Just another story of South Kilburn neglect – a rubbish saga

 

How the rubbish accumulates

 

Guest post by South Kilburn resident Pete Firmin 

 

Coventry Close is a cul-de-sac off Kilburn High Road, leading to the South Kilburn estate. It is not a residential street, but one containing Royal Mail's NW6 delivery office and a car wash (which replaced an earlier coach depot). It is a popular street for people to park who are shopping on Kilburn High Road, and busy with foot traffic of estate residents and pupils and parents going to and from St Mary's primary school via the footpaths which lead on from the road. Not a very pleasant street at the best of times, it only has a pavement on one side and the border for the car wash is an ugly corrugated iron fence. Hardly salubrious.

 

Near the top of the road is the rear entrance to what used to be the Kilburn job centre, now closed and unused for many years. The rear entrance was to the underground car park of the job centre. That entrance is now shuttered. Ever since the job centre closed there has been a problem of rubbish accumulating at the back.

 

After previous complaints in previous years, the rubbish got cleared, although local residents were never told by who (which might have helped in the current situation).

 

To be clear, local residents (including from the nearby Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury TRA) have always recognised that this is not public land and it is not the responsibility of the street cleaners to clear this. However, we have asked Brent Council to do something about it, not least on health grounds. They must be able to take action to get the owners of the building to clear the rubbish, not just on a one-off basis, but also regularly. Or arrange for Brent to clear it and charge the owners. 

 

The current version of the problem stems from - at least - September. Despite regular pleas, accompanied by photos, to various Council officers the pile of rubbish has just grown (see photos from 21 September and 26th November., it was not cleared once in that period).

 

It’s not that Council Officers, and a Councillor, haven't acknowledged the problem and recognised that it is unacceptable, but nothing ever happens.

 

Report it to the Council's fly tipping app, you get the response that, since it is on private land, it is not the responsibility of the council.

 

Other Council officers have referred the issue to the `fly tip team' (same response as we had) and other Council departments.

 

One reply from an officer (24/10) said "This is not BHM land- I have absolutely no jurisdiction over it. [which we had never claimed] I will come back to you today establishing who we can escalate this to directly."

 

One of the more substantial communications we were copied into (between two Council officers) (25/10) said

 

I inspected the location after the last email and contacted the owners of the building and the previous occupants (which I more recently discovered are no longer in control of the building- sadly the Business Rates database is not updated).

I have made subsequent visits to the location and whilst there appeared to be a litter accumulation in the small recess area in front of the understorey carpark, it looked as though it was a new accumulation to the one originally identified.

 

I have contacted Rossmore Properties Ltd again by email (office@aminpatelshah.co.uk ) and now telephone (+44 20 7278 7651) . Their representative has advised that they had originally instructed a local maintenance firm to clear the location and this should have been done. I have requested routine maintenance; however it is unlikely that the routine maintenance will be more frequent than our own street cleansing or refuse collection schedules and would be unreasonable for us to expect this. I am expecting a confirmation email with regards to remedial works here by the end of the day.

 

Generally speaking the issue is more related to litter accumulation and evidence of ASB activities ( drinking and laughing gas evidence) as opposed to “fly tipping” of larger items.

 

The last several inspections of Coventry Close would also indicate a lack of general street cleansing for this busy thoroughfare into Kilburn High Road, however the road surface and parked cars may have an impact with this regard.

 

3 Cambridge Avenue remains empty and lends itself to ASB type issues in its current state. This is another location of concern to add to the list of hotspots for patrols in the Kilburn locality. Whilst there has been a planning application submitted to convert the building into 19 flats, it appears that this application may have already expired ( according to the agency whom submitted the application) therefore its empty state may continue and one wonders what the financial incentive would be to leave a building like this unoccupied.

 

The carpark area off of Coventry Close/Bristol Walk is managed by Catalyst Housing / Peabody Trust.

 

Any issues relating to this area should be directed towards them. 

 

Anyone reporting issues here should be advised to send in photos which always helps to identify and action issues accordingly.

 

One solution may be to introduce Catalyst /Peabody representatives to Rossmore Properties Ltd to see if this small tiny recess area can be maintained at the same time as the routine maintenance for the estate; for an appropriate fee.

 

As soon as I get an update from Rossmore Ltd, I will let you know.

 

Sound useful? But nothing happened. And quite why Catalyst/Peabody (which now have some nearby properties) would take any more responsibility than Brent , which not only has nearby properties, but should also take some responsibility for obvious health issues, is a mystery.

 

As you might expect by now, nothing happened. When we pointed this out, we got this response:(30/10)

 

To clarify, the email I previously sent was to explain who is responsible for the small recess area in front of the understorey carpark for 3 Cambridge Avenue ( access area located on Coventry Close) and to differentiate the adjoining private land managed by Catalyst/Peabody ( which also suffers from waste and highways issues from time to time).

 

The litter accumulations periodically accumulate either as a result of wind blowing it from the public highway sections of the street or as a result of itinerants whom congregate around here to take “rest” on the small wall away from prying eyes.

 

I have previously served notice on the owners to clear the land in question and put measures in place to prevent future waste accumulations. As a result the metal shutter was installed some time ago. However as a result of the angle of the slope and the layout of the building lines, the shutter could not be installed up to the boundary edge of the public highway and hence you have a tiny recess that continues to suffer with this problem from time to time.

 

I am aware that the owners of the property have a locally sourced private maintenance contractor whom periodically attend the site to clear any accumulations ( as was advised in the original Notice served on them).

 

I have spoken with a representative of the company that owns the property to advise them that there is an existing accumulation that requires attention last week.

 

I have further contacted them today to insist upon action.

 

Unfortunately the landlords are not based locally and are reliant on their private contractor.

Brent Council can pursue enforcement and issue penalties when non-compliance of a Notice is observed, however in the initial instance would prefer to work with private individuals and organisations to effect a solution. Previous correspondence with the owners have generally been met with compliance whenever this issue has been brought to my attention.

 

With regards to rubbish bins on Coventry Close I am aware there are a number of recycling bins that were positioned along Coventry Close to serve the blocks of flats and are also accessible to anyone passing. However it is my understanding that the Veolia Street Cleansing contract no longer accommodates litter bins on residential streets unless there are some exceptional circumstances. Furthermore the only section of Coventry Close covered by the street cleansing contract is between the top block of Alpha House to Kilburn High Road. The remaining section from the top block of Alpha House to Canterbury Road is the remit of BHM’s maintenance regime

 

If you continue to experience negative impacts resulting from waste accumulations on private land please report these to waste.enforcement@brent.gov.uk or via Fix My Street platform. If you can include photos at the time of reporting will also be useful to help us identify locations and deal with the issues accordingly.

 

We then had to point out that there are, contrary to that message, no rubbish bins on Coventry Close (which is why we have been asking for them for years.....) And Coventry Close is not a residential street.

 

From what locals observe, while obviously some of the rubbish comes from street drinkers, the majority comes from people walking through and from those who park on Coventry Close. But it doesn't really matter who causes the problem, it needs dealing with both in the short and long terms and while Brent talks of doing so, the rubbish continues to pile up.

 

We wonder whether this would happen in other parts of the borough or is yet another sign of how Brent neglects its basic responsibilities in South Kilburn. Building showcase new housing looks nice, less so when surrounded by uncleared rubbish. And before anyone accuses us of exaggeration, Council officers have repeatedly accepted that the area is neglected and promised to sort it. And little happens.

 

Pete Firmin

 

LETTER: The South Kilburn Saga: financial problems, delays, tenure changes - what is achievable now?

Dear Editor,

Brent Council are resending the Hereford & Exeter site, along with the Craik Court-Crone Court -Zangwill House (CCZ)  site back to planning, as the new buildings will need second staircases.

 

The CCZ site was due to be completed by 2029 but it will now be much later.

 

This has a knock-on effect, as all those tenants and some of those in temporary housing will now face longer waits for a new home.

 

The CCZ project is in phase 6 which now means that phases 7 & 8 will now be pushed several years forward beyond their schedules.

 

Previously the council always said 'the whole 15 year (?) South Kilburn Regeneration would be completed by 2029' but that date now looks unachievable.

 

Also, the SK budget is facing financial difficulties but for now the budget has not been changed but the council are reducing their overall Capital programme by 25% (£103M.) covering the rest of this year and 2024/25.

 

We will find out the costs of the SK Regeneration at the meeting in February 2024 when the council sets their budgets for the future years.

 

The increased costs of the SK regeneration are the result of the higher interest rates that the council have to pay for their borrowing, together with high inflation causing increases in the cost of building materials and  higher labour costs.

 

It now looks like the 72 council homes on the NWCC site due in 2025 may be the last ones for some time and I expect that the allocations have already been made, as all the needs assessments have all been completed.

 

That leaves approximately 370 tenants and those in temporary housing having to wait for several more years before they will be offered a new home in SK.

 

 

Nobody seems to be bothered about this but the Peel site LINK has only 42 homes for social rent out of a total of 308 new homes. That is roughly 15% instead of the usual 50:50. So far 38 of the 42 are already occupied with the remaining 4 homes not available until 2026.

 

The Peel site is the largest one of all the SK sites but has the lowest number of social homes available. Many of the new homes are both for private sale as usual but there are also several shared ownership properties.

 

The 72 homes on the NWCC site will be available in 2025 with allocations given in 2024, although as I understand it the possible tenants have already completed their needs assessments. NWCC is Neville House, Winstanley and some of Carlton House and the Carlton Centre

 

This might be of interest to the tenant you featured in Wembley Matters on the 4th October LINK.

 

However, it seems that anyone in SK needing a 4 bed or higher have been offered new homes in both Stonebridge and Wembley.

 

All the remaining tenants and those in temporary housing wish to remain in South Kilburn, as their children attend school there, although some of them have been offered a new larger home in both Stonebridge & Wembley, However, this causes further allocation problems for Brent over who should get priority for a new home.

 

 

The Queen's Park Cullen House site will probably need to go back to planning, as the current one was approved as far back as 2016 with the tenants decanted in 2014.

 

However, the council still do not own the site. They have been trying since 2019 to purchase the Falcon Public House but Londonewcastle will not sell it. Londonewcastle built all the new blocks in Albert Road and may be holding out to win the contract for the Cullen House/Queens Park site, but the council do not want them. So will Cllr. Butt get his way or will he be disappointed?

 

This is the key site, as Cllr. Butt said it would mark the new gateway to SK with several up-market stores in the ground floors with flats above them,

 

Countryside say because they are developing the Health Centre on the Peel site, they had to reduce the number of social homes to make it viable for them.

 

Back in 2004 I seem to remember there was NDC money set aside to fund two health centres (and not just one) but the funding was 'borrowed by the Primary Care Trust' and would be made available when the health centres were to be developed

 

But of course, the Primary Care Trust' closed down and passed its assets to the Brent CCG who themselves have now closed down and are now in the super CCG (8 CCG's)

 

So, I assume the money has long gone and that is why we are having to rely on Countryside to build it and the Council to provide the revenue to run it.

 

 

South Kilburn Resident

LETTER: Brent Council is failing South Kilburn residents who are living in fear in with damp, mould, cold and debt

 Video created from photographs provided by the letter writer

 

I reported on last week’s Brent Renters meeting calling on Brent Council to take action on bad landlords, but what happens when it is the council itself that is the bad landlord?  Wembley Matters has received this letter.

 

Dear Editor,

 

South Kilburn is a lively and friendly community.

 

My neighbours are quiet but ever so respectful.

 

We look out for one another.

 

With a predominantly Black and African community the English language is not the first language of most residents however, it does not create a barrier.

 

In fact, it sometimes draws people together in support for each other, whether it be housing, schooling, benefits, or young people’s needs. We support each other where we can.

 

There is a great deal of deprivation and poverty.

 

With many temporary tenants living in council properties and being charged £440pw, the cost of living crisis, is nothing new to them. Many of them have been living in such conditions for 9+ years, hardly temporary?

 

They were promised that, should they vote for the regeneration bid, upon its succession, they would be placed in new-build properties with a choice of paint colour, kitchen fittings, flooring, and new white goods, some even a dish washer!

 

However, this has not been the case. The council carried out housing needs assessments for every individual to gain knowledge of exactly what was needed but, they failed to deliver many of their promises and continue to do so.

 

Many tenants have been forced to move to new areas outside South Kilburn despite being promised they could stay.

 

Not enough new-builds and not enough of the required bedroom sizes!

 

But didn’t the council carry out assessments? Yes they did?

 

What happened to the planning and the order of blocks to be-rehoused? After the succession of the bid, it all changed – it all fell apart and promises were broken.

 

So, the people moving to new-builds received the promises of flooring and paint etc. However, the others forced to take re-lets are being failed.

 

They must move urgently- within 1 week, to properties with no flooring down, an empty shell.

 

Where are they supposed to find the money to start all over again?

 

There are disruption payments to be had according to the council yet, many are refused and if they are lucky enough to be chosen to receive it, they must wait up to 3 months to receive it!

 

Some are reimbursed for their flooring and white goods, some even for their curtains but some are not, with the council picking and choosing who can and can not be reimbursed. It this discrimination?

 

But Countryside and the Mayor’s office are providing the council with this money to take care of the tenants. If it’s not going to tenants, where is it going?

 

They are not even following their own promises and despite the tenants complaining to heads of departments, they are simply passed from pillar to post with no answer.

 

The council have no fear of breaking the law as the tenants have no-one fighting for them. Even MP Tulip Siddiq is doing nothing to assist vulnerable tenants.

 

Is it because Labour can not fight itself?

 

The electricity bills in the blocks are huge and the saddest part is, regardless of how much they do spend on heating, the properties are ice cold.

 

The health risks to tenants living in damp and mould riddled flats are at an all time high.

 

One of the residents, a mother of 4 and 3 asthmatics had pneumonia three times in one winter and the year before 2 pneumonia and sepsis. Still, she was afraid to put the heating on because she could not afford the bills and was falling deeper and deeper into utility debt. How could she find a way to clear it when all avenues seemed to be closed?

 

They are left in thousands of pounds worth of debt because of the electricity bills. The properties are insufficient, no insulation and ineffective heating units.

 

Go and earn more money you say?

 

With the majority of residents having at least one person working, it’s impossible to up your income.

 

Why? As the wage increases the more hours you work, the council simply reduce the Housing Benefit top-up that is essential to pay the £440pw rent. They trap you into the Benefits system with no hope of getting out unless you become secure tenants paying council rents.

 

The more you earn, the less Housing Benefit you receive and the family’s chance of living better is diminished.

 

We have hard working families paying £440pw rent and £1000/£2000 pm electricity! That’s without council tax, water, food etc

 

What happens then?  The children suffer. Less food on the table, freezing cold mould and damp living conditions, parents constantly stressed because they can’t make ends meet and provide even essentials for their children or themselves.

 

No talks of holidays, new clothes, toys or even a day out!

 

We have knife, gun and gang crime around every corner - but it’s the norm.

 

The last three to four months have taken a turn for the worst, become more dangerous due to the high number of squatters living in the blocks.

 

All night long it’s screaming, fighting, cursing and break-ins.

 

Parents and children are fearful to step into the blocks and afraid to open their front door! Cannabis farms growing, pipes and boilers being stolen and sold for money resulting in tenants homes being flooded and their few positions ruined.

 

Whilst we are fearful, we are concerned with the amount of squatters who have nowhere to turn. They run their own rings, charging other squatters to live in abandoned houses in the blocks. When they can’t pay up, they beat them up and throw them out. It’s horrifying, the wails and screams, the sounds of blows to the bodies of desperate and destitute men and women.

 

Prostitution, it’s also included in the list, men coming and going all night because the women are being pimped out and beaten.

 

The council put two security guards outside for four days. Whilst they are in their car with no toilet or place to get a warm drink, the squatters are upstairs in the blocks and there’s no change.

 

Then we have the schools, they seem to run the same ethos as Brent Council, ignore complaints and carry-on?

 

Despite receiving petitions and concerns of safeguarding from parents, they simply choose to ignore it. The governors simply refuse to hold meetings with parents?

 

They take the case to Brent education and the same response?

 

They take it to Ofsted who agree based on information received, it needs to be investigated.  Ofsted write to Brent Council and raise concerns requesting investigation and Brent reply to Ofsted with ... No further investigation needed!!

 

What do we expect to produce in South Kilburn?

 

The next generation thriving and positively optimistic about a bright future?

 

Where would they ever get this impression from when all they see is doom and gloom?

 

Parents working hard but never having enough.

 

Parents, that when chidlren look at them, their faces are etched with pain and struggle.

 

From where are the young people given hope and is it the faults of the parents, or the people with whom the responsibilities and power is given to make a change?

 

Poor housing, poor  schools and poor finances.

 

No opportunities to thrive yet still, you see the smiling friendly faces of the South Kilburn tenants toward each other, while secretly, their hearts and hopes are broken.

 

I love living in South Kilburn, the residents are very special people who deserve more.

 

Ngozi Gemma Ijanboh

 

The Brent Council Promise in 2019

 

 

 

Wembley Park 'regeneration v gentrification' revisited 6 years on - do the warnings in this article still hold?

Wembley Matters has been following the development of the Wembley Park 'regeneration' areas for some time. In October 2017 LINK  I published the guest post below which attempted to look forward to the impact of what the author termed 'gentrification' rather than regeneration.  Some might argue that 'gentrification' doesn't fit as very few residents lived in the largely light industrial and warehouse area that were displaced, but it could apply to the wider area with many working class people unable to continue to live here.

Since then we have seen what residents claim is over-development in Alperton, further demolition and building on South Kilburn estate with shrinking green space; masterplan for the Neasden Stations area with high rises on the College of North Wesr London  Dudden Hill site and the light industrial area between Willesden High Road and Dudden Hill; and the huge re-development of the 'one public estate' (comprising Network Homes, NHS NW London, University of Westminster Brent Council) of what will almost be a new town in Northwick Park.

This is the original article with my introduction:

 

There have been many postings on this website about Quintain's Wembley Park 'regeneration' and even more comments, particularly as the development has accelerated recently eating up warehouse and industrial units and apparently squeezing tower blocks into any spare space. In this guest posting Dilan Tulsiani stands back and considers the implications for local people as well as the locality itself.
 

On the 29^th of August 2017, Quintain, a property investment and development business, announced via its website that it was ‘spending £1m a day on construction making Wembley Park one of the UK’s biggest construction sites’. According to Quintain, there will be over 8,500 jobs created, with a further 3,000 homes under construction ‘delivered at a pace not seen at any other London development site’. The construction framework consists of six contractors, the notables being: McLaren, Wates, Sisk and Carillion. Quintain have recently shifted their construction policy from ‘build to buy’ to ‘build to rent’. They aim to build over 7,000 new homes, with 5,000 labelled as ‘build to rent’, and a further 2,300 as “affordable”.

 

Quintain and Brent Council have both resisted using the term ‘gentrification’ to describe their partnership in transforming the area. Instead, you’ll see ‘regeneration’ on practically every website or poster promoting the ongoing process. This is understandable, as the critics of any form of gentrification, are quick to label the selective description by property developers as deceptive and dishonest. Technically speaking, regeneration is embedded within the process of gentrification. The Cambridge Dictionary defines regeneration: ‘to improve a place or system, especially by making it more active or successful’. Gentrification is defined as: ‘the process by which a place, especially part of a city, changes from a being poor to being a richer one, where people from a higher social class live’. Wembley Park’s ‘regeneration’ process factually falls under both definitions (for the remainder of this article I will use the term ‘gentrification’ instead of ‘regeneration’, as it is more accurate to my subject matter). Although, to prevent an ethical breakdown, new tenants would probably cling to ‘regeneration’ as an ontological justification for staying in Wembley.

 

Residents who have lived in Brent for more than a decade will remember the industrial abyss that used to exist just a short walk from the station. In this sense, the gleaming metallic towers, illusory designer outlet and newly placed pavement are well relished. However, there are a few fundamental concerns that have simply been swept aside. Firstly, the effect on the surrounding areas. There is no surprise, that most, if not all the flats in Wembley are not “affordable”. In fact, that term is usually used to provoke a narrative of relativity concerning financial status. Quintain has invested £900 million into Wembley Park, without careful consideration and evaluation from the residents of Brent, this could lead to some serious socio-economic disparities. David Fell, a research analyst at Hamptons International states that property prices in HA9 “have risen by 14% in the last year [2016], compared to a London average of 10%.” Just down the road from Wembley Park, a two-bedroom flat is valued around £335,000. A flat of the same size, less than 10 minutes’ walk away, is valued at £450,000 - £500,000. Recently, Alto has sold two-bedroom flats in Wembley Park for £800,000.

 

A similar problem was highlighted in 2014 during gentrification processes in South Kilburn, where a member of the Residents’ Association claimed: “Those who have been living in the area are essentially being driven out. This all amounts to a social cleansing of South Kilburn.” Moreover, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants’ and Residents’ Associations emphasised that the residents who have lived in South Kilburn for generations could no longer afford to live in their homes. These are not trivial or isolated matters. They’re simply the effects of gentrification. Wealth concentrated in one single area in this manner, will have drastic consequences. The surrounding populations will be allowed to use facilities, shops and walk the newly paved streets, but there is a cap on their indulgence of this ideology. Consider what the residents of Chalkhill think when their homes are (literally and metaphorically) overshadowed by the new apartment towers. When they, like so many other communities, have a lack of funding within their own neighbourhoods, along with other serious social issues. To name one, in Brent and Hounslow 34 high-rise buildings failed fire cladding tests issued after the horrendous disaster at Grenfell Tower. In contrast, I think it would be perfectly safe to assume that the newly built apartments in Wembley Park have some of the best fire safety systems available.

 

 Attached to this disparity of wealth is the subsequent problem of crime. There is no doubt that the new properties will have a well-maintained police presence, due to the proximity of the stadium, along with security guards for each building. Due to the disparity, crimes in the surrounding areas may increase. Let’s take some of surrounding areas as examples (take these as approximate averages): From January - August 2017, Alperton has had the average total crime rate of 118/month, Dollis Hill’s average total crime rate was 137/month, and Tokyngton stands at an average of 188/month. Tokyngton is the closest of the three areas to Wembley Park, and in recent years it has had a subsequent increase in total crimes committed. If the investment in selective industries and areas remains or increases in the next decade, there should be no surprise at the increase in crime. This correlation was well represented in gentrification processes in New York, especially Harlem. As living standards get higher, the price of property increases, more people will forcibly turn to crime – both petty and serious. The socio-cultural divide will only widen.

 

One last fundamental issue is an assessment by The FA (for those like myself who are not sport literate: The Football Association). In May 2016, The FA complained that Brent Council was considering those who visit the stadium “an afterthought”. The recent constructions sites, which appear directly outside the stadium, could present potential hazards to fans, according to the FA. In fact, these new apartments would present the highest, and thus the most expensive flats, with their own personalised view of the games below them. Wembley is already set to be overcrowded, yet with ongoing construction, and busy venues/rush hour, there should be an effective policy by the council to counter this.

 

Ultimately, I see no realistic counter-movement to what seems to be an unchecked gentrification process at Wembley. In the next decade, Wembley, just as many other towns in Greater London, will be injected with huge sums of money, none of which will aid ingrained social issues, but will make these issues less noticeable for those living in the newly ‘regenerated’ areas. In the meanwhile, surrounding populations will attempt to readjust and comfort themselves from their high price of living with the luxurious shopping outlets built on the borders between their areas and the ‘newly regenerated Wembley Park’.

 

South Kilburn 'Carnivale' Saturday 15th July - 12-5pm - Carlton Vale

 

£765,000 project to save and improve the deteriorating Kilburn Library

Photographs from collection submitted to Cabinet

Brent Cabinet will be considering major plans to rectify structural problems at Kilburn Library and improve the facility at its meeting on Monday. The project will cost £765,000 of which  £534,000 would come from Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy and £231,500 from an application to the Arts Council of England's Library Improvement Fund.

A dossier of photographs (see above) are submitted alongside the proposed works.

Offices explain:

This investment will:

 
· Upgrade the library facilities and building, including the substantial but
underused garden;
· Implement a flexible design to expand the use of the library and enable
hires outside of core opening hours;
· Improve the accessibility of the building through improved design and
signage;
· Extend the footprint of the building to create a dedicated event and
learning space which could also be used for community hire.

The last refurbishment undertaken at Kilburn Library took place in 2009/10.
Structurally, the building is in a poor state. There are large cracks forming in the
structure of the building and there is concern that debris may fall. Furnishings
are mostly fixed and offer limited flexibility to develop the library offer or adapt
the space for different audiences and uses. There is no dedicated event space
despite the strong demand for cultural programmes in the area. Local
consultation for the Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2022 also identified
community priorities of food growing and access to green space. Kilburn Library
has an underutilised garden and will meet this need, but it requires investment to
make it fully accessible and be used more extensively by the community.

 

The works would entail building an extension to the existing building and
reconfiguring the layout to create a larger more flexible space. The driver for this
is a need to increase engagement with residents in the South Kilburn area and
to meet an increased demand and need for services, with a particular focus on
digital, learning, culture and health, following the large amount of growth that is
currently taking place and expected to take place. The new spaces and design
would enable us to increase our programming in these areas and work more with
local partners to expand our reach and library usage in the area.

The increasing population of South Kilburn is cited as a further reason to improve the facility.

Costings:

The Project Plan