening is not helpful, and it should be remembered that the local town centre locations require significant policing and reinforcement.

F.    Encouraging customers to leave quietly is not particularly reassuring when a crowd, in a no doubt excited state leave the concert area. The hostelry on Watford Road often proves this point.

G.   What is meant by proactively informing customers to leave quietly? What density of security staff will for instance be require to proactively control the customers walking the 2.5 kilometres to Harrow on the Hill Public Transport hub?

 

Noise Management Plan (aka Public Nuisance Prevention)

 

A.   A qualified noise consultant will be engaged, will this consultant remain during the concerts to make sure of compliance?

B.    Which are the Noise Sensitive Premises? To our mind these would include nearby homes, the park bungalows, the Care Home, Hospital Housing and the Hospital itself, including the mental health Unit. Is this correct and how will the event organisers ensure that there is conformity at all these locations. Will the organisers supplement the hospital’s security team?

C.    Providing notifications to the residents of the hospital housing is from experience extremely difficult, can the organisers explain how they accessed the circa 1,000 residents in these secure blocks as they believed all the residents have been provided with the initial notification letter?

 

Public Space Protection Orders

 

Most of Brent is covered by Boroughwide PSPOs which, as we understand has to be enforced by either the Police or Civil Enforcement Officers (CEO). Therefore, will the Council be deploying extra Police and CEOs to enforce the PSPOs along the miles of routes that the attendees will no doubt exit the area? Or are the PSPOs just there to decorate lamp posts? The relevant PSPO sections are listed below, and this Residents’ Association and other stakeholders we are in touch with, do expect the Council to enforce the PSPOs appropriately.

 

3. Littering (urination or defecation)

Any person(s) urinating or defecating in a place other than a serviced public convenience.

4. Littering (spitting)

Any person(s) who spit(s).

5. Littering (bottles, cans, packets, food, paper, chewing gum, cigarette butts etc.)

Any person(s) who abandon(s) (leaves behind) bottles, cans, packets, food, paper, chewing gum, cigarette butts etc.) other than in an appropriate receptacle (bin).

 

 

Sovereign Network Group

 

 

I am writing on behalf of Sovereign Network Group (SNG) to formally object to the proposed planning permission for concerts at Northwick Park. As a provider of homes for key workers, including NHS nurses and doctors, we are deeply concerned about the potential impact these events will have on our residents, the surrounding community, and the operations of Northwick Park Hospital.

 

Impact on Key Worker Residents

Our tenants, who are predominantly NHS staff and other key workers, require a quiet and stable environment to rest and recover between shifts. Many of them work irregular hours, including night shifts, and disruptions such as loud music, bright lights, and large crowds during concerts would significantly hinder their ability to rest. This could directly impact their performance, with serious implications for the healthcare services provided by Northwick Park Hospital.

 

Challenges for Medical Staff Access

We are particularly concerned about the challenges medical staff may face in accessing the hospital during concert days, especially in emergencies. Increased traffic on local roads and overcrowding on public transport caused by the influx of concertgoers could delay critical staff members such as doctors and nurses from reaching their workplaces. This poses a risk not only to the staff but also to patients who depend on timely medical attention.

 

Noise and ASB Concerns

The proposed concerts are expected to generate significant noise pollution, which will carry across the flat landscape and disrupt hundreds of households, especially during the evenings. Past experiences with local events indicate that noise disturbances often exceed acceptable levels, affecting residents' sleep and overall quality of life. Additionally, anti-social behaviour (ASB)—including unauthorised parking, loitering, and public disturbances—has been a recurring issue during large-scale events, posing safety risks to our tenants and the broader community.

 

Unauthorised Parking

The potential for unauthorised use of our parking bays, which are allocated to tenants, is another major concern. This not only disrupts our residents' routines but also creates safety hazards. Given the limited public transport infrastructure for dispersing large crowds, this issue is likely to be exacerbated, as highlighted by the Sudbury Court Residents Association.

 

Safety of Access Routes

The proposed use of the Pasteur Court entrance or path is unsuitable and unsafe. This pathway, created informally by passers-by, is not designed to handle high foot traffic and poses significant safety risks. Furthermore, this access route is not approved by SNG for such use.

 

Impact on the NHS and Patients

The proximity of Northwick Park Hospital amplifies our concerns. Noise pollution and traffic congestion during concerts would not only disrupt the hospital's operations but also affect the well-being of patients who require a calm and quiet environment for recovery. Emergency medical services could face delays in navigating the area, further compromising patient care.

 

Broader Community Concerns

We also echo concerns raised by the Sudbury Court Residents Association regarding insufficient public transport planning, risks of pickpocketing and assaults, inadequate emergency escape routes, and poor crowd management. The potential for breaches of Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs), including littering, public urination, and defecation, would only worsen the already significant impact on the local community.

 

Conclusion

Given the substantial and far-reaching consequences of these proposed events, we strongly urge Brent Council to reject the planning application. The potential disruptions to our residents, the NHS, and the wider community are too significant to justify hosting concerts at this location.

 

We would welcome the opportunity to discuss our concerns further and work collaboratively to ensure that the needs and safety of all stakeholders are prioritised.