Barham family urge Planning Committee to protect Titus Barham's gift to the people of Wembley that stipulated 'his gardens should be used for the enjoyment of local people and nothing else'

 

Letter published with permission

Dear Councillor Kelcher,

I am writing on behalf of the Barham family to object to the building of even more houses within Barham Park.

As you will know Barham Park was the family home of the Barham family from around 1895 to 1937. From 1913 it was the home of Titus Barham and his wife Florence who spent a great deal of time and money to plant and improve the gardens. While it was a gated and fenced private home and gardens Titus would open it to the public on a regular basis. As supporters and founders of the then recently built Wembley Hospital, Titus and Florence held many fundraising events in their home and gardens.

As you will also know Titus and his wife were major benefactors, supporting many worthwhile causes in Wembley and Sudbury. In recognition of this Titus was selected to become the Charter Mayor of the newly formed Wembley Borough Council. Sadly he died on the very day the Charter was to come into effect.

Prior to his death in 1937 Titus had arranged to gift his home and gardens expressly “for the enjoyment of local people” . This gift became Barham Park.

As you will also know this charitable endowment placed responsibility on Wembley, and later Brent Councils, to manage and look after the Park in the best interests of local people.

The two houses in the Park close to the railway were built specifically to house Parks Department workers who helped to maintain and look after the Park. The building of those two houses, although maybe questionable at the time, could be justified because of the link with the Park and it’s purpose. No such link exists now and will not certainly exist if and when the two houses are replaced by the proposed 4 taller buildings whose sole purpose is not to house Parks Department workers working in Barham Park, but simply to generate a rental income for their owners.

I also understand that the Council has had a long-standing policy of protecting Parks from intrusive development. While the original building of the two houses may have been questionable the proposed building of 4 larger and taller houses is an affront to the wishes of Titus Barham.

As Councillors, you and members of the Planning Committee reflect on the action of one of your predecessors, namely Titus who was a Wembley Councillor for 4 years, and continue to respect and protect his generosity specifically for the enjoyment of local people.

On behalf of the Barham family I would therefore urge you and your Council colleagues to REJECT the latest Planning Application and to uphold Titus Barham’s express wish that his gardens should be used for the enjoyment of local people and nothing else.

Please present my appeal as outlined in this message to all Councillors in Brent and especially to the members of the Brent Planning Committee.

Yours sincerely

Allan Barham
On behalf of the Barham family

 

Education unions to hold joint industrial action campaign meetings in every school in England

From the NAHT

Today (Tues 6^th June), the general secretaries of teacher and school leader unions, including NAHT, ASCL and NEU [and NASUWT], have written to their members in all schools in England encouraging them to hold joint-union staff meetings on industrial action.

The unions have previously announced their intention to co-ordinate industrial action going forward. Speaking at school leaders’ union NAHT’s Annual Conference last month, the general secretaries pointed out that their combined memberships would mean action if taken would affect nearly every school in England.

All the unions are currently balloting their members to take strike action in the Autumn term, with NEU and NAHT’s ballots currently running, and ASCL’s due to commence this month.

The letter sent today calls for staff meetings of all union members eligible to vote in any of the ballots to be held the week commencing 19 June, to discuss how to maximise turnout and encourage members to return their ballot papers.

The letter reads:

The education system has faced years of real-term pay erosion; a funding crisis; enormous recruitment and retention challenges; escalating workload and working hours; and an inspection system that is doing more harm than good.

As a result, the four largest teacher and leader unions are in the process of balloting members in order to secure a mandate for industrial action.

We have worked incredibly hard to engage with the government on these issues and to try to find satisfactory solutions, but it simply refuses to listen. We believe that a mandate for industrial action across all of our unions is the only way we can get your voice heard.

In an almost unprecedented show of solidarity, all four of our unions have agreed to work together on this campaign. This shows not just the sense of unity among the profession but also our determination to make sure this government starts to engage properly with us in order to address these crucial issues.

Regardless of which union you are in, it is absolutely essential we all work together to ensure everyone eligible casts their vote. This really is a time to stand together and stand up for the profession.

Whether you are in the same union or in different unions, these staff meetings will provide a perfect opportunity to come together and show your solidarity for one another in this ongoing campaign.

We are all clear that we are now in a battle for the very future of education – stand with your colleagues and join us as we strive to bring about real change.

The full letter can be read here: JOINT GS Letter - staffroom meetings - June 2023.pdf.

'Misrepresentation' by officers cited in Objection to the Barham Park Application Committee Report before Brent Planning Committee on June 12th: Application must be refused.

 Philip Grant informed readers of this objection on a comment to the earlier article on the Barham Park planning application. With his permission I am publishing it as a guest post:

Barham Park objection comment on Officer Report to 12 June Planning Committee:-

This is an objection to a misrepresentation made in the Committee Report by Planning Officers to the Planning Committee meeting on 12 June 2023.

A Supplementary Report to the meeting should be prepared, setting out IN FULL the grounds for this objection, and the Officer response to it.

The heading of the Report states that the Planning Area for application 22/4128 is “Sudbury Town Neighbourhood Forum”. The misrepresentation occurs over the Sudbury Town Neighbourhood Plan, referred to in paragraphs 11 and 13 of the Committee Report.

Paragraph 11 correctly states that: ‘It is set out within Neighbourhood Plan policy BP1 (Barham Park) that any proposals for the re-use or redevelopment of park buildings for residential use (Use Class C3) will not be supported.’

That should be the conclusion of the matter, with a recommendation that application 22/4128 should be refused, because the application proposes the redevelopment of park buildings, increasing their size, height and number of dwellings for residential use.

However, paragraph 13 seeks to turn the clear policy position over the Sudbury Town Neighbourhood Plan (as set out in paragraph 11) on its head!

It begins the attempt to do this by saying that: ‘Neighbourhood Plan Policies LGS1, LGS2 and BP1 ARE RELEVANT to the proposal ....’ (note: my capital letters, for emphasis). Those policies are more than just relevant. They are what should decide the matter, for the reason I will explain at the end of this objection comment.

Paragraph 13 goes on to say: ‘... the proposal is not considered to result in the redevelopment of park buildings.’ However, at the top of the Officer Report “The Proposal” is described as: ‘Demolition of 2 existing dwellings and construction of 4x new three storey dwellinghouses.’

The definition of “redevelopment” in ordinary English usage is: ‘the action or process of developing something again or differently.’ The proposal should clearly be considered as a redevelopment of park buildings, and the Officer Report has misdirected the Committee on that point.

Following on from this misdirection, paragraph 13 states: ‘The proposal is considered to accord with policies LGS1, LGS2 and BP1.’ The proposal DOES NOT accord with those policies, because those policies in the Sudbury Town Neighbourhood Plan, specifically policy BP1 relating to Barham Park, state:

‘Proposals for the re-use of the existing Barham Park buildings to provide a new community facility (D1 or D2 Use) or any other use that would support and complement the function of the park will be supported. Any proposals for the re-use or redevelopment of park buildings for residential use (Use Class C3) WILL NOT BE SUPPORTED.’

Paragraph 13 concludes by trying to counter the point I have just made: ‘if one contended that Policy BP1 relates to all buildings within the area designated Local Green Space as opposed to all buildings within the park itself, it is noted that the fall-back position for the applicant would be the continued use of the houses and their curtilages for their current lawful use, for purposes within Use Class C3.’

Yes, the applicant can continue to use the two existing houses in the park, built originally as homes for park-keepers, but no longer required for that purpose, for their current Class C3 use.

But that does not entitle the applicant to demolish those two houses and redevelop the site for four new houses. To do that would require planning consent, which is what application 22/4128 is seeking to achieve. However, policy BP1 clearly states that such a proposal ‘will not be supported’. It should not have been supported, and recommended for approval, by Planning Officers, and it should not be approved by Brent’s Planning Committee.

The Sudbury Town Neighbourhood Plan was adopted by Brent Council in 2015, and forms an integral part of Brent’s current Local Plan. When the idea of neighbourhood plans was put forward in the original version of the National Planning Policy Framework (“NPPF”), this stated:

‘Local communities through local and neighbourhood plans should be able to identify for special protection green areas of particular importance to them. By designating land as Local Green Space local communities will be able to rule out new development other than in very special circumstances.’

There are no ‘very special circumstances’ which would support the proposed development in application 22/4128.

The most recent version of the NPPF (July 2021) states in paragraph 30:

‘Once a neighbourhood plan has been brought into force, the policies it contains take precedence over existing non-strategic policies in a local plan covering the neighbourhood area, where they are in conflict; unless they are superseded by strategic or non-strategic policies that are adopted subsequently.’

There is no evidence that policy BP1 in the Sudbury Town Neighbourhood Plan has been superseded by policies adopted subsequently. Therefore, policy BP1 takes precedence over any other Local Plan policies covering the neighbourhood area of which Barham Park forms a part. As a result, application 22/4128 MUST be refused.

Philip Grant, Submitted 5 June 2023.

Special article for National Carers Week from a local mother about her personal experience of trying to meet her child's needs in Brent

 

Guest post by 'Max's mum' - names have been changed to protect identities

Hi, I’m ‘Max's Mum’ and below is an overview that I hope gives you an insight into some of my experiences as a Carer which have been both positive as well as difficult. It is hoped that some of my experiences are informative, useful and purposeful in helping others as well as helping professionals working with Autistic children, young people and adults, learn, reflect and to consider what improvements can be made to local services within Brent.

 

Some of the best things about being a Carer include doing all that you can to ensure that the needs of your loved one are met, making sure that they are happy, and that they can make choices to promote their health, well-being and for them to live a safe, happy and meaningful life.

 

I am the proud parent of an eight-year-old boy named Max. Max is a happy, fun-loving, mischievous clever little boy. He is and has always been very social and curious.

 

Max is Autistic and received an official diagnosis of Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) when he was two years and six months old. Diagnosis of Autism in children is based on a child's developmental history and observable behaviour.

 

Early signs, action taken to support Max and the process of Max being diagnosed as Autistic

 

Before Max was 12 months old, due to behaviours that Max displayed both at home and within the community, it became apparent to me that Max might be Autistic.

 

A day in my life as a Carer starts early and ends late. My son sleeps well throughout the night, but not for long, so to get things done, it is necessary to wake up a lot earlier than him and to stay up late into the night after he has finally fallen asleep.

 

During the early morning or late at night, I can get things done such as cooking, cleaning, reading, researching or planning things to do to ensure that my son has lots to keep him busy and stimulated and has what he needs to develop and to thrive. We have travelled throughout London and beyond to access services that will help him now and in the future.

 

Messages and emails are usually responded to as soon as I  read them on my phone, not because I have so much free time, but because otherwise, there is no time to reply to them and they will be left unanswered.

 

Like all children the needs of my son are varied and they change over time. Being flexible to his needs is not problematic. The problem is continually having to advocate, educate others and engage in battles and fights, to access appropriate support and services for my son to ensure that his needs are met. This can be on the bus when he needs to sit due to being overwhelmed. My son is a priority customer on TFL, and he has Medi alert I.D. that I refer to, to simplify requests for his support needs to be met when required if I need to request that a priority seat is made available to him by anyone who may not need it.

 

Having to read legislation and other guidance related to how he can access a service that is available to him to promote equity is something that I have to do regularly. 'Professionals' often say, "Carers need to develop their resilience'". Professionals probably regularly discuss this when training or during their CPD sessions. Resilience is "the capacity to withstand or to recover quickly from difficulties."

 

There have been occasions when I have laid in bed during the day and slept. I can imagine some people thinking, 'I wish I could do that.' On such a day, if my son is at home unless he needs me to make something to eat for him, he tends not to wake or disturb me because he has come to realise that if I am asleep during the day at that point, I have no more energy left and my body has decided to take a break, so all the resilience in the world is not going to make it possible for a 'quick recovery' to be made.

 

Several factors contributed positively to Max receiving the correct official diagnosis when he was very young.

 

1. Max displayed many behaviours that some Autistic children, young people and adults may display, which I was able to observe and report to professionals within Brent, who worked with Max and our family. Max was and still is sensitive to audio, visual and other stimuli. By observing him it was, and still is, usually possible to work out what his support needs are, and to meet them.

 

2. As well as having family members who are Autistic, I had previously worked with children, young people and adults who are Autistic.

 

3. The third factor, that supported Max in gaining an accurate and timely diagnosis, was input from appropriately trained and competent Professionals who we encountered within Brent. When Max was approximately 12 months old he attended an initial screening with a Speech and Language Therapist at Hope Family Centre (now closed), who engaged in direct work with Max. Following this Max was referred to a Paediatrician and over the next 18 months a multi-agency assessment was undertaken.

 

Sources of support within Brent and London that Max and I have accessed, where we have received support in person or online

 

Family and friends

 

By learning more about Autism, I am able to learn about a wide range of strategies that were effective in supporting Max’s specific needs. I share these with family and friends to ensure that Max’s developmental and support needs are met in a range of settings and that others are able to provide appropriate care and support to him.

 

Childminder

 

Brent Early Years Services - completed an early help assessment of Max’s needs and help me to find a Childminder, who looked after Max for 15 hours a week. Her input was very beneficial to Max.  She had the willingness to listen and learn and was responsive to Max's needs and worked in partnership with Max and me. She attended the Autism Show with me and this supported us both in gaining more knowledge of Autism and how we could best support Max.

 

Drop-In SEND provision in Brent

 

Max attended  Drop-in Portage sessions at Three Trees Children’s Centre (now Three Trees Well-being Centre) and drop-in sessions that were held at Fawood Children’s  Centre (now Fawood Family and Wellbeing Centre).

 

While attending these sessions, Max’s specific needs were extremely well met by appropriately trained and highly competent staff.

 

As well as engaging in play sessions, attention Autism sessions with Max, play therapy and meeting his sensory and other needs, I was provided with key information about Max that helped me to meet his needs as an Autistic child.

 

Identifying a Nursery Place

 

Max needed to be assessed within the mainstream section of a community Nursery School within Brent for an application to be made for him to gain a place in the Additionally Resources Provision (ARP) of Granville Plus Nursery School. The staff worked in partnership with Max and me and implemented supports to ensure that Max was able to remain in the setting, when due to his sensitivities due to being Autistic Max engaged in behaviours that are 'perceived to challenge'.

 

Granville Nursery - ASD Parent Support Group

 

This was a group that was facilitated by workers from Brent Early Years Service and Granville Plus School - Horizon ARP (Additionally Resourced Provision.)

 

As well as speakers who provided invaluable information and guidance, including a Highly Specialist SaLT (Speech and Language Therapist) (who was outstanding), Autistic young people, and other parents of Autistic children and young people, this group was a space where parents and carers could share experiences, ideas, tips and provide and gain support and encouragement.

 

Parent and Toddler Groups (my experiences from 2015)

 

When I attended Parent and Toddler Groups within Brent although they were receptive to Max and I attending, in hindsight they would and probably would still benefit from training about what measures they could very easily implement to provide inclusive provision to ensure equity to all children both those with and without SEND.

 

Housing

 

Brent Housing Department should work towards training their staff, at all levels about the needs of families where a child, young person or adult has SEND.

 

I had to engage in years of battling with Brent Housing for Max’s needs to be taken into consideration.

 

Brent SENAS (Special Educational Needs Assessment Service)

 

Brent Special Educational Needs Assessment Service should work towards further training their staff, at all levels about the needs of families where a child, young person or adult has SEND.

 

I had to engage in many years of battling with Brent's Special Educational Needs Assessment Service. I took Max’s case to SENDIST (Special Educational Needs Tribunal) on two occasions,  in an attempt for Max’s needs to be adequately assessed and for an appropriate school to be gained for him.

 

Max is currently attending a school that can appropriately meet his needs, where he is happy and he is doing well.

 

Brent Parent Carers Forum CIC - Services and support need to be reviewed and planned in co-production with parents.

 

Brent Local Offer - Needs to be reviewed and co-produced with children, young people, adults with SEND and their parents and carers. Brent's Local Offer website needs to be formatted so that it is much more accessible and broken web links need to be deleted.

 

Brent Carer’s Centre - Excellent support advice, advocacy and support provided.

 

Early Intervention Service - (Bromley) - Invaluable Early Years in-person support.

 

Jason Roberts Foundation (Brent) - Jason Roberts Foundation offers SEND Provision that has competent, trained staff and youth mentors, who are responsive and work in partnership with children, young people and adults with SEND and their parents and carers. JRF take on board new ideas to meet needs and ensure that inclusive provision is provided and equity is promoted and championed. JRF’s work is the standard to which all services in Brent should aspire to provide to all SEND families.

 

Music House for Children (Shepherd’s Bush) - Max participated in Music Therapy, interactive music sessions, performances and concerts, in addition to engaging in online activities that aided his development significantly.

 

Pedal Power (Finsbury Park & Emirates Stadium) - Max was supported in learning how to cycle and is able to safely cycle during sessions at Pedal Power.

 

In-Deep Music Therapy (Westminster) -  Max participates in Music Therapy, interactive music sessions, performances and concerts, in addition to engaging in online activities that continue to promote his development.

 

A2ndVoice (South London) - Max is able to engage in social activities where his specific needs as an Autistic child are fully taken into consideration and met. We engage in activities with A2ndVoice, where I am able to meet and learn from Autistic Adults, young people, trainers and mentors, with whom Max is able to interact and gain support.

 

Chalkhill Community Centre SEND Parent Group - in conjunction with Wembley Central Big Local - Excellent provision provided by SEND parent(s) and other volunteers within Brent.

 

Equivalent (Brent) - Excellent provision provided by SEND parent(s) and other volunteers.

 

Brent Gateway Partnership - Excellent support advice, advocacy and support provided.

 

Brent Children with a Disabilities Team - My son and I have developed a very positive relationship with my son’s current Social Worker. My son also liked the other two Social Workers who were allocated to support our family. However, listening and collating information accurately so that relevant information was compiled into one assessment resulted in ongoing positive outcomes for my son.

 

Other Parent Carers and other Carers have been, and continue to be another source of knowledge, advice and support for me over the past eight years. When Max was younger, I wish that I had attended more settings where information and ideas were shared by parents and carers of children, young people and adults with SEND.

 

Brent is the second most culturally diverse borough in the UK. One of the many major changes that are needed within Brent, is that ‘Cultural Competency’ when working with SEND families needs to be gained and consistently implemented and reviewed for needs to be appropriately met.

 

Autistic children, young people, adults and their parents and carers need to be listened to so that appropriate support can be provided and so that equity is provided to all children, young people, and adults with SEND within Brent.

 

Max's Mum.

Cranes in place as towers set to rise on the Alperton Bus garage site

The Carey/Telford Homes buiding ste at the junction of Ealing Road and Bridgewater Road

The eventual height of the three towers to be built on the former Alperton bus garage site is evident from the height of the cranes as seen today.

The towers are 28, 25 and 21 storeys high and will dwarf Alperton Station and Alperton High School and will throw considerable shade.  The station and school can just be seen in the bottom right corner of this image, The blue outlines show the original height proposal that was reduced. Often developers take the likely demand for reduction from residents into account when they make their original proposal so it appears that they are taking note of residents views when they knock a couple of storeys off.

 

Ealing Road from the station to Bridgewater Road will be a canyon with high rise on either side and more high rises are planned for further up Bridgewater Road, The former 'Pleasure Boat' pub opposite is currently boarded  up awaiting redevelopment.

 

Brent Council  has agreed to spend around £48m of borrowed money to buy 155 leasehold flats in block 'C' from an unidentified “Asset Special Purpose Vehicle”. See Philip Grant's article HERE .

 

Open letter to the “Alliance for Radical Democratic Change” (AFRDC) from GET PR DONE!

 

Open letter to the “Alliance for Radical Democratic Change” (AFRDC)

By GET PR DONE!

Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham/Welsh First Minister Mark Drakeford/Former Prime Minister Gordon Brown

 

We appreciate that your new Alliance is looking at the issue of democratic change which is vital in making our society more equitable. But we are sure that tens of thousands of electoral reformers will be very disappointed — indeed perplexed — by your decision to omit any reference to proportional representation (PR) from the 1 June mission statement of a group that is calling for “radical democratic change.”

Not wanting to change the voting system comes across as illogical if you are serious about making other reforms. And, to be clear, PR is not especially “radical.” More than 90 countries around the world already use PR and this far fairer voting system elects the legislatures in both Wales and Scotland. Westminster is the laggard.

Moreover, we are doubly disappointed that two leading Labour politicians strongly in favour of PR — namely, Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham and Wales First Minister Mark Drakeford — have obviously lost out in making PR a part of your group’s mission statement. Other Scottish politicians from the Greens and the Liberal Democrats, two parties which also support PR as a matter of policy, have obviously lost out as well.

SUPPORT FOR A CHANGE TO PR GROWING RAPIDLY 

Your statement is being issued at a time when the overwhelming majority of Labour Party members support PR and three of its largest unions — UNITE, UNISON and USDAW —- all support PR. So do the majority of UK voters. Only the Conservative Party still supports the archaic first-past-the-post (FPTP) voting system. 

Set up in the 1880s, FPTP is notoriously undemocratic. It has created hundreds of safe seats and means that millions of votes are wasted. Minorities often rule. Under PR, by comparison, seats won match votes cast. PR is far more equitable and nonpartisan.  

AFRDC, which is headed by former PM Gordon Brown, was set up in Edinburgh on 1 June.  Here is a press release of its launch:   
https://ourscottishfuture.org/leaders-to-form-new-alliance-to-change-uk/

We in GET PR DONE! ask that the AFRDC consider revising its mission statement and include PR as a basic democratic principle for a democratic country. Retaining FPTP is simply indefensible for democrats.   

Signed,

The steering group of GET PR DONE!

Established in January 2020, GET PR DONE! is a cross party/ no party campaign group that aims to do what it is says on the tin.  https://getprdone.org.uk/                    getprdone@gmail.com 

The perils of permitted development - local housing needs lose out

 

Jenga House, 356 High Road, Wembley

2015 Report 25 units for residential use

 

'Apartments'  from £170 per night as advertised on 'Urban Stays'

Back in 2015 developers were given prior approval under permitted development for conversion of the the former Brent House Annex in High Road, Wembley from office space to residential use.  I emphasise residential because it has been used for short-term lets for a minimum of £170 a night for one bedroom and £200 a night for two bedrooms. The agent was Urban Stays but now a new agent appears to have taken over.

A local informant tells Wembley Matters:

Recently I have discovered from my neighbours in Jenga Court  that all of their rental agreements are not being renewed, and discovered that although all these properties were on sale on Zoopla for ridiculous prices, the property has been bought by Flying Butler LINK

Is this just another way of having permanent AirBNB, as before some of these were Valet Apartments?, and does this conversion have any impact on the planning that was granted? 

They are currently all being refurbished, decorated etc so not actually available as yet.

Sure enough Flying Butler is now advertising in advance of completion of the refurbishment  but apartment rates have not yet been publshed:

 

 Like the Krisha Court development in Queens Walk, Kingsbury that received planning permission for residential flats but now used a Airb&B short term lets (query to Brent Council regarding non-compliance with planning permission still not answered)  these are short-lets as reflected in the last sentence of  the blurb : '..you'll have plenty to keep you entertained during your visit.'

What is really annoying is that both developments deprive local people of possible long-term housing and as with other planning approvals there seems no follow up from planning officers to ensure that tenure is as granted and that any planning obligations are fulfilled.

 

Brent letter restricting attendance at Barham Park development hearing was a mistake - you CAN attend in-person

 

The proposed development in Barham Park

 

Opposition councillor Paul Lorber has received a response confirming that the Council made another mistake (the first was failure to consult everyone affected) in their letter apparently restricting public attendance at the June 12th Planning Committee. It was 'old wording'.

The Committee are due to consider George Irvin's application to build 4 three storey houses in Barham Park on a site currently occupied by a pair of two storey houses.

New letters are being sent advising that there are no restrictions and people can attend in-person or on-line and that the meeting is going ahead on Monday 12th June  at 6pm as planned.

 

The meeting is particularly crucial because it could set a precedent for application for other parks and green spaces where there are existing buildings.

 

To address the committee you must notify Executive and Member Services by 5 pm on the working day before the committee meeting. Please email committee@brent.gov.uk or telephone the Executive and Member Services Officer, Mrs Dev Bhanji, on 07786 681276 during office hours.