Showing posts with label Minavil House.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Minavil House.. Show all posts

Saturday 29 July 2017

Widespread objections to Alperton high rise giant

Guest post by Andrew Linnie.  This issue was covered earlier on Wembley Matters LINK

R55’s Minavil House project in Alperton has been the subject of much debate and controversy for some time now. The tower, standing at 26 storeys, will bring a huge shift in the landscape of the area, and was described by various industry publications as the tallest building in the entire borough. This came as quite a surprise to residents both old and new, as the 2011 Alperton Masterplan adopted by Brent Council set out a vision for the area of buildings up to a maximum of 17 storeys. It would stand to reason that a building a full 9 storeys above the maximum height for the area would be a cause for debate, but Brent Council seemed uninterested in engaging with the discussion.


The proposal shown towering over twelve storeys above its nearest neighbour (Submitted application drawings).

At the planning committee meeting in May, I put forward the concerns of residents in the two minute speaking time allotted to a single objector. It is of note that the council allows three minutes to the developer to put forward their case. Those concerns included the loss of light and sky to surrounding dwellings, the spurious transport impact figures used, and the fact that the building directly contravened the supporting planning document (SPD) for the area. These issues were largely disregarded in the ensuing discussion among councillors and the scheme was approved. None of the three councillors for Alperton (Cllrs Allie, Chohan and Patel) attended the meeting.

At this point I wrote a petition which over 200 residents signed, and further problems with the development were noted. In its disregard for context the project’s density runs off the charts, featuring twice the number of housing units per hectare of neighbouring schemes. A conversation with an independent transport assessor involved with another development in the ward reinforced the assertion that the transport impact figures presented at the meeting – of just two additional passengers per train at peak times – were wildly underestimating the impact of a development this size. The issues of light and sky persisted, and concerns about access and the level of parking provided remain unanswered (there are 251 homes but only 35 parking spaces, most of which are for a Lidl on the ground floor). It also emerged that the architectural justifications for the project’s height from R55’s own online publication misrepresented the scale of neighbouring buildings and created an impression of the constructed landscape rising towards the Minavil site which, in reality, does not exist.



The architectural justification for the project, with the actual numbers of storeys added. It shows large leaps in height between buildings only three storeys apart, and a small step up from 14 to 26 storeys. The image also implies a rising contour between two 11 storey buildings of equal height (R55).

The petition was addressed to MP for Brent North Barry Gardiner, Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, the members of the GLA including our local assembly member Navin Shah, and the councillors for the ward of Alperton and Brent in general.

Mr Gardiner held a meeting in the wake of the Grenfell tragedy in which he addressed the issues of residents in high rise buildings. Present at the meeting were many locals, representatives of housing trusts, Brent Borough Fire Commander Mark Davis, and the Head of Planning for Brent. When pursued by Mr Gardiner on the point of whether such proposals are assessed for their fire risk, the Head of Planning admitted they are not. For a disproportionately tall building with a small footprint, on a site hemmed in by a canal, a bridge and an industrial estate, this added further grave concerns for neighbouring homes.

Though Mr Shah’s office and Mr Gardiner were responsive to the petition, the scheme was passed back from the Mayor of London to Brent for approval with no intervention. Unless the Secretary of State for Planning (Alok Sharma) decides to intervene, the building work will commence, reportedly in November. At that point the debate will inevitably turn from one about this particular site to one about the wider area, and what kind of regeneration the local population want. When commitments are made to residents to lead a regeneration area in a certain direction and then entirely forgotten at the planning committee level, questions must be asked as to whether Brent Council are representing the interests of local people or the interests of developers.

Thursday 18 May 2017

Now a 26 storey block in Ealing Road to match the Wembley 'twin towers' !

Click on image to enlarge
The next Planning Committee will consider an application for a development at Minavil House (opposite the bus garage in Ealing Road) ranging in height from 10 to 26 storeys. In 2009 Brent Council Planning Committee refused an application for a 1-8 storey building on the site as being of an 'unacceptable scale and design'. However in 2012 it approved a 1-11 storey application.  The latest is the same height as the larger of the 'twin towers' on the site of Chesterfield House currently being built at the corner of Park Lane and Wembley High Road despite vociferous opposition from local residents.There is an application in for 28 storey blog at Apex House, Fulton Road, near Wembley Stadium.

This will be far the tallest building in Alperton and will dominate the area but planning officers state:
The proposal is substantial in terms of height, and objections have referred to this. Since submission the building has increased in height, and the assessment has been made based on the revised drawings. It is 26 storeys in total and it needs to be acknowledged that the Alperton Masterplan identifies some buildings of up to 17 storeys being appropriate. This clearly exceeds that, and would be taller than anything else nearby. Despite concerns suggesting that this would set a precedent for tall buildings, there are already tall buildings nearby: the context includes 243 Ealing Road (up to 14 storeys), Peppermints Heights (18 storeys) and Atlip Road (13 storeys). Minavil House is nearer to the station than the others, and the inevitably slightly better access to public transport does imply that this is where the greatest density should occur, which is a function of height. It is not within a town centre, but is near to a district centre.
 As is now 'normal' the amount of affordable housing is significantly less than Brent Council's and the Mayor's policy requires but after a viability study planning officers say:

-->
 London Plan Policy 3.12 requires boroughs seek the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing 
when negotiating on private and mixed use developments, having regard to a number of factors, including development viability. Policy CP2 of Brent’s Core Strategy sets a strategic target that 50% of 
new homes delivered in the borough should be affordable. Brent’s DMP15 reinforces the 50% target set by policy CP2 and the need to seek the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing. It also notes that 70% of new affordable housing provision should be social/affordable rented housing and 30% should be intermediate housing in order to meet local housing needs in Brent. London Plan Policy 3.11 sets a ratio of 60% social/affordable rented housing and 40% intermediate housing for new affordable housing across London. 

Presuming the proposals are considered acceptable on all other grounds, Officers take the view that the affordable housing proposals on the scheme should be supported. Notwithstanding the failure to comply with local and regional affordable housing tenure policy, the wider context is of delivering a key housing site in the Alperton area which has been allocated for development since 2011. Given the departure from policy and very large number of shared ownership units, it is recommended Genesis Housing Group be a party to the s106 agreement in order to ensure the scheme is deliverable. An appropriate Shared Ownership Nominations Agreement should also require a ring-fenced marketing period for the shared ownership units to local people, and that priority be given for applications from local people after that ring-fenced period expires, in order that the scheme endeavour to best meet local housing needs. 


Affordable rent in this scheme is 60% of market rent