The Mason's Arms in happier times
The proposed redevelopment of the Mason's Arms in Kensal Green with flats above a ground floor replacement pub is similar to the current redevelopments underway at the Queensbury in Willesden Green and the Showboat in Alperton.
The proposal follows the hard-fought battle in Kensal Green over Harriet Tubman House Community Centre.
CAMRA and Historic England, a community run pub, as well as the Vicar of the nearby St John the Evangelist have all pitched in submissions alongs local residents and people from wider afield with family links to the pub.
The redevelopment site is the pub itself and the adjacent vacant plot
Below are extracts from submissions to the Brent Planning Portal. If you would like to submit an objection or support you have until June 28th. LINK
HISTORIC ENGLAND
Historic England has concerns about the proposals on heritage grounds. Your authority should take these representations into account and seek amendments, safeguards or further information as set out in our advice. We encourage you to defer determining these applications until Historic England’s listing assessment for the Mason’s Arms public house has been completed. We also recommend that further structural information regarding the rebuilding of a section of the listed cemetery wall is requested prior to determining the listed building consent application so that the impact on the wall itself and the adjacent grade-II listed catacombs of the North Colonnade can be fully assessed
CAMRA
Campaign for Real Ale
(CAMRA) North London branch strongly object to the planning application to
demolish the Masons Arms public house, Kensal Green NW10. The Masons Arms is an
historic public house that has served the Kensal Green community for well over
a century. Its long-standing presence, architectural character, and
relationship with nearby heritage assets, including the Grade II listed horse
trough and the Grade I listed Kensal Green Cemetery wall, give it clear
historic and townscape value. Although the building itself is not listed,
national planning policy recognises that non-designated heritage assets can
still hold local historic significance, and their loss must be taken into
account in the planning balance.
The proposed pub area is much smaller, at 256.5 sq m, compared with 630 sq m in
the current public house, resulting in a clear reduction in community
floorspace, which is a material planning consideration. This is not an
equivalent replacement and therefore conflicts with both the London Plan Policy
HC7 and Brent Local Plan Policy DMP21, which requires that any redevelopment of
a public house must provide a facility of comparable or improved size, layout.
The proposed development would result in the unacceptable and unjustified loss
of a public house that has community value and which contributes to the economy
and in particular the night time economy of the borough.
The proposed six storey development is excessively bulky and out of scale with
the surrounding streetscape, its height, massing, and overall visual dominance
would create an overbearing presence that disrupts the established character of
the area. This is a material planning consideration, as national policy, the
London Plan, and Brent's Local Plan all require new development to respect
local context, respond positively to existing townscape, and avoid harm to the
character and appearance of the area.
The application removes the existing function room, a space that has
historically supported community meetings, funeral wakes, weddings, birthdays,
and local group activities. Its loss would permanently diminish the pub's role
as a multi functional community venue, further undermining the policy
requirement to retain or enhance community value.
No evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the existing pub is unviable
or that it has been properly marketed, as required by Brent's planning
policies. Without such evidence, the demolition, or change of use of the Masons
Arms cannot be justified. The proposal therefore fails to meet the tests set
out in national policy, the London Plan, and Brent's Local Plan for the
protection of public houses. The lost of pub's garden, which was sold off and
permission granted for change of use, means having a function room will be
important to aid the long term viability of the pub.
CAMRA also notes the frequent risk that promised replacement pubs are delayed
or never delivered once residential units are occupied. To prevent this
outcome, and to ensure compliance with policy, it is essential that if
permission is granted, Brent Council imposes a condition requiring that the new
public house is fully fitted out, let to an operator, and open for trading
before any residential units are occupied. Without such a condition, the
community asset is at risk of being lost in practice even if nominally replaced
on paper.
The proposed development would harm the setting of the Grade I listed Kensal
Green Cemetery boundary wall, which runs directly behind the site. As a Grade I
listed structure, it is of exceptional national importance, and national
planning policy requires that great weight be given to its conservation. The
existing Masons Arms forms part of the traditional low rise townscape that
frames and supports the historic character of the cemetery wall. Replacing it
with a six storey building would introduce an intrusive and disproportionate
mass that would dominate views, disrupt the historic scale of the street, and
erode the legibility of the cemetery wall as a heritage asset. The development
would harm the setting of the Grade II listed horse trough located immediately
outside the Masons Arms. This heritage asset derives its significance not only
from its physical form but from its historic relationship with the surrounding
streetscape and long established public house. Demolishing the existing
building and replacing it with a six storey structure would fundamentally alter
the scale, character, and visual context of the trough, diminishing its
historic setting and eroding its legibility as part of the area's traditional
streetscene. This impact is a material planning consideration and is contrary
to national policy on heritage protection, which requires great weight to be
given to the conservation of designated heritage assets and their settings. If
permission is granted, the developer should submit a plan for storage of the
Grade II listed horse trough, so it does not get damaged during redevelopment
of the site, the Brent Conservation Officer should oversee the plans for the
trough, to endure it is not harmed by the new development. Original bricks
should be used where possible in the repair of the listed boundary way,
overseen by the Brent Conservation Officer.
A further material planning consideration is the significantly higher carbon
footprint of demolition compared with retrofitting. National planning policy
requires decision makers to support development that moves towards a low carbon
future and to give substantial weight to reducing embodied carbon. Demolishing
the existing Masons Arms and constructing a new six storey building would
generate a far greater volume of embodied carbon than refurbishing and
upgrading the existing structure. Brent Council's own climate emergency
commitments, all of which expect applicants to demonstrate that demolition is
the least carbon option. No such justification has been provided, and the
application fails to show that demolition is necessary or environmentally
responsible.
The proposal is contrary to National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which
recognises public houses as essential community facilities and expects local
authorities to guard against their unnecessary loss. It is also contrary to
London Plan 2021 Policy HC7, which requires boroughs to protect public houses
and resist proposals that would lead to the loss of their community, cultural,
or economic value.
For these reasons, CAMRA North London Branch objects to the application and
urges Brent Council to refuse planning permission.
SUPPORT
I am writing in support of
the proposed redevelopment of the Mason's Arms on Harrow Road.
The building is a locally significant former public house with clear
architectural and historic value, and I fully recognise and respect its heritage
importance. In its earlier years, it was a well-loved and attractive feature of
the area. However, in recent years it has suffered from a prolonged period of
vacancy and deterioration, despite repeated attempts by various owners to
restore it to viable use.
At present, the building is in a poor state of repair and has remained empty
for extended periods. Its current condition has contributed to significant
issues around the site, including ongoing anti-social behaviour. There have
been instances of unauthorised occupation associated with the building, and the
immediate surroundings have suffered from visible neglect, including graffiti
and general deterioration. There have also been concerns about unsafe activity
taking place in and around the site, including fires being lit nearby. Taken
together, these issues have had a negative impact on the immediate environment
and have contributed to a feeling that the area is unsafe.
The condition of both the Mason's Arms and the adjacent Hazel Road open space is
a significant concern in terms of public safety and community use. The area can
feel unsafe after dark, and this is a concern shared by many local residents,
particularly women, when walking through or near the space in the evening.
Anti-social behaviour in and around the site contributes to this and limits the
ability of the open space to be fully enjoyed by the community.
I understand that concerns regarding heritage and local character are important
considerations in relation to any redevelopment of the site. However, it is
also clear that the existing situation is not sustainable, and that the
building is no longer serving the community in a positive or functional way.
The proposed redevelopment offers a credible opportunity to bring the site back
into productive use. I understand that the developers have engaged with the
local community over a sustained period, including holding meetings and
responding to feedback. This has resulted in revisions to the scheme, including
a reduction in height by one storey, which demonstrates a willingness to
respond constructively to local concerns.
In addition, the proposal includes commitments to improvements to the nearby
Hazel Road open space and playground, including investment in new play
equipment, improved lines of sight to increase natural surveillance, and, of
particular importance, significantly enhanced lighting. These improvements
would make a meaningful difference to safety, visibility, and overall usability
of the space.
The scheme would also provide much-needed new housing in the area, including a
significant proportion of family-sized homes, which is particularly welcome
given the ongoing local shortage of suitable housing. I also understand that
efforts are being made to retain and incorporate important historic features of
the original building, such as the trough, which is appreciated.
Overall, I believe this proposal represents a balanced approach that respects
the heritage of the site while addressing its current dereliction and unlocking
wider benefits for the local community.
ANTWERP ARMS (OBJECTS)
I represent a successful
community pub in north east London.
Thirteen years ago our pub was purchased by a developer who planned to close it
and turn the site into a block of flats. The Antwerp Arms Association was
formed as a community benefit society and the pub building listed as an asset
of community value. We purchased the building from the developer using a community
share issue and social funding. We have been in business for 11 years trading
as a cooperative venture.
So the Mason's Arms doesn't have to be a block of flats with a basement bar
that will struggle to be viable.
Wait for problems from operating a commercial bar under a housing development
as the licensing complaints for noise, smells and nuisance rack up from those
living above.
Where will all the storage and kitchen facilities go in a single storey new pub
?
Where will the manager and staff (on London living wages) live when there is no
accommodation for them above their bar ?
This pub could have a new life. It could provide a really nice bar and food
outlet, a safe community space, along with housing on its upper floor. It would
provide much needed jobs by directly employing a range of people. It could
deliver skills and training in the hospitality and bar sector and it could
benefit small companies in the local area by stocking their beers and produce.
The benefits to the community from saving this pub as a community enterprise
would, in my view, outweigh the advantages of providing a few extra housing
units. It would also save a locally important building.
Our association would be happy to help those in the local community who want to
save the Masons Arms as a pub and community hub.
OBJECTS
I object against the demolition of another Victorian building in Kensal Green. For that reason the Mason's Arms should keep its Victorian features and charm. After the Council allowed the demolition of Harriet Tubman House we don't need another Victorian landmark to disappear from Kensal Green. It was a betrayal from the Council to allow the demolition of Harriet Tubman House after the vast majority of people consulted objected. What is the point of a consultation if you do not listen to the results? Victorian buildings are in line with the Victorian terraces, save your modern buildings for empty spaces. Respect the views of those who love historical heritage and want to protect them. The existing building looks more charming that the proposed tall block of flat. I'm afraid the council is only interested in the council tax they'll receive by the new tenants which is greater than from a pub. Greed is a deadly sin don't you forget.
SUPPORTS
I would like to express my
support for this proposal.
I have a personal emotional connection to this pub, as it is actually where I
first met my partner many years ago. Because of that, it has always held a
special place in my memory, and it has been genuinely sad to watch it struggle
over recent years despite multiple attempts to keep it going successfully.
Having worked in hospitality myself, I understand how incredibly difficult it
has become to make pubs and restaurants financially viable, especially
independent venues. While it is always unfortunate to see change happen to
places with history and memories attached to them, I honestly believe this
proposal represents the best and most realistic long-term use for the site.
I particularly appreciate that the scheme still re-provides a pub space in a
more modern, energy-efficient and practical format that has a much stronger
chance of succeeding. It feels like a balanced and sensible approach rather
than simply removing the use altogether.
I am also very happy to see a fresh supply of modern, energy-efficient
apartments being delivered in what is genuinely my favourite area of London.
The area badly needs new homes, especially homes designed to modern
environmental standards, and I believe this proposal will make a positive contribution
to the neighbourhood.
Architecturally, I think the scheme has been handled thoughtfully and with
sensitivity to the surrounding character.
Overall, while there is naturally some nostalgia attached to the existing pub,
I believe this proposal strikes a fair balance between preserving community
use, delivering much-needed homes, and improving the long-term future of the
site. I strongly support the application.
OBJECTS
I am Vicar of the Parish of
St John the Evangelist, Kensal Green, the boundary of the parish extending to
close to where the Masons Arms is situated. The parish sits in both the City of
Westminster and the Borough of Brent. I say this, as although I write in a
personal capacity, I have seen many developments in the 13 years I have held my
post and the loss of two buildings of note. I believe this application should
be seen in the context of the loss of historic buildings for flats and any
impact documents should relate to the broader area of Kensal Green and not
simply a closely defined locality. I note the present closure of another pub
closer to the church on the Harrow Road, the area behind it being (at one
point) the last remnant of Kensal Green itself.
I object to this proposal on two grounds. First the Masons Arms )in its current
building) could be a viable and successful venue as a pub. It is situated next
to the All Souls Cemetery and West London Crematorium. I have attended
receptions at the Masons Arms and as I meet many families in relation to
funerals I believe the Masons Arms could serve, if properly managed, a place
for post service refreshments (amongst other things). I know that demand
locally is not being met. I should add that it is of regret that the council
gave planning permission for the building in the pub garden, thus adding to the
sense of inevitable closure and demolition. In an area with such little green
space I simply cannot comprehend this decision.
Secondly the building itself is worthy of retention even if my point above is
ignored. It could be converted to other use and an attractive building
retained. I note that the interior of the Masons Arms is listed as a "One
Star pub" on CAMRA's National inventory as having "special historic
interest".
