Resident launches petition to Sadiq Khan after Council agrees Wembley Stadium tower blocks planning application

I have received this from Sonia Shah. The petition can be signed HERE

Stop Brent Council from rushing through planning applications for big developments

I am a resident of Wembley, and an active member of resident-led campaign Keep Wembley Tidy. I would appreciate it if you could spare a minute to take a look at my petition, and circulate/publicise it. There is a great concern for public safety at Wembley Stadium and the surrounding area.

Brent Council approved all 5 planning applications related to the Quintain-owned lands around Wembley Stadium in just a single planning committee meeting on Wednesday evening. This is in spite of two councillors not being in attendance (under legal advice) and a third leaving before the final item was addressed. The new developments include high rise housing, more hotels and more student accommodation (with limited natural light which, according to Quintain, is irrelevant since it's temporary accommodation).

Plans for the car parks were approved last night by Brent Council, along with a scheme to bring 4,850 new homes, 350,000sq ft of new offices and shops, two new hotels, a new seven-acre public park, student accomodation and a 600-place primary school to Wembley Park as part of one of the biggest regeneration schemes in Europe.

Julie Harrington, operations director at the FA, last night told the council’s planning committee the location of the car parks off South Way “created genuine public order and safety concerns which would serve as a retrograde step for the stadium.” She said developer Quintain was ”working from a position to maximise profits” rather than to “protect fan safety”. “The holding of fans, the kettling of fans, that’s a return to the 1970s in my view. Even a short amount of time holding people, irate fans from teams that have lost, or rival fans mixing together is too much.” Ms Harrington warned that the FA “would not be able to attract major events to Wembley if fan’s can’t leave the car park.” “We cannot be complacent about the huge steps forward made in stadium safety in the past two decades. No-one should believe that its acceptable to herd fans like cattle. We must learn from past mistakes.”

The Football Association also argued that more flats by Wembley stadium would cause worrying safety issues http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/wembley-stadium-tower-block-plan-would-risk-fans-safety-a3245221.html What about the number of new residents needing to see local GPs and the effect on local hospitals? Having already closed Central Middlesex and Hammersmith A & E departments, they are now threatening to cut 500 hospital beds http://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/revealed-london-nhs-chiefs-to-axe-enough-beds-to-fill-a-hospital-in-battle-to-plug-1bn-black-hole-a3244251.html

Councillor Michael Maurice, the only member of the planning committee to vote against the proposals, told the meeting: “Up to 5,000 fans kettled? We don’t want to see another Hillsborough.” (A statement here on the original petition has now been removed by Sonia Shah - see comemnts below)

Objectors are also opposed to the size and scale of seven residential and commerical tower blocks of up to 19 storeys which were also given outline approval. Critics say they could block “iconic” views of Wembley from across London.

What chance do local residents have to try and make Brent Council see sense if they won’t listen to the FA, Sport England and the Department of Culture, Media and Sport?

Brent Council have given the go ahead for another 4,500 more homes in Wembley High Road and another 4,000 by the canal in Alperton.  They are also planning to build flats where the Fountain TV studios are and St Josephs social club (close to London Designer Outlet) is closing, it sits on a nice large piece of land just suitable ..for more flats?

Add to this the impact of events at the Stadium and the Arena - capacity of 90K plus staff at the stadium and 12K plus staff at the Arena = a potential extra 105K people in the area if events are on at both venues.  

What about public transport?
What about refuse collection – does the contract Veolia have with Brent Council include dealing with waste from all these new homes? 
What about services like sewers, water supplies, gas, electric?
What about the environment as a whole?
Brent Council has experienced a torrent of internal squabbles over the last few weeks, and rushing through such proposals, that'll have a huge impact on the surrounding area, is simply irrational.

This petition will be delivered to:

• Barry Gardiner MP
• Football Association
• Mayor of London
  Sadiq Khan

Should others be butting into the Brent Labour leadership contest?

The contest for the leadership of the Labour Group on Brent Council spilled over into the Planning Committee last night as tensions boiled over ahead of Saturday's decision.

Current indications are that the vote will be close.  I have been unable to substantiate suggestions that a third candidate has thrown her/his hat into the ring but discount a commenter's suggestion that Neil Hamilton is just the person to bring integrity back into Brent Council.

Michael Pavey has come in for criticism over his failure to support parents campaigning againsg the forced acadmeisation of Gladstone Primary and Copland High schools while there has been claim and counter-claim over the nature of his politics in reaction to his 'manifesto letter'. (See comments HERE)

Muhammed Butt has been criticised for his actions over pushing for the double Planning Committee this week and blamed for the resulting chaos, as well as ongoing criticism for his over-controlling behaviour in general.

Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have lobbed in a few bricks of their own with John Warren writing to the CEO and Paul Lorber to Jeremy Corbyn calling for action against Butt over the Facebook issue.

Former councillor Alison Hopkins has revealed that Cllr Butt made several attempts to join the the Liberal Democrats but Paul Lorber has not responded to a request to confirm the allegation.

These interventions could well cause some councillors to close ranks around Butt who has yet to issue his own manifesto for his continued leadership - or if he has, perhaps someone could pass it on.

Some have wanted this contest to be kept strictly an internal Labour Group affair and dislike public discussion such as has happened on this blog. This does raise an interesting question about the extent to which the public should have a view, or even a say, in who leads their Council. Afer all they will be at the receiving end of any change in policy as a result of the contest.

Controversial development around Wembley Stadium approved by Brent Planning Committee despite FA opposition

Julie Harrington speaks for the FA against Quintain's planning application


A depleted Brent planning Committee approved all 5 planning applications related to the Quintain (Texan company Lone Star) owned lands around  Wembley Stadium tonight. They include high rise housing, more hotels and more student accommodation.

The Committee was depleted because two councillors said they had been unable to read the huge number of documents (on paper and on-line) associated with each application after having read all the paper's for Monday's meeting earlier this week. Legal advice was that they should not attend.  Cllr Sarah Marquis, chair, was therefore absent and so was Cllr Patel.  Cllr Colacicco left before the final item leaving just 5 councillors making the decisions.

There was a battle on the main application between Quintain and the Football Association each drawing on their consultants' reports.  At one stage there were 4 people from Quintain occupying the speaker seats for deputations.

Julie Harrington made an impassioned speech on behalf of the Football Association. She stressed that they were a non-profit making organisation - everything got ploughed back into football. Unspoken was the fact that Quintain are very much a profit making organisation. Harrington stressed the threat of the development to the safety of fans and the FA's duty to preserve the status of the National Stadium.

Quintain relied on their experts to rebut the claims and emphasised how much their developments were benefiting Wembley.

Brent Planning Officers were challenged as to why a record of a meeting between the FA and Chris Whyte of Brent Council on community safety had not been submitted to the Committee and over officers' claim that TfL supported the application when in fact TfL had said there was much to be concerned about.

Generally the officers spoke in support of Quintain and minimised any issues.

When Cllr Stopp in his presentation remarked that he sometimes wondered why there was no Brent Cabinet member for Quintain it drew an angry response from Cllr Shafique Choudhary who accused him of bringing the upcoming Brent Labour Group AGM into the matter.

The Legal Officer (the same one who advised against Sarah Marquis' deferral motion on Monday, said it was unfortunate that Cllr Stopp had brought politics into the arena which the Planning Committee was strictly non-political (tell that to Cllr Butt who persuaded committee members, behind the chair's back, to hold two meetings this week before the AGM. Legal also intevened when Stopp said some councillors were not present because of the volume of documents that had to be read. She said 'I hope the public feel comfortable that members of the Committee present have read all the documentation.' There were cries of 'No!' from the public gallery.

To be fair there was some probing questioning from councillors, although some of it revealed they hadn't read all the papers. Issues around crowd management, safety of routes out of the stadium, penning in of fans, access to offices and homes on event days, the amount of affordable housing and the 7 year limit on some were all discussed.

I felt that the answers were not very convincing and wanted to urge the councillors to dig deeper. Instead they tended to pause and then say 'Thank you' very politely. The Planning Officer rushed through his answers at high speed which tended to leave councillors looking a bit bewildered, pausing and then another murmered 'Thank you'.

An attempt by Cllr Maurice (Conservative)  to defer the final application ignoted by Cllr Agha who was chaiting and not put to the vote.  In the event Maurice voted against each application and Lia Colacicco (Labour) abstained on each except the last where she was absent.

That left Cllrs Agha, Choudhart, Ezeajughi and Mahmood (all Labour) voting through the applications.

Although an attempt may be made to bring the two sides togather Brent Planning Officers said that could not be a condition of granting the application.

There is a possibility that the FA will appeal.

Sarah Marquis absent from tonight's planning meeting

Sarah Marquis, Chair of Brent Planning Committee has sent her apologies to tonight's meeting. No reason was given. Cllr Agha is in the chair and Cllr Patel is also absent. This means that tonight's decision on the controversial Wembley Masterplan development will be made by just six people.

I have now heard that they are absent on legal advice because they have not had time to read ALL the enormous documentation attached to the applications to be heard tonight.

We must presume that the six present have read it all...

Posted with Blogsy

Brent Council rejects Wembley Stadium/FA request for more time to consider tonight's planning application

From Supplementary report tabled for tonight's Planning Committee Meeting LINK

Additional letter received from Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners (NLP) on behalf of WNSL / The FA

NLP have specified that a significant amount of new information was submitted to Brent Council by the applicant on 9 May, only 48 hours before committee, including specialist responses on noise, transport and planning issues. They specify that WNSL as well as Brent Council need further time to review the detail submitted that appears to relate to the impact on the operation and safety of Wembley Stadium.

Information has been submitted to the Council. This information has been submitted by the applicant as a rebuttal to the letters submitted by WNSL and their consultants. It does not provide new information. The Council’s consideration of the proposal is based on the information originally submitted to support the information together with Appendix K which was submitted subsequently, with further consultation carried out.

The submission of the rebuttal letters is not considered to trigger the requirement for additional consultation.

Officers recommend tonight's Quintain decision handed to Head of Planning + Football Supporters objections

May 2011, before the UEFA Champions League Final between Barcelona and Manchester United (Photo Philip Grant)

Tonight's Planning Commitee and the battle between Quintain/Brent Council and the Football Association/Wembley Stadium/Football Supporters has hit the Evening stndard headlines tonight LINK.

Meanwhile Planning Officers appear to have changed their Recommendation through a recent published Supplementary Report which hands over decision making from the Committee to the Head of Planning (I am not sure if there is one at present).  This seems to undermine the democratic involvement of councillors in  such a massive multi-million development.

Recommendation in original report:

To resolve to grant planning permission, subject to the Stage 2 referral to the Mayor of London and subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and to delegate authority to the Head of Planning or other duly authorised person to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Chief Legal Officer, subject to the conditions set out in the Draft Decision Notice.

Recommendation in supplementary report:

To delegate authority to the Head of Planning or other duly authorised person to grant permission, subject to the Stage 2 referral to the Mayor of London and subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and to delegate authority to the Head of Planning or other duly authorised person to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Chief Legal Officer, and subject to the conditions set out in the Draft Decision Notice, an additional condition regarding design standards and amendments to conditions 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 19, 22, 26, 29 and 36 as discussed above.

The Football Supporters Federation have also objected to the planning application:

 

Football Supporters’ Federation opposition to planned redevelopment around Wembley Stadium

The Football Supporters’ Federation (FSF) represents more than 500,000 football supporters, with our membership comprising both individual fans and organised supporter groups for clubs across England and Wales. The FSF’s role is to ensure that the collective voice of football fans is heard on important issues and our members are always keen to engage in our work. Our recent campaigns have included our successful work to secure lower ticket prices for away fans in the Premier League, opposing The FA Chairman’s recent “B-team” proposal, and campaigning to enhance the diversity of football crowds.

I am writing to you today to ask you to oppose the recent planning applications for redevelopment around Wembley stadium (15/5550 and 15/5615) as implementing these proposals as they stand will have a hugely detrimental effect on supporters at Wembley Stadium.

For many fans, coming to Wembley Stadium to support their club in The FA Cup semi-finals or final, the League Cup final or the Football League Play-Offs is a once in a life-time opportunity and one that remains hugely special to the millions of people who have enjoyed seeing their teams play at the national stadium. In addition, hundreds of thousands of fans of the England national team also come together for matches at Wembley.

Of course the fans’ experience of Wembley is based on much more than the outcome of the game itself and the whole match day experience from beginning to end is important to football fans.

We are concerned that the planning proposals submitted for the redevelopment around Wembley have been created without football supporters in mind. We understand that the current proposals will mean that supporters would need to queue for over two hours to exit the new multi-storey car park, and that the proposals for the new coach park would see fans leaving the stadium in an anti- clockwise route and then joining the back of the queue towards the south of the stadium before being allowed back to the Carey’s/VDC coach park. Supporters would be held at the south of the stadium after the match before they are allowed to get back to their coaches.

These plans mean that there will be significant delays for fans when arriving at and leaving the stadium. Meanwhile, queuing or grouping fans together at best will create a poor experience for fans and at worst could lead to public order problems. We also have concerns for the safety of fans leaving the stadium and accessing the coach park at VDC/Carey’s, in particular as the current proposals will lead to conflict between pedestrians and vehicles, something which we feel is not acceptable.

Football fans appear to have been completely forgotten in creating these new proposals which would ruin supporters’ experience of Wembley and surely endanger the prospects of Wembley attracting world-class events in the future.

We recommend that the Council rejects the planning applications and works with supporters, Wembley and the developers to create a solution which ensures that Wembley Stadium retains its status as a world-class sporting venue.

Yours sincerely,

Kevin Miles
Chief Executive
The Football Supporters’ Federation

London Councils calls for academy conversion cash to be used to level up school funding

London Councils' Executive member for children, skills and employment Cllr Peter John OBE has responded to the recent government announcement on academisation. He said:

Revoking the decision to force all schools to become academies is great news for London’s schools. They can now focus on improving their already enviable results at Key Stage 2 and GCSE, working in partnership with boroughs, parents and central government to offer London’s children the best quality education possible.

Money set aside to help schools convert – said to be around £500 million – should now be used to level up funding across the country, ensuring no child is disadvantaged by the introduction of a new national funding formula.

'Dear Mo and Michael' please confirm your promise on Preston Community Library

https://www.flickr.com//photos/saveprestonlibrary/show/

Preston Community Library have called on Muhammed Butt and Michael Pavey, contenders for the leadership of the Brent Labour Group, and thus of the Council to stand by their promise on the future of their library:

Dear Mo, Dear Michael,

I hope you are both well. You were both present at our public meeting on 7 May 2014 at which Brent Labour Party made a very clear election promise to offer the Preston Library building "at a peppercorn rent to any local group who can provide a sustainable community library........that is our pledge". That promise is the reason why we have invested thousands of hours and many thousands of pounds in creating Preston Community Library.

In recent weeks we have become concerned about that promise. In particular, we noticed that a member of the Cabinet referred to the possibility of housing being built on that site - something never mentioned at the time of the last election.

Can you please confirm that if, this time next week, you are the Leader of Brent Council, you will honour that very clear election promise to support a library in Carlton Avenue East?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Philip Bromberg,
Chair, Preston Community Library