Cllr Butt 'not minded' once again to allow democracy and scrutiny over Barham Park Trustees' action - this time removing covenant protecting the park from development for a payment of £200,000 by developer George Irvin

 

George Irvin's plans for houses in Barham Park

Readers of this blog will know that many questions have been raised about Cllr Muhammed Butt's refusal to allow any scrutiny of Trustees' actions over Barham Park.

Barham Park was gifted to the people of Wembley by Titus Barham (HISTORY HERE) but Butt gained control of the Trustees by making himself their Chair and other members of his Cabinet fellow Trustees. They claim that they represent the people of Wembley and refuse any other representation.

In his role as the all-powerful Chair, Cllr Butt has refused to let people speak at meetings of the Trustees to raise issues over the accounts, plans to redevelop and privately market park buildings, his relationship with the developer and fairground entrepeneur George Irvin, the sale of two workers' cottages in the park to Irvin, and Irvin's gifts of free fairground ride tickers to councillors (see links below).

There is a Trustees' meeting on Monday morning where a payment bu Irvin  to the Trustees of £200,000 will allow a restrictive covenant protecting Barham Park to be removed, enabling Irvin to build four three storey houses inside the park on the site of the cottages. (CGI above). Irvin has already received planning permission for them from the Council pending settlement of the covenant issue.  Observers reckon given the sale value of the proposed private houses, situated in a beautiful park with vehicle access and nearby rail connections,  the payment is quite a bargain.

Unsurprisingly, local councillor Paul Lorber has asked to speak to the Trustees about the issues raised. Equally unsurprisingly Chair of Trustees and Leader of the Council, Cllr Muhammed Butt has refused:

The Brent Officer concerned responded:

As is usual practice I’ve consulted with the Chair and, as a result, can advise he is not currently minded to allow any requests to speak at Monday’s meeting.  Whilst it will not, therefore, be possible for you to address the meeting in person you’ll obviously still be more than welcome to attend to observe proceedings.  We’ll also be webcasting the meeting live, which you’ll be able to follow, as an alternative, via the following link:

Home - Brent Council Webcasting

In other words you are at liberty to silently watch us sell out the people of Wembley...

 

BREAKING: Barham Park Trustees' £200,000 deal with George Irvin to enable him to build four 3 storey houses in Barham Park

Trustees set to rubber stamp process to remove covenant restriction on building in Barham Park

Brent Council on Barham Park Covenant: 'Move along, nothing to see here.'

Barham Park Trustees approve original accounts in 7-1/2 minute meeting after refusing representations

Butt again refuses representations on Barham Park. Time for the CharityCommission to intervene?

Be Fair on the Fun – An open Letter to Brent on councillors’ free rides 

 

Butt gets a bruising in Alperton by-election. Lib Dems win with increased vote share

 Charlie Clinton (Lib Dem) speaks after vote declaration

 

Charlie Clinton swept to victory in the Alperton by-election yesterday with an increased vote share. The by-election took place in unusual circumstances following the resignation of Anton Georgiou as a result of pressures on his personal life casued by the release from jail of a stalker.

Brent Greens decided not to field a candidate and called on other parties to do the same as a principled stand against violence in public life.  In the event Conservatives and Labour went ahead and Reform joined them.

Cllr Muhammed Butt had allegedly received the news of Georgiou's resignation with glee and Labour threw everything into the campaign. Barry Gardiner MP and Labour councillors joined party members in a huge effort to gain the seat for their 19 year old candidate, daughter of a former councillor.

 

 

Charlie Clinton outside the blue blocks in which he lives opposite Alperton Station

 

 Paul Lorber, Leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Brent Council said:

The stunning victory for Charlie Clinton and the Liberal Democrats is down to the amazing had work by Anton Georgiou and the Lib Dem team for Alperton over many years.

Winning over twice as many votes as Labour was beyond our expectations but shows how much trouble Labour are in since the formation of their Government. Things will get even worse for Labour as they put up taxes and cut services. 

With Charlie's election the Lib Dem Group is back to 3 on Brent Council and we will continue to punch above our weight in challenging the Labour Leadership on the many bad decisions they are making.

We are grateful to the Brent Green Party for their solidarity with Anton Georgiou by not putting up a candidate in Alperton.

 

An ex-Brent Labour Party member reviewed the result for Wembley Matters:

 

As a long-term resident of Brent, an ex-Labour Party member and a lifelong trade unionist I have watched with horror what has been happening in Brent Labour since 2010 when the current administration come into power. I am very aware that the Tory Party austerity policies has put local councils, especially metropolitan boroughs, and Labour controlled ones and suffer financially. However, some of the decisions and direction of travel in Brent have not been what most of us would consider being aligned with Labour Party values, nor for the good of residents.

 

The campaign in Alperton was a prime example of Brent Labour’s lack of care about Labour Party values and the residents they are supposed to represent. 

 

There were several messages spawned by Brent Labour that were untrue and misrepresented.

 

Blaming the LibDems for the general untidiness of the ward, along with fly tipping etc is unbelievable. Brent Labour has the tools at their disposal to sort these issues, not the LibDems, all a LibDem councillor can do is make a noise to Council Officers, whereas, a Brent Labour Councillor, such as they have in Alperton, can request the Leader and Cabinet Member to rectify these issues by directing Council resources to where they are needed in the ward. That didn’t happen, so the mess in Alperton is down to Brent Labour, so electing another one is pointless?

 

Telling us we need Social Housing while allowing all the available land to be turned into either flats for sale, or more likely private rentals is not the way to go. We are told that Brent is supplying hundreds of Affordable Homes, 80% of an unaffordable rent is still too high for Brent’s housing waiting list applicants, as are even London Affordable at is it 60% of the inflated rental values. Then there are the Shared Ownership properties, these are known to be overpriced and very difficult to sell and realise even the original investments for those that buy in.

 

Basically, in the eyes of Brent residents they see Brent Labour as being the out and out supporter and facilitator of their best friends the developers and private landlords (such as many of their own councillors). The Leadership are not shy of accepting gifts (Irvin’s fairs, lunches, receptions and more no doubt) and why would the Council (Barham Trustees, chaired by the Leader) remove the covenant off the park warden buildings in Barham Park for a paltry £200,000?  I look at Ealing Road library forecourt and wonder how they are getting away with that ridiculous occupation. Maybe they know someone?

 

Brent Labour have let Brent’s environmental services decline into an ineffective service while spending ridiculous amounts of money on the Civic Centre, publicity, and other unnecessary spending. There are so many other failings of this Brent Labour led council that are wrong, it is not surprising that residents don’t vote Labour in sufficient numbers anymore, as shown in recent elections, even before the Labour nationally lost a lot of their support over its recent ineptitude. Citing the Labour Government as an issue is partially true, but it is far from the real issue for Labour in Brent, Brent residents need a Council that listens, does the right thing, tells the truth because it is worth telling and represents the electorate first.

 

I really believe that this Labour group believe what they are doing is the right thing and that they lost Alperton because residents don’t understand how wonderful the council is!!!! 

 

BREAKING: Barham Park Trustees' £200,000 deal with George Irvin to enable him to build four 3 storey houses in Barham Park

 

The houses proposed for Barham Park

 

The long-running campaign by local residents in Sudbury to resist the building of houses  in Barham Park will come to a head at the Barham Park Trust Committee on February 24th 2025.

 A deal with funfair and property developer George Irvin will see him pay the Trust £200,000 for removal of the covenant that prevented building of four 3 storey houses on the site presently occupied by two modest 2 storey cottages at 776-778 Harrow Road.

The deal also involves vehicular access into the park and eretion of other facilities. Details are below:

 Recommendations:

The Barham Park Trust Committee RESOLVES to

2.1 Approve the modification of the restrictive covenants at 776 and 778 Harrow Road, as detailed in paragraphs 3.8-3.11 and delegate authority to the Director of Property and Assets to execute a deed with Zenaster Properties Ltd for the agreed sum of £200,000, subject to 2.2 below.

2.2 If required, approve seeking Charity Commission consideration of the Qualified Surveyor’s Report (Appendix 1) and authorisation under Section 105 of the Charities Act to modify or discharge the covenants.

 

Existing Covenants (extract from single plot):

 

*Not to use the Property otherwise than as a single private dwelling house and the garage for any purpose other than as an ancillary private garage.

*Not to divide the Property into two or more dwellings or residential units.

*Not to erect or cause to be erected on the Property any building or structure whatsoever except a greenhouse or shed of not greater length than 4 meters (sic) and of not greater height than 3 meters (sic) or permit or suffer any person under the Transferor’s control to do so.

*Not to stand or support any vehicle, commercial vehicle trailer, mobile home, caravan, trailer, cart or boat on any part of the Property.

*Not to carry out any development within the meaning of Section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in or upon the Property.

* Not to park any motor vehicle on or otherwise obstruct any part of the accessway hatched yellow and hatched green or any part of the Retained Land at any time.

 

Proposed Modification (combined plots):

 

3.9 The deed (to be prepared in accordance with the planning committee report dated 12 June 2023 and decision notice dated 13 June 2023—see Appendices 3 and 4) will amend these covenants to permit the development of four houses.

3.10 A revised version of the restrictive covenants that would enable the proposed redevelopment in accordance with the granted planning permission is set out below and may be subject to further refinement.

 

Permitted Use:

 

*The Property may be used for residential purposes, permitting the construction and occupation of up to four residential dwellings, together with any ancillary buildings, structures, and facilities required for their use in accordance with the planning permission granted under reference 22/4128.

 

 From Application 22/4128

 

Subdivision of the Property:

 

*The restriction on dividing the Property into multiple dwellings is removed, approved under planning permission 22/4128.

 

Construction of Buildings and Structures:

 

*The restriction on erecting buildings or structures is modified to permit the construction of four residential dwellings and any associated infrastructure, including garages, outbuildings, and landscaping, in accordance with planning permission 22/4128.

 

Vehicle and Storage Restrictions:

 

* The restriction on standing or supporting vehicles, commercial vehicle trailers, mobile homes, caravans, trailers, carts, or boats on the Property is modified to permit reasonable residential use, including the parking of vehicles by residents and visitors in designated parking areas as approved under planning permission 22/4128.

 

Permitted Development:

 

*The restriction on carrying out development within the meaning of Section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 is removed to allow the construction and occupation of four residential dwellings in accordance with planning permission 22/4128.

 

Accessway and Parking Restrictions:

 

*The restriction on parking and obstruction of the accessway hatched yellow and hatched green or any part of the Retained Land is modified to allow vehicular and pedestrian access as required for the lawful residential use of the Property, ensuring that any access arrangements comply with planning permission 22/4128 and any subsequent highway or planning authority requirements.

 

3.11 These modifications preserve reasonable protections while enabling the approved redevelopment. The precise wording of the changes may be further refined or amended during the legal conveyancing process.

 

Timeline

 

3.12 The overall timeline for these steps is expected to span several months. Suppose the Trust Committee approves the restrictive covenants’ modification and/or discharge. In that case, completion may be subject to obtaining Charity Commission approval, if required, and the conclusion of legal formalities by the parties. This includes Zenaster applying to the Land Registry to register the Deed and effect the necessary changes.

 

3.13 The modification or discharge of the restrictive covenants is subject to the satisfactory reinstatement of the boundary in respect of 776 and 778 Harrow Road and return of the Barham Park Trust land to open space as agreed by way of surveyor’s aerial plan signed by George Irvin on behalf of Zenaster on 28th August 2024.

 

Zenastar Properties Ltd (previously Aventor) business is listed as

•      Buying and selling of own real estate
• Other letting and operating of own or leased real estate
• Management of real estate on a fee or contract basis  
  

Retained profits at January 2024: £3,781,976

Current officers

Campaigners will be looking for grounds on which to challenge to covenant deal. The report to Trustees discusses the role of the Charity Commission:

Compliance with the Charities Act 2011

 

3.4 The two key legal requirements under the Charities Act for land disposal have also been met:

 

*Independent advice: A report has been obtained from a qualified Designated Adviser acting solely in the interests of the Trust.

*Best terms achieved: The proposed transaction represents the best

financial terms reasonably obtainable by the Trust.

 

Requirement for Charity Commission Approval

 

3.5 Under the Charities Act 2011, charities do not typically require prior Charity Commission approval for land disposals where the two legal requirements above are satisfied. However, approval may be required in specific circumstances, including:

 

*Disposals to a "connected person" (as defined in the Charities Act).

*Disposals involving designated land in most cases

 The last two points regarding 'specific circumstances' may be considered grounds for challenge given previous allegations of a close relationship between Muhammed Butt, Chair of the Trustees and  George Irvin, Director of Zenastar, and argumets over designated land.

Butt boasts of squeezing Lime: Consultation and the first Resident Cycling Forum

 

From Brent Council

It is your turn to have your say on new parking bays for Lime bikes which will be popping up across the borough this year. 

Since 2019 over 100,000 people have used Lime bikes with nearly 2 million cycle trips taken across the borough. With rising demand, many residents raised concerns about the bikes, such as poor bike parking and safety.

Lime agreed to a number of the council's demands last year and will be implementing them this year, these can be read in full here, and include: 

• immediately reduce the size of the fleet in Brent by a third-  from 750 to 500 bikes - while other improvements are made and consult closely with the council before increasing bike numbers again
• introducing and funding towards the creation of 200 new parking bays, in priority areas. These designated parking bays will be implemented and enforced in phases and we aim to have all locations will be up and running by 1 July 2025
• implement zoning to prevent poor bike parking in certain areas. 

The consultation on the location of the 200 dedicated parking bays is now open for residents to give their views.

Councillor Muhammed Butt, the Leader of Brent Council, said:

I am pleased we have been able to squeeze concessions out of Lime, since most residents are simply tired of the minority that park their e-bikes badly.

We are working with Lime to address this with a borough-wide network of mandatory parking bays which will make cycling around the borough easier and also set stronger expectations of riders. Decisions are shaped by those that get involved, so I would encourage residents to have their say on the new locations proposed.

The first Resident Cycling Forum will take place on Monday, 24 February in the Civic Centre Conference Hall at 18:30. This forum will provide an opportunity for residents to hear directly from Lime about the scheme and raise any issues or concerns they may have.

Until the new parking bays are introduced, Lime bikes will still be able to park anywhere on a pavement, but users must follow Lime's rules to ensure bikes do not obstruct pathways. If you find a badly parked or abandoned Lime bike, you can report it directly to Lime via email or online.

Brent Council is also in talks with other e-bike operators, such as Human Forest, to explore formal arrangements for their bike hire schemes in the borough.

New SPD on Residential Extensions and Alterations will make it easier to extend Brent residences

 

A new supplementary planning document on residential alterations and extensions will come into force on January 25th 2025 following its approval by Muhammed Butt in his role as Lead Member as well as Brent Council leader.

The aim is to ease the housing pressures by enabling easier extensions to houses and it also contains recommendations on flooding and biodiversity:

The Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) is consistent with the priorities of the Borough Plan in a number of respects. In relation to the Prosperity and Stability in Brent priority it supports existing residents to meet their housing needs better by enabling them to extend their home more easily to meet their needs than in current guidance. This removes the need to purchase larger more costly homes and the associated moving costs. In relation to the Cleaner, Greener Future priority it seeks to ensure that existing green space, trees, plants and biodiversity is retained as much as possible in development and where possible additional provision is made. It is supportive of incorporation of renewable energy and low carbon space heating sources. It seeks to ensure development avoids areas of flood risk and addressed any additional surface water run-off created by retaining it on site.

 

In relation to the Best Start in Life priority, the ability of occupiers to more easily extend their homes should reduce the potential for over-crowding. It will allow for the opportunity for children to have separate bedrooms, with the associated benefits to sleep/ health and educational attainment. This also feeds into the Healthier Brent priority, as does the need to retain sufficient garden space/ green space which is known to be beneficial to physical and mental health as well as the measures to reduce the effects of climate change which will also be beneficial to health. Providing space may also allow carers  to live in properties to support occupants with a chronic health issue or disability.

 

EXTRACTS

Biodiversity

 

Regardless of any exemptions, you are encouraged to increase the biodiversity of your property by planting trees and flowering plants, retaining areas of long grass, nettles or overgrowth, introducing water features (ponds, bird baths etc) and creating a compost heap. You are also encouraged to include other measures not necessarily addressed by Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG), such as Swift bricks, bat and bird boxes and holes in fences for hedgehogs. These are particularly important where features that provide habitats are lost, such as old structures with holes and crevices. Useful information on how to approach this can be found on the Woodland Trust website, and elsewhere.

 

 

Flooding

 

Impermeable hard landscaping with poor drainage can help cause flooding within the borough.

 

You are encouraged to address surface water flooding issues through the provision of natural features, such as rain gardens or green roofs, and by not connecting the drainage of any new hard landscaping to the existing sewer network.

 

If your extension or outbuilding is proposed within an area of surface water flooding, as shown on the Brent Local Plan policies map, you will have to amend your planning application accordingly. You will need professional advice to provide information to support your application, generally in the form of a Flood Risk Assessment. Key factors to consider include the depth and speed of the surface water during flood periods, and the volume of water that could be displaced by your extension or outbuilding.

 

Dimensions of extensions

 

 

Depth

 

For attached homes, such as terraced or semi-detached homes, single storey rear extensions could be up to 6 metres in depth from the original rear wall of your home.

 

For detached homes, single storey rear extensions could be up to 8 metres in depth from the original rear wall of your home.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the depth of single storey rear extensions must not be more than half the length of your garden. The area (sqm) of your garden that is retained should meet the relevant amenity space standards, as set out in Brent Local Plan Policy BH13.

 

Height

 

 Single storey rear extensions up to 3 metres in depth for an attached home, or up to 4 metres in depth for a detached home, could be up to 4 metres in height as long as they have an eaves height of no more than 3

metres.

 

A maximum height of up to 4 metres could be acceptable, for example, where the extension has either a mono-pitched or pitched roof.

 

Single storey rear extensions more than 3 metres in depth for an attached home, or more than 4 metres in depth for a detached home, could also be up to 4 metres in height as long as they have an eaves height of no more than 2.5 metres along the boundary to any neighbouring properties.

 

A height of up to 4 metres could be acceptable, for example, where the extension has a pitched roof

 

PLEASE DO NOT RELY ON THE EXTRACTS FOR GUIDANCE. THE FULL DOCUMENT IS HERE.

 

Muhammed Butt defends Bridge Park actions on BBC LondonNews

 January 9th 2025

FULL STORY HERE

A Revolution in Neasden? Brent Cabinet to decide next week.

 The Lighthouse

Wednesday's meeting of Brent Cabinet will be asked to support a proposal to tackle the long term problems of Neasden Town Centre, often known as Neasden Shopping Precinct through the Neasden Civic Partnership Programme.

They are asked to:

Approve up to £7.4m Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy capital funding to deliver public realm and highways infrastructure improvements in and around Neasden Town Centre.

 

Note a range of contracts for consultants and contractors will be required to design, plan and develop the proposed public realm, community programming and highways improvements for the Neasden Civic Partnership Programme.

 

Note and endorse the proposed installation of a temporary building for community use on top of the council-owned car park next to 237 Neasden Lane, subject to obtaining any planning permission, and any other statutory consents.

 

The proposal will aslo utilise a GLA Civic Partnership Programme grant of £3.1m the key aims of which are to:

Strengthen representation and authorship in physical regeneration

Delivering projects for and with the communities they serve, with a focus on local network capacity building and agency.

 

Expand the public realm

Creating open, high quality, connected and inclusive public spaces with good social and cultural infrastructure managed by cross-sector partners.

 

Address the climate and ecological emergencies

Strengthening London's climate resilience and tackling environmental inequalities.

 

Changes to the Eastern Gyratory, a longer term project, is by far the most costly part of the Programme.

1)    Public Realm – Wayfinding for Neasden Town Centre and route to Neasden Underground Station and Neasden Stations Growth Area, with new signage, lighting, landscaping, public art; Green infrastructure for Neasden Town Centre: sustainable urban drainage system, pocket forest trees and low-level planting.

2)    Community Programming – Meanwhile Lighthouse : demountable two storey metal structure with access stairs and tower signage, internal first floor fit out, for workspace and community uses, installed on top of LBB- owned car park.

3)     Eastern Gyratory – reconfiguration, new access road, pavement, crossings, lighting and street furniture, to define and open up the gateway to Neasden Town Centre, improve access to The Grange open space, improve the route to Neasden Underground Station and Neasden Stations Growth Area.

 

Cllr Leader Muhammed Butt, now also the Lead Member for Housing, Regeneration and Planning writes a Lead Member Foreword to the Report:

Neasden Town Centre has struggled with the legacy of major highways infrastructure interventions, and more recently in responding to the impacts of the pandemic and cost of living crisis. To support Neasden’s growth and vitality, Brent Council designated it as one of our Priority Town Centres and since that time a number of studies have been delivered to identify ways to improve connectivity, accessibility, and safety within the area. Brent Council working with the Mayor of London engaged local residents, businesses and communities to develop the Neasden Town Centre Action Plan, which sets an ambitious vision to put Neasden Town Centre back on the map. Additional investment is now required to unlock Neasden's potential and deliver meaningful change that stands the test of time

 

With the upcoming development planned for the Neasden Stations Growth Area, it is essential that we put the right level of infrastructure in place so that new and existing communities alike can benefit from this regeneration and growth. Infrastructure to improve connectivity, accessibility, safety, community cohesion and to tackle the climate emergency are long welcomed by all. Neasden won’t be left behind because of the mistakes made in the past.

 

Brent Council is unashamedly pro-growth, and alongside other councils we’ve also continued to call for the infrastructure necessary for the West London Orbital railway to stop at Neasden. But as with any change, we must ensure our diverse residents, businesses and communities can participate and share in the benefits of growth. Young people in particular need more support. Gang activities remain troublingly prevalent in the Neasden area and have impacted residents for far too long. Initiatives that can help young people engage and connect to better opportunities will be fundamental to a brighter future for all of our communities. Where we put back pride in an entire  neighbourhood, we hope only good things can follow.

 

The Neasden Civic Partnership Programme will re-establish the socioeconomic and environmental links that have been lost between the historic town centre and its local communities, in order that both existing and new communities will find in Neasden a place where everyone can belong and thrive.

 

This will take time, but this council is determined to see this change through.

 

Can Neasden, the butt of many a Private Eye joke recover some pride,  dignity and success?

 Below are extracts from the 169 page Action Plan whuch you can find HERE:

 

1. The Ritz Urban Rooms and Kitchen

2. A Moveable Feast

3. Neasden Market

4. The Lighthouse

5. Visual Identity and Wayfaring

MEDIUM TERM PROPOSALS

 LONGER TERM PROPOSALS

Before much of this goes ahead there are issues to be dealt with as shown in the Risk Assessment: