- IARA AGM 2025:
Present:
Inkerman: Courtenay M, Alex P, Riley, Natasha W, Anne B, Rafe B, Alice, Carys L, Andras, Alex
Grafton: Simone, Tom C, Fiona B, Chris H, Alice T, George
Willes :John T, Belinda L, Michael S, Dee S, Mike S, Sarah H, Regis P, Anabelle R, Mike E, Raphael E, David P, Sarah, Vivienne McN, Catalin, Don H, Julia F, James H, Gary L, Julia P, Jonathan B, Rosemary W
Alma: Dilip L, David J, Debby H, Hilary B, Liz W, Charles C, Patricia D, Jane H, Jeremy B, Lesley, Emmanuel
Raglan: Paul S, Sylwia V, Kate B, Marine A, Gregory M, Robert L, Mary H, Harriet C, John N
Ryland: Trisha M, Gill B, Martin P, Christine G
– Brinsmead Jonathan F, Liz de K, Chris C, Shivaun McC, Jeff W
Anglers: Dominik A, Isabel A
Holmes: Dinah, Roy L, Paul , Sue McN
Cathcart: Kate V
South Kentish Town Councillors: Meric Apak, Jenny Headlam-Wells, Joseph Ball Observer: Annabelle Williams (former resident and Labour Party local election candidate)
A preliminary proposal by the Chair was that the agenda would be adapted to reflect current urgent concerns and we would go through items 1 to 5, but under the Chair’s report, we would adjourn discussion of the first topic raised there, namely the Regis Road / Camden Film Quarter applications and take that after items 6 and police liaison. This was agreed by the meeting.
Agenda item 1. Greetings and Apologies for absence
Jenny R, Terry R, Christel L, Valentina M, Gill R, Vince R, Jon C, Noreen McK, Cassie W, Judith L, Charlie H, Sarah C, Cathy G, Clare R, Robbie G, Ellie, Gail, Sophie, Hannah J, Chris K, Miranda B, David B, Julie, Peter L, Rachel T.
Agenda item 2. The minutes of the 2024 AGM, held onto 23.01.25, were available in printed form at the meeting and had been circulated shortly after the 2015 meeting and have been available on the website.
They were considered by the meeting and the adoption of them proposed by Robert, seconded by Gary and passed unanimously.
Agenda item 3. There were no matters arising.
Agenda item 4. John N acted as returning officer and advised the meeting that the only nominations for the post of officers were for the existing officers and he invited the meeting to approve that. Chair proposal Julia, seconded by Liz. Secretary proposed by Jeff, seconded by Robert. Treasurer proposed by Dee, seconded by Rafe. Approved by the meeting unanimously.
Agenda item 5. Chair’s report. Debby presented the report, which had been previously circulated and was available in printed form at the meeting. She went briefly through the main points, including the importance of reporting incidents of antisocial behaviour to the Community Safety team and the police. She also mentioned the Elders Group, which she hopes to reactivate in the year ahead.
Agenda item 6. Treasurers report. Paul presented the figures to the meeting which were available in printed form and on the website and explained a number of important matters including the fact that we are a company limited by guarantee in order to avoid personal liability falling on the officers for debts.
That means that we actually pay corporation tax to the government. Historically that has been a relatively simple matter and we were able to file the company accounts and the corporation tax return together using a free service. From 1 April 2026 this will no longer be an option. We will have to use third party software to file these and the annual costs can be £200-£300 per annum. We will avoid this cost for the accounts year ending 31 December by filing the two returns before 1 April 2026.
There were no questions arising from the accounts. Acceptance of the accounts was proposed by Lesley, seconded by Harriet and approved by the meeting unanimously with thanks to Paul.
Agenda item 7– first point – Police Liaison. John N reported on the fact that there are bimonthly meetings of The Police Safer Neighbourhood Panel which hears from individual areas within Kentish Town and sets priorities. He said that there would be minutes of the latest panel meeting filed shortly. The meeting was told that our general area has relatively low crime figures and the Inkerman area in particular has low crimes statistics – which he emphasised in no way minimises the importance or the impact on individual victims of crime.
In terms of prevention, John presented some visual aids in form of posters. The first one was “Porch Piracy“ and told people that thefts from doorstep of items allegedly delivered by people like EVRI or Amazon is a highly organised business with thieves trailing the vans and noting homes where parcels have been left on doorsteps.
He gave various suggestions as to how losses can be minimised, including making sure that deliveries are to several of the local shops which will accept incoming parcels. He warned people not to rely on the “Safe Place“ suggestion made by delivery firms, eg that people tuck them behind a dustbin somewhere because the thieves are completely wise to that. And if they are then stolen, the delivery companies will not cooperate with claims.
A second subject was theft from vehicles which he said is very prevalent on the other side of the High Street and in particular with high value vehicles with electronic locking devices which are very easily hacked by criminals. He advised anyone with electronic locking to keep their keys as far away from the vehicle as possible and ideally in a Faraday bag which blocks radio signals.
One of the main thefts is of parcel shelves. This seems extraordinary and hard to understand until you discover the shelves actually simply pop up for sale on eBay and other sites so that you can buy back your parcel shelf or someone else’s and it is simply an item that can easily be removed and replaced.
The meeting expressed thanks to John for this and his service over many years on the Police Safer Neighbourhood Panel.
Return to Chair’s report and the issue of Regis Road and CFQ. The meeting then returned to the deferred matter arising from the Chair’s report, namely the plans for Regis Rd / The Camden Film Quarter which has been a subject of extended and occasionally heated debate on the WhatsApp Group.
The major division was between those who want IARA to make a clear general unified response to the development and those who do not.
The first position was crystallised by Mike Eberhardt of Willes Road who had drafted a very full and critical response which he circulated by WhatsApp fairly shortly before the meeting and which he wanted the AGM to adopt or support.
In opposition to the proposal that the AGM produce a clear endorsement of this document it was argued that there were two obstacles.
Firstly the scheme contains so many different aspects that people may be supportive of some of those aspects whilst critical of others. It was argued that a blanket statement was not appropriate.
Secondly, and connected with this, is the fact that there is a lack of consensus in the membership and it has been the traditional approach of IARA only to comment as an organisation when there is a consensus. This policy has been publicly announced and accepted by membership and has worked for many years.
Procedurally, it was therefore proposed that there should be an initial vote on the question of whether it was appropriate for this meeting to pass one motion endorsing one particular statement regarding the proposed development, or whether the development had so many component parts that it was inappropriate and that there was a lack of unanimity or even clarity regarding a majority.
The executive suggested that the position of IARA should be developed over the next few weeks, including a more democratic testing of opinion.
Twelve people spoke on the subject and matters included the need to widen our membership, the fact that there is a deadline for submissions through the planning portal of 2 February and how it was important to for each individual to post comments for or against. And how IARA not posting any comment would be interpreted as a simple endorsement to the application. And how we could post a general comment and rely on the opportunity given for more detailed comments to be made after 2 February that would be considered by the Planning Committee which is likely to meet in the Spring.
The initial issue therefore of whether or not to have a binding vote was itself put to the vote and there was no proposal so accordingly it was not passed.
See a fuller report of the discussion of this item on the IARA website at the link below where there is also the text of Mike Eberhardt’s letter and a link to Kentish Town Neighbourhood Forums’ objection.
The meeting then moved on to a very brief mention of the Alma Street Fair – probably not happening in 2026 but being replaced by smaller street based events.
Agenda item 8. 2 Prince of Wales Road, the venue of this meeting, was described and it was explained that it will be closing later in the year for at least 18 months for major rebuilding so that it can become financially self-sustaining with commercial use – probably co-working – on two upper floors and community use on the ground floor. It means that for a time we will be looking for alternative venues for meetings.
Agenda item 9., Future Developments was very briefly touched on with the secretary picking up points made earlier that are outlined in the Chair’s report about the fact that our membership and the involvement with the WhatsApp Group is in fact extremely limited, mainly to owner occupiers or leaseholders. And 2026 must see an expansion of our membership and participation. There was also a suggestion about creating a music group, similar to that of The Theatre Lovers group, a walking or running Group, an Artists Group, and renewed energy from the Local History Group.
The meeting closed with a vote of thanks to the executive proposed by Hilary and not formally voted on but approved by a large number of people.
The meeting concluded at 9.00 for the consumption of modest food and drink.
————————————– 0 ————————————————-
2. ACTION ARISING
2.1 IARA posted a holding response to the application. It will take some time to be visible on the planning portal at: https://planningrecords.camden.gov.uk/NECSWS/PlanningExplorer/Generic/StdDetails.aspx?PT=Planning%20Applications%20On-Line&TYPE=PL/PlanningPK.xml&PARAM0=667284&XSLT=/NECSWS/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/camden/xslt/PL/PLDetails.xslt&FT=Planning%20Application%20Details&PUBLIC=Y&XMLSIDE=/NECSWS/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/camden/Menus/PL.xml&DAURI=PLANNING
But it says:
“We represent residents in the Inkerman Area, ie the area of Kentish Town bounded by Prince of Wales Road to the South, Kentish Town Road to the East and the railway lines to the North and West.
Many members want to see the development of the site, including the provision of affordable and social housing, and would support some aspects of the application.
However a large number of our members have strong objections to many other aspects of the project, seeing it as over-development and having serious reservations about, among other matters, the proposed height of the buildings, the safety and health aspects of the proposed recycling centre plans, and basement developments.
This is an extremely complex application filed initially at a time when many people were not available to comment, and we need to have time for the widest possible reach to ensure that local opinion is reflected fully and fairly.
A detailed response will be submitted to the planning officers and relevant councillors by email in the next few weeks, before any decision is taken.“
2.2 We encouraged people by WhatsApp and email to file their personal views, positive or negative at the same portal – before 2 February 2025. Or, after that by email to Planning@camden.gov.uk where we are assured it will be consider along with the responses filed through the portal.
2.3 We are in the process of drafting a questionnaire / voting form / survey to elicit and measure local opinion on the various aspects of the application.
We want to ensure the widest possible reach for the survey and will create a QR code which can be widely publicised by WhatsApp, emails, hand delivered and possibly posted on lamp post – which would be a first for IARA as we have previously avoided such methods.
We will need the help of the army of Street Representatives that have very successfully distributed notices eg of the AGM as well as the cooperation of members living in some of the blocks where we have little success in terms of reachg and engagement – including Monmouth and Una House.
D&D