Planning Committee raises issues on Colin Road, Dennis Jackson Centre and Queensbury redevelopment proposals

The Planning Committee heard three pre-application presentations at their meeting on October 9th and the Minutes of the meeting have been published.  All three have featured onWembley Matters. LINK

	Land at 370 High Road, London, NW10 2EA and 54-68 Dudden Hill Lane, London, NW10 1DG PDF 431 KB Minutes: The Committee received a briefing on a pre-application scheme for a mixed use development consisting of 224 residential units, a supermarket, nursery, gym, café, workshops and amenity space. Peter Mahoney and Nick Francis (R55) presented the scheme and answered members questions. Members then went into a session during which they examined the proposal and raised the following issues for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application. The main issues raised at the meeting were: Issue 1 – Locally Significant Industrial Site ·         Concern about loss of existing shopping parade and jobs. Issue 2 – Affordable Housing and Workspace ·         Advocate 25% family housing. ·         Ensure no ‘poor doors’ for affordable housing provision. ·         Questioned reduction from initial proposal in terms of level of affordable housing provision from 65% to 50%. ·         Queried tenure split not following policy. Issue 3 – A1 retail use in out of town location ·         Concerns about large servicing vehicles and impact on residential amenity. Issue 4 – Scale, massing, height and impact on daylight/sunlight ·         Concern raised about the amount of development on the site. ·         Potential for public space to attract ant-social behaviour. ·         Difficult to provide detailed comments without full information (i.e. daylight sunlight report) for analysis. Issue 5 – Public Realm ·         No further comments. Other Comments ·         Question whether adequate servicing and parking provided. ·         Assurance pre-application consultation carried out. ·         There should be an extra pedestrian crossing and traffic calming (particularly in view of proposed nursery). ·         Should be crossings at both ends of development. ·         Not clear on need for pedestrian route through development as other quicker alternative routes. ·         Question how parking for LIDL shop would be managed.
3.	Wembley Youth Centre and former Dennis Jackson Centre, London Road, Wembley, HA9 7EU PDF 4 MB Minutes: The Committee received a briefing on a pre-application scheme which proposed thedemolition of existing community centre and erection of three buildings ranging in height from 3- to 6-storeys containing 150 residential units (including private, temporary and NAIL tenure housing), including a replacement community centre. Stephen Martin and Charlotte Pollard (PRP Architects) presented the scheme and answered members questions. Members then went into a session during which they examined the proposal and raised the following issues for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application. The main issues raised at the meeting were: Issue 1 – Principle of development ·         Full detail of community centre would be required. ·         Queried rationale behind loss of open space. Issue 2 – Housing, tenure mix, including Affordable Housing ·         Council own development should be 100% affordable housing. Issue 3 – Design, height and massing of development within its local context. Queried rationale behind building heights. Issue 4 – Impact on amenity of neighbouring properties ·         Need clarification on daylight/sunlight. Issue 5 – Quality of residential accommodation ·         Concern over stacking of units. ·         Concern as to whether sufficient amenity space is being provided. ·         A compromise on quality for temporary accommodation should not be accepted (temporary can be for a fairly long period). E.g. Lack of windows to kitchens not considered acceptable. ·         Queried whether space would be provided in the NAIL accommodation for visitors to stay. ·         Provision should be made in NAIL accommodation to store mobility vehicles. Issue 6 – Transport ·         Need to consider ‘no right turn’ to London Rd from Wembley High Rd. ·         Over provision of cycle parking? ·         Concern over additional activity on London Road, particularly on event days. Other Comments ·         Detailed construction plan required to include routes for vehicles, hours operation etc to ensure impact on residents minimised.  ·         Queried level of community engagement.
(4.	110 Walm Lane, London, NW2 4RS PDF 410 KB  (Queensbury pub) Minutes: The Committee received a briefing on a pre-application for a scheme for the replacement of existing building (containing a public house and former members club) with a mixed use development comprising a public house and function room (A4) and 48 residential flats (C3).. Luke Raistrick, Nick Mokasis and John Losi (Martin Robeson Planning Practice) presented the scheme and answered members questions. Members then went into a session during which they examined the proposal and raised the following issues for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application. The main issues raised at the meeting were: Issue 1 – Principle ·         Need to ensure that the community space is not just finished to ‘shell and core’ standard. Issue 2 – Design, Heritage and Impact on Conservation Area ·         Concern regarding massing and density. ·         Concern regarding modern design. ·         Concern over loss of existing building- consider façade retention? ·         Queried how it can be demonstrated that the building will be of high quality. ·         Queried depth of frontage. ·         Restrictions should be placed on use of balconies to avoid clutter. Issue 3 – Scale, massing, height and impact on daylight/sunlight ·         Would require confirmation that complies with Council’s standards. Issue 4 – Public Realm ·         No further comments.  Issue 5 – Affordable Housing ·         Require up to date financial modelling.  Issue 6 – Standard of Accommodation ·         Noise mitigation needed in view of proximity to railway line. Other Comments ·         Queried response to consultation. ·         Comments have not suggested that the proposed building is exceptional. ·         Queried licencing for existing pub and if there is a special arrangement. ·         Noted the servicing bay – need to consider bus stop opposite.  ·         Blenheim Gardens Residents should be added to the consultation list

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

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

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

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

The meeting is open to the public.

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

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

Full details HERE

Cabinet paper on  the London Road site HERE

Queensbury pub redevelopment consultation today 4pm-8pm St Gabriel's Church Hall

Queensbury pub campaigners are rolling their sleeves up ready for another round in the campaign to save the Queensbury pub in Willesden Green.

Developers Fairview Homes lost an appeal against the refusal of permission to develop the site. Now it is the turn of Redbourne (Willesden) a subsidiary of the Winston Group to try and persuade the community and Brent Planning Committee to accept their plans for 48 flats and a pub with function room on the site.

The second day of an exhibition by the company's public relations company takes place today at St Gabriel's Church Hall, Chichele Road, NW2 3AQ 4pm-8pm.

When is a decision not a decision? Smoke and mirrors at Brent Council

Early days of the campaign to Save the Queensbury

 Guest blog by Ian Elliott

A property developer bought The Queensbury pub in Willesden Green almost four years ago and lodged a plan to build a 10 storey tower block in its place. Save The Queensbury was formed and we convinced Brent Council's planning department to reject the plans. We then represented ourselves at a five day public inquiry when the developer appealed, unsuccessfully and the Inspector spoke highly of the merits of the existing building.

From the start we believed that the building, in a conservation area, should have been protected by being added to Brent's "local list" of buildings. The problem is, we have been left completely confused as to who takes a decision as to what buildings are on the list and have now been stonewalled by decision-makers at Brent Council.

Back in 2012 we were told that there were no plans to review Brent's list, which contains buildings as diverse as the State Ballroom in Kilburn to the bandstand in Queens Park.

In June 2014 a mysterious report appear on Brent's website, rightly adding Kensal Rise library to the list but claiming that The Queensbury had been reviewed but would not be added. Naturally this was a blow so we asked for the assessment to be made public. Brent refused to publish the assessment so we complained to Brent's Chief Executive and asked for this to be looked at by a senior officer, away from those close to the decision. 

Instead we had a reply giving Brent a clean bill of health - from a manager in the same department who we wanted to be investigated as failing to consult with residents. (Bear in mind also that officers in planning have twice recommended that the pub be demolished, in spite of local opposition). Weird, eh?

Fast forward to summer 2015 and Brent consulted on a review of the local list and we, along with dozens of residents, asked for The Queensbury to be listed. Cllr Margaret McLennan, Brent Council’s lead member for housing and development, said: “This consultation is a chance for residents to have their say on the pieces of Brent’s fantastic heritage that are most important to them. I would encourage people to go online and nominate their favourite site of historical interest to be considered for inclusion on the Local List.” So we did.

We thought we were making progress when a report emerged, adding The Queensbury to the local list, later 2015. A decision was promised, in December 2015, but an email from Brent Council reveals that a decision not to proceed was apparently taken by Brent's Cabinet.

We asked for the minutes of that decision, given that it was on a Cabinet agenda for December. No response. No agenda. No minutes. Hang on.... this is getting weirder. Where's the transparency?

The Chair of planning then tells us that a "Policy Coordination Group" would a review the Cabinet decision but that's left us mystified. Of all the 30+ groups and committees listed on Brent's Democracy site, the PCG is not one. So we asked again, only to hear that the Lead Councillor (i.e. the one inviting us to participate in this democracy) will no longer comment or email us on this matter.

At the turn of 2015 we put in a Freedom of Information request to try and clear the smoke around Brent's mysterious PCG and hopefully find out precisely who took a decision not to add The Queensbury (again) and on what basis. 

In law, Brent have to respond to an FoI request, by the first week of February.

We will wait and see if we get transparency and minutes from the mystery PCG. Or at least an explanation as to why The Queensbury was not added, again. Without this, the popular and viable pub in a beautiful conservation area remains vulnerable to demolition.

Fairview Homes appeal to demolish the Queensbury Pub to be heard

It looks like the Planning Inspectorate may have to open an office in Brent! Fairview Homes have lodged an appeal against Brent Council planning committee's refusal of their plans for the Queensbury pub site at 110 Walm Lane. Fairview want to demolish the Asset of Community Value and replace it with a block of flats.

The hearing is expected to last three days. The Planning Inspector's letter can be found HERE

The Queensbury Pub planning commitee voting record

Readers have asked for details of the Planning Committee vote which saves the Queensbury Pub in Willesden Green from development for the time being. I am grateful to the Kilburn Times for this list:

Voted for the plans: Cllr Ann John (Stonebridge) and Sandra Kabir (Queensbury).

Against: Cllr Abdi Aden (Barnhill), Michael Adeyeye (Queens Park), Mark Cummins (Brondesbury Park), Sami Hashmi (Mapesbury), Dhiraj Kataria (Welsh Harp) and James Powney (Kensal Green).
Abstained: Cllr Ketan Sheth (Tokyngton).

Cllr Powney has written a comment about his vote against the plans on his blog LINK which mentions his participation in many planning decisions regarding the Mapebury Conservation Area. The selection of a new Labour candidate for Mapesbury Ward is taking place after the withdrawal of one of the three candidates for personal reasons. Cllr Powney was not reselected for his present Kensal Green seat.

Community, councillors, Assembly Member and MP rally behind Queensbury Pub campaign -decision tonight

Making community representations to the Planning Committee

Brent's Planning Committee will tonight decide whether to accept the officer's recommedation to approve Fairview's planning application, subject to Section 106 conditions*, to demolish the Queensbury Pub in Willesden Green, and replace with a 10 storey block, or to refuse planning permission.

At the time of writing campaigners have not yet heard how many of the public will be allowed to speak and it could be limited to just two. Local councillors are also likely to speak.

These are the most frequent obkections made by local residents (number of objections in brackets)

Loss of the Queensbury Pub and Busy Rascals which are both important local community facilities (140)

Height of replacement building too tall with surrounding area and modern design out of keeping the character of the area (105)

Replacement building is inappropriate and detracts from the character of the Mapesbury Conservation Area and setting of nearby heritage assets including Willesden Green Underground Station (69)

Demolition of existing building (68)

Designation of pub as Asset of Community Value should require its protection and be a material planning consideration (43)

Loss of existing pub will affect the wider regeneration of the area. Reference made to loss of the Deli on Walm Lane and loss of other community facilities including the Spotted Dog Pub and Willesden Library (41)

Replacement community space within the new building does not adequately compensate for the loss of the Queensbury Pub and Busy Rascals (33)

Lack of residential parking will lead to further congestion on surrounding roads (31)

The site is large enough to be redeveloped whilst retaining the existing building for use by The Queensbury public house and Busy Rascals. Housing can be provided elsewhere within the site.(26)

Lack of affordable housing within the scheme (26)

The Planning Committe is statutorily independent of the Council and therefore not whipped but these are representations made by councillors representing Liberal Democrat, Labour and Conservative parties and a Labour Assembly Member and a Liberal Democrat MP :

 

Councillor Krupesh Hirani (Dudden Hill Ward) - objection raised based on a representation received from a constituent that wishes not to see the site replaced by flats.

Councillor Christopher Leaman (Mapesbury Ward) - Objections raised on the grounds of the loss of the

community facility (The Queensbury public house and Busy Rascals) and the design is not in keeping with the area.

Councillor Carol Shaw (Brondesbury Park Ward) - Objections raised for the following reasons:- (1) The Queensbury Pub has been listed as an Asset of Community value and therefore needs to be protected and not demolished; (2) loss of public house which is a community facility; (3) loss of building in a conservation area; (4) replacement building does not fit in with its surroundings and will adversely impact on setting of other listed buildings in the area; and (5) increased traffic, noise and pollution.

Councillor Aslam Choudry (Dudden Hill Ward) - Objections raised to the planning application.

Councillor Alison Hopkins (Dollis Hill Ward) - Objections raised on the grounds of the loss of the community facility (The Queensbury public house and Busy Rascals) and the design plans are not in keeping with the area.

Navin Shah Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow - Objections raised for the following reasons:- (1) Loss of public house/community facility; (2) Loss of a building in a conservation area; (3) Design - to tall for conservation area; (4) Substandard accommodation - lack of affordable housing and family sized units; and (5) development too dense for this location.

Sarah Teather MP for Brent Central- Objections raised for the following reasons:- (1) Out of character with surrounding area - too tall; (2) Loss of public amenity - building will overshadow area; (3) Substandard accommodation - lack of affordable housing and family sized units; and (4) loss of community asset, The Queensbury Pub - replacement ground floor use does not compensate for the loss of the pub and its status as an Asset of Community Value should be a material planning consideration.

The Save The Queensbury Campaign submitted a letter of objection and a petition with 4,011 signatures and objections were also made by the North london branch of the Campaign for Real Ale, Mapesbury Residents' Assocation and North West Two Residents' Association.
 
The meeting is at 7pm this evening at Brent Civic Centre, Engineers Way, Wembley.  Follow events on Twitter @QueensburySOS

* SECTION 106 DETAILS

The application requires a Section 106 Agreement, in order to secure the following benefits:-

(i) Payment of the Council's legal and other professional costs on completion of the deed in (a) preparing and completing the agreement and (b) monitoring its performance.

(ii) Notification of material start 28 days prior to commencement;

(iii) Affordable Housing - 10 shared ownership units (3 x one-bed, 3 x two-bed and 4 x three-bed) + £138,346 offsite contribution + financial review mechanism on an open book basis;

(iv)Community Access Plan - to secure a minimum of 18 hours per week for community use, requirement to find alternative accommodation for Busy Rascals (existing community use) during the construction period; and provision for the ancillary community space to continue to operate in the event that the A4 use is not occupied;

(v) Sustainability - submission and compliance with the Council's Sustainability check-list ensuring a minimum of 48.4% score is achieved. Compliance with Code for Sustainable Homes Code Level 3 and carbon reduction of 40% improvement on 2010 Building Regulation (with compensation should it not be delivered);

(vi) Notify Brent 2 Work of forthcoming job and training opportunities associated with the development;

(vii) Join and adhere to the Considerate Contractors scheme;

(viii) Provision of a Travel Plan for the site;

(ix) Enter into a permit free arrangement to remove the rights of future residents and visitors being able to apply for a permit to park on neighbouring streets

CIL DETAILS

This application is liable to pay the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). The total amount is £1,382,214.75 of which £1,167,110.71 is Brent CIL and £215,104.04 is Mayoral CIL

Crowds turn out to save the Queensbury Pub

Young people make their view known

 Members of the Brent Planning Committee were left in no doubt how much local people value the Queensbury Pub whene they were greeted be a great crowd on their site visit this morning.

Local people expressed concerns at losing a pub which provides a social hub for the area which is safe for women to visit on their own and a base for the Busy Rascals pre-school group and the National Childbirth Trust. Tom Miller, a prospective Labour candidate in the local elections, said it was a valued meeting place for young professionals like himself to meet.

Alex Colas of Make Willesden Green

Alex Colas, the independent Make Willesden Green candidate, asked searching questions about the lack of affordable housing in the developer's plans. Only 18% of the proposed housing would be affordable against the recommended 50% and he demanded to know why the Council had not insisted on more. He was told that it was a matter of financial viability.  Around the corner Brent Labour were campaigning outside Sainsbury's on the housing crisis.

 

Other residents focused on the proposed 10 storey block and how it would not fit in with the townscape and completely contradicted the Conservation Area status of its surroundings. One resident said, 'If I wanted to paint my house red you wouldn't allow it but you allow this monstrosity to be put up!'

Concern was also expressed about the provision of interim accommodation for Busy Rascals with recent proposals dismissed as cosmetic.

The decision about the future of the Queensbury will be made at the Planning Committee meeting which takes place at 7pm at Brent Civic Centre (directions here) on March 12th . Again your presence is needed.

Anyone wanting to travel together to the Planning Committee meeting on 12th March should meet at Willesden Green station at 6.15pm.

Applications to speak on the issue at the Planning Committee should be made to:
Joe Kwateng, Democratic Services Officer  020 8937 1354020 8937 1354, Email: joe.kwateng@brent.gov.uk

Call

Send SMS

Add to Skype

You'll need Skype CreditFree via Skype

Last chance to ensure it's not 'Last Orders' for the Queensbury Pub

 
Message from Save the Queensbury campaign

Planning officers are recommending that The Queensbury is demolished. A decision will be made on Weds 12th March.

If you submitted an objection to the planning application to demolish the Queensbury you will receive a letter (or may have already received one) from Brent Council. Unfortunately the recommendation of planning officers is to approve the plans – but this is just a recommendation, the final decision will be made by the elected councillors who sit on the Planning Committee. The planners’ report with its recommendation can be found here. Its a long report, we’re still reading and digesting it but there is plenty in it to challenge.

There are 2 important dates:

Saturday 8 March: At approx 11.15am the Planning Committee will visit The Queensbury for a site visit. Your presence is also requested so that they see the strength of feeling in the community. This is not a demonstration (only one of us will be allowed to address the committee at the end of the visit) but home made signs and banners will be welcome. Be as creative as you like!

Weds 12 March: The decision will be made at the Planning Committee meeting which takes place at 7pm at Brent Civic Centre (directions here). Again your presence is needed.
Anyone wanting to travel together to the Planning Committee meeting on 12th March should meet at Willesden Green station at 6.15pm

Please support this last effort to Save the Queensbury. Too much has already been lost to developers in Willesden Green and this building and what goes on inside is a vital community asset.

4,000 petitioners demand that the Queensbury Pub be saved for the community

Busy Rascals Mums and toddlers wait to present the petition

Local residents, especially parents from the Busy Rascals group, came along in strength this week, to present a 4,000 plus petition to Cllr Michael Pavey to save the Queensbury Pub from developers. Pavey is Brent Executive member for children and families so may seem a strange choice, but that is because the Queensbury is no ordinary pub - it is now recognised as an 'asset of community value' not just as an exellent pub but as the base for Busy Rascals, a parent and toddler group and National Childbirth Trust meetings.

Pavey received the petition, not in his official role, but as a councillor committed to the interests of children. Independent Make Willesden Green Candidate, Alex Colas (on the left of Michael Pavey) was there to show his support, as was I for the Greens and there were several prospective Labour Party councillors present, but the real message was that this was a non-politically aligned community campaign that intends to fight on for the common good.

Willesden Green has lost too much in the last year or so and cannot afford to lose any more community assets. The Queensbury campaign deserves all our support.

Threatened Queensbury pub wins Community Asset status

Brent Council has issued the following statement. Well done to the Queensbury Campaigners and all, including some councillors, who supported them and the Council for listing it:

We are pleased to announce that the Queensbury Pub has been added to our list of assets of comuunity value.

Leader of Brent Council, Cllr Muhammed Butt, said:

I am very pleased that the Queensbury Pub has been listed as an asset of community value.

As well as providing a home away from home for Brent residents to meet their neighbours and gather as a community, pubs such as the Queensbury generate jobs for local people and inject hundreds of thousands of pounds into our economy every year.

Community assets are locally nominated public or privately owned buildings that have furthered the social wellbeing or social interests of the community and can continue to do so.
Assets stay on our list for a period of five years.

Queensbury Campaign invites your caption competition entries

Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt in Willesden Green

Brent Council is carrying out a Week of Action in each ward where ward councillors and officers seek to engage with local residents about local issues.

Willesden Green has been on the receiving end of this initiative where local people are particularly sore at losing the Willesden Bookshop, the open space outside Willesden Green Library (which has just been demolished); the threatened loss to developers of the popular community hub pub, the Queensbury; luxury flats being constructed on council land that has been given to developers being marketed in Singapore with the guarantee that there are no affordable homes or key worker homes on the site; and the failure of  Brent Council to mount a  campaign against the forced academisation of Gladstone Park Primary School.

The Week of Action does not of course have anything to do with all this and neither is it a reaction to the recent launch of the Make Willesden Green election platform LINK where independent candidate for the 2014 council election, Alex Colas, has high-lighted the 'democratic deficit' in the area.

The Queensbury Campaign invites your caption for the above photograph. Post your entries for the caption competition as comments below or tweet to .@QueensburySOS

Wit appreciated and there is a meal for two as a prize.

Make Willesden Green launch tomorrow at Queensbury Deli

Alex Colas will be launching his independent Make Willesden Green campaign for the 2014 local election in Brent tomorrow. He will be standing in the Willesden Green ward and his launch is at the Queensbury Deli, 68 Walm Lane, Willesden Green (right out of the station and on the left hand side.

The meeting is from 6pm until 7pm.



This is  Alex's platform:

 Make Willesden Green is an independent, grassroots platform that aims to:

•    Make Willesden Green more Democratic: local residents have been poorly represented by local Councillors and mainstream parties. The demolition of  Willesden Green Library Centre serves as a perfect example of how Brent Council put profits before people, ignoring widespread local opposition whilst promoting interests other than those of our neighbourhood. Local democracy requires better representation and more participation. If elected as an independent Councillor, I won’t be under any Party’s whip and will fight incessantly for participatory democracy in our ward and beyond. 
•  Make Willesden Green more Equal: the absence of affordable housing among the 92 luxury flats that will be replacing the Library Centre is a slap in the face to our community. Instead of addressing the chronic housing shortage for ordinary residents, the Council is inviting wealthy investors to speculate in our neighbourhood. In education too, the Council has been complicit in the privatisation of our state-funded schools. Public housing, education and free healthcare are key to achieving a more equal and democratic society. If elected as a Councillor, I will fight relentlessly for a public NHS, for quality state-funded and democratically accountable schools, and for properly designed affordable housing near people’s workplaces. 
• Make Willesden Green Safe: a busy neighbourhood is a safer neighbourhood. We need to protect and create public spaces and amenities where all people (especially children and the less mobile) can walk, rest, play or cycle safely and comfortably. The Library Centre redevelopment has swallowed up the only breathing space we had on the High Street, while other open spaces (like the one opposite Kingsley Court on St Paul’s Avenue) are left derelict. I believe traffic-calming measures and a public realm that is friendly to children, cyclists and pedestrians will make for a safer, more vibrant Willesden Green. 
•   Make Willesden Green Thrive: we need to support independent retailers and businesses in our neighbourhood. A pub like the Queensbury, which serves the community (as well as food and drink); or a shop like the sorely-missed Willesden Bookshop are much more than simple commercial outlets. They act as community hubs, facilitating the interaction between diverse residents, offering valuable services and ultimately encouraging local people to spend on our High Street. They also create sustainable and meaningful employment for many local people. As a Councillor for Willesden Green I would campaign for policies that promote the use of our High Street and champion neighbourhood-oriented enterprises.   

'Mums hold the trump card' on Queensbury development

Guest blog on the redevelopment of the Queensbury pub in Willesden Green by a local parent.

As well as being a concerned mum who took great confidence and sometimes solace from attending the National Childbirth Trust sessions,Tuesdays in particular, at the Qeensbury, I am also professionally, involved in Planning and Development so I have an idea of how the process works and what the developers are trying to do.



The exhibition run by Fairview is intended to consult locals on their revised proposals. They did this last year (9 months ago for their previous scheme) but the invitees to the exhibitions were a very short list and didn't include Busy Rascals or the NCT. Fairview recorded at that time only 22 comments from locals - I suspect that none of these 22 comments came from local parents who use the pub regularly for NCT/Busy Rascals.



If you can make it down to the exhibition it is most important that you leave a comment inside with the Fairview team so that this time they will have a more representative selection of comments to submit to Brent. These comments have to be formally presented to the council, they will not be ommitted or ignored. If you can't make it down they are opening some web pages on the 17th July where you can view the proposals online and I presume leave a comment (see below).The exhibition is online HERE



Just a few pointers so that you cannot be fooled: the new proposals as I understand it, include a space for community uses and a cafe on the ground floor. You may think this will be adequate for Busy Rascals but I think not...here's why:

1. The management team and staff at the Queensbury that are so welcoming and accommodating won't be there. This space will be leased to someone else who may not want children and babies running round their space. There is absolutely no way that Fairview can guarantee that the operators of this new space will take on the groups in the same way as the Queensbury people do.
   

2. There will be a period - if this happens - during demolition and rebuilding when there will be no venue at all for the groups. So how do Fairview guarantee a temporary venue for the groups? The Council are I think very concerned about the survival of the the children's groups into the future and Fairview will HAVE to address this point. How do they do this?
   

I would also like to say that the Queensbury is only under threat if there is no support for its retention. So far the team at the Save The Queensbury, along with support form local residents groups, CAMRA and hundreds of local individuals have delayed the application decision by at least 9 months, have forced Fairview to revise their plans (at great cost to Fairview) and raised a huge amount of profile for the pub in local press and within the local area. Please don't do anything because you think the closure of the pub is inevitable - I assure you it isn't!!



In many ways you mums hold the 'Trump Card' - Fairview cannot be seen to be closing down children's groups - bad for the company reputation, AND the council would be much, much less concerned about this application if the Queensbury was 'just a pub'! Please use your trump card!

The Queensbury: A myth buster

Guest blog from the Save The Queensbury Campaign

In this piece we look at some of the serious, outlandish and plainly bizarre myths that have sprung up since Fairview Homes bought the land and The Queensbury pub.
Myth
Fairview Homes own the land and the building and can demolish / build what they want.
Reality
Planning permission is required to change from “drinking establishment” to “residential” use, which is a matter for Brent Council’s planning committee and not Fairview’s decision.
Myth
The building cannot be demolished because it’s in a conservation area.
Reality
Permission is required but that does not mean it cannot be demolished.
Myth
The pub has a short lease and will close soon.
Reality
The pub has a 10 year lease, with 4 still to run. The pub has gone on record to clear this up here.
Myth
A pub on this site is not viable.
Reality
Fairview Homes were asked to substantiate these claims but have not. Actually the pub is thriving, as would be expected from any pub in such a prime location. The pub owners have gone on record to refute this myth here.
Myth
The building is old and will fall down soon.
Reality
The building is consistent with others in the conservation area and will stand for years if maintained properly. It is also used other than as a pub (an office is let to another tenant).
Myth
Fairview carried out a comprehensive consultation with the community and residents are supportive of their plans.
Reality
Fairview’s own Planning Statement claims community support. But Fairview (by their own admission) did not consult those who use the pub, either via Busy Rascals activity or pub goers. They did write to some local residents but in those letters, did not mention that The Queensbury would be demolished as part of their scheme. In fact they didn’t mention the pub at all. Fairview have so far refused to release the contents of the 22 comments received during their “consultation”.
Myth
The pub has debts and are looking to quit their lease with Fairview Homes to clear them.
Reality
The holding company of The Queensbury (London Gastropubs Ltd) has a historic debt listed at Companies House. To say they are looking for a way out via a deal with Fairview Homes is a big leap. The pub owners have gone on record to refute this here. (A holding company’s level of debt is not an indication of profit and loss).
Myth
The lease between the landowner (Fairview Homes) and the pub (The Queensbury) are not planning matters.
Reality
Details of the lease are their business and are not our concern. But retention of a pub on this site, be it the Queensbury or another pub, is most definitely a planning matter.
Myth
The Busy Rascals toddler group has been offered a new venue by Fairview Homes.
Reality
No alternative space has been offered to Busy Rascals and they are very happy where they are.
Myth
Brent needs more houses – 56 in this scheme would help.
Reality
Brent needs Affordable, Social and large houses for families on their waiting list. Only 4 of the 56 meet these criteria (and could easily be built at the side and rear of the existing building).
Myth
If the pub closes, the deli will close too.
Reality
The sustainability of the deli would be seriously threatened because 1) they share management costs and 2) produce from the Deli is sold in the pub during Busy Rascals activities six mornings a week.
Myth
Fairview are asking for a 10 storey building knowing that they’ll end up with 4 or 5 storeys instead.
Reality
Whether it’s 4, 5 or 10 the pub will still go!
Myth
Foxtons/Cameron Stiff have signed a deal to sell the flats, once built.
Reality
Without permission to change use, there are no flats to agree to sell!
Myth
A replacement pub is not possible in a new development.
Reality
Not true. There are plenty of pubs with residential above. Developers tend not to like pubs at the foot of their apartments because it limits their potential for profit.
Myth
If considered an Asset of Community Value the pub cannot be demolished.
Reality
The reality is that the legislation does not mean ACV status overrides everything else. Planning processes have to be followed but national guidance suggests that ACV status should be a consideration. We are expecting a decision on the building being an ACV in June 2013.
Myth
Save The Queensbury is run / funded / driven by the pub.
Reality
Pretty insulting and wholly untrue. The campaign has spent less than £150 to date, on a website and leaflets and has been funded by community donations. Planning advice, legal advice, petitioning and political lobbying has been carried out for free by members of the community. The pub owners and managers do not attend our meetings nor have any input into them. The only support from the pub has been a petition on the bar and use of a table to hold our meetings (those attending even pay for their own drinks!)

Queensbury developers 'trying every trick in the book'

 The Save The Queensbury group is demanding that developers Fairview Homes play fair in their attempt to gain planning permission to demolish the Queensbury pub.

The Campaign says:

Since October, when the original planning application was submitted, representatives acting on behalf of Fairview Homes have been active in fuelling rumours that the pub is unviable and that the owners are desperate to leave. We are pleased that the Queensbury owners have put on record their desire to continue running a business at 110 Walm Lane. In addition we would like to point out the following:

• a debt of a holding company is not the same as a business's profit and loss account. To pick a random figure from a set of accounts and state that it means the pub is unviable is highly disingenuous.

• The Queensbury has proved that it is a viable pub. This has been confirmed by the owners, by discussions with CAMRA, and by the residents who pack it out night after night. With its its location and its demographic, we suspect that this would be the case whoever was running the pub.

• the financial affairs of the pub owners are not a material planning consideration when deciding whether to grant permission for "change of use" from drinking establishment to residential premises.

We are now seeking a meeting with representatives of Fairview Homes at which we will ask them to refrain from spreading such rumours which, we believe, are an attempt to undermine support within the community for the campaign to save the Queensbury. In addition, at this meeting we will be requesting that Fairview produces alternative plans for the site at 110 Walm Lane which respects the community's demand that they preserve the existing pub and build around it, rather than demolish it

Ian Elliott of the Save The Queensbury group said:

The planning application to demolish the Queensbury was lodged months ago and it's very clear just how unacceptable the proposals are. The developers are trying every trick in the book to convince locals but there is absolute resistance to having a tower block built over a popular pub, one that sits in a conservation area.