Many questions left unanswered at today's Willesden Green consultation

Consultation presentation at 2pm today

I started out feeling sorry for Beth Kay from the Brent Council Regeneration Team today as she was once again the council's 'messenger' under fire from many quarters at the latest 'consultation'. .This sympathy was reduced somewhat when I heard the presentation and some of her answers to questions.. The Q&A would have gone much better if there had been a neutral chair to keep order and make sure that full answers were provided.

The main feature was the exhibition showing a possible scheme incorporating the 1894 Library. However Beth gave mixed messages about this. At one stage she had been talking about dialogue being frustrated by the issue of the the Victorian library and said, "Now the Old Library has been saved we can have conversations about what we want in the new library". However later she said that the retention of the Old Library compromised the scheme, presented challenges and made her nervous in planning terms.

In presenting the results of the top  consultation concerns (Loss of Old Library 45%, Loss of Wiilesden Bookshop 22%, Inadequate parking 18%, Renovation rather than redevelopment 17%, Dislike of design 16%, Insufficient consultation 16%, New building too small 14%, Loss of public space at front of building 14%) she referred to three petitions.  However for the 'Retaining Bookshop' petition and the 'Pause, Listen and Reflect' here presentation only gave the figures for the e-petition, rather than the much larger (sometimes 10 times larger) paper petitions. For the 'Oppose Demolition of the Old Library' petition  the presentation gave both the e-petition and paper petition figures.

I protested that this seriously misrepresented the number of people supporting the first two petitions and she undertook to amend the presentation.

Another conflict arose over the Willesden Bookshop. Beth claimed once again that the bookshop's rent had been subsidised (despite the owner Steve's denial on this blog) and that all bookshops were in crisis. She further claimed that the Bookshop itself had admitted it was not viable. However she said that (yet another) consultant had been appointed to look into the viability of a combined cafe/bookshop.

When it was pointed out that the Willesden Bookshop had now closed despite her presentation stating that the Council was trying to continue non-core services in the interim, she said that the Council was trying to find them premises on the High Road.

Challenged by another member of the audience on the total amount of  money that had been spent on consultants she was unable to provide an answer but implied that Galliford Try was footing the bill.

Questioned about why the planning application had been pulled Beth said this was due to the widespread opposition to the demolition of the Old Library. She did not mention that GLA planners had raised concerns that the proposals did not meet London Heritage policies in meetings with Brent Council officers. With a straight face she stated, "By withdrawing the planning application we have shown it is not a 'done deal' ".

During discussion about why refurbishment of the 1989 hadn't been considered, and when the audience laughed when someone asked 'Who built it if it's no good?" and was answered, to laughter "Brent Council!", Beth claimed that the Chalkhill Estate had been rebuilt and that was the same age as the current library. In fact the old Chalkhill Estate was built in several phases between 1966-70, 20 years earlier than the library.

I did not receive a satisfactory answer to a question about possible conflict over Brent Council's role as instigator of the project, point partner with the developer, conductor of post partnership public consultation, and decision maker on the planning application. I pointed out that our objections were not just limited to the retention of the Old Library but also concerned the loss of open space, the fact that the housing was unaffordable, loss of bookshop and the provision of council offices, none of which were to be consulted on. We wanted the Council to start again from scratch involving local people from the beginning. Beth angrily stated that the provision of council offices was a matter for the council and nothing to do with the  public, only the Council knew what they needed.

In the light of the above I asked that Keep Willesden Green be given the space to make their case to the public in the interests of openness and democracy. . To rumbles of disagreement she said that she did not think KWG was representative but added that it had been added to the list of special interest  groups to be consulted in September.   She responded more positively to a suggestion that there should be an ongoing  group to work on the proposals, possibly as part of the Willesden Town Team, or as a separate group.

I recognise this is a personal and subjective account and will happily post other views if they are sent to mafran@globalnet.co.uk

Martin Francis

GLA planning officers found Willesden Green application did not comply with heritage policy

GLA planners, advising the Mayor,  have acted before the bulldozers move in, at least as regards the Old Willesden Library.

We can now reveal that Strategic Planners at the GLA  met with the Galliford Try application team twice during the 6 week consultation period during which the they considered whether the Willesden Green Redevelopment application  complied with the London Plan Policy.

According to Gemma Kendall, Case Officer,  in the meetings before the July 4th deadline, the planning officers:

...expressed serious concerns that the proposed scheme would not comply with the London Plan Policy 7.8 and 7.9 regarding heritage assets and heritage-led regeneration. The applicant subsequently chose to withdraw the application before it was reported to the Mayor on 4th July 2012.

Galliford Try, in what appeared to be a surprise move, withdrew their planning application for the Willesden Green Cultural Centre on July 4th.

It now appears that the combination of unprecedented local campaigning, massive public rejection of the plans,  the views of the GLA planning team and not least the Town Square application combined to force withdrawal.

Meanwhile, appearing to have learnt little, the application team have arranged a consultation day on the revised application in the middle of the August holidays!

Willesden Green: Council should listen to the people

Replace the Old Library with a 'cultural memory'

The proposed development

Most of the planning documents for the proposed Willesden Cultural Centre are now available on the Brent Council website.  They are numerous and will need careful study.

Main Planning Application HERE

Conservation Area Application HERE

The future of the Old Willesden Library is of particular interest to many and the Heritage Statement is available below.

One key section states:

The loss of the Old Library is to some extent mitigated through ‘preservation by record’ and the undertaking of the historic buildings survey to English Heritage Level II standards, and which has been used in this report to understand the building’s significance. Should consent be granted for this or future schemes affecting historic fabric, it is recommended that additional recording be undertaken during demolition in order to supplement this report with further details of the building’s history.

It is also recommended that specific elements of the architectural fabric are retained, and where possible, reused within the new building as architectural details, art installations and/or exhibits within the museum space. While it is recognised that the scheme represents the total loss of the Old Library, the retention of certain elements would evoke the cultural memory of the building and help preserve the historic narrative of development on the site. Those pieces that should be considered for retention are as follows, though further elements may be revealed during the demolition process:

· Shell-hood above the former entrance way on the north elevation;

· Parge work on the north elevations and around the tower;

· Plaque commemorating the building on north elevation; and

· Weather-vane on summit of the tower

The remaining historic fabric and fixtures such as window frames should be considered for salvage, and where suitable, deposited in a suitable store such as the Charles Brooking Collection currently housed in Surrey

Pickles to decide on fate of 1894 library

Philip Grant has received a reply to his letter of 17 March. 

 

Eric Pickles passed it to his National Planning Casework Unit, who have discussed the matter of who has authority to give consent for the demolition of the 1894 Willesden Green Library building with Brent Council. 

 

The letter confirms that if the planning application for the new Cultural Centre includes demolition of the Willesden Green Library (which we now know that it will), and if the Council are minded to approve that application, Brent intend to refer the Conservation Area Consent application to the Secretary of State for his consideration under Section 74, Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act, 1990.