318 room 'aparthotel' for Elm Road, Wembley Central at Brent Planning Committee tonight

 

Euro Hotel, Elm Road, Wembley Central

Proposed Aparthotel (I don't remember Elm Road being that wide!)

No it's not!

Apart from the Wembley Edge planning application already descibed on Wembley Matters (LINK) another large development proposal that has been around for a while comes to Planning Committee tonight.

This is for the development of the site of the Euro Hotel (previously Elm Hotel) on Elm Road in Wembley Central and the adjoining Spiritualist Church in St Johns Road.

They would be replaced by an Aparthotel covering 10,090 square metres as against the current 1,258 square metres. 

The proposal:

Demolition of existing hotel building and community centre [church?] and erection of a part 6, part 8 and part 10 storey 318 room aparthotel plus basement accommodation with associated ancillary facilities, community floorspace (Use Class F1/F2),servicing, landscaping and cycle and refuse storage.

So what is an Aparthotel. Officers provide the answer:

Apart-hotels are defined within the London Plan as self-contained accommodation (within Use Class C1), providing for short-term occupancy, with a concierge and room service. the length of stay would be limited to a maximum of 90 days per occupant, and a planning condition would secure that residencies at the hotel accommodation of 90 days or more are to be prevented, to ensure that the use of the hotel accommodation would meet the needs identified within the London Plan and Brent Local Plan for visitor accommodation.

 

Each room would have a double bed, with storage, a shower and toilet en-suite and a kitchenette facility. Inclusive access has been confirmed as integral to the design of the hotel. It has been confirmed that10% (16) of the hotel rooms would be accessible in accordance with London Plan policy E10.

Brent received a 33 person petition in favour of the development which appears to include local businesses and 14 objections.

The impact on neighbouring two storey homes in St Johns Road and Elm Road is considerable and unsurprisingly most of the objections come from them:

 From a legal view point, my main objections are:

1) that the location of this planning proposal does NOT fall under the "Tall Building Zone". This is a residential zone and height restrictions should be observed.

2) I have it on good authority that the hotel group own many proprieties around the area of the existing hotel (I believe they own nearly all the houses on Elms Road, many of the houses on St Johns Road going north right up to the bridge and they also own houses on Acacia Avenue). Consultations have been sent by post to all these properties and there needs to be due diligence in identifying who owns the property when the consultations are returned. I strongly believe that the hotel should only be allowed to vote once.

From a personal view point, my objections are:

The planned building development would block out all light, many houses on St Johns Road would be in the shade all year round, with no sunlight ever hitting the windows or paving; this means it will be mostly wet underfoot - even worse with snow and ice which would stay longer than normal.

Parking would be harder for residents, especially on event days: Hotel coaches would take up 3 or 4 parking spaces and would only need 1 permit per day to stay. The plans show that two resident parking bays would be removed and there is already a shortage of spaces. Please note that on St Johns Road, none of the houses on the west side of the road (right up to bridge) have off-street parking.

I would also add there would be major TV disruption for anyone who uses freeview and has a freeview aerial on their roof, as any house north of the proposed development will have their aerials pointing in exactly that direction. TV channels (especially HD) would be limited, or worse still, freeview may not work at all.

For all the reasons listed above, I strongly object.

View from St Johns Road towards the High Road.

 

Officers comment on the loss of the Spiritualist Church:

The redevelopment of the site would involve the loss of the existing Spiritualist Church. A schedule of areas submitted with the application indicates that the existing church building has a total GIA of 145sqm. The application proposes the reprovision of 220sqm of flexible F1/F2 community space over ground and basement floor level, indicating that the social infrastructure space would be fully re- provided.

They conclude regarding the whole application:

The aparthotel proposed with an ancillary flexible F1/F2 space is considered to make efficient use of the land, which would regenerate the site which would provide a positive contribution to the emerging streetscene and the positive employment and economic benefits associated with the hotel.

 

The building is considered to have an appropriate scale and massing of proposed buildings would relate well to the existing and future site context. As the report acknowledges, there is expected to be some impacts on existing daylight and sunlight light conditions to existing residential dwellinghouses nearby.

 

The impacts would be commensurate with development of this form and such impacts must be balanced against the planning benefits of the proposal. Overall, and on balance, the impacts associated with the development would it is considered be outweighed in this case by the benefits of redeveloping the site, economic benefits and public realm improvements.

 

The Planning Commitee begins at 6pm tonight and  can be viewed HERE

Regulator finds 'serious failings' in Octavia Housing's health and safety responsibilities. The Housing Association has over 1,200 outstanding fire remediation actions, and mitigation failings

The fire at Petworth Court (Credit: London Fire Brigade)
 

Octavia Housing hit national headlines in January 2024 when Petworth Court, Elm Road, Wembley Central. It emerged that Barry Gardiner, MP, had repeatedly raised concersn about the block with Octavia with little response. The Fire Brigades Union warned of 'criminal complacency' on the part of the then government and some building firms regarding cladding.

Now the Regulator of Social Housing has issued a Regulator Judgement on Octavia Housing:

The Safety and Quality Standard requires landlords to have an accurate, up to date and evidenced understanding of the condition of their homes that reliably informs their provision of good quality, well maintained and safe homes for tenants. It also requires landlords to identify and meet all legal requirements that relate to the health and safety of tenants in their homes and communal areas, and that all required actions arising from legally required health and safety assessments are carried out within appropriate timescales.

Following a serious fire at one of its properties in January 2024 and wider review of its landlord health and safety compliance, Octavia made a self-referral to us in respect of fire, electrical and gas safety. Having sought further information including assurances on other areas of building safety, we have concluded that there are serious failings in the oversight, management, and delivery in several areas of Octavia’s landlord health and safety responsibilities.

London Fire Brigade has issued Notifications of Fire Safety Deficiencies in respect of 13 of Octavia’s buildings since May 2023. Octavia currently has over 1,200 overdue fire safety remedial actions categorised as either high or medium priority and has failed to take sufficient steps to mitigate the potential risks to tenants identified.

Octavia was unable to provide sufficient assurance that it meets other landlord health and safety requirements. Octavia has failed to hold complete and accurate records to confirm where health and safety inspections are required, whether they had been carried out within legally required or recommended timescales, and whether smoke and carbon monoxide detectors are installed as legally required.

Octavia has been proactive in engaging external support, increasing staff resource, and creating improvement plans to increase its oversight of its health and safety compliance. It is currently undertaking investigations to identify and address gaps in its records, develop an effective programme of health and safety assessments and confirm the full extent of remedial actions required to meet all legal requirements.

Octavia has reported that it recognises that it can deliver its purpose more effectively by joining another landlord and following the September 2023 Regulatory Judgement has been progressing the work needed to achieve this. Ahead of this being delivered Octavia has been able to draw on significant support from its preferred partner landlord to deliver the improvements required.

Our engagement with Octavia will continue to be intensive. We will seek evidence that gives us assurance that Octavia is making sufficient progress on its investigations and delivery of its improvement programme so that it is meeting its health and safety legal requirements and delivering the outcomes of our standards. We are not proposing to use our enforcement powers at this stage but will keep this under review as Octavia seeks to resolve these issues. Our priority will be that risks to tenants are adequately managed and mitigated.

 The housing provider that Octavia was engaged in partnership talks with is Abri that itself has been subjected to a finding of severe maladminstration in two cases by the Housing Ombudsman.  This caused Michael Gove, the then Secretary of State to write in December 2023:

In one case, you left one of your residents with faulty windows for almost five years, with the resident waiting up to a year to hear from you on multiple occasions. They were left with a cold property in the winter and issues with insects during the summer. I am disappointed to learn that these issues became so severe that she was forced to leave the property.

In the second case, you failed to deal with a complaint about damp and mould from a vulnerable resident with a heart condition and who is registered blind. You carried out the same ineffective repairs year after year, and failed to address the root causes, leaving your vulnerable resident living in poor conditions for far too long.

When your residents report an issue, and especially when vulnerable people are involved, it must be acted upon swiftly and effectively. The tragic death of Awaab Ishak has shown that we must not be complacent about issues that risk residents’ health.

I understand you have addressed all the orders and recommendations made by the Ombudsman, including overhauling your approach, processes and policies regarding damp and mould. I expect the changes to make a significant difference to the service you deliver to your residents.

Positive response to TfL's cycling plans for Harlesden-Wembley Central route: 'Now let's build it - no time to lose!'

From Transport for London

Between 10 November and 21 December 2023 we consulted on walking and cycling improvements between Wembley Central and Harlesden stations.

 

The proposals include a protected two-way cycle lane on the A404 Harrow Road and Brentfield, new and improved cycle and pedestrian crossings over Harrow Road, better street lighting and more trees and plants to help make the area feel safer and more welcoming. 

 

We received 313 responses in total, including ten from stakeholders. 

 

Some key findings include:

• 83 per cent (233 respondents) think the scheme will encourage more people to walk

• 87 per cent (243 respondents) think the scheme will encourage more people to cycle2

• 69 per cent3 (190 respondents) think the scheme will encourage more people to use public transport

• 60 per cent (163 respondents) think the scheme will mean fewer people will choose to travel by motor vehicle for personal journeys and 46% (125 respondents) think it will have no impact on business journeys

 

Next steps

TfL will continue to work closely with LB Brent officers to develop these proposals for walking and cycling improvements between Wembley and Harlesden over the coming months. The feedback we heard from local people and other stakeholders during our consultation will inform this work, along with further surveys and assessments.

 

An updated set of designs for these improvements will then be shared with Brent Councillors, who will then make a decision on whether to progress the proposed design solution to construction.

 

We will continue to liaise with community stakeholder groups to provide updates on our progress.

 

These are the indicative timescales we will work to, going forward:

• Spring 2024 – further design work, including surveys and assessments
• Summer 2024 – continue to engage with stakeholders
• Late 2024 – decision point (with Brent Council) to commit to constructing the scheme, subject to acceptance and further refinement of proposals following the consultation, The contract for the detailed design work would then be issued
• 2026 – anticipated start of construction, subject to approvals and programme
  

 

On Twitter Brent Cycling Campaign said:

The report into the consultation on the proposed walking and cycling improvements to the Wembley-Harlesden route has been published. Disappointing response rate but largely supportive. Let's build this now pleaseTfL and Brent Council. No time to lose.

.

Proposed new development on London Road, Wembley at Planning Committee on May 8th

 

 

Planning Committee on Wednesday will consider an application to redevelop a building on London Road, close to the High Road, presently consistingof 8 one storey shops and a workshop at the rear, into a double frontage part 6 storey, part 7 storey block of mid-rise flats. LINK

For those who know the road it would be between Patidar House and the chicken shop on the corner of London Road/High Road.

London Road proposed 

Street view of the 6/7 storey double block

Aerial view showing proximity to Central Apartments

 

Residents of the Central Apartments on Wembley Central Square have been most vocal in their opposition:

 I am an owner occupier of at Central Apartment which was build as a part of regeneration programme and currently has 117 families occupying this development since 2010. I am submitting this Objection on behalf of the Wembley Central Resident Association (CARTA) which has more than 90 families as paid members. Our association is recognised by the landlord and our local representatives. I am a Chairman of this association and in that capacity on behalf of our members, I strongly object to this development for following reasons.

1. Our track record of corporation and supporting local regeneration -

We have not objected to any other developments in the close proximity of development in last 12 years and always supported Brent in its regeneration agenda. This proposed development directly impacts our quality of life and investment and hence we strongly object it.

2. Devaluation of 50 plus apartments facing windows and balconies to London Road.

As illustrated in the separate photographic evidence, this development will block the view of the windows and balconies facing London Road and significantly devalue the properties to the significant drop in appeal of these flats upto 40% from the current market price.

3. Loss of sunlight and its impact on living costs.

This development is too close to us literally in the face of the balconies and windows of 50 plus flats facing London Road , which receive its sunlight only in the morning from NE side (facing London Road) till noon. All the windows of our flats are facing this side only and there is no other way to get the sunlight. The close proximity of the proposed construction of seven storey building will create a complete wall in front of us blocking any natural sunlight at any time of the day and in fact we will come under shadow of it.

As illustrated in the photos send separately it is going to create complete darkness in 50 plus flats and directly forcing residents to use more electricity and heating to keep the flats warm and maintain sufficient visibility in the flats even during day.

3. Insufficient Ventilation -

Due to the layout of the property and building design, we have limited options to achieve natural cross ventilation and completely depend on the fresh breeze from NE. This development will completely block it and the current MEP systems in the flats are not designed to operate without any natural ventilation. As a result this will create unhygienic , unhealthy living conditions to all the residents which could lead to long term health issues.

Also its impacts on the maintenance costs of properties, It is important to note that one person produces 4 pints of moisture per day, through cooking, cleaning, bathing and breathing. Therefore 5 people will produce 84 pints of moisture per week. with inadequate ventilation moisture produced will condense to cold surfaces, and eventually turn to mould which could also lead to additional wear and tear/ maintenance costs of the property.

4.Loss of views and loss of privacy - All 50 plus flat owners have bought their flats with an extra premium for the views for Wembley Stadium Arc and overall landscape . The proposed development will completely block it and lead to becoming unattractive to occupy due to significant change in the surrounding. The new development's close proximity to our windows and balcony would result us in losing our privacy of occupation.

This is a significant risk to our investment and with this objection , we are hoping this development proposal would immediately stopped to progress any further. In the event this proposal is progressed further without any further consultation / clarity on how the affected leaseholders concerns would be addressed commercially and technically , we reserve the right to explore legal options.

Given recent controversies over the dearth of affordable housing in new developments readers will note that Brent Planning Officers accept the viability assessment for the development that no affordable housing can be provided.  A late review of viability will consider whether a contribution could be made towards affordable housing elsewhere.

A recent think tank report suggested that developments of this height were better for family homes and social cohesion than high-rise towers.

Provision includes 41 flats and a much smaller commercial area,

 

Officers examine issues regarding daylight acess in both the new block and neighbouring blocks. On the later (presumably including Central Apartments) they conclude:

 

The properties that are mainly affected currently afford outlook over the low scale existing buildings on site resulting in higher levels of daylight than what could be expected for a typical urban context. The overall benefits of the development including the delivery of new commercial floorspace and residential homes (including a policy compliant level of family sized homes) would outweigh the limited harm identified above.

 

 Overall Planning Officers recommend that the Planning Committee approve the application:

 

The proposal would include the redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed use building of up to 7 storeys high, with a commercial Class E unit and 41 residential units. It would optimise the capacity of the site within a highly sustainable location within the Borough and make a contribution towards housing supply within the Borough, including the delivery of family sized homes. Whilst the scheme does not achieve 0.4 urban greening factor score, following the above discussion, officers consider that taking the development plan as a whole, the proposal is considered to accord with the development plan, and having regard to all material planning considerations, should be approved subject to conditions.

Brent Cyclists call for public support for Wembley Central - Harlesden cycling route: why and how

Guest post by Brent Cycling Campaign

 

 

TfL and Brent Council are currently consulting on walking, wheeling and cycling improvements between Wembley Central and Harlesden stations. At Brent Cycling Campaign we are really excited about this proposal which represents an important opportunity for Brent and North West http://London.You can read about the proposals here: https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/wembley-harlesden

 

New proposals to improve walking and cycling between Wembley Central and Harlesden are an important opportunity for Brent. Brent Cycling Campaign welcomes and supports plans by Transport for London and Brent Council for safer streets, new cycle lanes, and new pedestrian crossings.

 

After more than three years of planning and public engagement TfL published the new plans on 10th November. The plans connect Wembley Central to Harlesden with a cycle route on quiet roads and protected space between Sylvia Gardens and First Drive across the North Circular. The proposals, which do not reduce the number of lanes for drivers, follow an existing route from London Road onto Tokyngton Avenue, after crossing the North Circular people on bikes are diverted through quiet streets around Stonebridge Park to reach Harlesden Station on Acton Lane.

 

The junction of Harrow Road with the North Circular is the most dangerous junction for pedestrians in Brent. Between 2018 and 2022 there were over 90 collisions along Harrow Road, in January 2022 a person was killed crossing the road at the junction with the North Circular, and since 2018 there have been over 100 injuries and deaths on roads along the route. With quicker and safer pedestrian crossings, and a new protected cycle lane, the improvements to the A404 / A406 junction will be an example of how Brent can be transformed into a welcoming borough for active travel.

 

 

Throughout the plans new and improved pedestrian crossings and footpaths will help connect communities. Some side roads will have raised entrances, meaning people using mobility aids or with pushchairs do not need to go up and down steep kerbs. Extended bus lanes will mean faster, more reliable bus journeys. The new route will make it much easier to access Bridge Park Leisure Centre, with two new pedestrian crossings over the main road where people are not left stranded on pedestrian islands. TfL also plan to improve the lighting and CCTV in Tokyngton Recreation Ground and Stonebridge Park making these areas safer for people traveling alone and after dark.

 

The new proposals miss some important opportunities for better walking and cycling in Brent, for example by not continuing the improvements along Harrow Road to Wembley Triangle, and by not reducing the number of motor vehicles on residential roads. However, we at Brent Cycling Campaign welcome these plans, and hope they represent the start of significant investment in better active travel in Brent. If you would like to have your say and support the proposals please see the consultation on TfL’s website.

 

This article authored by Brent Cycling Campaign first appeared in the Brent and Kilburn Times.

 

AT LAST! TfL consultation opens on safer routes for cyclists between Wembley Central and Harlesden

 

 

I used to do a daily return trip by cycle for work between Harlesden (St Johns Avenue) and Park Lane, Wembley Central. To say it was more dangerous than going over the Berlin Wall would be an exaggeration, but I was often surprised to still be alive at the end of the day.

Next year it will be 5 years since Brent Council and TfL began working on safer cycling and pedestrian routes for the Wembley Centra to Harlesden journey and the long-awaited TfL consultation opens today and closes just before Christmas on December 21st.

 

 

TfL say: 

We have been working closely with Brent Council since April 2019 to develop a project that would make it safer and easier for local people to walk and cycle between Wembley and Willesden Junction.

We are developing the project in phases, and the first phase will focus on the area between Wembley Central and Harlesden stations, where we propose to provide a new high-quality Cycleway and improvements for pedestrians.

The changes would make streets in the area safer and more pleasant by enabling people to walk and cycle more and drive less.

The proposals include a protected two-way cycle lane on the A404 Harrow Road and Brentfield, new and improved cycle and pedestrian crossings over Harrow Road, better street lighting to help make the area feel safer and more trees and plants more welcoming.

This would help us to reduce air pollution and carbon emissions, which could improve local people’s health. It would also address congestion, and help support new developments(External link) (External link) planned across the wider area by providing better walking and cycling links to local businesses and stations.

The changes we would like to make are:

• Introducing a new protected two-way cycle lane on the A404 Harrow Road and Brentfield between Sylvia Gardens and First Drive, with separate low level cycle signals at junctions, new cycle crossings and better connections to other local cycle routes
• Introducing bus stop bypasses for cyclists at bus stops C and K, with the two-way cycle lane behind the bus stop island for cyclist safety
• Improving the quiet road cycle connections to Wembley Central and Harlesden stations
• Improving the route for pedestrians by adding a new crossing over Brentfield near Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre and making existing crossings at the A406 junction more direct, which will reduce crossing times
• We’ll add measures to slow traffic speeds, add better street lighting and drainage, and new areas of planting and trees where space allows along the route
• Improving the service for bus passengers by extending bus stop D so two buses can stop here at a time, and moving stop B in line with the traffic lane so that buses can pull away easily after passengers board
• Other changes to allow us to make these improvements include closing the left turn filter lanes from the A406 onto Harrow Road and Brentfield, making Sylvia Gardens exit only for motor vehicles (currently entrance only), shortening a parking bay on Harrow Road and reviewing parking restrictions on the quiet road connections. We would also move bus stop ‘Sunny Crescent’ 90m to the eastern side of Wyborne Way to make space for the new cycle lanes

 

The maps below will give you a more detailed idea of the proposals:

 

Two drop-in events are planned to discuss the proposals:

Public drop-in event 9th December

Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre, Brentfield, Harrow Road, London NW10 ORG (10:00 - 14:00)

 

Public drop-in event 12th December

Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre, Brentfield, Harrow Road, London NW10 ORG (15:00 - 19:00)

 

You can find the full online consultation here including further information: 

https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/wembley-harlesden

 

I have embedded the consultation form below in case you would like to preview it before responding or perhaps  prefer to answer offline.

 

 

The new face of Wembley revealed in the view from Barn Hill

 

The tower blocks around Wembley Stadium, from Barn Hill

The 'Twin Towers' on former Chesterfield House site (Park Lane/Wembley High Road) and new blocks being squeezed in next to the Chiltern Line, from Barn Hill

 

There's quite an audience for old sepia photographs of Brent and its various 'villages'. I wonder of these might be looked back on with nostalgia one day with attention drawn to the Metroland houses in the foreground, that have long-since been demolished and replaced by more tower blocks?

Revealed: Brent Council policy designates 'potential' for high rise development In Stonebridge (Conduit Way) and Wembley Central (Dukes Way)

 

Illustration from booklet celebrating the Brentfield Housing Scheme - June 11th 2021 LINK

An obscure Brent Council document LINK on the Council's Local Plan  piublished in June reveals plans for high rise development on part of the Brentfield Estate. I declare an interest as a former teacher at Brentfield Primary School who became familiar with the estate and its families living in low density homes with gardens and a sense of community

Their homes had been built in the wake of the First World War concerns about the poor health of working class recruits stemming from poor housing conditions. In a campaign which became known as 'Homes Fit for Heroes' local councils would build homes for those living in such conditions.

Willesden District Council planned their first Council Estate of homes for heroes and celebrated the handing over of the first homes to their tenants with a grand opening and a booklet written by the Council's Engineer and Surveyor. LINK

 

 Conduit Way now (Instant Street View)

Now 100 years later, almost to the day, those same homes have been described as of 'low quality' by Brent Council and some designated as suitable for high density tall buildings - which will probably comes as a surprise to existing tenants. This comes in the wake of the redevelopment of the Stonebridge Estates on the other side of the Harrow Road which saw high rise blocks demolished.

In a sort of domino effect in reverse, Brent Council justify the building of tall buildings here because of proposed tall buildings on the Bridge Park and Unisys sites. This designation is just part of the Brentfield estate but one can see that the same justification could be deployed at a later date for other areas with the proximity of the redeveloped tall buildings used as a justification. The open space on the other side of the North Circular may also be affected with the proposed tall building at Stonebridge station setting a precedent for the area.

 

For Stonebridge Park an additional area adjacent to the site allocation BSSA7 Bridge Park and Unisys Building has been identified. This incorporates the Conduit Way estate. This extension is justified on the basis that the existing estate is of low density, lower quality homes which has the potential to be intensified to a higher density reflective of its higher public transport accessibility. This is particularly so along and in the areas adjacent to the Brentfield frontage. This will complement the taller buildings proposed on the Unisys and Bridge Park site and reinforce the gateway role from the North Circular of those entering the borough from further afield. 

 

An accompanying map shows the proposed change to the 'tall building' area:

 

Satellite image (Google Earth)

 

 

 

The proximity to other tall buildings is also used to redraw the tall building zones for Wembley Central and Kilburn Square.

 

At Wembley Central the 'Twin Towers' on the site of Chesterfield House provides the justification for the extension of the tall building zone as well as an existing building. In this case the proposal is for additional floors to be added to the existing buildings:

For Wembley Central Area B, an additional area north of Duke’s Way has been included. This is a council housing block. This area has already been developed for a tall building at King Edward Court (11 storeys plus lower ground floor). As such its inclusion is justified in part on this basis to correctly reflect the current situation of a tall building being there. In addition, this block has also been identified as potentially being able to accommodate additional upper floors, in part taking account of the opportunity afforded by the adjacent taller Uncle building.

The new Kilburn Square Zone

The Kilburn Square controversy has already been covered on Wembley Matters LINK but it is worth recording Brent Council's justification here:

Subsequent to the submission of the draft Local Plan more work has been undertaken by the Council as the owner of the estate in testing delivery options. As a result of this a tall building is being proposed adjacent to the Kilburn Square open space. The tenants of the estate have been consulted as have the local neighbourhood forum. As the existing building is not occupied by residents, the scheme will not need a tenants’ ballot to proceed. The initial scheme has been subject to Design Council design review. Recognising the surrounding character, the Design Council regarded the principle of an additional tall building as acceptable in this location, principally due to the existence of a tower on the estate