Brent Council plans for accommodating higher secondary pupil numbers via academy expansion

It is one of the ironies of Government policy that Labour Brent Council has the duty to provide school places in  the borough but not the means to do so through building its own schools. The bulge that has been moving through primary schools in now entering the secondary sector. Secondary rolls will rise as primary rolls fall.

All Brent secondary schools are now either academies or faith schools, with none under the direct control of the local authority so the Council has to negotiate with them to provide extra places or rely on additional free school provision.

Projected Numbers and Shortfall

The report going to Monday's Cabinet admits that projections are subject to external factors (such as the impact of Brexit) and so plans have some flexibility built in.

It is expected that 6 of the 10 forms of entry required for 2023/24 will be provided by the North Brent School, a free school which will be part of the Wembley Multi-Academy Trust with Wembley High Technology College. The North Brent School will open in September 2020 with four forms of entry on the Wembley High site but will increase to 6 forms of entry when it moves to the former Chancel House site in Neasden Lane in September 2022.

Due to fears that the new school will have a negative impact on other secondary schools in the Neasden area the North Brent School will have a proportion of its admission numbers allocated via proximity to Wembley High.

This leaves a four forms of entry gap for 2023-24 and the report puts forward two unnamed secondary academies for consideration to provide two additional forms of entry.  Four forms of entry at one site is rejected as too risky for one school. Temporary bulge classes, a solution in the primary sector, is rejected as not suitable to the different curriculum provision in secondary schools - pupils move to different specialist rooms rather than being in one classroom. The report claims that the temporary bulge classes would be as expensive to provide as additional permanent expansion.

So who will pay for the expansion? Extract from report LINK

5.0  Financial Implications

5.1  This report includes provision of additional mainstream and SEND secondary school places and approval to allocate capital funding is sought for both. There are two sources of grant funding available for mainstream and SEND school places.

5.2  The estimated cost of the mainstream school places is £31.3m and the SEND school places is £3.8m, making a combined estimated cost for the Secondary School Expansion Programme of £35.1m.

5.3  Capital investment is sought for the whole secondary school programme at £35.1m, noting that the Director of Finance will approve the allocation of capital from this total to individual projects within the programme on production of further detailed information. It is anticipated that this is a maximum total forecast cost, which could be reduced as the programme develops.

5.4  There are two sources of grant funding available for mainstream and SEND school places; Basic Need Capital Grant and Special Provision Capital Grant. Both are provided by Central Government for the provision of school places.

5.5  For the period 2011-2020 the Council has been allocated a total of £164.1m Basic Need Capital. After taking account of actual spend to date and current commitments, there is a balance available to allocate of £27.9m.

5.6  The local authority was allocated a total of £2.8m from the Special Provision Capital Grant specifically for the provision of SEND school places. £1.1m of this funding has been spent and/or committed. The remaining £1.7m is available to be allocated to this programme.

5.7  A total of £29.6m of secured capital grant funding is available. Based on the total estimated cost for this programme this leaves a funding gap of £5.5m.

5.8  In addition to work to reduce the estimated cost, officers have looked at potential additional sources of capital funding. In addition to the secured £29.6m, a further £11.8m may become available through other identified sources. These are capital contributions from council development projects where a portion of the capital receipt must be allocated for education purposes; those sums were previously allocated to school projects but have not yet been secured. Also from a commercial settlement on a live school expansion project. The council may also be allocated additional Basic Need capital from 2021 onwards but this is not confirmed. In the event that costs cannot be reduced and/or additional funding secured, the council would need to fund up to £5.5m.

5.9  It is proposed that all remaining unallocated capital grant is used to fund this programme. It is already known that there will be a requirement for further capital expenditure to provide SEND school places as detailed in the School Place Planning Strategy 2019-23 approved in November 2018. A feasibility study is currently underway for an additional SEND project. Proposals will be brought to Cabinet in the new year which will include proposed funding arrangements. Should requirements in the mainstream primary or secondary sectors change and require capital expenditure this would also create a funding pressure.

5.10  The revenue costs associated with the operation and maintenance of the expanded school buildings once completed will be the responsibility of each school, as will the additional staff and running costs. Mainstream schools are funded from the Schools Block of the DSG via the funding formula, which allocates funds on the basis of the prior year’s pupil numbers so there is a time lag and the Schools Forum may recommend top slicing the block to allocate more funding to support expanding schools. New in-borough SEND places will be funded from the High Needs Block of the DSG, but at lower cost than the likely alternative independent out of borough provisions.

'Various sources' is the answer with quite a lot of uncertainties involved. I am awaiting a reply from Brent Council to the following question:

As these schools are academies and not under local authority control with land and buildings on a long lease to the respective trusts, does capital funding by the authority, coming out of the Council’s budget, mean that the Council will now have a proportional capital interest in the school?  Or is it just added to the Trust’s assets?

Further is there any possibility that the DfE itself could contribute to the capital costs via the EFA?

-->

Affordable Housing Task Group Report's recommendations to be considered by Brent Cabinet on Monday

A report to Monday's Cabinet will be of much interest to local people on the housing waiting list as well as those struggling with expensive but poor private rented housing. Cabinet will, rather belatedly  consider the report from the Affordable Housing Scrutiny Task Group that went to the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee in January.

Cabinet is asked to:

a.Note the Resources & Public Realm Scrutiny Committee’s endorsement of the report, and its recommendations

b.Note and consider the committee’s additional proposal: that plans for new housing developments take into account the known needs of people with disabilities awaiting housing provision.

 Recommendations (Link to report)

 

Affordable housing targets and viability 

1.     In the new Local Plan for Brent the strategic target of 50 per cent for affordable housing in new developments should be retained, with an expected tenure split of 70 per cent social rent / London Affordable Rent to 30 per cent intermediate affordable housing. 

2.    Brent Council should adopt the Mayor of London’s 35 per cent “fast-track” threshold approach to viability (with 50 per cent on publicly owned land and for industrial sites). Through this the council would forgo the requirement for a financial viability assessment and/or a late stage viability review in the event that a developer guarantees delivery of the requisite percentage of affordable housing across the entire development (with the 70 per cent social rent / London Affordable Rent to 30 per cent intermediate tenure split applicable). The policy should be subject to review. 

3.    To help meet the need for larger affordable homes in the borough, Brent should continue to require a minimum of 25 per cent of new affordable rented homes to be three bedrooms or larger, accommodating at least a household of six (2 people per bedroom). However, this approach must be combined with a clear and effective under- occupation strategy, enabling and incentivising down-sizing in order to release more existing larger homes for re-let. 

4.    The council should continue to use the “Existing Use Value Plus” (EUV+) method for determining benchmark land values. Any other uplift in value should be captured for the public. 

Corporate approach to affordable housing delivery 

5.    Future council policy with regard to the setting of rents for affordable housing should continue to be based on the traditional social rented model (like the mayor’s London Affordable Rent model) and should not be linked to volatile and irrational market rents rather than incomes. 

6.    Brent Council should create a cross-departmental Board of officers, reporting directly into the Corporate Management Team (CMT), to ensure a ‘one council’, joined-up, sustainable approach to the delivery of Affordable Housing. The board should have high level responsibility for programme management and monitoring of an Affordable Housing Action Plan and associated suite of Key Performance Indicators. The Board should include senior officers from Brent’s Planning, Housing, Regeneration, Property, Finance and Legal teams. 

7.     Brent should consider adopting a land assembly, master planner approach, working with key partners and designating Land Assembly Zones in its Local Plan. Where attempts to encourage and incentivise voluntary land assembly do not succeed, Brent should commit to extend its use of compulsory purchase powers in these zones, where the law allows. 

8.    Brent Council should maximise resources available through the mayor’s fund, RTB receipts and borrowing to support direct delivery within its own capital development programme with a primary focus on rented homes at social rent levels and on larger homes (3 bedrooms or larger). 

9.    Brent must adopt a clear policy on access to shared ownership in the borough, making the product accessible to people on incomes that are as low as possible and ensuring the policy is designed to enable keyworkers to take advantage of it. 

10. All new homes in Brent should be marketed locally first, as per the Mayor of London’s planned “first dibs” policy. Brent should investigate how such a requirement could be implemented. 

11.  Brent Council should explore all the options highlighted in this report for innovative partnering arrangements and delivery models with Registered Providers. 

Estate regeneration

12.Future estate regeneration projects in Brent should use the South Kilburn Regeneration Programme as a model of good practice and make a clear commitment to ensuring there is no loss (in quantum terms) of social rented affordable housing and to resident ballots. 

Land owned by public authorities  

 13. Brent should actively promote partnership working on publicly owned land with other public bodies, as promoted by the Naylor Review (One Public Estate), e.g. Network Rail/TfL sites such as potential over station and over rail land developments, as part of the Local Plan. 

Industrial/employment sites

14. Brent must adopt a proactive approach to identifying opportunities where surplus commercial space, underused retail sites and car parks may have significant potential for housing development, both strategic industrial land sites and smaller commercial land sites, and in particular where sites have potential for mixed-use developments.

Small sites

15. The council and its agents should proactively explore partnerships with developers and RPs on small sites to maximise the amount of affordable housing across the borough. Brent should identify potential opportunities and funding mechanisms for increasing development of small sites, including any further opportunities for infill development. It should be prepared to invest the necessary resources. 

16. Developers of small sites with capacity for 10 or fewer units should be expected to pay a commuted sum, wherever possible, based on a consistent tariff, to Brent as a contribution to the fund for affordable housing to be built elsewhere in the borough. All affordable housing in small developments should be included in Brent’s periodic performance stats. 

Community led housing

17.Brent should investigate and promote opportunities for community led housing projects, such as “Community Land Trusts” and “Self-Build” projects, which will protect homes and assets at affordable levels in line with local incomes for future generations. 

18. Brent should explore setting up of a CLT model on publicly owned land and encourage developers to do the same.

--> -->

Proposed 24 storey block opposite Stonebridge Station comes back to Planning Committee on Wednesday

In August Brent Council deferred a decision on the plans for a 24 storey block on the Argenta House site opposite Stonebridge Staion pending an independent review of the building's design and height. The proposed development replaces a 2 storey building. Four storeys were knocked off the original 28 storey proposal after consultation with the planning department.

The Planning Advisory Service found the officers' report to the Planning Committee to be 'balanced and sound' and the application returns to Brent Planning Committee on Wednesday.

Housing proposal for the tower block

Provision of 27% affordable housing by unit (30% affordable housing by habitable room) on a nil grant basis, broken down as:

o    21 units for affordable rent (at no more than 80% of open market rents, inclusive of service charges, and capped at Local Housing Allowance rates*), disposed on a freehold / minimum 125 year leasehold to a Registered Provider and subject to an appropriate Affordable Rent nominations agreement with the Council, securing 100% nomination rights for the Council on initial lets and 75% nomination rights for the Council on subsequent lets.

o    14 units for shared ownership (as defined under section 70(6) of the Housing & Regeneration Act 2008, subject to London Plan policy affordability stipulations that total housing costs should not exceed 40% of net annual household income, disposed on a freehold / minimum 125 year leasehold to a Registered Provider, and subject to an appropriate Shared Ownership nominations agreement with the Council, that secures reasonable local priority to the units). 

*Local Housing Allowance rates for the area

Shared Accommodation Rate: £92.72 per week

One Bedroom Rate: £203.03 per week

Two Bedrooms Rate: £257.09 per week

Three Bedrooms Rate: £321.45 per week

Four Bedrooms Rate: £385.63 per week

 Conditions include: (Full Report HERE)

• Safeguarding of a bridge link to the [neighbouring] Wembley Point to  be called upon in the future and made publicly accessible
• Contribution towards a local public space
• Contribution to carbon offsetting
• Contribution to expansion of Brent's controlled parking zone
• Contribution to Stonebridge Park Station capacity study

As mentioned in my previous report on this proposal LINK the proposed tower block is next to the North Circular Road - one of London's most polluted roads. It also continues the march of tower blocks throughout the borough, joining those at Wembley Stadium, Wembley High Road/Park Lane, Alperton and the Old Oak Park Royal development.

Wembley Central & Alperton Residents' Meeting October 15th at Ark Elvin

Wembley Stadium community engagement event on upcoming NFL fixtures - October 15th

From Wembley Stadium

Wembley Stadium invites you to attend a community engagement evening on Tuesday 15 October to learn about plans for the two forthcoming NFL (American Football) fixtures.

The two games are scheduled for Sunday 27 October, 5pm kick off, and Sunday 3 November, 2.30pm kick off.

The engagement evening will give local residents an opportunity to review event day transport and external operational plans, and to ask our team questions about traffic management arrangements, road closure timings, local bus diversion routes, and impacts on local underground and railway stations.

Representatives from Wembley Stadium, Wembley Park, Brent Council and NFL will be on hand to answer any questions relating to the two fixtures.

The evening will be held in the foyer of the Club Wembley Main Entrance, accessed at street level from the southern end of Olympic Way, and residents are welcome to drop in anytime between 6pm and 9pm.

SAVE THE NHS! Free showing of 'Under the Knife' October 15th Preston Library

 PRESTON COMMUNITY LIBRARY 

TUESDAY OCTOBER 15TH 7.30pm

Carlton Avenue East, Wembley, HA9 8PL (Preston Road tube)

This film is a weapon in our struggle to save the NHS. Armed with the evidence so eloquently provided here, we can win this battle." Ken Loach - Film Director 

Narrated by award-winning actress Alison Steadman, Under The Knife is a positive historical documentary unearthing how the NHS arrived at its modern-day crisis. From its stormy birth through seven decades of turmoil and political warfare, it has withstood almost everything that has confronted it, until now. 

Emmy award-winning director Susan Steinberg uncovers the covert, creeping privatisation of the NHS in the past three decades, culminating in a law which removed the legal duty of the government to provide universal health care. More than 200 MPs and Peers with vested interests voted for legislation which opened the floodgates to private companies. The democratic process had been subverted by the government.

Using interviews and archive footage, the film charts the history of the NHS which arose out of the ashes of post-war Britain to the turbulent times of today. From the influence of Neoliberal ideas on the NHS to the introduction of private finance initiatives, the film tells a ground-breaking story of complicity and survival.

Pam K Productions have partnered with Keep Our NHS Public and The Daily Mirror to host 50 nationwide FREE screenings between the 14th - 18th October. 

Register now for a free ticket! LINK

UPDATED: Brent Council set to borrow £110.5m part of which is to purchase units from Quintain for key worker housing

This article has been updated with additional clarification and correction from Brent Council.  The Room 151 article on which the original article was based contains errors according to the Council so I have removed it from this post.  Apologies for any confusion over what is a very complex proposal. MF

The Brent Council Cabinet is poised to approve a huge financial arrangement part of which would be for the purchase of units in a block which is one of four in the Quintain  development known as E01 and EO2. The particular block would cost a proportion of the proposed loan of 'up to' £110.5m.  The amount has not been disclosed publicly yet due to ongoing commercial negotiations with Quintain.

In addition there will be purchase of  shares by by Brent's investment company i4B or its housing company First Wave Housing for Phase 2 of the scheme.

The four blocks range from  12 to 15 storeys and are close to Wembley Stadium. The Cabinet paper refers to just one of those blocks.  Some of the flats would provide key worker homes for those on moderate incomes.

The Council would purchase 153 units: 63 one bedroom and 90 two bedrooms.   Key worker housing is badly needed in Brent with social workers, teachers, police and NHS staff being priced out of the borough and resulting poor recruitment and retention rates.

A £21.8m share purchase for Phase 1 was for the existing programme of purchasing homes to provide affordable housing for Brent residents who might otherwise be placed in bed and breakfast or other temporary accommodation. Brent Council says that more than 500 homeless residents have already found homes through i4B and the £21.8m is part of the financing package for these homes.

The Cabinet Report states:

 The acquisition is subject to negotiations with Quintain lead by the Operational Director of Property and Assets on behalf of i4B and FWH. Negotiations includethe timing of payments to Quintain and potential future financial obligations. The loan drawdown will be executed once these terms are agreed.

It is suggested that i4B/ FWH’s drawdown of funds to purchase the Quintain E01 02 block is contingent on the usual due diligence relating to blockpurchases and providing loans. 

It is recommended delegated authority is given to the Director of Finance to determine when the due diligence is adequately completed. For example, the Director of Finance’s considerations would include:(i)the robustness and affordability of operating assumptions relating to theblock; and(ii)the adequacy of protection for i4B/ FWH under different scenarios, including contractual default by Quintain.

A decision by the Treasury on Wednesday to increase the Public Works Loan Board 50 year new maturity loan rate from 1.81% to 2.82% may put the kibosh on the Council's plans. LINK

The Cabinet report notes the benefits and risks of the proposal: 

As lender and investor in i4B and First Wave Housing, the Council is also ultimately affected by financial implications for i4B/ First Wave Housing. These include being exposed to potential financial benefits and risks associated with owning and operating the building. For example, the Council would be impacted by 

(i) any future financial obligations entered into as part of the Heads of Terms with Quintain;
(ii) operational profits or losses associated with managing the block;
(iii) the block’s value increasing or decreasing over time (capital gains or losses).

-->
The Cabinet report to be discussed on Monday October 14th can be found HERE