Revised plans for Cricklewood Library

Hot on the heels of the Kensal Rise plamming application, revised architect plans for Cricklewood Library have been drawn up (above). The plans show that the community space has been increased slightly bu 30m2 to 180m2. The  library internal space of the current building was almost 300m2 on the ground floor with additional upstairs storage.

The revision includes outside space to the front and rear of the new development and includes a possible 'picture window' facing on to the landscape space.

One apartment has been deleted leaving one at the rear of the ground floor, two  each on the 1st and 2nd floors and one apartment only on the 3rd floor.

The Friends of Cricklewood Library Committee will be meeting soon and the plans are likely to be lodged with Brent planning today.
 
In October 2013 developer Andrew Gillick withdrew plans at the last minute LINK after campaigners said the community space was too small.

Police investigations are continuing into fraudulent emails supporting Gillick's previous planning application for Kensal Rise Library.

REVEALED: All Souls/Gillick Kensal Rise Library option agreement

Guest blog by Meg Howarth
 
All Souls College (ASC) has released the Option Agreement (OA) to buy Kensal Rise Library which it signed with Andrew Gillick on 26 November 2012. It was ordered to do so by the Information Commissioner following a successful appeal against its refusal to disclose the document under a Freedom of Information (FOI) request - details of that decision have been published on the ICO (Information Commissioner's Office) website.

 Failure to comply with the commissioner's decision could have resulted in ASC being reported to the High Court. Though the college was permitted to redact the names, dates and sale-price from disclosure, ironically it's only the price Andrew Gillick paid for Kensal Rise Library that's still unknown. As of today, the Land Registry records haven't been updated since the sale to Mr Gillick was completed on/after 31 January this year but currently reveal:

'Option Agreement dated 26 November 2012 made between 

(1) Andrew Gillick and (2) The Warden and College of the Souls of All 

Faithful People Deceased in the University of Oxford expiring on 31 

January 2013' 

and that the value of the property 

 'at 5 July 2012 was stated to be under £100,000'. 

Interestingly, the OA shows that Mr Gillick paid a deposit of £105,000 which was to be deducted from the sale-price of the building.

Dated                2012

THE WARDEN AND COLLEGE OF THE SOULS OF ALL FAITHFUL PEOPLE DECEASED IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD (1)

--------------------(2)

__________________________________

                OPTION AGREEMENT

         to purchase Kensal Rise Library

___________________________________

Delay continues over Kensal Rise email fraud: some niggling questions

Guest post by Meg Howarth

On 13 February, Brent council confirmed that ‘we have passed the police all the information they have requested in connection with Kensal Rise Library and that we continue to co-operate fully with their enquiries’. The police had previously stated that ‘[we]have been informed that there is further evidence to support the allegation of fraud and are awaiting receipt thereof. A decision whether to progress the allegation will be made after all the evidence has been scrutinised’ (Police may look again at email fraud evidence in Kensal Rise development, Wembley Matters 6 February).

So a police investigation in to the apparent fraudulent use of local, and other, residents’ addresses in support of a change-of-use planning application for the Mark Twain library is finally underway - five months after the Friends of Kensal Rise Library and others first reported the matter to the council. The Kensington and Chelsea force is handling the affair - developer Andrew Gillick’s head-office for his Platinum Revolver/Kensal Properties firms is in the royal borough.

There is currently no indication of when the police will decide whether or not a prosecution will follow.

Mr Gillick’s original planning application for one of Brent’s few remaining historic buildings was unanimously rejected by the council’s planning committee last September but it’s understood he has a revised application in the offing. That is why a speedy resolution to this tawdry affair is required. Despite the council’s official line that it,  

has a responsibility and obligation to consider any valid planning application that is put forward from any individual(s)...consider[ing] each on its merits in accordance with its statutory obligations’ (Christine Gilbert, acting chief executive)

most people will find it incomprehensible if the planning committee is asked to determine a further application before the outcome of an active police inquiry is known. Speed does not, of course, mean cutting corners. 

Meantime, some niggling questions remain:

Why wasn’t all the information and evidence the council had amassed handed to the police in the first instance, instead of what appears to have been a summary of its findings?

Would an investigation have been launched sooner if the police had received a complete dossier earlier?

Why did it take 10 days before council leader Muhammed Butt’s late-night tweet on 31 January stating that the police weren’t pursuing the investigation - the first (and last) anyone’s heard of the City Police’s NFIB (National Fraud and Investigation Bureau) initial decision to take no further action? The head of Brent’s Audit and Investigation department was informed of this on 21 January but was taking ‘advice’ on what he was ‘able to disclose’. In the event, he never disclosed anything. Did the council want to ensure vacant possession of the site by landlord All Souls College, Oxford)? It knew the completion of the sale of the building to Andrew Gillick was conditional on vacant possession and that the final date for this was 31 January - its lawyers are the only third party to have seen the Binding Agreement to sell the building to this developer. Vacant possession was, of course, achieved by All Souls sending in its heavies at 6am to demolish the pop-up.

Back at the beginning of October, Brent’s legal boss, Fiona Ledden wrote about Brent’s own inquiry into the fraudulent emails that: The [council’s] investigation is continuing and there have been some complications in relation to the work undertaken. It would not be usual to publish findings of any investigation, there may however be some conclusions that we will be able to share’.

At that stage, it seems the council didn’t anticipate police involvement. 

So what changed, and when? Was it the information the council received early in November that a property owned by Andrew Gillick in St Mary’s Terrace, Paddington was sub-let at the time an online-comment using that address appeared in support of the council’s own planning application for the Barham Library Complex? Mr Gillick, the only supporter of that proposed development, was slated to speak at the planning hearing but failed to attend. It was this same address that was previously used twice to support his own change-of-use application for Kensal Rise Library. Any developer is entitled to support her/his own application but if the comments using the developer’s W2 address were submitted in his name when someone else was living there, that surely could give rise to allegations of fraud? 

Information about this, like the theft of Kensal Rise businesswoman Kirsty Slattery’s address which was used to support the developer’s change-of-use application for the 110-year old library building, appears to have been sent to the police only this month.

Why?

Wall of Shame around Kensal Rise Library as developer annexes community asset

Gillick's Wall of Shame going up around Kensal Rise Library today

The Bursar of All Souls College, Thomas Seaman, has confirmed that the sale of Kensal Rise Library to developer Andrew Gillick has been completed.

All Souls College therefore has no further role having facilitated Gillick's possession of the site by demolishing the pop up library. They appear to have ignored pleas that the sale should not be completed until police investigations had reached a conclusion.

They have washed their hands of the problem but it won't go away as we wait for confirmation that the police are definitely going to investigate the fraudulent emails in Mr Gillick's previous planning application.

Police may look again at email fraud evidence in Kensal Rise development

The Evening Standard LINK  is reporting tonight that the police are set to launch an inquiry into the fraudulent emails that supported developer Andrew Gillick's planning application for the Kensal Rise Library building.

Hannah Bewley, who reports on Brent for the Harrow Observer, however has uploaded a story LINK that states:

A spokesman for Kensington and Chelsea police, which is dealing with the investigation, said: “Police have been informed that there is further evidence to support the allegation of fraud and are awaiting receipt thereof. A decision whether to progress the allegation will be made after all the evidence has been scrutinised.”

Clearly that raises the question of whether all the information was handed over by Brent Council  or perhaps the 'further evidence' is from individuals whose names and addresses were used without their consent. 

Whatever the case news that the police are now taking the issue seriously after their earlier dismissive attitude is welcome.

Butt 'bitterly disappointed' over dropping of police fraud email investigation

Reporter Hannah Bewley of the Wembley and Willesden Observer has been busy following up the Kensal Rise Pop Up library demolition story. Her report LINK contains the following statements from the Council and Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt:

A spokesman for Brent Council said:

The council undertook its own detailed enquiries before referring the matter to the police and provided the police with a summary of the outcome as part of the agreed referral process through the National Fraud Reporting Centre. The council remains very concerned about the way that the planning portal was used on this occasion and has subsequently made changes to forestall future problems arising. The council wants to continue to maintain the highest level of integrity with its planning process, since the authority continues to have statutory responsibilities to consider planning applications that are submitted.

Labour leader of the council Muhammed Butt said:

It is bitterly disappointing that the police have chosen to ignore the evidence found in the council’s own inquiries and drop their investigation. When the future of the building affects hundreds of Brent residents and the entire Kensal Rise community, any issue of alleged fraud must surely be a priority in order to maintain the trust of local people. Whilst I know that this Conservative-Liberal Democrat Government has cut the police force by a fifth in the last three years, I am troubled that this investigation has not been carried out as a matter of urgency. Brent Council will be writing to demand that the police review their original decision and launch an appropriate investigation.

Pressure mounted further following an Evening Standard report  LINK on the demolition and Hannah Bewley hinted on Twitter that the police may change their stance and expects a statement tomorrow morning. Cllr James Denselow tweeted back saying that he had 'seen the emails'  (presumably those between the council and police - not the fake ones) and that he had his fingers crossed.

I understand that  Kirsty Slattery, of Gracelands Yard, whose address was falsely used to support Andrew Gillick's planning application is taking up the issue directly with the police, having had no response to her emails to Brent Council.

Video: Kensal Rise rises up to defend their library

Developer submits new Queensbury pub plans

Fairview Homes have submitted their new plans to demolish The Queensbury. See them HERE

The proposals still involve a tower block but also include a space for a  drinking establishment (A4 in planning jargon) on the ground floor.

The Save The Queensbury Campaign is meeting next Wednesday, 4 December at 7.30pm at the pub to discuss a response. All welcome.

Stop Barnet Council stealing Cricklewood's green space for developers

The Green Space (Green Isle)

The Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Development has learned that under revised plans to go before Barnet planning committee in January 2014 the green space outside B&Q (known as the 'Green Isle') will be built over in Phase one.  Despite Cricklewood Town Team having popular plans to plant trees and utilise part of the space for a market in the short term, this green space has been parcelled up and sold for high density development as part of the Brent Cross Cricklewood development over a mile away.

The green space on Cricklewood Lane will be covered by a five storey building, right up to the pavement line. Phase one could begin within 3 years.

The view towards the bridge now

The view when the green space is built on

     

Lesley Turner, Barnet resident and BXC coalition member says:

This green space was given to Cricklewood community at the end of the eighties, as compensation or section 106 planning gain, when Food Giant (now B&Q) was built on the site. The Green does not belong to Barnet but to Cricklewood and we have asked Barnet to see the original 106 agreement. We will be challenging Barnet over the legality of the disposal or change of use of this land. 

Lia Colacicco, Mapesbury resident and member of the BXC coalition added:

Cricklewood Town Team identified that Cricklewood needs a landmark at its centre, and a town square.  The Green Isle is our only public space, used for the Silk Road festival and other community events and now it will be snatched from us.  This piece of land is totally unrelated to the BXC development a couple of miles away, but has been wrapped up with it to gain outline planning permission.  Barnet Councillors should be held to account for this stealthy disposal of green land. It is a generic piece of land to the developers, but means everything to us and needs to be unwrapped from BXC, or become the subject of a land swap. The site might not be pretty now, but look at how Mapesbury Dell has been transformed.

Once excavated it would be a real asset to the community as a plaza or other open space. 

Fiona Colgan from the Groves Community Action Group said:

My neighbours and I have written to our councillors and MP to strongly oppose the plan to build on our only local green space.  Cricklewood spans three boroughs - we are asking  Brent and Camden councils to call  Barnet to account.  

 Accommodation in the Groves is very high density and Cricklewood Lane gets very congested and polluted so this green space is particularly important to us but it's clear that everyone in Cricklewood would benefit if this land was retained as our 'town green’ at the heart of our community.  I think Barnet needs to explain why the green space in front of B&Q wasn’t included in its calculations of green space. Those of us who live in this part of the borough often feel overlooked by Barnet who do not seem to realise that we need green space as much as those who live in the wealthier, leafier parts of the borough to the North.

 The Coalition group urges people to attend the public consultation this week:

     

Consultation on Tuesday 12 and Wednesday 13 November from 11am to 8pm at Hendon Leisure Centre, Marble Drive, NW2 1XQ.

Comments need to be sent to nicola.capeli@barnet.gov.uk by 6th December

An on-line petition has been launched to save the Green Isle LINK

Further information on the Brent Cross Coalition website: LINK

Kensal Rise development fake email action now in police hands

Cllr Roxanne Mashari, Brent Council Executive member and lead for Environment and Neighbourhoods, today confirmed to Kensal Rise Library campaigners that the Council has referred the matter of fake emails to the police for further action.

The fake emails were sent to Brent Planning Officers purporting to support developer Andrew Gillick's planning application for the redevelopment of Kensal Rise Library. Gillick has recently complained to the local press that Brent Council is not talking to him.

More student accommodation coming to Wembley Park

Affordable family housing in the Wembley Stadium regeneration area seems even further away after this announcement:

Developer Unite Group has purchased a one acre development site in north west London's Wembley for a mixed-use student accommodation and retail scheme.18 Sep 2013

Unite's plans for the site, which is currently occupied by a car park, include the construction of student housing to accommodate 700 students as well as 10,000 square feet of space for shops.

The site is located within the Wembley Park regeneration area, which also includes plans for new homes, shops and offices to be built around Wembley Stadium.

Subject to planning consent, the scheme will be developed by the London Student Accommodation Vehicle (LSAV) which is a joint venture between Unite and GIC Real Estate.

“This development is the third scheme to be secured as part of our LSAV joint venture, representing 65% of our target, and demonstrates UNITE’s knowledge and experience in sourcing the best locations for student accommodation," said Unite managing director of property Richard Simpson in a statement.

"As well as being a key milestone in the Group’s development strategy, this site is close to the shops, entertainment and excellent transport links of Wembley Park, including the London Designer Outlet, and will strongly appeal to students,” he added.

Unite said it expects the scheme to be completed in 2016.

Councillors and The Queensbury: The roll call of shame

Guest blog from the Save The Queensbury Group

This is an epic battle; good vs evil, David vs Goliath, community vs developer. It seems to also be a battle of resident vs councillor.

Several residents have asked us what our local councillors are doing about the threatened demolition of The Queensbury Pub. Given the huge public opposition to the plans, the response of our elected representatives has been, on the whole, rather shabby. We find it disappointing that they are so out of touch with public opinion and also surprising, given that we are now in the run-up to to next year's local elections.

We urge everyone to telephone and write to local councillors and ask them to take a stand against the loss of a valued community space. Note that some will say that they will pass your views on to the planners but have no view themselves (the "postman" approach).

This is not acceptable - as representatives they should declare a view and stand up for the interests of their residents. If they refuse you might like to ask them why they think it acceptable to remain neutral on (or even support!) the destruction of community facilities in the name of a developer's profit. Don't be shy to email or telephone councillors, remember they are supposed to work for us! You might also like to remind them of the upcoming elections which take place in May 2014.

We have listed local councillors in the four wards closest to The Queensbury, along with their known views and their contact details. If your councillor is one of those who is opposing the development it is still worthwhile dropping them a line thanking them and saying you support their stance.
You can find out which ward you're in here http://www.writetothem.com/

MAPESBURY WARD
146 of the formal objections to the original plans came from residents in the Mapesbury ward.

Councillor Hayley Matthews (Liberal Democrat)
Councillor Matthews' colleagues tell us she against the Queensbury development although she has not made any public statement regarding it nor, as far as we are aware, has she submitted any formal objection to the plans.
cllr.hayley.matthews@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 020 8937 1133
Verdict: Not good enough

Councillor Chris Leaman (Liberal Democrat)
Councillor Leaman is opposed to the demolition of the Queensbury and has submitted an objection.
cllr.chris.leaman@brent.gov.uk
Tel 020 8451 9072
Verdict: Good

Councillor Sami Hashmi (Liberal Democrat)
Councillor Hashmi is a member of the Planning Committee and so is not allowed to declare a view until he hears all the evidence at the Planning Committee meeting. This should not stop you making your views known as a resident and he should still acknowledge your comments.
cllr.sami.hashmi@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 07956 212 825
Verdict: N/A

WILLESDEN GREEN WARD
90 of the formal objections to the original plans came from residents in the Willesden Green ward.

Councillor Lesley Jones (Labour)
Councillor Jones is opposed to the demolition of the Queensbury and has submitted an objection.
cllr.lesley.jones@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 020 8452 3086
Verdict: Good

Councillor Ann Hunter (Liberal Democrat)
Councillor Hunter has so far refused to take a view and is taking the "postman" approach. She has claimed that some residents are supporting the development but has refused to give figures of the numbers of people who have contacted her either for or against.
cllr.ann.hunter@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 020 8830 2152
Verdict: Poor, and possibly dishonest

Councillor Gavin Sneddon (Liberal Democrat)
Councillor Sneddon has not so far taken a view on the demolition of the pub. In conversation he has expressed concern that the development may be inappropriate and too profit-driven but he has made no formal statement. When questioned recently he exclaimed "you can't expect me to make a decision right now!" and was silent when it was pointed out out that that the demolition plans had been in the public domain for 7 months.
cllr.gavin.sneddon@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 07407 155 438
Verdict: Must do better

DUDDEN HILL WARD
41 of the formal objections to the original plans came from residents in the Dudden Hill ward.

Councillor Aslam Choudry (Labour)
Repeated emailing finally got a response 6 months after our original inquiry. Councillor Choudry has stated that he supports the need for new housing in Brent. He has not responded to our reply that just 4 of the proposed 56 flats will be the affordable family-sized homes that Brent desperately needs, and that these could easily be incorporated into a design which preserves The Queensbury.
cllr.aslam.choudry@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 07958 732 384
Verdict: Poor and misguided

Councillor Krupesh Hirani (Labour)
Councillor Hirani has submitted a view that the current proposals do not have enough wheelchair-accessible homes and there is not enough disabled parking provision . He has not objected to the demolition of the pub but will adopt the "postman" approach to residents who send him their comments. In response to a tweet asking him if he supported demolition of the Queensbury he said he had "no opinion". A local politician having "no opinion" on the loss of a community amenity seems quite odd to us.

cllr.krupesh.hirani@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 07886 939 295
Verdict: Poor

Councillor Rev David Clues (Liberal Democrat)
Councillor Clues moved to Brighton over a year ago and has not been seen or heard from for many months. He remains a Brent councillor and is still entitled to collect his allowances. Many residents have complained to us about their emails going unanswered, his lack of response to residents is now the subject of a complaint to the Standards Committee of the council by one resident, another is promising to pay him a visit in Brighton with copies of her unanswered letters about The Queensbury.
cllr.david.clues@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 07957 140 372

Verdict: Absolute disgrace
BRONDESBURY PARK WARD
24 of the formal objections to the original plans came from residents in the Brondesbury Park ward

Councillor Carol Shaw (Liberal Democrat)
Councillor Shaw is opposed to the demolition of the Queensbury and submitted an objection early on in the process.
cllr.carol.shaw@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 020 8958 4436
Verdict: Good

Councillor Barry Cheese (Liberal Democrat)
Councillor Cheese is a reserve on the Planning Committee and prefers not to express a view as it may be grounds to disqualify him from voting. This should not stop you making your views known as a resident and he should still acknowledge your comments.
cllr.barry.cheese@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 020 8459 1716
Verdict: N/A

Councillor Mark Cummins (Liberal Democrat)
Councillor Cummins is a member of the Planning Committee and so is not allowed to declare a view until he hears all the evidence at the Planning Committee meeting. This should not stop you making your views known as a resident and he should still acknowledge your comments.
cllr.mark.cummins@brent.gov.uk
Tel: 07976 739 058
Verdict: N/A