D Day for Willesden Green Adult Gaming Centre tomorrow. Licensing Committee 10.30am Civic Centre. Inperson or on-line

 

Having got through Planning Committee, with a change from Bingo Hall to Adult Gaming Centre, the applicants are at Brent Licensing Committee tomorrow applying for a gambling licence for the former Lloyds Bank at 1 Walm Lane, Willesden Green.

On Sunday afternoon there was a community demonstration on the traffic island opposite the building. People held up placards with quotes from the many objections to the application.

I took part in the protest

 

At a community meeting earlier this week called  by the police and Brent Council, residents expressed concerns about the deterioration of their neighbourhood, especially in terms of personal safety. Council leader Muhammed Butt attended but did not speak.

There are 245 documents on the Licensing Committee agenda for this application that will be heard tomorrow morning 10.30am at Brent Civic Centre - a lot of reading for Committee members.

There is a document from the police that declares them satisfied with the 24 undertakings given by the applicant and therefore making no representations to the Committee. That document is dated 16th April 2026 - a lot has happened in the area since then but no revised document has been submitted at the time of writing.

Cllr Mary Mitchell (Green, Willesden Green ward) has submitted an up to date statement that is the last on the list of 245 documents. It deserves wider circulation and I reproduce it below: 

  

Supplementary Statement from Councillor Mary Mitchell, Ward Councillor for

Willesden Green Application 37891 – Adult Gaming Centre, 1 Walm Lane, NW2 5SN

 

Having reviewed the applicant's supplementary submission, I wish to draw the Committee's attention to a number of matters which I believe require careful consideration alongside the representations already submitted by residents and community organisations.

 

1. I am concerned by the applicant's characterisation of resident objections. The fact that many representations raise similar concerns should not diminish the weight attached to them. Residents are responding to the same proposal within the framework of the statutory licensing objectives and it is therefore unsurprising that common themes emerge. The consistency of concerns relating to vulnerability, gambling harm, crime and anti-social behaviour is, in my view, indicative of the  depth and breadth of local concern rather than evidence that those concerns should be discounted.

 

2. I am concerned by the extent to which the applicant seeks to challenge or minimise the relevance of Brent's public health evidence, including the severe risk of suicidality and mental health denigration linked to gambling addiction. These documents have been developed to help the Council understand local need, deprivation and risk. The Committee should carefully consider whether the applicant has adequately engaged with this evidence when assessing the suitability of the proposed location and the effectiveness of the mitigation measures offered.

 

3. I ask the committee to consider the applicant’s remarks about the regulatory framework as ‘costly’, citing initial fees of £1400 and annual regulatory costs exceeding £1500 alongside the true cost of gambling borne by the people of Brent.

According to independent data from GambleAware, gambling-related harm costs the Brent infrastructure an estimated £18 million annually across emergency housing, mental health services and criminal justice interventions.

 

4. The applicant attempts to placate the committee by offering restricted opening hours. However, it is a well-established tactical playbook for Adult Gambling Centres to secure a foothold in a community with compromised hours, only to apply for a 24-hour extension shortly after, as demonstrated in the very case law the applicant cites. The applicant provides no binding permanent reassurance that they will not aggressively pursue a 24-hour rollout after the premise is up and running.

 

5. Since my original representation was submitted, further incidents of anti-social behaviour, violence, and the tragic murder of a 15-year old boy have been reported within the immediate vicinity of the proposed site, which compromise even further the position that a gambling premise would not cause harm to vulnerable individuals and increase crime and disorder.

 

These include:

 

• The murder of Jamal Ringrose, on Dudden Hill Lane on 30/05/26 (CAD9258/30MAY)

• An assault, under investigation, near Willesden Green train station on 31/05/26 (CAD6615/31MAY)

• An assault, under investigation, near Willesden Green train station on 07/06/26 (CAD 969/7JUN)

 

I do not suggest that the proposed premises would be directly responsible for such incidents. However, I believe the Committee should consider this evidence as part of its wider assessment of the local environment and whether the licensing objective of protecting vulnerable persons from harm can be adequately upheld at this location.

More than 200 representations have been submitted in opposition to this application. Taken together, these representations raise serious concerns regarding the suitability of this location for an Adult Gaming Centre and the potential impact on vulnerable members of the community.

I therefore respectfully ask the Committee to give careful consideration to the cumulative weight of the evidence before it and to satisfy itself that the licensing objectives can be upheld before any licence is granted.

 

 The meeting will now be viewable on line here: 

When clicking the link, there is no requirement to enter your email address, on the 18 June at 10.30am, click ‘Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub Committee’ to view.
 
https://brent.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/1102285

 

Public meeting tonight following the murder of Jamal Ringrose: 6pm Brent Indian Community Centre. Cllr Mary Mitchell sets out 6 key requests.

 

A week ago Cllr Mary Mitchell (Willesden Green) wrote to to the local following  following the murder of Jamal Ringrose, putting it into a wider context and making a number of requests:

  

Dear DCS Luke Williams, DS Tony Bellis and Insp. Naomi Wilder,

 

I am writing on behalf of many residents of Willesden Green who have contacted me regarding crime, antisocial behaviour, drug use and drug dealing in the vicinity of Willesden Green and Dollis Hill stations. There is a growing perception, which I share, that our area is not receiving the level of policing attention that residents reasonably expect and deserve. Residents have reported persistent and ongoing concerns including drug dealing, public drug use, antisocial behaviour, intimidation, theft, indecent exposure and violence. Many of these reports relate to the same locations and hotspots, yet residents have seen little evidence of sustained intervention or long-term problem-solving.

 

While individual operations have taken place, many residents feel that visible policing has diminished and that issues repeatedly return once short-term enforcement activity ends.

 

These concerns have been brought into sharp focus by a series of serious incidents over the past eight days.

 

Most tragically, fifteen-year-old Jamal Ringrose lost his life following a stabbing on Dudden Hill Lane. My thoughts are with Jamal's family, friends and the wider community, including the local business owners who came to his aid in the aftermath of the incident, showing the best of our community. I fully recognise that this investigation is ongoing and it would be inappropriate to speculate on the circumstances.

 

Separately, there have been two further incidents of knife violence in the vicinity of Willesden Green Station and the surrounding alleyways and public spaces that residents have repeatedly identified as locations associated with antisocial behaviour, drug use and criminal activity.

 

I do not suggest that these incidents can be attributed to any single cause, nor that they are necessarily connected. However, residents are entitled to ask whether longstanding concerns raised over many years have received sufficient attention and whether more proactive intervention could have reduced the conditions in which serious violence is able to emerge.

 

I therefore welcome your response to the following requests:

 

1. A commitment to immediate regular high-visibility patrols around Willesden Green Station, Dollis Hill station and adjoining routes

 

2. Participation in Multi-Agency Operation Walkabouts at an increased frequency when organised by the Council

 

3. Immediate efforts to reduce staff turnover, provide senior leadership responsibility, and reduce staff abstraction in Willesden Green

 

4. Formal joint operations between the Metropolitan Police and British Transport Police to tackle drug dealing, violence and antisocial behaviour linked to transport hub, with a greater focus on disrupting drug supply networks and repeat offenders operating within the ward.

 

5. A ward-level violence reduction strategy, including work with schools, youth services, community groups and local partners to prevent young people becoming involved in crime.

 

6. Strengthening of the Willesden Green Safer Neighbourhood Ward Panel as a forum for accountability, with a commitment for SNT attendance irrespective of competing priorities, and senior leadership participation.

 

I intend to share both this letter and your response with residents, as transparency and accountability are essential if public confidence is to be strengthened.

 

While I have no doubt that individual officers and frontline staff are working hard under considerable pressure, recent events indicate the collective response has not been sufficiently coordinated, sustained or effective.

 

It seems clear to me that the system as a whole is failing to prevent persistent antisocial behaviour and serious violence, disrupt drug-related criminality, support vulnerable people in crisis, and provide residents with the sense of safety they deserve.

 

I look forward to your reply and to working constructively with you to ensure that Willesden Green receives sustained attention and long-term solutions.

 

Meeting to support Willesden Green Access Group's bid for escalators/lift at the station TONIGHT Pakistani Community Centre 7-9pm

 

Improve Accessibility at Willesden Green Underground Station. Join the meeting tomorrow!

Willesden Green Access Group (WGAG) are holding a meeting with key stakeholders and the community to discuss plans to improve accessibility (by installing lifts/escalators) at Willesden Green station.

 

Transport for London (TfL) recently announced that Willesden Green has been shortlisted, amongst 17 other London Underground stations, to receive a feasibility study for accessibility installations. After this study just 2 stations will be selected to receive accessibility installations from TfL - such as lifts and escalators. 

 

WGAG volunteers have been working on this proposal since 2018, and they need your help at this next phase. Please join the meeting tomorrow to lend your support.

Register to join the meeting: 

 

When: Tomorrow Monday 24th November 2025,

At: 7:00-9:00pm

Where: Pakistani Community Centre, Marley Walk (off Station Parade), NW24PU

 

Please register via Eventbrite (below) and email to confirm your attendance: WGAG Chairperson Sajidah Kazmi at WillesdenGreenAccessGroup@outlook.com

Once registered , a Zoom Link can be sent to those who are unable to attend in person.

 

Eventbrite Link to register attendance:

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/.../willesden-green-access...

Brent Planning Committee approves Adult Gaming Centre for former Lloyds Bank in Willesden Green

 Readers may remember that having gained planning permission for a 'Bingo Hall' at the former Llouds Bank on the corner of High Road and Walm Lane, Willesden Green, the applicant came back with a new application to turn the former bank premises into an Adult Gaming Centre. LINK

Yesterday's diminished Planning Committee approved the application by 4 votes to one. 

Cllr Matt Kelcher, the Committee Chair advised that due to his publicly stated position against the provision of gambling establishments within the borough and to avoid any allegations of bias or pre-determination he would recluse himself. Councillor Johnson had declared a personal disclosable interest and therefore withdrew from the meeting for the consideration of that item.

 

The possibility of reducing the hours to an 10pm closure, that than the 'night time economy' 11pm limit was discussed but not adopted. 

 

Cllr Dixon was the lone voice against on grounds of the opposition from locoal residents, mpact on a conservation area, not contributing to the vibrancy of the high street and a failure to provide healthy streets amongst others.

 

56 residents had made submission against the application and Dawn Butler MP (Brent East) made a late intervention that necessitated a Supplementary Report. Butler has raised the issue of the impact on vulnerable Brent residents of so many gambling joints, in the House of Commons.

 

Officers were rather dismissive:

 

One further representation with comments has been received raising objection to the proposed development. The objections are from Dawn Butler MP (Labour Member of Parliament for Brent East). The comments that have been raised broadly correspond to those already received and addressed within the Consultations section of the Committee Report. The comments raised refer to existing gambling problems and impacts within the borough. It is suggested that limited information pertaining to the building has been provided, however it is considered that sufficient information has been submitted in line with the Council’s Validation requirements for the purpose of planning assessment.

 

Finally, the concluding objection is directed to the ‘Licencing Authority’. In response, Licencing is an independent department to Planning within the Council. As well as seeking planning permission the applicant would be required to obtain the relevant licences to operate as an Adult Gaming Centre. An informative to this effect would be included within the Decision Notice.

 

So next stop is Brent Licensing Committee. 

 

Drop into the Willesden Green Nest Cafe and purchase a postcard by a local artist to help raise cancer research funds (the coffee is good too!)

'Nest Cafe, Willesden Green', 2024 (Tim Danby)

 

Willesden Green artist Tim Danby is raising funds for Haematology Cancer Care at the University College London Hospital through sales of a postcard of his original painting. 'Nest Cafe, Willesden Green' 2024.

Tim painted the scene at The Nest Cafe between two bouts of Lymphoa.  The picture is on display with other UCLH Patients' Art work until 9th July in the Hospital .

Postcards of the painting are available from The Nest Cafe at Willesden Green Underground Station at a suggested price of 50p.

Tim told Wembley Matters:

I am not a famous artist. I am just happy to promote the Cancer Charity, the Nest Cafe and simply present a positive and sunny image of Willesden in these fraught times.

 

Opposition builds to Willesden Green Adult Gaming Centre

Oppositon is building to the new application to convert the Lloyd's Bank buidling at 1 Walm Lane, Willesden Green into an Adult Gaming Centre. See Wembley Matters story HERE.

Cllr Saqlain Choudry took to Next Door to urge local residents to object:

Willesden Green does not need another gambling establishment or betting premise. I strongly object to the proposed adult gaming centre (formerly Lloyds bank). Our community deserves investment in spaces that promote positive activities for all ages — not venues that could encourage addiction. Please make your voices heard and comment by emailing the planning department at Brent Council or commenting on the planning application portal. LINK

The letter asks the council Planning Department to reject the application rather than councillor members of the Planning Committee,

 

Another ward councillor writes;

 I strongly object to this proposal.

There would be five gambling premises in a short stretch of road - 2 Ladbrokes, Paddy Power, the new site, and the current adult gaming centre.

This is too much and the combined effect is hollowing out our High Street.

As a local Councillor I am profoundly concerned by this.

I am even more concerned that this application turns a bingo hall into an adult gaming centre. The lack of change to he floor plan shows that the initial application was made on a morally fraudulent basis, and insult to the integrity of the committee and its members.

Adult gaming centres replace social gambling with highly individualised and algorithmically driven forms of gambling, which seek to spur addiction and take advantage of vulnerable clients. It allows higher stakes than bingo, and because of the non-social nature increases the risk of localised antisocial behaviour, directly outside the site of two recent ASB related stabbings.

This application should not be looked upon kindly and should not be allowed to proceed. The committee should do everything in its legal powers to prevent its progress.

Many thanks to those who will consider this objection. I would encourage them to also take into account the volume of feeling against this from local residents.

 

In all so far there are  37 objections (one is wrongly classified as 'Supports'). This objection may strike a chord with many residents:

 I am writing as a local resident to strongly object to the proposed conversion of the former bank premises in Willesden Green into a casino or bingo hall. As a young woman living nearby, I am deeply concerned about the implications this type of venue will have on the safety, wellbeing, and character of our community.

Over the past few months, I have already noticed a troubling rise in antisocial behaviour in the area. There has been an observable increase in public drunkenness, drug use, and drug dealing in and around Willesden Green, including on my own street. This has made me-and many others-feel significantly less safe walking alone, particularly at night. I have experienced and witnessed incidents of sexual harassment in broad daylight, and these occurrences are becoming more frequent. The addition of a gambling venue with late-night operating hours will only exacerbate these issues.

Casinos and similar gambling establishments are well-documented in their association with increased rates of crime and antisocial behaviour. Numerous studies and case histories from other parts of the UK indicate that areas surrounding such venues often see spikes in petty crime, drug-related offences, loitering, and harassment. This type of environment poses a very real threat to residents, especially women and young people. I already avoid walking alone past certain areas in the evening-bringing in a venue that typically attracts intoxicated and vulnerable individuals late into the night will only make this worse.

Beyond safety, the proposed development raises major concerns about the character and future of Willesden Green. Our area is home to a vibrant and diverse community of families, small business owners, elderly residents, and working professionals. What Willesden Green needs are services and spaces that support this community: affordable housing, youth services, libraries, childcare, green spaces, and accessible cultural or educational venues. A gambling outlet offers none of this. Instead, it threatens to erode the fabric of our high street, attracting predatory business models and potentially displacing more beneficial local services.

Moreover, venues like casinos and bingo halls often prey on the most economically vulnerable in society. In a borough like Brent, where many residents are already living with financial precarity, allowing a gambling outlet to operate in the heart of Willesden Green sends entirely the wrong message. Rather than investing in social support and community enrichment, it risks fuelling addiction, debt, and mental health problems-all of which ultimately place further pressure on local services, healthcare, and policing.

This proposal also runs counter to the council's stated commitments to equality, public health, and inclusive neighbourhood development. If Brent is serious about building safe, resilient, and inclusive communities, this application should be firmly rejected.

Finally, there is the issue of planning precedent. There is already a similar establishment a few doors away from the proposed new development, as well as numerous similar gambling businesses in Cricklewood. The presence of yet another gambling venue in such a small geographical area may dissuade other, more community-oriented businesses from investing in the area. It could also have a negative impact on nearby property values and the perception of Willesden Green as a welcoming and safe neighbourhood.

In summary, I strongly urge you to reject this application on the following grounds:

- **Increased crime and antisocial behaviour** associated with gambling venues;

- **Public safety concerns**, particularly for women and vulnerable residents;

- **Recent local rise in harassment, drug use, and intoxication** that such a venue will likely worsen;

- **Negative impact on the area's social and economic fabric**, including risks to mental health, wellbeing, and community cohesion;

- **Contradiction of Brent Council's wider social and urban development goals**.

Please act to protect the wellbeing of residents and preserve the integrity of our neighbourhood by rejecting this proposal.

 

Note that if you submit  a comment by email only your address and whether you Object or Support appears on the Planning Portal. If you submit via the portal HERE your full comment appears so enabling other residents to read it.

 

 

Applicant who was granted permission for Bingo Hall at Lloyds Bank site in Willesden Green comes back with an application to make it an Adult Gaming Centre

Brent Planning Committee granted permission for a Bingo Hall at 1 Walm Lane, Willesden Green, previously Lloyds Bank, earlier this year. Some commentators suggested that the innocent title of 'Bingo Hall' hid an intention to make it an adult gaming centre.

 

They were right. Building on that success Barry Cunningham, of Star Commercial Ltd, has submitted an application for an Adult Gaming Centre (AGC) on that site:

The Proposal:

To use the ground floor as an AGC with ancillary facilities in the basement. To retain the street elevation as existing, forming a window display area in place of the ATMs and to install signage as permitted by Class 5 of the Advertisement Regulations. To make internal alterations not being development as defined by S 55 of the principle Act.

 

The proposed opening hours are 8am to 12.30am Monday to Friday,  Saturday 9am-1am and Sunday 9.30am-12.30am.

 

Building work would begin in September this year with comppletion in ugust 2026.

 

There is little public  information available about Star Commercial Ltd. 

 

The ground floor plans for the current AGC and previous Bingo Hall (below) are like one of those 'Spot the Difference' competitions they used to have in children's comics. It makes you wonder about the original intention.

 

 Proposed layout of the Adult Gaming Centre

 Proposed layout of the Bingo Hall

 

Comments on the Application, in support or opposed, can be made on the Brent Planning Portal HERE.

Battle over Gaudiya Mission expansion in Willesden Green as neighbourhood consultation closes

Comments on the application regarding the Gaudiya Mission in suburban Cranhurst Road, Willesden Green, increased from 16 to 26 over the weekend as today's Neighbourhood Consultation Expiry Date neared.

A planning application for a basement, rear extension and single storey outbuilding in the garden, was refused by Brent Council and an Appeal against the refusal dismissed. Now the Mission has come back claiming to have addressed the issues cited by the Planning Inspectorate (see Design and Access Statement below).

 In practice comments are accepted up to the day before the Planning Committee hearing (if an application goes to the Committee and is not delegated to officers) so there is a possibility of submissions after today's date.

Comment HERE

A resident has kindly provided Wembley Matters with a version of their comment on the application:

Since the mid-1980s we have suffered from regular noise pollution and disruption as a result of the activities of the Gaudiya Mission. This was particularly problematic while the centre had consent to act as a Hindu information centre and prayer hall and consent was withdrawn on 2nd February 2004 appeal decision T/APP/T5150/AV01/1073609.   

 

The extensive works proposed in the resubmitted planning application indicate a vast increase in volume of visitors to number 27 Cranhurst Road is planned, but this is a residential area with little space between properties (a 1.8m gap between foundations), small front gardens without driveways,  and no room for crowds to congregate on narrow pavements.   There could be well over 500-700 people  attending services on a regular basis.  

 

In October 2024 the Gaudiya Mission trustees purchased 25 Cranhurst Road for £1.7m.  This forms the other side of the semi-detached property at No. 27.    It has 6 bedrooms and 3 bathrooms and includes a loft and rear extension.  It is not clear why the applicants require additional accommodation space at number 27 or why they need to extend number 27 and overdevelop when they now own such a substantial estate on Cranhurst Road.  Whilst number 25. does not have permission to be used as a prayer hall/place of worship, there is nothing to stop the applicant using number 25 to accommodate visitors whether they be temporary or long term.   

 

It has been noted that Gaudiya Mission wishes to run courses at these properties, the first was run in August/September 2024 and a large number of visitors were attending number 27 over the course of several weeks.  Catering and washing facilities were provided at number 27 and this caused a great deal of noise and disruption to neighbouring properties.  It is planned to have more of these courses and that is one of the expected uses of this facility which is not to be used as a residence at all, but as a bed and breakfast and training centre, college of sorts.   The local sewers, utilities and other facilities do not have capacity for this expansion in population and usage of these two properties.  This is a residential area which is being turned into an institutional development hub without the civic infrastructure necessary to support such overdevelopment.  

 

The proposed works indicate a minimum of a fourfold increase in the size of existing dining facilities, with a basement catering kitchen, dining room of approx 1,300 square metres and a vastly extended existing prayer hall (labelled "Community room" in the plans). The kitchen is currently being used to cater for a congregation sometimes numbering well over 100 people between a number of services which take place most weekends.    Expanding the kitchen and dining area would lead to an increase in activity, noise, cooking emissions (catering for a larger groups of people) and other environmental nuisance not suitable for a residential property with such close proximity to neighbours.

 

Services are noisy and include drums, cymbals and a horn as well as chanting. If the prayer hall is extended this will result in a larger number of people attending services and noise will increase accordingly. The extension will adversely affect the peaceful enjoyment of our property as given its proximity to neighbours, number 27 is not suitable for this level of activity.   No amount of soundproofing will help contain the noise of so many people, who cannot be controlled, frequently open doors, windows and loudly congregate in the garden during visits.

 

The road is residential and has parking restrictions Mon- Sat. These restrictions do not apply on Sundays when the most popular services take place and some services last all day until 10pm. Increasing the activities of the prayer hall will lead to increased parking congestion on the road from visitors to the Gaudiya Mission on Sundays which will adversely affect residents, particularly those who have mobility issues and need to park close to their property (this affects one of us in particular).  It is not true that visitors arrive by public transport.  There is a constant flow of traffic and cars with Sunday visitors to number 27, blocking up the road and creating congestion and parking issues for neighbouring properties. 

 

There is nothing in the plans to indicate how the existing mains sewage system will support the proposed increase in number of washing facilities and volume of visitors.  The property's sewers have been badly blocked on a number of occasions in recent years.  

 

According to the conclusions and recommendations of the biodiversity report, 61.84% of habitat units will be lost.  This is an incredible loss of natural environment in a residential area of established gardens.  There is a comment to say that the client has accepted this will need to be offset but that is not possible on these premises. The front of the property once had a thriving garden but was concreted over by Gaudiya Mission on acquisition of the property in the 1980s.  The Mission removed as much vegetation as possible from the rear garden.  The applicants have also acquired number 25 in October 2024 and have also been removing the established vegetation from the garden of number 25 since gaining possession.    There is no commitment to biodiversity at either property.  But in the confines of the planning application, there is no scope to offset biodiversity at 27 Cranhurst Road as so much of the garden habitat is planned to be destroyed by this development.

 

The residential parts of this property should have HMO status along with appropriate health and safety features.  There are unrelated people living in the property.  For example, the property was also hosting a family for some time.   It has been acting as a hostel of sorts for some members of the congregation.  The additional bedrooms indicate an expansion of this service.  This is turning a residential property into an informal hotel without any regard for rules, regulations and planning / safety requirements for these types of buildings.  

 

There is no information on the occupancy load factor in the plans.    Given the nature of the use of this building and the number of members of the public regularly attending services, why has this been left out of the planning details?

 

There was no Disabled access evacuation assessment in the plans. Given the nature of the use of this building and the large numbers of members of the public regularly attending services, why has this been left out of the planning details?

 

Security of neighbouring properties due to a vast increase in numbers of attendees has not been addressed in the planning applications.     

 

There will be pollution and ground damage caused by the proposed excavation work.   It is not clear from drawings where exactly the outbuilding will be sited or how large it will be 

 

The proposed construction work at the property can be classified as unprecedented specifically on Cranhurst Road and would involve the following.

 

o        a. The excavation of a basement across the full width of the property extending from the front wall , for the full length of the existing property then the new rear extension, then some 3 m past that and then for the stairs. Allowing for hardcore and blinding it is estimated that about 500cu.m some 800 to 900 t of soil will need to be removed. Putting this in visual terms, this would involve some 70 of 80 medium size tipper lorry. The lorries will need to filled in some way. Possibly a crane or excavators would need to be used for this. With the narrowness of the road and access to the property this would be unbearable suffering to the local community living in the neighbouring properties.  

o        b. The proposals would require some 25cu.m of hardcore, that’s about 50t, about 5 tipper trucks .

o        c. There is likely to a need for about 450t of concrete to construct the basement retaining wall and the ground floor, that’s about 20 concrete lorries, plus a couple of lorry loads of reinforcement.

o        d. There will be a substantial need for temporary propping to create this basement so more trucks to bring this in and take it out.

o        e. It is clear from the plans of the ground floor the first floor and the proposed loft that all the internal load bearing walls within the building as well as the real and rear side walls at ground floor are to be removed. Again, this will require more lorry movements to bring in significant temporary works to accomplish this. Followed by the installation of appropriate permanent to support the upper floor and walls allowing the ground floor and basement to have no load bearing element internally and then the removal of all the temporary works. This will create yet more heavy vehicular movements on the narrow road.

o        f. This does not include the transportation required for the finishes and garden works.

o        g. All the transports including the delivery of plant, removal of spoil and bringing in new construction materials, will need to empty, filled, loaded or unloaded in some way. Possibly a crane or excavators would need to be used for this or significant amount of labour. Whichever way this would be noisy and disruptive to the local residents.

o        With the narrow street and access to the property limited, the amount of work proposed, the noise and can considerably increased heavy traffic movement on the street, would cause unbearable suffering to the local community living in the neighbouring properties.  

 

 The design and access statement is very short and does not advise on the frequency of events, the numbers of people attending each event, the street parking which will be required. Currently on Sunday if is difficult to find a parking space on Cranhurst Road in the area of this property due to the volume of people attending worship. These proposals appear to vastly increase the space available for attendance of the at the mission. It is not possible for the local roads sustain any increase in the number of worshipers at this property. These proposals are likely to hinder rather than help the local community.

  

Conclusion

 

 It is very important to note that the main objective of Gaudiya Mission’s planning proposal is to significantly increase the volume of visitors to 27 Cranhurst road, from the usual 100 to over 500 to 700.  It will also put great pressure on utilities, waste disposal, traffic and parking.   As well as the pollution, noise, major disruption of such radical construction works, the planned vastly expanded congregation will further disturb the peace of a residential area with no planned mitigating developments being put into place by public services to manage this increase in footfall.  This expanded usage has not been highlighted in the planning application, which is incomplete and light on detail. 

 

In addition to this the purchase of number 25 should form a part of the planning decision-making process.  The two buildings cannot be seen as separate for the purposes of this planning application.  They are owned by and will be used by the same organisation for the same purposes of attracting large crowds of visitors to the destroy the residential nature of Cranhurst road.   

 

Rather than continuing to seek to adapt 27 Cranhurst Road from a residential property to a public building closely proximate to residential properties, we would strongly encourage Gaudiya Mission to seek more suitable (non-residential) purpose-built accommodation for the expansion of its activities such as renting a local hall or function room.