Cost of new SEND school in London Road, Wembley Central, rises by a third (£7.4m)

 The second stage of the 150 pupil Special Education Needs and Disability (SEND) school in London Road, Wembley Central, has risen from an inital cost anaylsis of £14.8m to £22m.

The Key Decision Report says that the reasons for the rise in cost are set out in an Appendix but that is restricted and not open to public viewing.

The report states:

The two alternative options available to the recommended option in this report would be to seek a re-procurement of the main works contract or not deliver the project at all. Within the alternative option to seek a re-procurement, the Council would have the following sub-options:
 

a. Seek tenders from alternative Modular Contractors – this has been discounted as the school has been designed by a specific Modular Contractor to their module sizes so any new contractor would need to
undertake a redesign which would lead to an increase in cost and time.
 

b. Seek tenders from alternative main contractors – this has been discounted as the school has been designed by a Modular Contractor. Any Main Contractor would add their own Overheads and Profit to subcontract the scheme. Alternatively, they could seek to amend the design to a traditional build method. Either way, these options would require a redesign which would lead to increased cost and time.

 The option not to deliver the school build has been discounted as the 150 SEND places to be provided at London Road would not be delivered. The Council would therefore continue to transport SEND pupils out of borough for school places and this would put further revenue pressure on the High Needs Block.

The school will be run by an Academy Trust. The officers' report states that the rise in cost is affordale within the available budget:

As set out in the SEND Programme approved by Cabinet, the project is funded by Basic Need, High Needs Capital Grant and Special Provision Funding all from the DfE.

The programme budget was £44.2m. At the time of drafting this report, £7m has been spent, leaving £37.2m. Therefore, there is enough funding in the programme to award the works contract. Further, any additional costs to the project or programme can be funded via the unallocated 2021 High Needs Capital Grant £3.65m and the recently provided 2024 High Needs Capital Grant of £7.4m from the DfE.

This is a Key Decision and therefore subject to call-in for further scrutiny. The deadline for call-in is tomorrow (May 23rd). If the new call-in conditions are approved at tonight's AGM any call-in would require both opposition parties to support call-in or Labour backbenchersto join in.

 

Proposed new development on London Road, Wembley at Planning Committee on May 8th

 

 

Planning Committee on Wednesday will consider an application to redevelop a building on London Road, close to the High Road, presently consistingof 8 one storey shops and a workshop at the rear, into a double frontage part 6 storey, part 7 storey block of mid-rise flats. LINK

For those who know the road it would be between Patidar House and the chicken shop on the corner of London Road/High Road.

London Road proposed 

Street view of the 6/7 storey double block

Aerial view showing proximity to Central Apartments

 

Residents of the Central Apartments on Wembley Central Square have been most vocal in their opposition:

 I am an owner occupier of at Central Apartment which was build as a part of regeneration programme and currently has 117 families occupying this development since 2010. I am submitting this Objection on behalf of the Wembley Central Resident Association (CARTA) which has more than 90 families as paid members. Our association is recognised by the landlord and our local representatives. I am a Chairman of this association and in that capacity on behalf of our members, I strongly object to this development for following reasons.

1. Our track record of corporation and supporting local regeneration -

We have not objected to any other developments in the close proximity of development in last 12 years and always supported Brent in its regeneration agenda. This proposed development directly impacts our quality of life and investment and hence we strongly object it.

2. Devaluation of 50 plus apartments facing windows and balconies to London Road.

As illustrated in the separate photographic evidence, this development will block the view of the windows and balconies facing London Road and significantly devalue the properties to the significant drop in appeal of these flats upto 40% from the current market price.

3. Loss of sunlight and its impact on living costs.

This development is too close to us literally in the face of the balconies and windows of 50 plus flats facing London Road , which receive its sunlight only in the morning from NE side (facing London Road) till noon. All the windows of our flats are facing this side only and there is no other way to get the sunlight. The close proximity of the proposed construction of seven storey building will create a complete wall in front of us blocking any natural sunlight at any time of the day and in fact we will come under shadow of it.

As illustrated in the photos send separately it is going to create complete darkness in 50 plus flats and directly forcing residents to use more electricity and heating to keep the flats warm and maintain sufficient visibility in the flats even during day.

3. Insufficient Ventilation -

Due to the layout of the property and building design, we have limited options to achieve natural cross ventilation and completely depend on the fresh breeze from NE. This development will completely block it and the current MEP systems in the flats are not designed to operate without any natural ventilation. As a result this will create unhygienic , unhealthy living conditions to all the residents which could lead to long term health issues.

Also its impacts on the maintenance costs of properties, It is important to note that one person produces 4 pints of moisture per day, through cooking, cleaning, bathing and breathing. Therefore 5 people will produce 84 pints of moisture per week. with inadequate ventilation moisture produced will condense to cold surfaces, and eventually turn to mould which could also lead to additional wear and tear/ maintenance costs of the property.

4.Loss of views and loss of privacy - All 50 plus flat owners have bought their flats with an extra premium for the views for Wembley Stadium Arc and overall landscape . The proposed development will completely block it and lead to becoming unattractive to occupy due to significant change in the surrounding. The new development's close proximity to our windows and balcony would result us in losing our privacy of occupation.

This is a significant risk to our investment and with this objection , we are hoping this development proposal would immediately stopped to progress any further. In the event this proposal is progressed further without any further consultation / clarity on how the affected leaseholders concerns would be addressed commercially and technically , we reserve the right to explore legal options.

Given recent controversies over the dearth of affordable housing in new developments readers will note that Brent Planning Officers accept the viability assessment for the development that no affordable housing can be provided.  A late review of viability will consider whether a contribution could be made towards affordable housing elsewhere.

A recent think tank report suggested that developments of this height were better for family homes and social cohesion than high-rise towers.

Provision includes 41 flats and a much smaller commercial area,

 

Officers examine issues regarding daylight acess in both the new block and neighbouring blocks. On the later (presumably including Central Apartments) they conclude:

 

The properties that are mainly affected currently afford outlook over the low scale existing buildings on site resulting in higher levels of daylight than what could be expected for a typical urban context. The overall benefits of the development including the delivery of new commercial floorspace and residential homes (including a policy compliant level of family sized homes) would outweigh the limited harm identified above.

 

 Overall Planning Officers recommend that the Planning Committee approve the application:

 

The proposal would include the redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed use building of up to 7 storeys high, with a commercial Class E unit and 41 residential units. It would optimise the capacity of the site within a highly sustainable location within the Borough and make a contribution towards housing supply within the Borough, including the delivery of family sized homes. Whilst the scheme does not achieve 0.4 urban greening factor score, following the above discussion, officers consider that taking the development plan as a whole, the proposal is considered to accord with the development plan, and having regard to all material planning considerations, should be approved subject to conditions.

New academy trust Wembley Secondary SEND School at Planning Committee tonight

 

Brent Council is keen to save money by reducing the need for paying for places outside of Brent and the associated travel costs to provide for the borough's special educational needs pupils and those with disabilities.

Conservative government legislation means that councils cannot build and run new schools themselves (they favour academy trusts) so the council's need has fitted in neatly with the expansionist aspirations of the Rise Partnership Trust LINK, with its own CEO,  that currently runs Manor School and Avenue School.

The school name on the planning application going to Planning Committee tonight is Wembley Manor which confusingly was the name of the infant and junior schools in East Lane changed after merger and expansion to Wembley Primary.

The school would provide 150 much needed secondary places in a site tucked away at the end of London Road and the foot of Ark Elvin playing fields:

The application site is situated at the eastern end of London Road. The northern end of the existing site contains the Ansar Youth Centre (formally known as the Wembley Youth Centre) and its associated car parking and open space. The east of the site contains a large area of hardstanding previously used as car parking and the now demolished Dennis Jackson Centre. The central and eastern elements of the site previously formed a part of the Copland School site, but were fenced off and hard surfaced for parking many years ago and did not form a part of the Ark Elvin playing fields when this was redeveloped.

 

The immediate surrounding area is predominantly terraced residential dwellings, the site is to the north of the Wembley Brook watercourse, which separates the subject site from the railway to the south. The land surrounding the brook is designated as a wildlife corridor as well as a Site in Nature Conservation (SINC). It is not within a conservation area and there are no listed buildings within the site’s curtilage. The site adjoins the Ark Elvin School playing field to the north and east.

 

The site is accessed from the existing access point from London Road, there is a well established footpath that provides access at two different points from the site which have links to the High Road and further down towards Stonebridge Park.

The area is controversial locally because of the loss of the open space, known as Copland Fields, after the academisation of Copland School, to public access. It is now fenced off with the land also going to Elsley and St Joseph's schools. The site is close to the railway bridge used by Elsley, Ark Elvin and Lyon Park pupils (and still in a terrible statement despite campaigns by local councillors and parents).

Previous history of the open land:

https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2015/10/ark-elvin-land-grab-to-be-decided-at.html

https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2015/10/does-butts-interference-with-ark-elvin.html

https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2020/06/loss-of-copland-fields-mourned-as.html

The new school would also be on what was previously open space, some of which had been converted to hard space by the previous school. (see plan above).

The development of the school will mean the significant  loss of mature trees and the officers' report for the Committee goes into that in some detail and worth setting out here for the record (my emphasis) :

The combined canopy cover of the lost trees is 1650sqm, which is proposed to be replaced on site with a total of 23 new trees to be planted. On the assumption that the replacement trees are extra heavy standard trees (14-16cm trunk girth), the canopy radius will be approx. 1.0m (so 2.0m across) which equates to an area of approx. 3.142m2 at time of planting. This would mean that to replace the total canopy loss that the scheme would need to plant around 525 trees to compensate the canopy area lost as a result of the development. Given the constraints of the site, it would not be possible to plant this number of replacement trees. The policy also highlights that another option is for a financial contribution for off-site tree planting of equivalent canopy cover will be sought.

The typical cost of planting an off site tree is around £2,500. Therefore this would account to an off site contribution of around £1.3m. Such a cost is likely to significantly impact on the delivery [sic] of delivering the new school. Nevertheless, the applicant is proposing to plant 8 trees off site within the southern end of the Ark Elvin Playing Field. Such details could be conditioned any forthcoming consent as Brent owns this land.

Given the significant benefits of the proposal to provide much needed SEND school places within the Borough, the benefits associated with the proposal are considered to outweigh the harm as a result of the loss of the trees

 

 There is a cottage on the site that is surrounded by trees and accessed from London Road. The resident claimed in an objection to the scheme that this access road was private but officers state it belongs to Brent Council. 

That is the only objection recorded on the portal although the officers' report does make reference to a previous plan to build 170 units of housing on the site. See Wembley Matters article HERE. However, as the land was designated for educational use because of the youth clubs, permission to build on it would have to be given by the Department for Education, which is unlikely given the rising demand for special school places.

 

 The proposed building

 

Planning officers recommend approval of the application:

 

Following the above discussion, officers consider that taking the development plan as a whole, the proposal is considered to accord with the development plan, and having regard to all material planning considerations, should be approved subject to conditions.

 

The proposal would result in the provision of a new SEND secondary for which there is a significant identified need within the Borough. The new school building would be on land designated as open space which forms a part of the former Copland School site and is not publicly accessible open space, but other open areas are proposed within the grounds of the new SEND school. The proposal would result in the loss of existing trees within the site and while more trees will be planted than will be lost, the canopy at planting will not meet or exceed the canopy size of existing trees. The proposal also results in the demolition of community buildings.

 

However, a community access plan will be secured and new community facilities are also to be provided by Council at the Wembley Housing Zone site on the corner of Cecil Avenue and the High Road. Overall, the impacts associated with the proposed development are considered be outweighed by the planning benefits associated with the proposal and it is recommended that planning permission is granted.

 

 

New Test & Trace site to open in London Road, Wembley

UPDATED WITH VIDEO: Queensbury pub WON'T be demolished but Wembley green space WILL be built on

Save the Queensbury Campaign present their case against demolition of the pub

Mapesbury Residents' Association present their case against demolition of the pub

 The developer's planning advisor and the publican present their case

It was an evening of contrasts at Brent Planning Committee today. The latest round of the Willesden Green Queensbury pub saga ended in victory for the Save The Queensbury campaign when councillors rejected the Officers' recommendation and voted down the developer's latest plan B by 5 votes to 2.

No less than four local councillors from Willesden Green and Mapesbury spoke against the developer's proposal and there was a written submission by Cllr Tom Miller who could not attend. A powerful submission by Deputy Mayor, Cllr Lia Colacicco, was read out for her by Cllr Liz Dixon, with Cllr Colacicco following proceedings via the livestreaming. She argued that there had been no proper consultation by the developer, merely an exhibition with no discussion, it was an off-the-peg design that would not win any prizes and emphasised the Planning Inspector's comment that 'less than substantial harm' occasioned by a development, does not equate to a less than sub-substantial objection.

The most telling submissions were made by Ian Elliott of the Save The Queensbury campaign and a spokesperson for the Mapesbury Residents Association who clearly had hundreds of people behind them. They had done their research and mastered their brief which was not always the case with planning officers who were left leafing through their numerous documents in some desperation.

Perhaps the most pathetic moments were when the developer's planning agent tried to claim that there WAS a kitchen in the plans and officers tried to indicate a tiny space on the projected plan, unmarked, which they said was a kitchen space; and when officers tried to justify that a black 'tin roof' on the new building would somehow both be in keeping with, and enhance, the area.

The combination of strong community campaigning winning the support of councillors led to victory.

This morning the Save the Queensbury Campaign said:

We’ve asked Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt and Chief Executive Carolyn Downs to review officer conduct running up to & including the meeting last night. Misleading content in reports, biased extracts, incorrect verbal info given to councillors brought local government & planning into disrepute.

In contrast the arguably more far-reaching plans to build on green space in central Wembley went through unanimously with no representation from residents and ward councillors. There was a passionate intervention from the public gallery after the committee had unanimously agreed the proposal with little discussion. The resident lived opposite the proposed development and felt that she had not been properly informed or consulted.

Another London Road resident lamented that her neighbours were not interested enough to get themselves organised and that the area felt neglected by ward councillors and their MP Barry Gardiner. A new development at the end of London Road would add to congestion and crowding and she declared vehemently that after what had happened she wanted to move out of Wembley.

The architect for the development admitted that few people had turned up at the London Road consultation and that this was a continuing problem with people only getting involved when it is too late.

Officers did not mention that many of the trees that will be cut down to make way for the housing development have Tree Preservation Orders on them but it appears that when the development is on Council owned land little can be done to stop the felling.  Planning officers accepted the claim that planting saplings on the estate will make up for the loss of mature trees.

The loss of green space which is both a SINC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation) and a wildlife corridor is a worrying precedent when we have a council desperate to build much needed housing but with a blind spot regarding the environment and heritage. Officers accepted that a few bird and bat boxes was sufficient mitigation for the loss.

The Save The Queensbury Campaign have now published their own account of the meeting HERE

Planning Committee to decide whether to build on designated open space in Wembley Central

At the end of the long London Road, off Wembley High Road, there is a little known open space adjacent to the playing fields behind Ark Elvin Academy and Elsley Primary School. The open space is designated as such in Brent's Core Strategy Policy CP18 but planning officers argue in their report going to Planning Committee on Wednesday 19th June that it should be built on, partly because part of it has been covered in tarmac:

Officers do not consider that the site has the character or usability of conventional open space despite its designation as such. Officers therefore consider that the space could appropriately be developed for residential uses without materially detracting from the value of the playing fields open space designation.

The site is close to a Grade 1 Site In Nature Conservation (SINC) which is close to the brook to the south and is also designated as a woldlife corridor.

When I visited the site much of it was fenced off but these photographs show the nature of the site.

It is planned to remove 29 of the 43 trees on the site, including all those that have a tree preservation order.  I am not sure if it is proposed to fell the very handsome mature oak on the site that can be seen in the satellite view. Officers argue that there will be a net gain as 85 new trees will be planted as pat of the development.

Overall they argue that the loss of the open space is outweighed by the gain in terms of housing. The plan for the site can be seen below. Click bottom right corner for full page view.

As well as new housing there will be a replacement community centre slightly smaller than the present one but no new youth centre:

NAIL (New Accommodation for Independent Living) Residential Units (25 total)

     17x studio flats 
 8 x 1 bedroom flats 


Residential Units providing temporary accommodation (53 total) 


32x 1 bedroom flats (which are adaptable to a 2 bedroom layout) 


21x 2 bedroom flats (which are adaptable to a 3 bedroom layout)

General Purpose Residential Units for Affordable Rent (92 total) 


10x 1 bedroom flats 


61x 2 bedroom flats 


13x 3 bedroom flats 


8x 3 bedroom houses

 


Community Centre (293sqm indoor space + 168sqm outdoor space) 


There have been four letters of objection to the development and a 57 signature petition of objection from nearby households. Elsley Primart School supported the development on the basis of local housing need.

Queensbury, Colin Road and London Road presentations at Planning Committee on Monday October 9th

There are three noteworthy pre-applications coming up at Brent Planning Committee on Monday October 9th (6pm).

There are fuller details on the new Queensbury Pub proposals, extensive proposals for the current industrial site bordered by Colin Road, Dudden Hill Lane and High Road, Willesden and proposals for the former Wembley Youth Centre and Dennis Jackson Centre at the top of London Road Wembley.

No decisions are made at this stage but the committee can ask questions and officers in their reports will provide a commentary and suggestions on what needs to be done to make the proposals acceptable.

The meeting is open to the public.

The London Road proposal may be controversial because the three 3-6 storey buildings planned are significantly higher than the terraced houses of London Road and it is adjacent to the Ark Elvin (formerly Copland) playing fields and the wildlife corridor bordering the Wembley Book.

It provides housing for homeless people on the Brent Council housing list, assisted living accommodation as well as privare housing and space for a community centre:

Full details HERE

Cabinet paper on  the London Road site HERE