Tell Wembley Matters what you think about the Copland School & Ujima House redevelopment

I was unable to attend Saturday's consultation on the Copland School and Ujima House redevelopments as i was at the Green Party Conference but I expect attendance was not great because of the Wembley Stadium Event on the same day.

I went along on Thursday and there seemed to be better attendance from Brent councillors and the developer's PR team than the general public.

This video, taken from the upper floors of Ujima House, shows the current state of the Copland School site with demolition almost complete and demonstrates the size of the site. The new building of Ark Elvin Academy (successor to Copland) can be seen behind the site. The enormous black cube is the Ark Elvin Sports Hall.

This video shows the buildings on the Wembley High Road between Park Lane and Wembley Triangle. On the left of the screen is the Twin Towers building that is currently under construction and behind them to the right are Hub's planned two new tower blocks beside the railway line. At the centre on the other side of the road is the building on the Copland site which is much closer to the road that the schoolwas. Copland had some green space there and mature trees. Neither are shown on the model which was a matter of concern for residents on Thursday. There appeared to be space for a few saplings.

The building replacing Copland has some internal open space which developers said the public could access and the two new towers behind Chesterfield House have a green walk. The impression is given of many trees but these will clearly take a long time to grow into anything substantial.

As this is a Brent Council development I asked about the amount of truly affordable housing in the development (ie London Living Rent rather than 80% of market rent) but was told this was still to be decided - things are at an early stage.

I would welcome comments from those who went to the consultation and those who didn't about these proposals and so will the developers: 


These are the exhibition boards. Click on bottom right corner to enlarge to full size.

What future for the Wembley Park tile murals?

Guest blog from Philip Grant

Last April, I let readers know about an effort by Wembley History Society to persuade Brent Council and Quintain to uncover the tile murals in the Bobby Moore Bridge subway, which have been covered with advertisements since the autumn of 2013 LINK. 

At first there was little response from them, but by chasing up through correspondence, the Society's chairman, Jim Moher, managed to get a meeting with Brent's Chief Executive and senior Quintain officials last month. It appears that they might be willing to uncover at least some of the murals for a time during 2019, and possibly 2020 (Brent's year as London Borough of Culture), and to make some other proposals for the future of the murals. 

It was agreed that Quintain's Julian Tollast would give a presentation to the Society about their plans for the Olympic Way area, and their proposals for the tile murals, and receive feedback from the meeting about these. That meeting will take place on the evening of Friday 19th October (see poster above for details). As with all Wembley History Society meetings, visitors who are interested in the subject are welcome to attend (there is usually a £3 charge for non-members, but I am not sure whether this will apply for this particular meeting).

Brent have given Quintain a lease to advertise on the walls of the subway until at least late 2021. In return, the Council receives a basic rent (to cover Quintain's use of the walls for its own advertising) and a share of the profits which Quintain makes from allowing others to advertise on the walls (usually in connection with specific events at Wembley Stadium). 

The origin of this advertising on the subway walls appears to have come from Council officers, seeking to raise money for Brent to help reduce shortfalls caused by government funding cuts since 2010. My researches have shown that in all of the officers' reports on which decisions involving the advertising have been based, they have carelessly (or carefully?) avoided any mention of the tile murals which the adverts would cover up! 

However, the meeting on 19th October is not about this. It is an opportunity to listen to the proposals which Quintain (and Brent Council) are offering. It is also a rare opportunity for the Society's members, and others who are interested in Wembley's heritage, and in this piece of public art celebrating the history of sports and entertainment at the Stadium and Arena, to express their views, and hopefully have some influence over the future of the tile murals.

Philip Grant (writing as an individual).

Vigil in Harlesden over police 'over-reaction' during arrest of young black man

The West London Stand up to Racism and Brent Trades Council have called a vigil on Tuesday 9th October 6.00pm in Craven Park Road NW10 8Sh near the New Atlas Cafe following the arrest of a young man which involved six officers restraining him and the use of pepper spray to the outrage of passers by. Bystanders tried to intervene to stop the police from over reacting and there is a feeling of outrage that this could happen in Harlesden.

Support the #McStrike outside McDonalds, Kilburn High Road, 6pm tonight

In addition to other events happening during the day today there will be a chance for those working today to show solidarity with a demonstration outside McDonalds on Kilburn High Road from 6pm this evening.

Crossed spoons are a symbol of solidarity - bring your own.

Willesden Salvage to close

Local residents have expressed shock at news that Willesden Salvage, the amazing shop on Willesden High Road, is to close.  The news was sent out on Instagram:

Spurs v Barcelona road closures and bus diversions

The month is wrong but these are the arrangements for tomorrow's Spurs v Barcelona match at Wembley.

Note road closures and disruption to local buses.

Have your say on Copland/Ujima House redevelopment Oct 4th and 6th

Locals will be aware that the demolition of the old Copland High School building is in progress. Brent Council is holding a public consultation at Ujima House 388 Wembley High Road on October 4th (4pm-7.30pm)  and 6th (10am - 2pm).

Ujima House

Copland High School

According to the council the consultation is about the proposed redevelopment of Ujima House and the former Copland buudling and improvements to the public realm along Wembley High Road.

The council has been working with Karakusevic Carson Architects and Easy to develp ideas for the redevelopment if the sites, including new community facilities, workspace and new homes.

Residents will be able to meet council officers and the architects and give their views on the High Road and the design proposals to date, ideas for uses of the community spaces and feedback on proposed new play facilities and public realm improvements.

UPDATED: Wembley Stadium’s vanishing arch – more evidence on Brent Council's failure to protect 'iconic' views

 

View from Bobby Moore Bridge May 2011

 

View from Bobby Moore Bridge September 2018

Last month, I reproduced a letter from Philip Grant which had been published in the “Brent & Kilburn Times” on 6 September LINK . This challenged the Council to explain why it had allowed its own planning rules to be broken, and why it had failed to protect the iconic view of Wembley Stadium, despite its promise to do so.

Philip sent a copy of the letter to Brent’s Chief Executive, Carolyn Downs. Ms Downs replied that she had forwarded it to the Council’s Head of Planning, for attention and action, and that a response would follow. Here is the text of the Council’s response:-

‘Dear Mr Grant

Case 10658297

I write in response to your e-mail to Carolyn Downs within which you seek a response to the matters that you raised within your letter to the Kilburn Time. Within this letter, you have set out that you consider that the Council has failed to protect the view of Wembley Stadium and that you consider that the Council has allowed its ‘own planning rules to be broken’. Within your e-mail, you provide a link to an article that you have published on Wembley Matters which refers to two planning applications for developments within Wembley.

Policy WEM6 of the Wembley Area Action Plan relates to views to Wembley Stadium. This sets out that ‘Regard should be had to the impact of development on the following views … of the National Stadium’ with specific viewpoints referred to within the policy and on a map. The pre-amble to the policy discusses the contribution the Stadium makes and the importance of views to it. It sets out that the Council will protect a range of views to the Stadium.

The potential impact on the views to the stadium are considered within planning applications that could affect those views. This includes the provision of information to demonstrate whether the proposal will affect a protected view to the stadium and the extent of any effect on that view.

The submissions for the two planning applications that you referred to within your internet article do set out the effect of those proposals. As you have highlighted in your e-mail to Carolyn Downs, those reports (and the discussions at the planning committee meeting itself) highlighted that those proposals will result in a small reduction in the view to the arch. This matter was considered by officers and members, and the level of harm associated with this reduction was evaluated. On balance, it was considered that the extent of the reduction was such that it did not warrant the refusal of planning permission.

It is clear from the report and the discussion and debate at the planning committee meeting that regard was had to the potential impact of proposed development on the views to the Stadium. These proposals would result in a slight reduction in the view to the stadium. However, the level of reduction was considered to be small and the level of harm associated with this reduction also small. This is not a matter of rules having been broken. Due regard was had to the policy, with a slight impact occurring should those proposals going ahead. That impact was considered and weighed against the benefits of the proposals, and on balance, planning permission was granted.

Yours faithfully

Development Management Manager’

Philip has decided not to waste his time in trying to argue his point further, but has sent me this comment:

‘This response is typical of the sort of excuse that Brent’s planners come up with. They admit that their planning policy recognises the importance of views of the Stadium, and says that it will protect them. They say that ‘this matter was considered by officers and members’, and then they say that it was only a ‘small / slight reduction’ in the view of the arch, so planning permission was granted. 

Brent must be seen as a “soft touch” by developers. They have planning policies, but it seems they are willing to allow developers to ignore them, as long as they only breach them by a small amount each time! But those breaches are cumulative, and would not happen if Brent stuck to policies the Council had adopted, after public consultation.

The Council’s response does not answer my second question, on why it has failed to protect the iconic view of Wembley Stadium, despite its promise to do so. It HAS failed to protect the view. The evidence is plain to see, from these two photos  above) taken at the same spot on the Bobby Moore Bridge, in May 2011 and September 2018.’

The "protected view" of Wembley Stadium from the White Horse Bridge, on 2 November 2018. If only it was a case of No.13 being an unlucky number for the Stadium views supposedly "protected" by Brent's Planning Policy!

The view from Barn Hill (the road not the open space)