Should there be 3 options for Willesden Green's Queensbury pub?

Queensbury development Option 1

Queensbury development Option 2

Should this (retention of present building) and 'build around it') be Option 3

On his way out of the St Gabriel's Hall consultation on the Queensbury development a resident said, 'They call it a consultation but it's not really much of a choice. The two options are very similar.'

As you can see the main difference is the roof, dormer windows and the shape of the bays- the actual layout inside is the same for both options.

Others  I spoke to thought the designs 'weren't terrible' but were typical modern buildings that are in no way a match for the character of what they are replacing.

When it comes to the pub there was little more than a floor plan and an artists's impression.(above) The function room  would be next to the bar and managed by the pub. Apparently Brent Council thought they did not have the resources to manage such a small unit as a community room. The function room would have its own outside area, making it suitable for children's activities such as Busy Rascals, and its own external entrance.

The developers argued that taking into account the bar, the function room, the outside area and the basements to both rooms, the total area was more than the present pub.

The developers said that a lease agreement has been made with the publican of the Queensbury although it wasn't clear to me whether this meant the publican supported the particular designs being exhibited for the site.

I was concerned that the plans showed the existence of 'poor doors' - separate entrances for private and social/affordable flats.  The developers argued that there was a common entrance from the street (top left) but I pointed out there were separate entrances once inside the development (in the plan top left, next to the blue line of the pub and on the right,  below the two green rectangles which represent outdoor space. They said this was necessary for the convenience of what will be two separate management companies/agencies.  The outdoor space will be communal.

Of the 48 flats 10 will be social rent and 5 affordable rent. The developers said the actual rent level was a matter for Brent Council or the agency letting on their behalf. Of the total number of flats 70% will be rented and 30% shared ownership. The developer said that 35% of all habitable rooms were at social /affordable rent. This is because of the 3 bedroomed social rent flats included in the scheme.

The Feedback form asked attendees for personal details (name. phone, address, email) and there were just 2 questions: 'How did you hear about this exhibition?'  and  'Which design option do you prefer?' plus space to say why you prefer the design option. If you missed the consultation you can still write or email:

 Initial reaction on Twitter was not very impressed by the design:

Brent Council hails estate redevelopment ballot of St Raphael's residents

Brent Council has issued the following press release on their plans for the St Raphael's Estate. See article on Wembley Matters HERE

Muhammed Butt is quoted in the PR as saying he is 'committed to putting residents in the driving seat, making decisions about where they live.'   This may ring hollow to residents elsewhere in Brent who have found their voices ignored when they oppose redevelopment they felt detrimental to their neighbourhood.

BRENT COUNCIL'S PRESS RELEASE

Residents on St Raphael’s Estate could be among the first in London to be balloted on proposals to build new homes and community facilities in their neighbourhood.

This is a ‘once in a lifetime’ opportunity for the community of St Raphael’s Estate, local partners and Brent Council to shape the area for future generations. To kick off the process Brent’s Cabinet will be asked to give the go ahead to a full resident-led master planning process at its meeting on November 12.

The report, which is set to be considered by Cabinet, identifies two options as a starting point to be refined and developed by residents. One option would see the existing buildings refurbished with possibly limited new build on green space. If this is the final preference there would be no requirement for a ballot. The other option is for a comprehensive redevelopment of the whole estate which would be subject to a public vote of people who live there. 

Local people would design the area including the number of new homes, what community facilities are needed and where, and the layout of the roads. This plan would be put to a public vote on the estate, which would make Brent one of the first boroughs to action the Mayor of London’s ballot policy on regeneration.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s new policy requires major estate regeneration schemes to have residents’ backing before they can receive City Hall funding, a policy which Brent fully supports. 

Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of Brent Council, said:

 “We are committed to putting residents in the driving seat, making decisions about where they live. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for residents to redesign the estate they love. People have told us they want to live in modern homes in a safe, crime-free neighbourhood. 

“Tackling the housing crisis is a priority for Brent and this is a unique opportunity to build brand new homes that meet the needs of the families who live on St Raph’s. I’m proud that Brent residents could be some of the first to have the chance to participate in a ballot before anything goes ahead.”

James Murray, London’s Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, said:

 “When estate regeneration is done well, it can improve homes for existing residents and see more social housing built for local people.

“The Mayor wants residents to be confident they will have a real say over the future of their estate when regeneration is planned, so he has put ballots at the heart of his approach for schemes where demolition of existing homes is involved. We very much welcome Brent Council’s clear commitment to giving residents at St Raph’s a vote on their plans and look forward to continuing to work together to build more of the council homes that Londoners so desperately need.”

-->

Join Brent activists in urging support for National Unity demonstration against fascism and racism

Facing up to the rising tide of extreme right wing parties and movements and increased racsim at home and abroad, local activists are campaigning for as many people as possible from Brent to join them on the Nation Unity demonstration against fascism and racism on November 17th.

They are urging supporters to join them on Friday 9th November at Wembley Park station (5pm-7pm) to leaflet the public.

NEU urges Butt to follow Labour Party policy and act on Village School academisation

The Brent National Education Union passed the following resolution unanimously at their meeting last night:

Brent NEU note that The Village school is still a Local Authority school and that Brent Labour Party policy is to urge LA schools to remain within the LA family of schools. We further note that the overwhelming majority of staff and the community have called for the school remain in the LA family of schools. 

Brent NEU also note that the Labour Party Conference in September 2018 agreed the following.

“That in government, the Labour Party will bring all schools back under local democratic control including academy and Multi Academy Trusts. Therefore, proposals to wind up MATs and turn over control and management of schools to local democratically controlled structures should be developed urgently.”

Brent NEU therefore call on the leader of the council Muhammed Butt to urgently;

1. Write to the Chair of Governors and the Governing Board at The Village urging them to withdraw their proposal to become an academy as part of a Multi Academy Trust and remain as an LA school. 
2. Write to the Secretary of State for Education to urge the Government not to proceed with the proposal due to the difficulties accompanying this proposal to join Woodfield in a MAT.

Could you help create a community garden in Northwick Park? November 13th, Windermere Pub, South Kenton

One man's 18 month struggle to get a lamp repaired results in...

Broken lamp April 2017

ACTION! ? November 2018

In January this year South Kilburn resident Pete Firmin write about the problems he'd had trying to get a lamp repaired on the footpath way adjacent to Kilburn Park Station LINK.

Apparently the delay in repair was down to a dispute between Brent Council and Catalyst Housing about which organisation was responsible.  You can't fault Pete Firmin in his efforts to get the light repaired:

As the nights draw in one would hope someone would get around to actually repairing it so that pedestrians have the benefit of lighting as they walk along the path - but no!

Instead someone has taken action but only to seal off the light. Is it an artistic prelude to something even more exiting - a repaired light?

 It's a lovely neat sticky tape job but not much to show for more than 18 months of procrastination!

Candlelit vigil at the Kiln (Tricycle) Theatre's White Teeth first night

Production photo - White Teeth (Kiln Theatre)

Opponents of the change of name of the Tricycle Theatre, Kilburn are organising a candlelit vigil at Monday's first night of Zadie Smith's White Teeth LINK.

Martin Fisher of the It's our Tricycle Not Your Kiln campaign told Wembley Matters:

Out of respect for our local author, we decided on this rather than a noisy demo. 

To be clear, this campaign has no argument with the artistic direction of the theatre but we - and nearly all of the thousands of people we have encountered over 6 months - strongly object to the change of name. 

The Tricycle was loved locally and hugely admired abroad. The change and the high-handed manner of the Kiln has alienated a significant part of its former supporters and most of the local community.   

The vigil will begin at 6,15pm on Monday.

Big changes for St Raphael's Estate on Brent Cabinet agenda

The Brent Council Cabinet is poised to approve a consultation on the redevelopment of St Raphael's Estate at its meeting on Monday November 12th (4pm, Brent Civic Centre). LINK

The estate borders the North Circular Road and the River Brent and consists of around 1174 properties of which Brent Council manages 807. Network Housing also manages some and others are private following Right to Buy. The estate was constructed between 1967 and 1982 with little intervention since.

'Limited' shops

Open views on to green space

Space for small gardens and lawned common areas

Green space between the estate and the River Brent

The officers' report states:

St Raphael’s estate was built when land was in abundance and therefore the build density is low. This presents an opportunity, for the Council to consider what options are available to maximise housing supply on the estate. By doing so, the Council can start to address the housing needs on the estate, as demonstrated above. Initial indications are that, with careful planning and support of residents on the estate, redevelopment options could produce significantly more homes, of the right size and which are genuinely affordable, than the current residents of the estate require. 

Options: 


1. Refurbishment with Limited New Build– This option would retain but increase the height of the existing blocks but could also possibly add new blocks on available land as in-fill to the existing estate. This option would not likely to be able to deliver the best outcomes for St Raphael’s that a re- development could as it would eat into and not re-provide greenspace. It would not facilitate the reprovision of better community facilities. 


.         

2. Re-development - This option would be the most radical and would likely involve the re-modelling of the estate and also increase the overall numbers of homes located on the Estate and at the same time, address the socio- economic issues affecting residents on the estate through improvements to the infrastructure on the estate. This would require a ballot. 


If Option 2 is not to eat into the green space on the estate and between the estate and the river, it appears likely that there will be high rise development.

In the past the estate had a difficult relationship with the residents of the private houses just over the River Brent in Monks Park. At one stage Monks Park residents asked that the bridge linking the two should be removed so that St Raphael's residents couldn't access their streets. Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt declares two residences on Monks Park in the Register of Interests and Dawn Butler has a house there.

Brent Council recognises the socio-economic challenges the estate faces:

The Council is committed to improving the housing, environmental and economic outcomes for those who live on the St Raphael’s Estate. The Council is aware from both the feedback and from its own knowledge of the Estate that there are environmental, safety and socio-economic issues for St Raphael’s. For example, the Community Profile for St Raphael’s identifies some specific challenges for its residents:

·      38% of children are living in poverty in St Raphael’s compared with 19% across England 


·      25% of people have no qualifications in St Raphael’s compared with 22% across England, 18% in London and 19% in Brent 


·      27% are in full time employment compared with 39% across England, 40% in London and 36% in Brent 


The Council also knows that there are other issues.

·      St Raphael’s is identified as having a low PTAL (public transport accessibility level), and only 56% of households have a car (compared to 74% nationally). 


·      The nature of the roads and river surrounding St Raphael’s can make it feel isolated even although it is relatively close to Wembley, which is exacerbated by the limited retail offer on the Estate. 


·      There are also issues in regards to the air quality and noise from the North Circular. The parts of the estate immediately beside the North Circular have high poorer air quality (65-90 NO2 (ug/m3) – reducing down to 75 dB) - reducing down to 0-55 dB further into the Estate. 


The Council is also aware that personal robbery is a prevalent crime on St Raphael’s estate, which increased by 107% from last year, compared to an increase of 52% in the rest of the borough. Also increasing, but to a lesser extent, are assault of wounding/Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH). There is also recorded gang activity on the estate. The Council’s Community Safety and Housing Management teams are working very closely with the Metropolitan Police to try and tackle these issues. However, the design and nature of the estate is likely to be a contributing factor in these crimes. 

The redevelopment option would introduce private housing into the St Raphael's mix in order to finance the redevelopment and provision of additional affordable housing and the South Kilburn regeneration is cited as an exemplar. However there are differences in terms of involvement with private developers:

Whilst the South Kilburn model has worked through the Council engaging with delivery partners to deliver and manage new private and affordable housing, on St Raphael’s the Council will seek to explore with its partners and Council wholly owned companies such as I4B and First Wave Housing, to be able to deliver/manage private sale or market rent housing products, as well as retention of social housing by the Council alongside Network Homes and Peabody Trust.

Unlike the South Kilburn development any redevelopment of St Raphael's will have to go to a tenants' ballot following GLA rules. 

Here are extracts from a residents' survey about the estate (click on images to enlarge):

Given the report's mention of gang activity it is noteworthy that 'facilities for youth' is top of the residents' agenda for improvement but that of course is not just a matter of providing a building but also the provision of ongoing funding. The Roundwood Centre is a great building, the last one left in Brent, but the latest Brent Council budget proposes no longer funding its youth service activities.

The high priority given to parks and green spaces by residents is also significant and it is likely that any proposals that eat into that space will be opposed.

Overall of course concerns that the redevelopment is a cover for gentrification will have to be addressed by councillors and council officers.