'Challenging and disruptive' 18 day works following a gas leak at Brent Cross begin tomorrow

 

Cadent Gas works on the A406 North Circular Road opposite Brent Cross Shopping Centre  are due to commence on Thursday 27^th October with works starting in the early hours. The closure involved is on the border of Brent so will affect residents.

 

Cadent recently identified a leak on one of their gas pipes on the North Circular, opposite Brent Cross Shopping Centre, just west of the Brent Cross Flyover. The leak was temporarily made safe  but there is now need to permanently repair the leaking pipe. To do this, they will need to reduce traffic to one lane in both directions. 

 

Brent councillors have been told that given the location and the significant traffic volumes, the works will be challenging and disruptive, something Cadent are fully aware of and are now actively preparing for.

 

Cadent predict the works will last approximately 18 days, and to ensure the disruption ends as swiftly as possible, their frontline teams will be working extended hours, 7 days a week.  

 

'Full participation on Brent Cross West Station plans or we will go to law,' Capita-Barnet told

Image from Barnet Council Brent Cross West Station consultation page

The Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross was formed a long time ago and consisted of several political groups, including the Green Party, Liberal Democrats and Labour politicans as well as individuals. trade councils and community organisations. It has had ups and downs as the plans ebbed and flowed but Alison Hopkins has written to Capita-Barnet, who handle the Brent Cross Thames Link project, calling for full public participation ahead of the submission of any planning application for Brent Cross West station:

I write as the co-ordinator of the decade-old “Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood Plan”, made up of local politicians, community organisations and individuals. 

At its various peaks, the Coalition has comprised of twelve residents’ associations plus the Federation of Residents’ Associations in Barnet (another twelve largest residents’ associations in Barnet), Brent Cyclists, Brent Friends of the Earth (FoE), Barnet & Enfield FoE, Camden FoE, Sarah Teather (former MP for Brent Central), Dawn Butler, (current MP for Brent Central), Labour and Liberal Democrat Councillors from Brent and Camden, Navin Shah (London Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow), Darren Johnson (former London Assembly Member), Jean Lambert (now former London MEP), Brent Green Party, Barnet Green Party, Alexis Rowell, (former Chair of Camden Sustainability Taskforce), Brent and Barnet Trades Union Councils, the Bestway Group and numerous individuals.

There is a lower level of involvement nowadays, but, as a former London Borough of Brent councillor, I can still rely on widespread all-party and no-party contacts who have been involved in the Coalition for many years. There is now an increasing London-wide co-ordination of community groups fighting developer-led control of London’s planning policy. We play a part in that, and the content of this submission draws on that resource.

The collapse of the car-based Brent Cross shopping centre expansion has met one of main aims of the Coalition, which has been to oppose Barnet council’s predicted 29,000 extra car journeys every day in the area. That has been opposed based on both unwanted road congestion and what is now called the global heating emergency.

Given the limited nature of this consultation, I want to submit comments on only a single issue. That is the nature of the design integration study for the station.

Barnet Council's Assets, Regeneration and Growth Committee decided on 17 September 2018 to “Authorise Officers to undertake a design integration study to assess how the WLO line (Dudding Hill line) could link into Brent Cross West Station. The £50k cost estimate for the study will be funded from the Thameslink budget”.

As the committee was told:

“As reported to the last Committee, the Council Officers have undertaken an initial review for the potential station on the WLO line (Dudding Hill line) to link into Brent Cross West Station.  There are a number of options for configuring platform arrangements for a potential station.

“Subject to Committee approval, the Council is proposing to undertake a design integration study to understand potential preliminary designs for the station that would integrate with the new Brent Cross West Thameslink Station. This would allow passive provision to be provided, if possible, within the Brent Cross West station.  This review will also need to respond to other constraints such as the existing Brent Curve Junction and the Hendon Lines. 

“Consequently, the Committee is asked to authorise Officers to undertake a design integration study to assess how the WLO line (Dudding Hill line) could link into Brent Cross West Station.  The £50k cost estimate will be funded from the Thameslink budget.”

That public-sector design study clearly and unambiguous falls within the scope of provisions of the UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters of 1988, a convention ratified by the UK.

You must open the study’s findings to what the Supreme Court would consider to be appropriate levels of public participation. Furthermore, that consultation must be in advance of incorporating the study’s findings into any Brent Cross West station planning application. Otherwise, we will challenge you in law, using our London-wide expertise and resources.

Please also note that the submission version of the London Borough of Brent Plan has a policy of 8-carriage-length platforms (perhaps provided passively) at any Dudding Hill line stations within the London Borough of Brent. 

That allows future inter-regional trains, running tangentially to central London, to stop at Brent’s growth area stations, as well as short London Overground trains running on this London orbital route.

That aspiration has also been included in community submissions to the Mayor’s London Plan, currently under examination by the Planning Inspectorate.

If and when there is a Dudding Hill Line station at Old Oak Common Lane station, it is also likely that the London Borough of Ealing will require 8-carriage platforms, given that other platforms at that station are already being so specified by Transport for London.

Therefore, the specification within your Dudding Hill line integration study will need to reflect these current and future policies of neighbouring boroughs. You cannot credibly avoid provision for 8-carriage platforms at Brent Cross West station.

Alison Hopkins

What about the Brent Cross Development? How will it affect you? April 4th Meeting

Useful update on the Brent Cross Cricklewood development & associated projects

It has been really hard to keep up with the changes of direction in this long running saga so many thanks to the NW2 Residents' Association for this post from their website LINK:

Brent Cross expansion on hold

5th August 2018

Hammerson announced the expansion of Brent Cross shopping centre was on hold. It’s not obvious what this means for us, especially now that Brent Cross Cricklewood‘s been divided into three parts.

Brent Cross London

Brent Cross London is Hammerson’s part.

• Expanding the shopping centre
• Moving and expanding the bus station
• A new bridge across the North Circular
• Changing the ends of the existing bridge across the North Circular (Templehof Bridge)
• Remodelling the roundabout at Staples Corner with fast slip roads around it
• Straightening out the Cricklewood Broadway / Cricklewood Lane / Chichele Road junction
• Straightening out the Cricklewood Lane / Claremont Road / Lichfield Road junction
• Changing the junctions with the Hendon Way
• Other changes to the roads and junctions

All this is now on hold. Barnet’s position is that it must be started before October 2019, because otherwise planning permission will expire. They still believe Hammerson sees the expansion of Brent Cross as a necessity. Hammerson talked about completion in 2023 rather than 2022 but the chief executive said “it would be wrong for me to give any firm guide.”

Brent Cross South

Brent Cross South is Argent Related’s part, south of the North Circular and east of the railway line.

• Housing, in large apartment blocks
• Offices
• Shops, restaurants and other facilities

We’re told it’s going ahead. The first block has planning permission, Argent are finalising designs for two more and will soon put in planning applications for them. Some demolition and construction is scheduled for 2019. By 2022 there should be a thousand new homes and a few hundred thousand square feet of office space, plus shops, places to eat and other facilities.
Construction vehicles will normally go along Tilling Road. The first block is going to be for people moved out of Whitefield Estate, so at first there won’t be a big increase in population. On the other hand, we all know how easily the junctions clog up. Might Hammerson try to put off paying for work on the junctions and what would that do to the Brent Cross South development?

Brent Cross Thameslink

Brent Cross Thameslink is Barnet Council’s part, mainly the stretch between the Edgware Road and the railway line.

• DB Cargo’s aggregate/spoil superhub, also known as the Rail Freight Facility, behind Lidl at 400 Edgware Road. This cleared the planning committee in February and permission’s now been granted. It might be in operation in 2019.
• New sidings and rail buildings near the south end of Brent Terrace, for completion by 2020. Network Rail are already working on the site.
• The Waste Transfer Station on Edgware Road, on the Serco site. Barnet are now consulting about their redesign of this. It might be built in 2019.
• The new Thameslink station “Brent Cross West”, behind Argos, Curry’s and the old cinema, including a public pedestrian bridge across the railway, scheduled to open in 2022.
• A road bridge across the railway, south-east of Geron Way, which last year was supposed “to open in 2021 rather than 2027” and this year “by 2030”.

We expect the superhub to go ahead. It never depended on Brent Cross Cricklewood for funding or to be profitable; only a tiny proportion of the 450 HGV movements a day will be to Brent Cross Cricklewood.
There’s an argument that the Waste Transfer Station will only be needed if the Thameslink station’s built, and maybe not even then. Barnet and North London Waste Authority still seem determined to have it. It will put 350 more HGV (Heavy Goods Vehicle) movements on the A5 every day, it requires new traffic lights on the Edgware Road, the old plans to make it more environmentally friendly with a “brown roof” have been scaled back and there are other changes, it’s attracted 447 online objections and will mainly affect Brent residents who of course have no say in appointing Barnet’s decision-makers, but we’ve seen how relaxed Barnet’s planning committee is about such considerations already.
If Hammerson didn’t go ahead with the expansion of Brent Cross, a big part of the justification for the station would go. It will be very expensive; the government will pay for part of it and the increase in business rates from Brent Cross is supposed to match another part. Barnet insist that it’s going ahead and will not be put on hold.

Other stuff

The outline planning permission area includes Donoghues on Claremont Road and Cricklewood Green on Cricklewood Lane. According to the planning statement for the Waste Transfer Station, “The PB Donoghue site is identified for redevelopment in Phase 4 of the BXC regeneration and is currently not anticipated to be redeveloped until after 2028.” Last year the Green was registered as an Asset of Community Value and before that councillors swore that it would not be developed as long as they were councillors, but a senior council officer tells us he still wants to develop it.
The B&Q buildings and car park are not part of Brent Cross Cricklewood, nor is 1-13 Cricklewood Lane (where the Co-op, Lucky 7 and other shops are), nor is the Galtymore site on the corner of Depot Approach and Cricklewood Broadway, opposite Beacon Bingo.

Hammerson put Brent Cross expansion on the back burner

Hammersons have announced that its £1.4bn Brent Cross Shopping Centre development has been put on the back-burner, perhaps until 2023, reflecting the current poor performance of the retail sector.

The proposals are now more than 10 years old and throughout the period have been hotly opposed by the cross-party Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood Development.

Doubts have emerged over the viability of the scheme following many recent failures in the retail sector and the public's move to on-line shopping.

Shareholders' basic earnings per share was 7p in June 2018 and 36.2p in 2017 - a reduction of 81%.

Hammerson said:

Given the current turbulence in the UK retail markets and whilst alternative uses of capital offer higher short-term financial returns, we have decided to defer the start on site at Brent Cross.

Whilst we have decided to defer the start on site of the scheme, it remains an important strategic project and we continue to recognise its role as one of London’s leading retail destinations.

It also forms part of the wider Brent Cross Cricklewood regeneration plans encompassing improved road and rail infrastructure and significant residential development and we remain engaged with retailers and stakeholders towards the future delivery of the scheme.

Andrew Dismore, Labour Assembly Member for Camden and Barnet said:

 Due to the nightmare market conditions for retailers, the developers for Brent Cross- Hammerson and Aberdeen Standard Investments- say they need more certainty before they can commit to going ahead with the project. Brexit and the possibility of leaving the EU with no deal is a genuine fear for businesses.

This delay is also a disaster for the local community, as it delays the creation of much needed jobs, and will have an impact on the rest of the huge regeneration scheme.  More immediately, given Barnet Council’s reliance on projected business rates in its future budgeting, this decision could really impact on  the Council’s solvency.

Company press release HERE

Check the record of Laing O'Rourke winner of £700m Brent Cross pre-construction contract

--> It was announced today that Laing O’Rouke has been appointed under a pre-construction agreement as part of a two stage tender process for the main construction work of the Brent Cross  regeneration with an overall value of £700m.
Laing O’Rourke will work with Hammerson and Standard Life Investments to finalise the design and procurement in order to enable a start on site in 2018. 

The regeneration of Brent Cross London will double the size of the existing centre to 2 million sq ft of retail and leisure space. This will include up to 150 new retail stores and 50 new restaurants, a leisure and cinema offer, hotel accommodation and, it is claimed, improved public spaces including a new town square. The plans also include a relocated and enlarged bus station as well as, it is claimed, improved transport and highways infrastructure.

The regeneration has been opposed by residents in both Barnet and Brent concerned with over-development and and a significant increase in traffic. See Coalition for A Sustainable Brent Cross

O’Rourke hit problems earlier this year when it posted a £245m loss as a result of a PFI contract in Montreal. LINK

Earlier in October this year  two subsidaries of the company were fined a total of £3.8m after a worker was crushed by an 11 tonne concrete panelin Worksop in 2014. LINK

HSE inspector Stuart Pilkington said after the hearing: “This tragic incident led to the avoidable death of a young man, whose death could easily have been prevented if the companies had acted following previous warnings to identify and manage the risks involved, maintain the equipment, and put a safe system of work in place.”

Laing O’Rourke was fined £800,000 in March of this year over an incident in which, again in 2014, a worker crushed his own brother to death while driving a dumper at a building site for a multi-storey car park at Heathrow Terminal 2. LINK

London Mayor urged to intervene in risky Hammerson 'fairy tale' at Brent Cross

Guest blog by John Cox (click on image to enlarge)

'Britain In or Out' debate Sunday Brent Cross

Click on image to enlarge

URGENT: Act to save Cricklewood's last green open space from Barnet Council's land grab

Cricklewood Open Space (Thomas Bell Photographs)

This is what Barnet Council says to justify the selling off of Cricklewood's last green space:

The subject plot fronting B&Q, on Cricklewood Lane is currently an open space primarily used as a disabled access ramp to the B&Q store. It is regularly fly-tipped and attracts rough sleepers among other social issues such as alcohol and substance misuse. The proximity to local businesses means on-going disturbance to businesses, environmental degradation, and Health & Safety concerns resulting from substance/alcohol misuse and excessive littering. Retention of the site in its existing condition would not only allow these problems to continue, but also drain the Council’s resources in terms of on-going management costs. 


Campaigners and residents from Barnet and Council came together in November 2013  to protest at the possible disposal of the green space outside B&Q in Cricklewood and are organising again as a planning application to build on it goes before Barnet Council on September 7th.

November 2013

The Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Development sent this message over the weekend:

Barnet  Councilare meeting on September 7th to discuss the sale of Cricklewood’s only green space, outside B&Q. It was given as public open space in 1987 when the retail park was built. Crown Estates sold it to Barnet in 2004 with a stipulation it would not be built on.  Barnet have managed to remove this requirement, and are selling public land with no public consultation.



All the known Cricklewood Green Space material is now on the BX Coalition website  LINK - scroll down for the last few postings there:

Actions you can take
-          Tweet @Barnetcouncil using #CricklewoodGreen
-          Sign the petition if you haven’t before and ask your neighbours to sign LINK
-          Write to the papers
-          Write to the committee about the sale of public land without consultation,
-          Join us in a protest outside the meeting on September 7th (check blog)
-          Keep checking the blog and Twitter @BXcoalition

From the Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Development
Our co-ordinator  Alison is on holiday, please contact fiona.colgan@yahoo.co.uk

Saving William Gladstone Open Space for all of us

I am opposed to free schools and academies and so is the Green Party. The Liberal Democrats have gone along with free schools and academies in the Coalition and Sarah Teather changed her position from opposition to support when she became a minister. On that and much else I am passionately opposed to them.

However Liberal Democrat councillor Alision Hopkins has been vociferous in her opposition to the Gladstone Free School being built on the William Gladstone Open Space next to Gladstone Park and I think her reasons deserve a wider circulation.

Here is Alison's Guest Blog which is what she would have said at tonight's meeting. 

I’m really sorry I can’t be at the meeting tonight. I’ve a family funeral in Southampton which clashes.

For me, this is a very personal issue. I grew up at the Gladstone Park end of Dollis Hill Avenue, and played in the park and on the open space as a child. I know it well, and I know its history and value to our community.

Let’s be clear, first of all, about the kind of green space that’s threatened. This land has never been built on. Centuries ago it was part of Lower Oxgate Farm, later, market gardens and then allotments. It is now Metropolitan Open Land, which is the equivalent of Green Belt in London. It is protected by law.

Let’s also be clear that this is not about the school per se, it’s about the proposed location.

Gladstone School has claimed that they wish to build on the site of the old William Gladstone School. That site – where the school buildings once stood – is now houses and flats. The school wish to build on William Gladstone Open Space, which is its proper name, NOT Gladstone Playing Fields. And, for the sake of clarity, it’s in Dollis Hill, not Willesden as has repeatedly been stated.

The William Gladstone Open Space is precisely that. Open, green land that belongs to ALL of us. The school have also claimed the space is disused and run down. Their own press release refers to it as a “near abandoned “space! Perhaps they should tell that to the rugby players, the dog walkers, joggers, commuters and all the other people who use it. Perhaps they should also tell that to the people who simply love looking and enjoying one of London’s precious and all too few green lungs.

Gladstone Park isn’t merely “nearby” as the school claim. It’s part of the space they want, and any road from Parkside to the school would have to go through Gladstone Park itself. The importance of Gladstone Park and the William Gladstone Open Space cannot be overstated.

The school also claims that Brent Council considered building on the Open Space in 2005. That’s being economical with the truth, to say the least. In 2005, Brent looked at every piece of land they owned to identify a site for a second City Academy at Wembley. The William Gladstone Open Space came last on the list and was rejected out of hand as totally unsuitable. Nothing has changed since them.

I was contacted by the school in August last year and I, with another fellow councillor met them in September. I made it clear then that I thought any idea of building on the open space was utterly wrong, would be fiercely resisted and that other options were available. Indeed, I suggested several to them, including other Brent owned properties.

Residents then started to approach me, to express their fears for what is the heart of our community. They are the ones – as it should be with any grass roots campaign! – who are leading this and who have pushed this campaign along. They’re the ones who’ve spent every evening and all weekends knocking on doors. They’re the ones who’ve set up Facebook pages.

Kilburn Cosmos, our terrific local rugby team, would be devastated if these plans went ahead. It would mean the loss of one of their essential rugby pitches. And, by the way, over a quarter of a million pounds was spent on that pitch very recently. When Cosmos applied to build a tiny club house on the Open Space, they were turned down almost instantly by Brent Council.

William Gladstone school was closed due to failing rolls in the early 1990s. This was in part because of poor transport links and also because of the nature of our Dollis Hill feeder schools. Nothing has changed since then.

There are three local primary schools in Dollis Hill. One is Orthodox Jewish, one Catholic and the only non-faith school, Braintcroft is directly across the road from Crest Academy.  Crest is having £40 million spent on it and will be using brand new buildings from September.  Gladstone School tells me that they only approached Braintcroft to assess their interest last week! Neither Our Lady of Grace nor the Jewish school will act as a feeder school to Gladstone. It’s also very unlikely that Braintcroft would, as they feed to Crest and to schools in Wembley. What that means is that the pupils attending Gladstone would be unlikely to be local children who could or would walk to Gladstone School. Again, the 2005 Brent Council report clearly stated this.

The small primary school at the bottom of Parkside does cause some issues with traffic and parking at the beginning and end of the school day, as pupils travel from a distance. That school is, however a very good neighbour indeed and works hard to alleviate the difficulties. However, as part of their own small planning application, further double yellow lines will be put on Parkside.

The proposed site has no access roads. Parkside and Oxleys Road are both cul de sacs. Extending Parkside would mean encroaching into the park, and extending Oxleys Road would mean  traffic, including construction traffic driving directly through a quiet residential housing estate.

The Open Space is not served by tubes or busses. When Brent assessed the land in  2005, it scored the lowest possible mark for transport using the PTAL rating, which measures non car accessibility in general. That study also said that the railway line bordering the site made it difficult for primary schools in the south of the borough to get to the Open Space. , Those are the schools that  Gladstone School has canvassed and where any  interest seems to lie. There are no direct bus routes.  The  226 serves the south side of the park and is infrequent, requiring changing to other bus routes to reach most of south Brent. The 232 on Dollis Hill Lane is also infrequent and serves the St Raphael’s  Estate  and Brent Cross.  There’s a railway line, but that’s a goods and freight service, which also happens to carry waste as well as fuel to Heathrow Airport.

The school also claims they were asked by Brent Council not to campaign for the site and thus stir up local feeling. I find that hard to credit and have asked for confirmation from Brent officers. They also claim to have consulted widely: surely those claims are contradictory?

The school is now petitioning for Brent Council to consult on the proposed school. It actually isn’t down to Brent Council, for once, to consult with residents about the school and its location. That can’t happen until a formal planning application is sent to the council. It’s up to the school to talk to local people, and that’s been sadly lacking. I’m a local resident. I wasn’t contacted. I know that Braintcroft, for example, were only contacted last week. I’ve also been told that Gladstone School has been contacting schools outside Dollis Hill for two years.

As I said at the outset, this isn’t about the existence of the school, this is about proposals to use a location which is not only utterly unsuitable for the school, but deeply damaging to our community. I’ve rarely seen such a depth of anger and disquiet here. We love our green space and want it left for us and succeeding generations. Once it’s gone, it’s gone forever.

Greens condemn 'greenwash' in Brent Cross development plans

The proposals for the redevelopment of Brent Cross seem to have been going on since the turn of the century. Like many recent developments it is just over the border from Brent and has received opposition from Kilburn, Dollis Hill and Cricklewood residents.

This is the Barnet Green Party's submission:

Barnet Council is currently considering a massive planning application for the Brent Cross Cricklewood redevelopment, including a huge extension to the shopping centre and a whole new residential town.

Barnet Greens say the BXC plans are full of utter ‘greenwash’, seeking to create a false impression about the environmental sustainability of this multi-billion pound project.

Here are the main objections we have submitted to the council:

1.These plans must be suspended until the development partners pledge to make the whole site carbon neutral and set out measures they will take to achieve that target. Sainsbury’s has already opened its first carbon neutral store (bit.ly/1bjnRQG) and plans to open more, showing that the technologies are available to make the Brent Cross shopping centre and the housing developments completely carbon neutral or carbon positive.

The proposed buildings are likely to exist for several decades at least and there is no way whatsoever that the British government will achieve its aim of a 60 per cent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 if concrete giants like the Brent Cross shopping centre are still belching out carbon dioxide from heating, lighting and air conditioning.

This scheme is an ideal opportunity to install energy conservation measures and sustainable power facilities right from the beginning. There is plenty of scope on the site for enough wind turbines, solar arrays and ground source heat pumps to make the whole area carbon positive, never mind carbon neutral.

So why aren’t they doing it? As well as benefitting the environment, carbon neutrality would save money for the people who live in the new town and for the businesses, as their energy bills would be much lower – they might even make money by feeding electricity back into the grid.

Can it be that the developers are more interested in building cheaply than in saving on running costs for the future occupants of the homes and commercial buildings?

2. At a time when neighbourhood shopping areas are under threat all over London from post office closure, cut backs to libraries and the marginal viability of many small shops and pubs, Barnet Council should be making a broader study, paid for by the developers, of the likely impact of Brent Cross Cricklewood on other shopping areas in the borough.

The scheme is not just about new housing and a so-called town centre, the whole thing is based on “an expanded and improved shopping centre”, with an “enhanced retail offer including new stores at Brent Cross Shopping Centre”, to cite the developers’ own documents.

3.When the council has assessed the likely impact, it should order the developers to pay whatever it costs to ensure the sustainability of Hendon, Golders Green and the other nearby centres: better street layouts, improved public transport, more greenery, more public toilets, more benches to rest on or whatever it takes to ensure that these neighbourhood areas remain available and attractive for local residents to use.

4. As for the transport issues surrounding the new plans, of course there should be a direct rail link to the expanded shopping centre rather than more car parking. The developers say they expect cars still to be the main way that people get there but why is that? People will no doubt continue to want to shop at Brent Cross but why should they necessarily go by car? Do people mostly go to Oxford Street or Westfield shopping centres by car? Of course not, because they are properly served by London Underground lines and by buses.

The Brent Cross Cricklewood developers should be instructed to provide attractive and adequate Tube/train/tram, bus, cycle and pedestrian links for there to be a likelihood of far fewer than the projected extra 29,000 car journeys per day in the area.

5.The Clitterhouse Farm buildings should be saved. Preserving them would only require minor alterations to the overall plan.

6. If waste treatment facilities are to remain part of the plan, it should be specified that the priority should be sustainable systems such as anaerobic digestion and/or other systems from the growing range of alternative technologies.

7. It should be specified that no waste incineration should take place at the Geron Way cite. A new waste plan is under consideration for North London and it would be simple and cost-free for the designers of that plan to omit any proposal for incineration at Geron Way. This would in any case match the practicalities of the site, given the current objections by Bestway and others.

Check out the plans for yourself  HERE 

    

INCINERATOR THREATENS SCHOOLS AND HOMES - U.S. EXPERT

Leading waste expert Professor Paul Connett voiced vehement concerns about plans for the proposed Brent Cross Cricklewood waste incinerator, at the Willesden Area Consultative Forum last Wednesday, October 7th. This comes in advance of Barnet’s likely acceptance of the plans at the forthcoming planning committee on Tuesday 20th October.

Paul Connett, Emeritus Professor of Environmental Chemistry at St Lawrence University New York State, gave an enlightening and condemning talk, after being briefed on the proposed waste plans, including a site visit of the area by members of the Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood (BXC) Plan. He ripped apart the “green wash” claims made by the developers that the plans are harmless and “not incineration” and called the plant a “gasifying incinerator”.

He stated that no gasification plant anywhere in the world has been used to successfully dispose of commercial waste by burning, that the technology is unproven other than for burning wood, that burning waste is not the answer to achieve “zero waste” and that the emission of ultra fine nano particulates by these plants isn't regulated.

Professor Paul Connett said, “These modern new-style incinerators put out more nano-particles than the old ones. The particles are so small that rather than lodging in the lungs they enter the bloodstream. You would have to be STUPID to put one of these things near a community – schools and homes are being put at risk from non-regulated and potentially lethal emissions. We need to protect our citizens from this stupidity. The United States hasn’t allowed any new incinerators since 1995, so why have Barnet? Developers should come clean and give us the information. Barnet need to move from PR to solid answers.”

He added, “After 25 years you would be no closer to sustainability compared to zero waste. An incinerator is one big black box. Aiming for zero waste is hundreds of little green boxes.”

Lia Colacicco, Co-ordinator of the BXC Coalition said, “The Professor’s views have confirmed our worst fears that plans are totally wrong for this area. Not only is it not safe, it’s incredibly stupid. It’s madness to burn waste, crazy to put this so close to a local school, and dishonest to claim it is harmless and not incineration. This is not the right way to deal with our waste, and only confirms that plans for Brent Cross are not in the public interest. If the developers don't believe it is an incinerator, then give us the plans and show us the facts.”

“We are also concerned that Barnet Councillors have been hoodwinked by developers’ PR to believe the plant is safe, when neurotoxins will be emitted. We do not believe that Barnet Councillors and those making the decisions have fully researched the facts or have even visited the site. If they had done so they would be fully aware of the implications of this toxic monster of a scheme.”

Local Councillor Alec Castle said, “Professor Connett’s enlightening talk makes it even more clear that the Brent Cross development would have a catastrophic impact on the environment and the health of local residents if approved in its current form.”

The proposed site for the incinerator is just 200 yards from Our Lady of Grace Infants School in Dollis Hill, Brent. Brent Friends of the Earth had previously condemned the plans over toxic dioxin emissions that developers admitted would be released from the plant, about monitoring of emissions and lack of detail in the plans.

The coalition now consists of twelve residents groups in Barnet, Camden and Brent, three political parties, two MPs, two London Assembly Members, three Friends of the Earth groups, London-wide and local transport campaigners, a cycling campaign, a large local employer and individual local residents. It aims to demand and achieve a public inquiry to prevent BXC being built according to current plans.

Brent Green Party is a member of the Coalition.

DETOX BRENT X

The chair of Barnet's planning and environment committee has announced that she will move deferral of the controversial Brent Cross-Cricklewood planning application at today's meeting. She said. "We have had several detailed representations in the last few days and it is important that the council gives these the fullest consideration. I want everyone to appreciate that representations will be dealt with professionally, transparently and in full.”

This is the fourth time that consideration of the application has been delayed. The Brent Cross Coalition, who are campaigning for the application to be refused said, "The fact that the planning meeting been has deferred at the last minute, and delayed countless times previously, shows that Barnet are wrong to think they are able to give the degree of scrutiny at ordinary planning committee that this 5-billion-pound regional development deserves. Barnet are right to fully consider the large number of detailed objections they have now received. But inconsistencies in the committee report and myths banded about by the developers, mean that Barnet alone can't decide on this scheme. It should be called in to a public inquiry as soon as possible."

Before the deferral announcement the Coalition had drawn attention to the fact that the developers had said 9,000 extra cars per day would be generated bu the development,despite Barnet and Transport for London's estimate of 29,000.

The Coalition said, “It is outrageous that developers have managed to ‘lose’ 20,000 of the 29,000 extra cars a day from Barnet’s own predictions. We challenge the developers how they think the 1,500 new homes at West Hendon can account for 20,000 of the extra 29,000 cars generated. What we need is a full public inquiry to thoroughly scrutinize the plans, not the quick rubber stamp of Barnet’s ordinary planning committee.

“We need proper regeneration of the Brent Cross area, giving the local community real power in its design and phasing, not the PR myths that are more fiction than fact. A growing number of groups across London won’t be fooled by the developers’ spin and ‘green-wash’ painted on these 1980s car-based plans, when they should be environmentally designed for the 21st Century.”

Despite the deferral the Coalition will still be holding a protest outside Hendon Town Hall at 6pm tonight.

ALL ABOARD TO FIGHT BRENTOX PLAN

A coalition of local groups spanning Brent, Barnet and Camden has formed to oppose current plans for the Brent Cross Cricklewood (BXC) development, and to win a public inquiry, in advance of Barnet Council’s forthcoming determination of the planning application at a planning committee meeting on Wednesday 23rd September.

The coalition consists of ten residents groups, three political parties, two MPs, one London Assembly Member, three Friends of the Earth groups, two cycling campaigns, London-wide and local transport campaigners, a large local employer and local residents. It aims to demand and achieve a public inquiry to prevent BXC being built according to current plans.

Lia Colacicco, Brent resident and Coalition Co-ordinator says, “This scheme is unsustainable in many ways, despite the green-wash painted by developers. Our coalition objects to many aspects of the plan: transport provisions, increases in pollution, environmental degradation and lack of social sustainability. The Mayor’s Rules are clear that major developments should be zero carbon emission but the developers say it is not commercially viable”

“In view of the huge negative environmental impact this regional scale development will have on a wide area of North West London, all our diverse groups have come together to oppose it. We welcome regeneration of the area, but not this ill-conceived pre-climate change plan that has incensed a great number of local people across three boroughs.”

Alison Hopkins, Brent Resident on the border with Barnet adds, “This is an attempt to build Manhattan in a suburban setting, destroying much green space and our quality of life in the process. Frankly, the whole scheme is overbearing, and smacks of over ambition, especially in the current fragile economic climate.”

“This scheme contains outline planning permission for the next couple of decades, for the developers to do what they want. Only an unprecedented Act of Parliament could undo the tremendous power they will gain, if this outline scheme is approved.

“Furthermore, the developers have slipped FULL planning permission into what Barnet has always called an outline application. So they can immediately make huge changes, convenient for them, even though they have no commitment to see them through in the years ahead.”

The report to the Planning Committee from Barnet Council’s planning officers is not due to be made public until Tuesday 15 September, giving only a week for residents and groups to make sense of it. It will be determined by Barnet alongside minor matters at an ordinary monthly Planning Committee meeting.

Over 3,000 petitions calling for the development to be called into Public Inquiry were handed in to John Denham, Secretary of State for Local Government and Communities in June.

WE WON'T BE DUMPED ON, DRIVEN OVER, OR DUPED!

A 'Coalition for a Sustainable BXC Plan' has been formed to oppose the Brent Cross-Cricklewood regeneration project following a meeting at Brent Town Hall last week. Those attending included four local councillors, Brent Friends of the Earth, local Residents' Associations, Brent Cyclists and myself from the Brent Green Party.

The coalition is united around the aim of opposing the current plans for the development by campaigning against the planning application which is likely to go to Barnet Planning Committee on Wednesday September 23rd, and campaigning for the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to call in the plans and set up a public inquiry.

Although participants in the Coalition may have differences in terms of the detail of their objections they are agreed that the present plans would cause environmental damage and be to the detriment of the local community.

A petition to the Secretary of State organised by Brent Friends of the Earth can be found here.