Page 2 of 88

Page 3 of 88

CONTENTS Introduction 4 Part 1: A Brief Introduction to Brent & the Planning Service 5 1. Brent: Between Inner and Outer London 6 2. Brent Planning Service 2009 – 2010 11 3. Brent‟s Land Use Strategy 12 Part 2: Review of Development in Brent 2009 – 2010 4. Monitoring Development 14 5. Towards A High Quality Built Environment 15 6. Towards a Sustainable Brent 19 7. Protecting and Enhancing the Environment 23 8. Providing More and Better Homes 27 9. Travelling In Brent 36 10. Working in Brent 41 11. Shopping and Brent Town Centres 50 12. Promoting Culture and Tourism 65 13. Enhancing Open Space and Biodiversity 70 14. Providing For Diverse Community Needs 75 15. Reducing Waste, Promoting Recycling 79 16. Regenerating Wembley 82 Part 3: Progressing LDF Preparation 17. Monitoring the Local Development Scheme Progress 88

Page 4 of 88

INTRODUCTION This is the sixth Annual Monitoring Report that the Council has produced in accordance with its statutory obligation under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The statutory purpose of the Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) is to inform the Secretary of State of the Council‟s progress towards the replacement of the Brent Unitary Development Plan 2004 (UDP), which forms part of the Borough‟s statutory development plan, along with the London Plan (published by the Mayor of London), by the Local Development Framework (LDF). The AMR will also provide key elements of the „evidence base‟ for preparing the LDF. The LDF will provide the local element of the „spatial plan‟ for Brent. This means that the UDP, which set out Brent‟s land use strategy and the planning policies used to determine planning applications, will be completely replaced eventually by the LDF. Pending the „adoption‟ of all of the replacement Development Plan Documents (DPD), those key UDP policies, which are still in accordance with Government land use strategy, planning guidance and the London Plan have been statutorily „saved‟ so as to enable their continued usage. The adopted LDF will effectively comprise a „folder‟ of DPD‟s that can be individually reviewed and updated as necessary, more frequently than the current „single volume‟ style UDP. The first and most crucial DPD, the Core Strategy, setting out the Council‟s „spatial vision‟ for Brent during the next decade and its implementation strategy was adopted in July 2010. The Council is also awaiting the Inspector‟s report into the examination of its Sites Specific Allocation DPD, identifying the preferred uses of some seventy sites, whose development, to provide new housing, employment opportunities and community facilities, will play a key role in implementing the Core Strategy. The preparation of the Core Strategy and Site Specific Allocations has involved a process of extensive public consultation, starting with the initial Issues and Options and then on the Preferred Options and latterly on the pre-submission DPDs. Consultation has also taken place on the Issues and Options and the Preferred Options stages for the preparation of the Development Policies Document which will provide the more detailed policies needed to determine planning applications. The preparation of these DPDs has been undertaken and managed in accordance with the arrangements and timetable of the Council‟s overarching LDF project plan called the Local Development Scheme (LDS). Changes to the LDS had to be initially agreed with the Government Office for London (GOL) and latterly with the Mayor of London. This AMR outlines the current LDS (Chapter 19), provides more detail on the various DPD consultations and targeted further work in the coming years. The AMR should also contain a review of the developments that have been permitted or undertaken in Brent during the year so as to establish how effective the planning policies have been in enabling sustainable development and protecting the environment. Identifying the successful, or otherwise, implementation of the planning strategy and its specific planning policies should, in so far as possible, be evaluated by measurable targets and other relevant outcomes. The LDF Regulations and LDF Good Practice Guide require that the AMR must, at least, monitor the „net additional dwellings„ provided. Planning Policy Statement 12 Development Plans further requires the inclusion in the AMR of a „housing trajectory‟ illustrating the phased delivery of the envisaged level of additional housing provision during the Plan‟s life. (Chapter 8) In addition to its statutory reporting role to the Secretary of State, the AMR offers a valuable opportunity to inform people of the main development trends in the borough and to make people aware of the range of development activity taking place. It is also invaluable in ensuring that the review of policy is timely and informed by up-to-date evidence.

Page 5 of 88

PART 1: A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO BRENT & THE PLANNING SERVICE Map 1 Brent‟s Strategic Location & Principal Spatial Areas

Page 6 of 88

1. BRENT: BETWEEN INNER AND OUTER LONDON

Location and Regional Context

1.1 The London Borough of Brent is located in North West London, bordered by the boroughs of

Harrow, Barnet, Ealing, Camden and Westminster. The Borough, which takes its name from the

River Brent, a tributary of the River Thames, occupies an area of 4,325 hectares (c 17 sq miles);

making Brent the 15th largest borough in London. Brent extends approximately 5 miles (8 km)

long on its north to south axis, from Queensbury to Kilburn, and 6 miles (10km) wide on its east

to west axis, from Cricklewood to Sudbury. This area encompasses both Outer and Inner

London suburban and urban locations, with the North Circular Road generally separating the

less populated northern areas from the more densely built southern parts of the Borough. Much

of the southern parts of Brent are further bisected by the Grand Union Canal.

1.2 Brent„s locational position is both a strength and a weakness as most of its major road links radiate out from and into Central London, echoing the line of the original Roman Watling Street highway. Subsequent railways lines (from Euston and Marylebone stations) and the later underground lines (Metropolitan, Jubilee and Bakerloo) replicated this radial orientation, with the result that Brent suffers from inadequate links, particularly mass public transport access, too much of the rest of the West London sub region, with a noticeable absence of orbital routes.

1.3 Brent forms an important part of the West London spatial planning sub region, along with the

boroughs of Ealing, Hammersmith and Fulham, Harrow, Hillingdon, Hounslow and Kensington and Chelsea. The Park Royal and Wembley areas of Brent constitute part of the „Western Wedge‟, the arc between Paddington and Heathrow, which has been identified in The London Plan as a major economic growth zone. Brent is bordered by the North London and Central London Sub Region boroughs and their sub regional spatial strategies, together with the London – Luton - Bedford Corridor‟s strategy, also impact on Brent‟s spatial planning.

Places and Neighbourhoods

1.4 Although the Borough of Brent was only created in the 1965 London local government

reorganisation, many of its constituent areas have a long history of a distinct local identity and sense of place. Some populated areas can trace their origins back to hamlets first settled at least two millennia ago and probably much longer to pre–Celtic times.

1.5 Evidence of Roman occupation has been excavated in Kingsbury and Neasden, while the

Roman signalling station on Dollis Hill was the forerunner of today‟s mobile phone masts. The names of Kingsbury, Neasden and Willesden are derived from the Anglo Saxon hamlets of Cyngsbury, Neosdune (the nose-shaped hill) and Wellesdune, while a forest clearance by Wember (a Saxon land owner) created Wembalea, now known as Wembley. After the Norman Conquest, the Cyngsbury royal hunting lodge became the site of the present 12th century St Andrews Church. Other areas can trace their origins from this Norman period with Domesday Book references to Harlesden and Kilburn (the Kele-bourne Priory).

1.6 The linkage of these hamlets and villages over the ensuing centuries and their incorporation,

particularly in the south of the Borough, into the wider London area was significantly hastened by the development of the railways in the mid 19th century. Kilburn, which had for long been an important stopping place on the roadway out of London to the North, became a major urban centre with the arrival of the North London Line in 1853, and Willesden Junction was an important maintenance centre on the London-Birmingham line. But much of the north of present day Brent was essentially rural until the Metropolitan Line created, from the 1880s onwards to the 1930s, the „Metro Land‟ suburbs of Kingsbury, Wembley, Preston and Kenton.

1.7 These communication improvements made areas of Brent much more accessible to other

Londoners and so Brent became an important centre for leisure and entertainment. Indeed, the

Page 7 of 88

origins of Brent‟s role as a major tourism attraction can be traced back to the pilgrims who flocked to the 14th century shrine of Our Lady of Willesden and subsequently in the 19th century to the more secular attractions of the Welsh Harp Reservoir (excavated in the 1834-35 to supply the Grand Union Canal). And latterly Wembley; the site of the 1924-25 British Empire Exhibition, the 1948 Olympics and now the rebuilt National Football Stadium (the world‟s largest covered football stadium) has become a global „brand image‟ for Brent.

People

1.8 The 2001 Census enumerated 263,464 Brent residents, an increase of over 8% since the 1991

Census. But the 2001 Census probably under-enumerated Brent‟s population, as it did in other areas of London. Subsequent Government (Office of National Statistics) estimates which „project‟ the Census and also depend upon unsatisfactory other sources of information (changes in NHS registrations and the International Passenger Survey), therefore substantially underestimated Brent„s population at 270,600 in 2008. The Greater London Authority (GLA) using enhanced modelling of the same data sources as the Government have estimated Brent „population as ranging from a low of 277,500 to a high of 281,700 in 2008.

1.9 As underestimating the Borough‟s population means a loss in Government funding to the

Council and the Brent Primary Care Trust, as well as making effective spatial planning more difficult, the Council commissioned Professor Mayhew, a leading demographic expert, to better estimate Brent‟s current population. Using a radically new methodology (computer matching and filtering all available administration records, such as health, educational, electoral and benefits) his study estimated that Brent‟s population in 2007 was probably at least 289,000.

1.10 Brent„s population is extremely diverse, 71% are not „White British Born‟ and almost half were

born outside the UK, effectively making the many ethnic minority communities the „majority‟ (55%), the second highest ranking in England and Wales and the highest in London. Furthermore, the chances that any two residents encountering each other in a Brent street will be of different ethnicity is 85%; making Brent the most „ethnically diverse‟ area in the country (Office of National Statistics).

1.11 Brent residents speak over 130 languages. Interestingly, significantly more primary school

pupils do not speak English as their „first language‟ (60%) than secondary school pupils (53%), inferring substantial recent arrivals of non or limited English speakers. People born in India (18.5%) constitute the largest ethnic minority. Brent has the second highest proportional Hindu population (17%) in the country and their Neasden Temple was the first and largest traditional „mandir‟ built outside India. Residents of Indian and other Asian origin represent 28% of Brent„s population. Other substantial ethnic minority communities, enumerated by the 2001 Census, include persons born in the Caribbean (10.5%) and in Africa (7.8%) who with their offspring collectively constitute 22% of Brent‟s population. Although the Irish born community (7%) has substantially decreased in the last two decades, it still represents the highest proportion of London‟s Irish born residents.

1.12 An indication of the origins of more recent incomers to Brent can be gleaned from the

birthplaces of those issued with new National Insurance Numbers in Brent. During 2009/10, 19,590 New National Insurance Numbers (NINOS) were issued to Brent residents who were born outside the UK; the second highest number in the country (Newham, 28,720). These Brent registrations, issued to residents from over 100 countries, were slightly up on the previous year (18,780), largely reflecting an increase in the number of migrants from India. The 10 countries which accounted for 68% of the total NINO‟s are listed in Table 1.

Page 8 of 88

Table 1: New National Insurance Registrations 2009 – 2010

Country of birth Number of Registrations Percentage

India 7,750 40%

Poland 1,360 6.9%

Romania 1,080 5.5%

Nepal 1,080 5.5%

Italy 630 3.2%

Sri Lanka, 570 2.9%

Brazil 540 2.8%

France 440 2.2%

Portugal 430 2.2%

Pakistan 410 2.1%

Total 19,590

1.13 Brent has a relatively young population; 25% are under 19 years, 19% are aged between 20-29,

with a total of 62% aged under 40, and a relatively low proportion of pensioners (14%). This age profile (Census 2001) combined with a fertility rate substantially above the average London level is imposing significant stress on the Borough‟s social infrastructure, particularly schools. This demographic structure has also resulted in the third highest household size in England and Wales (2.62 persons) and the second highest level of overcrowding in London. Professor Mayhew‟s study suggests that the average household size in Brent has recently increased to 2.7 persons, contrary to the national trend towards smaller households. Brent is relatively densely populated with 61 persons per hectare compared to the Outer and Inner London averages of 35 and 78 respectively.

Incomes

1.14 Brent residents of working age are slightly more „economically active‟ and less „inactive‟ but

have disproportionately higher unemployment rates 5.3% than Londoners generally (4.5%) [NOMIS,„Brent Labour Market Profile 2009‟]. Residents in Brent who are not working constitute some of the most deprived population sectors in the country according to a detailed survey of Benefits Recipients which found that:

Brent has the highest number of Pension Guarantee claimants (66%) in London Brent has the 29th highest Job Seeker Allowance level in Britain Harlesden has the 2nd highest Job Seeker Allowance in London wards Harlesden has the 5th highest Income Support level in London wards (GLA „Who Benefits‟, 2007)

1.15 Brent‟s working residents earn less than any other Londoners as they have median gross

incomes of only £23,145, compared to the London median salary of £27,762, (Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings 2010) Brent household incomes are also relatively low with 60% having a total income of under £30,000, compared to an average of 53% for London, according to a GLA study which „equivalises‟ income to allow for, greater, household size (DMAG Briefing 2006/34).

1.16 This combination of lower than average salaries and household incomes, together with higher

than average unemployment rates has resulted in Brent being ranked in the 2007 Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) as the 53rd „most deprived„ of the 354 English local authorities. This ranking means that Brent dropped 28 places from the 2004 IMD, thereby moving Brent from within the 25% to the 15% most deprived local authorities‟ category. The Carlton, Stonebridge, St Raphaels, Roundwood and Harlesden wards are ranked in the 10% most deprived wards nationally.

Page 9 of 88

Variable Distribution of Income, Wealth, and Resources in Brent

1.18 Employment and incomes are very unequally distributed across Brent with a £17,000 difference

between the mean annual household incomes of Queens Park and Stonebridge residents. But the traditional view of a simplistic North/South „affluence divide‟ is no longer supported by the 2007 IMD which shows the growth of „pockets of deprivation„ in the Preston, Kenton and Queensbury northern wards.

1.19 More complex patterns of the locational differences in the distribution of „wealth and poverty„ in

Brent are shown in Professor Danny Dorling‟s study, as summarised below :

Constituency Core Poor

Breadline Poor

NonPoor/ Non Wealthy

Asset Wealthy

Exclusive Wealthy

Brent East 15.3% 37.9% 35.7% 26.5% 10.5%

Brent North 11.5% 27.7% 33.0% 39.3% 6.6%

Brent South 17.5% 43.5% 37.2% 19.3% 2.4%

Source: D Dorling „Poverty, Wealth and Place in Britain 1968 to 2005 (Joseph Rowntree, 2007)

1.20 Access to open space and outdoor recreational opportunities is similarly unequally distributed, with large areas of open space, such as Fryent Country Park and the Welsh Harp, mainly located in the north of Brent, while the southern areas generally have insufficient land for sporting and recreational use. This is a particularly unfortunate distribution of open space as the south of Brent has by far the highest population densities; with Kilburn having 150 persons per hectare as compared to less than a fifth of this density level in the northern wards of Tokyngton, Fryent and Northwick Park.

1.21 Perhaps, the most graphic indicator of the spatial gradient of relative wealth and poverty in

Brent is that male life expectancy increases by each northward Bakerloo line station, with Northwick Park having ten extra years compared to Harlesden (Brent Primary Care Trust 2004). And women in Fryent ward can expect to live six years longer than Harlesden women.

Economy

1.22 Brent accommodates major areas of employment opportunities, some of which are of London–

wide importance, such as, the large industrial and business parks in the Park Royal and Wembley areas. Much of the traditional industrial manufacturing base of the Borough has been replaced by newer distribution and service industries. Park Royal, for example, evolved from the First World War munitions factories to a major food and beverage manufacturing centre, which accommodates 30% of London‟s food and drinks manufacturing /distribution sector. Large warehousing and distribution plants have been constructed in recent years to availing of the proximity of Park Royal, Alperton and Wembley to Heathrow Airport and the national motorway system. Brent has also become the location for London‟s „bioscience industry‟ (London Councils 2009)

1.23 However, despite these large employment areas, the overall Brent economy is so

disproportionately small that its Gross Domestic Product is the 3rd lowest in London (Borough Profile).and as its „jobs density‟ (ratio of total jobs to working age population) is only 0.61 as compared to 0.93 for London overall, Brent is essentially an „outflow commuting‟ labour market; which has never recovered from the post 1980 extensive de-industrialisation. , Manufacturing which provided 32,200 jobs 1981) now employs only 9,700, although this proportionately more than twice the overall London level (NOMIS, 2009).

1.24 Table 2 shows other significant differences between the Brent and the overall London

employment sectors. Brent‟s higher level of construction employment reflects the extent of major housing development projects. While Brent‟s significantly much lower Finance and

Page 10 of 88

Business sector is reflected by the paucity of any substantial office construction in recent years and the long term vacant office blocks, such as those around the Stonebridge/North Circular Road junction.

Employment Sector Brent London

Manufacturing 10.5% 4.5%

Construction 5.4% 3.0%

Distribution & Catering 28.7% 21.0%

Transport & Communication 8.9% 7.4%

Finance , IT & Business 15.9% 34.3%

Public, Health & Education 24.5% 22.4%

Other Services 11.3% 15.4%

1.25 Employment sectoral differences, further reflected in Brent‟s significantly lower proportion of

Managerial & Professional occupations SEG 1-3), 45% vis 54% for London and the substantially higher proportion of manual workers (SEG 8-9), 20% vis 13%. Similar differences are exhibited in the relative proportions for NVQ type qualifications. (NOMIS 2009). The result of these differences is that the median earnings for those working in Brent are £24,723 as compared to the overall London median salary of £30,000 (ASHE, 2009).

Page 11 of 88

2. BRENT PLANNING SERVICE 2009 – 2010

2.1 This overview of the Planning Service during 2009-10 briefly outlines the following key indicators of the effectiveness, or otherwise, of the Planning Service:

Applications Received and Determined

2.2 Brent received 2,998 planning applications, and issued 2,813 decisions during 2008-09, which

represents respective decreases of 3.8% and 5.5 % on the previous year.

Appeals

2.3 Applicants who are refused planning permission have the right to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate who allowed only 20% of 126 appeals decided in 2009-10. This high proportion of upheld refusal decisions is a good proxy indicator for establishing the general robustness of the development plan, particularly as it compares very favourably with the Government‟s acceptable guideline of 40% successful appeals.

Enforcement

2.5 Ensuring that approved proposals are properly implemented and preventing unauthorised schemes is an important contribution towards sustainable development. Brent devotes very substantial resources to its planning enforcement actions, as can be seen from its issue of 144 Enforcement Notices, 25 prosecutions during 2009-10.

Publications

2.6 The UDP is on the Council‟s web site (www.brent.gov.uk) in an „interactive‟ format. All published Local Development Framework documents and Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents are also available on our website, including the following recent publications

LDF Core Strategy (adopted July 2010) LDF Site Specific Allocations Submission version Wembley Link SPD Wembley Masterplan SPD

Page 12 of 88

3. BRENT’S LAND USE STRATEGY

3.1. Brent‟s land use strategy to make the best possible use of scarce land resources is primarily

implemented through the Brent Unitary Development Plan (UDP, 2004) and the emerging replacement Local Development Framework (LDF), which seeks to protect the best of Brent‟s heritage, natural environment, listed buildings and conservation areas, while enabling regeneration, and ensuring sustainable new development that promotes access for all and redresses socio economic disadvantage.

3.2 The UDP effectively acts as the land use enabler for the Council‟s Community Strategy, „Brent

Sustainable Community Strategy 2006 - 2010‟ which sets the vision for Brent as a safe, clean, green and lively place to live in and visit. The Community Strategy identifies the Council‟s key priorities:

Local employment & enterprise Early years excellence Health and wellbeing Support and social care Settled homes

3.3 The Council implements these key priorities through its overarching strategy, „Brent‟s Corporate

Strategy called „Brent Our Future 2010 - 2014‟ and the individual directorates strategies for key areas, such as regeneration, housing, transport and environmental protection; whose implementation is dependent on relevant and robust UDP policies.

3.4 The UDP and the emerging LDF, in seeking to implement the Council‟s strategies, must have

due regard to national planning policy and guidance, which in turn is influenced by European Union strategies, particularly pertaining to sustainable development, energy efficiency and waste minimisation.

3.5 In addition, to satisfying national policies, the UDP and the emerging LDF must properly

consider the regional strategic planning policies of The London Plan, produced by the Mayor of London, and satisfy specific London Plan targets, such as an additional 11,200 homes in Brent between 2007/08 -2016/17. The London Plan has also designated particular areas of Brent on account of their role and importance in implementing its various metropolitan overview strategies. These include:

Opportunity Areas and Areas of Intensification (for major regeneration and large new development projects); Wembley, Park Royal and Willesden Junction Strategic Industrial Locations (industrial estates and business parks); Park Royal, Wembley Stadium/Neasden, Staples Corner and East Lane Major Town Centres; Wembley and Kilburn District Centres; Harlesden, Willesden Green, Wembley Park, Preston Road, Neasden, Ealing Road and Kingsbury Blue Ribbon Network; Grand Union Canal and River Brent

Page 13 of 88

3.6 The UDP and emerging LDF seeks to comply with national and regional statutory planning requirements and to implement the Borough‟s strategies, to ensure sustainable development that benefits all its residents, while protecting and enhancing their environment, through the following key objectives and strategies:

UDP & LDF Strategic Objectives: To improve the Borough‟s environment To ensure sustainable development To promote regeneration To make development accessible to

all

Key Implementation strategies: Protecting & enhancing the environment Maintaining employment opportunities Prioritising development in sustainable locations

Promoting leisure, recreation & sport

Reducing travel need Protecting open space and habitat Enabling regeneration Securing adequate community

facilities Meeting housing need Supporting town and local centres

Page 14 of 88

PART 2: REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT IN BRENT 2009/10

4. MONITORING DEVELOPMENT

Methodology 4.1 The detailed review of the effectiveness of the relevant planning policies is best undertaken on

the basis of monitoring on a topic basis. For ease of presentation and consistency of information and analysis, each of the chapter reviews is generally organised on the basis of the following common structure, format and content :

1. Strategic Objectives 8. Monitoring Indicators 2. Key UDP Policy Themes 9. Policy Effectiveness & Robustness 3. Emerging LDF Core Strategy Themes 10. Policies Upheld Upon Appeal 4. Supplementary Planning Guidance /

Documents (SPG/SPD) 11. Sustainability Appraisal

5. Key London Plan Policy Themes 6 National & Regional Guidance 12. Updating Previous Information 7. Local Plans & Strategies 13. Summary & Issues for Further

Consideration 4.2 While most of these themes are self explanatory, it is necessary to elaborate on the use of

Monitoring Indicators.

Monitoring Indicators 4.3 The Local Development Framework Monitoring: A Good Practice Guide (ODPM, 2005) has

recommended the use of a hierarchy of Significant Effects, Contextual and Core Output Indicators. The Council considers that the Sustainability Appraisal of Brent Adopted UDP, undertaken by independent specialist consultants, satisfies the Significant Effects Indicator recommendation. Reference is thus made, where appropriate, to the findings of the Sustainability Appraisal in the relevant sections of this Report. The preparation of the emerging LDF Core Strategy and DPDs has been similarly informed by independently undertaken Sustainability Appraisals.

4.4 The recommended Contextual Indicators, which encompass broad topics such as population

characteristics and socio-economic indices, have been appropriately employed through this Report. The Core Output Indicators (COI), as further elaborated (Updates, 2005 & 2008), which generally encompass the outcomes of the granting of planning consents and their implementation, have also been appropriately employed.

4.5 Much of the information provided and evaluated in this AMR is also relevant to the monitoring of

the Brent Local Area Agreement (LAA) key performance benchmarks as detailed in Appendix 1. This information provision and monitoring synergy is recommended by the Government„s COUNT (collect information once, use many times) strategy.

4.6 The Council recognises that it is still not been possible to satisfactorily monitor every desirable

indicator to its preferred benchmark level. Proposals to address such problems are outlined in the Towards the Next Annual Monitoring Report section. Some survey derived information, such as employment premises occupancy and retail vacancies cannot be collected annually owing to the level of required resources. Such surveying is therefore carried out on a biannual basis.

Page 15 of 88

5. TOWARDS A HIGH QUALITY BUILT ENIVRONMENT

Urban Design, Landscape & Heritage Strategic Objectives: To make Brent a more attractive and sustainable place in which to live and work. To protect and enhance the built environment. UDP Saved Policies:

Urban Design Principles -Townscape, Urban structure, Space & Movement, Safety, Public realm, Architecture (BE1– BE11) Priority Areas for Townscape & Public Realm Enhancement -Areas of low quality, Corridors, Gateways (BE13-BE15) Other Structures –Mechanical Plant, Advertisements, Telecommunications (BE17, BE19-BE21) Urban Conservation –Locally Listed buildings, Conservation Areas, Tree Protection (BE24-BE34)

LDF Core Strategy Themes: Placemaking (CP 5) Design & Density in Place Shaping (CP 6) Protecting and Enhancing the Suburban Character (CP 17) Supplementary Planning Guidance: SPG17 Design Guide For New Development SPG10: Community Safety SPG5: Altering & Extending Your Home SPG4: Design Statements Other SPGs: Shopfronts, Advertisements, Disabled Access, etc. Conservation Area design Guides Key London Plan Policy Themes: Principles of design for a compact city (4B.1) Promoting world-class architecture & design (4B.2) Enhancing the quality of the public realm (4B.3) Respect local context and communities (4B.8) Tall buildings – location (4B.9) Large-scale buildings – design and impact (4B.10) London‟s built heritage (4B.11) The UDP (2004) introduced a suite of urban design policies to improve the design quality of the built environment in Brent. The robustness of monitoring their effectiveness is variable, partly due to the qualitative nature of outcomes, but some baseline information is available on the following indicators.

Page 16 of 88

Quality of Guidance, Design Submissions & Architecture Design & Planning Guidance Design & the Application Process Delivering Architectural Quality

Community Safety Creating a Safe and Secure Environment

Landscape & Conservation Preservation of Trees Landscape Design & Public Realm Conservation Area building & landscape features

Monitoring Indicators and Performance Review

Quality of Guidance, Design Submissions & Architecture Indicator: Design & Planning Guidance Target: Net Improvement Monitoring Point: Number, range and quality of design & planning guidelines available to help

applicants 5.1 UDP Policy BE9 addresses issues of architectural quality, and seeks to ensure a consistent

consideration of design issues on the part of both applicants and planning officers. This Policy (along with Policy BE2) is one of the most cited in Delegated Decisions /Committee Reports and Appeals, and has a very good record of being upheld by inspectors.

5.2 The Wembley Masterplan (SPD) was adopted in June 2009. This is a design based guidance document covering the borough‟s largest growth area. This has already been utilised as part of negotiations with developers in order to secure a high quality development with real sense of place.

5.3 Further Supplementary Planning Documents are under production, including for Alperton and part of Wembley Town Centre (Wembley Link). These will provide design guidance to aid both applicants and planning officers in securing high quality design in the borough.

Indicator: Design & the Application Process Target: Net Improvement Monitoring Point: Quality of Applications Received 5.4 Since the requirement to submit Design & Access Statements was introduced in PPS1 with

guidance on their production, the number received for major applications has increased significantly. The council now receives Statements for all major residential applications.

5.5 Due to the relative success of a pilot scheme for the formalisation of pre-application advice, the council now formally charges for certain types of advice such as major development proposals (over 10 dwellings or 1000 m² of commercial floorspace) and project work (masterplanning, public consultations, etc.).

5.6 The council recognises the value of CABE‟s Building for Life guidance as a means of assessing

the design parameters of proposals and delivering high quality design. Officers have been trained on the assessment process and it is now an integral part of the assessment of planning applications.

Indicator: Architectural Quality Target: Net Increase Monitoring Point: Number of design awards or citations of schemes in Brent

Page 17 of 88

5.7 The council has introduced an independent Design Review Panel made up of architects,

landscape architects and other built environment professionals who meet to assess major and strategic schemes at the pre-application stage. This process raises and emphasises design issues at an early stage in the process.

5.8 This is difficult to monitor directly through the monitoring database and, due to its partly

subjective nature, has to be largely inferred from external agency citations for Brent developments, such as:

Granville New Homes was designed as a showcase development for the wider South Kilburn regeneration area and provides a range of housing units, a new building for a local children‟s and community centre and a pocket park for the wider community. Granville New Homes was given the Building for Life Silver Award in 2009.

Community Safety

Indicator: Creating a Safe and Secure Environment Target: All large schemes to achieve Secure by Design accreditation Monitoring Point: Accredited planning applications 5.9 The Brent Police Crime Prevention Design Advisers (CPDAs) advise consultees to “comply with

the aims and objectives of „Designing Out Crime‟ as required by UDP Policy BE5”. Brent Police CPDAs meet with planning officers to offer advice on schemes to be considered. Additionally, they continue to give informal advice to developers, builders, planners, engineers and other professionals working in Brent.

Landscape & Conservation

Indicator: Preservation of Trees Target: Net Increase Monitoring Point: Retention of existing and inclusion of further „at risk‟ trees, 5.10 Trees play a key role in ensuring a good and varied local landscape character of high amenity

value. A key UDP and emerging LDF aim is to raise public awareness of the importance/value of trees in Brent‟s urban environment. This will be substantially helped by the ongoing survey to GIS map Brent trees of value and the entry of Tree Preservation Orders (TPO's) into a computerised database which is intended to be placed on a publicly accessible website. This work is being undertaken by the Landscape Design Team which has a specialist Tree Officer to advise on TPOs and undertake enforcement action to protect trees and secure appropriate replanting where protection is not feasible.

5.11 A further 14 new TPOs (covering c 50 trees in total) were made in 2009-10. Brent now has

about 300 TPOs, many of them protecting substantial groups of trees. But TPOs cannot protect trees from loss through disease, including new 'climatic change' pest infestations, adverse weather conditions and age. Nor can they always protect trees from pleas from landowners and householders, often stemming from insurers pressure, for the removal of trees, and the revocation of TPOs, to counteract the fear of building subsidence exacerbated by shrinkable sub soils All too often this fear of tree related subsidence results in offers only to replant much smaller ornamental species.

5.12 Landscape officers are concerned that the need to provide additional homes and the required

infrastructure for a growing population is eroding our tree stock and preventing adequate new planting of large species of tree. Higher rise, high density proposals which do not include any amenity space at ground level, provide little opportunity for tree planting. In such cases, officers have sought Section 106 agreements to include contributions for off site landscaping and street tree planting.

Page 18 of 88

Indicator: Conservation Area building & landscape features Target: Net Improvements Monitoring Point: Retention or enhancement of (timber/steel windows) & (front gardens). 5.13 Brent has 22 Conservation Areas (CAs). In addition there are 10 Areas of Distinctive

Residential Character (ADRC) –a local, non-statutory policy designation. 5.14 A set of baseline data for key window and landscape indicators, as well as other features, was

compiled through a comprehensive photographic survey to provide a photographic record of each property in Brent CAs; and a view of the perspective vistas along each street within the areas.

5.15 This baseline survey has contributed towards comprehensive Character Appraisals which have

been produced (or updated) for each Conservation Area. Brent was one of the first 2 local planning authorities in the country to complete Character Appraisals. These included the production of Management Plans for each CA.

Summary & Issues Requiring Further Consideration 5.16 These indicators have shown the current strengths and weaknesses both in terms of the current

implementation of UDP policies and the availability of monitoring data. The provision of new SPD is helping both applicants and officers in determining applications. However, more still needs to be done to gain recognition for good design, for example by considering a local Brent design awards scheme.

5.17 It is clear that Brent‟s tree stock is declining significantly, and will continue to decline unless

addressed.

Page 19 of 88

TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE BRENT

LDF Core Strategy Strategic Objectives & Core Policies: Objective 10 – to achieve sustainable development, mitigate and adapt to climate change CP19 – Brent Strategic Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Measures UDP Saved Policies: Sustainability Principles (Policy BE12) Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents: Brent Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG19): Sustainable Design & Construction, 2004 How to Achieve Sustainable Design & Construction: A Householder‟s Guide, 2004 London Plan Policy Themes: Sustainable Design & Construction (Policy 4B.6) Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy (Policy 4A.7) Energy Assessment (Policy 4A.8) Water Supplies (Policy 4A.11) Emerging Replacement London Plan: London‟s Response to Climate Change (5.1-5.11 & 5.15-5.16) Key National & Regional Guidance: London‟s Climate Change Action Plan (2007) Delivering London‟s Energy Future – Mayor‟s draft climate change mitigation & energy strategy (Feb 2010) Draft London Climate Change Adaptation Plan (Feb 2010) Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1) Delivering Sustainable Development, 2005 PPS1 Supplement: Climate Change, December 2007 PPS22 Renewable Energy Mayor‟s Supplementary Guidance: Sustainable Design & Construction, 2005 Local Plans & Strategies: Brent Carbon Management Strategy & Implementation Plan, 2007 Brent Climate Change Strategy

Monitoring Indicators and Performance Review Indicator: Installation of Sustainable Urban Drainage systems in new development Target: Appropriate major proposals should secure SUDs or apply water retention of

harvesting measures Monitoring Point: No. of developments that include SUDs. 6.1 The Core Strategy introduced a new local output indicator to the monitor the installation of

Sustainable Urban Drainage systems (SUDs) in new development. SUDs comprise a range of measures:

Permeable paving

Page 20 of 88

Swales Filter drain/strip Basin Rain garden Bioretention area/planters Wetlands Ponds

6.2 Green roofs also attenuate rainwater runoff and are often considered a SUD measure. Due to the predominance of London clay many permeation measures are not considered feasible and underground storage tanks are installed to slow the rate of runoff post development to meet Environment Agency runoff requirements.

6.3 Currently there is no coordinated process to record the installation of SUDs in new

development, this will need to be developed in future to monitor this LOI. Indicator: Application of the GLA‟s energy hierarchy in order to secure high levels of

renewable generation in Growth Areas Target: All major proposals to submit energy assessment & apply energy hierarchy.

Major proposals to achieve 20% carbon reduction through renewable energy generation or secure carbon offset payment

Monitoring Point: 6.4 This year 22 major planning applications were approved that included renewable energy

generation. There has been a significant increase in the number of applications including renewables since the adoption of London Plan policy 4A.7 which requires proposals to achieve a reduction in carbon emissions of 20% from onsite renewables. In support of this policy, applications are now required to submit an Energy Demand and Options Assessment. Increasingly more detailed assessment of the energy requirements for proposals is being made earlier on in the design stage. Renewable technologies proposed in the past year have included PV panels, solar hot water panels, ground source heat pumps and three communal biomass boiler systems. Combined Heat and Power is also increasingly being incorporated into proposals to meet carbon emission reduction targets, although these are generally gas-fired CHP systems.

6.5 Monitoring the implementation of proposed renewable systems is an area for improvement.

Energence have developed a renewable energy generation monitoring system which is web based and provides real-time feedback on the energy generation of installed renewable systems. LB Merton has used Energence to check development compliance with energy planning policies. This could be considered in Brent also.

Indicator: Secure district wide CHP in Wembley area Target: Complete one district wide CHP network. Monitoring Point: 6.6 A more detailed condideration of necessary policies and proposals to realise the target will be

provided by the progression of the AAP for Wembley timetabled for 2011.

Page 21 of 88

Indicator: Sustainable design standards Target: Net increase in number of developments meeting „Fairly Positive‟ or „Very

Positive‟ on Brent‟s Sustainability Checklist and /or meeting „Good‟ or „Very Good‟ for the BREEAM/EcoHomes Standards

Monitoring Point: Planning approvals meeting above standards

6.7 There has been a steady increase in the number of proposals meeting CSH and BREEAM

standards as the Core Strategy has gone through stages of consultation and gained material weight. This year 5 proposals met CSH level 4 and 7 proposals met BREEAM Excellent. In addition over half of applicable major applications achieved 50% or more on the Brent Sustainability Checklist.

6.8 The UDP (2004) introduced a suite of new urban design policies to improve the design quality of

the built environment in Brent. The monitoring of their effectiveness is still at an early stage, partly due to the qualitative nature of outcomes, but we have attempted to derive some baseline information on the following indicators.

Sustainable Development Sustainable Design Standards; Range of Sustainability Measures Sustainable Construction

Indicator : Sustainable Design Standards Target: Net increase Monitoring Point: Number of developments meeting „Fairly Positive‟ or „Very Positive‟ on Brent‟s

Sustainability Checklist and /or meeting „Good‟ or „Very Good‟ for the BREEAM/EcoHomes Standards

6.9 The sustainability of design proposals, their construction methods and materials can be

evaluated using a range of methodologies and codes, such as the BREEAM (non residential) and Code for Sustainable Homes/ EcoHomes (housing) assessments employed by the Building Research Establishment (BRE). Brent also has its own Sustainable Development Checklist (TP6 Form) which covers a wide spectrum of sustainability indicators.

Page 22 of 88

No. Of Code Level Rankings Qualifying Major Proposals 2009/10

Sustainable Design Standard

Number of qualifying applications

Number of dwellings/ floorspace

CSH Level 4 4 1,060

CSH Level 3 14 999

BREEAM Excellent 7

BREEAM Very Good 5

TP6 Very Positive (50% or more)

17

TP6 Fairly Positive (25% or more)

13

Indicator 2: Range of Sustainability Measures Target: Net increase in Best Practice Measures Monitoring Point: Number of permitted developments „designing-in‟ the full range of Best Practice

sustainability measures (i.e. Water conservation, SUDS, Materials resource efficiency, Operational waste, etc.)

6.10 Brent‟s Checklist is used at the application stage to assess the level of compliance with UDP

sustainability policy & SPG19 requirements, as well as to facilitate discussions on, and commitments to, specific measures. The checklist encompasses a whole range of sustainability measures, some of which are also covered by the BREEAM and CSH assessment. An effective monitoring mechanism for these individual sustainability measures is yet to be developed as the level of detail required is currently not consistently monitored. However, the BREEAM and CSH assessments do provide an overall indication of the package of sustainability measures that are being secured.

Page 23 of 88

6. PROTECTING AND ENHANCING THE ENVIRONMENT

LDF Strategic Objectives & Core Policies: Objective 9: To Protect and Enhance Brent‟s Environment Objective 10: To Achieve Sustainable Development, Mitigate & Adapt to Climate Change CP18 Protection and Enhancement of Open Space, Sports and Biodiversity CP 19 Brent Strategic Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Measures UDP Saved Policies: Restricting noise generating development (EP2) Improving air quality (STR12, EP3) Protection from potentially polluting development (EP4, EP5) Contaminated land (EP6) Water quality, protection of water resources & flood mitigation (EP10, EP12) Supplementary Planning Guidance: SPG 19: Sustainable Design, Construction and Pollution Control Key London Plan Policy Themes: Air quality (4A.19) Energy and sustainable materials (4A.4 – 4A.11) Water (4A.12 – 4A.18) Noise (4A.20) Contaminated land and hazardous substances (4A.33, 4A.34) London‟s Response to Climate Change- policy 5.12 (Flood Risk Management), 5.13 (Sustainable Drainage) 5.14 (Water Quality) 5.15 (Water Use) London‟s Quality of Life Emerging Replacement London Plan Protecting London‟s Open & Natural Environment 25R 2007-08 Key National Guidance PPS1: Sustainable Development & Climate Change (2005) PPS22: Renewable Energy (2004) PPS23: Pollution Control (2004) PPG24: Noise (1994) PPS 25: Development and Flood risk, (DCLG 2006) Local Strategies: Air Quality Action Plan 2005-2010 Brent Contaminated Land Strategy 2005 Brent Environmental Health Noise Policy May 2004 West London Air Quality & Transport Action Plan 2005 Thames Catchment Flood Management Plan Brent Strategic Flood Risk Assessment The Major‟s Air Quality Strategy (Dec 2010)

Page 24 of 88

Monitoring Indicators and Policy Performance Review Indicator: Percentage of retail/leisure floorspace approved in areas of moderate to excellent

public transport accessibility Target: 90% to be located in areas of moderate to very good public transport accessibility

2000-2010 (PTAL 3 or above) Monitoring Point: Planning permissions for retail/leisure developments

7.1 In 2008/09 over 90% of new retail and leisure floorspace granted was in areas of public transport accessibility level moderate or above. In 2009/10 the picture was reversed with 81% of retail and leisure floorspace granted being in areas of poor public transport accessibility. This was due to two large scale proposals which replaced or extended existing uses.

Indicator: Days when Air Pollution is Moderate or High Target: National Air Quality Strategy Targets Monitoring Point: Daily readings at monitoring stations

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2005-06 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10

no

. of

day

s

Number of days air pollution is moderate

John Keble School

Ikea

0%

100%

2008/9 2009/10

PTAL rating of retail & leisure permissions

Floorspace in PTAL 1 or 2

Floorspace in PTAL 3 or above

Page 25 of 88

7.2 Air pollution adversely affects health, causing lung damage and symptoms including wheezing,

coughing, pain when taking a deep breath, and breathing difficulties during exercise or outdoor activities. Air pollution can also damage plants and wildlife. A number of monitoring stations have been set up around the borough to record the number of days when air pollution is moderate or high.

7.3 Records show that air quality has improved since 2005, with the number of days recorded as

exceeding national guidelines reducing year on year. This trend continued in 2009-10, apart from at the Kingsbury monitoring station where there was an increase in number of days where air pollution was moderate. The key recorded air pollutant is PM10 (fine particulate matter) which is caused by emissions from transport. Improvements to vehicle engines and cleaner fuel use have improved air quality markedly over the past 5 years.

7.4 At Kingsbury monitoring station the key recorded air pollutant is ozone, which is a product of

chemical reactions between NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOC), and is also largely generated by transport emissions and also domestic gas boilers. Ozone levels tend to peak during summer time.

Indicator: Planning permissions granted which are contrary to Environment Agency advice

on flood risk or water quality Target: No permissions granted contrary to the advice of the Environment Agency Monitoring Point: Planning permissions where EA advice provided 7.5 The EA initially objected to 8 planning applications in 2009/10. The objections were based on

unsatisfactory Flood Risk Assessments (FRA). All objections were subsequently withdrawn once additional FRA detail was submitted and conditions were recommended to secure adequate SUD measures.

7.6 To avoid future EA objections it would be useful to provide more guidance at pre-application

stage on the requirements of FRAs. Indicator: Proportion of Borough with Historical Industrial sites/contaminated land Target: 3% of sites remediated Monitoring Point: Sites investigated for Remediation 7.7 Development of land is the main driver of contaminated land investigation and remediation. In

2009/2010, despite the economic downturn, 26 sites were investigated in the Borough for contamination. 22 of these were through enforcement of planning conditions and 4 were through investigations undertaken by the Council. This equates to an area of 17 hectares of land.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2005-06 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10

No

. of

day

s

Number of days air pollution is high

John Keble School Ikea

Kingsbury

Neasden Lane

Page 26 of 88

7.8 In conjunction with this, 17 sites were verified as being suitable for use, either through investigation or soil remediation works. This equates to an area of 8.4 hectares of land.

Summary and Issues requiring Further Consideration

7.9 Environmental quality is a key consideration for planning, development has the potential to

either adversely affect or improve air, noise, water and ground conditions. It is the role of planning to ensure the latter is achieved.

7.10 It has been identified that further detailed guidance on FRAs would be useful to ensure

development proposals adequately address flood risk and surface water run-off. 7.11 Climate change adaptation is increasingly on the agenda for ensuring satisfactory

environmental quality. Within London a major threat from the changing climate is an increase in flooding. The Flood and Water Act came into force in April 2010 and this places new responsibilities on Local Authorities including the approval drainage related works. Work is currently underway to complete a Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Management Plan, these will be taken into account in developing more detailed requirements within draft development management policies.

Page 27 of 88

7. PROVIDING MORE AND BETTER HOMES

LDF Core Strategy Strategic Objectives & Core Policies:

Objective 7 – Achieve housing growth and meet housing needs by:

- Promoting mixed use, mixed tenure development - Providing 11,200 additional homes between 2007/8 to 2016/17, 85% of which in 5 growth

areas - Ensuring 25% of new homes are family sized (3 bed or more) and 50% are affordable

CP2 Population and housing growth, CP7, CP8, CP9, CP10, CP11 (Growth Areas), CP21 A Balanced housing stock, CP22 Sites for nomadic peoples.

UDP Saved Policies: Encouraging sustainable new homes (H11, H13, H14, H15); Conversion and change of use (H17, H18 and H19); Mixed use schemes H20). 50% of new housing should be affordable (STR 20, H4, H5 & H6) Amenity provision and protection (H12, H19 & H22)

Supplementary Planning Guidance: SPG 17 Design Guide For New Development Draft SPG 21 Affordable Housing

London Plan Policy Themes: Housing provision (3A.1, 3A.2, 3A.3, 3A.4, 3A.7, 3A.9 & 3A.15) Affordable housing (3A.8, 3A.9 & 3A.10 & 3A.11) Type of Housing (3A.5, 3A.6, 13,3A.14, 3A.11 & 3A.13, 3A.14 & 3A.16) Amenity provision (3A.6 3A.7)

Emerging new London Plan Policy Themes Replacing universal affordable housing target with locally negotiated targets Mandatory floorspace requirements for new homes

National and Regional Guidance: Planning Policy Statement 3 (CLG, June 2010) Delivering Affordable Housing (DCLG, 2006) London Housing Strategy (GLA, Feb 2010) Draft revised Interim Housing SPG (GLA, Oct 2009) London Strategic Housing Market Assessment (GLA, 2009) London Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (GLA, 2009)

Local Strategies: Brent Housing Strategy 2009 - 2014 Brent Housing Needs Survey 2004 Brent Private Sector Stock Condition Survey 200

Housing Supply and Demand Summary

At the end of 2009-10 there were c110,000 houses and flats

Page 28 of 88

21,737 of the borough‟s 111,000 households were registered on the council‟s statutory Housing register as of 1/4/2009 3,651 households having to be accommodated in short term accommodation

Housing Stock Summary

Census 2001 indicated Brent had 98,840 occupied self contained homes

54% of these are houses and 46% flats

Fig.1 Dwelling Stock by Housing Type

80% of private housing stock was constructed before 1944 and is therefore prone to construction age associated structural problems

50% of homes in 2001 were estimated to have no more than two bedrooms

55% of households are owner occupiers, 24% of households socially rent and 17% rent from private landlords.

Fig.2 Tenure by Housing Type

Housing Needs Summary

The 2001 census showed 9% of households and 30% of all residents were living in over occupied or over crowded accommodation.

Average household size is 2.7 persons (2nd highest in London) (Professor Mayhew Study)

Brent Housing Needs Survey (2004) estimates:

- 24,404 HH are living in unsuitable/unaffordable homes; of which 4,979 require new homes.

- 3,386 additional affordable homes required annually to meet backlog and new arising need of 1,429 annually; of which 43% should be 3/4 bedrooms

- Only 32% of priority needs households could afford „intermediate‟ affordable housing, virtually all for no more than 1/2 bedrooms

- Requirement for 1,252 wheelchair accessible dwellings (62% from private sector) - 21% of the households on the waiting list require three or more bedrooms.

Brent‟s average house price/average earnings ratio is 7.18 (6th highest in London) (Hometrack, 2008)

Brent Housing Market Summary

Between 1999 – 2009 Brent housing market sale prices experienced the 3rd highest increase in London (153%) [Standard, 7/1/2010]

In 2009, Brent prices rose by 8%, the 4th highest rate in London (Standard 24/8/2009).

An overview of Brent‟s public sector housing supply and demand is provided in Table 1, which is derived from a London wide survey by the National Housing Federation:

Terraced 19%

Semi Detached 28%

Detached

7%

Purpose built block 27%

Converted House 17%

Converted Commercial 2%

Social rental 28%

Owner occupies 74%

Private rental 30%

Owner occupied 26%

Social rental 72%

Private rental 70%

Houses Flats

Page 29 of 88

Total Local Authority & Housing Association Homes, 2008 24,759

New Housing Corporation Funded Homes, 2007/08 276

Total Local Authority & Housing Association New Lettings, 2007/08 1,470

Households On Local Authority Waiting List, 2008 20,386

Households In Temporary Accommodation, 2008 3,907

Households Accepted as Homeless, 2007/08 894 Table 1 Brent Public Sector Housing Supply and Demand

The survey showed Brent had the highest level of Homeless Acceptance and 3rd highest Housing Waiting List and Temporary Accommodation levels in London.

MONITORING HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

Indicator: Total additional homes Target: 1,120 additional homes annually, minimum of 11,200 homes (9,150 self

contained) supplied 2007/8 – 2016/17 Monitoring Point: No. of net new housing units completed

Type Additional Homes Provided Annual Target

Self-contained dwellings 888 915

Non-self contained homes 100

Reoccupied vacancies 189 103

Total additional homes 1,077 1,120,

8.1 Self contained completions:

8.2 888 new homes were completed in 2009/10 which is an increase on the previous 3 years but below the revised annual target agreed in the London Plan in 2008.

Indicator: Number of homes completed in growth areas Target: Minimum 85% of new homes completed are in Growth Areas 2009/10 – 2016/17 Monitoring Point: No. of net new housing units completed

8.3 400 net units were completed in the Growth Areas in 2009/10. This is equivalent to 50% of total

completions.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Completions 1997/98 - 2009/10

Total Built (Gross)

Page 30 of 88

8.4 This is a new indicator introduced in the Core Strategy to monitor the effectiveness of policy CP2 which sets the target that over 85% of new homes will be delivered in the growth areas. In 2009/10, 50% of new homes were delivered in the growth areas. As planning permission for these new homes was given prior to CP2 being adopted, it is expected that the proportion of new homes in growth areas will increase in future years.

Indicator: Development Type of new homes completed (non CS indicator) Target: None Monitoring Point: New housing units completed

8.5 The majority of new homes are delivered through new build development and these largely

being flats of maisonettes. This reflects the built up urban character of the borough.

Indicator: New affordable Housing Target: Minimum 50% or 4,575 completions 2007/8 – 2016/17 Monitoring Point: No. of new affordable units completed

10%

11%

2%

77%

Development type 2009/10

Chang of Use

Conversion

Extension

New build

83%

15%

0%

2% Unit type 2009/10

Flat of maisonette

House or bungalow

Cluster flat

Studio or S/C bedsit

Page 31 of 88

8.6 In 2009/10, 460 affordable homes were built. This provided a net increase of 414 affordable

homes which slightly exceeded the target of 50% affordable homes.

Indicator: Type of new affordable homes Target: 70% social rent and 30% intermediate housing Monitoring Point: No. of new affordable units completed

8.7 287 (62%) social rental and 173 (37%) intermediate. Type of affordable homes completed did

not quite reach the London Plan target of 70% social rent in 2009/10. The new London Plan is due to bring in a new target of 60% social rent, although there continues to be substantial local need for the social rental sector.

Indicator: Proportion of family homes Target: 25% of self contained homes are 3 bed or larger Monitoring Point: No. of new affordable units completed

8.8 In 2009/10, 22% of new homes built were family sized (3 beds or more), falling slightly short of

CP21 target of 25%.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2007/08 2008/09 2009/10

Total built (gross) Total affordable units

38%

40%

14%

5%

3%

1bed

2bed

3bed

4bed

5+ bed

Page 32 of 88

Indicator: Proportion of new homes that are wheelchair adaptable Target: 10% of schemes 10 units or more Monitoring Point: No. of new wheelchair adaptable units granted approval

8.9 147 out of 1,600 new homes granted approval were wheelchair adaptable, comprising 9.2%.

The number of wheelchair adaptable units was slightly below the target of 10% Indicator: Housing units lost on completed new development Target: No net loss Monitoring Point: No. of new wheelchair adaptable units granted approval

8.10 194 units lost through development, however net gain of 807 units. Redevelopment schemes

can involve the loss of existing units to enable development at a higher density. In 2009/10 there was an overall net gain of 807 units.

Indicator: Number of new homes built to Lifetime Homes standards Target: 100% Monitoring Point: London Plan 3A.5

8.11 1,365 units (85%) were built to Lifetime Homes standards.

Indicator: Density of new housing Target: None Monitoring Point: No. of new dwellings per hectare 8.12 An average density of 174 dwellings per hectare results from permissions granted in 2009/10. NB – optimising potential of a site should take into account local context, design and transport capacity

which are particularly important, as well as social infrastructure, open space and play provision. 8.13 This Indicator, which is derived from, Circular 01/2005, the London Plan Table 3A2.1, and UDP

Policies H13 and H14 shows that the average density of new housing approved in 2009-10 has been significantly in excess of the indicative minimum of 50 dwellings per hectare, as 95% of the completed housing schemes exceeded this density level.

Future Residential Development Pipeline

8.14 Brent maintains a substantial residential pipeline with the majority of approvals not yet being implemented. As of the end of 2009-10, this comprised a total of over 8,500 homes which had not yet been started or completed. About 90% of this is for sites of 10 or more units.

8.15 In addition to this very sizable residential consents pipeline, the draft LDF Site Specific

Allocations DPD has identified sites with a potential capacity to provide c 10,000 additional homes, as outlined in Appendix 4. A further 1,700 additional homes could be provided through the Council‟s South Kilburn and Barham Park Estate Regeneration Programmes.

8.16 The Council has also undertaken a study of the longer term potential housing capacity (post

2017) which could arise from the probable replacement and refurbishment for mixed use redevelopment of premises and sites not currently in residential use, as part of its contribution to the London Strategic Housing land Availability Study 2009 (SHLAA) which has revealed that

Page 33 of 88

Brent has the 9th highest identified large site housing capacity in London and the highest in West London.

. Projected Future Housing Completions 2009/10-2025/26

8.17 This is derived from COI H1, H2a/b/c /d and London Plan target of 1,120 additional homes annually between 2007/08 –2016/17. The Housing Trajectory therefore includes all the sectoral elements of this London Plan target i.e. 915 self contained, 100 non self contained and 103 vacant homes reoccupied annually. For ease of presentation the self contained and non self contained homes with planning consent have been aggregated into a single „consents„ category.

8.18 In apportioning the envisaged completion dates, the Council has considered it reasonable, in the light of historical information, to generally assume that all small sites, with permission for less than 10 dwellings, will be completed in 2010/11, 2011/12 or 2012/13 depending on their respective consent dates.

8.19 The larger sites, more than 10 s/c homes, have been specifically apportioned completion periods according to their relative size and consent date (where applicable) and any proposed phasing.

8.20 This Housing Trajectory has been modelled by sequentially employing the following actual and projected outcomes:

Housing Consents, including non-self contained homes

LDF Site Specific Allocations, estimated capacity of c 10,000 homes (s/c), derived from Appendix 4.

Estate Regeneration Programmes, c 1,700 units.

Other Potential Sites

Vacant Homes , reoccupied at an annual rate of 103 as per London plan

8.21 The above additional housing capacity is very concentrated within the identified LDF Growth Areas, as 85% of the residential consents pipeline and 80% of the estimated LDF Site Specific Allocations and 88% of the Estates Regeneration Programmes new housing capacity is located within the Growth Areas.

8.22 The Council considers that its Housing Trajectory satisfies the PPS3 guidance to identify a sufficient level of housing capacity for a 15 year period on the phased basis of:

Specific deliverable and ready to develop sites for the first five years

Specific developable sites for years 5-10

Indicate potential growth for years 11-15

8.23 It must be emphasised that this Housing Trajectory is based on very conservative assumptions as to the implementation of the housing consents and the development of identified sites which do not yet have a residential consent. Furthermore, the realisation of this identified capacity is very dependent on the timely provision of essential physical and social infrastructure so as to ensure sustainable new housing development is delivered.

Page 34 of 88

Page 35 of 88

Summary and Issues requiring Further Consideration 8.52 It is considered that the housing policies have effectively delivered sufficient new

housing to meet all targets and satisfy most policy objectives with the notable exception of the appropriate dwelling mix.

8.53 Brent has more than met its London Plan housing targets. Yet, these achievements

must be seen in terms of identified need, particularly affordable and especially social rental, larger family accommodation (for both purchase and rent) and wheelchair accessible housing.

Page 36 of 88

8. TRAVELLING IN BRENT

Strategic Objectives: To reduce pollution and noise of traffic To reduce the need to travel, especially by private car, and to provide improved and more sustainable transport choices To co-ordinate planning and regeneration to achieve transportation improvements To ensure that the Borough‟s residents, workforce, visitors have real choices in travel modes To make better use of existing roadspace and reducing environmental impact of traffic by prioritising sustainable modes To ensure that the needs of freight transport and servicing are met To support the Borough‟s Air Quality Strategy by implementing traffic reduction plans UDP Saved Policies: To ensure a pattern of development which reduces the need to travel whilst securing transport improvements. Policies TRN22-25, TRN27-31 aim to reduce car usage by controlling parking. Parking controls and standards used to restrain traffic. Target to reduce traffic in the borough by 10% between 1997 and 2008 by addressing the transport impact. Policies TRN1-TRN4 aim to reduce traffic impacts and improve public transport integration. Implementation of the London Bus Priority Network and London Cycle Network, this includes the provision of appropriate routes. Policies TRN6, 8, 9, 10, 11 aim to promote sustainable modes of transport. LDF Core Policy Themes: The Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy (CS) policies have aided the determination of planning applications since summer 2010, when it was adopted. The Core Strategy attempts to integrate key transport issues into many cross-cutting policies. The LDF emerging Site Specific Allocations seek transportation improvements in the following locations: Site T1. 12-14 Carlisle Road Site T2. Barningham Way T3. Oxgate Lane T4. Humber Road T5. Sidmouth Road T6. Waxlow Road Supplementary Planning Guidance: SPG3: Forming an Access to a Road SPG13: Layout Standards for Access Roads Key London Plan Policy Themes:

Page 37 of 88

Encouraging development in areas of high public transport accessibility and integrating transport and development (policies 3C.1 - 3C.4); Enhancing transport links (policies 3C.5 - 3C.8); Increasing public transport capacity, security and managing phasing on underground, bus, tram and Thames river crossing services (policies 3C.9 - 3C.14); Reducing congestion, reducing traffic, on street parking management and parking in town centres (policies 3C.16 – 3C.24); Distribution of goods and services by freight (policies 3C.25 and 3C.26) (3A.5, 3C.1) The Mayor of London‟s Transport Strategy, 2001 and subsequent revisions 2004, 2006 provide an „integrated package of measures to improve transport, enhance the environment, and foster London‟s economic development‟. Emerging London Plan themes Chapter 6 – Transportation Reducing the need to travel by car; Improved public transport access, and promotion of walking and cycling; Supporting development that generates high levels of trips only at locations with high levels of public transport accessibility, either currently or via committed, funded improvements Improving interchange between different forms of transport, particularly around major rail and Underground stations, Promoting greater use of low carbon technology. Local Strategies: Brent‟s Local Implementation Plan 2007-2011 sets out how the Council proposes to implement the Mayors Transport Strategy priority areas, which includes Brent‟s Road Danger Reduction Plan. Brent Transportation is currently producing the next Local Implementation plan for the next five years after 2011. Brent‟s roads and rail lines form a part of a wider network of transport links in London, with 47 daytime bus routes, 5 night bus routes and 3 twenty-four hour bus routes. Brent is also served by 28 Network Rail and London Underground stations. It is important to co-ordinate strategic transport links such as the London Bus Priority Network and the London Cycle Network.

Monitoring Indicators and Performance Review

Mitigating Transport Impacts Indicator: Mitigation of transport impacts from development proposals. Target: Reduce significant impacts from developments on the operation of

the local highway, public transport and other transport facilities. Monitoring Point: Record all proposals which required Transport Assessment – were

there significant impacts, how were impacts mitigated. 9.4 In 2009-10 the Council secured Travel Plans for thirteen planning applications

(consents), two of which provided financial contributions towards sustainable transport improvements. A total of £288,000 was secured exclusively for transport improvements, this compares to £1,164,453 the last financial year. The reason for this reduction in income is because of a fall in the number of large scale planning applications submitted to the council.

Page 38 of 88

Sustainable Transport Modes

Indicator: Implementation of the London Bus Priority Network (LBPN) and

London Cycle Network (LCN+). Target: Major developments that abut the LCN+ and LBPN should

contribute to improvements and increasing capacities. Monitoring Point: Record all major development proposals and identify those which

should provide funding towards these networks. 9.5 Twenty one major development proposals abutted the LBPN in 2009-10. All of the

applications secured contributions to sustainable transport, including fourteen car free developments, six Travel Plans and highway improvements worth £200,000 for five schemes.

Fourteen major development proposals in 2009-10 abutted the LCN. The Council

secured improvements for all applications.

Shaping Sustainable Patterns of Development Indicator: Increasing capacity of and promotion of development at Key

Transport Interchanges. Target: Encourage a sustainable means of travel by providing more and

improved public transport choices. Monitoring Point: Record all major residential development proposals in the vicinity

of key transport interchanges- have contributions been sought for interchange improvement?

9.6 Six major approved planning applications including residential development were

located within proximity of a proposed transport interchange in 2009-10. However none were large enough to require any funding for specific transport upgrades; furthermore historically improvements to transport interchanges have, in the main, been funded through TfL.

It should be noted however that S106 contributions were required for the proposals,

and could potentially be used for sustainable transportation in future when pooled together.

Parking

Indicator: Amount of completed non-residential development within UCO‟s A, B,

and D complying with car parking standards set out in the Local Development Framework.

Target: Ensure all completions of non-residential development, Use Classes A, B, and D comply with car parking standards.

Monitoring Point: Number of recorded completions within Use Classes A,B, and D which comply with PS.

9.7 No planning applications were granted planning permission that did not meet the

borough‟s maximum parking standards in 2010 as was the case in 2009.

Page 39 of 88

Traffic Flows Indicator: Reduction of traffic impacts. Target: 10% reduction of traffic in the Borough between 1997-2009

Mayor‟s reduction target of zero growth in outer town centre locations for 2011 compared with 2001.

Monitoring Point: Traffic flow figures from the Department for Transport, measure % change.

9.8 Traffic volume decreased by around 2% and 6% in the borough in 2008 and 2009

respectively, a higher reduction in traffic compared to outer London at 0.5% and Brent‟s neighbouring borough, Camden, where traffic increased by 1%. The rest of Brent‟s neighbouring boroughs, however, performed better, with Barnet‟s traffic reducing in volume by 3%, Harrow by 2.5% and Westminster by 3%.

9.9 The Council has met the Mayor‟s target of zero growth for town centres for the

financial year 2009-10. However, it did not meet Brent Council‟s own target of a „10% traffic volume reduction‟.

Summary and Issues Requiring Further Consideration:

9.10 Whilst the Borough has not witnessed a dramatic change in traffic flow from 2003-

2007, our aim for a 10% reduction in traffic flow from 1998-2008 is not on course to being met. This matter is connected with improving the permeability of the built environment which encourages sustainable modes of transport for short journeys and further development of and around key transport interchanges.

9.11 Further investigation is required on how development proposals for the Borough will

impact on existing infrastructure and any requirements for future improvements. The council‟s Core Strategy, once adopted in 2010, will enable infrastructure to be secured in line with the growth as shown in the IIF.

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Ch

ange

in t

raff

ic v

olu

me

(ki

lom

etr

es)

Change in traffic volume, 2003-2009

Brent

Barnet

Camden

Harrow

Westminster

Outer London Average

Page 40 of 88

9.12 Contributions towards significant transport impacts, where major developments abut the LBPN and LCN, should be sought towards sustainable transport measures.

Page 41 of 88

9. WORKING IN BRENT

Strategic Objectives: To protect existing viable employment opportunities Encourage the widest range of new industrial, commercial and service enterprises; Promote regeneration Widen residents‟ access to employment. UDP Saved Policies: Protection of Strategic, Borough and Local Employment Sites (EMP5, EMP6,EMP7, EMP8, EMP9, EMP10, & EMP11) Encouraging modernisation and expansion of existing enterprises (EMP1 & EMP2) Promoting new employment and skill training opportunities (EMP3, EMP4, & EMP20) Locational preference for new developments (EMP15, EMP16), Workspace standards (EMP14,EMP18, EMP19, EMP21, EMP22, Special Policy Areas (EMP23 & EMP24) Alternative uses for redundant premises (EMP9 & EMP17) Environmental protection and enhancement (EMP12 & EMP13) Enabling the Council‟s Economic Development Plan. Supplementary Planning Guidance: SPG 18 Employment Development SPG 16 Special Design Standards for Hassop Road SPD Former Guinness Brewery Site Key London Plan Policy Themes: Strategic Industrial Locations (2A.10, 3B.4); Opportunity Areas; West London (2A.5, 5F.1 & 5F.2); Specific employment sectors (3B.1, 3B.2, 3B.4, 3B.5 & 3B8); Enabling new technologies (3B.5, 3B.6 & 3B.7); and West London Strategy (5F.1). National and Regional Guidance: GLA SPG Industrial Capacity DCLG Guidance Note Employment Land Reviews Local Strategies: A Regeneration Strategy for Brent 2006 – 2009 Brent Employment Land Demand Study 2006 Park Royal Partnership – Draft Opportunity Area Planning Framework – 2007

Page 42 of 88

Local Context

10.1 Brent has approximately 380 hectares (about 940 acres) of employment land, comprising strategic, borough and local employment sites. The Brent Core Strategy 2010 designates industrial land for industrial and warehousing employment operations. The designations are:

4 Strategic Industrial Locations 9 Locally Significant Industrial Sites Numerous Local Employment Areas

10.2 There has been a well documented long term national shift away from producing

goods towards importing, storing and moving them around and this has altered the profile of industrial land use. More recently of course, the credit crunch and recession has also altered land use, most drastically manifested in occupation and vacancy of industrial premises. This will have a lasting impact upon structural demand in the wider economy, and at a local level the planning system will need to react to demand for new uses as well as promote economic growth.

10.3 In Brent the long term trend of decline in demand for factory and manufacturing

space and an increase in demand for warehouses and distribution centres has remained relatively steady. Demand for modern small and medium workspaces has declined, perhaps suggesting an oversupply of accommodation. Increased availability of space at rents has benefited some users, such as cultural and creative industries.

10.4 Although the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition has moved away from housing

targets, the Brent Core Strategy seeks to deliver new homes in line with the London Plan. The Core Strategy suggests that new homes in Brent should be delivered upon previously developed land, and has removed employment land protection to facilitate this, for example in Alperton. Despite this, it is the responsibility of the council in partnership with the GLA to manage industrial land supply in order to achieve a balance of protecting employment, while recognising the demand for land for residential development and other uses, such as community facilities and places of worship.

Brent‟s industrial land policy hierarchy 10.5 Strategic Industrial Locations and Locally Significant Industrial Sites are generally

self contained in defined parcels so that the operations within are kept away from other conflicting uses, such as residential development. In addition, they afford good access to the road network.

10.6 Strategic Industrial Locations in Brent are part of the reservoir of industrial land

recognised by the Mayor of London in the London plan. They are protected for Industry (use class B2) and Warehousing (use class B8) and other closely related uses. In Brent, the SILs are:

Park Royal Wembley and Neasden Staples Corner East Lane

Page 43 of 88

Figure 1: Designated employment areas in Brent

10.7 Locally Significant Industrial Sites are effectively the same as Strategic Industrial Locations in terms of local planning policy, but are not recognised by the Mayor of London. Locally Significant Industrial Sites in Brent are located in:

Alperton Brentfield Road Church End Colindale Cricklewood Honeypot Lane Kingsbury Neasden Lane

10.8 Local Employment Areas (LEAs) have a lower level of planning protection and their

loss to other uses can in certain circumstances be justified. Despite this, the Council recognises that they perform an important role for the local economy. Brent‟s Local Employment Areas are often characterised by:

Small industrial premises Small scale distribution Motor vehicle repair Proximity to residential areas Accessibility problems and traffic conflicts Poor quality buildings and public realm

Offices

10.9 In line with the government‟s Planning Policy Statement 4, the preferred location for office developments is within the Borough‟s town centre hierarchy, particularly within Wembley. The re-use of redundant office space is managed by Policy EMP17 and encourages residential, hotels and education uses. The council is also exploring how redundant space can be used more creatively for temporary uses, particularly where this can assist with the council‟s regenerative ambitions.

Page 44 of 88

Monitoring Indicators and Performance Review

10.10 The Annual Monitoring Report includes data on a selection of monitoring indicators. These may be recommended by the Government or developed by the Council itself in response to specific conditions.

10.11 The Council classifies planning applications by use class such as B1, B2 and B8.

Some proposals and developments may be for combinations of some or all of these, for example work/live. This reflects the consolidation of employment operations as business react to the structural economic change.

Indicator: Amount of floorspace developed for employment by type Target: None Monitoring Point: Employment floorspace completed

Industrial Employment and Office Completions 2009 to 2010 10.12 Compared to the previous years return, completions data shows that activity was

significantly up. Total floorspace completed was 64332m/2, up approximately 36500m/2 from the previous year. Major developments include 17420m/2 as part of the First Central phased development in Park Royal and some 16460m/2 at a major new site for the Metropolitan Police, also in Park Royal. Approximately 21000 m/2 were changes of use.

10.13 At 37% B1a office floorspace was the largest proportion of employment floorspace

completed within the period with 23890m/2, dominated by the completion at First Central. Figure 2: Floorspace completions by use class

23890, 37%

5700, 9%

15080, 24%

8447, 13%

11215, 17% B1a

B1c

B2

B8

Sui Generis

Page 45 of 88

Figure 3: Floorspace completions by use class by regeneration or employment area

10.14 Park Royal strategic employment area witnessed the largest proportion of activity with the major developments at First Central and the Metropolitan Police.

Industrial employment and office approvals 2009 to 2010

10.15 There were 16768m/2 of new floorspace approved in the last year with the largest single proportion accounted for by the new Brent Council Civic centre in Wembley. Park Royal had the most new floorspace approved overall, with 7332m/2 in a mix of B class uses. Figure 4: Floorspace approvals by use class

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

B1a

B1c

B2

B8

Sui Generis

9008, 54%

3212, 19%

2489, 15%

1144, 7%

915, 5%

B1a

B1c

B2

B8

Sui Generis

Page 46 of 88

Figure 5: Floorspace approvals by use class by regeneration or employment area

Indicator: Amount of floorspace by employment type, which is on previously

developed land Target: None Monitoring Point: Employment floorspace completed Percentage of industrial employment and office development on previously

developed land B1a 100% B1b 100% B1c 100% B2 100% B8 100%

Indicator: Employment land available by type Target: None Monitoring Point: Survey of employment land

Industrial Employment Land Supply 10.16 The Council generally completes bi-annual surveys of its industrial land portfolio.

The survey was completed in 2009 and the results are outlined below.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

B1a

B1c

B2

B8

Sui Generis

Page 47 of 88

Vacancy Levels in SIL and LSIS

SIL Total ha In use ha Vacant ha Vacant % Wembley 25.1 18.2 6.9 27.4% Park Royal (Brent) 134.8 72.8 62 46% East Lane 18.1 8.6 9.6 52.8% Neasden 39.7 36.6 3.1 7.7% Staples Corner 36.4 30.3 6 16.6% Sub total 254.1 166.5 87.5 34.5% LSIS Total ha In use ha Vacant ha Vacant % Alperton 29 25.3 3.8 13% Brentfield 4.4 4.4 0.03 0.7% Church End 9 8.5 0.5 5.7% Colindale 7.2 4.4 2.8 38.4% Cricklewood 1.3 1.3 0 0% Neasden Lane 3.2 3 0.2 7.3% Honeypot lane 5.1 4.5 0.6 12.5%

Kingsbury Road 6.9 5.4 1.6 22.8%

Sub total 66.2 56.6 9.5 14.4%

Total 320.2 223.2 97.1 30.3%

10.17 The figures suggest a sharp increase in vacancy across the borough compared with

previous surveys in 2006 and 2008. A „healthy‟ quantum of vacancy to allow for development churn is considered to be between 5 and 10%, where as the overall figure for the borough is approximately 30%. Of particular concern is the rate of vacancy in Park Royal, which is so important to London and the UK as a whole.

Indicator: Losses of employment land in employment/regeneration areas. Target: None Monitoring Point: Completed development in employment areas 10.18 Using completions data, it is possible to determine employment floorspace lost during

the financial year. In total 14214m/2 of employment useswas lost due to development completions, but all but 4780m/2 was lost to alternative b-class uses.

Estimating Employment Generated

10.19 It is possible to estimate the number jobs created by floorspace depending on the

type of floorspace that has been approved or indeed completed. Employment densities vary according to the type of floorspace – offices generally employ more people per m/2 than warehouses, which generate a small number of jobs. This is called the worker/floorspace ratio model. Because the estimations are derived from floorspace, whether approved or completed, the employment figures depend on the floorspace being occupied.

10.20 The worker floorspace ratios have be calculated based upon historical trends of the

amount of floorspace divided by the numbers of staff, depending on the type of floorspace. Ratios are applied to detailed breakdowns of floorspace use. For example ratios exist for office floorspace that could be for „Headquarters‟ or „City of London‟.

Page 48 of 88

10.21 In order to match the detailed breakdowns to the use classes used in this report, average employment densities have been calculated, as shown.

Floorspace type and use class

Average m/2 per worker

B1a offices 18.3 B1b research and development 29 B1c light industry 32 B2 general industrial 31.8 B8 storage and distribution 65 B1 and/or B8 41.9 B1/B2/B8 44 B2 and/or B8 48.4

10.22 By applying the employment density to the floorspace of a particular approval or completion, the notional level of employment can be assumed.

Completions: estimated employment 10.23 The total estimated employment generated by the completions floorspace based

upon worker/floorspace ratios is approximately 2472 jobs. This estimate takes account of perceived jobs lost from changes of use from other land uses.

Park Royal SIL

Wembley SIL

Staples Corner SIL

Wembley Growth Area

Burnt Oak LSIS

Cricklewood LSIS

Other

1938 192 124 18 62 126 13

Approvals: estimated employment

10.24 The total estimated employment generated by the approvals floor space based upon worker/floorspace ratios is 717 jobs. This estimate takes account of perceived jobs lost from changes of use from other land uses.

Park Royal SIL

East Lane SIL

Staples Corner SIL

Alperton LSIS

Burnt Oak LSIS

Church End LSIS

Other

579 8 9 7 24 8 82

Summary and Issues for Further Consideration 10.25 The impact of economic climate has undoubtedly manifested itself in terms of the use

of employment land. Although completions data appears to show an increase in activity, much of this can be accounted for in changes of use from other uses instead of net increases in floorspace. Approvals data is well down on the year before, even accounting for the large Police development in Park Royal. 2009 supply data

B2 1500 m/2

1500/31.8

47 jobs generated

Page 49 of 88

(although this needs to be understood further) appears to show that the level of vacancy in the borough between 2006 and present day has increased very significantly. The medium and long term demand for employment land must be closely monitored to appraise whether the prospect of re-occupation has been significantly affected by the down turn.

10.26 Park Royal continues to lead the way in terms of approvals and since it is the largest

industrial area in London, this is perhaps unsurprising. The emerging Local Development Framework views Wembley as the economic engine room for the borough in the long term, and this should continue to be monitored to assess whether the Council‟s aspirations are delivered.

10.27 As the Council moves forward with the preparation of the Local Development

Framework, the emphasis on how land is managed will alter. Although the Council will continue to manage industrial employment land through a hierarchy of Strategic, Borough and Local Employment Areas, it is also starting to take a more proactive approach to improving the estates and facilitating commercial regeneration on a site by site basis, particularly through the emerging Site Specific Allocations document.

10.28 The Council. shall also be promoting modern standards of operation such as more

intensive land use. The Council is very keen to support small and medium sized businesses and the creative and cultural sector. It has developed partnerships with operators that can manage and let affordable work space to businesses that would otherwise find it difficult to secure floorspace.

Page 50 of 88

10. SHOPPING & BRENT TOWN CENTRES

Strategic Objectives: To maintain the vitality and viability of established town centres; and To promote their physical and economic regeneration. Key LDF Core Strategy Themes: Sequential Approach in Brent: Principal Retail Location; Preferred Locations; Exceptional Locations (CP 16). Emerging Site Specific Allocations sites Sites supporting retail provision within the town centres of Wembley, Church End, Burnt Oak/ Colindale, Harlesden, Willesden, Kilburn Kingsbury and Neasden. UDP Saved Policies: Location of Non- Retail uses and protection of Primary Shopping Frontages and local centres through the use of conditions (SH6-SH7, SH9-SH10, SH13-SH18). Protect the town centre environment and ensure quality design in retail developments (SH19, SH21-SH24). Promotion of markets and specific centres with unique characters (SH26-SH29, SH31-SH35).

Supplementary Planning Guidance: SPG7: Shopfronts & Shop signs Key London Plan Policies: Supporting Town Centres (3D.1 & 3D.2) Maintaining & Improving Retail Facilities (3D.3) Emerging London Plan Policies Supporting & defining Town Centres (POLICY 2.15) Retail & Town Centre Development (POLICY 4.7) Supporting a successful and diverse retail sector (POLICY 4.8) National and Regional Guidance: Planning Policy Statement 4 (PPS4): Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth (December 2009). Local Strategies:

Willesden Town Centre Partnership, Action Plan, 2007-2010 Positioning Willesden Green, Dec. 2008 Brent Retail Need and Capacity Study, Feb. 2006 Brent Retail Need and Capacity Study Update, Nov 2008

Page 51 of 88

Brent Scenario and sensitivity testing paper on retail matters, Sept 2009 Draft Brent Town Centre Strategy, Nov. 2006

Local Context

11.1 Like all boroughs, Brent has gradually developed a hierarchy of shopping centres

over time regarding their individual size, status, range of shops and the facilities they provide.

Major Town Centres: Neasden

Wembley Kingsbury

Kilburn Preston Road

District Centres: Ealing Road

Burnt Oak Local Centres:

Cricklewood Queen‟s Park

Harlesden Sudbury

Wembley Park Kensal Rise

Preston Road Kenton

Colindale

11.2 The categorisation of Brent‟s town centres was updated in the Core Strategy and

now aligns with emerging London Plan.

Monitoring Indicators and Performance Review 11.3 The LDF Core Strategy performance measures for town centre policy CP 16 are as

follows:

Strategic Objectives Monitoring points

Strategic Objective 1 Local indicators Local employment change – target of 10,000 new jobs within Wembley to 2026.

Strategic Objective 3 Enhancing the vitality and viability of Town, District and Local Centres

Core Output Indicators Amount of completed retail, office and leisure development – target of net increase in floorspace. Local indicators Town Centre vacancy rates – target of no net increase in vacancy rates compared to national average. Health of town centres – increase in rent (inflation adjusted) in primary shopping area Health of town centres – increase in pedestrian footfall in town centres.

11.4 The Core Strategy and Unitary Development Plan performance measures for its town

centre policies are as follows:

Amount of new floor space in Wembley Amount of completed retail, leisure and office development Percentage retail composition in town centres including vacancy levels Net gain/ loss of floorspace by use class Increase in leisure/ retail applications in and adjoining town centres

Page 52 of 88

LDF Core Strategy Indicators

Strategic Objective 1: Promoting Economic Performance and Regeneration

Indicator: Local Employment Change Target: Amount of new floorspace developed by type in Wembley Monitoring Point: Change in floorspace, Wembley

11.5 This indicator is monitored by the Annual Monitoring Report Chapter “Working in

Brent” - please see this chapter for details of this indicator.

Strategic Objective 3: Enhancing the vitality & viability of town/district/local centres Indicator: Amount of completed retail, office and leisure development Target: Net increase Monitoring Point: Completed developments 11.6 The London borough of Brent monitored completions for the financial year 2009-

2010. There were only 33 completions relating to changes town centre uses, and 52% of these were in or adjoining town centres. The largest increase in employment uses outside of any Brent town centre was at Park Royal, where more than 11,5997 sq m of B1 office space was completed in the financial year. Two further completions also increased the proportion of B1 use in Park Royal, totalling 9,940 sq m. This is considered acceptable in policy terms given that it is within Brent‟s highest quality area of industrial land.

11.7 Changes of use within and adjoining town centres generally represented an increase

in A1 floorspace across the borough, with a large amount of A1 use completed at Wembley conference centre. The biggest retail loss adjoining a town centre was also in Wembley, where a change of use from bulky retail goods allowed for A3 and A4 use for the relocation of the niche Chinese food outlet, Oriental City. This is in line with the council‟s planning guidance and aspirations for Wembley.

11.8 Whilst there was a marginal increase in A3 and A4 uses in the borough, there was an overall net loss of B1 use in/adjacent to town centres in Brent. This can be attributed to an appeal that was allowed by Secretary of State within Kilburn town centre, granting a change of use from B1 to hotel space.

Page 53 of 88

Source: Brent Planning Application Data. 2010

Strategic Objective 3: Enhancing the vitality & viability of town/district/local centres Indicator: Vacant Units in Primary Shopping Frontages Target: National Average by 2010 Monitoring Point: Vacancy levels

11.9 The table below compares vacant primary frontage lengths within the borough since 2005. The national average (unit) vacancy rate, taken from Colliers CRE National Retail Barometer, stood at 14.4% in October 2009, down from 17.1% in April 2009. However, prior to April 2009 overall vacancy rates were lower; 14.2% and 9.3% in 2007 and 2006 respectively.

11.10 This compares to an average of 6.8% in 2009 across Brent centres, down from 9.7% in 2007. Whilst it seems that Brent‟s town centres are defying the national trend, this figure masks the reality of the situation in certain town centres in Brent. In 2008, the closure of Oriental City at Burnt Oak resulted in a high proportion of floorspace remaining empty; however this has now been filled and replaced by a car showroom, increasing retail frontage by 24% in Burnt Oak. As stated in the previous section, Oriental City has now been re-provided in Wembley.

11.11 Areas such as Cricklewood, Kensal Rise and Willesden have seen an increase in vacancy rates, with Willesden performing particularly poorly. This may be explained by last year‟s unlawful use in Willesden town centres of the operation of a “Metro Textiles” distribution centre.

11.12 The detailed frontage length vacancy rates by town centre, from the Brent Town centre Land Use Surveys, are in Appendix 10.A (and summarised in graphs below).

11.13 It is worth noting that Brent‟s Major town centre, Wembley, is the only location, including the District Centre of Preston Road, which has bucked national trends in the last year and has increasingly seen a reduction in vacancy rates since 2005 despite the recession.

-2000

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B1 D1 D2

Change in floorspace by type - in and adjacent to town centres

In centre Adjacent to centre

Page 54 of 88

Source: Brent Planning Application data, 2009 Strategic Objective 3: Enhancing the vitality & viability of town/district/local centres

Indicator: Rental Values in Town Centres Target: Net yearly increases Monitoring Point: Retail Zone „A‟ rents 11.14 Retail Zone „A‟ rents are monitored across the UK by Colliers CRE. Average prime

retail rents in Outer London decreased by 12.6% between 2008-2009, but increased by 0.3% 2009-2010, which shows some minor growth of the retail sector. This, compared to the National average of -11.5% between 2008-9 and -6.2% in 2009-10, shows that both Brent and London are in a stronger position than the rest of the country. Within the prime (Zone A) town centres in Brent, Wembley‟s rental increased by £5 per sq ft whilst Kilburn‟s has remained the same, which shows an improving situation since the previous year. Willesden was listed since 2004, but has not been listed in 2009. This may be because rents have dropped so low that it is now not considered to have a large enough retail share to be in the survey, which is of a concern for Brent given that this has happened for the second year in a row. Other Brent town centres are excluded.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Vacant Primary Frontage Length (%) by centre in 2005, 2007 & 2009

2005

2007

2009

Page 55 of 88

Source: Colliers CRE

Strategic Objective 3: Enhancing the vitality & viability of town/district/local centres Indicator: Level of Pedestrian Footfall Target: Net yearly increases Monitoring Point: Level of footfall every two years 11.15 Every two years, the council commissions pedestrian footfall counts within its three

main town centres, Wembley, Kilburn and Harlesden. The pedestrian flowcounts help to assess the vitality and viability of the town centres, by recording the number of visitors in a number of different points within the town centres.

11.16 The charts below show an estimate of the total number of pedestrians passing each

site, in each town centre, over a six hour period between the hours of 10.00am - 5.00pm on Friday and Saturday, and during the whole week (Monday-Saturday). The totals given for Friday and Saturday represent samples which are grossed up by a factor of 30, the reciprocal of the sampling fraction, to allow for the fact that on either day pedestrian movements were counted for a total of 12 minutes out of a possible 6 hours. Each of the charts show the indexed count points relative to the average pedestrian flow, and indicates the locational hierarchies throughout the centres.

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Wembley 30 30 40 45 45 55 60 65 70 70 65 70

Kilburn 60 70 70 80 80 90 95 100 105 105 100 100

Willesden 40 45 45 50 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Zon

e A

Re

nts

(£

pe

r sq

. ft

Key Town Centre Retail Rents by Year

Page 56 of 88

11.17 The chart above for Wembley shows that the place with the highest footfall in

October 2009 was around Primark, followed by Newsmart photo, just west of Wembley Central. This was then followed by Poundland and TK Maxx. The area around Wembley Central appeared to be the most popular. This is likely to be the case because it is a through route for the town centre and a key transport interchange. The least visited places were Sky Masters Travel (off the main High Road in Lancelot Parade), followed by Barclays Bank (on the corner of St. John‟s Road), and Peacocks (located in the corner of the recently completed Wembley Central Square). It is not surprising that the former and latter are the least visited places as they provide no through flow in the town centre, although Barclays is a slight anomaly considering it is located directly on the Wembley High Road.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

26 13 29 9 7 6 30 14 25 5 24 16 23 2 18 15 17 10 19 21 3 4 27 1 20 11 8 12 28 22

IND

EX

ED

PE

DE

ST

RIA

N F

LO

W

COUNT POINTS

WEMBLEY OCTOBER 2009 - RANKED COUNT POINTS based on the indexed flow for the week

WEEK SATURDAY

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

20 21 19 13 12 14 23 15 16 18 24 10 9 3 6 2 17 4 5 1 25 22 27 29 28 30 7 8 11 26

IND

EX

ED

PE

DE

ST

RIA

N F

LO

W

COUNT POINTS

KILBURN OCTOBER 2009 - RANKED COUNT POINTS based on the indexed flow for the week

WEEK SATURDAY

Page 57 of 88

11.18 Kilburn had a very similar pedestrian count to that of Wembley, although its quieter

points were generally visited less than Wembley‟s. The areas of highest footfall were outside Sainsbury‟s, followed by Poundland and Marks and Spencer. All of these stores are located to the south east of the Kilburn High Road, which is considered to be the most highly occupied area of the town centre. Comparatively, the areas with the least footfall were near two vacant units at 1-2 the Grangeway, 2 Priory Park Road and the Kingdom Public House. These are to the northern edge of the high road.

11.19 Harlesden has comparatively less pedestrian footfall than Wembley or Kilburn. Its

busiest areas are located at Iceland, Peacocks and the Romik Boutique around the centre of the town. The quietest points are around the areas of Ayan Clothing, the New Atlas Café and the Cedar Liquor Store.

Unitary Development Plan (UDP) performance indicators

Indicator: Percentage Retail Composition In Brent Town Centres Target: Mix to reflect National Average Monitoring Point: Proportions of convenience, comparison & service units 11.20 The Goad plan data is collected each year and updated every six months, and the

council currently commissions the data for sixteen centres across the borough every two years.

11.21 The Goad 2010 UK average for Convenience (food) outlets in town centres was 7%

(8.5% in 2008) while the national average for Comparison (non-food) goods was 57% (37.3% in 2008). For the number of Services (leisure, retail & financial/business) in a town centre, the national average was 20% (44.9% in 2008). Across the nation, therefore, there has been a sharp rise in stores selling miscellaneous goods (classed

0

50

100

150

200

250

17 16 15 14 13 3 4 10 2 9 1 6 12 7 5 18 19 11 20 8 IND

EX

ED

PE

DE

ST

RIA

N F

LO

W

COUNT POINTS

HARLESDEN OCTOBER 2009 - RANKED COUNT POINTS based on the indexed flow for the week

WEEK SATURDAY

Page 58 of 88

as others), whilst services have fallen proportionately. The chart below compares Brent‟s retail composition to the national average.

11.22 The proportion of convenience stores within Brent town centres has increased since 2008, and is higher than the Goad National average in 2010, with the exception of Kenton. This is in contrast with national data which shows that the proportion of convenience stores has fallen since 2008.

11.23 The composition of comparison outlets in Brent‟s town centres were mostly under the national average in 2008, except for Burnt Oak, Ealing Road and Kingsbury. The proportion of comparison outlets has fallen further in the borough and Ealing, Kingsbury and Alperton are now lower than the national average, which is in contrast with national data for 2010.

11.24 In terms of service units, the majority of Brent‟s town centres had a higher or equal level of services than the national average in both 2008 and 2010. Indeed, whilst services have fallen across town centres nationally, they have increased across Brent town centres.

(Source: Goad, 2010)

11.25 The chart below presents the level of changes in the retail composition in Brent‟s town centre between 2005 and 2008.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Brent's town centre composition (2010) compared to national averages

Convenience Comparison Service

Page 59 of 88

11.26 From 2007-10, the most dramatic negative changes in town centre composition

related to the centres of Kensal Rise, which saw a negative drop in service goods compared to national averages and has dropped in services since 2007. Disappointingly, there was also a loss of comparison goods, whilst convenience stores saw no growth. It should also be noted that the vacancy rates in Kensal Rise have also increased proportionately since 2007, which shows that Kensal Rise‟s health as a centre is deteriorating.

11.27 Other centres where there has been a net loss of service, comparison and convenience stores include Queens Park, Kilburn, Cricklewood, Harlesden, Sudbury, Preston Road and Neasden. However, this does not necessarily indicate that the health of the centres is deteriorating as the Goad data also includes a miscellaneous category for other town centre uses. Indeed, whilst Queens Park, Harlesden and Cricklewood saw an increase in vacancy rates, Sudbury, Preston Road and Neasden saw a reduction whilst Kilburn remained the same after an increase in vacancies in 2005.

11.28 In 2007 Kenton was underperforming in relation to its convenience offer, however since 2007 there has been an increase in the proportion of convenience stores. Although there has been a loss of service stores, the vacancy rates for Kenton have decreased which shows that although there has been a shift in the retail proportion, the centre‟s health has not deteriorated.

11.29 Brent‟s Major town centre Wembley, earmarked for the most growth within the borough, saw an increase in convenience stores and a loss of service and comparison stores. However, rents have increased slightly and vacancies have reduced which shows that the centre is performing fairly well.

Indicator: Net Gain/Loss of Retail Floorspace by Use Class Target: Net retail floorspace increase by 2010 Monitoring Point: Completed floorspace for changes of use from/to retail & non-retail 11.30 During the monitoring period of April 2009 to March 2010, 33 planning applications

have been implemented, compared to zero and 2, in the previous year. This is obviously a higher rate compared to the two previous monitoring years, but slightly lower than in 2004–05, when 40 completions had been recorded. It is however, worth noting that only five of these completions were approved in the 2009-10 financial

-30.0

-25.0

-20.0

-15.0

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

Wem

bley

Kilb

urn

Cricklew

oo

d

Bu

rnt O

ak

Willesd

en

Kin

gsbu

ry

Harlesd

en

Sud

bu

ry

Wem

bley P

ark

Presto

n R

oad

Qu

eens P

ark

Neasd

en

Co

lind

ale

Ken

ton

Ken

sal Rise P

erc

en

tage

s

Changes in Town Centre Composition, 2007-10

2007-10 Conv. Change 2007-10 Comp. change

Page 60 of 88

year, and most of the permissions date from the previous four years. As predicted, the completions rates increased in this financial as consents have approached expiration, and this trend is likely to continue in the next financial year.

11.31 The permissions were further analysed to provide an overview of potential total net

gain or loss of retail and leisure floorspace in the Borough. The charts below indicate land use types derived from the Use Classes Order. Class B1 (includes general business/office uses) A1 are retail shops, A2 professional services, D1 and D2 refer to community and leisure facilities respectively. Sui Generis refers to a wide range of land use types from car parking space, open storage yard, and petrol station, to allotments, and private playing fields etc.

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B D S.G.

Ch

ange

in f

loo

rsp

ace

(m

ult

iple

by

10

sqm

)

Use Classes

2006 - 2007

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B D S.G.

Ch

ange

in f

loo

rsp

ace

(m

ult

iple

by

10

sqm

)

Use Classes

2007 - 2008

Page 61 of 88

11.32 The charts for 2008-9 show an increase for all floorspace in town centres. Whilst town centre uses in 2009-10 have seen a loss in office space (B1), there has been the largest growth in office space since 2007, with over twice as much compared to the previous financial year. The loss in office space related to an application that was approved by the Secretary of State on appeal for a change of use from office space to a hotel.

11.33 Like in 2007-8 and 2008-9, there has been a continuous increase in community

facilities floorspace, and a small increase in A3 and A4 use. The increase in retail use is largely because of two approvals for retail in Brent‟s two major centres, Wembley and Kilburn.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B D S.G.

Ch

ange

in f

loo

rsp

ace

(sm

ult

iple

by

10

sq m

)

2008-2009

-2000

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B1 D S.G

Ch

ange

in f

loo

rsp

ace

(m

ult

iply

by

10

sq

m)

2009-10

Page 62 of 88

Indicator: Percentage Retail/Leisure Floorspace in/adjoining Town Centres Target: 90% by 2010 Monitoring Point: Proportion of retail/leisure permissions in or adjoining town centres 11.34 The UDP recognises that the improvement of town centres‟ attractiveness is

important to facilitate investment opportunity and ensure the continued vitality and viability of the town centres. These objectives can be measured by the total number of permissions, having regard to their locations in or adjoining or out of town centres.

11.35 The definitions used by the council in this analysis are from the PPS 4 definition that „a location within easy walking (200-300 metres) of the primary shopping area‟ is defined as edge of centre. Where locations are clearly separated from a town centre they are classified as „out of centre‟, and the new Core Strategy town centre boundaries were used for this exercise.

11.36 Locations within 150 metres of the nearest centres are defined as „adjoining‟ and any locations beyond that distance are defined as „out-of-town‟ centre.

11.37 There were 55 planning permissions granted for retail and leisure uses between the monitoring period of 2009-2010. The tables below provide a break down percentage of the gross floorspace being permitted in or adjoining or out of town centres between these monitoring years. There has been an increase in retail developments approved in 2009-10 on the edge of centre, which is attributed to the approval of the relocation of Oriental City. A number of small scale retail applications were approved for out of town developments which were considered as local use, but accrued to a high floorspace figure. It should also be noted that the town centres in the borough are experiencing a divergence away from A1 retail to more mixed uses, which will need to be monitored. Permitted Retail, Leisure & Office Floorspace, 2006-07

Use Class

Total permitted Floorspace (Sqm in gross)

% in Town Centres

Other Location

A1 2260 12% 69% (adjoining centre), 19% (out-of-centre)

A2-A5

1590 47% 2% (adjoining centre), 52% (out-of-centre)

B1 150 0% 100% (out-of-centre)

D 2850 0% 100% (out-of-centre)

Total 6850

Permitted Retail, Leisure & Office Floorspace, 2007-08

Use Class

Total permitted Floorspace (Sqm in gross)

% in Town Centres

Other Location

A1 30,750 3% 3% (adjoining centre), 94% (out-of-centre)

A2- 720 7% 93% (out-of-centre)

Page 63 of 88

A5

B1 1890 0% 90% (adjoining centre), 10% (out-of-centre)

D 11,160 15% 4% (adjoining centre), 81% (out-of-centre)

Total 44,520

Permitted Retail, Leisure & Office Floorspace, 2008-09

Use Class

Total permitted Floorspace (Sqm in gross)

% in Town Centres

Other Location

A1 12,179 12% 82% (adjoining centre), 6% (out of centre)

A2- A5

77,38 61% 18% in adjoining centres, 21% out of centre

B1 22,367 4% 62% in adjoining centres, 34% out of centre

D 18,992 37% 37% adjacent to centre, 26% out of centre

Total 61,276

Permitted Retail, Leisure & Office Floorspace, 2009-10

Use Class

Total permitted Floorspace (Sqm in gross)

% in/ adjoining Town Centres

Other Location

A1 -3066 32% 13% in adjoining centres, 55% out of centre

A2- A5

34 31% 62% adjoining town centres, 7% out of centre

B1 8230 3% 92% adjoining town centres, 5% out of centre

D 14276 61% 34% adjoining town centres, 5% out of centre

Total 19,474

Page 64 of 88

Summary and Issues Requiring Further Consideration

11.38 There has been a trend in 2010 for more approvals in town centre locations to uses

other than retail. This should be monitored to ensure that there are no detrimental impacts in allowing these changes of use.

11.39 Broadly speaking, vacancy rates in the borough‟s town centres slowed from previous years, and rents have increased, which shows that town centres in the borough are recovering.

11.40 The borough continues to defy national trends and has a lower proportion of comparison stores compared to that of the rest of the country, however changes have not been consistent across centres and the trends do not necessarily show that the trend is necessarily negative. The main centre for concern in the reporting period is Kensal Rise, which has seen an overall loss in its proportion of retail offer and an increase in vacancies.

11.41 The level of implementation of planning permissions was very low, and increasingly so, between the monitoring periods of 2005–2009, with some increase in 2010. It is hoped this figure will improve as the recession draws to an end and credit becomes available for the implementation of planning applications in the next few years.

Page 65 of 88

11. PROMOTING CULTURE, SPORT and TOURISM

LDF Core Strategy Strategic Objectives & Policies: Promoting arts and creative industries (CP1, CP7, CP10 & CP23)

Promoting sport and other recreational activities (CP7 & CP18)

UDP Saved Policies: Suitable locations for new large and small scale tourist, visitor and ACE uses (TEA1, TEA2)

Provision for public art in large scale developments (TEA4)

Use of vacant or short life buildings for ACE Facilities (STR 32, TEA5)

Provision for large scale and small scale hotel facilities (STR32, TEA6, TEA7, TEA8)

Location of indoor sports facilities (OS19)

Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents: Wembley Masterplan SPD 2009 Key London Plan Policy Themes: Development and promotion of Arts and Culture (3D.4)

The Olympic and Paralympic Games and sports facilities (3D.6)

Visitors accommodation and facilities (3D.7)

Emerging Replacement London Plan Policy Sports facilities (3.20)

London‟s visitor infrastructure (4.5)

Support 7 enhance provision for arts, culture & entertainment (4.6)

National and Regional Guidance: Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres (ODPM 2005)

Planning Policy Guidance 17: Open Space, Sport and Recreation (ODPM 2002)

Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism (DCLG 2006)

Cultural Metropolis – Mayor of London‟s Priorities for Culture 2009-2012

West London Tourism Strategy and Action Plan (LDA 2005)

Culture and Sport Planning Toolkit (Living Places 2009)

Accessible Hotels in London (Mayor of London 2010)

Local Strategies: Brent Cultural Strategy 2010-2015 Brent Sports and Physical Activity Strategy 2010-2015 Planning for Sports and Active Recreation Facilities Improvement Strategy 2008-2021 Wembley Masterplan 2009 Wembley Arts Strategy 2003

Page 66 of 88

Monitoring Indicators and Performance Review Indicator: Net increase in cultural/leisure facilities Target: Net increase in floorspace of leisure uses Monitoring point: Planning applications for new leisure development

12.1 While there was a net loss in culture and leisure floorspace in 2009-10 this was largely due to the conversion of the former Gaumont State Cinema (last used as a bingo hall) to a place of worship. There were also 4 permissions granted for new culture and leisure floorspace, including new library and performance space in the new Brent Civic Centre and new indoor and outdoor sports facilities at the new secondary school, Ark Academy.

Indicator: Secure new community swimming pools for the borough Target: Complete and open one new community swimming pool in the

borough by 2017 Monitoring Point: New swimming pool completion 12.2 The Planning for Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Strategy 2008-21 identified

the lack of swimming pool provision in the Borough as a major issue. The need for 2 new pools was identified to meet existing deficiencies. One pool should serve the north of the borough, the second pool should be in an easily accessible location in the centre of the borough, preferably near Stonebridge / Barnhill to meet projected demand to 2016.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-4000

-3000

-2000

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2009-10

No

. o

f ap

plicati

on

s

Flo

or

are

a m

2

net floorspace

no. of applications

Page 67 of 88

Indicator: Local employment in the tourism industry Target: Increase in Brent employment in tourism sector Monitoring Point: No of people employed in tourism in Brent

Source: Annual Business Inquiry *tourism-related jobs includes the following sectors: hotels, restaurants, bars, travel agencies, libraries, archives, museums, sporting activities & other recreational activities

12.3 In 2008, 5.9% of Brent employee jobs were tourism-related*, this was the equivalent of 5,500 jobs. Tourism-related jobs in Brent peaked in 1999 at 6.8% and then declined during the early 2000‟s when the national stadium was rebuilt. At the same time Wembley Arena underwent refurbishment. Tourism-related jobs have begun to increase since 2007 and it is anticipated this trend will continue towards 2012.

Indicator: Provision for new, or improvements to existing, sports facilities

(including sports pavilions) Target: No net loss of sports facilities Monitoring Point:

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

% o

f al

l em

plo

yed

Employment in Tourism

Brent

London

Great Britain

-2000

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

net …

Page 68 of 88

12.4 There has been a year on year increase in sports facilities since 2005/06. In 2009/10 there were 5 proposals relating to sports facilities. The most significant of which was the creation of new sports facilities in the Wembley area with the completion of a new school, Ark Academy, on Forty Lane. The school has been built on the Former London Transport Sports Ground which used to have 2 private junior turf pitches. The new school has a full size floodlit all weather pitch, junior turf pitch, flood lit MUGA, 3 x flood lit basketball/netball courts & 4 court indoor sports hall.

12.5 Permission was also granted for a boxing club in Stonebridge and pilates studio on

Lonsdale Road, Queen‟s Park.

Indicator: Visitor accommodation bedrooms (hotels, inns, guest houses, self catering holiday homes and B&B‟s) in the Borough

Target: 50% Increase 2000-2010 Monitoring Point: No. of new bedspaces developed

12.6 In 2009-10, 2 applications were approved relating to hotel uses. 1 application was for

a 120 bed „Apart‟ hotel in Harlesden. The proposal is a limited-service hotel with small kitchenette within each room. The hotel is expected to attract business customers (during the week) and budget conscious travelers (weekends). Work on site is due to start imminently. The second application was for conversion and extensions to an existing public house to a 21 bed hotel on Ealing Road.

12.7 No hotels were completed in 2009-10. However, it is anticipated that works will

commence over the next year on a number of permissions in advance of the 2012 Olympics.

12.8 Of the 3000 bedspaces approved over the last 10 years, less than 20% of these have

been built. However, it is anticipated that a number of permissions will be implemented over the next year in advance of the 2012 Olympics. The GLA Hotel Demand study June 2006 estimates that between 2007 and 2026 a net addition of 2500 bed spaces should be provided. The number of permissions already exceeds this figure.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

% In

cre

ase

Year

Actual % Increase

Target % Increase

Page 69 of 88

Summary and Issues Requiring Further Consideration 12.9 Although there was an overall net loss to culture, sport and tourism floorspace in

2009-10, this reflects one major application for change of use from bingo hall the place of worship. There were also several permissions for new cultural and sports facilities, including a new library and all weather football pitch.

12.10 Improvements to sports facilities in the past year have been focused within school

grounds, where community use is secured as part of the planning permission. 12.11 141 hotel bed spaces were approved but there were no completions this year, and it

still remains a problem that more than two thirds of bed spaces approved in previous years have not been built. However it is anticipated that construction works will begin on a number permissions in the forthcoming year for opening in time for the 2012 Olympics.

Page 70 of 88

12. ENHANCING OPEN SPACE AND BIODIVERSITY

LDF Core Strategy Strategic Objectives & Policies: Objective 9 – Protect and enhance Brent‟s environment CP18 Protection and Enhancement of Open Space, Sports and Biodiversity UDP Saved Policy: Protection of Metropolitan Open Land from inappropriate development and the continuity of Green Chains (OS1, OS2, OS3, OS5, OS16, OS21) Dual use of school facilities (OS9) Protection and enhancement of wildlife and nature conservation (STR 36, OS12, OS13, OS14, OS15, OS17). Promotion of indoor sports facilities and children‟s play areas (STR31, STR35, OS18, OS19, OS20) Protection of existing cemeteries and provision for burial needs where possible (OSS23) London Plan Policy Themes: Sports facility provision (3D.5) Protection of open spaces (3D.7, 3D.9, 3D.10, 3D.11) Protection and promotion of biodiversity and nature conservation (3D.12) Encouragement and protection of agricultural land (3D.14) Provision for burial needs (3D.15) Emerging Replacement London Plan: Protecting London‟s Open and Natural Environment (7.17- 7.23) National and Regional Guidance: Planning Policy Statement 9 „Biodiversity and Geological Conservation‟ (ODPM, August 2005) Planning for Biodiversity and Geological Conservation: A Guide to Good Practice (ODPM, March 2006) Supplementary Planning Guidance: Providing for Children and Young People‟s Play and Informal Recreation (Mayor of London, March 2008) The National Play Strategy (DCSF and DCMS December 2008) Local Strategies: Brent Cultural Strategy 2010-2015 Brent Sport and Physical Activity Strategy 2010-2015 Brent Park Strategy 2010-2015 Brent Play Strategy 2005-2008 Brent Biodiversity Action Plan (first adopted in 2001, reviewed in 2007) Brent Allotments Development Plan 2004-2008

Page 71 of 88

Monitoring Indicators and Performance Review:

Indicator: Protection of all open space of value Target: No net loss of open space to alternative uses Monitoring Point: Completed developments resulting in a loss Net change in all open space (M2)

13.1 While the loss of public open space and allotments has been resisted since 2005/06,

there has continued to be some incremental loss of private playing fields. In 2009/10, 0.7ha of private playing field was lost to the development of a new school. There is a significant need for new school places in the borough and some loss of playing pitches was considered acceptable to enable a new primary and secondary school to be built. With the schools, new sports facilities have been provided including an all weather flood lit football pitch. Allotment space has also been provided for school use.

Indicator: Protection of areas designated for intrinsic environmental value

including sites of national or regional/sub regional significant Target: No net loss of areas of wildlife and nature conservation importance Monitoring Point: Completed developments resulting in a loss 3.2 No permissions were granted for development within sites of designated

environmental value. One application directly adjacent to the Tramway Brook (a local site of nature conservation importance) was approved. The proposal was for demolition of existing portacabins and erection of a three-storey building residential building. The Tramway Brook has limited nature conservation value and the proposal was not considered to adversely impact its designated importance.

3.3 Very few applications are received which directly impact on sites of nature

conservation importance or lead to the loss of nature conservation value. However adjacent proposals can also impact on wildlife value and should incorporate measures to mitigate their impact or make environmental enhancements.

-20000

-15000

-10000

-5000

0

5000

10000

Public Open Space

Private Playing Fields

Allotments

Page 72 of 88

Indicator: Provision for new or extended public open space Target: Wembley – 2.4ha, Alperton – 1.6ha, South Kilburn – 0.8ha, Burnt Oak

– 0.6ha, Church End – 2ha Monitoring Point: Amount of new public open completed 3.4 See „Net change in all open space‟ above. In 2009/10, 0.1ha of public open space

was reinstated at Villiers Road play space (see further details under indicator New or improved play space). This provides valuable public open space in an area of deficiency.

3.5 New allotments were also proposed at the Ark Academy School, Wembley. These

are for educational use and will not have general public use. Indicator: Improvement of existing public open space Target: Increase the number of parks maintained to Green Flag award

standard Monitoring Point: Green Flag awards

Roundwood Park (1999)

Gladstone Park (2005)

Queen‟s Park (1997)

Barham Park (2009)

Mapesbury Dell (2009)

Preston Park (2009)

3.6 Currently there are 6 Green Flag Award parks in the borough. The Parks Strategy

2010-2015 identifies Welsh Harp, King Edward VII park and Brent River Park as potential future achievers of the green flag award.

3.7 In 2009/10 £200,000 S106 money was spent on improving drainage and providing

changing facilities at Gibbons recreation ground. Substantial S106 monies were also spent on creating the new park in Church End. £30,000 S106 monies were spent on improving drainage at Leybourne Road Open Space.

Indicator: Improvement of existing and provision for new areas of nature

conservation Target: Enhance and increase nature conservation areas. Reduce area of

wildlife deficiency Monitoring Point: 3.8 There were no applications in 2009/10 within nature conservation areas. 3.9 Opportunities to extend nature conservation areas are generally limited; however

measures can be taken to improve existing sites. The Improving Londoners‟ Access to Nature Implementation Report (2008) identifies priority opportunities to reduce Areas of Deficiency in access to nature. These are: -

Page 73 of 88

King Edward VII Park, Barham Park, Woodcock Park, Roe Green Park (biodiversity improvements), Diageo Lake and Coronation Gardens (access)

Indicator: Tree planting for new neighbourhoods Target: Wembley – 1,000, Park Royal – 4,000, Alperton – 500, Church End,

Burnt Oak, South Kilburn – 200 per growth area Monitoring Point: No. of new trees planted 3.10 The Core Strategy introduced a new indicator to monitor; tree planting in the growth

areas, where targets for number of new trees planted have been set. Development proposals are encouraged to include tree planting as part of their landscape design. Currently there is no co-ordinated monitoring process of new tree planting in development schemes. This will need to be developed in future in order to monitor this indicator.

Indicator: Provision for new or improved children‟s play areas Target: Meet standards on children‟s play as out in the Infrastructure &

Investment Framework Monitoring Point: 3.11 In 2009/10 8 out of 19 major applications provided onsite play facilities. These

tended to be on schemes over 100 units. On smaller proposals, amenity space can be restricted and opportunities to install a decided play facility limited. On such proposals the landscaping should allow for informal play by providing climbable objects and seating for carers when fixed equipment is not feasible.

3.12 The new public park at Villiers Road neared completion this year. Playbuilder grant

and £30,000 of S106 monies funded the creation of the new park. Improvements were also completed at Kimberly Road & Chippenham Gardens.

New climbing equipment at Kimberly Road

Summer Block Party at improved Chippenham Gardens

Page 74 of 88

3.13 The proportion of proposals that including onsite dedicated play facilities has improved since the introduction of the Mayor‟s SPG on Play in 2008. This requires 10sqm of play space per child.

Summary and Issues Requiring Further Consideration

3.14 2009/10 saw a net decrease in open space, this was due to the development of part

of private playing fields for a new school. There was a small gain in public open space with the completion of Villiers Road play space.

3.15 Although there was a net loss in the private open space category, the redevelopment

of private playing fields as a new school with community use of sports facilities including sports hall and STP was considered to provide wider community benefits and meet local priorities by meeting the need for new school paces.

3.16 The standard of play spaces was improved over the past year through the spending

of Playbuilder funds, this grant has now been withdrawn and future improvements will de dependant on capital funds and S106 contributions.

3.17 The Core Strategy induced a new indicator to monitor tree planting in growth areas.

A co-ordinated monitoring system needs to be developed in order to report on this indicator in future.

Page 75 of 88

13. PROVIDING FOR DIVERSE COMMUNITY NEEDS

Strategic Objectives: Enabling responsive, sensitive and fair services for Brent‟s diverse communities Facilitating community facilities that encourage well being, quality of life and community participation

UDP Saved Policies: Protection of existing and promotion of new community facilities (STR 37, STR38, CF1, CF2, CF3, CF4 & CF5) Adequate school place provision (STR 37, CF6, CF7, CF8, CF9, CF10) Provision for nurseries and other day care provision (STR 37, CF11) Hospitals and Higher and Further Education Zones (STR37, STR38, CF12) Provision for primary health care (CF13) Provision for places of worship (CF14)

Emerging LDF Core Strategy Objectives: Promoting healthy living, including creating a safe and secure environment

Key London Plan Policy Themes: Protection and enhancement of social community infrastructure (3A.26, 3A.23, 3A.15, & 3A.16) Health and Education (3A.21, 3A.22, 3A.17, 3A.18, 3A.19, 3A20) Promoting regeneration (3A.23, 3A.24, 3A.25 3D.1)

National and Regional Guidance: The Mayor‟s Cultural Strategy, 2004 The London Health Inequalities Strategy, Draft for public consultation Aug 2009 The London Childcare Strategy

Local Strategies: Brent Children and Young Persons Plan 2009-2011 A Cultural Strategy for Brent 2006-2009 A Plan for Brent 2003-2008: Community Plan School Organisation Plan 2005-2010 Sustainable community strategy Local Area Agreement (LAA)

Monitoring Indicators and Performance Review

General Community Facilities

Indicator: Location & provision of new community facilities Target: Facilities to be located in places where they reduce the need to

travel by private transport Monitoring Point: Location of new community facilities through approved applications

Page 76 of 88

14.1 A total of 24 planning permissions were granted which provide support for diverse

communities in the form of community facilities. Over half of these were for education related facilities. Less than half of these permissions were within areas of good public transport but are supportive of UDP(2004) policy CF2. Only 1 of these planning permissions was completed this fiscal year. This was for an adult education college, LPA ref: 08/01

Education Facilities

Indicator: No. of applications approved for educational use Target: Sufficient school places to meet future demand Monitoring Point: No. and type of applications applied for educational use 14.2 Of the 13 planning permissions granted for education purposes, the majority were for

improvements to existing schools 14.3 There was 1 planning permission for a new primary school but it is not Borough

owned. Although the number of places in Primary and Secondary schools has increased, the number on roll (NOR) does not exceed place provision and allows for increases in pupil intake throughout the year.

A recent report by London Councils on Primary School capacity1 state Brent as a borough

that will require more than 2000 extra places at reception level between 2010/11 and

2013/14. Brent currently provides 3428 reception places and of these places 3232 have

been taken up (NOR census Jan ‘09). This leaves 196 unoccupied (5.7%) for possible

increases as the academic year proceeds.

Nurseries and Childcare Facilities Indicator: No. of applications for nurseries or childcare Target: Sufficient nursery places to meet future demand Monitoring Point: Gains and losses in nursery or childcare places and services 14.4 Current demand for childcare is high and so future demand will be higher with

population increase. Table 1 illustrates the different types of childcare available in the borough.

1 Understanding Primary School Capacity Issues, Item no.8, Leaders „ Committee, London Councils,

10 Nov 2009

21%

54%

25%

Proportion of Planning Permissions Granted which support diverse

communities

Education

Faith relat

ed

Health

related 46%

17%

29%

4% 4%

Illustration of Public Transport Access Level (PTAL) with planning

permissions granted for community use

2

3

4

5

6

Page 77 of 88

Table 1 : Childcare availability in Brent

Type of childcare (age range)

Childcare provided per day

No. active premises & (places)

No. closures & (places) in 2009

No. new openings & (places) in 2009

Percentage vacancy

Local government nurseries (age 3-4yrs)

2.5 hours(free)

47 (2331) 0 0(72) -

Children‟s Centres (0-5yrs)

Up to 10 hours

7(488) 0 0 7%

Private nursery care (age 0-4yrs)

4 to 12 hours

71(2692) 3(194) 7(54) 22%

Nursery Schools and nursery classes in independent schools

School hours

6 (234) 0 0 3%

Childminders (age 8 & under)

Variable hours

238(975) 44(148) 24(109) 40%

Playgroups & pre-school Less than 4 hours

11(299) 1(86) 0 17%

Holiday schemes (age 3-8yrs)

School hours

25(1176) 1(40) 2(80) -

After school clubs (3-8yrs) 2.5 hours 42(1356) 221 1(45) -

14.5 Childcare vacancy rates in private facilities support findings2 that cost is the biggest

barrier to childcare for local parents. The 7% vacancy rate for Childrens‟ centres illustrates a further issue about access to childcare in terms of hours and location3. Vacancies at 3 specific childrens‟ centres are highlighted by Brent‟s Children and Families department as resulting from their location.

Healthcare Facilities

Indicator: No. of GP‟s per population and healthcare related services Target: No net loss in health care facilities Monitoring Point: Planning applications for health care facilities 14.6 Of the 6 permissions granted for healthcare facilities, none were for GP practices. As

such the number of GP‟s in the borough remains unchanged. Furthermore there was

no net loss of healthcare facilities. One permission was for improvements to the

existing mental health facility at Northwick Park Hospital

Religious Facilities Indicator: Floor space area for religious facilities. Target Monitoring Point: No losses in provision of religious facilities Monitoring Point: Changes in the provision of religious facilities 14.7 Four permissions were granted to faith organisations, 2 of which comprised an

increase in the floor space of existing religious facilities. One permission was a re-submission of a previously granted proposal. Three of the proposals were for extended facilities comprising community spaces which could be used for meetings and childcare. Overall there was no loss of provision in religious facilities.

Summary and Issues for Further Consideration

2 Brent‟s Child Care Sufficiency Assessment January-March 2009 Final Report, May 2009

3 Ibid

Page 78 of 88

14.10 There has been a decrease in planning permissions granted for new community facilities compared to previous years, mainly because previous permissions included school expansions.

Page 79 of 88

14. REDUCING WASTE, PROMOTING RECYCLING

Strategic Objectives: To reduce the amount of waste in Brent by 20% from 1995 – 2015 To increase the proportion of recycled waste to 40% by 2005 by pursuing a “recycling- intensive” option as opposed to an “incineration- intensive” one. To ensure sufficient land supply for waste management facilities while minimising transport and environmental impact. UDP Saved Policies: UDP policy theme to promote the „best practical environmental option‟ and the „proximity principle‟ (W1 and W2) are superseded by the London Plan Policies 4A.1, 4A.2 and 4A.3. Ensure an acceptable environmental impact (W3, W4, W5 and W6); Key Core Strategy Theme: Minimise waste and promote the waste hierarchy in development by ensuring sufficient land supply for appropriate integrated waste management facilities through safeguarding existing facilities and allocating sites for new facilities through the West London Joint Waste Development Plan Document (JWDPD) Supplementary Planning Guidance: SPG 19 – Promotes the recycling of demolition waste through the ICE‟s Demolition Protocol. Key London Plan Policy Themes: Locational criteria and preferences for waste management facilities (Policy 4A.1, 4A.2, 4A.3 and new Policy 4) Set of new policy requires LPAs to safeguard existing waste management facilities, and identify land capacity and range of facilities to handle waste arise; either by acting on own or work in a joint partnership with neighbouring boroughs. Emerging London Plan Waste self-sufficiency (policy 5.16) Waste Capacity (policy 5.17) Construction, excavation and demolition waste (policy 5.18) Hazardous waste (policy 5.19) National and Regional Guidance: PPS10 Planning for Sustainable Waste management Waste Strategy for England, May 2007 Mayor‟s Municipal Waste Strategy 2003 Local Strategies: Brent‟s Municipal Waste Management Strategy 2006 Waste Policy Statement for the London Borough of Brent LAA indicator 7 – recycling & composting

Page 80 of 88

Monitoring Indicators and Performance Review Indicator: Capacity of new waste management facilities Target: None Monitoring Point: New waste facilities completed 15.1 No new waste management facilities were completed in 2009/10. However, planning

permission was granted in September 2010 for a change of use from warehouse to a materials recovery facility and the installation of a biomass CHP plant at Hannah Close, Wembley.

Indicator: Land lost from waste management use Target: No net loss of designated waste management land to non-waste

management use Monitoring Point: Completed development with loss of waste management use 15.2 London Plan policy is for no loss of waste management facilities without replacement.

There were no completed developments in 2009/10 which involved a loss of waste management facilities.

Indicator: Percentage of waste recycled Target: 30% by 2010 Monitoring Point: Annual proportion of municipal solid waste (MSW) recycled 15.3 The London Plan target (consolidated Feb 2008) requires up to 30% of household

waste be recycled or composted by 2010 and 33% by 2015. The National target, as set out in the Municipal Waste Strategy for England 2007, is 40% by 2010 and 45% by 2015.

15.4 Through the national „Zero Waste Places‟ programme Brent is expected to become

an exemplar of good environmental practice in reducing the environmental impact in all waste, implementing the waste hierarchy and focusing on waste minimisation which would aid the Borough further to achieve the 30% recycling and composting targets in 2010.

Percentage of MSW recycled by Brent over the last 10 years

Page 81 of 88

15.5 The graph above illustrates that Brent recycled 28.9% of its total municipal solid waste (MSW) in 2009/10, a 4.3% increase on the previous year. Overall waste recycling rates in Brent have grown continuously. There has been, apart from 2007/08 continuing improvement ver the last 10 years, although to meet the draft London Plan revised target of 50% by 2020 will require something of a step-change.

Indicator: Amount of municipal waste arising Target: Reduction of 20% from 1995 levels by 2015 Monitoring Point: Amount of waste arising per annum

Municipal Waste Composition by Year

15.6 In terms of MSW arisings, the Council collected a total of 105,705 tonnes in 2009/10,

a decrease of 13.6% on 2008/09.

Summary and Issues Requiring Further Consideration 15.7 The saved UDP(2004) policies have remained effective. Since 2000, land

designated for waste management has remained in this use and has not been permitted for any non-waste management uses. In 2009/10 the Council received no applications for new waste management sites.

15.8 A Waste Development Plan Document, known as the West London Waste Plan

(WLWP) is being jointly prepared by Brent, Ealing, Hounslow, Harrow, Hillingdon and Richmond-upon-Thames. A draft plan will identify new sites across the sub-region for waste management. However, it is not scheduled for adoption until 2012.

15.9 As there have been no planning applications proposing new waste facilities within the

borough in 2009/10, it is not appropriate to make inferences on the efficacy of Brent‟s waste policy for this monitoring period. Nonetheless, the saved UDP(2004) and London Plan policies are considered robust in terms of safeguarding existing waste sites and preventing new facilities being located in inappropriate locations. Improvements in waste reduction and recycling rates have been recorded overall.

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

19

95

/96

19

96

/97

19

97

/98

19

98

/99

19

99

/00

20

00

/01

20

01

/02

20

02

/03

20

03

/04

20

04

/05

20

05

/06

20

06

/07

20

07

/08

20

08

/09

20

09

/10

Other Disposal

Composted

Recycled

Page 82 of 88

15. REGENERATING WEMBLEY

Strategic Objectives: To promote Wembley as a major sporting, leisure, tourism visitor destination. To ensure that the National Stadium and adjacent developments promote the comprehensive regeneration of the area; and enhances the vitality and viability of Wembley town centre. To ensure that the local community benefit from the new National Stadium and other regenerative development. To provide a world class setting for a world class Stadium. To provide an enhanced transportation system, with the emphasis on public transport and pedestrian accessibility Combined Wembley Regeneration Area and Park Royal target that 20 hectares of land should be redeveloped between 2000 and 2010. UDP Saved Policies: To promote regeneration To allow the eastwards expansion of the town centre (WEM1 -4). A Comprehensive Development Area is designated adjacent to the Stadium (WEM9) Specific Opportunity sites are identified with accompanying guidance as to appropriate development (WEM27-31). Promote transport improvements (WEM11-14). Key LDF Core Strategy Themes: Wembley as a focus for growth (CP 1 and CP7)) Wembley to be promoted as industrial / business location (CP 3) Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD): Wembley Masterplan, 2008 Wembley Link Supplementary Planning Document The Wembley Link SPD refers to the stretch of Wembley High Road from Wembley Triangle to Chesterfield House (at the corner of High Road and Park Lane). It provides a link between the new retail proposals approved and proposed in the Stadium area (Wembley City) and the main shopping core around Wembley Central station. The LDF Core Strategy sets out a strategy to promote the expansion of the town centre eastwards towards the Stadium and this requires an improved retail presence in the Wembley Link. This SPD provides the detail to achieve the LDF Core Strategy. Public consultation took place from 1st November to 17th December 2010. Key London Plan Policy Themes: Wembley designated as an Opportunity Area. Policy 5F.1 states that a strategic priority is to realise the potential of Wembley as a nationally and internationally significant sports, leisure and business location, co-ordinated with town centre regeneration and new housing. Local Strategies: The Council‟s regeneration strategy for Wembley centres on the new National Stadium, an international iconic brand, which opened to the public in March 2007. The Council aims to exploit the opportunities offered by the construction of the new Stadium to regenerate the surrounding area, a declining industrial and commercial environment adjacent to a declining

Page 83 of 88

and run-down town centre. The redevelopment of the Stadium has provided the opportunity to deliver the much-needed regeneration of the Wembley area by acting as a catalyst for investment. Since the opening of the new Wembley Stadium, development has commenced on a number of sites in the surrounding area and there are also a number of permissions in the development pipeline. The development of these sites will enhance the overall reputation of the Wembley area as an international destination for tourism and leisure which will, in turn, further London‟s position as a World City by providing a major location for sporting, recreational and entertainment facilities as well as accommodation for visitors. The Council‟s aim is to ensure that the regeneration of the Wembley area benefits the local community by providing improved shops, services, new housing, transport and public realm as well as job opportunities.

Monitoring Indicators and Performance Review 16.1 There are no specific targets for Wembley Regeneration Area set out in the UDP

apart from the combined target of 20ha to be redeveloped in Wembley and Park Royal by 2010. Since the UDP was adopted in 2004, a number of major developments have been completed as shown in the following table which does not include Ada Lewis House. The target figure has been exceeded in Wembley alone.

Major Development Completed date Hectare Application number

Ark Academy (partially located in Wembley Regeneration Area) September 2010 4.20 08/2842

Central Square Redevelopment (phase 1) October 2009 1.66 03/3765, 05/1515, 07/2280, 07/3548

Elm Road Car Park March 2008 0.50 03/3727

Former Marks and Spencer May 2010 0.28 07/3058

Forum House September 2008 0.55 05/2949

Quadrant Court February 2010 0.72 06/3630

Wembley Arena and Arena Square March 2006 2.00 04/0426, 04/0427

Wembley Park Station and Olympic Square March 2007 0.51 03/3147

Wembley Retail Park March 2007 4.66 04/2158, 05/0227

Wembley Stadium March 2007 10.62 99-2400

White Horse Bridge and Stadium Square March 2006 0.56 04/0379

Total 26.26

16.2 During 2010, approvals have been granted for temporary uses in Quintain Stage 1

development plots. Meanwhile, Quintain also obtained consents for revised proposals for W05 and W07. A number of development proposals approved by Planning Committee are still waiting for the conclusion of section 106 agreements.

Major Development Approved by Committee Consent Granted

Application number

Brent Civic Centre 17 March 2010 22 March 2010 09/2450

Power League 5-aside (W03)

17 November 2010 10/2387

Dexion House 24 February 2010 9 April 2010 09/2291

Hilton Hotel and student accommodation (revised W05)

14 September 2010 10/1842

Outlet centre and cinema (W07) 2 November 2010 16 November 2010 10/2202

Interim car park (W10) 15 September 2010 Subject to Section 10/1417

Juniper Close 18 August 2010 S106 10/1362

Elizabeth House 16 March 2010 8 February 2011 09/2506

Shubette House, Olympic Way 17 June 2009 14 February 2011 08/3009

Page 84 of 88

The major schemes completed and in the pipeline, with their current status, are outlined below.

Wembley Stadium

16.3 Since opening in March 2007, the new national stadium has hosted many events attracting large numbers of visitors to the local area. Planning condition 3 of the Stadium permission restricts major sporting events held in the Stadium to no more than 22 while 15 for non-sporting events. Major event is defined by the number of spectators leaving the upper tier (39,165 seats) unoccupied.

16.4 So far, the numbers of events held in the Stadium have been below the cap. The Stadium, including with the Stadium Tour, conferencing and banqueting, draws more than two million visitors a year.

16.6 The Stage 1 outline planning permission for Quintain Estates and Development

involves the reuse and regeneration of 17 hectares of „Brownfield‟ land north and west of the stadium. The total floorspace of the proposed development is about 500,000 sqm including 3,727 new homes, 13,600 sqm leisure uses, 51,700 sqm retail /food & drink uses, 63,000 sqm office space, 8,200 sqm community facilities.

16.7 Quintain Estates and Development plc is bringing forward separate detailed

Reserved Matters applications for each development plot in the Stage 1 Scheme. Quintain Stage 1 has so far delivered 518 apartments in Forum House and Quadrant Court. February 2010 saw the completion of Quadrant Court, the second residential block (232 residential units, of which 90 private, 77 intermediate and 67 social apartments) of Quintain Stage 1 development (ref 03/3200). A Tesco Express (618 sqm) was simultaneously opened.

16.8 Temporary (up to ten years) approval was granted for

Power League to provide 7-a-side and 5-a-side football pitches and a 282m² pavilion on a vacant site adjacent to Arena Square.

16.9 Amendments were approved for a 361 bed 4* hotel and

660 room student accommodation Construction has started on both buildings.

16

16

18

17

3

7

8

8

8

3

12

4

0

1

0

0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

2007

2008

2009

2010

Sporting Major Sporting Minor

Non Sporting Major Non Sporting Minor

Page 85 of 88

16.10 In September 2010, subject to a section 106 agreement,

Brent Planning Committee approved a temporary (up to 10 years) multi level car park. The 700 space car park will replace the 1,200 space multi-storey car park after the London Olympics.

Civic Centre 16.11 Brent‟s new Civic Centre was granted planning consent in

March 2010. The building will comprise offices for up to 2,000 Brent Council staff and Brent's councillors as well as a community and performance space, including a new library, Registrar's Office, Community Hall (up to 1,000 people) and Council Chamber. Construction started in November 2010.

Quintain North West Lands

16.12 In November 2010, Quintain submitted an application for

outline consent relating to a second phase of development – 160,000 sqm of development across 5.71 hectares surrounding the Civic Centre. The proposals comprise:

Retail/financial and professional services/food and drink: 17,000m² to 30,000m²

Office up to 25,000m²

Hotel 5,000m² to 20,000m²

Residential 65,000m² to 100,000m² (815 to 1,300 units)

Community 1,500m² to 3,000m²

Leisure and Entertainment up to 5,000m²

Student accommodation/ Serviced apartments/apart-hotels 7,500m² to 25,000m²

Shubette House,Olympic Way 16.13 Construction commenced in 2010 for the 20 storey building

incorporating 158 self-contained residential units, a hotel (225 bedrooms and 12 apart-hotel rooms), business and food and drink uses and conferencing facilities.

Victoria Hall, North End Road

16.14 Construction started in 2010 on a 20 storey 435

room student accommodation block on a 0.32 hectare site.

Page 86 of 88

Malcolm House/Fulton House, Empire Way

16.15 The buildings of Malcolm House and Fulton House were

demolished for a 11 storey, 262-room hotel with 53 basement parking spaces. Construction work is yet to begin.

Dexion House, Empire Way

16.16 Planning consent for 129 residential flats (37 one-

bedroom, 73 two-bedroom, 19 three-bedroom), a 5,837m² 125-bedroom hotel, 1,983m² of community swimming-pool and fitness facilities was granted in April 2010.

Elizabeth House

16.17 Octavia Housing received planning consent in 2010 for a

part 13 -storey building comprising 115 flats (27 social rented, 18 intermediate and and 70 private) with retail use at ground-floor and basement car parking.

Ark Academy 16.18 The new six form-entry secondary school and two

form-entry primary school, built on the site of the former Wembley Park sports ground at Bridge Road and Forty Avenue, opened in September 2010. The school provides 420 primary places and 1,150 secondary and sixth form places.

Public Transport Improvements

16.19 A key policy objective for the Wembley Regeneration Area was to promote the

improvement of public transport facilities and, in particular, the improvement and refurbishment of the three stations that serve the area.

.

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Wembley Park 6.6 6.5 7.1 11.1 11.9 10.8

Wembley Central 2.5 2.8 2.6 3.0 3.2 3.5

Figure 16(a) Annual Underground Usage 2004 - 2009 Source: Tfl

Entr

is/

Exit

s

Page 87 of 88

Wembley Park Wembley Central

entry exit entry exit

2009 weekday 12927 13150 6188 5992

2010 weekday 14027 13714 6744 6290

2010 as % of 2009 108.5% 104.3% 109.0% 105.0%

16.20 The table above indicates the annual underground usage for both Wembley Park and

Wembley Central Underground stations based on the number of recorded entries and exits through the ticketing barriers. The number of passengers using Wembley Park and Wembley Central stations in 2010 showed modest increases against 2009.

Summary and Issues Requiring Further Consideration

16.21 It remains too early to gauge from the level of development activity whether the full

range of planning objectives are being met. However, the consents given and the progress made on mixed use development and infrastructure improvements outlined above, and the number of schemes in the development pipeline, indicates that regenerative activity is healthy and there is an excellent prospect that most, if not all, of the objectives will be achieved. The completion of the Stadium development will provide a major boost to economic regeneration through the number of visitors it will bring to the area.

16.22 One of the main indicators in assessing the success of the strategy for the area will

be whether or not the town centre can capitalise on the injection of new investment locally, particularly by linking the stadium area with the High Road. Although the new pedestrian bridge link is complete, there is still a need for the promotion of major development at the eastern end of the High Road, as well as the completion of the Central Square scheme, for the two areas to be fully integrated.

Page 88 of 88

PART 3: PROGRESSING LDF PREPARATION 16. MONITORING LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME PROGRESS

17.1 Brent‟s Local Development Scheme (LDS) was agreed by the Mayor in January 2010. The LDS sets out the programme for Local Development Document (LDD) preparation. Brent will ultimately produce 4 development plan documents as well as a number of Supplementary Planning Documents. The Statement of Community Involvement was adopted in June 2006.

Development Plan Documents (DPD)

17.2 The Council adopted its Core Strategy in July 2010. The Site Specific Allocations DPD was progressed to Examination in December 2010. It is anticipated that the Site Specific Allocations DPD will be adopted in June 2011. The focus for 2011 will be on the preparation of the Wembley Area Action Plan

Development Plan Document

Date for Consultation

Date for Publication

Date for Submission to S of S

Date for Adoption / Adopted

Core Strategy Done Done Done July 2010

Site Specific Allocations

Done Done Done May2011

Suite of DM Policies

April 2012 Sept .2012 Dec. 2012 Oct.2013

Wembley Area Action Plan

June 2011 Nov. 2011 Feb. 2012 Dec. 2012

Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD)

17.3 The Wembley Masterplan was adopted in June 2009. Public consultation was undertaken on a new SPD called “Extending Your Home” in October 2009. Progress has also been made on the Alperton Masterplan SPD, with public consultation to take place in January 2011. An SPD called the Wembley Link dealing primarily with the section of Wembley High Road from Park Lane to Wembley Hill Road, was subject to public consultation in November 2010 and it is scheduled for adoption with the SSA DPD in May 2011. The council will be revising its timetable for SPDs in the LDS.

Supplementary Planning Documents

Public Consultation

Adoption

Design Guide for New Development. Feb. 2011 July 2011

Extending Your Home Done July 2011

South Kilburn Sept. 2011 March 2012

Alperton Masterplan Done May 2011

Burnt Oak / Colindale Devt. Framework

March 2011 Sept. 2011

Wembley Link Done June2010

17.4 The LDS agreed in January 2010 includes a timetable for the West London Joint

Waste DPD. This anticipates consultation on a draft Waste Plan in February 2011.

Document Title Consultation on Draft Waste Plan

Submission to S of S

Adoption

West London Joint Waste DPD

Feb. 2011 Jan. 2012 Nov. 2012