BKT interview with Steve Adams of Willesden Bookshop

See the current issue of the Brent and Kilburn Times for this story

100% disapproval of old library demolition, 95% opposition to entire scheme

This further comment on the planning application may be of interest:

I have spent many hours talking to local residents and others about this scheme. To date I have found that there is 100% disapproval of the proposal to demolish the old 1894 Library building and probably 95% opposed to the entire scheme.Many are actively campaigning by writing objections to Brent's planning officer. It should be recognised that the Applicant's own survey implemented in April 2012 indicated more than 70% disapproval for this scheme.

On this basis alone the current plans should be rejected. The application being considered by the Planning Committee includes many unsubstantiated statements in particular in relation to the condition of the existing buildings, consultation procedures and outcomes etc. The design and access statement correctly identifies that the 1983 design was opened in 1989 as a 'marker for regeneration in the area'. Later in the same document there is justification for the new development by reference to the public spaces which are apparently neglected at the rear and steeply ramped at the front thus deterring their use as a public space and preventing access to the library.

Neither of these contentions is true, public events are often organised easily in ether position but little promotoion is implemented by Brent Council as a result of the lack of will to create public community feeling. The description of the library building is clearly inaccurate. It describes it as unwelcoming and with poor signage. The signage could easily be updated, and indeed a new matrix light sign has been erected over the frontage and provides information about current events. The two Willesden Green Library Centre signs at the front are both clearly visible from the High Road and could be enhanced with modern LED lights if necessary. Colourful flags and banners could be incorporated along the frontage and elsewhere in Willesden Green advertising the facilities. This is the approach taken by other Councils in parts of London.

 As I understand it Brent Council has Planning Guidelines for this type of public building. It is clear that the scheme does not comply with these. For example Objective 9 of the Brent sustainablity plan states that an increase of public open space is to be provided. This not the case with this scheme, where public open space is actually decreasing and being moved round to the rear, largely as a facility for the flats behind. It should be noted that there is currently a Town Square registration application for determination later in July. The Registration is necessary because the area between the Old and New libraries have been used by the Public as of right for more than twenty years, thus precluding any building work over the area.

 Public car parking is not included within the new WGCC at all. Existing loading bay provision in Grange Road is being converted to Parent/baby and disabled spaces (5 in total). This contrasts directly with the private car parking being provided for the private flats where 60 spaces are being created in an underground car park below. This will reduce use of the new Centre because public transport does not serve all areas of the borough.

 Section 106 Agreement. In discussions with many members of the Community, I have been asked repeatably about Social Housing provision as a planning gain to be provided by the developer. None has been offered. Brent Council has indicated that the construction of a new library is being offered in lieu. However as indicated above the new library will have less provision than the existing arrangement. This means that there is nothing additional offered for the benefit of the community. There is thus a lack of S 106 legal provision making the entire application invalid. Please ensure that it is rejected on these grounds

Navin Shah opposes library demolition

Last month Navin Shah, Labour London Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow wrote to Andy Bates regarding the application to demolish the old Willesden library building.. This is what he wrote:

Dear Mr. Bates,

Application for Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of the old library building.
Willesden Green Library Centre, 95 High Road, London NW10 2SF

I am writing to you about the conservation area consent application for the proposed demolition of Willesden Green Library. I strongly object to the proposal for demolition on the following grounds.

As the London Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow I have been contacted by a number of residents in Brent who are extremely dismayed at the proposals to demolish the library. I fully share their dismay as I feel that this is a historically important building of local interest and importance which should be preserved.

As an architect by profession with special interest in listed buildings of architectural and heritage value I feel preserving Willesden Green Library is extremely important. The old building of ‘Arts and Crafts’ design contributes greatly to character of the area and should be celebrated as an iconic building, rather than be demolished.

This library building is a social and cultural tool and knocking it down would destroy the historical and architectural contribution it makes to the Borough of Brent and its special significance to the character of the area. This is a much loved building making positive contribution to the surrounding areas which is recognised by its local listing by Brent council and local people love it, as do I. So why destroy local heritage?

I’m not against the principle of regeneration for the site but there are other options available to the Council without destroying this cute little local landmark. Once a building of this character is destroyed, you will never get it back. I urge the members of planning committee to save Brent’s heritage by refusing the consent for demolition

Demolition would remove a 'good and much-cherished historic local building', Victorian Society

The Victorian Society has added its voice to the public outcry against Galliford Try's planning application to demolish the Victorian Willesden Library to make way for a warehouse style Cultural Centre. This is their submission:

Dear Mr Bates

RE: Demolition of former Willesden Green Library building (Locally listed, 1894, Newman and Newman)

It is disappointing that despite a request in March to be kept informed of developments in this case, the Council failed to notify us of this application. Instead we have been reliant on a huge number of concerned local residents to inform us that an application was submitted.

Given this application differs very little from that presented to the public a few months ago (and on the principle of demolishing the Victorian library building has not changed), I can only reiterate those objections expressed in my letter of 13 March this year.

The old Willesden library was erected in 1894 following a poll of the Ratepayers of Willesden. Built in an Arts and Crafts style, its form, unusual roof configuration and good quality decorative plasterwork are particularly pleasing. Overall it can be said to make a very positive contribution to the streetscape and the conservation area in which it sits. We disagree with the view of the applicants that this building is of “little architectural value”.

Its significance is enhanced by its prominent site, noted in the Willesden Green conservation area character appraisal as one of two principal foci of the conservation area. In the context of the consulted scheme, the historic building occupies only a small portion of the site. Moreover, it lies on the site’s fringes, not at its centre and there is thus scope to develop the site behind the library, leaving it to remain unaltered.

Proposals to demolish the old library fly in the face of the Council’s own guidelines on heritage and urban development. The conservation area character appraisal stresses the significance of the building and of preserving and enhancing the character of the conservation area. The Council has also stated the “need to conserve the best of our built heritage against pressure for redevelopment and unsympathetic alteration.”

Public consultation exercises came too late in the day to be of any real worth, with the first of two public exhibitions being held in March, and a second post-application. It is also clear that no major amendments were made to the proposals as a result of this exercise and the opposition pronounced by local people. An indication of that opposition was the 5,700-signature petition presented to the Council.

The proposed cultural centre fails to abide by the Council’s stipulation that proposals must be of “exceptionally high quality in terms of design and contribution to the streetscape”. It would see the removal of a good and much-cherished historic local building and an erosion of the character and quality of that part of Willesden.

Yours sincerely

James Hughes

Conservation Adviser

Willesden Green: Council should listen to the people

Beware the stranger at your Willesden door

Reports are reaching us of a door-to-door campaign in Willesden Green asking people to sign a petition in support of the 'lovely' new Cultural Centre. This follows hundreds of objections to Galliford Try's planning application for the demolition of the 1980s Centre, the bookshop and the Old Willesden Library.


It is enough to move us to poetry:
 

'Is there anybody there?' said the Developer,
Knocking on the moonlit door;
And his heart in the silence beat anxiously,
Would they see the fatal flaw?
And a police car sped by a-wailing
Enough to wake the newly dead;
And he smote upon the door again a second time;
'Is there anybody there?' he said.
But no one descended to the Developer;
No head from the leaf-fringed sill
Leaned over and looked into his grey eyes,
Where he stood perplexed and still.
But only a host of determined campaigners;
That dwelt in the lone house then
Stood listening in the quiet of the moonlight
To that voice from the world of men:
Stood thronging the faint moonbeams on the dark stair,
That goes down to the empty hall,
Hearkening in an air stirred and shaken
By the lonely Developer's call.
And he felt in his heart their steadfastness,
Their determination answering his cry,

While the petition slipped from his fingers:

No profits for Galliford Try.

Transition Willesden on Willesden Green Redevelopment plans

Transition Willesden is a local group offering a community-led response to the challenges of peak oil, climate change and the economic crisis.  We are not a campaigning organisation, but wish to raise the following concerns in objection to the proposals:
 
Consultation and democracy

    There has been little transparency as to why the existing building cannot be renovated rather than be demolished, and financial information as to why keeping the original 1894 building has been deemed ‘unviable’.

    It is both wrong and misleading to state that the community have been consulted all along, when only 12 people attended focus groups, their views were NOT taken into account, and they were evidently NOT kept informed of progress of the scheme subsequently.

    As a local community group, we have not been approached as a stakeholder group for our views.

    The developers were obliged to hold a 2 day public exhibition, but have so far provided only two half days.

    The consultation questionnaire provided at the exhibition was very limited – question 2 on proposals for a new public space around the cultural centre is very unclear.

Housing provision

    There is NO affordable housing – the form of housing that is most needed in the area.
    The density of units is high.
    The majority of units are one and two bed, with only four three bed flats proposed  - all meeting bare minimum standards in terms of size.  This does little to encourage families into the area.
    The housing is clearly not designed to be ‘whole of lifespan’ and as such the type of occupants it will attract are unlikely to stay long, feel part of, or contribute to the local community.
    All flats are single aspect, which neither promote much sense of space nor encourage social interaction.  It would be more like living in a barracks than a community.  What are the heights of the flats?
    The number of parking spaces provided for the flats is generous, compared to the amount provided for the cultural centre.

Green space

    We oppose the loss of green space and very concerned about the impact the proposed development will have on both the local community and the environment.
    Why is there no community food growing area within the public space?
    What will happen to the two crab apple trees planted by the community at the Willesden Green wassail?
    The loss of open space at the front of the building is not welcomed.  It leaves no clear place for the end of the wassail – a local event that has been going for three years.
    It is noted that a small orchard has been included in the plans as part of the outside space for the residential units.  Given it would be maintained by non specialist contractors, without involvement of residents and access by the local community, this is likely to be a wasted resource.  We understand this has been included to appease us, but we find it tokenistic.
    Planting that attracts pollinating insects and encourages biodiversity, such as wild flower meadows, and other features such as bee and bug hotels should be included.  These features also require less maintenance than traditional beds and cut grass.

Sustainability
·         If this is being promoted as a building fit for the 21st century, why do the plans meet only grade 4 in the code for sustainable homes?
·         Whilst we welcome the green roofs, what other water saving facilities are included in the plans, such as water butts, and use of grey water for flushing toilets?
·         Are any solar panels or other renewable energy features included?
·         What recycling facilities will be available on site – public and for residential units?
·         Could a community composting scheme be included?
·         How long is the new cultural centre designed to last?  The current building was also deemed ‘state of the art’ when built, but is now dismissed as poorly designed.
·         The scheme has come about due to the Council letting the current cultural centre run down.  What guarantee is there that the new centre will be better managed and maintained in the future?

Impact on the local community

    The library provision, in particular amount of study spaces is inadequate.  Since the library is replacing seven closed local libraries in the Borough, it should be equal to or exceed existing provision in size.
    Interim facilities are less than adequate and a cause for concern for local community.
    The loss of the existing library, bookshop, meeting rooms and other facilities will have a damaging affect on community cohesion during the closure period.
    Following the closure of other local libraries in the area, we do not consider that adequate interim facilities are being made available for local residents.
    Will the new meeting rooms be affordable for local community groups?  What charges are being proposed?
    The Willesden bookshop is a key resource for the local community, and a valuable service for schools across the Borough and beyond.  It should be included in the plans for the cultural centre.  Whereas there are plenty of cafes in the area, there is no other bookshop.  This should be taken into account.
    The loss of Brent Artist Resource and the Irish Advice centre will also have a negative impact on the community.
    The design of cultural centre is out of keeping  with the Edwardian houses that surround it.