Alperton, Wembley

According to recent data, Brent is falling behind in the building of affordable housing. For new construction starts, Brent sits close to the bottom of the league table of London boroughs. During last year, Brent started only ca. 17% of affordable projects that are being built in nearby Ealing borough or Hammersmith and Fulham borough.

Source: Greater London Authority

Brent’s dismal record is largely the result of poor planning in Brent Council’s Planning department. The planners have a strong preference for new tower blocks.

However, these won’t get built anytime soon. This is due to the long waiting list for “Gateway 2” approvals – the safety certificate that every building of more than seven storeys needs before construction can start. Therefore, the tower blocks are not being built, no matter how dearly the council officials would like to collect the fat cheque from the developer. People looking for housing in Brent that is actually affordable cannot find it here.

What is the solution to the housing crisis in Alperton and Brent? It is to focus on small and mid-size constructions up to 7 storeys high. There are plenty of empty plots derelict for more than a decade. The solution involves simple designs, quick planning approvals and more affordable housing actually delivered. Is anybody in Brent Council able to connect the dots?

Recent articles in the London Standard have explained the reasons for London’s housing crisis well:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/housing-crisis-affordable-homes-sadiq-khan-mayor-2024-25-angela-rayner-b1227661.html

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/affordable-homes-construction-sadiq-khan-city-hall-b1182624.html

The Brent Council Planning Committee will formally meet this week to rubber-stamp the planned mega-development at Atlip Road (Atlip Centre and 2 Atlip Road, Wembley, HA0 4LU). The application will be formally considered at the meeting of the Planning Committee on Wednesday, 12 March 2025, starting at 6.30pm. The location of the meeting is the Brent Civic Centre (Wembley HA9 0FJ).

Given the dismal record of previous Planning meetings regarding Alperton, all concerns voiced by local residents will be brushed aside. The outcome of the vote is a foregone conclusion.

Relevant documents can be found at this link:

https://pa.brent.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=DCAPR_167877

Those who wish to observe proceedings may either do so in person or via the live webstream which we will make available on the Council’s website.
It is possible to speak at the Committee Meeting, which can be undertaken online (or via the telephone) or in person at the meeting, subject to the restrictions set out in the Council’s Standing Order. These provide for one objector and/or one supporter of the application to speak.

Addendum (April 2025)

The Council’s Planning Committee voted unanimously for the proposal. This vote demonstrates that not a single member of the Planning Committee is willing to listen to the concerns of Alperton residents and vote accordingly. Additionally, it shows just how badly the Council needs the cash paid by real-estate developers for planning approvals. Planning meetings such as this one resemble a charade, where members go through the motions but ultimately just rubberstamp a decision taken much earlier. It’s another poor outcome for Alperton and its residents.

For the record, the members of the Brent Council Planning Committee are:

• Councillor Matt Kelcher, Labour
• Councillor Saqib Butt (Vice-Chair), Labour
• Councillor Ajmal Akramm, Labour
• Councillor Rita Begum, Labour
• Councillor Elliot Chappell, Labour
• Councillor Liz Dixon, Labour
• Councillor Robert Johnson, Labour
• Councillor Jayanti Patel, Conservative

None of them represent the Alperton ward.

A petition has been lodged at Brent Council to stop the approval of another mega-development at Atlip Road in central Alperton. The campaigners have put forward the following reasons against the proposal.

1. Loss of Light – The development’s height (up to 30 storeys) will cause severe overshadowing, reducing natural light to nearby homes, including Bigler Court and Dawson Court, contrary to BRE guidelines. Reduced daylight can lead to health impacts such as vitamin D deficiency, especially for brown and black residents at higher risk.

2. Overcrowding – The proposal includes 885 residential units, adding excessive strain on already stretched local services, including GP surgeries like Stanley Corner Medical Centre, schools, and public transport.

3. Parking and Traffic – The limited parking spaces will lead to increased congestion on surrounding roads, creating parking difficulties and worsening air pollution.

4. Noise Pollution – Construction noise will cause major disruption, particularly for those working from home or resting at home. Long-term noise from communal spaces will also impact residents’ quality of life and stress pets.

5. Loss of Facilities – The proposed demolition of the existing gym will force residents to travel 30–45 minutes on foot to the nearest affordable alternative, making fitness routines less accessible and harming physical well-being.

6. Flood Risks – Existing flood risks on Atlip Road, with depths up to 600mm, will be worsened by the development. New drainage systems offer no guaranteed protection against surface water flooding.

7. Air Quality – Construction dust and emissions pose health risks, especially for children, the elderly, and those with respiratory conditions, while long-term increases in traffic will reduce air quality further.

8. Privacy and Child Safety – Flats will overlook nearby homes, including Bigler Court, and Alperton Community School’s playground, raising safeguarding concerns for children.

The petition can be signed online until 30 April 2025.

The members of the Brent Council Planning committee are well advised to read the report from the Grenfell inquiry before approving more tower blocks in Alperton. Grenfell Tower is a derelict 24-storey tower in Kensington, where 72 residents lost their lives in a devastating fire in 2017.

The inquiry concluded that all deaths were avoidable and due to a combination of dishonesty, incompetence and greed. In the construction industry, multiple problems are highlighted:

1. Incompetent architects
2. Greedy suppliers
3. Dishonest manufacturers
4. Unskilled labour used in construction
5. Tendering process purely focused on lowest cost
6. Unreliable Quality Assurance
7. Faulty quality documentation
8. Embellished qualifications
9. Close relationships to council decision makers

Anyone familiar with the construction industry will recognize that the situation is worse in 2024 compared to 2017. This means that an immediate stop must be placed on new tower blocks to ensure the health and safety of residents.

What is the maximum height of building that may be considered for approval? We suggest that Brent Council must reject all planning applications exceeding 10 floors. Why 10 floor as the limit? The London Fire Brigade has fire engines with ladders reaching up to 10 floors. Above that height, there is no rescue by ladders in case of a big fire.

Alperton residents will not accept further tall towers in central Alperton. Alpertonians are watching the planning applications closely, and will hold decision makers personally responsible.

A proposal to redevelop a large site at Atlip Road in Alperton has been submitted.

Atlip Road site, Alperton

The plan entails the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of seven new buildings, mostly for residential dwelling use.

At the heart of the development are large towers comprising 30, 24 and 21 floors respectively. The 30-floor tower exceeds the height of the Zenith tower at the nearby Minavil House site.

Local residents have already submitted comments on the planning application, mostly negative. Residents have noted the excessive height of the buildings and the lack of investment in community facilities, amongst other issues.

To comment on the planning application, go online to the Brent Council Planning and Building Control website and search for the application using reference number 24/0410.

The question has been posed in a recent article in the London Evening Standard (link below). The question is particularly pertinent in Brent, where the Council’s planning department has given priority for over-tall constructions for years. Despite the fact that local people object strongly, despite the fact that few people actually chose to live in a small box in a skyscraper. The Brent Council planning department is always willing to rubber-stamp another outrageous development scheme.

https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/why-are-we-building-all-these-ugly-towers-london-nine-elms-north-acton-b1089613.html

Let us hazard an answer to the question posed. The answer is, to a large extent, Section 106 of the UK planning rules. Under Section 106, the Council holding the planning authority can impose extra conditions or activities on the developer of a proposed project. The extra condition could be anything, but most often it boils down to a cash payment made directly to the Council. The negotiations between developers and Council officials take years, with both sides trying to maximize the financial benefits of a deal. After years of under-funding from the UK Government, every Council is very mindful that planning permissions can serve as effective way of raising revenue. Large developments thus increase the profits of developers but they also increase the revenue to the Council. All of this is perfectly legal under Section 106. Smaller developers who understand the true needs to the local community do not have the means to engage in year-long negotiations with Council officials. This leaves only the big developers who understand the financial pressures of local councils very well.

Ealing Road continues to be a popular race track for boy racers and antisocial drivers and motorcyclists. Often, the resulting excess noise is due to modifications of the engine or exhaust system of the car or motorcycle. In the UK, it is illegal to modify exhaust systems to boost the noise level.

The quality of life of residents in central Alperton continues to be blighted by excess noise from traffic, with 20 – 25 thundering cars and motorcycles counted every day (and night).

Enhanced racing car

Thankfully, there is a new technical solution to protect the quality of life in Alperton, the noise camera. This is like a speed camera but it captures noisy cars and motorcycles with pinpoint accuracy. One such system, SoundVue, is produced by Intelligent Instruments in Southampton. (Other manufacturers are available.)

The UK’s Department for Transport has trialed noise cameras in Bradford and has expanded the test to Birmingham and Bristol. In London, a number of councils have installed noise cameras locally; including Kensington & Chelsea, Westminster Council and Wandsworth Council.

Alperton residents are calling on Brent Council to install noise cameras along Ealing Road without delay. This would encourage car users and motorcyclists to use the roads in a responsible manner without blighting the lives of local residents.

Littering and rubbish dumps are a common feature along the Grand Union Canal, unfortunately. Far too many locals and boaters are disposing of unwanted items, beer bottles and machinery along the towpath or in the canal waters.

A local volunteer group has been formed to tackle the rubbish issue with support from the Canal and River Trust. The group meets at least once a month – typically on the first Sunday of the month. Equipped with litter pickers, gloves and bin bags the volunteers collect rubbish along a 600 meter stretch of the canal running through Alperton.

The Alperton Canal Group welcomes additional volunteers. For more information on canal cleaning, please join the Facebook Group ‘243 Ealing Road Canal Group‘ or send an email message to AlpertonCanalGroup [at] outlook.com

The environment department at Brent council can be reached via email to environment [at] brent.gov.uk

Councillor James Allie, who represented the Alperton ward in the Borough of Brent, has resigned on 9 December 2019.

  James Allie (Labour)

It was reported in the Daily Mail that Mr Allie plundered the £1.6m estate of a dead women. As a solicitor, he was appointed executor of the woman’s estate, but stole funds for his own purposes.  Link: Labour councillor plundered… (Daily Mail)

Previously, James Allie had come under scrutiny over his role in a vintage wine business used to defraud investors. Templar Vintners Ltd attracted £100,000 from its victims, offering them the chance to buy wine while it was still in the barrel. James Allie was made company secretary in June, 2009.

The founder of the business was jailed for fraud. Despite his association with a fraudulent business, Mr Allie was allowed to continue in public office representing the Labour party in the council.

James Allie’s resignation creates a council vacancy. A by-election is planned for 23 January 2020 giving Alperton residents a chance to bring fresh blood into the council chamber.

Addendum: on 23 January 2020, Anton Georgiou (Liberal Democrats) swept to victory in the by-election with 1,699 votes defeating the Labour, Conservative and Green Party candidates.

I am the CEO of R55 and much of what is published about us on your site or our intentions is wholly incorrect.

Whilst the residential elements of Minavil House have been sold to Clarion, the reason for this is that it has allowed us to deliver unprecedented levels of affordable housing which as a private developer we cannot do. Minavil House has 92% affordable housing, probably one of the highest levels in West London. R55 retains all of the commercial space except the Lidl store. We are proposing a triple height cafe with an open terrace which opens out onto the canal side with seating and landscaping pouring out onto the canal. The work space will provide approximately 30 small workspaces for local businesses with a particular focus on those in the creative arts. I have been involved with this project since it’s start and would be happy to discuss the plans with your group rather than you publish untruths or present our company in a bad way. The delivery of Minavil House and our other project the Rise has and will improve the quality of the neighbourhood and amenities on offer for the benefit of everybody.

Peter Mahoney, CEO of R55

In its 2017-2022 action plan, Brent Council acknowledged the impact of poor air quality on health and the need for action to reduce or eliminate air pollution. In previous years, Brent has consistently failed to meet national air quality targets for two key pollutants, Nitrogen Dioxide and Particulate Matter (PM10). It is estimated that 200 premature deaths occur in Brent each year due to poor air quality. The council officials have accepted that air quality in Brent is poor and recognise that significant intervention is required to improve local air quality for all.

There are no air quality monitoring stations located in central Alperton. The nearest monitoring station is at Hanger Lane gyratory, operated by Ealing Council. Real-time air quality data is published on the London Air website thanks to a research initiative by King’s College, London.

London Air – Brent Council air monitors (Link)

London Air – Ealing Council air monitors (Link)

In Alperton, there are two Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) diffusion tubes located along Ealing Road. The first (ID #7) is at the corner of Bridgewater Road and Ealing Road, and the second (ID #54) is at the corner of Ealing Road and Riverside Gardens.

Unfortunately, it appears Brent has not published any data from these diffusion tubes on the council website since 2016. It is absolutely critical for this emission data to be published on a regular basis.

Brent Council Air Quality website (Link)

What can I do at a personal level? Use “smarter travel”. This means cycling, walking or using public transport where it is more effective. London has many resources to help people use these smart methods of getting around. Using less-polluting transport is not just about being more environmentally responsible, it is often cheaper and faster too.

When upgrading to a new car, utilize low emission car technologies, including vehicles that run on hydrogen or electricity. Many of these are being trialled in London. Better still, don’t buy a car at all and join a local car club.

According to a recent article in the Brent & Kilburn Times, work is due to start at the Minavil House site in central Alperton. Local residents and workers are interviewed and expressing their concerns about the controversial scheme put forward by developers R55. “People living and working near Minavil House questioned the area’s need for a 27-storey high-rise at a time when public services are stretched.”

Construction soon to begin on Brent’s tallest tower in Alperton [Link]

‘Immoral’ Housing Group Clarion to operate Minavil House

The Minavil site has been acquired by Clarion Housing Group for £109 million from R55. Clarion has been described as ‘immoral’ after residents on the Ranwell West estate in East London were presented with bills for repairs of up to £32,000 each by Clarion. A group of homeowners from the estate is taking legal action against Clarion to fight excessive bills and maintenance charges.

Angry residents hit by £2m bill for repairs by ‘immoral’ housing group [London Evening Standard]

Unbelievably, Clarion received £8m in grant funding for the controversial development from the Greater London Authority. Increasingly desperate to meet targets for so-called affordable housing, Mayor Sadiq Khan and his Deputy Mayor James Murray are apparently willing to hand over suitcases of taxpayers’ money to the developers. In previous years, Clarion has been repeatedly in the spotlight for outlandish pay levels for its executive team.

With growing concerns for air quality in Alperton, locals welcome any effort to expand the green spaces in the area. This attempt, however, is not exactly what is needed:

This lovely green fencing has  been erected around the Minavil House site in December. No other work has taken place at all. The developers, R55, are keeping everyone in the dark. Locals are asking; what is the status of the skyscraper plan?

Instead of a green fence, locals would welcome a real green space with trees to improve the air quality in central Alperton.

Information has come to light showing the close relationship between certain Brent Councillors and property development firms active in the area. The explosive information is the result of freedom of information requests by local campaigners.

On 9 May 2017, Councillor Muhammed Butt and several other councillors enjoyed the hospitality of Terrapin Communications, a PR company representing the interests of various property developers including R55, the company behind the Minavil Tower scheme. The councillors enjoyed a free 3-course meal while meeting with the developers from the construction industry. The stated purpose of the hospitality was “to engage and enable developers to better understand the Borough and our aspirations” for social housing and quality of design. More to the point, however, the developers clearly hoped to influence key decision makers of the Council.

Exactly why R55 feels the need to be represented by a “Public Relations” company like Terrapin Communications is unclear. It is interesting to note that some senior staff at Terrapin have previously worked at Bell Pottinger, the disgraced PR firm which has gone into administration this year following a scandal in South Africa.

Furthermore, it has emerged that Councillor Butt, the leader of Brent Council, has met with R55 staff on three separate occasions in the weeks before the critical planning meeting on 24 May 2017, where R55’s application was approved. One of those meetings took place on the day immediately before the decision.

What was discussed in those meetings between Cllr. Butt and R55? Unfortunately we will never know because no notes or minutes were taken. This is despite guidelines from the Local Government Association (LGA) which recommends the keeping of notes to ensure transparency.

In light of this information, the crucial question is whether the Council leader directed the members of the Planning Committee to cast their votes in favour of R55’s application (16/2629). If so this would cast doubt on the integrity of the Minavil  House decision and the Council’s planning process more widely.

Related links:

Cllr. Butt and hospitality from a property PR company (Wembley Matters)

Concern over openness after no minutes taken in Brent Council leader’s meetings (Brent & Kilburn Times)

Demolition of the old Minavil House is due to start in November. Local residents and business people are braced to live and work next to a massive building site for the coming two years which will see the rise of Brent’s tallest building. The new high-rise ghetto will spoil the Alperton skyline for decades to come.

So, who is responsible for this dire state of affairs? As pantomime season approaches we have identified a number of candidates in the piece.

• Councillor Muhammed Butt, the leader of Brent Council, who is ultimately responsible for the the big decisions taken by the council.
• Alice Lester, Head of Planning, and her colleagues in the Brent planning department who pulped the Alperton masterplan and ignored the many concerns raised by local people.
• Peter Mahoney and Nicholas Francis of R55, the developers behind the brazen plan to build a 26-floor skyscraper in a low- and medium rise neighborhood.
• Lidl, owners of the site, which allowed the land to lie derelict despite obtaining planning permission with an earlier proposal in 2014.
• Alperton councillors (Cllrs Allie, Chohan and Patel) who failed to turn up to the critical planning committee meeting on 24 May where the tower proposals were waived through without much critical questioning.

It’s not clear that this story will have a happy ending.

On 17 July 2017, the Mayor of London published his final decision on the Minavil House tower plans:

“Having now considered a report on this case I am content to allow Brent Council to determine the case itself, subject to any action that the Secretary of State may take, and do not therefore wish to direct refusal or to take over the application for my own determination.” Mayor of London’s Final Decision

It appears that the promise of a high proportion of subsidized housing has trumped all other considerations.

Unfortunately, a promise of subsidized housing is not worth very much. In a recent case, the proportion of subsidized homes at the Battersea Power Station development was cut by 40%. The Mayor of London does not have the powers to ensure the developers keep their promises made in those glossy brochures.