From Brent Council
|
From Brent Council
|
Guest post by local historian Philip Grant
Back in November 2018, I wrote a short post about a blue plaque which had been unveiled in Ealing Road, to commemorate Sir Henry Cooper. The greengrocers business that he ran there, for three years in the 1960s, was called “Henry Cooper of Wembley”, and that is the name of a free illustrated talk which I will be giving at Brent Civic Centre on the morning of Saturday 17 June. I’m writing this article, so that as many local people as possible, who might wish to come along to my talk, are aware of it.
The talk has been arranged for that weekend, and that venue, because it will be the 60th anniversary of Henry Cooper’s famous boxing match at Wembley Stadium (a final eliminator, with the winner fighting for the Heavyweight Championship of the World) against Cassius Clay, aka Muhammad Ali.
The talk is not just about boxing, but also about Henry Cooper the man, who lived in Wembley with his family for fifteen years, at the height of his career. Although it is advertised as being at the Civic Centre's Wembley Library, the talk will actually take place in Boardrooms 4&5 as students will be revising for exams in the library itself. Because of this, if you are coming to the talk, please arrive between 10.15 and 10.25am, at the library entrance in the main Civic Centre atrium, so that a member of staff can take you up to the third floor in the lift.
Although this is a free talk, you need to book online, at the Brent Culture Service Eventbrite website, to reserve your place. To see more details, and to do that, please click HERE. I look forward to sharing Henry’s story with you, in words and pictures!
Philip Grant
'Reach for the book' - the 'concept' plan to replace the spiral straircase
The Liberal Democrat Group on Brent Council have expressed doubts about the Council’s decision to spend £2m on the £100m 10 years old Brent Civic Centre.
They said:
The Cabinet decision to spend an excessive sum of £1.96 million on upgrades to Brent Civic Centre, at a time when services provided by the local authority continue to be reduced, is wrong and unjustified.
As a service-based organisation, Brent Council should always be putting the needs of residents first and we do not believe that committing this large amount of money on ‘Improving the Customer Experience’ at the Civic Centre is a priority for our residents. Most residents are concerned about crumbling and dangerous local roads and pavements, increased rubbish being dumped in our area, and most significantly the huge financial pressures faced due to the Cost-of-Living crisis, compounded by upcoming additional pressures like the increase in Council Tax and other charges.
It is difficult to justify spending £1.96 on the Civic Centre building, when there are so many other areas the Council should be prioritising at this time.
The Report makes no mention of the number of visitors to the Civic Centre, what the numbers the current arrangements can cope with and what the numbers the redesign will be able to accommodate, after spending £1.96 million. Why?
The Report also makes claims about savings without specifying what these savings will be.
Brent Civic Centre is barely 10 years old. We find it incredible that the Cabinet have been able to identify such a large amount of money for a redesign, whilst simultaneously claiming shortfalls in the budget exist, which impact the delivery of services and upkeep of our wards.
It is accepted by many that, particularly post pandemic, the Civic Centre is not being used to full capacity. Much of the vast space available for use is not being utilised as intended, as many Council Officers are able to do their work remotely and from home. Whilst the Report refers mostly to the customer areas of the Civic Centre, we believe that a discussion now needs to also begin about the continued use of the Civic Centre as a whole, given the costs involved for its upkeep, and the potential for considerable revenue to be generated if it is used in different ways.
The Report focuses on the face-to-face public spaces in the Civic Centre as being in need of a redesign. We do not believe that enough effort has been made to adapt, at much lesser cost, the existing spaces for ‘customers’ who come to the building seeking support.
We believe that further work needs to take place to understand alternative, less costly action to ensure a better ‘Customer Experience’ at Brent Civic Centre. We acknowledge that some consultation has been done that has led to the decision to produce this Report, however we are sceptical that enough people’s views were taken into account and that a wide range of views were considered in preparation for this Report.
As Councillors often in the Civic Centre, we recognise the waste of space in the mezzanine area. This space should be used more efficiently, as noted in the Report, however, we see no need for expansive works to improve it.
The Report refers to the need to create private more secluded areas for ‘customers’ (residents) to have meetings and discussions with Council Officers. There is a great deal of empty space on the ground floor and the first floor that could quite easily be turned into private spaces, as is required.
There is also an opportunity to create a secondary reception area on the left side of the ground floor, where currently ‘Registrations’ take place. We see no problem in dual purpose use of that side of the ground floor.
As to the issues with heating in the building, the current plan seems extravagant and unnecessary. We want to see officers explore alternative options to regulate the heat in the Civic Centre, possibly by installation of additional artificial walls.
Our view is that better use can be made of existing Hub centres across the borough, in order to provide a service to our residents out in the community. The money agreed by Cabinet to spend on redesign of the Civic Centre, can be better used to improve existing services that are more likely to directly assist residents with their needs.
Fundamentally, we believe it is impossible to justify the £1.96 million spend as agreed by Cabinet. It is the wrong time, the wrong look and could bring this Council into disrepute if this goes ahead.
Our residents want to see their Council focus on the issues that matter to them and for the vast majority that will never step foot in the Civic Centre, this decision will have no positive impact.
If you're having problems with your device and don't know what's wrong, our friendly IT experts are on hand to help answer all your questions. Don't despair - choose repair!
We've opened the UK's FIRST EVER Fixing Factory in Brent to tackle the major problem of discarded tech.
Last year, west Londoners threw out 116,000 tonnes of electrical items – that’s over 68 Wembley arches worth of stuff! We're fixing our relationship with tech by:
- Saving laptops & tablets from waste by refurbishing and repairing them
- Teaching FREE repair skills to local people in the process
- Empowering local communities by giving FREE fixed devices to those without access
Book a slot to come down and receive a free diagnostics check and repair advice on your laptop or tablet. Our expert volunteers will need the full hour so don’t be late!
Location: Brent Civic Centre Library ( Wembley Library)
REGISTER HERE (Note only 14.30-15.30 seemed to be left when I checked)
To assist in achieving the vision for Wembley, a significant element in terms of place making is the provision of new and substantial steps to the stadium to replace the pedestrian way (‘pedway’) and works to the public realm between Wembley Park underground station and the National Stadium Wembley: Olympic Way. This will enhance the area, both from an aesthetic and functional requirement.Olympic Way as a piece of public realm is showing its age. It does not present the type of quality considered consistent with the environment necessary for a world renowned iconic venue and the wider Wembley Park development. In the context of other pressing infrastructure needs and other Council revenue spending requirements, a response might be that a significant Council funding contribution towards these changes should be a low priority. Nevertheless, this would be a simplistic and does not take account of all factors, including limitations associated with funding streams generated from development. CIL funding attained by the Council is specifically related to infrastructure and is not available to support Council general revenue spending. In addition this proposed change in public realm should be seen as part of a wider picture about what will be achieved in Wembley which will have far reaching positive impacts for Brent and its prospects.Improved public realm has a key role in place-making. Such changes in their own right have the potential to totally transform the perception and function of an area. It can lead to enhanced social and economic value benefits that far outweigh the initial investment. Notable examples of the impacts of such transformational public realm changes are Regent’s Street, Granary Square at Kings Cross, Birmingham, Manchester, Sheffield and Liverpool city centres. Empirical evidence set out in valuing the Benefits of Regeneration published by CLG 2010 indicates a benefit cost ratio of 1.4 for public realm work. Specific evidence associated with Sheffield indicated that the £9.5 million invested in the Peace Gardens has generated £4.5 million visitor shopping/leisure spend per annum that otherwise would not have occurred. In addition it attracted commercial property investment and occupiers that otherwise would not have come, improving investment yields with the associated economic benefits of providing access to future investor funding.The transformational change of Wembley has and will continue to require strong partnership working between the Council, developers and key stakeholders. As part of providing certainty and support for investment, the Council has previously identified that it will use contributions generated by Quintain’s developments to support the new infrastructure. Key elements relate to where these contributions will be prioritised relate to the provision of new jobs and homes and improvements to the environment and public realm. As part of the shared vision for Wembley, the Council has worked closely with Quintain in identifying the quality of public space that both organisations consider is necessary to enhance the Wembley offer.Following a design competition, in which the council participated, Dixon Jones were selected as Architects and Gross Max as Landscape Architects for Olympic Way. Designs have been developed over a number of months that when implemented will:· Provide new hard and soft landscaping throughout· New coordinated crossing at Fulton Road· New Lighting columns with large banners and future digital screens· New Trees· Built in services to allow pop up and cultural events· Fast Wifi throughout· Containment for future digital screens· Wayfinding· Create a significant square outside Civic Centre· Remove of the Pedway and new substantial steps· Enhanced entrance to the stadium· New Retail / meeting point below new stadium steps· Removal of surplus ramps and steps adjacent to 1 Olympic Way· Cycle parking at Wembley Park station· Treatment to Bobby Moore Bridge· Long term management arrangements through potential for designation as a ‘Area of special interest’
Agreed.I am not not reassured by the opacity of Quintain's relationship with the Council, or what often strike me as the perverse judgements of Cllr Muhammed Butt in planning matters, or the degree to which the Planning Committee is independent of the Council Leader's influence.
Brent Town Hall Council Chamber |
The Civic Centre Conference Room/Council Chamber - councillors' offices are behind the translucent panels |
There is no public gallery as such but these are seats for officers and public |
The replacement for the Paul Daisley Hall - ballroom dancing? |
Into the grey zone - a committee room |
The Labour Group's Office |
The Mayor's Parlour |