Is the WGLC planning decision final?

Philip Grant writes:

Although Brent (Regeneration Department?) were very quick to put out a triumphal press release last Friday, saying:

'the redevelopment of Willesden Green Library Centre (WGLC) took an important step forward last night (Thursday) when Brent Council's planning committee approved the plans,'

it is noticeable that (as at 4.30pm on Monday 25 February) neither the Democratic Services (Planning Committee) nor the Brent Planning Service  (ref. 12/2924) web pages have yet given details of any such decision.

The press release does go on to say:

'the proposals will now be put to the GLA and Secretary of State who need to give the go-ahead before Brent can formally give planning permission,'

but Galliford Try and Brent's Regeneration Department have another problem as well. At the Planning Committee meeting of 21 February there was a clear breach of Brent's own Planning Code of Practice (part of Brent Council's constitution), as a public register which Planning Officers have to sign if they have what could be regarded as a "prejudicial interest" was not available for inspection at the meeting.

I had specifically advised the Democratic Services Officer responsible for the meeting that I wished to inspect this register at the meeting, so that there is no excuse for it not being there (under the Code, it is meant to be there anyway). As a result, I complained to Brent's Chief Executive about this irregularity on 22 February, and it is currently being investigated by Fiona Ledden, Brent's Director of Legal Affairs. She has promised to report back later this week. As the Planning Committee were not made aware the possibility of "prejudicial Interest" in the reports and recommendations put before them at the meeting on 21 February, they may be asked to reconsider their decisions.

Crunch time for Willesden Green at Planning Committee tonight

Planners will decide the fate of our library and the construction of 94 flats tonight at Brent Town Hall - over 400 objections have been received and yet the council are still proposing to push it through planning.

The general public are welcome to attend so come along to the Town Hall at 6.30pm (starts 7pm sharp) Willesden Green Library Centre is the only thing on the Agenda  - so there is nothing else to sit through.

If you care what happens in Willesden do come along - this will  affect us all.

Residents speak out on unaffordable housing and 'bogus' letters

Validity of Galliford Try planning application site still an open issue

Wiembley and Willesden Observer February 7th 2013

Philip Grant writes: 

Despite Galliford Try saying that 'this claim is completely misleading', and a Brent Council spokesperson saying 'we regard the application as valid', the issue highlighted in yesterday's "Wembley & Willesden Observer" (above) has not gone away.

 

When Brent Planning Service sent a response (see: "Formal challenge issued on validity of Willesden Green planning application", 23 January, below) earlier this week, they would not even acknowledge that the application which they validated on 2 November 2012 was, in fact, invalid. Although they said that the revised plans which Galliford Try submitted to "correct" the application were now valid, they did not answer the point which was raised, that the site plan includes a larger area than that actually agreed by Brent's Executive and included in the Development Agreement.

 

Dissatisfied with that reply, I referred the matter to Brent's Acting Chief Executive, Christine Gilbert, on Wednesday, as the matter is too important to allow it to be swept under the carpet. As far as I am aware, Brent's Executive has not agreed that the site boundary can be extended. If any Council Officer has agreed it, or has allowed it to be done without raising any objection, what authority do they have for this? It will be interesting to see whether the Executive is asked to approve the larger site, by way of an emergency item at the end of next Monday's already busy agenda, "just to be on the safe side".

 

The extra 1180 square metres added to the Willesden Green Library Centre development site is not a "land grab", in as far as the land will remain in Brent's ownership, but the fact that Galliford Try are now showing a larger site than that agreed by Brent's Executive is there for all to see, in black and red. There needs to be transparency about what is going on here, and whether or not it has been validly authorised. If it has not, then proper procedures need to be followed.

Plan A, Site Plan,Brent Executive Jan 2012        Plan B, Revised Site Plan, Galliford Try Dec 2012

Galliford Try the soft soap on land grab

Thanks to James Thurber

 In response to our 'land grab' story below Linden Homes released the following statement:

+++STOP PRESS: Galliford Try Statement in response to recent land acquisition claim

 ‘This claim is completely misleading - Galliford Try is not receiving or acquiring any further land from Brent Council.

We were asked by officers, just before Christmas, to resubmit drawings for the planning application. Those revised drawings show an amended red line around the development site which reflects the fact that Galliford Try will be undertaking significant landscaping improvements to the area around the Cultural Centre, including a section of Grange Road, to the benefit of the local community. Consultees have been informed of this change in line with statutory planning procedure.’

 Kate Spence has issued the following rejoinder:

The original area of the WGCC site allocated for WGCC works and attendant housing scheme was clearly defined by an edged and cross-hatched area on Plan A and presented to an Exec committee in Jan 2012.

The brief from Brent Council to the tendering developers and the agreement signed with Galliford Try required the provision of an improved public realm WITHIN the constraints of this hatched area. The brief required parking spaces for 8 cars, 2 library vans and cycle parking. It also required good out door amenity for children and teens. There was never an agreement that the boundaries of the site could be expanded in order to provide these essential requirements.

Currently the play provision for younger children on the site is 50 sq m of safe, fenced play ground. The land at the end of Grange Road is a safe, calm pedestrianised highway giving the benefit of uncluttered and neutral space facilitating cohesion to the High Road.  This is now to be cluttered by cycle parking and pavement play interventions which should have been accommodated within the agreed site leaving a calm area at the High Road end of Grange Road. 

We would welcome an improved public realm. There is nothing that the adjacencies of a cycle route, pavement play interventions and reduced pedestrian highway offer as an improvement to the stretch of land at the end of Grange Road. 

If there had been a smaller area of land made available for housing, then there would have been sufficient space to include these essential requirements within the agreed red boundary.  There should also be provision for 8 parking spaces on the site. 

The brief was written to protect public interest. Surely, Brent Council cannot approve a scheme that so clearly deviates from the agreed contract and their own brief.

Rebuttals in press herald tonight's KWG meeting

Excellent rebuttals of Cllr  George Crane's letter by Cllr Carol Shaw and Helen Marcus in today's Brent and Kilburn Times (p16) plus letter in the Willesden and Wembley Observer (p14) by Martin Redston on how the cultural centre will be dwarfed by flats.

Don't  forget our residents meeting at 7pm tonight a Kings Hall.

Willesden residents warned about 'desperate' people at their doors

From Brent and Kilburn Times, June 28th, 2012

Last chance to sign 'Pause' Willesden Green Development petition

From Kilburn Times

Today is the last chance to sign our e-petition on the Willesden Green Redevelopment. Follow this LINK to sign.

THE FULL PETITION TEXT

We the undersigned petition the council to Pause the Willesden Green Library Centre regeneration plans to allow for full consultation with residents in order to ascertain their views on how the area should be developed and the amenities that should be provided or retained.

Brent Council is handing over public land worth £10.4 million to a property developer in exchange for rebuilding the Willesden Library Centre. The original 1894 library building on the High Road will be demolished, The Willesden Bookshop is likely to be driven out of business, the public car park will be reduced to 8 spaces and a children’s play area will be lost. Over 18 months, three five-storey blocks of 90+ luxury flats will be built behind the existing Library Centre.

We all want a thriving, welcoming and dynamic library and cultural centre, but the current deal has been sealed with virtually no public consultation and very little available information, ignoring the wishes of over a thousand local residents who have expressed opposition to these plans in two Brent e-petitions.

While the developers get a healthy profit from the sale of luxury flats and Brent councillors get some fancy new offices, the cultural and financial cost to rate-paying citizens is disproportionately high. It smacks of ‘profits before people’.

Borough residents need to have a say in the content and design of the library centre redevelopment, but we have not yet been given the chance to do so.

The Council says: Plans for the development of the library centre were raised at the executive committee in February 2011, and quickly followed by two public consultations to ‘test the market’. The council had to abide by commercial confidentiality, so no detailed plans could be made public until a deal was signed with the developer on 15 February 2012.

We say: Did you know about this in 2011? Not a single local resident or tradesperson we spoke to knew about the plans until Jan 2012, and only then through word of mouth. The Feb 2011 consultations were conducted with, respectively, 5 and then 7 people. One person present recounted that they were asked for their opinion, then shown plans for the centre that were drawn up before the meeting. This does not conform to the generally understood definition of a ‘consultation’

Willesden Green Consultation: a shambolic sham?

We are gathering feedback from the individual consultation sessions that were held this week on the Willesden Green Regeneration. Individuals and small groups met with Brent Regeneration, Galliford Try, the project architect and Remarkable Public Relations.

It became clear that the Consultation Team acknowledged that the communications.consultation strategy thus far has been poor. However, they appeared confident about their ability to bring residents on side in a scheme which they felt was strong because of the zero cost to the council and the fact that, in their eyes, there was no alternative.

They said that the demolition of the Old Library was required in order to build the 90 plus flats behind the new building. They justified the lack of play space in the development by their expectation that as they would be one or two bedroomed flats there would be few children and thus no impact on local schools. There is of course no justification for such an assumption and many local families live in extremely over-crowded conditions.  None of the team lived in Willesden which is a real weakness in terms of local sensitivities.

Brent Regeneration appeared to give some ground on possibly bookshop space, according to some who attended, but this could not automatically be allocated the the Willesden Bookshop. It would have to be offered on the open market.

When the Team said that this was the beginning of the 'real consultation' a KWG supporter retorted that this was like discussing what kind of lock to put on a stable door long after the horse has bolted. When they were asked if the two day consultation had thrown up a single person who actually supported the plans, the ensuing silence said it all.

Consultees were assured that the trees would stay and there would be an application to move the bus stop. The Team were more confident that residents that the Planning Committees decision would be impartial and independent. One resident felt that the project architect was less than proud of the plans for the development and he suggested this was due to the constraints imposed on the developer.

Residents felt that often the Team were unable or unwilling to answer detailed questions on the scheme, including how the building would be managed and maintained on completion. Despite the loss of the car park, which will be built on, they confirmed that there will be NO public parking for the Cultural Centre - just 2  'mother and baby spaces' and 6 for the disabled. There would be no extra Pay and Display in the surrounding streets.

They were challenged that their plans amounted to a net loss to the neighbourhood of a landmark building and valued bookshop and a net gain of offices for Brent Council.

Asked about the status of this part of the consultation Remarkable PR replied that it would feed into the Community Involvement section of the planning application.

Following the controversies over Equality Impact Assessments in the legal proceedings and the need under the Equalities Act to ensure that no section of the community was discriminated against, it was surprising that the Teams recording of the age, ethnicity etc of consultees was haphazard with some residents reporting that there was little consistency in documenting demographic details. Some were asked to fill in a form and others were not.

One resident concluded, "Overall, I think the experience confirmed my suspicion that the consultation is a sham and I let them know that."

Brent Council's lack of planning brief for Cultural Centre exposed

This is the speech that Kate made at Thursday's public meeting:

The proposed development of the Willesden Green Cultural Centre is being greeted with mixed feelings locally. There seems to be a mistrust in the Council’s intention to do the right thing.  

The 6 library closures has cast doubt over the Council’s commitment to provision of much needed study space and library facilities and the plans for the new WGCC leave further questions.

In a search for information about what we, as residents, should expect from our Council, I have turned to the London Plan 2011.

The following grabbed my attention:

Boroughs should work with local communities ensuring that they are engaged in shaping and delivering local development strategies.

In the context of the built environment these development strategies are also known as Planning Briefs. 

So what is a Planning Brief?

A Planning Brief is a document, which summarises the planning authority's guidelines and requirements for the development of a site such as Willesden library. The Planning Brief sets out the context, the preferred land uses and key urban design principles for the site. It also addresses a number of important issues relating to the delivery of development proposals such as the partnering with a developer.

A Planning Brief can also perform a number of functions such as promoting a site for development, interpreting and supplementing development plan policies, or addressing a particular site constraint or opportunity.

All Planning briefs should undergo full Public Consultation and the results of this should be fully considered before the brief is formally adopted as council policy. Once adopted, the brief becomes a material consideration in the determination of any future planning application relating to all or part of the site.

I have recently asked the regeneration team if I could read the planning brief for the Willesden Green Cultural Centre and local regeneration programme. The answer is no. There has been no Planning brief for this project.

So why was this essential part of the Planning process skipped? Why was there no robust Consultation based on a Planning brief? If there is no Planning brief, how can a future planning application for the site be determined?

The London Plan also states:

Boroughs in Consultation with English Heritage should include appropriate policies for identifying, enhancing and improving access to the historic environment and heritage assets and their settings.

The Old 1894 Library is a distinctive feature of the High Road Conservation Area. It is recognised as a well-crafted building of it’s period. Designed by Newman and Newman, it is well documented as a unique building of quality. Despite a history of alteration, the frontage of the building remains intact and defines the local townscape.

The London Plan goes on to say that:

“People should have access to a built environment that reinforces a strong, unique local history and character.” And later it states that:

“Development should reinforce the connection between public spaces and existing features of heritage significance.”

The Old Library makes a positive contribution to the character of Willesden Green. It is a landmark building and a monument to the determination of the local 1894 poll tax payers who raised funds in times of terrible poverty to provide books, a library and ensure literacy. Surely it is these historic values that should be celebrated and influence the future character of the area. The development should be informed by The Old library, not facilitated by it’s demolition. It reinforces meaning and civility and its presence should enhance our relationship with the new building. It is an inherent and unique part of the Willesden Cultural heritage and should be recognised as a catalyst for regeneration. It should be valued, conserved, restored and put to a suitable and viable use in the new Library Centre. 

It is for this reason that we have requested that English Heritage designate the Old Library as a listed building and await their response.

Speakers on Willesden Green development at Executive tomorrow

Several local residents have requested permission to make 3 minute presentations at the Brent Executive meeting on Monday evening. They are likely to be taken at the beginning of the meeting after apologies and minutes.

The meeting begins at 7pm on Monday 13th February in Committee Rooms 1,2 and 3 (at the top of the stairs).

The members of the Executive are:
Cllr John (Chair) Leader/Lead Member for Corporate Strategy and Policy
Co-ordination
Cllr Butt (Vice-Chair) Deputy Leader/Lead Member for Resources
Cllr Arnold Lead Member for Children and Families
Cllr Beswick Lead Member for Crime and Public Safety
Cllr Crane Lead Member for Regeneration and Major Projects
Cllr Jones Lead Member for Customers and Citizens
Cllr Long Lead Member for Housing
Cllr J Moher Lead Member for Highways and Transportation
Cllr R Moher Lead Member for Adults and Health
Cllr Powney Lead Member for Environment and Neighbourhoods

Cllr George Crane will probably comment on the regeneration  proposals with possible additional comments from Cllr James Powney who leads on libraries.

Among the issues that have emerged about the regeneration proposals are:

• Lack of consultation over the original proposals and the 'offer' to be made in the proposed Cultural Centre
• The handing over to developers of council land to finance the development with all profits from housing going to the developer
• The Council-Private Partnership which leaves a lot of decision making to the developer
• The developer's apparent decision that retail in the Centre would not be viable (despite provision for a cafe when there are many available in the vicinity)
• The subsequent loss of premises to the much valued Willesden Bookshop
• The developer's advice that the historic old  locally listed 1894 Willesden Library could not be accommodated in the new plans
• The subsequent loss of  a base for the Brent Irish Advisory Service
• The apparent lack of public meeting rooms in the new Centre when the current rooms have been well-used and are essential to local democracy
• Provision for council offices in the new building when other offices are being closed and moved to the new Civic Centre
• The adequacy of the council's alternative arrangements during the 18month-2 year building period and proposals to reopen some of the closed libraries instead
• Loss of the open space in front of the library
• Lack of parking spaces for disabled visitors

More questions for Brent Council and the Regeneration team

I have been asked to post the following:

Some more questions…..

Brent Council’s own Policy regarding Area Consultative Forums is as follows:. “To give the local community a full voice in the planning and other local government priorities in an area”.

 

Why is it then, that as the plans for the new Willesden Library and Cultural Centre come to light, it is becoming clear that we are being served a “done deal”? The intended placement and envelope of the proposed building has been decided. The positioning of the building and its relationship to the High Road and surrounding neighbourhood is set. There seems to be an assumption from Brent Council and the Regeneration team that Consultation will only need to be a matter of presenting the scheme as a given, telling us that it will meet their “vision” for the site and discussing the detail of the building use so that we, as a neighbourhood, can feel involved. This does not give us a full voice. Yes, of course we will have opportunity to object when an Application is submitted but what are our chances of being heard when the Council are Applicant, Judge and Jury.

 

The plans are being currently developed for a Planning Approval  by the partnered Galliford Try alongside Brent’s Regeneration team and there will be considerable work going on to meet the Councils deadline of a submission in April, in order to demolish by September 2012. 

 

This process is far from democratic. The Council have very successfully managed to exclude the stakeholders and have kept the information regarding the proposed development from the public domain until 18^th January 2012. My guess is that the feasibility plan has been on the drawing board for at least 2 years in order to reach the highly developed master plan that is being presented. As residents living within 200 yards of the library, I, and all my neighbours, would not have given the proposals our blessing had we been informed. We all recognise the need for an efficient and well run building to meet the needs of future generations and perhaps demolishing the 1983 building is the best option, but did anyone ask us if we would like to have the Old 1896 Willesden Library demolished? NO.

 

The 1983 Library Centre, with a footfall of almost 500,000 a year, is well-used and in many ways serves the “vision” that Brent has laid out for the future. The building was overhauled and upgraded 5 years ago at a significant cost to the rate payer. Yes, the existing Centre is not ideal and the needs of future generations could be better met with improved technology and a more sustainable building, but the building is well-used, it works, why rush? Why not improve the status quo by better managing the existing building and create a fund with a longer-term plan to retain the entire site. So little effort has been made to maximise the existing and previously well-loved facilities such as the Cinema, Bookshop and Café. The Cinema and Cafe have been allowed to decline by the Local Authority and the Bookshop has been asked to relocate. 

 

The phrase “constructive dismissal” springs to mind when I think about these spaces. It is hard to agree that we need a large housing development with a “compact” and ill-conceived Cultural Centre attached. What we really need is good and properly administered Public amenity and a Regeneration Team that is happy to listen to the local Community to deliver a Cultural Centre that will genuinely meet the needs of Willesden Green.

So what is the hurry? 

 

Brent Council needs to raise cash. They have therefore (behind closed doors) worked up a master plan and consulted with three property developers. These developers have told them that a scheme to rebuild the library would not be viable without the demolition of the Old 1896 Library, to facilitate the construction of private housing units, which could then be sold by the appointed developer for mutual financial benefit. So, the fate of our Community amenity has been decided by the opinions of Brent’s three chosen Property developers, who have been asked to submit bids to develop the land to maximise financial benefit. Not surprisingly, Brent has told us that in the opinion of these three property developers, the site is not financially viable without demolishing the Old 1896 Library. There are no facts and figures publicly available to back this up. There is no evidence of feasibility studies with input from Quantity Surveyor and property valuation. We are simply expected to accept that, for financial reasons, agreed behind closed doors, there are no alternatives.

 

The truth is, Public Space is being squandered in a rush to do a deal with cash-ready developers to meet the short-sighted ambition of a Regeneration team.

 

The building sits in a Conservation Area defined by Brent Council as follows:

The Willesden Green Conservation Area has a linear form running along the High Road and Walm Lane. The junction of these two roads and the junction at the original library are foci within the Area; whilst the St Andrews group of buildings and Willesden Green Tube Station mark the boundaries of the Conservation Area. The Heathfield Park Estate has a somewhat different leafy, residential feel from the much busier main roads.

 

The main Victorian commercial centre contains many significant buildings by several well-known architects. James Brooks, Newman and Newman and Gabriel contributed St Andrews Church, the Old Library and the bank premises respectively. Sexton's Spotted Dog (1881) and Clark's faience-tiled Met. Station of 1924 are also worthy of note.

 It is locally listed as a significant building within the High Road Conservation Area. The Brent Conservation Officer has been consulted so why has there been no mention of the Conservation Area Application that will be required alongside a Planning Application?

 

Excerpts from Brent’s Conservation Area Policy follows:

 

BE25 DEVELOPMENT IN CONSERVATION AREAS

Development proposals and new uses in Conservation Areas, or outside them but affecting their setting or views into or out of the area, shall pay special attention to the preservation or enhancement of the character or appearance of the area.

 

New development and enhancement proposals in Conservation Areas shall have particular regard to any specific design policies as may be prepared by the council, in co-operation with the local community, to ensure that the scale and form of new developments consistent with the preservation or enhancement of the character or appearance of the area.

 

BE27 DEMOLITION & GAP SITES IN CONSERVATION AREAS

 

Consent will not be given for the demolition of a building, or alteration involving demolition of part of a building, in a conservation area unless the building, or part of the building, positively detracts from the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.

 

Where demolition in a Conservation Area is acceptable and this would form a gap site, then a full planning application will be required to accompany the application for Conservation Area Consent, showing details of what is to be substituted.

 

Replacement buildings should be seen as a stimulus to imaginative, high quality design and an opportunity to enhance the area.

 

The Brent Strategy for Development says:

 

2.5.16 The Council is committed to ensuring that new development contributes to preserving that which is environmentally pleasing in the Borough and improving those parts of Brent which are less attractive…….Wherever possible, schemes to upgrade the environment will be undertaken with the full involvement of the local community.

 

STR 15

Major development should enhance the public realm, by creating or contributing to attractive and successful outdoor areas. 

 This rare building is so important to the context of the High Road. It’s presence defines the Architectural Character of the area. The new scheme proposes to demolish this gem and gives us a South facing, glass-fronted monstrosity which sits hard up against the reduced pavement and eliminates the gathering space that currently defines the location.

Would a Conservation Officer see the demolition of this landmark and defining historic building in favour of a dense housing scheme as justifiable?

My biggest fear is that the ambition has eclipsed morals. There seem to be no obligations to the existing stake-holders and no intention of listening to the views of anyone other than hand picked property developers”. Are Galliford Try aware of all the Planning issues here or are they agreeing to a deal on the understanding that all Planning issues are already mitigated? If Brent Council are standing by the guidance set out in their own and Central Planning Policy, this situation presents risk for all parties concerned.

The voice of residents: 1894 and 2012

Why you must accommodate the Willesden Bookshop in new Cultural Centre

Before the Executive meeting  on January 16th a Willesden Bookshop customer sent this message to Brent Executive members:

Dear Councillor,

As a member of the Executive who will be attending this evening's meeting I am writing to you to register my dismay at the proposed redevelopment plans for Willesden Green, which currently do not accommodate The Willesden Bookshop. 

As a Brent resident for the last ten years I have valued this establishment and with each year I use it more and more.

I am not sure if you are aware of the invaluable resource that the bookshop provides, supplying stock to countless individuals and schools in the borough and beyond, cognisant of the diverse cultural community which it serves and reflecting those needs in the books that it sells. The depth of knowledge of the staff there is comprehensive impressive and provides a great service for those of us who prefer to browse and have a face to face conversation about a title or genre with someone whom we know will help us. It is efficient in ordering books for customers when they do not carry the titles on their own shelves, and are always courteous and helpful. My primary school aged children and secondary school aged son spend hours selecting books there and would be devastated not to be able to couple their visits to the library with one to the bookshop. There are numerous local authors whose work is regularly and prominently displayed. It's one of the few beacons of cultural success in Willesden Green and is a successful small business that we as individuals as well as local and central government should be championing. 

The current cafe space in the Library Centre area has always been unsuccessful. This may be down to the fact that there is a great deal of competition when it comes to cafes in the High Road and yet the redevelopment has plans for one. Willesden doesn't need another cafe. It needs to keep its only general bookshop, and I would like the developers to explain to Brent residents how one can have a Cultural Centre without having a bookshop, reflecting the culture of the area and the needs of its residents, at the heart of it.

I would please ask you to reconsider the plans in order to accommodate the Willesden Bookshop. It would be a tragedy for it to be lost.