Cllr Shama Tatler moves on from Brent Cabinet to start a new role at the LGA

 Cllr Shama Tatler attended her last Brent Cabinet today to make a presentation on the next stage of the South Kilburn regeneration.

Cllr Tatler earned the nickname 'Towerblock Tatler' for her unapologetic support for highrise developments and densification in Brent housing projects.

From tomorrow she starts a new role at Head of the Labour Office at the Local Government Association.

Cllr Tatler will step down as the Cabinet lead for Regeneration, Planning and Growth  but says she will continue to support Brent Labour from the back benches.

She wrote on LinkIn:

Thank you to all my Cabinet colleagues, past and present and I wish my successor all the best in continuing to deliver progressive Regeneration and Planning for Brent's residents.

Brent Council tries to stop South Kilburn regeneration from hitting the buffers via a single developer and more private homes

 

The map shows how many sites are still to be developed 20 years after the 2004 Masterplan.

 

The South Kilburn Regeneration began as a concept in the late 1990s, with the New Deal for Communities adopted in 2001.

The first South Kilburn Masterplan was approved on the 12th July 2004 so the project has been going for 20 years and completion may take at least another ten.

The Minutes of the 12th July Executive Meeting show that non-Executive members were concerned that the Masterplan had not gone to the Scrutiny Committee. LINK

Tomorrow's Cabinet starts at 10am and South Kilburn is Item 12 out of 15 items LINK. The meeting will be livestreamed HERE.

Cabinet will be asked to approve a new chapter with the council seeking a single developer rather than a multiplicity of developers for the sites that remain. They include Queens Park & Cullen House, William Dunbar House and William Saville House, Masefield House, Wordsworth House and Dickens House, Craik Court, Crone Court and Zangwill House, Hereford House and Exeter Court, Austin House and Blake Court and John Radcliffe House.  

The Cabinet are told that Early Pre-market Engagement has indicated interest from several companies to take on the very large task with attendant risks in the current climate. Economies of scale are cited as an advantage but there are still risks regarding viability

The regeneration programme is based on the cross-subsidy model where the receipts from market housing funds the delivery of affordable housing, social and public infrastructure.  It is however notable that the programme has up until now benefitted from rapidly rising sales values as regeneration improved the area, but the sales values are now flattening out. 

Meanwhile construction cost inflation has risen steeply and continues to remain high, this alongside the recent regulatory changes, specifically the second staircase, is putting viability under extreme pressures. Also, interest rate rises have affected both development market and purchaser demand. Affordability of the programme is expected to remain challenging and will need to be carefully monitored and robustly managed.

There are still tenants waiting to be rehoused on the estate in line with the Landlord Promise made by the Council that they would be rehoused on the estate. It appears that 164 will have to wait until after 2028:

933 tenants have been permanently rehoused in a new home in South Kilburn. Approximately 200 tenants have been permanently rehoused outside South Kilburn in a new build or an existing home around the borough in areas such as Harlesden, Willesden, Cricklewood, Willesden Green, Kensal Rise, Kensal Green, Brondesbury and Kilburn. 

 At time of writing there are 284 tenants across Austin, Blake, Dickens, Craik, Crone, Zangwill, John Radcliffe, William Dunbar and William Saville remaining to be rehoused. 120 of the 284 will have the opportunity to be rehoused between 2025 and 2028 in the developments under construction at NWCC, C&G and Peel. The rehousing team is working with tenants at Austin, Blake and Dickens as a priority for the next phase of rehousing as these blocks are in the poorest condition.

The report is franker that previously about the difficulties encountered, partly in support of the single developer proposal:

 In a small number of developments however residents have experienced disruptive build quality issues. At Granville New Homes, Franklin, Chase and Hollister House, there have been issues with water leakage, supply of hot water and heating, poor workmanship and use of poor-quality material. Elsewhere, at Merle Court and George and Swift House fire safety issues with cladding has required significant remediation works.  

Multiplicity of landlords and managing agents arising from the site-by-site development model is also reflected in the inconsistent and variable standards of management and maintenance of the public realm across the neighbourhood and sometimes on opposite sides of the street. This inconsistent approach has marred the community's experience of living, working and visiting South Kilburn.  

Parts of South Kilburn have a concentration of sites at various stages of redevelopment - sites which are hoarded up and under construction, sites which are part or fully vacant. There areas have been experiencing increased levels of anti-social behaviour, fly-tipping and squatting. Alongside this is the noise, dust, vibration, and traffic disruption arising from the construction itself.  

Whilst these are the inevitable consequences of large-scale, long-term regeneration programmes, it presents significant disruption to the day-to-day experience of residents and erodes their sense of safety, community and ownership.

21. The delivery programme as set out in the 2016 Masterplan review has been delayed due to economic and viability challenges and recent regulatory changes requiring extensive design amendments. Beyond the sites which are currently under construction there is no future pipeline of new homes. For residents (tenants and leaseholders) remaining in the existing blocks the uncertainty of not knowing when and where they are going to move is frustrating, particularly for residents living in overcrowded and poor quality homes.

For viability there will be an increase in the private homes quota as well as an increase in densification.

According to the 2016 Masterplan, the remaining sites can provide a further 1,400 homes. An initial review of the Masterplan has indicated that there are opportunities for optimisation, densification to deliver more housing The remainder of programme will include a higher percentage of private housing to re- balance the overall distribution of housing tenure and front loading of affordable homes provision in the earlier phases of the programme. The level of private housing will be critical to the viability of future phases.

 

There is never much discussion, and certainly not debate, at Cabinet - that is all done in private with officers at a private pre-Cabinet meeting, so this complex and risky proposal is likely to go through in a few minutes. It is important that Scrutiny Commitee (unlike in 2005) considers it at the appropriate time.

 

Brent FoE Players to perform at Brent Civic Centre during half-term with 'Jackie and the Greenstalk - an eco-patomime

 

From Brent Friends of the Earth

After the success of our Eco-Panto at two libraries in Brent (see report here), it's been agreed with Brent Council that we will perform the show again at the Civic Centre Atrium on 23rd October at 11:45am (during schools' half-term).

 

We hope to see you there.

British Reggae Allbums Covers Exhibition - Talks and Music - Monday October 14th 6.30-8.30pm at Harlesden Library

 

Families Homelessness Service to be moved out of Brent Civic Centre

 

Visitors to Brent Civic Cente and Wembley Library will have become used to seeing homeless families, often accompanied by children and suitcases, waiting to be seen by council officers. It is a sobering daily reminder to councillor officers, councillors and the public of the borough's homelessness crisis.

At present the Families Homelessness Service sees an average of 61 families a week.

Now Brent Council is considering moving the  Families Homelessness Service to the New Millennium Centre in Robson Avenue (there is also an entrance on Harlesden Road), Willesden, at a cost of c£400,000 for fitting out the allocated spaces.  The aim is co-location of the service with other services that would help families in need of support.

However, the proposal comes on top of the £1.96 million being spent on reshaping the Civic Centre to improve Customer Services which involves moving the library and the main entrance. Brent Liberal Democrats strongly criticised that proposal, arguing that the money could be better spent in the borough LINK.

At the same time there are at least 2 office floors at the Civic Centre that are empty and Brent Council has appointed Avison Young to market them to high status clients. LINK

 

As you view the marketing video you cannot but think that families surrounded by suitcases with children running around do not fit in with the glossy image Brent Council is promoting for the Civic Centre. The New Millennium Centre appears shabby by comparison.

 

The marketing video stresses the accessibility of the Brent Civic Centre to public transport including the Jubilee and Metropolitan lines. The paper going to Cabinet states that the New Millenium Centre is accessible by the 206 and 226 bus routes. Both are usually single deckers and not as frequent as other routes. The 206 is promoted as giving access from the Civic Centre. It is crowded at school start and finish times and is regularly curtailed at Bridge Park on Wembley Event Days. Taking your suitcases and children on the bus to Robson Avenue could be quite a headache.

Clearly there are advantages in co-location of services and the Council's proposal is set out below for fairness so that readers can make up their own minds. Will it be a case of 'out of sight, out of mind'?

Proposal

 

It is proposed the Families Homelessness Service relocates from the Brent Civic Centre to the New Millennium Centre, Roundwood. The proposed relocation offers several opportunities. The site is located in the south of the borough, with high levels of homelessness demand and is walking distance from the Single Homelessness Service at the Turning Point, The Design Works, Park Parade, Harlesden, NW10 4HT (10 minutes). It is also conveniently located a walking distance to the Crisis Skylight building (15 minutes) and Job Centre Plus Harlesden (15 minutes), both key partners in tackling the homelessness emergency.

 

The service would also benefit from co-location with other complementary services based at the New Millennium Centre. The site will be host to services designed to support vulnerable adults and families. This includes the Community Wellbeing Service which is targeted at families and as part of which a free, evening Community Kitchen meal service will be available to all (including non-members). Families accessing the families homelessness service may access elements of the food support, as well as potential be eligible to join the wider scheme. Brent Hubs will also be based on site, as well as Debt and Immigration advisors on a timetable basis.

 

The Brent Hubs already work directly with and alongside volunteer and charity organisations, such as Citizens Advice, Age UK, Brent Mind, and many others, enabling much clearer referral pathways and knowledge sharing.

 

Building works to prepare the site ahead of the service launch offer an opportunity to expand the scope of the works to include an area in the site for delivery of the Family Homeless Service, which would provide purpose-built facilities for the service.

 

The primary goal of the proposals in this report is to empower residents to become more independent, yet during times of unprecedented crisis support will be available to help with immediate responses to issues such as homelessness risk. Co-location with wider services including Brent Hubs, debt and food support is expected to help vulnerable families with wider challenges they may be facing. Proposals aim to prevent future rough sleeping, and to prevent future homelessness main duty acceptances through the intervention of support services.

 

The service is currently based in the Brent Civic Centre and is responsible for assessing homelessness applications from families with dependent children and pregnant women. The service has been experiencing high demand for the past 2 years, due to the national housing crisis and sees an average of 61 families per week. There has also been a recent influx of larger families, many of whom come directly to the Civic Centre at the point they become homeless.

 

The approved model includes a ‘Community Wellbeing Service’ – an expanded version of the Community Wellbeing Project piloted at Bridge Park Leisure Centre which supported up to 400 families per year with access to food and household essentials, as well as providing wraparound support to improve their situations in the longer-term. The Community Wellbeing Service will operate five days per week at the New Millennium Centre, where it will be co-located with wider support provision such as Brent Hubs and specialist debt and immigration advice and will have capacity to support up to 1,000 families and residents per year. The New Millenium Centre site provides the space and core facilities required to deliver the expanded Kitchen, Café and Shop offer of the new Community Wellbeing Service, as well as make use of other on-site facilities including the garden.

 

Management responsibility for the New Millennium Centre will transfer from Adult Social Care (ASC) to Partnerships, Housing and Resident Services in-line with the 1st November 2024 phased launch of the new service. ASC client groups that currently access a day support offer from the site will continue to do so on a sessional basis under new arrangements. This client group will also be able to access and benefit from the new wider suite of services delivered from the site, with support where required.

 

The New Millennium Centre is accessible for residents including through 206 and 226 Bus Routes and is located in a deprived area with low food accessibility (based on e-food desert index EFDI) and high levels of RSF applications and Council Tax Arrears. It is also within walking distance of the Willesden Centre for Health and Care (2 minutes) and both Harlesden and Willesden High Roads (15 minutes).

 

The report will be presented at Cabinet on Monday by Muhammed Butt, lead member for housing as well as council leader.

 

 

UPDATED WITH COMMENTS: Brook Avenue residents object as plans for a large scale co-living complex & flats that would demolish their homes goes to Brent Planning Committee

 

Brent Planning Committee will make a decision on this application this Wednesday October 16th. It is Item 4 on the Agenda. LINK

 

Some of the residents of suburban housing in Brook Avenue, adjacent to the Metropolitan line at Wembley Park, have objected to a planning application going to Brent Planning Committee next week. This would see their property demolished and built on. They say no terms or conditions have been agreed with the developer. One resident told the planners:

The developer has not got any agreement on purchasing my home, and I have no intention of moving, but the plans show my house being demolished and built over.

Brent planners responded:

This is a civil matter. Any person/entity can apply for planning permission on land not in their ownership but must first serve notice on the land owner that planning permission has been applied for. Notice (Certificate B) was served on all affected property owners on [Editor's note - this sentence breaks off at this point and new paragraph follows]

 

Should planning permission be granted, the permission cannot be implemented unless the developer has acquired all of the individual plots that form the application site.

The appplication involves demolition of 22 mainly 3 bedroom family houses with gardens backing on to Wealdstone Brook.

Most of the objections on the planning portal come from the blocks of flats opposite the proposed development regarding loss of light, over-development and traffic. The development is proposed to be car free.

 The proposal is for two  linked blocks of purpose built shared living accommodation, 6 and 15 storeys,and two linked blocks of residential flats between 4 and 9 storeys. 

 

As you can see from the above this actually amounts to at least 7 blocks. They will face across the road to recently built blocks on ex-railway land and just up the road to the blocks currently being built close to the Wembley Park station steps.

Purpose built shared living accommodation LINK is a comparatively new concept and a kind of cross between student accommodation and a care home. Longer term than students and no care provision. It is marketed as suitable for single people who want their own space but with access to other facilities such as large communal kitchens, gym and outside areas. These plans also include a cafe that would be open to non-residents as well The development would supply 517 units.

These plans will give you an idea of what is envisaged for shared living:

 The Planning Officers' Report notes:

LSPBSL (Large Scale Purpose-built Shared Living) generally provides accommodation for single-person households who cannot, or choose not to, live in self-contained homes or HMOs. This accommodation type may be used on a transitional basis until residents find suitable longer-term housing. Whilst LSPBSL provides an additional housing option for some people, due to the unique offer of this accommodation type it does not meet minimum housing standards and is therefore not considered to meet the ongoing needs of households in London. It is therefore not recognised as an affordable housing product because it does not provide accommodation suitable for households in need of genuinely affordable housing, including families.

 

It should however be noted that as a recognised housing choice, they are counted towards housing supply on a ratio of 1.8:1 basis as per London Plan Policy H1.

Responding to whether there is a need for co-living accommodation an assessment was made:

The Assessment confirms that 27% of a total of 118,602 households in Brent are 1-person households, or a total of 31,985 people. There are 17,000 HMOs in Brent, which compete with 3-bedroom family housing, therefore at least 51,000 residents are living in HMOs and most likely the estimate is higher. Co-living would not only meet the needs of a significant population of single renters, but also potentially free up family housing currently in use as HMO.

 

Brent has 38% of residents aged between 20 and 44, and Wembley 39%, which are both above the UK population average of 32%. Nationally, 66.9% of market renters are in this age range. In Brent, 32% of people live in the private rented sector, compared to 18% nationally. The proportion is 34% in Wembley area in isolation. Brent therefore has above national average proportions of people in the ideal age range and who are renting.

The residential accommodation would consist of 26 one bedroom, 48 two bedroom and 26 three bedroom flats.

 

The question of tenure affordability is addressed by officers:

The total net internal floorspace (NIA) of the development is 19,549sqm, comprising of 12,665sqm for the co-living element and 6,884sqm for the C3 dwellings. The proportion of C3 floorspace therefore equates to 35.2% of the total provision thereby satisfying the minimum threshold of 35%. Moreover, the tenure mix proposed is a policy compliant 70% low-cost social rent and 30% intermediate rent. The proposal, with regard to affordable housing, satisfies the requirements of the London Plan and the Local Plan, subject to an early stage review mechanism.

For co-living the report states:

Having regard to the population profile of Brent and to the local housing market in terms of affordability, average incomes, household sizes/tenure, it is considered that co-living would be affordable based on the average salary in Brent of £43,215 (ONS/2022), the depth of the market is estimated between 20,697 and 28,741 people in Brent who could both have a requirement and be able to afford a co-living unit. This represents between 8% and 11% of the adult population aged 20 or over in the borough.

 

A Whole Life Carbon Assessment has been submitted:

A Whole Life-Cycle Carbon Assessment has been submitted outlining the measures that would be considered or employed to reduce the carbon emissions arising from the development. Measures such as, but not limited to

 

Reducing the volume of concrete used and employing the use of recycled concrete; 

 

The sourcing of materials as near to the site as possible;

The use of products that have low embodied carbon  

 

The use of brick for the façade, a material that requires minimal maintenance over its lifetime;

 

 The use of materials that can be separated from each other to allow for more effective recycling at the end of life  

 

The above measures are welcomed and would be reviewed further by the GLA as part of the Stage 2 referral. Appropriately worded conditions would be imposed following GLA input at Stage 2.

'Would be considered or employed' and 'measures such as' are rather vague so the conditions set by the Planning Committee will be important.

 

 Satellite View

As can be seen from the above view there is green space, back gardens and mature trees alongside the Wealdstone Brook. Across the brook is a designated green corridor.There are concerns that biodiversity will be lost. The developer submits a plan for the outside areas that is essential to meet amenity space guidelines:

 

The extent of treet removal is demonstrated in this chart from  the Arbicultural Assessment.

There is the usual promise of replacement tree planting. The GLA 1st Stage assessment argues:

The proposed development seeks to secure a net biodiversity net gain (BNG) of 1.73%, which falls below the 10% outlined in London Plan Policy G6. The existing site has a high biodiversity score. Although the design approach seeks to maximise BNG, given the low figure, there should be consideration of further on-site opportunities and the Council could secure payment to overcome the shortfall to enhance the adjacent Brook.

 But Brent Council Planning Officers respond:

It should be noted that the application was submitted prior to a 10% BNG coming into force, therefore the scheme only needs to demonstrate a net gain, which it does.

 A further issue is potential flooding from surface, fluvial and articial (Brent Reservoir) Most of the buildings will be lifted above potential flood levels and there are proposals for mitigation. The officers' report concludes:

From the Flood Risk Assessment we can establish that there are no sequentially better sites for the development proposal than the current site. In addition, subject to conditions such as securing the Flood Warning & Evacuation Plan, finished floor levels, engagement with Emergency Planning Officers, along with other measures, the proposal should provide sufficient safeguards to ensure the safety of occupiers.

The proposed drainage strategy, again subject to conditions, is considered acceptable and should sufficiently attenuate water and reduce the risk of flooding.

 

APPLICATION DOCUMENTS

 As Paul Lorber points out in comments this development was foreshadowed in the Adopted Local Plan. It puts the site capacity at 450 units, whereas the above totals 617 units.

If you have been disconcerted by this application it is worth looking at the detailed Local Plan for potential developments across the borough. You may find your home or business there. The Local Plan extends to 2041.

 https://legacy.brent.gov.uk/media/16420376/brent-local-plan-2019-2041.pdf

This is what the Local Plan indicates for the Brook Avenue site:

 

Barry Gardiner challenge to Government on Gaza: Show that you respect international rules-based order

There was a debate in Westminster Hall yesterday on Gaza and Humanitarian Aid instigated by one of the new Independent MPs,  Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr), elected in the wake of the Gaza conflict.

Westminster Hall debates do not make policy but give MPs a chance to register their concerns.

This is Barry Gardiner's contribution from They Work for You

As politicians, we talk of the international rules-based system, by which we mean the World Trade Organisation and the United Nations, but often we do so only when it suits our position. When it does not, we ignore it. That is why it is crucial that we grasp the legal implications of the decision promulgated on 19 July this year by the International Court of Justice. It settled the law in its advisory opinion on the legality of Israel’s continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory. The opinion came from a request by the United Nations General Assembly in December 2022, and I believe it carries immense weight. It is the interpretation of our world’s highest court of law as it relates to the occupation of Palestine.

The court ruled that the occupied Palestinian territory is to be considered a single territorial unit, which means that the failure to recognise Palestine as a state is now out of step with international law. On 10 September, Palestine took its seat at the 79th session of the General Assembly of the United Nations. It is not yet a full member, because it has been blocked by the United States, but it has the right to submit proposals and amendments. The Government of the UK still does not recognise the Palestinian state, and I believe that that is now incompatible with international law.

The court ruled that settlements and outposts in the west bank and East Jerusalem were unlawful. It does not matter that Israeli law considers settlements to be lawful; they are not, and they should be evacuated. The court ruled that Israel’s exploitation of natural resources in settled land was also unlawful. The court ruled that Israel occupied Gaza. It ruled that it occupied the west bank and East Jerusalem. It ruled that that occupation was unlawful. It ruled that the occupation must be brought to an end.

That also means that, in its actions, Israel must behave not as a warring nation state against another warring state, but as an occupying force, with all the obligations that entails about its conduct, including ensuring that aid can get through to all who need it. Israel ought to cease its unlawful activities, halt all new settlement activity and provide full reparation for the damage caused by its wrongful acts, which includes returning land, property and assets seized since the occupation began in 1967 and allowing displaced Palestinians to return to their original places of residence.

The court made it clear that other states also have obligations. It emphasised that all states are required not to recognise the illegal situation created by Israel’s actions in the occupied territories. That means that they should not engage in trade, investment or diplomatic relations that would entrench Israel’s unlawful presence. The advisory opinion is a landmark in the legal and political struggle over the fate of the Palestinian people and the integrity of international law. It highlights the obligations of all states, including the United Kingdom, to ensure that the rule of law prevails. We are all duty bound not only to act in the interests of justice and human rights, but to uphold the very principles of international law. That is the law. It is clear. It has been authoritatively stated by the court. What is not clear is whether Governments will abide by it. The law can state, the court can rule, but none of it brings about anything unless the power of enforcement lies behind it.

In the UK we are very fond of saying that we respect the international court and the international rules-based order. My challenge to the Minister is this: show it.

 

 

Brent consults on new planning document for residential extensions and extensions

 From Brent Council - some consultations slip under the radar but in later years prove to have been very important. This may be one of those.

Brent Council is inviting comments on the Residential Extensions and Alterations draft Supplementary Planning Document. The formal consultation period is from 3^rd October 2024 until midnight 28^thNovember 2024 (8 weeks).

 

The document is attached. Paper copies can be viewed at Brent Council Libraries during their respective opening hours.

 

The draft SPD has been produced to support the policies within the recently adopted Brent Local Plan (2019–2041), in particular policy DMP1 'Development Management General Policy' and BD1 'Leading the Way in Good Urban Design'.

 

Once it has been adopted it will replace the Council's existing Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD2) adopted in 2018.

 

How to comment

 

If you wish to make representations, you can do so through our consultation portal: https://www.brent.gov.uk/neighbourhoods-and-communities/have-your-say

 

Alternatively, representations can be made to planningstrategy@brent.gov.uk or by post to the following address:

 

Paul Lewin

Planning Policy Team, 

Regeneration and Environment, 

London Borough of Brent, 

Brent Civic Centre, 

Engineers' Way, 

London, 

HA9 0FJ

 

You must include a name and a postal and/ or e-mail address. We will show the name of any organisations that respond, but not those of individuals or any other personal information. It would be helpful if you also indicate your status, e.g. resident, landlord or agent.

 

Please indicate if you wish to be notified of the adoption of the SPD and future Brent Planning Policy consultations. Additional information on how we will use your personal data is set out in the draft SPD which also provides links to our privacy policy.

 

A reminder - any representations must be received before midnight on 28^th November 2024. If you have any other queries related to this consultation or planning policy in Brent please feel free to contact us, also at: planningstrategy@brent.gov.uk