Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Thomas with Councillor Iftekhar Ahmed substituting.

Apologies for absence were also received from Councillor Lorber, who had registered to speak as an objector in relation to the first application. Councillor Georgiou, therefore attended as his substitute for the duration of the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Thomas with Councillor Iftekhar Ahmed substituting.

Apologies for absence were also received from Councillor Lorber, who had registered to speak as an objector in relation to the first application. Councillor Georgiou, therefore attended as his substitute for the duration of the meeting.

Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, the nature and existence of any relevant disclosable pecuniary or personal interests in the items on this agenda and to specify the item(s) to which they relate.

In relation to Agenda Item 4: 26/0225 - Brent NHS Primary Care Trust, Wembley Centre for Health & Care, 116 Chaplin Road, Wembley, HA0 4UZ, and Item 5: 25/0810 - Kingsbury High School, Princes Avenue, London, NW9 9JR – the Chair confirmed all members of the Committee had received approaches from objectors (comprising 1 approach in relation to Agenda Item 4 and 4 approaches in relation to Agenda Item 5) but had not engaged in discussion or sought to take any position on the application and therefore felt able to consider the applications impartially and without any form of predetermination.

No other declarations of interest were made during the meeting.

In relation to Agenda Item 4: 26/0225 - Brent NHS Primary Care Trust, Wembley Centre for Health & Care, 116 Chaplin Road, Wembley, HA0 4UZ, and Item 5: 25/0810 - Kingsbury High School, Princes Avenue, London, NW9 9JR, the Chair had confirmed all members of the Committee had received approaches from objectors (comprising 1 approach in relation to Agenda Item 4 and 4 approaches in relation to Agenda Item 5) but had not engaged in discussion or sought to take any position on the application and therefore felt able to consider the applications impartially and without any form of predetermination.

No other declarations of interest were made during the meeting.

To approve and confirm the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 3 June 2026 as a correct record.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 3 June 2026 be approved as a correct record of the meeting.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 3 June 2026 be approved as a correct record of the meeting.

RESOLVED to defer the decision for the following reason(s):

·       As the majority of Members on the Committee had indicated that they were minded to refuse the application, it was agreed to defer a final decision to a future Committee meeting in order to enable a further report to be provided addressing the indicative reasons outlined as the basis for refusal, including:

i)               insufficient provision of affordable housing;

ii)              insufficient parking provision on site and impact of congestion on surrounding streets;

iii)            lack of community space;

iv)            lack of on-site play space for older children;

v)             insufficient provision of family sized housing;

vi)            harm to neighbouring amenity including loss of daylight; and

vii)           impact on non-designated heritage asset and character to the streetscene.

Voting on the above decision was unanimous and accordingly, the application was deferred to allow for further assessment and consideration of the matters identified by the Committee.

PROPOSAL

Demolition of existing buildings to provide within buildings of between 3 and 6 storeys, 108 residential units (Use Class C3) and car parking spaces together with associated public realm, landscaping and highway improvements, cycle parking and stores, and all other associated and ancillary works.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(1)           The prior completion of a satisfactory legal agreement; and

(2)           The conditions and informatives, as set out in the committee report.

Gary Murphy (Principal Planning Officer) introduced the report, advising members that the application sought full planning permission for the demolition of the existing Old Wembley Hospital buildings on the site, along with the former Ambulance Station and to redevelop the site to provide replacement residential buildings ranging from 3 to 6 storeys comprising of;

• 108 dwellings (99 flats and 9 houses);
• Which include 11 affordable homes (all at London Affordable Rent level);
• New public realm, including landscaped publicly accessible pedestrian route connecting Chaplin Road and Fairview Avenue;
• Outdoor amenity space, including private balconies, terraces, communal courtyard, and children’s play space;
• Associated landscaping, including new trees; and
• Vehicle parking and cycle parking spaces

Attention was also drawn to the supplementary report circulated in advance of the meeting, which noted the receipt of a further representation from Councillor Lorber, together with the officers’ responses. The recommendation remained to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions and informatives set out within the main committee report, together with the prior completion of a satisfactory s106 legal agreement.

The Chair thanked Gary Murphy for introducing the report. As there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair then moved on to consider a request which had been received to speak on the application and invited Sylwester Zabielski (who had registered to speak as an objector) to address the Committee in relation to the application, who highlighted the following points:

• Sylwester Zabielski began by stating that he and his partner had purchased their property at 15 Fairview Avenue approximately 6 years ago, having regarded it as their long-term forever home.

• The property was described as a 2 storey red brick bungalow situated at the end of Fairview Avenue and adjoining the rear of the former Old Wembley Hospital site. It was stated that the property's features included its natural light, convenient location, relative tranquility, and the privacy afforded to both the dwelling and its garden.

• The speaker objected to the proposed development of the semi-detached houses that were designed to replace the parking lot at the back of the Old Wembley Hospital, specifically the construction of 4 dwellings which, in his view, would result in irreversible harm to the levels of daylight, sunlight and privacy currently enjoyed.

• The objector stated that both their dwelling and a garden outbuilding would be adversely affected by the proposed development and raised 3 principal concerns:

1)    Firstly, Sylwester Zabielski described the kitchen as the heart of his home, being used for dining, entertaining guests and daily living activities. It was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Granted planning permission subject to:

(1)  The conditions and informatives required to secure the matters identified within the main committee report and supplementary report.

PROPOSAL

Proposed construction of Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) Facility and cricket pitch and netting with fencing and lighting to the school.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(1)  The conditions and informatives required to secure the matters identified within the main committee report and supplementary report.

Colin Leadbeatter (Development Management Area Manager) introduced the report, advising members that the application sought full planning permission for the addition of a multi-use games area facility comprising 2 artificial sports pitches. The pitch to the west had been marked on the plans for football and the pitch on the east had been marked on the plans for hockey. The 2 artificial sport pitches combined would occupy a 126m x 102.5m section of the schools playing field on the southern side of the school site. Ancillary boundary fencing at a height of 4m and floodlights at a height of 15m were proposed for the 2 artificial sport pitches. A 2m acoustic fence was also proposed along the eastern and southern sides of the eastern pitch. In addition, the proposals sought to relocate the existing cricket practice facility, on part of the site used as a playing field and existing cricket pitch. Ball stop fencing at a height of 6m was proposed towards the western boundary, to serve the relocated cricket pitch.

Attention was also drawn to the supplementary report circulated in advance of the meeting, which noted the receipt of further representations, comprising 12 new objections and 8 additional comments from previous objectors, together with the officers’ responses. The additional representations did not raise any new material planning considerations that would alter the officers’ assessment or recommendation. The recommendation remained to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions and informatives required to secure the matters identified within the main committee report and supplementary report.

The Chair thanked Colin Leadbeatter for introducing the report. As there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair then moved on to consider a request which had been received to speak on the application and invited Deborah Nyman (who had registered to speak as an objector) to address the Committee in relation to the application, who highlighted the following points:

• Deborah Nyman began by stating that she had resided in Roe Green Village, a valued conservation area since the late 1980s and was speaking on behalf of the Roe Green Village Residents' Association, which represented more than 250 households, together with other nearby residents affected by the proposal.

• The speaker expressed that residents were surprised that the application had been brought before the Committee, noting that the Committee had previously considered 2 similar proposals submitted by Kingsbury High School. It was noted that the second scheme had not been supported and was subsequently withdrawn during the appeal process, resulting in an award of costs in favour of the Association by the Planning Inspectorate.

• Deborah Nyman advised that many residents objected to the current proposals on the grounds that they were neither  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

RESOLVED to defer the decision for the following reason(s):

·       To allow the ownership certificates relating to the application to be evaluated prior to determination and to clarify whether the scheme would fall within the definition of self-build.

PROPOSAL

Demolition of garage block and erection of a new dwellinghouse with associated amenity space, provision for new pedestrian access and cycle and refuse storage and creation of additional hardstanding to allow reconfiguration of the parking layout (amended description).

RECOMMENDATION

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(1)  The prior completion of a satisfactory legal agreement; and

(2)  The conditions and informatives, as set out in the committee report.

Curtis Thompson (Career Grade Planning Officer) introduced the report, advising members that the application sought full planning permission for the demolition of a garage block and erection of a new dwellinghouse with associated amenity space, provision for new pedestrian access and cycle and refuse storage. The recommendation remained to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions and informatives set out within the main committee report, together with the prior completion of a satisfactory legal agreement.

The Chair thanked Curtis Thompson for introducing the report. As there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair then moved on to consider a request which had been received to speak on the application and invited Satbir Singh (who had registered to speak as an objector) to address the Committee in relation to the application, who highlighted the following points:

• Sabir Singh began by expressing that Brent had been his home since 1987. It was explained that, in 2020, he and his wife had purchased their first home, a top floor flat within Thanet Lodge on Mapesbury Road, following almost 10 years of saving. It was noted that their first child had been born shortly after they moved into the property.

• Following occupation of the flat, Sabir Singh described that the top floor flats constructed by the freeholder were, in his opinion, of a dangerously substandard nature, and had serious deficiencies relating to fire safety, fire compartmentation and cladding.

• Sabir Singh further advised that, in 2025, his mother, who had previously worked for Brent Council for many years, had suffered a stroke whilst living with Alzheimer's. It was explained that his family had subsequently relocated across the borough in order to provide care for her, as they considered that local social care services were unable to provide the level of support required. It was stated that, as a consequence, his flat had been placed on the market and that a purchaser had been secured in September 2025 despite the concerns he had identified regarding the property. However, it was reported that the developer had refused to confirm that the ground rent account was up to date and had also refused consent for the sale to proceed.

• Sabir Singh further expressed that his mother had passed away in January 2026 and reported that, shortly afterwards, the developer had informed him that any future sale of the property would require payment of £15,000, which he stated had been described as “compensation” for objections he had submitted in relation to previous development proposals. He further reported that, in February 2026, the developer had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Deputy Director Democratic & Corporate Governance or their representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 60.

There was no other urgent business.

There was no other urgent business.