Showing posts with label Shama Tatler. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Shama Tatler. Show all posts

Friday 29 March 2024

Brent’s Council Housing – A Tale of Two Sites. The reality behind Brent Council press releases

 Guest post by Philip Grant in a personal capacity

From the Brent Council website home page, 18 March 2024.

 

Two news items about Council housing on Brent’s website caught my eye this month. Before I look at these schemes individually, let’s have a recap about their targets for affordable homes.

 

When Brent’s New Council Homes Programme was launched five years ago, the aim was for 5,000 affordable homes to be built in the borough between April 2019 and March 2024 inclusive. As part of that aim, the Council set itself ‘a strategic target of delivering 1,000 new council homes at genuinely affordable rent by 31 March 2024.’

 

Promise’s “promise”, from the Spring 2024 edition of “Your Brent” magazine.

 

Having failed to meet those targets by next Sunday, the Council is doing its best to ignore that fact, and to publicise their new target instead. The ‘5,000 affordable homes in total within Brent’ is given an extra four years, and although an extra 700 new Council homes is added to the target to be achieved by 2028, rather than March 2024, they are no longer promised to be at genuinely affordable rent.

 

The Brent news release banner, from the Council’s website on 15 March 2024.

 

The first housing scheme that a Brent news release celebrated this month was the start of construction on the Neville and Winterleys site in South Kilburn. Among the white hard hat “crowd” in this Council publicity photograph are “the usual suspects” from Brent’s Cabinet, including the Council Leader with a spade (as in the Watling Gardens “groundbreaking” photo last October). But who are the others in this “flash mob”? Are they local residents waiting to be rehoused, celebrating that something is actually happening, or workers from a nearby site operated by the same contractor? Please add a comment below if you know the answer.

 

Brent applied for planning permission for this development in December 2018 (application 18/4920), and these were the details of the homes, and split between Social Rented and Private Sale, approved by Brent’s Planning Committee on 18 February 2020 (more than four years ago!):

 

Extract from the Final Officer Report to the 18 February 2020 Planning Committee meeting.

 

After minor changes to the design, the number of flats to be built here has been increased from 219 to 225, but the number of Council homes has gone down from 112 to 95. Despite this, Brent’s Lead Member for Regeneration can still put a positive “spin” on the numbers:

 

Extract from Brent’s 15 March 2024 news release.

 

The “almost half” is actually 42.2% of the new homes, and these will all be for existing Council tenants in South Kilburn, being decanted from other blocks that will be demolished as part of the troubled South Kilburn Regeneration Project. None of the ‘more than 200 much-needed homes’ will go to provide housing at genuinely affordable rents for local families on the Council’s waiting list, even though the 95 for existing tenants will be counted as ‘new Council homes’. 

 

Despite Brent celebrating the start of construction now, those homes may not be built in time for the 2028 target, as the news release says: ‘The scheme will be delivered by Countryside Partnerships (part of Vistry Group) and is due for completion by 2029.’ [I may add a comment below later about Vistry Group.]

 

Another Brent news release banner, again picturing some of “the usual suspects”, on 18 March 2024.

 

The second housing scheme that Brent issued a news release for this month is the former Euro House site in Wembley Park, now known as Fulton and Fifth. The development initially received planning consent in December 2020 for a total of 493 homes, which was increased to 759 (of which 218 would be “affordable”) under a second application to Planning Committee in November 2021 (with one Labour member, since removed from the committee, voting against approval). From the news release, it seems that the final figure is 876 homes, with 294 of them as new “affordable” Council homes.

 

It's amazing how many homes you can squeeze onto a site of 1.29 hectares, which used to be a two-storey warehouse. And the five towers have gone up quickly, as you can see on the left in this photograph, which I took earlier this month, while looking at what had happened to parts of the British Empire Exhibition grounds of 100 years ago (when there was a coal mine here!):

 

The Fulton and Fifth site, with its tower cranes, seen across Engineers Way from Canada Gardens.

 

It is very good news that all 294 ‘will go to council tenants on the council’s housing waiting list.’ But, as they say, ‘the devil is in the detail’, and these are homes that the Council is buying, on long leases, from a private developer, not Council homes that Brent is building itself.

 

In the 2021 proposals, there would only have been 80 homes for London Affordable Rent (“LAR”), with 62 “affordable” at no more than Local Housing Allowance (“LHA”) rent level and 76 for Shared Ownership. I explained LHA and Shared Ownership in detail, in a November 2022 guest post

 

The press release says that now ‘118 will be at London Living Rent, and 176 homes will be rented at London Affordable Rent.’ 176 homes at the “genuinely affordable” LAR rent level will be very welcome (although that rent level does not include a cap on the level of service charges). But 176 is slightly less than the 181 which will be sold privately, or as Shared Ownership, on Brent Council’s own development at Cecil Avenue in Wembley, with only 56 of the 237 being built at that site for rent to Council tenants at LAR level!

 

You may not be familiar with London Living Rent (“LLR”), so I will take this opportunity to explain what it means. It was introduced by the Mayor of London, and the GLA website says: ‘London Living Rent is a type of intermediate affordable housing for middle-income Londoners who want to build up savings to buy a home. … it is designed to help people transition from renting to shared ownership.’

 

To qualify for an LLR home, you need to live or work in London, be in housing need, but not be able to afford to buy a home (even a Shared Ownership one!) and have a household income of no more than £60k a year. Your tenancy, if you get an LLR home, will be for a minimum of three years, and up to ten years. During that time, you will be expected to save, so that you can buy a share of your home through Shared Ownership.

 

London Living Rent levels from 1 January 2024 for each Brent Council Ward. (From a GLA spreadsheet)

 

LLR rent levels are based on one third of average local household incomes, on a Ward-by-Ward basis across the capital, and are recalculated each year. Currently, the monthly LLR rent level for a 1-bedroom flat in Wembley Park would be £1080, rising to £1320 for a 3-bedroom home. For 2024, there is a cap of £1400 a month for LLR rents.

 

Extract from Brent’s 18 March 2024 news release.

 

What the LLR rent levels for Wembley Park will be in 2026, if the promised homes are ready in ‘just two years from now’, will depend on figures for household incomes in that area. Given the large number of new Quintain Living (and other private) apartments being let, and the rents that people have to pay for them, “local household incomes” are likely to rise, with the LLR rents rising as well.

 

Quintain Living advert, photographed on a Jubilee Line train in March 2024.

 

As an example of what is currently charged by Quintain Living, the advert above says that you can rent a studio apartment from £1703 a month. That’s more than £20,400 a year for a home only big enough for one or two people, so not affordable for most local people in housing need. (You have to look very closely for the “small print” on ‘one month rent free’, as it’s printed in white on a light background – it only applies to selected unfurnished apartments with a minimum 12-month tenancy.)

 

One final point on Brent’s affordable housing at the Regal London Fulton Road development. 294 homes is only 33.5% of the total being built there. Brent’s own planning policies say that at least 70% of the affordable housing provided on large developments should be “genuinely affordable”, but the Council’s 176 LAR homes are just under 60%, while the 118 “intermediate” LLR homes account for just over 40%. Not even following their own rules!

 

I hope you have found my latest look at Brent’s Council housing of interest. I’m sure it is more informative than Brent Council’s press releases!

 


Philip Grant.

 

 

EDITOR'S FOOTNOTE

 

Meanwhile MYLONDON reports on private renting:

 

The average cost of renting privately in one North West London borough has exploded over the past 12 months. Since February last year, tenants in Brent have seen their housing costs increase sharper than anywhere else in the country, leaving some residents feeling like life has become about nothing more than simply working to afford the extortionate prices.

 

The cost of renting the average private home in Brent is 20 per cent more expensive than it was in February 2023, according to data from the government’s Housing Market Indices Team. This increase is five per cent more than the next worst affected London borough, and more than double the national average.

 

FURTHER INFORMATION FROM PHILIP GRANT

 FULTON AND FIFTH SITE:

In case anyone is wondering how the 759 home scheme approved by Brent's Planning Committee was magically increased to an 876 home development, here is the answer.

Among the many further planning applications arising from conditions set out in the November 2021 planning consent was application 22/3123, seeking variations of (among others) 'conditions 2 (approved drawings/documents), 3 (residential units)'.

One of the variations was to add an additional floor within the buildings, making the tallest 24 storeys rather than the 23 approved, but to do so without raising the consented height of the building.

How do you do that? By reducing the ceiling height of the flats on each floor! The ceiling height would now be 2.5 metres, which is still acceptable for housing standards. One of the two blocks where this reduction would be made was block E, with 176 homes - and it is no coincidence that 176 is the number of homes for LAR which Brent Council tenants will be offered!

This planning application did not go to Brent's Planning Committee. It was approved by a Delegated Team Manager, and signed off by Brent's Head of Planning on 9 June 2023.

This was despite the Report on the application saying: 'It is acknowledged that the proposal would continue to be in excess of the indicative site capacity of the whole site allocation,' - squeezing them in, as my article points out!

The Report also says: 'Of the 876 units, 122 of these would be 3-bed (13.9%). Under the extant consent, 79 out of the 759 units were approved to be 3-bed (10.4%). While there is an uplift of 3-bed units, these still fall short of the requirement for 1 in 4 dwellings within a development to be 3 bedrooms or more, sought by the Local Plan Policy BH6.' So, a big shortfall in the family-sized homes which Brent desperately needs.

The 3-bed flats which Brent Council will receive are shown to be 56 for LAR in block E
and 36 for LLR in block D. (That's 56 family-sized homes for "genuinely affordable" rent in a development of 876 homes!).

Tuesday 9 January 2024

Homelessness applications in Brent could reach 8,200 this year - the highest ever as South Kilburn regeneration faces viability risk

The Quarter 3 Financial Report LINK going to Brent Cabinet on Monday repeats the Quarter 2 warning that the seriousness of the Council's financial position cannot be understated.  The £13m overspend if sustained will require a transfer from unallocated reserves. Any overspending not dealt with will transfer to 2024-25 requiring more cuts in spending as the ability to use reserves will be reduced.

The scale of the financial challenge for 2023-24 and 24-25 us sucj that in addition to work currently underway to implement savings in 2023-24 and toidentify new savings proposals for 2024-25 and 2025-26, the Council will need to implement further measures to control expnditure in order to address the underlying issues that the Council's net expenditure is significantyl greater that available sources of in-year funding.

The main financial pressure continues to be on housing where there is an overspend of £13.2m:

The forecast overspend of £13.2m is made up of the following pressures:

  • £4.2m overspend associated with the cost of providing temporary accommodation

  • £8.9m attributable to a loss of housing benefit subsidy from the Department of Work and Pensions as a result of the type of accommodation being used to house those that are homeless

  • £0.6m is a result of additional Council Tax liability on empty properties that are being considered for temporary accommodation use

  • (£0.4m) is a saving attributable to spending controls, mainly staffing related

 Homeless presentations at the Civic Centre  have increased by 38% compared to this time last year, households in temporary accommodation in Brent are up by 13% and people in Bed and Breakast hotels has inreased to 639 (377 families and 262 single people):

This is an increase of 16% when compared to the previous quarter. If demand continues at the same rate, the service will received a total of 8,200 applications this financial year, an average of 158 applications every week, which is the highest it has ever seen.

Adding to the housing financial pressure is housing benefit subsidy loss for payments made. Where a family occupies more than one room in a hotel and the rooms are not connected only one room will be eligible for subsidy.  The loss of subsidy is forecast to rise to £8.9m in 2023-24 (£3.7m in 2022-23). 

As previously reported the Council is consulting on ending the South Kilburn Promise (Landlord Offer) for new temporary accommodation households and the use of void properties on the South Kilburn Estate for temporary accommodation. At present the Council incurs a £0.6m charge on South Kilburn void properties.

The South Kilburn regeneration itself is threatened by a viability crisis:

Viability is a key challenge for the remaining developments within the South Kilburn programme. The Single Delivery Partner approach is being explored to help provide certainty for the programme and provide economies of scale for the delivery partner.

South Kilburn is due to deliver 2,400 homes of which 50% are supposed to be 'affordable'. The reports says the programme is about halfway through with 10 sites delivered or on site and 7 sites remaining to be delivered.

Given what has transpired in the Wembley Housing Zone Cecil Avenue development (see Philip Grant's article) we might expect some tenure changes increasing the proportion of private housing. 

If that becomes the case there will be a big question mark over whether South Kilburn council tenants promised a place in the new housing when their blocks were demolished, or are due to be demolished, will actually get one.

Elsewhere the Council has announced a decision  for the Corporate Director for Comminities and Regeneration to make an offer to Londonnewcastle to acquire the Falcon pub site, previously seen as a key site forming a gateway to South Kilburn.  Its acquisition along with the car park opposite led to the HS2 vent being controversially located within the estate next to a primary school.

There is just one sentence on the Bridge Park Regeneration which was featured recently on Wembley Matters LINK:

The Bridge Park Regeneration project is still in the early stages of developing options for delivery and is forecasting £0.8m of slippage.

That sounds rather like 'back to the drawing board'.

Other 'slippages' where expenditure goes into next financial year or beyond are in the Public Realm and total £7.7m:

The Public Realm is forecasting a variance for the overall programme of £7.7m, the majority of this is being slipped into future years (£7.5m). There are circa 135 Public Realm live Capital projects. Some of the bigger re- profiling includes Highways, where there is a £2.6m budget slippage. The key projects in Highways are Wembley High Street [sic] and Church End, which have experienced delays due to ongoing contractor disputes with FM Conway (£1.5m), the hostile vehicle mitigation has slipped by (£0.4m) as the works are reactive, and Highway Structures (£0.4m) where a new consultant is being appointed to take the programme forward. The parks programme is forecasting slippage of £1.6m which has been pushed out partly due to the pitch improvement project (£0.4m). Delivery is dependent on Thames Water's agreement to increase the drainage system and discussions are ongoing. Healthy Streets has had some scheme delays resulting in a £1.1m slippage, including (£0.5m) slippage on North End Road. Landscaping is forecasting a slippage of £0.7m, primarily due to procurement challenges. The new waste bin trial has been scheduled for 2024/25 resulting in £1.5m being reprofiled into FY24/25. 

The dispute with FM Conway deserves further investigation.

There is more slippage in the  Housing General Fund:

At Q3, the Housing General Fund is forecast to spend £30.6m below the current year budget. This position is due to slippage, i.e. expenditure originally targeted this financial year now moved to future periods. This quarter is reporting significant slippage at: Church End, £8.0; Clock Cottages, £1.7m; Edgware Road, £6.8m and Fulton Road, £14.1m. The underlying theme for this level of slippage is the viability challenges due to changing regulatory requirements (additional staircases and fire safety measures) and a generally worsening economic environment

In her foreword to the Financial Report Cllr Shama Tatler writes:

It is important to recognise that over a decade of austerity on Local Government has reduced the ability of councils to withstand issues like the increased pressures on Temporary Accommodation. The impact of the disastrous mini-budget last year on interest rates and inflation has significantly impacted the supply of housing and on delivering council services. Brent will continue to take decisions to ensure a sustainable budget can be delivered while safeguarding key services.

It is also worth noting that Brent will receive the second lowest Local Government Finance Settlement in London for 2024/25. Despite the significant challenges Brent faces, the Government has not allocated any support for homelessness pressures. Pressures on Local Government finances are going to continue to be difficult as a result of the decisions of this Government. 

 

The full report lists all the measurea that have been or are being taken to tackle the financial shortfall and includes changes in services, attempts to reduce service costs via procurement measures, restructures and cuts in staffing. LINK


Thursday 4 January 2024

What is happening with the Bridge Park/Unisys redevelopment? Apparently, nothing.

 

Unisys House, Stonebridge

The death of Bridge Park fighter Leonard Johnson in November 2023 made me wonder where we were with redevelopment of the Bridge Park Leisure Centre and Unisys House. Unisys has been empty for decades and Brent Council made a deal with General Mediterranean Holdings to sell off its land as part of a scheme to redevelop the leisure centre and build housing and a hotel.

The community in Stonebridge waged a court battle over ownership of the Bridge Park Centre which had been set up by local black activists. The council won and seemed ready to go ahead. 

Questions were asked by Dan Filson, then chair of the Scrutiny Committee, about the wisom of dealing with GMH in the light of concerns over its owner and the companies Luxembourg registration. There was a concern about the effectivess of due diligence carried out by the Council and even Cllr Mike Pavey, then Deputy Leader of the Council,  had his doubts.

In an email in response to Philip Grant he said:

'I take your point on ethics and I for one am not comfortable dealing with companies registered in tax havens. Realistically though this is a much wider issue than this development. When you have companies like Starbucks, Amazon and Next routinely avoiding tax, it becomes difficult to hold this against any single company. We need national Government to lead a crackdown on legal tax avoidance and to insist on clearer transparency requirements. I don’t like dealing with companies registered in tax havens, but considering the size of the problem, I think the solution must come from the Government.’

 In September 2020 Ian Lunt, then the newly appointed Director of Regneration, signed off a Deed of Variation with Stonebridge Real Estate Development. LINK The Decision Form states that Shama Tatler. Cabinet Member for  Property, Planning and Regeneration was consulted

 Agreement to exchange a Deed of Variation to the Bridge Park Conditional Land Sale Agreement with “Stonebridge Real Estate Development” a UK-registered subsidiary company that has General Mediterranean Holdings SA as the parent company and Harborough InvestInc as the second guarantor.

The Decision Form states that Shama Tatler, Cabinet Member for  Property, Planning and Regeneration was consulted. However no details of the variation were released to the public:


Stonebridge Real Estate Development 2021 accounts have an interesting reference to its parent company GMH and its second guarantor Harborough Invest Inc LINK:

So it appears the Brent Council is in partnership with a subsidiary company that has doubts over its relationship with its guarantors: 'there can be no certainty that the support will continue to be available for the forseeable future.

This is GMH's account of the development and the agreement with Brent Council (undated) on its website LINK under the heading 'Land Development - UK':

Bridge Park Development

Known as Bridge Park, the 6.7 acre site area is located in easy walking distance from Stonebridge Park Station, in North West London. The development will have a Gross Development Value of circa £500 Million and will include more than 800 residential units, retail and a 198 room hotel, allied to a new leisure and community complex.

The development’s title ownership is divided between two parties, GMH Group, with the other being the London Borough of Brent (‘Council’). The GMH owned land includes a pair of imposing curvilinear office towers, one of which is ideally suited to conversion into a hotel and the other to residential, perhaps multi-family.

The Council ownership has an existing leisure and community centre and other commercial office buildings that are proposed to be demolished and replaced by a state of the art sports hall, swimming pool and other new community facilities, all of which are to be delivered by the Council at its expense.

GMH has exchanged contracts with the Council, subject to planning, to purchase the majority of the Council Land and develop both its ownership and the balance of the Bridge Park site into a new urban location with a range of much needed housing (including affordable), retail, a prominent hotel, as well a leisure and community facilities complex.

This important regeneration will bring jobs, homes and new community facilities, fully exploiting the great public transport links and general accessibility and prominence of the site.

The development seems a long way away now in 2024.

I asked Brent Council where the development was at present and they responded:

We don't any current planning applications. If that changes there will of course be public consultation.

Also there aren't any reports planned for Cabinet on the Forward Plan.

 




Wednesday 8 November 2023

Cllr Tatler on the 'perfect storm' facing Brent Council finances

 Cllr Tatler made no bones about it at Brent Scrutiny last night: Brent Council is facing a 'perfect storm' regarding its finances:

 

 

As already reported by Wembley Matters the combination of increased homelessness (150 families a week seeking help from Brent Council), inflation, rising interest rates, rising private sector rents and reduced private sector rental properties as a result of landlords exiting the market; combined has led to a £13m overspend by the Council.

The Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee delved deeper into the repercussions and possible mitigations last night.  

One focus was the 600 plus empty properties that could easily house the 500 families and single people (858 people in all) currently in expensive bed and breakfast accommodation.  The challenge was how to contact the owners so that the Council could lease the property.  Some councillors there were more than 600 empty properties and asked how the  Council collected the figures. A councillor asked if this coudl be checked against the most recent census. In response Cllr Tatler said that the Council could reactivate the campaign to ask residents to report empty properties.

Contact Empty Property Team

Opening hours: Monday to Friday from 9am to 5pm

Monday 11 September 2023

Cllr Tatler takes over as Deputy Leader of Brent Coucil while Cllr Mili Patel is on maternity leave

 

Cllr Tatler
 
 
Kingsbury councillor Shama Tatler has become Deputy Leader of Brent Council while Cllr Mili Patel is on maternity leave. Cllr Patel was congratulated on the birth of her baby at the Brent Cabinet meeting this morning. Cllr Tatler is now Deputy Leader, Cabinet Member for Finance, Resources & Reform and Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Planning & Growth.
 
At today's meeting Leader Cllr Muhammed Butt extolled the benefits of regeneration for Brent residents when the Cabinet approved Strategic CIL projects in Alperton, South Kilburn and Harlesden.

Saturday 22 July 2023

Brent’s Wembley Housing Zone – 'Some' Good News! (But what is Brent Council's policy now on unaffordable Shared Ownership?)

Guest Post in a personal capacity by Philip Grant 

 

Architect’s view of Brent’s 250 home Cecil Avenue development.

 

On 14 March this year, Martin’s post “Wembley Housing Zone: Never mind the gloss – what are the details?” shared with us a Brent Council press release, about its deal with Wates to finally build the 250 homes at Cecil Avenue, which it had received full planning consent for in February 2021. The blog included “links” to several of the guest posts I’d written since August 2021, urging the Council to include more genuinely affordable homes for rent in the project, especially homes at Social Rent level which the 2020 Brent Poverty Commission said should be the priority.

 


My “parody” Brent Council Homes publicity photograph (from November 2021).

 

Since 2021, Brent’s plans had been to allow its “developer partner” to sell 152 of the homes on the former Copland School site privately, with only 37 of the 250 for London Affordable Rent, and the other 61 as “intermediate” Council housing (either shared ownership or Intermediate Rent level). 

 

You would have thought that when they arranged additional funding from the GLA, to allow for more affordable homes to be delivered as part of this Wembley Housing Zone project, Brent would have celebrated with another press release, telling us about this “good news” story. Instead, I only discovered it when I spotted an item on the Forward Plan page of the Council’s website, as I was checking whether another item had been included there. It was about a Key Decision made by the Corporate Director, Communities and Regeneration, in April 2023:-

 



There was a “Officer Key Decision Report” on the website, but (true to form) the appendices to it were both “exempt”, so that the press and public were not allowed to find out ‘information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)’. The Report did, however, give an outline of what the amended agreement with the GLA involved:-

 


 

My various attempts, since August 2021, to get Brent to include more genuinely affordable homes at Cecil Avenue, using additional GLA funding where possible, have been ignored, dodged or blocked. I was told that anything other than what the Council already planned would be impossible, because the scheme would not be viable. Now they had an extra c.£10.5m, how many extra affordable homes would they be able to provide? 

 

I had to submit a Freedom of Information Act request to find out, but “Wembley Matters” can (at last) share the Good News!

·      Instead of only 37 of the Cecil Avenue homes for London Affordable Rent, there will now be 59. 35 of these will be family-sized (3 or 4-bed) homes.

·      36 of the Cecil Avenue Council homes will be for Shared Ownership (of which 9 will be family-sized).

·      3 of the Cecil Avenue Council homes will be “Other” affordable homes. (Does that mean at Intermediate Rent?)

·      As before, 152 of the homes being built by Brent Council at Cecil Avenue will be for private sale by Wates (including 20 family-sized).

My title does say ‘Some Good News’. The other part of the Wembley Housing Zone project, across the road at Ujima House, was meant to have ALL of its 54 flats for London Affordable Rent to Council tenants. The revised figures for this block are now:

·      32 for London Affordable Rent (including all 8 family-sized flats).

·      22 for Shared Ownership.

So, the original proposed number of Wembley Housing Zone London Affordable Rent homes was 91 (37 + 54), and the revised number is 91 (59 + 32). Perhaps that is why Brent did not want to draw attention to the extra funding they’d negotiated from the GLA!

The only improvement from the extra GLA funding, and that is genuinely to be welcomed, is that more of them will be family-sized homes for affordable rent, and more will be delivered earlier (Ujima House still only has the outline planning permission approved in February 2021).

Of the original proposed 61 “intermediate affordable homes”, 58 have now been positively identified as being for shared ownership. But didn’t Brent’s Cabinet, just last week, decide to sell off the 23 shared ownership homes it had acquired at the Grand Union development,  because the Council does not have 'the knowledge, experience and the capacity to effectively sell and manage' shared ownership homes?

 

Placard from a demonstration against Shared Ownership.

 

The Report to the 17 July Cabinet meeting clearly showed that shared ownership is well above the affordability level of most families in Brent, and admitted:

 

‘… the market and demand for Shared Ownership, particularly in the latter quarter of 2022 was and has remained turbulent. This is both in terms of too many shared ownership homes available in the market and appetite and demand for these homes reducing.’

 

In a November 2022 guest post, I set out the reality of Brent’s Affordable Council Housing programme, and why they should not include any shared ownership homes. But the decision makers at the Civic Centre are still pressing on with their flawed policies!

 


Cllr. Shama Tatler fronting a publicity photo at the Cecil Avenue site in March 2023.

 

Brent’s March 2023 press release about its Wembley Housing Zone deal with Wates began by claiming: ‘More much-needed housing will soon be a reality following an agreement to build 304 new homes in Wembley.’ From the hard hats and “high-vis” jackets in the photograph that came with it, you might believe that heavy machinery was already at work on the Council-owned Cecil Avenue site, which has been vacant for at least three years.

 

 

The Cecil Avenue site from the top deck of a bus, 26 June 2023.

 

In the extract from the April 2023 Key Decision Report above, it says that ‘start on site [was] recorded on 27 March 2023’. When I went past on the last Monday in June, there was no machinery, no workers and no progress on the Cecil Avenue site, just two portacabins. My recent guest post, 1 Morland Gardens – an Open Letter to the Mayor of London, explains what is required for a “start on site” for GLA funding, and it appears this has not yet happened.

 

It appears that the ‘will soon be a reality’ actually means ‘by 31 December 2026’. Some eventual good news, but I still believe that Brent could have done so much better than 59 “genuinely affordable” homes for rent to Council tenants as part of its 250 home Cecil Avenue development.

 


Philip Grant.