Kingsbury’s plan for four-storey flats is going ahead despite fears of more development

Plans to build a four-storey block of flats in a north London borough have been given the green light despite fears it would “open the floodgates” for further development in the area. Developers have pledged almost £30,000 to improve road safety around the site as a local nursery claimed its impact on traffic would “pose a direct threat” to the safety of their children.

The developers, Salmon Street Property Ltd, have applied to demolish a detached house on the corner of Salmon Street and Queens Walk – on the outskirts of Wembley – and replace it with a three-storey, four-storey block of flats with 13 flats. The plan was approved by split decision at the last meeting of Brent Council’s Planning Committee (June 11), with two councilors voting against.

Addressing the committee, Junaid Iqbal, who lives near the site, called the development a “severe downgrade for (the community)”. He said it would “burden (residents) with increased traffic, parking problems, noise and pollution.

Mr Iqbal also claimed it would “significantly affect” their quality of life and suggested the disruption caused was “solely for the financial gain of the developers” and not for the benefit of the local area. He believes increased car use in the area will create a “parking nightmare” along the road.

Another resident who lives opposite the site, Mr Gidoomal, described it as a “huge disappointment” that developers want to build “this madness” on Salmon Street. And he suggested the scheme was about “monetary gain” for developers rather than community benefit.

The application received more than 25 objections in total, which included a backlash from residents and a local nursery who believed it would exacerbate existing parking problems, disrupt their “peaceful co-existence” by “opening the floodgates” to developers and will pose a danger to children.

St Nicholas’ Nursery, which is located close to the site, claimed the development would “exacerbate” the current congestion on the roads as well as “posing a direct threat” to children’s safety.

They said: “Congested streets resulting from increased traffic and inadequate parking arrangements have a direct impact on the safety of children in transit to and from St Nicholas Nursery. Narrow, congested roads increase the likelihood of accidents and create an unsafe environment for our young participants.”

Speaking on behalf of the developers, project architect Kieran Stevens told the committee the plan would provide a “high-quality living environment” that had been “thoughtfully designed” in relation to adjacent properties. As a condition of approval, Salmon Street Property Ltd agreed to contribute £29,000 towards the council’s ‘healthy streets’ program and highway improvements to address safety issues, including the ‘double dangerous mini-roundabout’ further along Salmon Street.

Developers claim the project will “deliver a range of key planning and regeneration benefits” for the local area. This includes redeveloping brownfield land, delivering ‘much needed housing’, funds that can be used to fund local infrastructure, as well as attracting new residents to the area who will ‘contribute to the local community and boost the local economy. through local expenses’.

The approval means the scheme will deliver 13 new apartments comprising three studios, two one-bedrooms, four two-bedrooms and four three-bedrooms. However, none of these would be classed as ‘affordable housing’ as the costs meant it would be ‘unviable’ to do so.

A viability assessment, following changes made by council consultants, concluded that if affordable housing was provided, the development would result in a surplus of £41,000. Council documents state it was deemed “not large enough” to provide affordable housing. Instead, the council agreed a ‘payment-in-lieu contribution’ for affordable off-site housing in the borough – which matched the surplus (£41,000).

The plan was approved in line with the officers’ original recommendation, however, two committee members voted against it. Cllr Saqib Butt opposed it on the grounds of the “bulk and bulk” of the building, while Cllr Robert Johnson was concerned about the lack of affordable housing and described the developer’s £41,000 contribution to affordable housing elsewhere as “miniscule”.