Keep Kensal Green - Ladbroke Grove Sainsbury's development site contamination issue VIDEO

 

Controversial Barham Park planning application returns with new proposals

 

Existing houses

 Rejected proposal

New proposal

Proposals for the redevelopment of the modest ex-park keeper's 'cottages' in a corner of the much-loved Barham Park have returned after proposals made in 2021 were rejected, opposed by both the local residents' association and local councillors. LINK

The planning situation is complicated by conditions on the land  LINK and the role of the Barham Park Trustees chaired by Brent Council leader, Muhammed Butt.

 

 

The new proposal is for demolition of the existing 2 houses and replacement with four 3 bedroom, 5 person, 3 storey houses. 

 Although the Brent Council planning portal states that there are 11 comments on the planning application at present one is from Chiltern Railways and another from a resident which just records their objection to the proposal. I have asked Brent Council about uploading the other comments and also if restrictive covenants on the land have been taken into consideration.

Brent Council's Heritage Officer has submitted a comment:

• A Heritage Statement has been submitted with this application which describes the significance of theheritage asset(s) and to understand the potential impact of the proposal [NPPF 194].
• It should have included a Statement of Significance and the Greater London Historic Environment Record consulted.
• Notwithstanding this, I am satisfied with the overall design approach based on the half-timbering present in the existing locally listed buildings.
• I am also satisfied that the new build will not harm the significance or setting of the park given the location.
• The western part of the park was outside the original ‘Sudbury Lodge’ grounds and only became part of the park in the 20th century and is not the most significant part of the park. The proposed development, although more visible in relation to this area, will not harm the importance of the public open space nor impact upon the ability to experience the area of the original historic landscape park.
• Views from within the heart of the park show that the development will be mainly masked by trees and in any case, its overall scale and design would not be seen as out of keeping.
• In terms of the setting of the locally and listed buildings, they are set within a very secluded area where they are screened from view from the wider area of the park.
• The Council can be content that the proposal will preserve the character and setting of the park of local special architectural or historic interest.

The site is close to the Chiltern Railways line and they have submitted a comment:

Chiltern Railways have no objection to this proposed development. We would, however, point out that it is in the best interests of the developer, Brent Council and Chiltern Railways to ensure that the proposed three storey dwellinghouses are built to a standard that mitigates any impact the operation of railway services will have on the inhabitants.
 

Looking at the proposed development site, the 4 new houses would be located within a 20m distance of the Chiltern mainline. The line provides regular commuter railway services connecting the West Midlands, Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire with London Marylebone Station.
 

As per the Acoustic Assessment Report enclosed in the planning documentation, we would like to raise the fact that Chiltern trains run on the mainline from approximately 05:00 to 01:00 the next morning, so their will be significant noise and vibration impacts for the future residents of the site. There may also be freight trains running during the night-time, which create additional noise due to their slower speeds and heavier weight. As such we would like to stress that the proposed property be given suitable noise insulation to mitigate the impact of the railway line nearby.
 

We also operate Sudbury and Harrow Road Station which is located approximately 70m from the proposed development site. Whilst the station is used a limited number of times for example it recorded 15,352 entries and exits in 2021/2, many through trains travel through the site creating noise impacts for the proposed development. The station will also have automated service and safety announcements, including warning announcements when fast trains are passing. As such we agree with the contents of the acoustic assessment report, that suitable noise proofing and glazing be put in place in this development to mitigate these impacts on the future residents.

The Thames Water submission is more detailed than is often the case:

 EXTRACT

The proposed development is located within 15 metres of a strategic sewer. Thames Water requests the following condition to be added to any planning permission. "No piling shall take place until a PILING METHOD STATEMENT (detailing the depth and type of piling to be undertaken and the methodology by which such piling will be carried out, including measures to prevent and minimise the potential for damage to subsurface sewerage infrastructure, and the programme for the works) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with Thames Water. Any piling must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved piling method statement." Reason: The proposed works will be in close proximity to underground sewerage utility infrastructure. Piling has the potential to significantly impact / cause failure of local underground sewerage utility infrastructure.

 

We would expect the developer to demonstrate what measures will be undertaken to minimise groundwater discharges into the public sewer. Groundwater discharges typically result from construction site dewatering, deep excavations, basement infiltration, borehole installation, testing and site remediation. Any discharge made without a permit is deemed illegal and may result in prosecution under the provisions of the Water Industry Act 1991. Should the Local Planning Authority be minded to approve the planning application, Thames Water would like the following informative attached to the planning permission: "A Groundwater Risk Management Permit from Thames Water will be required for discharging groundwater into a public sewer. Any discharge made without a permit is deemed illegal and may result in prosecution under the provisions of the Water Industry Act 1991. We would expect the developer to demonstrate what measures he will undertake to minimise groundwater discharges into the public sewer.

As far as I can see no mature trees are proposed to be removed, although at present Tree Preservation Orders have not been made on them. 

Full documentation and comment opportunity HERE,

Plans for 1,500 homes on College of North West London's Dudden Hill site revealed - it's early days get your feedback in

 

The College Entrance

The Hill Group held an on-line consultation and an in-person consultation this week in the first stage of their engagement with the public over plans for the  extensive Dudden Hill campus.  I attended both.

The College will be demolished in phases with the eventual move of both the Dudden Hill and Wembley Park students to a new building in Wembley Park on the site of Network House.

The plans are for c1,500 new homes, work spaces, retail, nursery and community facilities. They are at an early stage and little detail is available. This gives residents a possible opportunity to influence the development.

Some buildings were demolished some time ago but there are also comparatively new buildings that will be demolished when redevelopment gets underway:

 

 

 

The plans include a central green open space as well as the retention of the green at the junction of Dudden Hill and Denzil Road.

A tree survey of the site is to be completed but a tour of the site yesterday demonstrated that there are some attractive specimens which I hope will be retained.

 

The size of the plot can be seen from this satellite image. Note the green corridor along the railway line and the area near Dudden Hill Lane and the green where buildings have already been demolished.

 

Among the issues I raised was the heights of the buildings. The highest blocks will be along the railway line and complement the tall buildings on the other side of the line on the former garden centre site. Lower blocks will front Denzil Road and  Selbie Avenue.

I was told that tenure for the homes had not yet been decided and there were ongoing discussions with Brent Council. I stressed the importance of the provision of genuinely affordable housing and the findings of the Brent Poverty Commission that social housing was the only housing type that was affordable for Brent residents on the housing list. It was cleared that despite the issues involved shared housing would be part of the mix as well as private sale and built to rent. We discussed the current conditions regarding cost inflation.

You will see from the boards below that there is quite a lot of retail planned within the development. When I raised doubts about that given how many such units remain unlet in Wembley Park I was told that this was a different sort of development and the retail would serve the residents rather than visitors. It was not envisaged that it would compete with other nearby retail outlets.

Community spaces are planned and the public are invited to share ideas for what they should be. A nursery is already planned. An earlier visitor had suggested a swimming pool. I was interested that there shddould be an accessible and affordable space in which the new residents and other locals could get together with perhaps a cafe along the lines of the Chalkhill Community Centre model.

Further questions were raised about 'child yield' the number of chidlren expected to live in the 1,500 homes and the capacity of local schools as well as the impact of increased commuter traffic on Dollis Hill Jubilee line station.

The on-line webinar had a small section on the separate but connected WembleyPark  campus redevelopment also to be be built by the Hill Group. This is separate from Quintain's development of the 'Fulton Quarter' which includes the curren retail park, McDonalds and the former TV studios, now a temporary theatre,

The Wembey site has the  Wealdstone Brook running by and there are plans to see if this can be naturalised. I of course spoke about the extreme climate change flooding dangers as covered elsewhere on Wembley Matters.  A very tall building will be the cornerstone of this development but there will be a separate consultation on this. 

Concerns that came up earlier when plans were first publicised was whether the new integrated College site in Wembley Park would be able to house the space hungry engineering and building faculties that exist in Dudden Hill and whether Willesden area students would be happy travelling to Wembley Park for their courses.

Have a look at the Exhibition Boards below kindly supplied by Hill Group and submit any questions or feedback to collegegreen@fourcommunications.com .

Click on bottom right corner for full page view.

First consultation on massive redevelopment of the Dudden Hill College of North West London site on zoom tonight and tomorrow at the college 3pm-7.30pm

 

 

The Hill Group will be holding public consultation events for the proposed College Green scheme on Thursday 20 October from 3pm to 7.30pm and Saturday 22 October from 11am to 2pm. These will take place at College of North West London Willesden Campus, Denzil Road, London NW10 2XD. They will also be holding a public consultation webinar event on Wednesday 19 October at 7pm. The link to register for the webinar is:
https://fourcommunications.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_tBBYKv8mS2KTKHQMIQs1jg 

 

 Wembley Matters has covered these plans since 2019 and the college's merger with Westminster College came rise to speculation over selling off of some property. Current plans are for CNWL to move to a new site in Wembley Park, with the Dudden Hill site and the current Wembley Park site redeveloped. The site is part of the Neasden Stations Growth Area Draft Masterplan LINK.

 

An old view of the college and College Green

 

The development is site 3 of the Neasden Growth Area Masterplan

 Artist's image (right) of the development from Masterplan

 From the Draft Masterplan - contrast with Hill Group's description for the consultation (top of page) including increase in homes from 1,100 to 1,500 and dropping of 'affordable' description.

 

Artist's impression of the development 

 

 

 

Newland Court residents' objection to Council plans for the estate

Residents of Newland Court wish to draw attention to proposals for their estate which are another example of in-fill. They have asked Wembley Matters to publish a copy of the letter they are sending to Brent Council. Publication does not indicate Wembley Matters support for every point made but it is important that residents' voices are heard.

NEWLAND COURT AND GRENDON GARDEN RESIDENTS V BRENT COUNCIL

LETTER OF OBJECTION TO PROPOSED BUILDING DEVELOPMENT

 

7th July 2022

I have been a resident at Newland Court for over 30 years and I am taking this opportunity to write to you on behalf of the majority of residents of Newland Court and Grendon Gardens regarding Brent Councils proposal to knock down the garages in Newland Court and build 7 town houses in replacement (4 x 3 bed, 3 x 2bed). I have seen the proposed plans and discussed them with both residents of Newland Court and Grendon Gardens at length. We have collectively concluded that the plans have lots of flaws in them and we will petition against it and seek legal advice.

 

I have been looking at the plan designs for the town houses that Brent Council want to build in Newland Court and these do not give measurements of the lengths and widths of the houses, only the height. However I can see that the plan gives the lengths and widths of the gardens of all the residents’ in Grendon Gardens but does not give the distance in length between the houses being built and the fencing that separates the houses and their gardens. The only measurements of the houses are in sq metres which only explain size in area therefore is quite misleading. 

 

 

The residents of Grendon Gardens trees in their gardens lean over and grow across the fencing into Newland Court by up to 3 metres in some areas so there is no way you can build houses without cutting half of one side of all the trees that are on the Newland Court side of the fencing and also as you build the foundation of the houses downwards, you will be destroying most of the roots of the trees. Basically, you would need to remove most of the trees to build houses on the proposed site. This will have a significant impact on the trees and the greenery that gives us privacy and creates a peaceful and scenic view to the area now. 

 

 

In our collective opinion there are lots of flaws in the new development planning and design. Not only would it not be practical if you had to destroy or remove the trees to be able to build houses in the areas specified as this is a conservation area but this would ignite uproar especially with Greenpeace campaigners and Environmentalists’ alike. It would create anxiety not only with the residents of both sites who will be impacted, but more specifically Newland Court residents who are worried about the effect it would have on their mental state of mind. 

 

 “-No trees to the properties of Grendon Gardens will be removed. An arboricultural

impact assessment will be submitted as part of the planning application-

 -The new houses will not directly overlook the properties on Newland Court and

Grendon Gardens, as the windows have been designed to face south, east

    and west to avoid any overlooking-“ 

 

Which is a deception as the 7 proposed houses’ windows will be facing south overlooking our flats, and will invade our space and privacy. The present paving and green space will be further reduced by building the houses outwards south and both new and old buildings will be overlooking each other quite closely, which will have a negative affect our everyday lives. So our privacy will be taken away from us yet I see in the plans that the new houses will have their own courtyard and bin area. Newland court will have an even smaller bin area than we have now and there are currently not enough bins at present to service the 60 flats here and yet your plans are to reduce them in further. 

 

 

This is going to cause a great deal of chaos as in the plans the bins will sit in a built area on the greenery further restricting the little green space we do have and possibly causing the perfect environment for infestation of rats which is already causing fear and great concerns within the tenants at Newland Court. The reduction in Bins and the site where you plan to locate them will be extremely unpleasant and unacceptable right below one blocks kitchen windows for us to smell all the rubbish constantly. You may not be aware that there is always an overflow of the bins towards the latter part of the week so rubbish will be exposed and probably scattered as there will be more rubbish and less space to service 60 flats.

 

 

At present we do not have enough bins to service the 60 residents’ at Newland Court so we cannot imagine the frustration and inconvenience reducing them will be like. Another issue which has been raised by most of the residents is that because there are no security gates and not enough street lighting in communal areas and cameras, fly tippers come and fill up our bins with building waste materials and other stuff as soon as our bins have been emptied which happens frequently and they to do this because there are no consequences for them to worry about. They come not only at night but in the day time too and I have been attacked and almost run over when I have tried to confront them.

 

We have had rat issues for many years and both Newland Court and residents of Grendon Gardens have been significantly impacted by the frequent problem because at present we always have over flowing bins. It is simply unreasonable and inconsiderate for our bins to be further reduced unless collections are done twice a week instead of once a week for both regular general waste bins and recycling bins. This is very unlikely to happen as they sometimes only come once a fortnight, hence the growing problem. Almost all the residents at Newland Court, especially those who have lived here for 10 years or longer have suggested you fit proper security gates at both ends of Newland Court to prevent our homes and vehicles being vandalised or burgled, our families and kids being harassed by drug dealers or mugged on our little estate.

 

Everybody usually using Forty Avenue /Forty Lane use Newland Court as a cut through to The Avenue or other neighbouring streets or as a meet up or stop off for eating and drinking or drug smoking or dealings right under our noses. This has intensified in the recent years and elder residents and children cannot walk freely because of the lack of security and bad lighting.  Between the last two blocks (42 to 48 and 55 to 60 Newland Court) it is easy to see the broken gate where the padlock goes missing every 4 to 6 weeks and a raised wall area where everybody sits and meet up to drink, eat, shout and either deal or take drugs. At night it is very dark in that spot and have asked Brent Council for lights to be put on the walls in that area numerous times.

 

There are currently limited and inadequate parking spaces for the residents of Newland Court and since Brent council deployed an inept parking firm (WING) to control the parking, at weekends it is free to park which is extremely inconvenient to residents as we can’t find parking spaces. On weekend event days, event goers can freely park so that residents on Newland Court have to keep parking on nearby roads and have to keep moving their cars around during the day until a space is available if at all. Also WING only sends a parking attendant on weekdays 2-3 times a month.

  

We currently have spaces for at least 30 cars which are not enough and there are at least 5 disabled residents that I know of however there are no disabled parking bays at present in Newland Court and in your new plans parking spaces seem to have reduced significantly to approximately 12 parking spaces. A total of 12 car spaces to service 60 flats and 7 new houses is very inconsiderate. This will cause more problems between residents, more double parking and possible congestion in the local streets as well. How can you possibly justify the few parking spaces as reasonable? 

 

What are your suggestions for the new residents in the proposed 7 new houses and where are the present residents of Newland Court going to park their cars? I guess that is why Brent Council stopped charging us for permits from 2022 to soften the blow of your new plans of building these new homes. You have also rented a Portacabin for the cleaner taking up 2 car parking spaces at a rental cost of £220 per week which has been parked there for about 2 years now at the cost of £22,880 so far. It runs on a diesel generator and when it is running, it emits diesel fumes which rises and comes through our windows for us to inhale. What happened to Brent Council going greener???

 

Having lived at Newland Court for more than half of my life I could write a book on how Brent Council have wasted money and resources on the unnecessary wrong things and not spent money on the right things which I have already highlighted earlier. Another example is when someone stole the inner plastic bin from the main food waste bin so that the refuse collectors refused to empty it. The food waste bin filled up with food waste till it overflowed and the stench that it caused which attracted rats as big as cats. After dozens of calls complaining about the issue it still took over 6 months to be replaced. Just simple things like that which takes Brent Council so long to resolve.

 

We have had to endure loads of disruption over the years with building works when the double glazing was installed. When the kitchen and bathrooms were renovated and recently when the roof was replaced and every single time the predicted time scale over ran for months. The scale of this proposal would be hugely disruptive to the residents in Newland Court, Corringham road and Grendon Gardens for at least the next 2-3 years. No matter what time scale you give because this project is massive and residents are worried about the detriment to their mental health and wellbeing which will be impacted from the stress of noise and the disruption to the area.

 

At present Brent Council have been building a tiny block of 8 flats in a tiny plot at the entrance into Newland Court on the corner of the Avenue and Corringham road by Mason Court. This has not disrupted the lives of the residents of Mason Court because it is to the side of Mason Court but has taken almost 2 years and is still not finished. It was supposed to have been finished by March 2022 and has been hugely disruptive with delivery trucks blocking the entrance into Newland Court several times and destroying the recently laid new paving. Brent Council have since erected new large wooden stumps to prevent trucks from parking on the pavement.

 

Brent Council says that there is a shortage of land to build on yet Brent Council have allowed private investors to buy up all the land around Wembley stadium and the surrounding areas to build unaffordable skyscrapers which are bought by foreign investors who rent them out to only those who can afford them. Why didn’t Brent Council build housing on some of the land at least knowing housing crisis have been here for years and years??? Brent Council moved their headquarters to the Civic Centre (at a cost of about £90 million but rumoured to be a lot more) from the former Brent Town Hall on Forty Avenue and sold the land which is now a private French School. That land could have been used to create 100’s of council homes.

 

There are numerous little plots of open spaced land scattered across Brent that could be used for homes. There are lots of derelict homes and then of course the former Unisys building on the corner of Harrow Road and the North Circular that has stood empty for 25 years in legal disputes. Over the years we have seen 2 petrol stations and a pub disappear from Forty Avenue only to be replaced by private residential flats and the Sattavis community centre on the corner of Forty Avenue and The Avenue which was promised to be a community centre for the locals but has turned out to be a hardly used private hire hall used only once a month or every couple of months. Why didn’t Brent Council buy up those plots when they were up for sale and build homes????

 

Our suggestion is that most of the unused garages be knocked down and sufficient parking spaces made for residents of Newland Court including a few disabled bays as there are at least 5 disabled residents living in Newland Court. A proper security gate at both entrances into Newland Court installed and the side entrances locked permanently to prevent not only vehicles but pedestrians cutting through the estate dumping their rubbish in our bins which includes residents of Corringham road who causally walk into Newland Court with their bin bags. This would also stop fly tippers filling our bins up in the middle of the night. Sufficient lighting and security cameras like other estates have. We need to be heard and we need you to take every angle into consideration. Thank you for your consideration.

 

Yours sincerely,

Marc Etukudo

 

On Behalf of Newland Court and Grendon Garden residents.

 

 

 

1.    This derelict house in Barn Hill with overgrown shrubs even leading to the front door. It has looked empty and not lived in for at least the last 2 years. This house could be used to house a family unit.

 

  

2.   The Sattavis community centre on the corner of Forty Avenue and The Avenue which was promised to be a community centre for the locals but has turned out to be a hardly used private hire hall used only once a month or every couple of months.

 

 

3.   Another derelict house on the corner of Wembley Park Drive and Wembley Hill Road that has also stood empty for over 15 years. Looking like an eyesore with another excuse of an ongoing legal battle.  

 

 

 

4.   The Unisys buildings that have lain derelict and unused for over 20 year in a costly legal battle between Brent Council and the Bridge Park/ Harlesden community. 

 

 

Isn’t it time that Brent Council and the Bridge Park/Harlesden community stopped wasting time and money on this long legal battle and come to an agreement or split the land equally or are we going to see another 20 years of to and fro of legal actions. A redevelopment would improve the environmental quality of the area and create an attractive gateway to the borough and Bridge Park. There are numerous other homes or sites in Brent that lie empty and could have homes built on.