A digital petition at the time of the submission to council held 2,064 signatories, latest review of the petition found 2199 signatories. Signatories come from across the world, the majority outside of the South Kilburn area. 

The petition was titled: Would you like to see Rumi’s Cave continue? 

The petition web page describes how the community centre is to be closed down and turned into flats. The stated aim of the petition is “it is vital that we save our building or are given an alternative building to continue all of the work we do.” 

Rumi’s Cave is described as providing the following services: 

Food bank, Soup Kitchens and community lunches, Breakfast Clubs for school children and local residents, Night Shelter for the homeless, Tea & Chat sessions for the elderly, IT support for the elderly, Martial Arts and Yoga (Children & Adults), Language Courses, Music Lessons, Knitting & Crochet club, Mental Health support groups, Open mic and poetry sessions, Free Community movie nights, Interfaith music nights, Herbal medicine Training, Alternative Medicine Treatments. 

No planning reasons are suggested in addition to the stated objection. It is clear there is objection to loss of space for use by Rumi’s Cave/ULFA Aid, this seems to be based on the suggestion the Carlton building is to be turned into flats which is not the case. The space which Rumi’s Cave/Ulfa Aid currently occupies on a temporary short term lease is to be refurbished to primarily serve as an enterprise hub to serve the local community and was formerly an adult education centre. 

CS Policy CP23 seeks to protect existing community facilities. Whilst there is some overall loss of floorspace in community type uses, a range of facilities is proposed, and those facilities are to be redeveloped and improved. Overall the small scale loss is considered to be mitigated by the rationalised and modernised facilities. The proposals would offer significant improvement in layout, access and usability enabling much more efficient use of the community type uses on site and is considered a significant benefit of the proposals. It is therefore considered that the community facilities would be significantly improved despite the reduction in floorspace. 

Some public comment has been concerned with the net loss of community type floorspace. However, it is important to note the specific policy wording. Policy CP23 refers to the protection of community and cultural facilities or their loss mitigated where necessary. The policy does not specify that there should not be a net loss of floorspace and it is important to consider the type and nature of facilities that are proposed. In this instance there is a comparatively smalls scale loss of net floorspace within the new community facility provision. Some of the floorspace is changing. For example, the multi-use community floorspace and the community focused affordable workspace is increasing in size. The nursery and children’s centres are also increasing in size.

The space that was used as an adult education centre and has been used by Rumi’s cave in 2018 and 2019 is not being reprovided. However, overall there the community facilities are considered to be improved, benefitting the community as well as supporting the wider regeneration benefits of the South Kilburn masterplan area. 

The petitions received by the Council centred on the potential loss of space for the Rumi’s cave organisation. Rumi’s cave entered the site on a temporary arrangement in 2018. This part of the site was formerly used as an adult education centre. The South Kilburn masterplan clearly identifies the site for a range of uses including an enterprise hub, education, community space and residential development and the proposal looks to deliver those uses. The South Kilburn masterplan SPD was recently endorsed by a significant majority in a local referendum (72% of eligible resident’s voted, 84% voted in favour of the masterplan). 

Whilst some limited weight can be given to the charitable work and benefit to the community Rumi’s cave provides as a community facility use, planning decisions are informed by the proposed land use and the development plan rather than a particular occupier of a building at the time of an application. The development plan should be given significant weight by the decision maker. 

Some objection comments cite that office space demonstrated as part of the proposals fall outside the scope of community type uses. While this would be the case for standard office space let on the private market, the office space is proposed to serve a community function, with a management plan submitted which sets out how the space will be operated. A condition is proposed to secure a management plan which would ensure this space continues to serve and support the community and improve local engagement, employment and enterprise opportunities which is consistent with the objectives of the South Kilburn Masterplan SPD for this site and the Local Plan. 

Whilst some objections have focussed upon the specific parameters of the D1 use class, the policy is not referenced in terms of D1 use class. It is possible for buildings to serve a community/social infrastructure purpose without strictly being within the D1 use class as defined by The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. The broader site has a mix of uses present currently and flexibility in the specific uses is considered to be appropriate. 

CS policy CP2 requires to plan for additional housing, which this development would contribute towards, in particular affordable housing, all units are to be affordable (affordable rent) units, which is a significant benefit of the proposals. 

Whilst officers do sincerely empathise with the challenges of finding space for charitable organisations, planning decisions are required by law to be based upon the adopted development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 

It is notable Rumi’s cave have a short term lease arrangement, understood to expire in 2021. The Local Planning Authority (as a distinct authority from the Council, although sits within the Council) has a legal requirement to objectively assess the application on its planning merits. 

Whilst some material weight can be given to the charitable work and benefit to the community Rumi’s Cave and other organisations utilising the existing space offer, planning decisions are generally informed by the proposed land use and the development plan rather than a particular occupier of a building/land at the time of an application. The development plan should be given significant weight by the decision maker. 

Given the retention of a mix of community and social infrastructure based uses on site, plus delivery of housing the principle of development is considered acceptable and in accordance with the objectives of the development plan.

Based on the data and comments received, we are able to confidently assume that most people used number 1 to rank their highest priority. However, just to be sure we will be emailing all respondents to this consultation to clarify the ranking order and they will be invited to submit a new response which will be counted separately.

The Council amended the relevant page thus:

To clarify, the 'n/a' which appears in some of the tables means 'not applicable' rather than 'not available'. For the avoidance of doubt we have included a clarification point at the end of the document which has been republished online. In addition, the third table of the Report includes the name of the item of infrastructure that CIL was used to fund in 18/19 - Olympic Way Pedestrian Improvements - which is linked to footnote 3.

Trees on King's Drive Estate, Wembley

• Low tree cover
• High levels of air pollution
• High levels of deprivation

A simple tree has a story that lasts a lifetime, it cleans the air we breathe, it gives habitat to natural life and it makes our streets that much nicer to behold.

Our climate fightback has only just begun, but with hundreds of new trees coming to roads and avenues, we’re not just planting for the future, but investing in Brent’s lungs today.

To acknowledge the great work of the department in achieving these savings, we believe that this money should be ring fenced to be spent on a project with an environmental theme. In line with the council’s priorities, and the fact that Brent has recently declared a climate emergency, the obvious area for spending this money would be on improving air quality. There are actions that can be undertaken by the authority to improve air quality where a one-off capital injection of £700,000 would make a significant difference. 

We believe the most notable is in the area of tree planting. The council currently does not have the revenue budget to replace all diseased or dying trees it removes (outside of those removed as part of the footway improvement plan), or to plant all of the mature trees it would like to. The presence of mature trees on our streets can help to reduce levels of carbon in the atmosphere and significantly reduce storm water runoff. We will therefore be recommending to cabinet that this pot of money is ring fenced and invested in a tree planting scheme.

• Brent views trees in terms of their immediate and future potential cost to the council.
• The council fails to calculate the value of its mature street trees.
• Brent Trees public meeting with the council was attended by 150 residents, which demonstrates the strength of feeling about the lack of care of street trees, removal of healthy street trees, lack of replacement of trees removed, and stumps being left in the place of removed trees.
• At the public meeting we made a presentation on the value of mature trees: amenity, carbon sequestration, air quality control, air cooling, storm-water run-off, to name a few.  Small replacement trees and new small trees will provide relatively little in terms of climate change mitigation compared to large mature trees. 
• We have a climate crisis; Brent Council has declared a “climate and ecological emergency”; Brent aspires to be the “cleanest and greenest” London borough; and yet it removes mature healthy trees that mitigate climate change in order to save money.
• Brent Council has historically underfunded trees; the council has admitted that it removes trees because it can’t afford to maintain them and yet the environment department underspends year after year. 
• There is a compelling case for committing additional funds to the maintenance of street trees, replacement of street trees, replacement of street trees removed historically.

• Require information from the council. Councillors sitting on scrutiny committees have broad information access rights which means that they can and should be able to have access to information even on matters exempt for reason of commercial confidentiality, and the other exemptions found in Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. More information on information rights can be found in section 4.1 below and at section 5 of the guidance.
  
  
• Require attendance from council officers and councillors. Members of the executive invited to attend scrutiny committee meetings, and council officers issued with similar invitations, are expected to do so. While the law does not specify the seniority of officers who should be invited to give evidence, it will usually be most appropriate for senior officers to attend, even where questions are being asked about operational delivery. More information on engagement with councils officers and executive-side councillors can be found in section 2.1 below.
  
  

• Require that the council provides responses to scrutiny’s recommendations. Importantly, it is for scrutiny to determine the nature of the response. It is legitimate, for example, for scrutiny to require that a substantive response to each recommendation be made individually, with timescales for implementation; scrutiny can require that the executive do not respond to recommendations simply by “noting” them. More information on recommendations and impact can be found in section 5 below.  

11. POLICY REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT
The specific functions relating to policy development and review functions of Scrutiny Committees are detailed in Article 6 in Part Two of this Constitution. In addition, the terms of reference of the Resources and Corporate Performance Scrutiny Committee are listed in Part 3.

12. REPORTS FROM THE SCRUTINY COMMITTEES 

a.     The Scrutiny Committee may develop a protocol for the production of reports.

b.    Reports from the Scrutiny Committees shall be submitted within a reasonable
time of their completion to the Proper Officer for consideration by the Cabinet and/or the Council as appropriate.

c.     The Cabinet and/or Council shall send a written response to the Scrutiny
Committee within a reasonable time of considering a report, with a copy to the Proper Officer 1.

1 Section 21 B of the Local Government Act 2000 now imposes a time of limit of two months for the Cabinet/Council to reply

13.MAKING SURE THAT SCRUTINY REPORTS ARE CONSIDERED BY THE CABINET

a) The agenda for Cabinet meetings (including any meetings of single members and the Cabinet (Environment) Sub-Group) shall include an item entitled ‘Issues arising from scrutiny’. Reports of the Scrutiny Committees referred to the Cabinet shall be included at this point in the agenda within one month of it being submitted, unless either they have been considered in the context of the Cabinet’s deliberations on a substantive item on the agenda or the Cabinet gives reasons why they cannot be included and states when they will be considered. The Cabinet shall send a written response to the Scrutiny Committee within a reasonable time of considering a report, as set out in Rule 11 above.

To: The Rt Hon Priti Patel MP The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Restorative Compensation Scheme for Windrush Scandal

‘Over the last two years my life has been turned upside down . The mental stress and turmoil that caused me I’ll health still impact my daily life. The government compensation scheme has not been fairly documented , it was constructed behind closed doors, no public input and no one to represent the Windrush victims.’

‘The Windrush scandal impacted my mum, Sarah not only on her health but emotionally. Before the scandal was exposed, she felt on her own and like she had done something wrong despite contributing to the country for many years. For my mum the compensation scheme has come too late and I’m so disappointed that it is still taking this long for people to get what is owed to them. I just hope that people get compensated fairly for everything that they have been through. This scandal has ruined people’s lives and in today’s world it is terrible that we have allowed that to happen to this extent.’

Existing

Planned

 1. Inappropriate development on Metropolitan Open Land with no special circumstances cited for development.
2. Loss of existing employment on the site.
3. Non-compliant flood risk assessment.
4. Insufficient information on the impact of the proposed development on biodiversity and nature conservation.
5. Insufficient information on whether the development would provide future occupiers with adequate levels of amenity, particularly with regard to the proximity of the Hendon Rifle Club.
6. Insufficient information of the development's impact on the amenity value of trees, including those protected by Tree Preservation Orders.
7. No energy strategy or assessment of the energy demands and carbon dioxide emissions of the development submitted with the application.
8. No formal undertaking in the application to enter into a travel and traffic management plan.

Woodfield Nursery is an an area of Metropolitan Open Land and development would be contrary to the Barnet Unitary Development Plan.

The site is in an area of an SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest)

Development would disturb bird and wildlife on the site and in its proximity.

Development of 41 dwellings would contribute to traffic on what was originally a winding country lane which has single file traffic over Cool Oak Bridge to the new West Hendon development.

Increased traffic on the lane would increase the possibility of accidents to  pupils at the nearby Woodfield Special School who arrive by school buses and taxis.

There is  no public transport in the immediate area.

The Barnet-Brent Welsh Harp sited has already suffered from the West Hendon development on the opposite bank and further development would set a precedent for more applications to develop this rare and much valued open space, including perhaps the Birchen Grove Garden Centre site. (I have checked the Brent Planning Portal and no application has been lodged so far.)

Pre-application discussions with the Council have unfortunately proven unhelpful and inconclusivewith officer’s initial positive stance towards the development of the site having been replaced with one that is diametrically opposed. This has been extremely frustrating for the applicants and has placed them in a somewhat difficult position, and one we as their advisors have never experienced before. Having sought legal advice, they feel that they have no option but to proceed with the submission of a planning application, and an appeal thereafter, if necessary, in order to obtain a conclusive response.