Brent to underwrite Northwick Park Spine/Access road with £10m Strategic CIL money

 

The Partnership Development site

 The new spine/access road (Download PDF HERE)

Brent Cabinet is expected to approve a £10m Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy underwriting of the new spine/access road to be built on the Northwick Park One Public Estate development. The money is required upfront for the road building but should, if conditions are met, be repaid from the Housing Infrastructure Fund.

The development is a partnership between Network Housing, University of Westminster, London North West Health Authority and Brent Council. The Brent Council Highways Team will be responsible for the project.

The project as a whole is expected to raise  £19m CIL from developers.

It should be noted that the future of Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy are currently under review by the government.

OFFICERS REPORT

Network Homes tenants in Northwick Park face uncertain future

The Phase 1 site between the park footpath and the road

Network Homes have told their assured shorthold tenancy(AST)  tenants in Northwick Park, part of the proposed One Public estate regeneration between themselves, Brent Council, North West London University Healthcare NHS Trust and the University of Westminster; that their tenancies could be ended with two months notice after a fixed period.

Network Homes say that they do not intend to do this until they have to remove the present housing as part of the redevelopment and that this will not happen until at least 2021.

They recognise this announcement could cause concern but promise they will work with residents over the next few years to listen to concerns and keep them informed about the development.

Network stop short of any firm promises about the future stating that tenants will want to know if they will be offered a home in the new development and how their rents will be affected.  At present a substantial numbers of the homes are allocated to NHS staff and Network have stated that they intend to prioritise NHS staff wherever possible.   They go on to say until designs are finalised and planning permission granted they are unable to provide exact details of homes that will be available.

Network Homes have purchased the land to the north of 'Northwick Park Village' from the NHS Trust and plan to build new homes as Phase 1 of the regeneration. I understand that this is the land between the incinerator and the social club, including the car parks, and 1,300 new homes are planned. They will be a mix of what Network call 'genuinely affordable' and homes for private rent and private sale. Early artist impressions of the redevelopment showed high-rise homes on  this stretch of land.

Outline proposals will include rebuilding the existing homes on Northwick Park Village but 'this is some years away' as part of Phase 2 and won't start until the new homes have been built as part of Phase 1.

As with other developments much will rest on the 'viability assessment' in terms of the balance of affordable homes versus private rent  and private sale that will give a 'sufficient' financial return to the developer. This is what will impact on the rehousing propspects of existing tenants.

Network Homes promise to consult with local residents in advance of submitting a planning application.

Northwick Park development. The question they didn't want you to hear.

Brent Council is involved in several multi-million regeneration and development projects with wide repercussions for the community. When it comes to making representations about them to Planning Committee they are limited to just a few minutes to speak on extremely complex issues while the Planning Officers involved have plenty of time to sing the praises of applications that they are backing.  The only way a representation can be extended is by the councillors on the committee asking questions of the person making representations to enable them to elaborate on their case. In my experience this seldom happens.

Last night at Full Council Gaynor Lloyd was informed without prior notice that she had just one minute to ask a supplementary question about the One Public Estate regeneration of Northwick Park. Despite her request for more time (she had rehearsed her question and got it down to 2 minutes) she was told she had just one minute and was not able to ask her full question. You can see the exchange HERE.

In the interests of local democracy and the public interest I publish below Gaynor's full question that she was unable to complete:

I am grateful for the opportunity to ask a supplemental question on the Council’s response to my original question. It may assist the Deputy Leader if I outline some further background, as my question relates to public consultation on the OPE proposals, in particular, the access road and Metropolitan Open Land swap – and when it will take place and on what basis?

I have just received a response to my FOI request to which  Councillor Butt kindly directed me at the August Cabinet meeting . 

I have seen some illuminating emails and sections of reports – even though at least half of over 1400 pages has been blacked out. Firstly, I saw that, when approving a press release for the February Cabinet on OPE, Ms Downs asked whether it had to “mention all green land, including play golf? Can’t we just say it is protected and any plans will fully take this into account?” To which the lead officer responded, “I agree with Carolyn, keep the statement brief and positive. I would be inclined not to mention MOL at all. It is opening us up to further question.” 

I also learned that the 4 current partners in the OPE project (Brent Council, Network Housing, London North West University Healthcare Trust and University of Westminster) employed GVA, the consultants who (I believe) are the lead advisers on the OPE project to prepare professional representations on behalf of  those 4 partners for the Council’s  first consultation on the Local Plan. This Consultations and Options Paper was published in February 2018, for response by all residents and others by March 2018.

As lead adviser, GVA was fully briefed on all the proposals including the proposed reallocation of Northwick Park for “regeneration”; potential sites for the access road across the Ducker, or through the  golf course; the alterations to Watford Road to make right turns into the Hospital; and Metropolitan open land swap. By contrast, the public were in complete ignorance. No mention was made in either the papers put out for Local Plan public consultation to residents, or at the Northwick Park ward Local Plan public “consultation” meeting. There was  no reference to Northwick Park in any document, apart from its propensity to flooding. Northwick Park was, however, apparently consulted on in something called a Developer’s Forum. According to the Consultation outcomes document (1.17), it is in a list of sites about where housing should be put and whether at high or low density. 

As to the access road, and MOL swap, discussions have been going on since at least  early 2017. Roads through the Ducker Pool and the golf course are suggested but , amongst the emails about eventual consultation, a lead officer mentions putting 3 options in relation to the access road so that residents would “feel genuinely consulted”.  The Council met the GLA re  swapping the pavilion (which is on MOL anyway)  for the triangle by the tube station  on 15 March 2017. 

The Council paid public money to their own professional advisers to put in representations to the first Local Plan consultation to prepare the way for a “regeneration” allocation. It briefed a “Developers Forum” about developing on Northwick Park - but those living next to the Park were kept in the dark  for their Local Plan consultation. When the Consultation results were published, there is no mention at all of the GVA representations on behalf of the Council & its partners. When the Cabinet agreed the grant application for £9.9 million - and all the work that will need to be done by Council officers,  there was no public mention of what the grant is for: to widen Watford Road to allow for a right turn into the Hospital and provide other access across Northwick Park - to improve the PTAL rating and justify “reallocating” Northwick park for high density development as a “regeneration” area. Even a Cabinet press release had to be sanitised to minimise reference to green land.

Cllor McLennan is fortunately a Ward member from Northwick Park and knows both the Park and her residents (as mature and sensible a group of people as you would ever wish to meet) . My question is when is all this going to be shared with us residents - who will be most immediately affected - and consulted on? 

Is Northwick Park open space safe? Cllr McLennan's response

This is the written reply to Gaynor Lloyd's question regarding the futire of open space in Northwick Park in the light of the One Public Estate Plans for redevelopment. She is allowed a supplementary question if she attends tonight's Council Meeeting. The meeting can be viewed on-line live HERE (if the broadcast does not go wrong again). Towards the end of the meeting there is a potentially controversial (and poorly formulated) motion reaffirming Brent Council support for the IHRA definition of anti-semitism which doesn't actually mention adopting the examples.

Question from Mrs Elizabeth Gaynor Lloyd to Cllr Margaret McLennan, Deputy Leader of the Council:

In the light of (1) the change in Cabinet member responsibility since the assurance given by Councillor Tatler at the Cabinet meeting in August that the Metropolitan Open Land/ open space at Northwick Park was safe, and (2) her comments to the Harrow Times that all proposals will be made in consultation with residents which is scheduled for the coming months, and (3) the fact that a Transport Viability study was carried out almost a year ago indicating the possibility of an access road through the Ducker pool area or the golf course or the Fairway (all of which would involve a road across Metropolitan Open Land), can the Cabinet Member now vested with responsibility for this project please either confirm that these access road proposals have been abandoned or, if not, please publish a simple indication of the rough alternative routes for the access road to the Northwick Park Regeneration area proposed?

If the open space is safe, can the Cabinet member also confirm that there will be no development on the SINC Grade 1 Northwick park & the Ducker Pool B103 area and open space protected under CP18, and that these areas will be fully protected so that their value is not prejudiced by the adjoining/nearby development?

Response:

Peter Brett Associates (transport and infrastructure consultants) have been engaged by the four landowners under the One Public Estate Initiative to work alongside other consultants, to assess the transportation issues that affect the Northwick Park site and its surroundings.

Part of this study included access to the site. A number of options were considered by Peter Brett, with advantages and disadvantages of each given careful consideration. The format and details of future public consultation has yet to be agreed, but this is likely to include access options for discussion and feedback.

The February 2018 Cabinet paper, updating members of progress at Northwick Park, confirms current proposals consider a possible “land swap” of Metropolitan Open Space, subject to the necessary consents. In broad terms this would involve swapping the area currently occupied by the sports pavilion and car park, with an equivalent area immediately to the south of Northwick Park station.

(Para 4.7 Appendix One of February 2018 cabinet report):

“.... include the smaller MOL swap involving the existing pavilion area and the area immediately to the south of Northwick Park station.”

This too would form part of any public consultation.

Mrs Lloyd may be reassured by para 3.2 and 3.3 of the same report, which stated:

3.2 All of the Council freehold ownership, and the Ducker Pond, is designated as Metropolitan Open Land (‘MOL’). This effectively affords it the same planning status as Green Belt, where development for uses other than those deemed appropriate for the Green Belt will be refused unless there are exceptional circumstances. The same land area is also designated as local open space.

3.3 The Ducker Pond area is designated as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Grade I, being of high biodiversity value. This designation extends to part of the Playgolf site, particularly the hedged area at the boundary. Part of the site also forms a section of the Capital Ring public walkway. Policy seeks to preserve and enhance the habitats in these areas.

Full Council – 17 September 2018 Motion selected by the Conservative Group

With anti-Semitic hate crimes rising across London and the United Kingdom – this Council expresses that it is appalled at the increase in anti-Semitic Hate Crimes, and reiterates its support for the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism.

This Council is shocked at the recent spate of anti-Semitic posters that have been going up across TfL run bus stops, and it is further shocked at the recent comments by those who have described the recent condemnation of anti-Semitic language and behaviour as a ‘Zionist’ movement – using anti-Semitic language and imagery in campaigning and online, further enflaming anti-Semitic hatred across the Borough.

This Council will immediately adopt, into its councillor and public workers code of conduct, the full and complete IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, and implement policies to ensure that hate crimes against Jewish people are acted upon quickly and decisively.

Councillor Michael Maurice Kenton Ward

-->

Northwick Park Regeneration: Does 'appropriate consultation' mean 'No public consultation'?

Gaynor Lloyd asked a number of questions at the August 13th Cabinet Meeting regarding the proposed One Public Estate development at Northwick Park. Philip Grant left a comment on my original post on this issue LINK but I think it is worth publishing in its own right:

The Minutes of the 13 August Cabinet Meeting are now available on the Council’s website. This is how they report the item on which Gaynor spoke:

’Councillor Muhammed Butt, Leader of the Council, welcomed Ms Elizabeth Lloyd, a Northwick Park resident, to the meeting. In accordance with Standing Order 13 Cabinet heard a public question from Ms Lloyd on the matter of the housing infrastructure bid relating to the Northwick Park Regeneration Programme as set out in the report.

Ms Lloyd stated that Northwick Park was a much loved and well used local facility, highlighting, at the same time, that it had been recognised Brent was deficient in all types of open space and recreation grounds. She felt that the Council therefore had an obligation to protect these areas from inappropriate development, with the report not clearly demonstrating the extent of the regeneration area which would be affected by the project, or seeming to take into account any planning protection designations.

Ms Lloyd felt that there had been insufficient public consultation on the programme to date and noted that there was a growing concern amongst local residents on the likely impact of any proposed development in Northwick Park. As a result she asked for clarification on the following issues:

(a) the boundaries of the regeneration area subject to the grant application,
requesting publication of a plan;

(b) for clarification on the evidence in support of the criteria met under the terms of the grant application; and

(c) an indication of the alternative routes being considered for any access road to the regeneration area.

In response, Councillor Shama Tatler, Lead Member for Regeneration, Planning
and Highways thanked Ms Lloyd for her contribution at the meeting. She stated that the report was part of a wider project seeking to unlock more housing opportunities and improve the local infrastructure. She acknowledged the importance of protecting open spaces in Brent, as set out by the Greater London Authority and reassured Ms Lloyd that no action would be taken without appropriate public consultation.’

However, it appears that Cllr. Tatler’s “reassurance” was rather hollow, as the very next action which Cabinet took was: 

’RESOLVED:-
i. Cabinet agreed to receive grant funding and enter into grant agreements with the Greater London Authority for two Housing Infrastructure Fund bids relating to South Kilburn and Northwick Park regeneration Programmes.’

That means that the Cabinet committed Brent Council to a funding bid grant for a “Northwick Park regeneration programme” on which there has been NO public consultation!

The only reason I can see for why the Lead Member might believe the “reassurance” she gave is that Cabinet thinks ‘appropriate public consultation’ means ‘no public consultation’. 

Northwick Park regeneration - key public questions for Monday's Brent Cabinet

I am pleased to see that Gaynor Lyoyd is pressing home her demand for more information on the One Public Estate Plan for Northwick Park.  A year ago I called for more public information LINK

Gaynor's questions following up her earlier post on Wembley Matters LINK

The combination of a Cabinet meeting on August 13th, a meeting held in peak holiday season and one at a time (4pm) inconvenient for people who work, would normally mean a lack of scrutiny so all credit to Gaynor Lloyd for her detailed questions. It should mean that the meeting lasts longer than its normal 45 minutes.

These are the questions:

 

Item 8  “Approval to enter into grant agreements for 2 Housing Infrastructure bids relating to ...Northwick Park Regeneration “ in Cabinet meeting Agenda 13 August 2018.

1  Northwick Park is a much loved local facility - a park, playing fields and sports pitches, a golf course and a Grade 1 Nature conservation site an area much used by locals for open air leisure over many years. As Brent’s policies CP17 & 18 make clear, Brent is deficient in all types of open space and - at any rate in a Sports England survey in 2005-6 - had one of the lowest levels of sports participation in England. Unsurprisingly, policy CP17 para 5.15 states that the council will protect  all open space from inappropriate development.

No plan is attached to the Report showing the extent of the (proposed) area for “Northwick Park Regeneration”. So it is not possible to see if this is restricted to the Northwick park Hospital Site allocation15.

There is  local concern about the possibility of our Park and its margins being designated a “regeneration zone”, allowing for higher density/high rise blocks - even though no-one can recall this potential allocation as having been mentioned in any general Local Plan consultation meetings.  

Question 1: could a plan of the boundaries of the Northwick Park Regeneration area the subject of the grant application be published? 
 

2  According to details on the HM Government website, to qualify for a grant being considered under this Housing Infrastructure  Marginal Viability Fund, evidence has to be given of: 

a) “demonstrable market failure “ (given as per the Technical guidance in https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/housing-infrastructure-); and

b) “local support “  ( as per examples in the same paper -“extensive local consultation” );  and 

c) “alignment with the Local Plan” (ditto) ; and

d) “ imminent” provision of homes 

I have been trying through a FOI /EIA request to get details of the evidence or details of how the first three of these were demonstrated with the grant application. The Cabinet may like to note that the Information Commissioner is now dealing with my request  for that evidence or those details, after the Council failed to comply with a direction of the Commissioner to give me a response. 

So far, only a Sudbury Court Residents Association AGM in April 2017 - at which the presence of officers was requested by the Association - is cited but the Council officers appear to have made no notes of that presentation, and is apparently asking if the Association made any. 

Question 2: if these criteria are required to be satisfied for a grant application under the MVF - is the Cabinet satisfied that there is evidence/ details of the demonstration of demonstrable market failure, local support, alignment with the Local Plan and imminent provision of homes, and if so, could that evidence please be published generally and supplied to me and save the Information Commissioner’s Office time and effort?

3  The grant  application seems to be on the basis that the site is landlocked, although neither the University of Westminster nor the Hospital site is landlocked. The £9.9million grant is for infrastructure, including an access road.

By the same troubled FOIA/EIA request process, I have tried to ascertain where this access road might be. As above, my request is now with the Information Commissioner, having patiently waited since December 2017.

Question 3: please publish a simple indication of the rough alternative routes for the access road to the Northwick Park Regeneration area proposed as options in the viability studies (as these must be known for the MVF grant application) including confirming  if a route/routes  across any part of the Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) at Northwick Park is/are  under consideration.
 

4  Since naturally not all Cabinet members may be familiar with the precious asset to Brent that Northwick Park is - or its protective planning designations -  although I am sure they will have been properly briefed before this meeting , I am keen to know that they are aware, and that any public who may attend is aware of the position under planning.

Question 4:   does  item 8 take account of the extent of MOL and Open Space at Northwick Park, and of the other open space planning protection designations (including especially the SINC Grade 1 designation of Northwick Park and the Ducker Pool B103) - and the legal effect of  all those designations? Could the  officer please bring a copy of the Brent GIS plan showing this  with the full MOL/Open Space designations for the site (as I only have a screen shot of the same which is small scale)?

You may also be interested in the Ducker Pool SINC review of 2014 LINK

-->

OK, it's August -Silly Season - time to see what Brent Council's Cabinet is tabling for their get together on the 13th

Guest post by Gaynor Lloyd
 

If you live in Northwick Park area - or South Kilburn for that matter - it’s worth having a quick look at the  Cabinet papers  about Brent’s  “Regeneration Zones”. LINK 

Yes, some of us lucky residents of leafy Northwick Park were just a bit startled to see ourselves in a “Regeneration Zone”. Some of us weren’t  too shocked, however - though still very , very upset. This is just the latest stage in the story of the plans for what we residents call “the Park”. A fantastic piece of Brent open space, including formal much used sports and  playing fields, a nature conservation area and a golf course. 

And it seems  the Leader of the Council is in charge of this; South Kilburn get the Cabinet Member for Regeneration. I expect we should be flattered. 

This is all about one element of the One Public Estate (OPE)  scheme which has come home to roost in Northwick Park. [More about OPE for those interested at the bottom of this piece **- and see also the linked news stories in Brent & Kilburn Times LINK  

and my letter on Page 13 on the earlier story LINK 

The scheme involves Network Housing, Northwick Park Hospital, Brent Council, University of Westminster and potentially TfL. It’s quite hard to get the detail  but the idea is that there will be 3700 homes  by 2035 somewhere on the margins of the Park. Tower blocks will be built on the land near to the Tube station - a “landmark residential development”.

Sure, as some  papers have emerged, there have been references to key worker housing, and affordable homes  - gosh, do we need key worker housing, and social housing - truly affordable homes - but these proposals  are all very vague. I’ve been trying for more transparency - a couple of Freedom of Information (FOI)  requests over the last 2 years - but not much joy. 

Even though  Brent got a grant of  £530k to do viability research on all this. Including transport research, my current  huge concern - and the reason for asking Martin to post this blog. 

My latest FOI request of Brent  from last December has been so sat on for a very long time -  despite  numerous charming assurances that the sifting process of 100’s of emails was being done  and that the release of  all or some would be opined on “soon” by Brent’s Legal Team . Well, after a last chance given to Brent by the Information Commissioner just to reply at all,  it’s now been accepted by her  as a complaint . I await hearing if the Information Commissioner accepts my argument that the plans should be out in the public domain. 

I was particularly incensed by  the secrecy for the transportation reports/ surveys, and the plans being hatched for  “infrastructure works”  . Principally an access road for this huge re-development. Our very own Regeneration Zone.

Clearly the access road can’t  go across the railway/Tube lines. OK, University of Westminster might be decamping for pastures new; maybe it could go that way. But the University’s plans  seem to be a more recent possible development. 

So where could this road  possibly go? And where might it be considered for going - a location of such commercial confidentiality and sensitivity that Brent can’t possibly release any professional transport reports or plans on it into the public domain? 

Oh, let me think...

Could it be an access road across our Park - designated as Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) - put simplistically, the London equivalent of Green Belt? (The Mayor recently refused an application by Harrow School for a major long planned sports centre on its MOL  land just cross the road from Northwick Park - because it was inappropriate development on MOL) 

It’s not “just” the effect on the environment, or the open air sports facilities; it’s the madness of adding to the roads here, which also serve Northwick Park hospital - a major hospital with (as we all know) a busy A&E. 

But hang on - to finance all this - Brent has a £9.9 million grant from HM Government from the Marginal Viability  Fund bit of its  Housing Infrastructure Fund. To get  this “marginal viability funding”, according to the HMG website , there is supposed to be “market failure”, and  “extensive local consultation” and      “alignment with the Local plan”. Well, these are  a bit news to me but obviously I don’t know everything.

So another reason for my FOI request - which sought evidence of  any of those factors. So far all I have got is a bit of alleged consultation.  Sudbury Court Residents’ Association AGM in April 2017, to which Brent officers did come after a bit of persuading. They brought  a very rum set of slides, including one of rather a scruffy park bench by Northwick Park Tube station, mentioning   litter. The officers did do a bit of question answering by local residents - and promised to revert on some stuff (but didn’t).

If that was consultation, it seems odd  the FOI officer says they have to ask the Chair of the SCRA for her notes of the meeting! Anyway, it wasn’t “consultation” in any normal sense of the word.(NO comments please on Brent’s consultations)

Oh -  and that aligning with Local Plan point. Well, maybe that can be retrospective. The Cabinet paper says “ members may be aware that Brent’s planning department is engaged in consultation on the local plan for which Northwick Park has an allocation “. I’d hope all members (especially on the Cabinet) would be aware we’ve had a bit of Local plan consultation in Brent. 

However, speaking as a local resident (and married to a Ward Councillor) and  having gone to a local meeting  on this Local Plan business   - though I admit I am getting on a bit , so I might have forgotten  - I was completely unaware of any Planning Officer referring to Northwick Park at all. Let alone in terms of revising Northwick Park’s  Local Plan “allocation” or Northwick Park becoming a “Regeneration Zone”.

It seems that the Local Plan “Preferred Options” will be out in November - when “it is proposed to run public consultation specific to Northwick Park in parallel”.

I hope we residents will be having a little pre-consultation consultation amongst ourselves rather more quickly than that. I also hope others in the Borough interested in open space, the environment,  good use of NHS land, pollution, key worker housing and good social housing provision will join us. WATCH THIS SPACE.

[**NOTE on OPE if you’ve got this far!

HM Government OPE is a plan to dispose of “surplus public land”. A particularly infamous issue is the disposal of NHS land in London - based on a couple of reports by Sir Robert Naylor. Generally Sir Robert in his openly available  Report says  to NHS bodies “Identify your surplus land” (that can include unused/empty space like corridors and open walkways, by the way). If your percentages of unused/empty or underused space to your overall site are too high, oh dear, inefficiency - using a carrot & stick approach - the message  is “sell, sell, sell”. Sir Robert’s second, confidential report -  “Naylor 2” - identifies some prime value London NHS sites for disposal  and  is so sensitive NHS England has been fighting a Freedom of Information request I have in on it for around 2 years. 

So clearly a sensitive area generally. Naylor’s reports IS useful in one respect though; Deloittes accountants did a background research report for him - which said sensibly that we ought to be looking strategically at the need for land for NHS use, in light of London’s growing population - and reminding of high land values here if we need to reprovide. Gosh how sensible - how ignored! ]

Northwick Park redevelopment takes another step forward at Monday's Cabinet

Property owners/leaseholders

The One Public Estate plan for Northwick Park will take a step forward at Cabinet on Monday February 12th when it is expected that a revised Memorandum of Understanding LINK between the partners will be approved and a timetable agreed.

The One Public Estate (OPE) is a government initiative aimed at rationalising and realising the potential (including financial) of public land by bringing together all the various public sector owners for redevelopment.  In the case of Northwick Park this includes Brent Council, Network Homes, the University of Westminster and the London NW Healthcare NHS Trust. LINK

Various options are considered in a feasibility study (embedded at the end of this article) and the favoured one is Option B2:

Click on image to enlarge

This includes the highest density of housing and reprovision of the existing university accommodation. On the issue of the proportion of affordable housing proposed the feasibility study notes '50% affordable [is at] the margins of viability, before any consideration of the value of existing uses'. The Option B1 included the provision of a new secondary school which may have provided a site for the proposed North Brent Secondary School LINK.

The plans are at an early stage but may include provision of much needed lift access at Northwick Park Metropolitan Line Station and work to improve the present narrow tunnel exit to the hospital and university, and improved pedestrian access to South Kenton station on the Bakerloo and Overground lines.  There is the possibility of a new road being built to take traffic into the area.

The Officers' report puts forward this timetable:

·      Prepare a planning brief for the site. (Feb 18- Dec 18) 


·      Commission further transport studies. (Feb 18- Dec 18) 


·      Maximise OPE funding. (ongoing) 


·      Commission energy feasibility studies. (Jan 18- July 18) 


·      Consider potential for inclusion of a secondary school. (Jan 18 – July 18) 


Network Homes Ltd and LNWUH to conclude negotiations on NHS owned 
land. (June 2018) Timescales are indicative. 

These are early days but local residents will want to look into the plans carefully for any impact on the Metropolitan Open Land that surrounds the site and which they have fought so hard to preserve in Harrow-on-the-Hill.

Will property deals follow CNWL and CWC merger?

The CNWL Wembley Campus

The 'Fulton Quarter' site with CNWL just outside (bottom left)

The College of North West London (CNWL) and City of Westminster College (CWC) have announced that their respective corporations have agreed to a merger, subject to the approval of the Education Secretary, Justine Greening LINK.

Andy Cole, Principal of CNWL, who previously was Vice Principal of CWC, had emphasised the independence of CNWL when taking up the post after the retirement of Vicki Fagg in August 2013 LINK

Plans to merge the two colleges had been abandoned earlier in March 2013.

Cole said 

I believe the college is well placed to secure for itself a distinctive and independent future; a future that will see us delivering the very best opportunities for our students, business partners and communities; a future that will see the College as the destination of choice for vocational education and training.

Something has obviously happened to make him change his mind.

The CNWL has already sold off some of its property in Kilburn and Wembley and before the announcement of the merger was in talks with developers over its remaining Wembley Park building (the other is now occupied by Michaela Free School). 

The Wembley Park site is next door to the proposed development of the adjacent Wembley Retail Park and Fountain Studios renamed by Quintain as 'the Fulton Quarter' LINK.   Given the Quintain developments around the stadium the college site is prime land. It has been suggested that there could be a higher education facility on the site.  

CNWL plans for the Wembley site included a housing component but at the meeting of the CNWL  Finance and Resources Committee on January 18th members discussed an approach made by Brent Council:

The college has been approached by Brent Council with a view to purchase the Wembley site, and they have intimated that they would not look favourably on planning permission for the required housing provision if the college proceeds with an alternative developer. 

The meeting minutes record that members went on to discuss when CWC should be told of Brent Council's interest and discussed whether the proposed developer should be made aware of Brent Council's approach. They discussed what influence Brent Council would have on the college's future and noted that under devolution Brent Council would in future be the funder for the Adult Skills Budget.

As readers of this blog have been reminded all too frequently the Brent Planning Committee is statutorily independent of the Council and charged with making decisions only on planning grounds so the message from Brent Council is particularly interesting.

Responding to the statutory consultation on the merger Brent Council said LINK:

SUPPORT; It enhances the breadth and relevance of learning opportunities for residents in Central and West London and will help to secure financial stability.

Public sector organisations are under presure to cash in on the value of their properties under the One Public Estate Strategy. Rationalisation of sites, letting surplus property at market rents, selling of sites for housing and redevelopment of sites retaining pubic sector facilities but also providing housing or commercial facilities have all formed part of the strategy.

The merger of CNWL and  CWC will doubtless lead to a review of their respective properties.