Mumbai Junction and Kilburn Square at Brent Planning Commitee next week

 Campaigners will be sharpening their swords for next week's Planning Committee as two controversial planning applications are heard. (Wednesday 18th October 6pm) Mumbai Junction is from a private developer while Kilburn Square is from Brent Council itself.

Swords may not be much of a match for the developers' bulldozer (soon to be driven by Keir Starmer!) but a lively meeting is in prospect.

 

Mumbai Junction (John Lyon pub) proposal

 

The Mumbai Junction application was deferred at a previous meeting when officers intervened to derail a straight rejection by the Planning Committee. LINK Officers felt that the reasons for rejection put forward by the members were inadequate and would open the Council to an expensive appeal.

Officers have now come forward with a report that still recommends approval of the scheme but suggests reasons that the Committee could give for rejection. There is an air of 'On your own head be it' about the report:

 

Officers remain of the view that the scheme is compliant with the policies that have been set out. It has been clearly demonstrated that the proposed development would deliver the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing (in this case no affordable housing). A late stage review mechanism would be secured within a Section 106 Agreement to capture any off site contributions towards affordable housing in the event that viability improves.

 

Officers do not consider there to be any substantive grounds for refusal based upon the affordable housing provision as the scheme is in line with the relevant policies.

 

If members are minded to go against Officer advice a reason is suggested below:

 

The proposal would fail to provide an appropriate level of Affordable Housing to meet an identified local need within the Borough. This would be contrary to Policy BH5 of the Brent Local Plan 2019-2041, and Policies H4, H5 and H6 of the London Plan (2021).

In summary, the scale and massing of the proposed development is larger than the surrounding context and represents a departure from policy BH4 in this respect and one could reasonably consider that this departure warrants the refusal of planning permission.

 

However, officers consider the overall appearance to be appropriate in light of the site’s specific characteristics. Furthermore, the benefits of the scheme (including the delivery of homes in the borough) are considered to outweigh the policy departure from Policy BH4.

 

Nevertheless, if, bearing in mind the discussion above, the Planning Committee are still minded to refuse the application, then the following reason for refusal could be considered:

 

The proposed development by reason of its scale, design, bulk, massing and siting in relation to the suburban context of the site would appear as an excessively dominant building which would have a detrimental impact on the character of the surrounding area. This would be contrary to Policies DMP1, BD1 and BH4 of the Brent Local Plan 2019-2041, and Policy D4 of the London Plan (2021)

 

It is legitimate for Members to ensure that the optimum site capacity is achieved within development proposals. However, officers consider that this has been achieved for the site.

 

Notwithstanding the officer recommendation, if the Planning Committee are still minded to refuse the application for this reason, then the following reason for refusal could be considered:

 

The proposal would fail to optimise the capacity of the site and this would result in a deficit in relation to local needs, in particular affordable housing. This would be contrary to Policies DMP1 and BH5 of the Brent Local Plan 2019-2041, and Policies D3, H4, H5 and H6 of the London Plan (2021)

 

Kilburn Square proposal

The Kilburn Square proposal has also been controversial and changes made since the first version of the application have included the removal of a second tower.  However, issues such as densification, loss of daylight, loss of amenity, loss of green and play space, loss of 13 mature trees and fire safety remain concerns. The officers' report introduces a new concept (to me anyway) of 'doorstep play space' that conjures up visions of terraced cottages opening straight on to the street.

Officers' report:

Following public consultation, objections from a total of 117 people have been received. One objection has been received from MP Tulip Siddiq for Hampstead and Kilburn (objection reflects concerns of residents within this constituency), as well as an objection from the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) charity and an objection from the Brent Parks Open Space Forum. One objection has also been received from Sian Berry who is a Green Party member within City Hall.

Four (4) petitions have also been received against the development. These include:

·        Petition containing 21 different signatures representing objections from residents of Algernon  Road

·        Petition containing 103 different signatures representing objections from residents of Brondesbury Road, Brondesbury Villas and Donaldson Road

·        Petition containing 14 different signatures representing objections from residents of Sandwood Court

·        Petition containing 176 different signatures representing objections from residents of Victoria Road, Victoria Mews and Hazelmere Road

 

 The tenure split - See Philip Grant's post HERE

 

After a long and detailed discussion of the objectors' alleged 'harms' of the scheme and what officers see as its benefits  LINK officers' conclude:

Conclusion

247. The proposal would provide 139 new homes including 40 extra-care homes and 99 Use Class C3 homes. At least 50 % of those homes would be Affordable, with 70 % of the Affordable homes provided at London Affordable. The proposal is considered to constitute a well composed series of blocks that fit well within their context. The proposal will result in the loss of some of the amenity spaces within the site and some car parking, but improvements to the remaining amenity spaces and play spaces are proposed whilst car parking has been demonstrated to be sufficient to meet demand. All new homes will be "car free" and will be supported by a Travel Plan. Cycle parking has been provided for existing and new residents along with electric vehicle charging points.

 

248. The buildings will be near to existing heritage assets and 'Less than Substantial Harm' has been identified to the significance of the Kilburn Conservation Area. However, a balancing exercise has been undertaken with regard to paragraph 202 of the NPPF, it is considered that the very limited 'less than substantial harm' that has been identified is significantly outweighed by the public benefits that would be afforded as a result of this development.

 

249. When considering other impacts, the development would result in some impact to the light and outlook of a number of neighbouring occupiers both within and adjacent to the existing site. Although the proposal has been designed to limit the degree of impact , it has been noted that there would be some losses of daylight which would be material to a limited number of windows on existing properties. When considering the impacts on the overall living conditions of these neighbouring occupiers, the would largely be modest and not have a significant effect on the function of the function of the properties as a whole. Furthermore, when considering the site allocation, the requirement to make efficient use of land and the impact of any meaningful development would have in comparison, the proposal would achieve an appropriate balance. The benefits of the new dwellings, a policy compliant provision of affordable housing and the NAIL accommodation, for which there is an identified need.

 

250. In addition, the development would enhance security within Kilburn Square by providing natural surveillance, CCTV and appropriate security features. Landscaping would be improved with additional planting and a layout that would provide an attractive setting for the resultant buildings and more useable areas for recreation.

 

These public benefits are significant and would far outweigh any harm that has been identified and the application is considered to be in compliance with the Development Plan when read as a whole.

251. It is therefore considered that the application should be approved subject to the conditions set out,

 

 If you along to the meeting in person it may be an idea to take a flask and sandwiches - it may be a long one. (Also accessible online).

 

Maintenance work to start at the end of the month on Welsh Harp Reservoir - including fully draining it and fish rescue

 

The Welsh Harp (Brent Reservoir) from the dam

From the Canal and River Trust

Towards the end of October, we are planning to carry out a five-month programme of essential maintenance work at Brent Reservoir Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), also known as the Welsh Harp.

What will this include?

The reservoir works, which are supported by players of People's Postcode Lottery, will include repairs to the chains and rods that operate the reservoir's sluices; and repainting the Valve House Tower from where the sluice gates which control the water levels in the reservoir are operated.

To complete the statutory works, which are required under the Reservoir Act 1975 and were identified during an inspection in 2021, the reservoir will need to be fully drained.

A fish rescue will be carried out whilst the reservoir is being drained. As well as employing our own dredging contractor to clear debris from the reservoir, we are planning to work with volunteers and our partners to clear the rubbish that is expected to be revealed when water levels are reduced.

A significant urban wild space

Ros Daniels, our director for London & South East, explains: “The Welsh Harp, with Brent Reservoir at its heart, is one of London's most significant urban wild spaces. We are planning to carry out these essential statutory repairs to the reservoir's structures over the winter months so as not to impact nesting birds, including great crested grebes.

KEEP YOUR CHILDREN OFF THE MUDDY DRAINED AREA

“The Reservoir will remain open to the public throughout the works, but signs will be up warning people not to walk onto the Reservoir's drained area and mud.

“Sadly we are expecting to see a lot of rubbish again when the Reservoir is fully drained, just as we did back in January 2021, when we partially drained the reservoir to inspect the dam and Valve House.

“We’d like to work with volunteers and our partners to take the opportunity to clear as much of the rubbish that will be revealed as possible, and we are planning to launch a Crowd Funding campaign to help support that work”

A joint vision

Also known as The Welsh Harp, Brent Reservoir was built in 1835 to supply water to the Grand Union Canal. Today, surrounded by buildings and fast roads, it provides valuable green open space for people and wildlife.

Made up of representatives from us, the Greater London Authority, London boroughs of Brent and Barnet, London Wildlife Trust, Thames21, the Welsh Harp Strategy Group was formed in 2019 to work together to create a Joint Vision for the future of the site as a place for wildlife and people. The group is planning to publish its Joint Vision for the site on 28 July.

Timeline

Monday 25 September

We started two-week programme of reed marsh habitat improvements at the East Marsh, using our specialist contractor Land & Water Services.

Monday 2 October

Our Crowd Funding campaign is live, and we're asking for your support for rubbish removal once the reservoir is drained.

Monday 30 October

We plan to start draining the reservoir ahead of statutory maintenance works, including repairs to the chains and rods that operate the reservoir’s sluices and repainting the Valve House tower.

Wednesday 1-3 November

Our contractor Rothens will begin a three-day programme of debris removal from the reservoir.

Friday 10 and Wednesday 22 November

We are planning some volunteer clean-up events. People will be able to sign-up to take part via our Eventbrite links.

Around mid-November

We will carry out a fish rescue.

LETTER: Brent Council is failing South Kilburn residents who are living in fear in with damp, mould, cold and debt

 Video created from photographs provided by the letter writer

 

I reported on last week’s Brent Renters meeting calling on Brent Council to take action on bad landlords, but what happens when it is the council itself that is the bad landlord?  Wembley Matters has received this letter.

 

Dear Editor,

 

South Kilburn is a lively and friendly community.

 

My neighbours are quiet but ever so respectful.

 

We look out for one another.

 

With a predominantly Black and African community the English language is not the first language of most residents however, it does not create a barrier.

 

In fact, it sometimes draws people together in support for each other, whether it be housing, schooling, benefits, or young people’s needs. We support each other where we can.

 

There is a great deal of deprivation and poverty.

 

With many temporary tenants living in council properties and being charged £440pw, the cost of living crisis, is nothing new to them. Many of them have been living in such conditions for 9+ years, hardly temporary?

 

They were promised that, should they vote for the regeneration bid, upon its succession, they would be placed in new-build properties with a choice of paint colour, kitchen fittings, flooring, and new white goods, some even a dish washer!

 

However, this has not been the case. The council carried out housing needs assessments for every individual to gain knowledge of exactly what was needed but, they failed to deliver many of their promises and continue to do so.

 

Many tenants have been forced to move to new areas outside South Kilburn despite being promised they could stay.

 

Not enough new-builds and not enough of the required bedroom sizes!

 

But didn’t the council carry out assessments? Yes they did?

 

What happened to the planning and the order of blocks to be-rehoused? After the succession of the bid, it all changed – it all fell apart and promises were broken.

 

So, the people moving to new-builds received the promises of flooring and paint etc. However, the others forced to take re-lets are being failed.

 

They must move urgently- within 1 week, to properties with no flooring down, an empty shell.

 

Where are they supposed to find the money to start all over again?

 

There are disruption payments to be had according to the council yet, many are refused and if they are lucky enough to be chosen to receive it, they must wait up to 3 months to receive it!

 

Some are reimbursed for their flooring and white goods, some even for their curtains but some are not, with the council picking and choosing who can and can not be reimbursed. It this discrimination?

 

But Countryside and the Mayor’s office are providing the council with this money to take care of the tenants. If it’s not going to tenants, where is it going?

 

They are not even following their own promises and despite the tenants complaining to heads of departments, they are simply passed from pillar to post with no answer.

 

The council have no fear of breaking the law as the tenants have no-one fighting for them. Even MP Tulip Siddiq is doing nothing to assist vulnerable tenants.

 

Is it because Labour can not fight itself?

 

The electricity bills in the blocks are huge and the saddest part is, regardless of how much they do spend on heating, the properties are ice cold.

 

The health risks to tenants living in damp and mould riddled flats are at an all time high.

 

One of the residents, a mother of 4 and 3 asthmatics had pneumonia three times in one winter and the year before 2 pneumonia and sepsis. Still, she was afraid to put the heating on because she could not afford the bills and was falling deeper and deeper into utility debt. How could she find a way to clear it when all avenues seemed to be closed?

 

They are left in thousands of pounds worth of debt because of the electricity bills. The properties are insufficient, no insulation and ineffective heating units.

 

Go and earn more money you say?

 

With the majority of residents having at least one person working, it’s impossible to up your income.

 

Why? As the wage increases the more hours you work, the council simply reduce the Housing Benefit top-up that is essential to pay the £440pw rent. They trap you into the Benefits system with no hope of getting out unless you become secure tenants paying council rents.

 

The more you earn, the less Housing Benefit you receive and the family’s chance of living better is diminished.

 

We have hard working families paying £440pw rent and £1000/£2000 pm electricity! That’s without council tax, water, food etc

 

What happens then?  The children suffer. Less food on the table, freezing cold mould and damp living conditions, parents constantly stressed because they can’t make ends meet and provide even essentials for their children or themselves.

 

No talks of holidays, new clothes, toys or even a day out!

 

We have knife, gun and gang crime around every corner - but it’s the norm.

 

The last three to four months have taken a turn for the worst, become more dangerous due to the high number of squatters living in the blocks.

 

All night long it’s screaming, fighting, cursing and break-ins.

 

Parents and children are fearful to step into the blocks and afraid to open their front door! Cannabis farms growing, pipes and boilers being stolen and sold for money resulting in tenants homes being flooded and their few positions ruined.

 

Whilst we are fearful, we are concerned with the amount of squatters who have nowhere to turn. They run their own rings, charging other squatters to live in abandoned houses in the blocks. When they can’t pay up, they beat them up and throw them out. It’s horrifying, the wails and screams, the sounds of blows to the bodies of desperate and destitute men and women.

 

Prostitution, it’s also included in the list, men coming and going all night because the women are being pimped out and beaten.

 

The council put two security guards outside for four days. Whilst they are in their car with no toilet or place to get a warm drink, the squatters are upstairs in the blocks and there’s no change.

 

Then we have the schools, they seem to run the same ethos as Brent Council, ignore complaints and carry-on?

 

Despite receiving petitions and concerns of safeguarding from parents, they simply choose to ignore it. The governors simply refuse to hold meetings with parents?

 

They take the case to Brent education and the same response?

 

They take it to Ofsted who agree based on information received, it needs to be investigated.  Ofsted write to Brent Council and raise concerns requesting investigation and Brent reply to Ofsted with ... No further investigation needed!!

 

What do we expect to produce in South Kilburn?

 

The next generation thriving and positively optimistic about a bright future?

 

Where would they ever get this impression from when all they see is doom and gloom?

 

Parents working hard but never having enough.

 

Parents, that when chidlren look at them, their faces are etched with pain and struggle.

 

From where are the young people given hope and is it the faults of the parents, or the people with whom the responsibilities and power is given to make a change?

 

Poor housing, poor  schools and poor finances.

 

No opportunities to thrive yet still, you see the smiling friendly faces of the South Kilburn tenants toward each other, while secretly, their hearts and hopes are broken.

 

I love living in South Kilburn, the residents are very special people who deserve more.

 

Ngozi Gemma Ijanboh

 

The Brent Council Promise in 2019

 

 

 

CONSULTATION LUNCHTIME TODAY ONLINE: Plans for a 4 storey block of 13 flats on the corner of Queens Walk and Salmon Street - consultation this evening and tomorrow lunchtime

 A large house at 26 Salmon Street, Kingsbury NW9, built within the last 10 years, is set to be replaced by a four storey block of  13 flats.

Wembley Matters warned that the approval of Krishna Court, a block of flats that replaced a family  house on the opposite corner of Queens Walk, could lead to similar applications. Krishna Court, claimed to have been an addition to Brent housing stock, is in fact an AirB&B and despite being notificed as far as I know Brent Council has taken no enforcement action on it. Krishna Court is 8 flats. The application for 26 Salmon Street (image below) is for 13 flats.

 

 

Developers are consulting with the public this evening and tomorrow about their plans. See LINK

Monday October 2nd 7pm BOOK A PLACE

Tuesday October 3rd 1pm BOOK A PLACE

 From the website: 

We are proud to bring forward this development of much need high quality homes, having undertaken a significant design process for this new building.  We are looking forward to meeting our neighbours, hearing your comments, and considering them before submitting an application in the autumn.

This proposal, for much-needed homes, is for a four-storey building with 13 new homes including:

Two studio flats

Three 1-bed flats

Four 2-bedroom flats

Four 3-bedroom flats

Community Amenity Area and Play Space

We are including a secluded courtyard and community amenity area and play space at the rear of the site.

At the ground floor, large amenity areas for all residents are provided fronting onto Salmon Street and adjacent to 43 Queens Walk.

Parking

Parking will be provided at the side of the property on the Queens Walk elevation. We are including 7 car parking spaces and 23 cycle spaces.

When residents commented that this post was the first they had heard of the proposal I rang the PR company and they say they wrote to neighbours on Salmon Street, Queens Walk, Deanscroft Avenue, Tudor Close, Bruno Place and part of Kingsmere Park.

On the other side of Salmon Street at Number 39. It says it is a family home...

 

 

Some important issues to be discussed at Kilburn Connects tonight on-line from 6pm

 

I am publishing the Agenda for tonight's Kilburn Connects on-line meeting as it was not published on the above Brent Council website page. 

There are several important items including an update on Kilburn Square Regeneration proposals and an interesting  'New Community Review Panel for Planning'.  After recent events it would be good to see some specific actions under Keeping Young People Safe'.

Book your place HERE

 

17:50 - 20:00

Kilburn Brent Connects Area- Agenda

17:50 - 18:00

Join Session

18:00 - 18:05 

 

Section One

---

Welcome, actions from previous meeting and meeting overview Councillor E Gbajumo Brent Connects Kilburn Chair

18:05 - 18:20

Community Soap Box

18:20 - 18:25

Community Grants

18:25 - 18:45

Agenda Item 1

---

Community Safety/CYP-Keeping Young People safe

18:45 - 18:55

Community Project-United Borders

18:57 - 19:05

Comfort Break

19:05 - 19:11 

 

Section Two

---

Welcome and housekeeping. Councillor A Molloy Brent Connects Kilburn Co-Chair

19:10 - 19:20

Neighbourhoods Update

19:20 - 19:40

Agenda Item 2-Kilburn Square Regeneration followed by Q&A

19:40 - 19:55

New Community Review Panel for Planning

19:55 - 20:00

Close

 

Brent Renters put a passionate and powerful case to Brent Council for action on health hazards in the private rented sector

 

 

In a unique event in Brent, around 100 people gathered in Willesden yesterday to negotiate the demands of Brent Private Renters for action by Brent Council against landlords who failed to remedy damp and mould in their properties. The meeting was a mixture of a detailed questioning akin to a Scrutiny Meeting, and a US style Town Hall meeting with passionate testimonies by renters about their treatment at the hands of their landlords and Brent Council officers.

One contributor said that this was an attempt to hold the council to account and to their credit Muhammed Butt, Leader of the Council and Cllr Promise Knight, Lead member for Housing, took on the challenge. It is a strategy that other campaigns may do well to sdopt.

The councillors and representatives from Brent Renters sat around a large table on the stage and the lively audience witnessed the proceedings from the floor. The recording below gives you a taste - it is dark because slides were projected to show the evidence that had been gathered.

 

 Images of damp and mould projected on the wall

It was clear that Brent Renters had managed to organise a very broad cross-section of the community and I was struck by the passion and eloquence of the several Somali women who spoke, sometimes in Somali, with controlled righteous anger about their experiences.

Brent Renters had set out the basic facts and their demands:

Most of the Private Rented housing stock in Brent is old and very badly maintained. 65.7% is preWWII (relating to more than 100,000 residents), much of that 19th century. Landlords have no incentive to do repairs when the power to evict is so great, the demand is so high, and the punishment is so lacking.

 

The council estimates that 10,108 family homes have a serious health hazard in them, In the areas with the most dangerous housing (those that a selective licensing scheme has just been agreed within - Willesden Green, Dollis Hill, and Harlesden and Kensal Green) the council aims to deal with at most 10% of the most serious hazards this year.

. 

In the vast majority of the borough (everywhere outside Wembley Park) 1 in every 5 private rented homes contains a serious danger to the health and safety of tenants, more than double the London average (9%).

 

In the worst wards, there are an estimated 2374 properties with at least one Category 1 hazard. The council’s plans for this year involve dealing with 250 hazards of any severity- many properties have multiple hazards, and many hazards are category 2, so in fact the council is likely to make far less than 10% of these properties free from serious risk this year.

 

It’s outrageous that many of us are paying £2000 a month in rent to get asthma and mould poisoning - our housing shouldn’t make us sick.

 

We are all paying the price for dangerous housing. Because landlords aren’t reinvesting rental income into maintaining their properties, taxpayers are footing the NHS bill for the health problems they are causing. We can’t go through another winter like the last - our children deserve better.

 

Poor housing cost the NHS £340 million last year. The average cost of dealing with damp in a property is £3590 (BRE report). The total annual cost to the NHS is over £38 million, which would be paid back within 7 years were damp to be remediated. The total annual cost to society of damp is £96 million, which would be paid back within 2.8 years.

 

Brent Council must:

 

○      Agree a timeline with the London Renters Union for dealing with the 10,000 unsafe private rented homes in Brent, and recruit the staff to do it.

○      Ensure that Environmental Health cases can never be closed before sending a report on what has been done to the tenant and confirming it with them.

○      Make interpretation available for the PRS enforcement team, especially in,  Arabic, Somali, Portuguese, Romanian, Urdu and Hindi.

○      Inspect ALL properties where a landlord has applied for a licence within 1 year, instead of 50% over 5 years.

○      Issue Improvement Notices that protect us from eviction while dealing with disrepair, and fine the landlords that refuse to fix up.

 

The renters wanted faster action on the Category 1 homes that include a danger to life and pointed out that many homes have multiple hazards at Category 2. Renters spoke out about their own illnesses and those of their children as a result of damp and mould and the sometimes unhelpful assessments that has been made. One example was a claim by officers that the condition of one property was due to 'condensation' when they had been sent video of a leak.

 

 

Responding Cllr Butt referred to government cuts in council funding and £18m savingsthe council had to make. Cllr Knight said that the council were going to increase the number of enforcement officers by double the existing number (12 instead of 4) which would enable more inspections to be made.  Cllr Butt said that rather than instantly fine landlords they had to give them the chance to remedy defects.

Renters said that upping the number of fines would raise funds that the council could reinvest in enforcement, creating an income stream enabling employment of more enforcement officers. At present monies raised were not reinvested in the service. They also suggested an extension of landlord licensing across the borough and a higher licensing charge in line with other boroughs (£640 vs £750).  Muhammed Butt said the 2024-25 budget was in the first stages of drafting and without promising anything he would look at the possibiltiies.

It was clear from the contributions that intimidation from landlords and threat of eviction if they complained was a real problem. If evicted, homeless families then had to deal with housing officers who had a huge workload. The council was urged, 'Put more people out there so officers  are not so over-stretched that they treat people badly.'

At present the licensing system covers only three wards: Harlesden and Kensal Green, Willesden Green and Dollis Hill. Renters wanted to see the number increased but Prmise Knight said that this would have to be agreed by the Secretary of State. She urged that residents provide evidence to the council to help them make their case.

800 people have signed the Brent Renters petition and this shows the strength of feeling. One renter summed up, 'People have complained and feel like Brent Council doesn't listen to them. Perhaps, here today, maybe they are listening.'

LINK TO THE PETITION

After the meeting London Renters commented on what they had gained from the meeting:

What did we win in our negotiation? 

🔰 A plan with targets on dealing with Category 1 hazards and unsafe homes for borough-wide licensing by the end of the year 

🔰 A commitment to a pilot project in Harlesden and Kensal Green, Willesden Green and Dollis Hill, including increasing current targets for dealing with unsafe homes.

🔰 Council leader Butt to talk to finances side of council about increasing enforcement capacity, and whether income from fines can be included to increase budgets. 

🔰 Improvement notices to be issued every time there is a Category 1 hazard!

🔰 Interpretation to be offered for main languages so that people can access the Private Housing Service and complain, and forms reworked in plain English.

🔰 An aim to ensure that cases are not closed before speaking to the tenant, by discussing with senior officers and creating a concrete plan.