SAVE OUR GREEN SPACES - Community fights to keep South Kilburn's Granville Rec

 

Wembley Matters has reported the regeneration of South Kilburn over many years - problems are many including Granille New Homes purcased by the Council and costing more to remediate than to purchase price, balconies that flood, windows that fall out, shops flooded and closed down, heating breaking down regularly, new build built up close to old build not meeting separation space standards, fire in the disused job centre, Brent Council's  'Landlord Promise' looking unlikely to be fulfilled and much more.

 

The new Peel Precinct public space (above)  is windswept concrete and privately owned and symbolises the lack of soul that often characterises new developments.

It is no wonder then that tenacious residents want to hold on to a remnant of green space that represents what many hold dear, community belonging and engagement, and a space that is utilised for the benefit of all. 

Even on a cold day outside the growing season, there were crops to be seen that contribute to Granville Community Kitchen's mission of transforming 'ourselves, our communities and our food systems to create a just resilient  and sustainable world.'

 

 

A space to run around, tumble safely on a grassy surface AND get involved in growing food and engage with your neighbours. It is clear to me that the site has a lot of potential. Volunteers are already investing hours of their free time and it would be great if Brent Council also invested in the space and saved it from further development.

 

THE PETITION - PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY - SAVE OUR GREEN SPACES

 

We, the undersigned, strongly object to the proposed development of Block D on Granville Recreation Ground (planning ref: 21/2587).

 

Key Concerns & Why We Object: 

• Loss of vital community green space & garden
• Negative Wider Environmental Impact - air pollution and biodiversity
• Lack of Proper Consultation with Residents
• Negative impact on Princess Road Conservation Area 
• Contradicts the original South Kilburn Regeneration masterplan
• Totally inadequate replacement 

 

We demand that Brent Council:

• Halt plans for Block D to preserve our existing green space, garden, vegetable growing project, trees and biodiversity.
• Conduct a genuine public consultation with all local residents
• Revise the development plan to benefit both new and existing residents without compromising our local green space.

SIGN THE PETITION HERE

This is an objection made in July 2025: 

I object to the proposed development at Granville Road, which prioritizes housing density over the preservation of vital green space. As a resident of this area for over 50 years, I have deep concerns about the environmental, social, and infrastructural impacts of this plan. My objections align with those of the Princess Road Residents Association and others who have highlighted the severe drawbacks of this proposal.

LOSS OF GREEN SPACE AND ECOLOGICAL IMPACT:

It seems to me that the removal of Granville Recreation Ground will have detrimental consequences for local biodiversity.

I cannot see where the plans help address the decline in birds, pollinators, and wildlife, many of which rely on the mature trees and green spaces that the current space provides.

The introduction of a heavily regimented "urbanized" park design falls woefully short in attempts to replicate the ecological value of the existing natural landscape - so much so that it begs the question if ecological value has been fully assessed.

I am also concerned about the increased heat island effect due to reduced tree cover, which I understand is contrary to Brent Council's own Climate Emergency Declaration (2019, updated 2021).

The proposed "replacement" park, while technically larger, is dominated by roads and parking spaces, meaning an overall loss of usable green space. I fully echo the expressed concerns that this is exactly what London does not need in the face of climate change.

FLOODING RISK EXACERBATION 

I have personally experienced severe flooding in this area (most recently during the July 2021 cloudburst), and the proposed development raises serious concerns about drainage. My household has received no compensation and has had huge implications on matters of insurance for us.

Increased hard surfaces (buildings, roads, paved areas) mean greater rainwater runoff, threatening already overwhelmed drainage systems.

Past flooding events (including historic incidents from the 1950s-60s where basements were inundated) show this area is highly vulnerable.

Lack of detailed flood response plans in the application suggests the council and developers are ignoring this critical risk.

INADEQUATE CONSULTATION & COMMUNITY VOICE IGNORED

Despite being a long-term resident, I-like many others-have not been properly consulted on the material changes to this plan since its 2021 inception. The opaque communication from Brent Council and developers has left me and my wife, as with many of my neighbours, feeling disregarded and misled.

CONTRADICTIONS TO BRENTS OWN POLICIES

As far as I can tell, this proposal directly conflicts with Brent Council's commitments to:

Green Infrastructure Vision (loss of mature trees and biodiverse spaces)
Health Equity Goals (reduction in accessible, natural recreational areas)
Clean Air & Carbon Reduction Targets (fewer trees, more concrete)
Conclusion & Appeal

IN SUMMARY

I urge Brent Council to reject this flawed proposal and instead:

- Protect Granville Recreation Ground as a vital green lung for South Kilburn. 

- Demand a full, independent flood-risk assessment before any further planning decisions. 

- Hold transparent public consultations-where residents' concerns are not just heard but acted upon.

If this development proceeds in its current form, it will be a loss for the environment, a risk to homeowners, and a betrayal of community trust. I expect Brent Council to uphold its duty to residents-not developers' profits.

LETTER: Complaint about delays with repairs? No problem, Brent will delay dealing with your complaint

 

Via ChatGPT         

 

Dear Editor,

   

Last November, with increasing frustration at lack of progress with mounting issues around our blocks, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants and Residents’ Association in South Kilburn submitted an official complaint to Brent Council. This listed over 20 outstanding issues around the blocks, some reported years ago, and also complained about the lack of communication from Council departments about these issues.

 

The response we received at the start of December was, to be frank, a joke. The seriousness with which the responding officer treated the complaint is perhaps best shown by the fact that they got the name of the blocks wrong. They tried to pin the blame for repairs not being carried out on the officer who does monthly walkabouts around the area with us and said “I am pleased to hear that a walkabout is scheduled for 11 December 2025. During this visit, all outstanding issues will be collated, and further updates will be provided afterwards. I have also reminded the wider service areas of the importance of clear and timely communication, both to manage expectations and to ensure residents feel included in the process of improving their community spaces.”

 

We waited until after that walkabout to respond on the off chance that what was written might materialise. Fat chance, so we escalated the complaint (20/12), pointing out that, as so often, no other Council officers came besides the one who always comes and makes meticulous notes. In escalating the complaint, we objected to the attempt to place the blame for delays on that officer, since we know for a fact that he passes on issues (he copies us into the emails). Like us, he rarely gets responses. In the face of this we named a succession of more senior Council officers who have, at various times, promised to take action to action those issues and little has happened and nothing more is heard.

 

The acknowledgement we received on 5th January said, “the latest date by which we hope to respond in full is 25 February 2026, although we will aim to do so sooner if at all possible.”

 

On 25th February we received an email from the Complaint Investigator saying “I am writing to update you with progress on your complaint. Unfortunately, ongoing unprecedented caseload pressures mean that we will need more time to complete the investigation. We expect to provide you with a full response to your complaint by 25 March 2026.”

 

Unbelievable. 

 

Of course, in the meantime, a few of those issues initially complained about have been dealt with, most haven’t, and new ones (reported, of course,) have arisen. As ever, getting blood from a stone is much easier than getting any information from brent Council.

 

Meanwhile, we are told that Brent's Chief Executive is concerned at problems with neglect of South Kilburn, A Cabinet officer recently told an online meeting that he knew there are real problems in South Kilburn. Yet knowing and concern and actually doing anything seem a long way from their minds. When, earlier last year, officers from several South Kilburn TRAs wrote to all and sundry (MP, CEO, Councillors, council officers), in general terms about lack of action and communication, most didn’t respond, those that did told us they were passing our letter on to Council Officers, obviously oblivious to what we were raising in the first place.

 

Note: To be clear, the Council blocks concerned are not part of South Kilburn regeneration, though people might think they are being neglected in advance of demolition.

Pete Firmin, chair, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants and Residents Association

       

LETTER: John H of South Kilburn still waiting for repair to his Octavia HA flat to be completed - 3 months on

 

Readers will remember the case of John H, the disabled South Kilburn pensioner, who was without heating for many weeks in the winter. After repeated stories on this blog and help from Brent Council the heating in his housing association flat was eventually restored, but the associated repairs are still outstanding. The wordcloud above gives an idea of the nightmare that John has encountered in trying to get the repair completed.

In despair, John wrote another letter to Wembley Matters yesterday that I publish below:

   

Dear Editor,

 

It is now 3 months (24th Nov. 2025-24th February 2026) since I reported to my landlord Octavia, that 2 of my thermostats had failed and needed to be replaced.

 

However, I am still waiting for the repair to be completed, even though my heating was restored on the 6th of January 2026.

 

Yesterday SureServe were due to install a new thermostat in my living room, but they failed to attend, which has now reached 14 missed appointments over 3 months.

 

Mears are due to come tomorrow to repair all the damage caused by SureServe when they restored my heating system.

 

I made a complaint to Abri yesterday by email regarding waiting for 7 weeks to get my temporary thermostat replaced with a new one in my living room.

 

As they did not reply to yesterday's email, I have now submitted another one, using the Abri complaints online form regarding the wait of 50 days for my thermostat.

 

 

John H

South Kilburn

 

John H repair saga not finished yet after 2 months

Although John H's heating is working after a very long wait for repairs, the South Kilburn pensioner is still waiting for the reconnection of his meter and damage  made good. There has again been a lot of passing the buck and failure to answer phone calls etc. The process has now been going on for 2 months.

Yesterday John wrote to me:

Abri Housing Association  (who took over  Octavia) emailed me this morning to inform me that they are working with their relevant parties to try and complete the repair to my wall mounted meter.

'However, we still cannot give you a date for when we will carry out the repair.'

This afternoon I rang Octavia and my responder said they rang their repairs team but there was no answer, so they sent an email to them but there was no reply.

So after 2 months I am still waiting for my repair to be completed and to see how much credit I have left, as my credit balance remains frozen since the 6th January, when the SureServe engineer disconnected my meter leaving a blank screen.

I am concerned that if my credit runs out, my heating will be shut down again.

I sent emails to everyone at Brent Housing this morning and also to Cllr. Donnelly-Jackson but she did not reply and neither did anyone else reply to my emails.

John  has had recent problems with credit payments elsewhere which may be the result of the frozen credit on his meter. He has heard no more from anyone concerned today.

He said tonight:

I tried to send my complaint to the Housing Ombudsman but it seems I must wait for Octavia to respond to my 2nd stage complaint.'

As it took Octavia 7 weeks to respond to my 1st stage complaint, I could be in for a long wait.

Update on recent cases on adult social care highlighted by Wembley Matters

 I wrote in the week before Christmas about a pensioner with dementia who left his care home for 7-1/2 hours and ended up in hospital. An official complaint was made calling for an investigation. See LINK. I understand that  Glen Atkins has now moved from Beechwood Court to a residential setting that is better  able to meet his needs and safeguard his wellbeing.

I am told he is much happier in his new home, his needs are being met and he is safe.

Menwhile the first stage of the investigation has concluded that provider concerns were identified that warranted further investigations that are currently in progress.

Unfortunately in another case we covered over the holiday, that of John H in an Octavia property in South Kilburn, who was without central heating for 45 days, the outcome is not as satisfactory. His heating has been restored after 17 appointments and 45 days without heating  LINK but in the process of 'repair' parts of the system were disconnected meaning he cannot not top up credit for his heating. The engineer put in a temporary £10 credit which in the current cold weather is likely to run out quickly.

John wrote yesterday evening:

Just to update you.

No one from Octavia, Abri and Brent Council have been in touch today.

I still do not know if I will lose my heating when the 10 pounds of emergency credit runs out. 

My wall mounted meter screen remains blank and my Insite Energy credit balance is still frozen at the same amount as it was on Tuesday, when it was disconnected.

There was another case earlier this week when an elderly and vulnerable council tenant got locked out of her home and Brent Council proved less than helpful. 

Changes will needed if Brent Council is to realise its ambition to become an 'age-friendly borough'.

South Kilburn pensioner's heating back on after 44 days and 17 appointments

Pensioner John H's heating was finally repaired today. From Day 1 the 24th November, 2025 until today the 6th January 2026 the heating was down for 44 days. There were a total of 17 appointments arranged with SureServe of which four were attended and 13 missed.

John is a disabled  tenant of Octavia Housing at Bannister House South Kilburn.

Cllr Fleur Donnelly-Jackson commented on Wembey Matters today:  'The repair has been completed today after continued advocacy by the council's housing partnerships team. The support to the resident is ongoing. 

The saga isn't quite over. John told Wembley Matters this evening: 

All my heating is back on.

However, I now need another repair appointment to fix all the damage caused by SureServe today, including disconnecting my heating meter, which shows how much credit I have left and leaving some of my pipework exposed.

I asked Octavia to carry out the repair but they say it's not their responsibility and it's up to me to arrange the appointment with Insite Energy, who provide my heating.

 

Cllr Butt's office response to John H's case re heating and temporary arrangements - they are 'actively pursuing' a solution

 I wrote to Cllr Muhammed Butt, leader of Brent Council about the issue of John H, the South Kilburn resident about the lack of repair of his heating after 15 visits from Sureserve and the unsuitability of the initial offers of alternative accommodation.

This is the response from his Office:

 

Dear Martin,

 

I am responding on behalf of Cllr Butt.

 

 

Thank you for flagging this case with his office and for setting out the position.

 

Having looked into the matter on behalf of Cllr Butt, I can see that Cllr Donnelly-Jackson has pursued this issue throughout the Christmas period, raising it repeatedly with housing officers and the partnerships team that liaises with housing associations, including Octavia. To avoid any duplication of that effort and to ensure continuity, Cllr Donnelly-Jackson will therefore remain the lead councillor on this piece of casework.

 

Cllr Butt is aware of the position and will support Cllr Donnelly-Jackson in escalating the matter with senior management at Octavia where needed, with a focus on ensuring that any temporary arrangements reflect John’s health needs and required disability adaptations.

 

Thank you again for your advocacy on John’s behalf: please be assured that the case continues to be actively pursued.

 

 

UPDATE IN COMMENTS AS TEMPERATURE DROPS: Still no heating repair for South Kilburn disabled pensioner. Unsuitable hotel room offered.

I regret that the story first published before Christmas about the disabled pensioner in South Kilburn left without central heating for weeks LINK continued over the holiday. This is despite the intervention of a Kilburn councillor and the Cabinet Lead for Housing.

Today heating contractors for Octavia made their 15th visit but, 'The Sureserve engineer was unable to restore my heating, as he needs to call on the assistance of other SureServe operatives, including an electrician to carry out the repair.'

John H was unable to accept Octavia's offer of a Premier Inn hotel room as, 'It does not provide any disability aids and  adaptations. For example I need a wet room with support railings around the shower and toilet.'

With cold weather forecast for the weekend this is absolutely unacceptable and makes a mockery of Awaab's Law.

 

UPDATED: Octavia HA leave pensioner 25 days without heating after 10 'no shows' by heating engineers

 Bannister House - what's behind the gloss?

UPDATE: SINCE PUBLICATION TWO COUNCILLORS HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT OFFERING HELP.

 

A pensioner with cancer has been left for 25 days in a new build South Kilburn flat with only a portable electric fire for heating. Octavia Housing Association has promised repair but  made 10 appointments and failed to turn up to any of them. I understand that the required repair is replacement of two thermostats,

John H, the pensioner concerned had been transferred to the housing association, at higher rent, as part of the relocations taking place as a consequence of the South Kilburn Regeneration.  When he turned to Brent Council for assistance they washed their hands of him: it was the housing association's problem.  An appeal to the South Kilburn Tenants' Steering Group was similarly fruitless.

 On December 8th John H emailed me;

 Briefly, I have rung about 30 times, contacted both Octavia and Abli, SureServe the heating contractors & tthe Management Agent for Bannister House, 

On Wednesday I rang Octavia again only to learn they were closed as they were holding their Xmas party.

Last Monday I received a phone call from SureServe Serve an engineer would visit my home sometime during the day but no one came.

On Monday afternoon I tried an officer, who managed to arrange an appointment for me on Tuesday between 8am and 12pm but again no one came.

Another apptointment was made for  me yesterday morning but no one showed up.

I am losing track but I think they have made 6 appointments so far but no one has attended any of them.

For good measure, I asked some questions at last Wednesdays Tenant Steering Group Zoom meeting  to the South Kilburn Regeneration Team leader who told me they could not help me, as I was no longer a Brent council tenant and it was up to Octavia to fix the issue. 

 

From Octavia's Tenants' website

In a catch up John told Wembley Matters : 

I made my first contact with Octavia on the 24th November who made 10 appointments for me with their heating contractor SureServe but they failed to attend any of them with the latest one being today the 19th December 2025.

I also contacted the Management Agent for Bannister House who informed me that they were only responsible for communal repairs.

I am still waiting to have my heating restored. I have have been waiting for more than 3 weeks to get the repair carried out.

If I had known that it would take this long to carry out an emergency repair, I might have asked for alternative accommodation but I suppose now I will just have to wait until the repair is carried out.

I submitted a complaint to Octavia, as on their website it says all emergency repairs will be completed within 24 hours but they have not replied to me yet, even though they are well past the time they are supposed to reply.

 

I wish I was a Brent council tenant again.

 The last statement is poignant after all the hope and public relations put into the regeneration  with around 6 different developers and housing associations involved.

I understand there is also a heating problem at Swift House, managed by L&Q, that has existed since March and I have covered the long delay in Brent Council repairing a faulty door in one of its own blocks despite the finding of the Social Housing Regulator   See: https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2025/12/failings-in-brent-councils-social.html

The Brent Council's Action Plan in response to the findings of the Regulator has yet to be published and is significantly behind schedule. 

Where do residents turn to for decent housing? Not to up-market build to rent Quintain it appears from the Evening Standard's story abour soaring charges and evictions:  

https://www.standard.co.uk/homesandproperty/renting/quintain-living-tenants-evictions-rent-hikes-bills-wembley-build-to-rent-b1259844.html

L&Q had problems with unsafe balconies on its properties and currently balconies are being inspected in the first Quintain Properties at Quadrant Court and  Forum House.

After the seious fire in Octavia's Wembley Central  property. Petworth Court,  the  Housing Regulator found it had  over 1,200 outstanding fire remediation actions, and mitigation failings. LINK

 

Let's face it, despite all the hype about numbers, and the glossy PR, it is the quality of the new housing itself and its management, including repairs, that are undermining the confidence of tenants and leaseholders.

Failings in Brent Council's social landlord duty continue

 

This morning's Brent Cabinet discussed progress on addressing the improvement plan demanded by the Social Housing Regulator after the Council's self-referral.  'Historic failings' on repairs and maintenance were condemned.

Lead Cabinet member Donelly-Jackson said that the progress report was 'necessarily frank' but the council was now aiming to be easy to contact, quick to respond and with clear communication.

Leader of the Council, Muhammed Butt, said, 'Even one failing for one resident is a reflection on all of us...we are the only ones they can come to. They can't go anywhere else.'

Summarising he said, 'We hold ourselves accountable for all our failings.'

Fine words but the entrance door on a South Kilburn block above, reported on November 14th if not before, has still not been repaired. It is not a fire door as first thought, but is a security door. Despite a council claim that it has been 'made safe' pending repair, it is still open.  This is way byond the 8-10 days promised and well outside the new regulations for urgent safety issues. 

Just yesterday in Harlesden I spoke to a tenant in a Brent Council block where gound floor sewage leakage had been reported frequently for months but never effectively irradicated. 

Clearly there is much to be done before the Council can claim to have solved its long-term 'historic failings.' 

LETTER: Q: 'When is a Brent Council fire door, not a fire door?' 'When it's ajar and they will only be "in touch" within the next 7-10 days!'

 

 In fact it is the front door - both fire and security.

Dear Wembley Matters

You recently posted on Brent Council's plans for dealing with problems in social housing. Included was: "Emergency hazards (for example, dangerous electrical faults, damaged external doors or windows, or major leaks) will be investigated and made safe within 24 hours."

 

One of the external doors in Gorefield House in South Kilburn has been damaged (and reported) for some time. (see photo) Since nothing has happened, I went online and reported it again this morning. This is the email I have just received from Brent Housing Management: 

"Dear PETER FIRMIN,

Thank you for contacting us. Your query has been reviewed and passed to the relevant specialist team to look further into and they will be in touch with you within the next 7-10 working days. Should you need to follow up on this case, please contact us by replying to this email."

 

nuff said.

 

Pete Firmin

South Kilburn Regeneration – from 75 years ago!

Guest post by local historian Philip Grant in a personal capacity 

 

Pete Firmin’s recent letter, Regeneration has made no difference to deprivation index in South Kilburn, reminded me that regeneration efforts for this most deprived part of Brent have been going on for more than the past 20 years, and that things could have been so much different! 

 

A few years ago, knowing my interest in local history, my daughter gave me a copy of “The Willesden Survey 1949” (which she’d noticed in the window of a second-hand bookshop) as a birthday present. The quotations, and most of the images, in this article are taken from that book. There is also a copy of it at Brent Archives if you would like to know what the southern half of our London Borough was like then.

 

Despite the austerity of the years immediately after the Second World War, there was a feeling of optimism for the future. The 1947 Town and Country Planning Act gave local councils much broader powers to design better places for their residents to live, and Willesden Borough Council decided to grasp the opportunity. They commissioned their Officers to carry out a detailed survey of the borough, as it currently was, and to use that to plan for improvements.

 

Two maps from The Willesden Survey, showing levels of overcrowding and the condition of homes.

 

The Survey showed that the worst area of the Borough for both overcrowding and poor housing conditions was in Carlton Ward, part of South Kilburn. In its chapter on “Population and Housing” it reported that Carlton (South Kilburn):

 

‘contains the highest average density in Willesden, but in view of the vast overcrowding (in some cases as many as 15 persons in a small two-storey dwelling) this is not surprising. When this area was originally developed about 1850-60, the large four-storey houses were built and occupied by fairly wealthy tenants with large families. However, with the passage of time, the status of Carlton has declined and now the complete area irrespective of the size of the individual houses is let off as tenements, and very few houses have been structurally converted into self-contained flats.’

 

New Council flats at Canterbury Terrace in 1950.

 

Work had already begun by the time the Survey was published in 1950, and the report continued:

 

‘A complete redevelopment scheme has been drawn up for the majority of South Kilburn, and the redevelopment which has recently taken place on cleared war damage sites in Canterbury Terrace and Chichester Road areas forms the first stage of this Scheme. The second stage will be the general rebuilding of blighted and derelict areas. The final stage will show the complete neighbourhood replanned and rebuilt.’

 

One of the “blighted” areas was Albert Road, and this remarkable pair of photographs, taken on the same day in the early 1950s, shows the difference between the side which was awaiting redevelopment and the opposite side, where blocks of new Council flats had just been built.

 

Two sides of Albert Road, early 1950s. (From Len Snow’s 1990 book “Brent – a pictorial history”)

 

The “final stage” redevelopment plan by Willesden’s Borough Engineer and Surveyor was set out in this coloured map (although the eastern end had still to be agreed by Paddington Borough Council at that date):

 

Map showing the proposed South Kilburn Redevelopment Scheme (1949).

 

As part of the government’s wartime plans for post-war reconstruction, Professor Abercrombie of UCL (a leading architect and urban designer) had been asked to prepare a “Master Plan for Greater London”, which was published in 1944. His guidelines were followed in drawing up the proposals for the Scheme:

 

‘In the Greater London Plan standards for the allocation of land use have been determined according to the four population density zones. The area covered by the South Kilburn Redevelopment Scheme is situated within the Inner Urban Zone, for which a net density of 100 persons per acre with four acres of open space per 1,000 population is proposed.

 

As Paddington Recreation Ground is within easy reach of the area, the standard of 40 acres [per 10,000 people] for open space can be reduced to 30 acres and, as few main roads affect the area, the figure of 17 [acres per 10,000 people] for “main roads and parking” can be reduced to 12. This would give a total requirement of 165 acres for 10,000 population and a gross density of 60 persons per acre. As the area within the Borough proposed for redevelopment totals 67 acres, the ultimate population will be 67 x 60 = 4,020, and land use will be approximately divided as follows:-‘

 

Table showing the proposed land use for the South Kilburn Redevelopment Scheme (1949).

 

You will see on the proposals map above that there is plenty of green (with around 12 of the 67 acres allocated for open space and school playing fields). But as already mentioned, South Kilburn was the most overcrowded district in Willesden. How would the proposed Scheme house everyone already living in the area? This was what the Survey suggested:

 

‘In the Scheme as envisaged, flats are predominant and no allowance has been made for flats over four storeys high. The area zoned for residential purposes, including dwellings over shops and offices, amounts to 41.78 acres with a population of 4,100. These figures compare favourably with the required 40 acres for housing, 2½ acres for shops and offices, etc. and the population estimate of 4,020. The present population is estimated at 6,364 which leaves 2,264 persons to be accommodated elsewhere in the Borough, or to be decentralised to one of the New Towns.’

 

Map showing the “Willingness to move to a New Town” of Willesden residents in 1949.

 

The post-war policy of moving willing residents from Willesden to Hemel Hempstead New Town was looked at in a 2020 “local history in lockdown” article: Uncovering the history of Church End and Chapel End, Willesden – Part 3. As the map above shows, more than half of the families surveyed in South Kilburn said that they would be willing to move (as long as there were decent affordable homes and employment for them in the new town).

 

Employment in Hemel Hempstead for people from South Kilburn was not seen as a problem in the Survey, as many small industrial firms from the area were likely to move as well. The proposed Scheme only included one small area for light industry near Queen’s Park station, and the Survey reported:

 

‘The highest proportion of firms willing to move is at Carlton Vale where 50 per cent of the total number of firms, involving about 33 per cent of the employees, wish to change their location. In many cases conditions in Carlton Vale are so bad that no specific location for a new site is expressed, the sentiments of the employer being “anywhere but Carlton Vale!” Much of the area is scheduled for early redevelopment, but the area designated for absorbing present industries cannot possibly accommodate them all, and it is, therefore, from Carlton Vale that a large proportion of industrial migration will occur.’

 

Many firms and residents from Willesden did move to New Towns, but although the vision set out in the 1949 South Kilburn Redevelopment Scheme started well, circumstances changed, and the plans changed with them. The proposed three or four storey brick-built blocks of Council flats had been replaced, by the early 1960s, with much taller concrete-framed blocks.

 

Two photos showing Craik Court in Carlton Vale, under construction and completed in the 1960s.
(Photos courtesy of John Hill)

 

You can read and see more about the regeneration of South Kilburn in the 1960s in another “local history in lockdown” article from 2020: Uncovering Kilburn’s History – Part 6. For the past twenty years, there has been a further regeneration programme for South Kilburn. Some of the 1949 Redevelopment Scheme buildings have so far been replaced, and some of the 1960s Brent Council blocks are still waiting to be demolished. They will make way for “new homes”, less than half of which are now likely to be for Council tenants (almost all of them existing tenants “decanted” from other blocks due for demolition).

 

In the late 1940s, Willesden’s Borough Surveyor and Planning Officers, working closely with elected councillors on its Town Planning and Redevelopment Committee, and using detailed survey data collected from the local community, came up with a plan for South Kilburn which may now seem like a dream. They managed to implement some of it during the 1950s, but it was never finished as they had planned it to be. 

 

Though I don’t live in South Kilburn myself, I suspect life might have been much better there now if their Scheme had been completed!

Philip Grant.