The development and others planned (grey shading) from North End Road
Before
After
Cumalative massing
Brent Planning Committee on December 12th will consider an application to build a block of varying heights, maximum 23 storeys, on a site in Watkin Road currently occupied by single storey car repair buildings. It is just outside the Quintain Masterplan site but illustrates the way tower blocks are spreading across the area.
At 23 storeys it is lower than the 29 storey Apex House student accommodation tower which will be its near neighbour. There is a 34 story block planned at Quintain Plot NE06.
The new building continues the enroachment on
As has become custome and practice the report by Brent planners glosses over aspects where the application fails to meet or comes close to not meeting local and London guidance:
Provision of new homes and affordable workspace: Your officers give
great weight to the viable delivery of private and affordable housing and new
affordable commercial floor space, in line with the adopted Development
Plan.
The impact of a building of this height and design in this location: The
proposal replaces a poor quality commercial plot with a large modern high
density development in keeping with the surrounding and approved built
form. The development utilises good architecture with quality detailing and
materials in order to maximise the site’s potential whilst respecting
surrounding development. The development will not obstruct views of the
Wembley Stadium arch from any protected viewpoints. A “tall building” is
proposed within an area designated as “Inappropriate for tall buildings”.
However, the height, layout, design and massing has been carefully
considered and has been evaluated by the Design Council Design Review
Panel, the GLA and by Brent Officers who all have concluded that the
proposed building is appropriate for this context.
Quality of the resulting residential accommodation: The residential
accommodation proposed is of sufficiently high quality. The mix of units is in
accordance with the standards within the London Plan and reasonably well
aligned with the Wembley Area Action Plan mix, and the flats would generally have good outlook and light. The amenity space is below our standard, but is still substantial and is high for a tall building.
Affordable housing: The maximum reasonable amount has been provided
on a near policy compliant tenure split. This includes 35% affordable housing
provision with a tenure split of 60:40 between affordable rented and
intermediate flats when measured in terms of habitable rooms. 48% of the
affordable rented accommodation are 3 bedroom flats when measured in
terms of habitable rooms. The viability has been tested and it has been
demonstrated that this is the maximum reasonable amount that can be
provided on site. The requirements of affordable housing obligations are
considered to have been met and a late stage viability review will be secured
by S106.
Neighbouring amenity: There would be a loss of light to some windows of
surrounding buildings, which is a function of a development on this scale.
Many of the windows affected would serve student accommodation and/or
do not yet exist as an established residential standard. The impact is
considered to be acceptable given the urban context of the site. The overall
impact of the development is considered acceptable, particularly in view of
the wider regenerative benefits.
Highways and transportation: The alterations to the public highway as
required in the S106 would be acceptable, considering the needs of
pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. The highway works will include (i)
providing a new loading bay on North End Road and (ii) extending a 20mph
zone alongside the building. To encourage sustainable travel patterns, the
scheme will be 'car-free' with the exception of blue badge parking spaces. A
financial contribution of £110,000 towards extending CPZ's into the area is
proposed with the removal of rights for residents within the development to
apply for parking permits. A for bus service enhancements in the area, as
required by TfL, will also be secured.
Trees, landscaping and public realm: Some low quality trees are
proposed to be removed but they are not considered worthy of retention.
The proposal is likely to substantially improve on the existing situation with a
new public realm and associated tree planting proposed alongside a wider
landscaping strategy. This will be assured through conditions.
Environmental impact, sustainability and energy: The measures outlined
by the applicant achieve the required improvement on carbon savings within
London Plan policy. Conditions will require further consideration of carbon
savings prior to implementation.
Flooding and Drainage: Part of the site sits within a flood zone. A flood
mitigation strategy and drainage strategy will be secured by condition to
mitigate the risks associated with this. The development will also
substantially improve the drainage capacity of the site through attenuation
measures.
I would be interested to hear what the residents of Empire and Danes Court think of the proposal.
I'm going to look even scruffier than usual for the next month as I am going to grow a Decembeard...
I don't usually write about personal issues on this blog so this is an exception to the rule.
I will be joining other men caross the country by growing a beard to raise money for research into bowel cancer.
I had my last shave for a month on Friday morning, so all ready for
spending December nurturing my beard. I am hoping for a thick, curly
black beard with hints of brown and ginger but doubt that is going to be
the case. It is more likely to be useful for my annual role as Father Christmas but may be painful when the kids tug the beard to see if it is real.
Having spent the last almost 2 years undergoing
investigations for all sorts of diseases after a sudden loss of
weight and anaemia I realised that bowel cancer was a major issue, with 1
in 14 men being diagnosed with it during their lifetime and 2,500
people under 50 being diagnosed with it in the UK every year. I was
given the all clear (my problem is kidney disease) but as a result of
my experience and learning about it, want to do my bit for research into
bowel cancer. If you'd like to sponsor my beard and support bowel cancer research please go to my Just Giving page here: LINK
The relationship of the block to surrounding buildings
As the block will appear from Cricklewood Lane
Proposals for a 6-15 storey block on the corner of Cricklewood Broadway and Cricklewood Lane (1-13 Cricklewood Lane) is being opposed by many Barnet and Brent residents who live close to the proposed development. These two statements extracted from comments on the Barnet Council planning portal sum up the reasons for opposition:
COMMENT 1
The proposal is based on misleading
claims and specious arguments which are factually incorrect. A 15 storey
high-rise extreme-density tower would dominate everything around it and be
totally out of keeping with the rest of Cricklewood.
FUL-PLANNING_STATEMENT-4245340
2.12 The Site is within the wider Brent Cross Cricklewood (BXC) Framework.
It is not.
5.9 The Site is designated, by the LBB and the GLA: Cricklewood/Brent Cross
Opportunity Area:
It is not.
6.28 .......the Brent Cross Regeneration Area is situated in close proximity to
the Site, which provides precedent for tall buildings.
It is not "in close proximity to the Site"; There is no precedent for
tall buildings
6.28 "Cricklewood is not identified by LBB as one of the areas suitable
for tall buildings".
There is no Affordable Housing
7.2-Affordable housing provision will only be "discussed further with the
Council".
The scheme will be detrimental to the area:
6.24 The tower "will be situated to the rear of the Site to minimise
townscape views and amenity"
6.50 The scheme proposes a residential density that "exceeds the current
London Plan density matrix"
6.61 "....the scheme proposal will result in several breaches of BRE
daylight guidance", due to the design
Public Consultation
4.6. "an extensive process of consultation was undertaken ..... between
the Applicant and the local community". This is an exaggerated and
misleading claim.
4.8 reveals that only 43 people attended the exhibition, and that only 15
feedback forms were returned. Most local residents were not told
7.0 SECTION 106: the developer is making no contribution at all other than a
Carbon offset payment - this is unacceptable.
If planning applications are to be decided on the basis of this kind of
falsehood, that is a subversion and debasement of due democratic process, This
proposal by an off-shore speculator to exploit residents' environment for
commercial gain constitutes town cramming. It should be refused
COMMENT 2
Let's not pretend that anything about
this development is intended to benefit the local area. It's about developers
making money. The development is not in keeping with the local area, it's far
too big. The development is not about providing housing to local people, there
is no social housing, despite the desperate need. There is no guaranteed
affordable housing.
I was born and brought up in Cricklewood and at the age of
33 I have had to move back in with my parents to be able to stay in the area
that is my home. This housing is not even within my reach and in many ways I'm luckier
than many other local people I am proud to call my neighbours.
Cricklewood
infrastructure is already under enormous strain. I have given up trying to
drive down the Broadway, the traffic barely moves. The new housing development
towards staples corner, plus the planned distribution site are already going to
add to an already overburdened road network. A development of that many flats
would be awful, not to mention the health effects from the added pollution. The
train networks are overloaded, it's nearly impossible to get on a train at
Cricklewood Station as it is.
Why are we intent on letting outside financial
interests come in and create so much damage to the place we live. Let's
redevelop Cricklewood, some areas desperately need it but let's do it in a way
that works for local people, before we realise we've ruined our home for a
quick buck.
If you wish to comment on the proposal or read more about it follow this LINK
An angry, passionate account of the history of Bridge Park by one of its founders Leonard Johnson. He rallies the Black community to get behind the campaign for Bridge Park and calls on them to ignore rumours that attempt to undermine his reputation.
Gail Tolley, Director of Children and Young People's Service in Brent, confirmed yesterday that a new 6 forms of entry secondary school will be built on the site of Chancel House, Neasden Lane. It will be a free school with Wembley High Technology College, an academy, as its sponsor.
Originally it was intended to refurbish the redundant DWP building, Chancel House (above) to accommodate the school but the Education Funding Agency (EFA) decided demolition and new build was preferable.
A new secondary school south of the North Circular Road has long been a demand from residents in Willesden, Harlesden and Church End following the closure of Sladebrook High School. Neasden High School,also closed, was just on the other side of the North Circular, on that section of Neasden Lane. Parents made the case for a school which will be at the heart of the local community. Brent Council decided not to go ahead with a possible secondary school on the Bridge Park-Unisys site as part of the regeneration. The school has the project name of North Brent School LINK but this will obviously be revised.
Interestingly Gail Tolley said that the site had been considered by the EFA for the ill-fated (and expensive to the public) Gladstone Free School. LINK
Neasden Lane suffers from poor air quality some quite heavy truck truck movements. LINK
As the primary 'bulge' moves through into secondary schools more places will be needed and the local authority is working with academies regarding expansion. As academies they are independent of the local authority and cannot be forced to expand.
There is of course some uncertainty over the future of Brent's European families regarding Brexit and this will need to be taken into account in school places planning.
The EFA has also approved a Free Special School to be set up by the Brent Special Academy Trust on a site in the Avenue and has again opted for demolition of the existing building and building of a new school. At present many children are transported outside the borough due to the lack of special provision in Brent.
Responding to the plateau in reception primary school applications and vacancies in some school the Ark Somerville Primary, which will be built on the car park of York House, has been reduced to 2 forms of entry. LINK
We have a large number of furniture items that we no longer need and are therefore in the process of donating them away. We have made contact with a few charities but it would be great if we could find a local home for most of it.
List of items
·Purple chairs, Circa x 600-650
·Artificial wall x 2
·Coffee tables x 10
·Plastic stools x 30
·White Atrium chairs x 15
·Pouffes x 25
·Bar sofas x 10
·Bar glass tables x 6
·Round tables x 8
·Red and white sofa x 8
·Brown stools x 40
·Blue chairs x 2
·Red chairs x 20
·Little black stools x 40
·Tours stools x 10
·White poser tables x 20
·3 seater sofas x 2
·Box sofas x 2
·Light boxes for Wembley suite x 8
·Big red sofas x 2
·Lollipop signs x 7
·Lamp x 1
With the exception of a small number items, most pieces are in good used condition.
Please note that if you are interested in taking some of this furniture, you would need to make plans to have it collected by the end of next week. You can do this by simply emailing Community@thefa.com Subject line **free furniture**
Community
The FA GroupPostal address: Wembley Stadium, PO Box 1966, London, SW1P 9EQ
Brent Council will be consulting with residents on the St Raphael's Estate next Friday on their plans to redevelop the estate. St Raphael's will be the first estate where residents will be balloted on the changes.
Concerns have been expressed on social media over possibilities of gentrification and social cleansing with private housing being built on the estate to help pay for the redevelopment. There are also worries over the potential for the loss of green space, not just in the area surrounding the estate which stretches to the River Brent, but within the estate itself. People are aware of what happened in West Hendon with private developments next to the Welsh Harp reservoir and social housing close to the poor air quality main road. St Raphael's borders on the heavily polluted North Circular.
Another issue is the need to ensure the future of the premises of various community groups, nurseries, children's centre and the Sufra Foodbank and Edible Garden if new blocks are to be built requiring additional land.
St Raphael's Estate is on a flood plain for the River Brent. There are artificial hillocks between the river and the estate which protects it to some extent but locals speak of underground springs in the area. They suggest that this could limit any high rise developments. There was flooding in the area in the 1970s.
With climate change underway the flood risk is clearly something to be considered. This is the longer term risk from the Environment Agency:
Brent Clinical Commissioning Group (Brent CCG) at its meeting on December 5th is likely to go ahead with a proposal to move from Wembley Centre for Health and Care in Chaplin Road, to Brent Civic Centre. Brent Council already lets out two floors in the Civic Centre to external organisations and is due to cut their staff further in the next budget. The report going before the CCG states:
The CCG
has expressed an interest to be co-located with Brent Council in its Civic
Centre (subject to affordability and commercial terms). Equally Brent Council
is extremely keen and supportive of this move and fully recognises the
opportunities for greater collaboration that co-locating would bring.
The
current HQ premises are spread across the Wembley Centre for Health and Care
site with staff working in silos largely within cellular offices. This is not
an efficient use of space nor does it foster cohesive working arrangements.
Releasing
space at the Wembley Centre for Health and Care, under the NHS Property
Services vacant space policy, potentially creates an opportunity to reduce CCG
running costs. Strategically this also supports the future aspirations for the
site to become an out of hospital hub, appropriately sized and fit for purpose.
There are
76 staff working at Brent CCG, the accommodation on offer at Brent Civic Centre
is 48 dedicated desks together with shared offices and breakout areas. This
move would require the CCG to adopt the NWL Agile Working Policy which
recommends a staff to desk ratio of between 6:10 and 7:10. The proposal
complies with the policy with a ratio of 6.3:10. The CCG is required to reduce
its office accommodation and desk allocation across its estate; as such this
proposal is in line with the overall strategic direction being adopted across
NWL.
Current
estimated project costs are £85,500 to be covered from existing revenue
funding.
There is
an annual saving to Brent CCG of £446,000 generated by moving to Brent Civic
Centre.
The walk-out of schoolchildren in Australia, protesting against government inaction on climate change (video below), reminded me of various school children's protests in this country over the years. Back in 1911 there were school children's strikes at a time of widepsread militancy and their demands included ending corporal punishment LINK.
The walkout above, in 1988, was by Neasden High School pupils who marched to protest at Brent Town Hall. Neasden High School was in Quainton Street and according to local historians was partly created to absorb Asian refugees families. The school was closed and demolished in 1989. More recently there were walk-outs by secondary school students over the Iraq war.
30 years after this protest the NEU is balloting for possible strike action over the government's failure to fully fund the recent pay increase and teachers, parents, headteachers and schoolchildren are protesting over the cuts in education funding. Some of the children in the news report may well now have their own children who are affected by the current round of cuts.
A legal battle is on between Brent Council and the Afro-Caribbean community of Stonebridge, Harlesden and Monks Park over the future of Bridge Park. The centre is part of a Council redevelopment project that includes the long-empty Unisys building. It is much more than a legal battle - it is a battle for the beating heart of the local community.
Wembley Matters has covered the dodgy nature of some of Brent Council's partners in their development scheme and this was reinforced by trenchant criticism of the Council by the late Dan Filson. LINKLINK
Young visionaries in what was then a bus depot
Bridge Park was set up by young black people in the 80s at a time of the uprisings. It is part of black heritage in the borough that came from the grassroots, just as the Stonebridge Adventure Playground, closed by the council, also had its roots in the community and amongst the young.
A community group, Bridge Park Community Council, set up to save the centre from the council plans have put forward their own alternative which is rooted in the community and continues the original ethos of Bridge Park when the Harlesden People's Community Council organised to purchase the old bus depot:
BPCC successfully appealed to the Land Registry over the sale of the land and it was blocked but now the council is fighting back through legal action.
A fundraising campaign is now underway to take the council on: LINK and there is a petition of to stop the sale and return control and development of the Bridge Park site to the community HERE
BPCC's short-term plan is:
(a) To show the “London Borough of Brent” that we have an interest in
the land, and to therefore suspend the sale of the Land and
property referred to as “Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre”.
(b) To secure the Community interest in the Land and property by means of legal, public and political action.
(c) To develop a self-sustaining Centre of Excellence providing
educational, Technology, social, well-being and commercial facilities.
(d) To encourage Brent Council and all parties to engage with BPCC in
peaceful timely negotiation (ADR), Mediation or Arbitration as opposed
to costly litigation with a view of coming to an agreement in relation
to the Community’s control and interest in the said Land and Property.
EMPOWERING OUR COMMUNITY
WE NEED YOU...!!!!
THANK YOU FOR CONTINUED SUPPORT TO SAVE BRIDGE PARK LAND & COMPLEX
*FIRSTLY - BRIDGE PARK IS NOT SOLD.
Bridge
Park Community Council as successor to HPCC established Bridge Park
Complex Steering Group, to protect the interest, control and development
of the Bridge Park Land and Properties for the community.
In
the 1980s, HPCC, founded by a group of young 16-20 year olds, who
followed their vision and desire to serve the community, and to ensure
that the young men and women growing up in Stonebridge, N.W London had
facilities and opportunities to empower them to succeed. They bought
the land supported by sourced grant funding of £1.8m.
They
raised a further £3m+ along backing to design and build the current
Bridge Park Complex seen today. The original vision was for the creation
of educational, commercial business units, sports and multi-purpose
facilities. The land is estimated to be worth over £50 million on the
open market.
In order for HPCC to obtain the funds, Brent Council
acted as custodians ONLY: with no right to sell, transfer or dispose of
the land, acquired by the community for the community. The Bridge Park
site had a protective covenant on the land. Brent Council officers
removed the covenant prior to February 2014. The community were not
informed. [Wembley Matters here is the LINK to the report to the Brent Executive in June 2013 which states: The Bridge Park site had a covenant on it that sports and
community uses should be protected and around half of any value of any
development would have to paid to the LB Bromley (as successor body to the
GLC). However officers have successfully re moved this covenant.]
-->
Experienced Lawyers, (DWFM Beckman, London) have been
engaged, and advice has been taken from a Senior Counsel, specialising
in this area of Law and Chancery.
*Brent Council entered into the
Conditional Land Sale Agreement with General Mediterranean Holding
(GMH) as guarantor, for the sale of the Bridge Park Complex in June
2017. A strict condition of the sale is that the land must be free of
all interests. Brent Council plan to allow development worth over £800
million on the land, but aim to sell off the Land and 42x Business
Units, 2x restaurants, Bar, 2x Gyms, full size In-door Basketball and
Badmintons Courts, plus Multi-faith centre and Nursery buildings all
this for less than £13 million Brent will not fully disclose the lower
price. THIS DID NOT GO TO TENDER !!!
HPCC in association with successor's BPCC Steering Group and S.C. Trust (HPCC) Ltd the land.
An
application to the Land Registry to restrict Brent Council, to stop the
Sale of Bridge Park was made in August 2017, through our lawyers.
Brent Council have been given an extension of 30 days to file their documents to challenge this restriction.
***** WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT *****
Our community needs a lot more than a Gym & Swimming Pool.
We
will build an iconic Centre of Excellence for The Community by The
Community. Addressing our Educational, Social and Commercial needs. And
most of all it will be self funded and sustained.
A land mark building upon which we can take pride in.
Come and get involved - Sign the petition against Brent Council's plans
WE NEED our community building to be kept in the hands of the COMMUNITY in PERPETUITY!!
Help us to raise the much needed funds for the legal challenge to halt the sale of Bridge Park.
WE NEED TO FIRST RAISE THE INITIAL £10,000 OF THE £25,000 FOR OUR LEGAL DEPOSIT, TO FIGHT OUR CASE IN THE HIGH COURT, LONDON.
The officers' report to the Brent Executive in June 2013 stated:
Our officers have carried out a new Equality Analysis.
There are a number of important conclusions. The first is that Bridge Park has
been important in serving an important part of Brent’s Afro-Caribbean community.
Removing the sports centre would strongly negatively impact on this group. The
area has one of the strongest increase in under 5’s in the whole of Brent. Over
88,000 of the 447,000 people within a three mile catchment of the centre are
under 16 years of age (20% compared with a borough average of 16%). The starter
business units that would not be replaced do have a high proportion of people from
Afro-caribbean background.
Wembley Matters has approached Brent Council for a comment on how the possible extension of Tottenham Hotspur's use of Wembley Stadium up to May 2019 would affect the timetble for removal of the stadium pedway and its replacement by steps. The request was made more than a week ago and despite reminders no answer has been received. The works already had a tight schedule and would not take place on event days, so an increase in the number of event days will obviously make an impact. The Minutes of the Planning Commitee meeting of September, where the steps application was unanimously approved states:
Members heard that the
steps were intended to be in place for 2020 when Brent would become
the Borough of Culture and Wembley National Stadium would host
European Nations League finals.
Wembley is scheduled to host seven Euro 2020 games including the final LINK
The works schedule is formidable:
The
delivery of the project can be split into three main construction phases:
•Phase
1 – Site Preparation and Substructure Works;
•Phase
2 – Pedway Demolition and Construction of Steps;
•Phase
3 – Landscaping and Fit Out.
.6.62
Phase 1 - The initial work activity will focus on clearing the site below
and around the Pedway of those utilities and other items that will obstruct the
Pedway demolition and subsequent staircase construction. As areas become clear,
works to the foundations and substructure of the steps will commence.
•6.63
The foundations to the steps will be constructed in and around the
existing Pedway structure in advance of its demolition. Therefore, there will
be a need to utilise small/specialist plant, such as restricted access piling
rigs that will be able to access the low headroom areas beneath the existing
Pedway to construct the piles.
•6.64
Phase 2 - This phase will commence within an agreed window of time to
minimise the impact to WNSL. The first stage of demolition will focus on
removing the Pedway structure from the area of the new staircase construction.
Once this is removed, the demolition will focus on removing the remainder of
the Pedway (as it runs across Engineers Way towards Olympic Way and Wembley
Park station north of the Stadium). A road closure of Engineers Way will be
required whilst the Pedway is removed across the carriageway area (details as
to the number and timeframes required for the road closures are not yet
available but will be agreed, at the proper time, with the Council).
•6.65
The construction of the staircase is anticipated to be a combination of
pre-cast and cast in- situ concrete. It is anticipated that the bridge podium
section that will connect to the Stadium will be cast in-situ and the staircase
will be formed from precast structural elements. The staircase is of a modular
construction and will follow a step by step process that will be prescribed by
the designer and supplier. Throughout this phase of heavy lifting it may be
necessary to have lane closure on Engineers Way to facilitate easy delivery and
unloading of the precast elements. Pedestrian management will be a key feature
of this phase to maintain safety exclusion zones around the works.
•6.66
Phase 3 - The fit out of the staircase undercroft will commence as soon
as all overhead working is complete and it is safe to do so. The final
landscaping will be constructed during the WNSL events season. Ahead of this
phase there will be agreed processes and access routes to limit the level of
non-working and disrupted time (as has been managed through the delivery of the
Olympic Way Zone A works).
•6.67
The construction of the landscaping and public realm works will be
undertaken in two sections that will run concurrently: Olympic Way (from the
boundary of the Zone A works) to Engineers Way and the Olympic Steps area
comprising land south of Engineers Way to the Stadium.
More than a week ago I reported on the collapse of Allied Healthcare, providers of adult social care in Brent and across the country. LINK
I contacted Brent Council Press Office to ask what contingency plans had been put in place for Brent recipients of their care. I had no response, despite several phone calls and email reminders, the latest yesterday.
However, yesterday evening at Brent Council, Cllr Farah, lead member for adult social care, announced that Allied was responsible for 94 residents and, with the situation regarding the company still unclear, Brent Council would today be implementing their contigency plan - although he gave no details of what that plan was. Presumably the clients will be transferred to other providers but it would be important to know what steps are being taken to ensure continuity of care, including if possible retention of carers with whom people would have built a trusting relationship.
