Kilburn Square battle against over-development part of a London-wide defence of residents' amenity space

 

Kilburn Square potest over over-development threat to green space

 

An article in last Wednesday's Guardian LINK on growing opposition to London council's plans to meet housing quota by building on green space and playgrounds rang a bell with campaigners opposing plans to increase the amount of housing on the Kilburn Square Co-op council estate by over 80% with the potential loss of  much valued green space.

Keith Anderson, Chair of Kilburn Village Residents' Association, was moved to write to the Guardian on how such proposals affected this corner of Brent close to the traffic laden polluted Kilburn High Road.

This is the letter that is awaiting publication:

Harriet Grant’s article (“London councils under fire for plans to build homes on play areas” June 2) struck a strong chord here in the South-Eastern corner of Brent.

 

I’m Chair of a Residents’ Association that includes the Kilburn Square Co-op – a mature, well-balanced, sociable estate with 246 flats. Council-owned, but managed by residents. Two-thirds Council tenants, one-third Leaseholders.

 

Last October, Brent announced to some residents a Plan for an extra 180 Council flats in an “Infill” development. Infill may be accepted jargon to housing insiders; but it’s a laughable euphemism in this case. Together with a new block completed last year, this Plan would increase the number of flats by over 80% compared with the original estate.

A 17-storey tower (right by the highly-polluted A5 Kilburn High Road), plus four further medium-rise blocks – removing green space and a number of mature trees, encroaching on a playground – does that sound familiar…?.

 

Our Association has been arguing that this would be serious over-development; the draft Local Plan had a suggestion, with limited elaboration, of a project on less than half this scale. This Plan would transform the Estate’s character and there’s no clear evidence that it would respect norms of amenity space per resident. We have so far been denied sight of any of the surveys and analyses on which the Plan is supposedly based. An extract from a pre-Covid parking survey showed it had wrongly assumed Brent residents can park in neighbouring Camden!

 

As elsewhere in London, Brent cites housing need and its ownership of this land – but how does that justify ignoring the wellbeing of all the current residents?

 

The project team’s attempts at pre-consultation on the estate have been ineffective: poor uptake for “Resident Panels” and a low response rate to a questionnaire; and questions merely about design details, with the overall scale a taboo subject.

 

Unlike the Southwark project, this one is not yet at formal Planning Application stage.  So is there a ray of hope? Brent’s Cabinet Housing Lead has assured a local paper that “no decisions have yet been made” and the Director of Housing told a recent Scrutiny Committee meeting that Brent “would not want to force homes on anyone”; but there’s no sign of a resident ballot. Consultation with the wider community has been postponed while the Project team “review the designs”. That hardly sounds like a major rethink on the project scale… 

 

Yours truly

Keith Anderson

Kilburn Village Residents’ Association

 

For full information about the Kilburn Square proposal see  https://save-our-square.org/

 

Daily Mail claims Wembley Stadium is being 'hemmed in' by Quintain developments

I don't often quote the Daily Mail but a recent comment by columnist Charles Sale LINK may ring bells with Wembley residents regarding concerns over over-development of the site by Quintain. As a Green I support a mainly public transport venue but it is clear not everyone is happy with current arrangements.

One of the biggest financial blunders in the history of the FA would have been apparent to fans at Wembley on Monday night as the huge car park nearest the stadium is no longer in use.

This is because work has started on the latest building development by all-too-close neighbours Quintain to construct 500 new homes on the site.

Apart from the inconvenience of parking now being further away — which the VIPs will not like — the project is taking place on land that could have been FA property if more vision had been shown two decades ago.

In 1999 the FA only had the funds — courtesy of a £120million Lottery grant from Sport England — to buy land for the stadium but none of the surrounds now being exploited by Quintain. For less than the £35m it cost Liverpool to buy Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain from Arsenal, however, the FA could have bought the whole 85-acre site and staged the London 2012 Olympics there.

Instead, one of the world’s great stadiums is hemmed in on all sides by Quintain projects.

Heron House campaigners issue urgent call for support before October 25th deadline

The site

Second Pre-application design

From campaigners against Heron House redevelopment plans LINK

We urgently need your support to sign this Letter of Objection to stop the  huge redevelopment of Heron House, Wembley Hill Road, Wembley.  Please make any changes you see fit.

The deadline for comments/objections is October 25th 2016 

1)  Copy the letter below making any alterations you think fit. Insert your full name and address, including postcode, in FROM
2)  Paste into an email with Heron House Ref: 16/4156 in subject line and send  to: mandeep.chaggar@brent.gov.uk
3)  Now please forward to family members over 18 years and as many people as possible anywhere in the UK.

FROM:  

I strongly object to the proposed redevelopment of Heron House, Wembley Hill Road, Wembley by Plowden Limited,  for the following reasons and I urge Brent Council to refuse planning permission.  Brent Council Ref:  16/4156

1)  Stadium & High Road Regeneration: Those who live in Wembley can expect 11,000 high rise dwellings in the massive Regeneration of the Stadium and High Road Areas ("Regeneration").  As this regeneration was planned and agreed many decades ago, its progress will continue and one can only hope it will  be of benefit to all the residents of Brent. Will this now be copied in other locations throughout the country?

2) Smaller High Rise Developments: Our greatest fear is the  smaller high rise developments, which are intrusive and are rapidly creeping into residential streets everywhere,  whose impact is adversely affecting our quality of life.  One of these is the proposed redevelopment  of Heron House on Wembley Hill Road, into expensive higher rise flats and commercial businesses and I am very concerned that if permission is granted, similar developments could very well happen on my street next!

3) Not in Keeping with the Character of the Street:  Wembley Hill Road and all the street off it are totally residential and the existing Heron House was built in the '60s and is not as intrusive, overbearing or dense as the proposed development will be. The proposed development is much larger and certainly not in keeping with the character of the streets  and its visual effect will totally spoil the area.   Our streets consist of houses, bungalows, maisonettes, small blocks of flats and gardens.

4) Too close To Existing Regeneration:  As  the "Regeneration"  has already planned 11,000 dwellings, any more higher buildings in the same vicinity is surely excessive and would have a negative impact on the area, overshadowing all the houses around it, with an increase in noise pollution.

5) Loss of light, privacy and the existing outlook:  Although the Developers apparently plan to block some of the balcony glass partitions, they cannot possibly do this in all directions, so many residents will still be overlooked and lose their privacy and existing outlook. The dense building will also block out a significant amount of light for all the nearby residents.

6) Parking:   The proposal by Plowden mentioned a number of parking spaces smaller than the number of flats proposed. Therefore there will not be enough parking spaces for all the vehicles from the flats and the commercial businesses.   This will be putting even more pressure on the streets around  Wembley Hill Road, where there is already a huge demand for parking spaces and it is almost impossible to find one.

7) Traffic and Air Quality:  The transport implications have not been taken fully in consideration. The traffic at the nearby junction at the London Designer Outlet  is already gridlocked every day, so how will our roads cope with all the extra traffic that will be generated? There will always be disruptions around this junction, as road works never seem to stop and with all the extra traffic from the "Regeneration", we cannot allow even more traffic chaos from this new development.
The air quality in the area which has already been impacted by the "Regeneration", will only get worse. The main pollutants of concern, nitrogen oxides,  are lung irritant and especially liable to harm children and those with chest problems such as asthma. Surely the Council has a duty to enhance the health and wellbeing of the local community and not encourage every one of these smaller developments?  Heron House in particular  is right on the door step of the "Regeneration", it surely is not vital?

8)  Setting A Dangerous Precedent:  If this large higher development is allowed in a residential area, it will also set a dangerous precedent and before long even more developers will want to do the same. How much more destructive impact on our residential areas is the Council going to allow, despite huge opposition from its residents?  It is very unfair, as we are all already trying to retain the residential areas we live in, despite the looming high rises of the "Regeneration"

9)  Likely Purchase of Land Opposite:  These same developers have already expressed an interest in purchasing St Joseph's,  the land opposite Heron house, with a view to building yet another higher rise block! We cannot just sit back and do nothing and allow the development of these buildings, as local people are being priced out of the area, which impacts on other areas of the Borough.

10)  Other Sites:  There are many brown-filled and derelict sites in Brent, where these part/commercial development can be situated and these should be used before encroaching onto our residential streets.

11) Impact on Infrastructure:  What provision has been made for the infrastructure needed to cope with the extra people? As this is a new development,  provision obviously was not made when creating the "Regeneration".

12) A Concrete Jungle:  I am trying not to be too pessimistic, but  these smaller high rise dense developments,  which are causing great concern amongst residents, could happen anywhere and before you know it the whole of Brent could  become a concrete jungle!  I wish I could say with certainty that this will not happen, but the speed with which  these smaller high rises are going up, makes me and my neighbours truly fearful. The lack of transparency when making these decisions is very worrying, as they have an adverse effect on all our lives.

13) Love Where You Live:  On the one hand Brent Council is encouraging residents to "love where you live" and improve our environment and yet on the other forcing us to accept even more higher rise developments.  I know things have to change and progress, but do we have to loose our precious existing residential areas for even more high rises? Surely Brent Council should be aiming for both?

14) The Attitude of Developers: Developers everywhere are undermining and exploiting planning authorities, with planning performance agreements and other inducements.  They must be opposed and cannot continue to completely ignore the wishes of residents.

 15)  Historical Significance: High Street which runs along one side of the proposed development is of great historical significance, more so since there is little left of the old Wembley after the thatched cottage down the road was burnt down. High Street was the main street in Wembley 250 years ago and it is the only public way in Wembley which carries the name "street". As such, we ask the Council to give this due consideration and protect this area and not allow such a massive redevelopment to spoil the character of this quiet historic part of Wembley, , which is so much part of our low rise suburban area.

16)  Lower Level Affordable Housing: We of course appreciate that more houses are needed, so we propose and would be happy to support lower level affordable family accommodation perhaps some with small private gardens, as this is just the sort of dwelling which is in very short supply in the borough. The proposed plans for Heron House are excessive, damaging and totally inappropriate for the area and as such they should be rejected.

(Petition Organiser: Zerine Tata, Tokyington Ward, Email: zerinetata@hotmail.com)