ASDA & McDonald's need to spill the beans over McDelivery service at ASDA Wembley

Local residents are taking on the big boys over the proposed McDelivery service at Wembley Asda. Despite a request by Brent planners for more information to be provided the only details on the application are for installation of a window!

In my submission to Brent Council I wrote:

There is insufficient information in this application to make an evidence-based comment. It refers only to a sliding window and canopy but behind this is a proposal for a McDelivery service to operate from Asda. We need information on the times the service will operate, any changes in the vehicle lay-out, how pedestrian safety will be ensured if scooters/motorbikes are used to collect food orders and noise controls. Although the Council decided planning permission was not needed for a McDonalds to replace the previous Asda cafe I would suggest that the extension of opening hours and a delivery service operating from the premises DOES require planning permission.

A resident from the flats that overlook the Asda site wrote:

The planning documents made available to residents give little information as to what the application is for, primarily a sliding window. It has now come to my attention and also to the attention of 115 Chalkhill Road residents that a McDonalds restaurant is being built on the Asda site (former Asda cafe) with 24 hrs opening. As residents we have already raised our concerns with the Wembley Matters as well as the Council person Ms Seaton. There is a massive record of noise disturbance record that as residents we have been reporting to the Council on Asda's noise pollution for many years and there has been a noise abatement notice given to Asda few years ago by the Council which has not been really fully acknowledged by Asda hence they have been operating their Home Delivery and Click and Collect business outside of permitted hours for few years and residents have suffered due to this disgraceful behaviour of Asda's management and staff. I would like to mention also about car racing that has been going on at Asda's car park at nights for few years and despite residents reporting this as a health and safety as well as noise issue as well as public safety issue (reported to the Police with number plates of racing cars on multiple occasions) this has never been tackled and resolved. As residents we are extremely concerned that approving night time McDonalds restaurant will certainly generate more noise at nights and more cars at car park causing trouble to the public.

Please kindly look into this objection thoroughly and check previous history of complaints made by 115 Chalkhill Road residents.

Another resident wrote:

The works for McDonalds have already commenced at Asda Forty Lane, with the gutting of the cafe.

I was under the impression no decision was being made until the start of this week?

The planning documents made available to residents gave little information as to what the application was for, primarily a sliding window.

It has now come to light that a McDonalds restaurant is being built on the site of the former cafe with 24hrs opening.

The cafe was not open 24 hours, neither is Asda on a weekend.

You will see from previous correspondence with Brent Council, that the residents of 115 Chalkhill Road have long suffered noise pollution since all the planning applications submitted by Asda have been approved. The car wash directly beneath our homes was moved as it created too much noise pollution, only to be replaced with a skip during the building of the opticians, which then made way for the home delivery and click and collect areas which, even today, are a constant source of noise pollution (although, admittedly, significantly less than before our complaints) The residents facing Asda car park (includes me), faces the most noise pollution. And with this 24 hour operational food joint, it will be a nightmare!!!

There is still an ongoing issue with birds, attracted to the area by the food waste, again, better than it was now both MTVH and Asda have installed netting, but will continue to be a problem until Brent Council address the littering problem we have in this area, which I fear will be exacerbated with the arrival of a 24 hr McDonalds on our doorstep.

We are deeply concerned about the negative impact this will have on our neighbourhood and quality of life.
There are already groups using the staff shelter as a hang out late at night, with loud chatting and car stereos blasting out of open car doors.

The space in front of the car wash is frequently used as a race track, with cars picking up speed from Forty Lane end culminating in 'donuting' in front of the car wash.
What kind of clientele are you expecting at a 24 hour McDonalds? Do you think there will be an increase in trouble? Noise pollution? Littering? This will increase antisocial behaviour. We already find problems near Paddy Power corner.

Not to mention, positioned between to schools, Ark Academy and Lycée International. Is this in line with Brent tackling child obesity? Healthy eating? Why do we need another Mc Donald's, when there are two in close proximity and multiple chicken shops?

Would you please advise, as a matter of urgency, exactly what the plans are for this space and what considerations Brent are taking into account with regard to the issues raised above.

McDonald's seeks restaurant licence for period when Asda isn't open!

Extract from the licence application

Wembley Asda opening hours

Asda today confirmed to Wembley Matters that McDonald's restaurant would be open for the same hours as the store (above). McDonald's application form LINK (above) lists late night refreshments on Saturday and Sunday when Asda is closed overnight.

Brent Planners seek further information from McDonalds on McDelivery service at Wembley Asda - cafe now closed and gutted

The Planning Officer dealing with the application for a McDonald's restaurant in Wembley Asda has replied to Wembley Matters' query regarding the McDelivery facility:

I had previously requested further information from the applicants regarding how the proposed McDelivery window would operate and the impact the proposals would have on transport movements, pedestrian flow and parking, including the disabled parking provision and parking associated with the operation of the window.  I have contacted the applicants again today regarding the further information required, including the noise impact.   

I will keep you informed with regard to further information received and how we intend to take this forward.  We will ensure that further information relevant to the determination of the proposals is made public and that the public have the opportunity to comment further.

Meanwhile today the existing cafe has been closed and is boarded off inside the store and outside, and the interior gutted.

-->

CONFIRMATION: McDonalds to open in Wembley Asda

An existing McDonalds in an Asda store

McDonalds and Asda today confirmed that they are to open an in-store McDonalds at Asda Wembley Park.

An Asda spokesperson said:

We’re always looking for new ways to innovate and we work with a number of partners across our stores and online to enhance our offering for customers. We are pleased that plans for a McDonald’s in our Wembley store have been confirmed and customers can expect to see this open towards the end of the year.

A McDonald’s spokesperson:

We can confirm that plans have been submitted for a new restaurant at the Asda in Wembley. We look forward to progressing with this application and hope to invest in the local community as well as creating at least 45 new jobs.

Neither answered questions on the proposed opening hours of the restaurant or the hours of a McDelivery service that would operate from the site but McDonald's licence application  LINK is for 'late night refreshments' between 11pm and 5am both indoors and outdoors.

The plan submitted with the licence application shows an extensive operation: (Click on image to enlarge);

Brent Council Planning Department is still to answer questions from Wembley Matters on the application which has not been welcomed by residents living close to the store who are already bothered by noise from the store's home delivery service. The planning application on the Council website refers only to the positioning of a McDelivery window on the store's frontage. LINK

However an investigation by Wembley Matters has found that a Certificate of Lawfulness for an 'ancillary restaurant' within Asda (replacing the present restaurant)  was issued by Brent Council planners in January 2019 LINK on the grounds that:

The proposed café/restaurant is lawful in that it does not constitute a material change of use within the definitions set out in Section 55A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.Therefore, planning permission is not required.

This means that the application did not go to Planning Committee and neither neighbours nor councillors were consulted.

You can make a comment on the licence application HERE The application number is 16965 Deadline August 30th 2019.

It is unclear how another McDonalds in the vicinity (there are McDonalds on Blackbird Hill and at the Stadium Retail Park, Wembley Park) fits in with the Council's desire to tackle Brent's high child obesity rate as well as the need to tackle littering and noise nuisance.

UPDATE: McDelivery at Wembley Asda: residents need more information to respond to planning application

McDelivery is common in some other countries and now spreading here. A planning application has been submitted for alterations to the Wembley Asda store which suggests such a service will be opening there. Unfortunately there is very little information on the application to enable residents to make a comment.

This is what I have written to Brent Council's Head of Planning, Amar Dave.

Dear Mr Dave,

I have been approached by residents regarding the above application. The information on the Planning Portal is very sparse referring only to ‘installation of a new sliding window with overhead glass canopy and associated works’ LINK .

The application is from McDonalds and the drawing features McDeliveries - a motorcycle courier delivery service  that is often 24/7.

There is no information on changes in the current Asda restaurant but it appears the delivery service will be run from these premises. The collection window is labelled ’Non-public’ so this is presumably where couriers will collect food to be delivered.

Residents are concerned that if this is indeed a 24/7 service that they will be subject to a noise nuisance from the motorbikes/scooters. You will recall that the Council had to issue a noise-abatement order on Asda previously LINK   and there were regular complaints about noise from the delivery service.

In addition concerns were raised over road safety when a child was knocked down and killed on the crossing at the store entrance LINK.

Could you please point me to any additional information about this application including proposed hours of operation and noise and traffic impact assessments.

The dearth of information means that residents cannot make any meaningful comment on the proposals.

UPDATE This afternoon I received this prompt response from the North Area Development Management Team:

This application is currently under consideration by the Council, and the case officer is currently on annual leave, and will be back in the office on Monday. I am copying her into this email so she is aware of your correspondence, and logs it accordingly on the application file so that it is properly considered as part of her appraisal of the proposals.

The information on the public access system is all that has been submitted by the applicants for consideration – which constitutes a site location plan, elevations and an application form. However, I am aware that we have already sought additional information from the applicants with regard how the proposed alterations would be operated and what impact this would have on the overall operation of the superstore, and how this would impact the road and pedestrian access network (including pedestrian flow and disabled parking provision).

I can see the case officer  has made a note on the application file that an email was sent to the applicants on the 1^st of August. I will put a note in my diary to speak with her upon her return from leave, and will ask her to update you directly at the start of next week

Earlier today Blog on the Block reponded via Twitter:

Support the #McStrike outside McDonalds, Kilburn High Road, 6pm tonight

In addition to other events happening during the day today there will be a chance for those working today to show solidarity with a demonstration outside McDonalds on Kilburn High Road from 6pm this evening.

Crossed spoons are a symbol of solidarity - bring your own.

Councillor accuses Brent Council/Kingdom Securities of 'bounty hunting' over littering fines

Cllr John Duffy has condemned the Fixed Penalty Notice Littering Scheme run for Brent Council by Kingdom Securities as 'bounty hunting' and 'entrapment of the worst type:

My understanding is that these tickets should not be issued until the resident have had the chance to pick up the  litter.  I believe this whole scheme is a con , these officer will not investigate dumped bags, only hang around outside fast food  bookies and pubs looking for smokers, instead of approaching the premises and asking them to place a receptacle for smokers.

This is bounty hunting  the poorest residents  and in the case of Kilburn High Road is entrapment of the worst type.

Duffy visited Victoria Road and McDonalds to see for himself and wrote to Carolyn Downs, Brent Chief Executive Officer: 

I visited the area last night.  I spoke to someone from McDonald's  and some residents .

No one seems to understand why Brent would remove the bins from outside a major fast food retailer , with a high foot fall, a young demographic  and a strategic location.

One resident asked were they removed to increase the numbers of litter tickets issued by KS.  As I cannot think of any other reason for the removal, can you confirm the day they were removed , who made the request to remove  them and were any FPN issued in that area during the time the bins were removed .

This morning  (10mins ago) I heard of KS issuing tickets on  Kilburn High Road, without  giving the person an opportunity to pick it up.

I realise this a serious issue  removing litter bins when we have an enforcement process going on.  If we are trying to entrap residents into committing a offence , that is unacceptable. I believe we need to get to the bottom of the issue immediately. 

I have always had concerns about the policy of paying for bounty hunters to issue tickets , which was promoted by Cllr Southwood and Cllr Mashari, now I believe we should suspend the service until we have sorted out clear rules of engagement with public.

In the meantime I demand to know why they were removed and who requested there removal , with a full email trial of the instruction. I also need to know the number of tickets that were issued in Kilburn high road during the period the bins were removed.

In an earlier email to Brent Council officers, Cllr Duffy asked for answers to a series of questions:

I understand from the local paper, that the private firm introduced by the cabinet, Kingdom Securities (KS),  has issue 1200 FPNs.I therefore would like the following information.

(1) Can you also tell me how many FPN were issued for offences other than Littering( list below provided by DEFRA )

·       littering

·       fly-tipping

·       dog control offences

·       graffiti

·       fly-posting

·       nuisance parking (people selling or repairing cars on the road)

·       abandoned vehicles

·       leafleting without permission on land where leafleting is restricted (‘designated land’)

·       failing to nominate a key holder or give the council key holder details in an alarm notification area

·       failing to provide a waste carrier licence (for businesses transporting their own waste)

·       failing to provide a waste transfer note when moving non-hazardous waste

 or are KS employed exclusively for littering.

(2) What percentage were issued outside Tube stations, bus stops for discarding cigarette butts or similar before they enter a tube station or get on a bus.

(3) How many of these were issue following the searching of dicscarded waste under section 87 and section 88.

(4) Were any of the 1,200 offenders offer a chance to pick the offending litter as per the guidance laid down by Defra "that strictly speaking the unintentional dropping of litter is an offence , however DEFRA advise that a notice should only be issued if, after drawing the matter to the person’s attention, and he then fails to pick it up. Can you confirm you have followed Defra's guidelines that you have allow the offender to pick it -up and therefore only cautioned them if they did so, instead of issuing a FPN.

(5) As you may be aware Defra also say that in practice, the overwhelming majority of environmental offences are ‘summary offences’, this is to say they are criminal offences that are tried summarily, in front of the magistrates.  Also it is a requirement that records should be kept of the number of fixed penalty notices issued, the resulting receipts and the number of cases pursued through the courts. This information is legally required on an annual basis by Defra for monitoring purposes.Therefore can you confirm how many cases have been referred to the legal section for prosecution.

(6) How many have been paid within the 14 days required? (please change the question below to your anwser)

(7) I am assuming  we have received 70% payment and have been  paid = £67200 we have paid KS £55200 and therefore we have received £12k extra revenue to deal with appeals and taking legal actions against the outstanding offenders,can you confirm that is the case. Can you  also estimate the cost of the legal department of dealing the outstanding unpaid FPNs.

(8) Can you give me the on costs for the office space per month for the six members of staff , which was  circulated in your report to scrutiny and has KS incurred and other costs like the use of IT, use of pool cars , free car parking,  could you also give me the cost of collecting the fines by Brent.

 (9) It is clear the only fixed cost is the £55k income we have paid KS, can you confirm we have stopped cost for any item in part (8) above.

SIR ARTHUR ELVIN, INSPIRATION FOR COPLAND’S NEW NAME, GIVES ARK FOUNDERS SOMETHING TO ASPIRE TO

Guestblog from Neonymph

Last week staff at Copland received a message from the proposed new Head saying that she, with a group of students and staff,  ‘together’ had chosen the new school’s name. (This did seem a little premature to some as Mr Gove has apparently not yet signed the Funding Agreement for the school).  Still, it was refreshing to see that, in choosing a new name,  Ark had put its bad old sham ‘consultation’ days behind it and had involved all the stakeholders in the decision-making process. And the extent of that culture-change should not be underestimated. Only a few weeks have passed since Ark’s control-freak nature was revealed in its decision to entrust the running of the new school only to a current employee of Ark working alongside another current employee of Ark who is a product of Ark’s own  Future Leaders processing  system. 

                                                                                                       So letting the staff and students choose the new school name without any guidance from Ark signals a sea-change comparable to McDonalds suddenly allowing its employees to ignore all they were taught at Burger Academy and to start flipping their patties any old way they fancy. (And if  any cynics out there are still sceptical about how democratically the chosen name was arrived at, the words ‘students and staff’ are employed 4 times in the message, along with ‘unanimous’, ‘we’ and ‘together’ in order to set their minds at rest).                                                                                                                                                                        There’s hope for the future too in the aspirational nature of the name Ark have selected. For Sir Arthur Elvin was a man who came from nothing, came to Wembley as an outsider, built up the old Twin Towers stadium, gave jobs to the unemployed, allowed the community to use the athletics, swimming and ice-skating facilities of the Wembley complex, got his hands dirty with his workers picking up litter after an afternoon event in the stadium in readiness for an evening fixture, treated his employees in exemplary fashion and, according to local historians, had their almost universal  respect and affection.  Anyone looking for an aspirational figure would agree that there’s lots here for Ark’s managers, and particularly the hedge fund fat cats, millionaire Tory party donors  and Boris Johnson bankrollers who own it,  to aspire to. (As well as the kids of course).  

                                                 And the names that didn’t make the cut?:  well, The Bob Crow Ark was never really a starter and the long list of names suggested  by Wembley Matters readers here  LINK

probably  wouldn’t have survived the democratic scrutiny of ‘students and staff’ either.       

           Next meeting ‘we’ decide on Ark’s new ‘Ark Elvin Academy’ logo   ‘incorporating some inspirational features of Sir Elvin’s (sic) life’. Any suggestions from Wembley Matters readers would be very welcome . I’m sure that in their new inclusive, democratic and consultative mood, Ark would be delighted to take them on board.

 Meanwhile Hank Roberts of the ATL has written to Annabel Bates (Headteacher designate) about the way the decision was made:

Dear Ms Bates,

You have informed me, as a member of Copland staff, that you have decided on the name of the proposed ARK academy on our Copland Community school site, to be the 'ARK Elvin Academy'.

May I ask on what basis the committee of four staff and six students, that was set up to consider the new school's name, was selected? For example, did you ask for volunteers, was there any particular qualification, were they picked out of a hat?     

Were the committee given one proposed name, a selection of names or did they put forward their own names for consideration?

I also ask, was the Headteacher Dr Richard Marshall and the senior leadership team consulted and if not, why not? Were the Interim Executive Board (IEB) who are the governing body*, consulted? I know that the staff were not consulted, or asked for suggestions or given any options to take part in what you call “an important step forward .. for our school”. But why not? And is your proposed school logo to be decided by the same select committee?

Is this the manner in which you intend to make important decisions affecting the whole school in the future?  There has been no staff 'buy in' to this decision. Even when the name of a pet dog is being chosen, normally the whole family are involved.

I look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely
Hank Roberts  
Joint Copland NUT Rep and ATL Brent Branch Secretary

 * The IEB remains responsible for school decisions until the funding agreement has been signed