Common threads emerging as Council tenants rebel over Brent's infill plans

 Newland Court, Wembley Park

Brent Council's project to use space on existing council estates to build new council homes is running into trouble from current tenants.  In a nutshell the council's commendable commitment to house people on the waiting list in council accommodation puts puts the backs up of existing residents  who feel patronised and treated with carelessness, if not disdain.  

Early on the building of 4 bungalows on existing car park and garage spaces encountered opposaition but is now nearing completion.  The saga of Kilburn Square has been frequently covered on Wembley Matters and more recently Rokesby Close, Watling Gardens, Clement Close and Newland Court have all provoked opposition.

There are several themes emerging across the borough. Claims include:

1. Consultation letters not delivered

2. Poor information, wrong information and lack of detail on the consultation letters

3. Consultation web portals that are difficult to access

4. Questions phrased  in  such a way as to provide the answers the council wnts

5. Insufficient time to respond to the consultation

6.  Loss of open space that was previously designed into estates by enlightened architects and planners that became essential during lockdown and loss of mature trees,

7. Estates picked out to cram in much needed affordable housing while the council encourages the building of unaffordable housing, often sold abroad, in other parts of the borough. 

8. The proposals are being made despite the council's lack of response to long-term issues on some of the estates.

Some residents feel that estates are being picked off one by one and suggest that those affected should get together to campaign on these themes.

 

This letter sent to Cllr Promise Knight and Barry Gardiner MP (Brent North) covers some of the issues and more:

OBJECTION LETTER AGAINST A NEW DEVELOPMENT AT INITIAL STAGE OF CONSULTATION IN NEWLAND COURT WEMBLEY HA9 9LZ 

 

I am a tenant living in Newland Court for the last 22 years. I OBJECT to this planned development going ahead at Newland Court in its entirety. I am aware that currently we are at the initial consultation stage of the planning. I am also aware that there will be a further consultation in September 2022. 

 

It is important that I express how this new development will affect residents. 

 

Whether we are tenants in Newland Court as well as adjacent Grendon Garden feel about these new development plans. Several residents feel insignificant at both locations because they did who not receive the Newsletter with the Feedback form when it was supposedly hand delivered to all. 

 

After making a call to Brent Council last week, I found out that the Newsletter was delivered to every household sometime around mid-June 2022. I can confirm I did not receive it. I found out about this after speaking with a neighbour in early July 2022 only to find out that we have to respond by the end of the day of the 12th July 2022. 

 

I was aware of some plans regarding improvements to the Newland Court area has been on the agenda for about by Brent Council for the past three years. However, I as well as other residents knew nothing about this plan until a few weeks ago. We have a very short time to consider the development plan with vague and misleading information provided on the Newsletter. The majority of residents do not see this plan as an improvement like me. It is important to take into account that all residents want a pleasant space. Brent Council could be prioritising the development needs for the existing residents. We will collectively resist any new development that would prejudice safety and the livelihood of our local community. 

 

I recently supported my neighbour Marc with getting a petition signed with residents who oppose this development plan and we asked residents in Newland Court if they got the Newsletter. We went door to door and spoke with many residents. We asked them if they were aware of the development plans and most people did not read it, or did not receive it. I think it is unreasonable to expect to get a realistic input or feedback from the majority of residents and for all of us to consider the information carefully. It is important for all of us that you should provide a more realistic plan. The full extent of the development including all the dimensions and how this will affect our day-to-day lives. We believe that this development will have a direct negative impact on all the community both short term and long term at Newland Court and Grendon Gardens. 

 

It would have been more appropriate if the development plan information had not been casually sent in a Newsletter; when there was a deadline for feedback of the 12th July 12.00 midnight 2022. It is only reasonable to expect this information to have been received via recorded delivery by each resident and leaseholder at Newland Court. Ideally, a reasonable amount of time such as 30 working days to be fair. This would give us more time to raise concerns individually. We should have been provided with links to easy to understand and access drawing; maybe both to scale and a 3D Plan to give clarity. 

 

At Newland Court, we had the impression that the garages were going to be knocked down to make more car parking spaces for the residents. For many years we have been aware of that, all the Garages have Asbestos on the roofs. It is more important to address the problem with Asbestos as well as the drainage in the grounds around and between the Garages. The drains haven’t been cleaned for many years and there are issues already with flooding. However, it makes perfect sense for Brent Council to demolish the existing Garages and make more parking spaces for the existing residents instead of building these 7 town houses planned. 

 

EXISTING MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLOOKED & IMPACT OF NEW DEVELOPMENT ON THE LOCAL RESIDENTS 

 

Brent Council has done nothing about tackling the ongoing problems with Fly tipping, lighting in communal areas, not enough refuse bins both general and recycling, no proper security gates at the entrance, no marked parking bays, no disabled parking bays; just to name a few safety concerns raised with Brent Council over at least the last 5 years. 

 

The gate for emergency access at one end, towards the end of by 55-60 Newland Court, which has been broken for at least 10 years, it has never been repaired or fixed. The padlock on the gate has been stolen or removed many times in the last few years; Whenever it has been reported to Brent Council, they still take up to 3 weeks to replace a lost or stolen padlock every time . This is supposed to be an emergency access but because it is adjacent to Forty Avenue, many drivers normally using the busy Forty Avenue have been using it as a short cut speeding down the road without a care in the world. This is dangerous especially as many families with young children live here and they play in the little greenspace by this road after school, weekends and in school holidays. This space is close to the road and we need Brent Council to consider the safety concerns we have as existing residents’; not ignore the safety concerns we have raised many times and then decide to erect 7 houses directly on top of us. 

 

This development plan will damage the character of our street. It will psychologically affect all the residents, local community as a whole and it is not in the public interest to proceed. In accordance with the new plan, Disabled and Older Person’s walking access will be restricted as well as Wheelchair user access to name just a few concerns. 

 

We have had significant problems with the Refuse bins are overfilled. There are no cameras to deter fly tipping and it is happening on a regular weekly basis. There are no consequences for fly-tippers and this has been going on for years. There are Refuse bins for general waste as well as Recycling but they are not enough for the 60 flats at Newland Court. At present, they are located between garages, some under the flats on the greenspace, and some in the designated area .The new plan shows only one designated space for the placing of the existing bins; which residents in that Block deem to be unacceptable. This simply is unrealistic and inconvenient, as the bins will not be able to fit in that small space .It looks like we will have lines of large bins right outside the blocks to ensure there are enough bins. We strongly believe this will be impractical, very unpleasant, and dangerous for children to have to play in the small green space left. Local Infrastructure, as well as the green space will be practically gone; especially if you erect a concrete jungle, looking play area for the children. This consideration in the development plan to entertain the new kids on the block; or do Brent Council think its compensation for taking the greenspace. The reason I bring this to your attention is because it t has never been a consideration in the past for us residents with kids in Newland Court. 

 

Brent Council has not considered the current issues with parking at all. There are no allocated spaces for the disabled residents or wheelchair users and not enough spaces for the current residents. The new plans show that there will be 11 parking spaces only .I am sure they will be pay and display too. How can this be a consideration for Brent council? when we currently have maybe 30 parking spaces and these are not enough for the residents now. Some Garages are in use for some residents to park their cars; this development plan will be detrimental to those needing access for emergency services, those residents who drive and park here as well as resident motorcyclists, where will they go? Where will delivery drivers park? Where and how will the Refuse Collection vehicles get through to the Refuse Bins when you are narrowing the current road plan? We have no dimensions to view in the space between the proposed development plan and the current layout. Many parking spaces will disappear along with Garages. Are there any safety considerations that Brent Council have identified for drivers? All drivers should be able to see any potential hazard in time to slow down or stop before reaching it. 

 

We have a reoccurring issue with parents picking up their children from the Ark Academy and they use our parking spaces, park their cars blocking the emergency exit. I have reported this to WING many times over the years and they do not do anything. This issue is between Mondays to Fridays. At weekends, residents cannot park at Newland Court because if it is not an event day parking is free. So it is FREE for anyone to park here and leave their car for whole day or all weekend .There are no consequences for them only the inconvenience for residents. What can we expect from the new plans that would not make this problem a lot worse? 

 

OUR VOICES MATTER 

 

Instead of addressing the problems, we currently have and listening to us, you are going ignore us and plan to try erect 7 houses to make it worse. How many of the 7 houses will be affordable homes? If you want to reach your target to build affordable homes then stop selling all the land to developers and use the land, you own only for affordable homes that would be fair. Brent Council have already sold enough land in Wembley to private developers. Wembley Park is a concrete jungle of new developments. Why it is that existing residents at Newland Court and Grendon Gardens have to pay the price for your greed? 

 

We have no idea about the dimensions of the planned new development. It will block light for us and for Grendon Gardens. We have come to know that the roots of the large trees will damage the new development because you will need to dig the foundation for the new development. You will have to cut the Trees down the middle at the back of Grendon Gardens because so many are leaning over to Newland Court. 

 

You destroyed the beautiful Tree on the Corner at Masons Court so why  are you providing us with misleading information .We know that you will be removing the Tree at the entrance of Newland Court on the Corner of Corringham Road. You will most likely destroy the smaller existing trees in our greenspace too. How does existing destroying existing Trees and then planting new trees feel justified to you. The new trees cannot replace the charisma of the existing trees by a long shot. 

 

The impact of the construction work alone will cause mayhem on the green area and the road. There is no indication of how long this construction will take and I know residents have a lot a great deal of concern about the disruption, noise, increased safety risk as well as the inconvenience of delivery vehicles and trades people increase. Disabled and Elder residents will not be able to walk freely or use most of the parking spaces as they will be taken up by the construction for a significant period of time most likely a few years.. This will be very disturbance to the residents and the local community; as access roads and footpaths will be restricted and narrowed during works. They will not wide enough for residents who use a wheelchair , mobility scooter or a pushchair .The lack of outdoor space will have an impact on wellbeing and mental health of the local residents. 

 

There will be a significant Loss of privacy for all the residents affected. This has not been a consideration in this new development plan by Brent Council. I strongly believe the planning of the new 7. houses proposed at Newland Court with the windows that will not be able to open will cause problems of natural lighting in the new houses and a deficit in our natural lighting because these houses will block the natural light. 

 

WE DO NOT HAVE ALL THE FACTS IN THE PLANS FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT I would like to draw your attention to the following

5.1 Privacy and amenity Development should ensure a good level of privacy inside buildings and within private outdoor space. Directly facing habitable room windows will normally require a minimum separation distance of 18m, except where the existing character of the area varies from this. A distance of 9m should be kept between gardens and habitable rooms or balconies. Reduced distances between new frontages may be acceptable subject to consideration of overlooking and privacy as well as high quality design and solutions, which can sometimes mitigate impacts and allow for efficient use of land. For sites within an existing street scene, the distance between front elevations should normally be determined by the character of road widths or setbacks from roads in the area. Windows may be designed to direct views in certain ways and to avoid overlooking in other directions.

https://legacy.brent.gov.uk/media/16411795/brent-design-guide-spd1-nov-2018.pdf

 

We all believe that it is only fair that Brent Council provide us with all the answers to the points myself and other residents at Newland Court and Grendon Gardens have raised. Also provide us with an accurate scale plan with transparency on the dimensions in reference to the above for us to consider further. 

 

Yours faithfully. 

 

TONYA NIAZI

 

Rokesby Place  https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/05/brent-councils-infill-housing-plans.html

 

Gauntlett Court  https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/07/letter-lack-of-information-on-brent.html

 

Clement Close  https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/07/clement-close-residents-set-out-reasons.html

 

Newland Court https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/07/newland-court-residents-objection-to.html

 

Watling Gardens https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/06/watling-gardens-rushed-and-incorrect.html

 

Kilburn Square https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/02/kilburn-square-residents-present-900.html

 

Potential Compulsory Purchase Orders  https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/07/cabinet-to-approve-last-resort.html

 

Brent's "secret" Council Housing Projects: https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/08/brents-secret-council-housing-projects.html

 

Ditto - the Council's Response: https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/09/brents-secret-housing-projects-councils.html

 

Gauntlett Court, and Airspace explained: https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/10/brents-secret-council-housing-projects.html

 

Brent Council’s “infill” housing plans – some clues from Rokesby Place

 Guest post by Philip Grant in a personal capacity

 

In August last year I wrote about Brent’s “secret” Council Housing projects, a list of proposals ‘not yet in the public domain’ for building extra homes on existing Council housing estates. A map presented to a Cabinet meeting in July 2021 included three possible new homes for “Rokesby”, which was then in Sudbury Ward.

 

I was recently asked to have a look at planning application 22/1400, which has now been submitted for building two homes at Rokesby Place. When taking a look through the Design & Access Statement for the application, this page caught my eye:

 

Fifteen sites in Brent where FBM have been appointed ‘to develop proposals’.

 

The Statement in support of application 22/1400 was prepared in March 2022 by Fraser Brown McKenna Architects (“FBM”). As it was written on behalf of Brent Council (client), and submitted to Brent Council (Local Planning Authority), the glowing details about Brent’s New Council Homes Programme seem rather unnecessary, but the final sentence reads: ‘FBM were appointed in April 2021 to develop proposals across 15 sites within the borough.’ The map shows the locations of those fifteen sites, and if there is a blue dot close to where you live, you may wish to ask your local councillors what “infill” schemes the Council is planning near you!

 

There is no doubt that Brent needs to build more Council homes for people on its waiting list and those who are homeless. At first sight, the plans for the two new houses (below) at Rokesby Place look attractive, as they are 4-bedroom / 7-person family homes, for which there is a real shortage of affordable housing in the borough.

 

  

Architect’s drawing of the proposed new houses at Rokesby Place, from planning application.

 

The Council does need to make use of any spare land it owns which is suitable for building homes on (like the vacant Copland School site – so why are all 250 homes there NOT going to be genuinely affordable Council homes?). But it also needs to consider the existing residents of the estate it is considering adding new homes to. That is why in my “secret” Council Housing projects article last year I made the point that early consultation with residents was needed.

 

Cllr. Southwood, then Lead Member for Housing, replied to the points I’d raised, saying:

 

‘I absolutely agree that Brent Council must work with residents to shape housing development projects, not just on the housing itself but also on the improvements that are made as part of each development we deliver.  We take this responsibility seriously - with workshops, public events, newsletters and questionnaires all used to discuss and get input on our proposals.’

 

However, this is what the Rokesby Place Residents’ Association have said about the consultation they are supposed to have received, in their objection comments on the current planning application:

 

‘Apart from a generic questionnaire which had only one relevant question that was listed last, the whole questionnaire was irrelevant to the proposal. The only information sent with the questionnaire was a publicity leaflet from Cllr Southwood which did not give any detailed information. There has been no consultation with Rokesby Place residents or the neighbouring community. All the information we have found out has been from perusal of the documents on the planning portal.’  

 

Another objection comment, from a leaseholder of one of the Rokesby Place flats, was also very critical of the application’s claims over consultation:

 

Extract from the “View Comments” section for application 22/1400 on Brent’s planning website.

 

Brent certainly needs to improve its consultation with existing residents of estates where it is proposing to add “infill” housing, in order to try to reach agreement on proposals which are acceptable to them, as well as providing at least some of the additional homes which are needed. If they had done that at Rokesby Place, they might have avoided putting forward plans which have produced more than a dozen objections, some of them very detailed.

 

The proposed homes would be built on an existing car park, used by many Rokesby Place residents. One of the main concerns is the effect of the proposals on the availability of parking, with a net loss of nine parking spaces on the estate. The assumption in the application that because the new homes will be “car free” (in that no parking spaces will be provided for them), no one in either of the seven-person households will own a car or van, also seems naïve.

 

The Design & Access Statement admits that the level of "parking stress" would increase from 65% to 107%. Residents have stated that the problems caused by the loss of parking spaces would be worse than that. The consultee comments by Brent's Transportation Officer (included in the “View Documents” section) make clear that insufficient data has been supplied by the applicant to justify the Statement's claim that the loss of parking spaces would be acceptable.

 

Aerial view of Rokesby Place, with sites A&B marked, from the planning application.

 

In order to restrict the level of “parking stress” to what the application claims is an “acceptable” 107%, the existing car park at A on the photo above, where the two houses would be built, would be replaced by a new five-space car park at B. As you can see, it would be built on what is currently an open green. That has led the Residents’ Association to point out, in its objection comments, that this would go against Brent’s policy over the amount of external amenity space needed to satisfy (existing) residents’ needs:

 

‘By taking away the only green space which is relatively level, quiet, private and safe will leave no usable place sit out and enjoy the good weather. Residents have always used this area to have picnics, barbecues and ladies get togethers. During the lockdowns this space was a lifesaver for all residents who used this area.’

 

The loss of parking spaces and the loss of green open spaces and trees (the loss of three mature trees, and severe cutting back of others, is another point raised by objectors) are likely to be key issues in many of the proposed Brent Council “infill” schemes. It will be very interesting to see how these matters are dealt with in the Report by Planning Officers on the Rokesby Place application. 

 

And what will the response of Planning Committee be, if it comes before them for a decision (as it will have to, in view of the number of objections, unless the Council withdraws its application in the face of strong opposition)? 

 

I understand that one of the objectors is a Labour councillor for Wembley Central Ward (in which Rokesby Place now sits, following the boundary changes ahead of the 5 May local elections). Will other Labour councillors have the courage to stand up for their residents, in the face of Brent’s New Council Homes “infill” proposals? And if so, will it make any difference?

 

Philip Grant