Showing posts with label Brent Cross Coalition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brent Cross Coalition. Show all posts

Monday, 31 August 2015

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

Saturday, 16 November 2013

Dinosaur and developer join protest against loss of Cricklewood green space


Demonstrators protesting against the possible loss of the green space outside B&Q in Cricklewood Lane in a deal between Barnet Council and the Brent Cross developers, coped quite well when they were joined by a dinosaur.


They were rather more surprised when they were joined by Jonathan Joseph, of Brent Cross Cricklewood Development Partners, and the man they have been battling since at least 2009.

Friday, 15 November 2013

Demonstrate tomorrow to save Cricklewood's only green space from developers

Outside B&Q :

Unit 1, Broadway Retail Park Cricklewood Lane Cricklewood, London LONDON NW2 

11am Saturday 
November 16th

Brent X Coalition LINK

Monday, 11 November 2013

Stop Barnet Council stealing Cricklewood's green space for developers



The Green Space (Green Isle)
The Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Development has learned that under revised plans to go before Barnet planning committee in January 2014 the green space outside B&Q (known as the 'Green Isle') will be built over in Phase one.  Despite Cricklewood Town Team having popular plans to plant trees and utilise part of the space for a market in the short term, this green space has been parcelled up and sold for high density development as part of the Brent Cross Cricklewood development over a mile away.

The green space on Cricklewood Lane will be covered by a five storey building, right up to the pavement line. Phase one could begin within 3 years.

The view towards the bridge now

The view when the green space is built on
     
Lesley Turner, Barnet resident and BXC coalition member says:

This green space was given to Cricklewood community at the end of the eighties, as compensation or section 106 planning gain, when Food Giant (now B&Q) was built on the site. The Green does not belong to Barnet but to Cricklewood and we have asked Barnet to see the original 106 agreement. We will be challenging Barnet over the legality of the disposal or change of use of this land. 

Lia Colacicco, Mapesbury resident and member of the BXC coalition added:

Cricklewood Town Team identified that Cricklewood needs a landmark at its centre, and a town square.  The Green Isle is our only public space, used for the Silk Road festival and other community events and now it will be snatched from us.  This piece of land is totally unrelated to the BXC development a couple of miles away, but has been wrapped up with it to gain outline planning permission.  Barnet Councillors should be held to account for this stealthy disposal of green land. It is a generic piece of land to the developers, but means everything to us and needs to be unwrapped from BXC, or become the subject of a land swap. The site might not be pretty now, but look at how Mapesbury Dell has been transformed.

Once excavated it would be a real asset to the community as a plaza or other open space. 
Fiona Colgan from the Groves Community Action Group said:
My neighbours and I have written to our councillors and MP to strongly oppose the plan to build on our only local green space.  Cricklewood spans three boroughs - we are asking  Brent and Camden councils to call  Barnet to account.  

 Accommodation in the Groves is very high density and Cricklewood Lane gets very congested and polluted so this green space is particularly important to us but it's clear that everyone in Cricklewood would benefit if this land was retained as our 'town green’ at the heart of our community.  I think Barnet needs to explain why the green space in front of B&Q wasn’t included in its calculations of green space. Those of us who live in this part of the borough often feel overlooked by Barnet who do not seem to realise that we need green space as much as those who live in the wealthier, leafier parts of the borough to the North.
 The Coalition group urges people to attend the public consultation this week:
     
Consultation on Tuesday 12 and Wednesday 13 November from 11am to 8pm at Hendon Leisure Centre, Marble Drive, NW2 1XQ.
Comments need to be sent to nicola.capeli@barnet.gov.uk by 6th December

An on-line petition has been launched to save the Green Isle LINK

Further information on the Brent Cross Coalition website: LINK

Thursday, 23 February 2012

Alison Hopkins to fight Dollis Hill by-election for Lib Dems

Alison Hopkins
Brent Liberal Democrats have selected Alison Hopkins as their candidate in the Dollis Hill by-election.

Alison Hopkins has been active in the Campaign for a Sustainable Brent Cross Development, was critical of the revised Brent waste strategy and its use of co-mingled collections, and  campaigned against the closure of Neasden library.

Wednesday, 18 January 2012

'Scrap the whole Brent Cross Regeneration Plan'- Brent Cross Coalition

The Brent Cross Coalition has  welcomed the collapse of what they call  'the grotesque, car-based Brent Cross scheme'. However. they say it is totally unacceptable to still go ahead with the 'easy-profit shopping centre expansion', which they have been told  told is a 'possibility'. Neighbouring Brent Council fought this successfully in the late 1990s, and is likely to again. 

The Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross-Cricklewood Plan say:



We demand the whole plan is scrapped, and the arrogant local developers, and their ineffective PR company, are removed from the project.


Measures in the new Localism Act mean that over-bearing property companies, in alliance with the conceited Barnet Council, cannot get away with “business as usual”. This is a great day for people-power – not Hammerson plc and not Mike Freer (former Barnet leader, now MP).


We want development based on people’s aspirations for a sustainable, low-carbon, exciting regeneration of the area. This means starting from scratch, and will also obviously have to wait for improvements in the economy.


The developers have wasted many years – not ONE home has been built, not ONE transport improvement. Barnet Council has also wasted many hours of work in promoting something nobody wanted - their web site still estimates 29,000 extra cars every day in the Brent Cross area, which would cause traffic misery.


The developers have just received planning permission for a small building at Brent Cross – but have resorted to making the application from a tax haven in the Channel Islands. They have no shame, and are behaving no better than bankers.


Lia Colacicco, Co-ordinator of the Brent Cross Coalition, said:

“The regeneration was always a mirage; despite the PR spin, the developers were only ever committed to building a few hundred new housing units anyway. In return for cheaply purchasing large swathes of public land, their main return to the local population would have been gridlocked traffic. I hope the next deal is more transparent, and involves a stretch of light rail to link to local tube lines.”


Alison Hopkins, Dollis Hill resident, said:

“What we are being offered now is little different from the rejected shopping centre planning application of 13 years ago. We will still get lots of extra traffic, but no transport improvements. The developers want to 'pick the low-hanging fruit' of what pays out quick profits. The Brent Cross Waste Incinerator seems to be a dead project now, but we will continue to campaign, to make absolutely sure.”



David Howard, Chair of the Federation of Residents Associations of Barnet, said:

“The Brent Cross Cricklewood development would have had a negative impact on the infrastructure and the environment of much of North London and for generations to come. Brian Coleman cannot quote my phrase of “hobbit homes”, since he has done nothing to stop the scheme, and we have. We need the public land at Brent Cross to be kept out of the hands of the developers, and corridors across it reserved for future light railway to Brent Cross Northern Line station, and to other local areas.”


Councillor Shafique Choudhary, London Borough of Brent, said:

"Unfortunately, this probably means that the developers and Barnet council are trying to get what they wanted all along, which is the expansion of their Brent Cross 'out-of-town' shopping centre, with no other benefits. This is something that my borough, the neighbouring London Borough of Brent, fought long and hard, but successfully against, in the late 1990s. That included making a convincing case at an appeal inquiry to a Planning Inspector, who found in our favour. The Brent Cross Coalition and Brent Council may have another fight on their hands!

Tuesday, 1 November 2011

New Brent Cross planning application would scupper light rail

We, the Brent Cross Coalition, bitterly criticise the just-released planning application by the Brent Cross Cricklewood developers, Hammerson (Brent South) Ltd. and Kleinwort Benson (Channel Islands) Corporate Services Ltd. It intends to build on top of yet another of the possible light-rail corridors at Brent Cross, despite the threat of massive road congestion. 

We believe that the developers must rethink their 14-million-square-feet, 20-storey, incinerator-fuelled, car-choked scheme, and we believe general political support for their current plan is leaking away – yet Barnet Council is currently encouraging them to go ahead, regardless. The Channel Islands low-tax company now wants new development to jump from the stalled ‘Phase One’ Brent Cross plan to build on Phase 7 land.

Various transport solutions at Brent Cross remain possible, but we think that passenger numbers would be high enough for a new “Docklands Light Railway” here. This could then be expanded, as an east-west rail line across the whole of outer London, from west London, to Brent Cross, then via Colindale, Mill Hill East and Finchley Central, to New Southgate and Arnos Grove. It would be “off-road”, so no high streets would be dug up.

Any new Thameslink station would certainly mean closing Cricklewood and maybe Hendon stations, since they would be so close together on a very busy main line. Temporary work from the developers at Cricklewood would not change that.

In doing this, it would destroy the only feasible light-rail route into the site from Cricklewood station that avoids Phase One buildings. It could also bring into Brent Cross thousands of passengers from the planned “High-Speed-Two” and Crossrail stations in west London, via stations on the Bakerloo and Jubilee Lines in neighbouring Brent.
Dollis Hill campaigner Alison Hopkins  says:
“The Brent Cross developers surprise us. We keep pointing out that car grid-lock will not be a ‘plus point’ in their future marketing, and will not enhance the future profitablity of their development. That is why we keep suggesting a viable alternative. Perhaps we need to set up tents in the Brent Cross car park to finally get through to them.”
We, the Brent Cross Coalition, point out that Barnet Council’s web site still predicts over 29,000 extra cars every day in the Brent Cross area, if development goes ahead. Later, lower car estimates totally lack credibility.
We know that the developers are planning to physically raise the Brent Cross development "ground level" by three or four metres above the current ground level, so a light railway on the EXISTING level of land could be built around, in due course.
Lia Colacicco, Convenor of the Brent Cross Coalition says:
“Due to the arrogance of the developers, we are unable to stop them going after their quick profits, but they have never properly consulted local people. Many house-owners remain in fear of compulsory purchase of their perfectly adequate homes, many of which have gardens.
“Overall, we are opposed to the current complete, off-shore-funded Brent Cross plan.
"Development should be exciting. It should be designed with local people and the environment in mind. The developers are no better than greedy bankers. We need to work on a new master-plan for a sustainable development fit for the 21st century, not one that is twenty years out-of-date.”
We, the Coalition, accept that the new planning application is for only a small (catering) building on the Phase Seven land, but it is the thin end of the wedge, and it could be proposed elsewhere instead. 
The light-rail line is needed at the start of Phase One, certainly not as late as Phase Seven! We will continue to fight for a sustainable development that will improve the needs of the residents and local town centres, while improving the transport network over much of west and north London.
Readers can go to the web site of another Conservative Council, Hammersmith and Fulham, and search for “Old Oak Video”.
 
They will see an alternative, brighter future – large-scale, high-density development that is properly designed around public transport, not Barnet Council’s apology for the concept.
If the government backs the “High-Speed-Two” railway between London and Birmingham in the next few months, the proposed “DLR light railway” shown on the video at Old Oak may well be built. Will extensions of that light-rail line merely permanently stop at the borders of Barnet?

Saturday, 19 February 2011

Could a 'Needs Budget' unite us?

It was clear as I was chatting during the by-election count on Thursday evening that there is a great deal of disquiet amongst some Labour councillors about the Council's cuts programme.

 "Me! Closing libraries... I can't believe it!" was the comment from one Labour councillor, while a former Lib Dem councillor lamented the lack of political power of ruling group councillors who aren't on the Executive. He said that the new 'cabinet' form of local government sharply reduced the role of 'back-bench' councillors.  It is those Labour councillors, often newly elected, who stood last time in order to improve the quality of life of Brent residents, who will be faced with a stark choice on February 28th when the full Council meeting is due to vote on the budget.

The Labour leadership has undermined its own position to some extent because they have denied that the cuts they propose will have a detrimental impact on already disadvantaged local people. To make the cuts palatable they have sought to placate opposition by insisting that those most in need will be protected and that the quality of service, despite massive staff cuts, will be maintained.   Added to this they have sometimes echoed David Cameron's 'Big Society' smokescreen by calling for volunteers to run libraries and other services. The people of Brent aren't fools and can see through the spin.

The Labour leadership thus separates itself from local community activists, users' groups and trades unionists who seek to defend public services. Rank and file councillors find themselves at odds with erstwhile friends, colleagues and comrades and some are sickened by the position they find themselves in.

Rather than act as the Coalition's bailiff's, Labour could be taking the lead in fighting the Coalition's cuts imposed at local and national government level by constructing a 'needs-led' budget in collaboration with local activists.  Rather than deny that the cuts will hit the most vulnerable they would analyse what services local people need to survive the forthcoming period of  economic turn-down and social stress and cost them.  They would also look at what investment and job creation needs to be made locally order for Brent  to move out of recession.   Such a budget would, for example,  immediately show that cuts in children centres, youth provision and Brent Law Centre are counter to the needs of local people.

Armed with this budget, and the detailed analysis on which it is based,  the Council could fight a campaign, alongside organisations such as Brent Fightback, against the Coalition cuts and make the case for fair funding for Brent based on the needs of the population.   They could also unite with Labour councils elected across London at the last election in a London wide campaign publicising the irrevocable damage public service cuts will cause.

LINK to report on similar campaign in Portsmouth


Thursday, 10 February 2011

BRENT BELTS BARNET'S BRENT CROSS BALONEY

The Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood (BXC) Plan has learnt of bitter criticism by Brent Council of transport plans for the proposed £4.5 billion Brent Cross Cricklewood development.
In a draft document for its "Local Implementation Plan" (LIP) for the Mayor of London released in January, Brent tears into the Brent Cross Transport Assessment and wants neighbouring Barnet Council to stop the whole Brent Cross development until revised modelling and assessments are carried out.
In its LIP document  Brent says:
"Brent Cross / Cricklewood ... Brent has concerns about the potential negative impacts of aspects of the proposals on parts of Brent. There are particular concerns about the robustness of the transport assessment."
"Brent will have to object to the proposals until revised modelling and assessments are carried out."
Brent objected at the time of the Brent Cross planning inquiry, but Barnet Council played down the scale of Brent's objections. A promise made since by Barnet, to jointly consider increased traffic congestion on the A5 Edgware Road, has not changed Brent's position.
Brent also insists that road changes around Staples Corner:
"should not prejudice future opportunities to provide light rail, or other fixed link, to the [Brent Cross area].”
This follows Brent Council’s endorsement of a future North and West London Light Railway (NWLLR) project at a full Council meeting on 24 January.
Brent Council, Harrow Council and Ealing Council  have all now voted unanimously, to support in principle the "North and West London Light Railway" as one of several solutions for an orbital railway line across outer London.
John Cox, BXC Coalition member and transport campaigner says,
“Brent Council is right to reaffirm its concerns about the Brent Cross transport figures, and the resulting road congestion we will all suffer. It was due to questions that the "Brent Cross Coalition" raised about Barnet Council's figure of over twenty-nine thousand extra cars a day (including at West Hendon) that led Barnet to magically revise this figure down. After five years of the high figure, It now states a more "politically acceptable" nine thousand cars, somehow managing to lose twenty thousand.
"Barnet has misrepresented the numbers by assuming car journeys would account for one third rather than two-thirds of trips. Brent also recognises that the transport assessment needs to be revised again in view of other new plans, such as the Wembley regeneration. However, the desire for extra money from the Brent Cross developers has completely stopped the council from representing the public interest.
“In common with Brent Council, we just don’t believe these dubious figures. Barnet and the developers need to go back to the drawing board. We know the real impact their car-based scheme will have on congestion and air pollution in Barnet, Brent and the surrounding areas.”
Shafique Choudhary, Brent Councillor and BXC Coalition member, says:
“Alongside many local residents, councillors from all parties have been campaigning against this damaging development and the impact it will have on us. I am pleased that Brent Council planning and transport department are yet again pointing out major concerns about the severe congestion that the Brent Cross development will bring.
"I am dubious about the quality of the 'A5 Corridor Study' that Barnet is now trying to palm us off with. It is not going to reduce the car levels from Brent Cross one bit.
“I am also delighted that all political parties at Brent Council are supporting proposals for a North and West London Light Railway – a sustainable public transport project that will go a long way to ease the gridlock and provide alternative routes right across north and west London."
There are campaigners in Barnet who want to extend such a light-rail line across Barnet, via Colindale and Mill Hill East, to benefit even more people. The Coalition believes that the car-based developments at Brent Cross (costing £4.5 Billion) , Colindale (£1.5 billion) and elsewhere could pay for it, if only the political will is there.

COALITION FOR A SUSTAINABLE BRENT CROSS CRICKLEWOOD DEVELOPMENT WEBSITE  HERE

Wednesday, 29 December 2010

Independent on 80 giant incinerators planned for 2011

The Independent has an excellent on-line article about the debate around the new incinerators planned for the UK LINK.

The Brent Cross Coalition has been raising urgent questions about the incinerator planned for the new development there on the borders of Brent and of course we have proposals to expand 'waste processing plants' in Park Royal as part of the West London Waste Strategy, with no information on the actual processes that will take place in the plants.

I hope our councillors will take time to read this important article.

Monday, 8 November 2010

House of Commons Burning Talks

Environmental groups opposing the Brent Cross incinerator took their fight to the House of Commons on Tuesday of last week.  Together with invited MPs, they heard leading waste experts spell out the dangers of incinerators, such as that proposed at Brent Cross, and the arguments for a “zero waste” alternative.  However, Mike Freer, local MP for Finchley and Golders Green failed to attend.

Brent Cross Cricklewood Coalition members from local Friends of the Earth (FoE) groups in Brent, Barnet and Enfield were invited to the seminar “Zero Waste – the Cost Effective and Sustainable Alternative to Incineration”.  The meeting, organised by Gloucestershire against Incinerators, part of the “UK Without Incineration Network” (UKWin), was attended by anti-incinerator groups from across the UK, as well as members of Parliament.  Keynote speaker Paul Connett, Emeritus Professor of Environmental Chemistry from St Lawrence University, New York State, had previously visited the Brent Cross site, and also recently addressed the United Nations.

Professor Connett said, ““The Brent Cross Cricklewood developers need to radically rethink their "energy from domestic waste" plans.  Putting a gasifying-incinerator, emitting unregulated and toxic nano-particles, into a built-up area, near schools and homes is madness.  Gasification is an unproven technology for domestic waste.  This has caused at least one evacuation of local homes in Germany, after which trials were stopped.

"It beggars belief that the developers continue to claim they are not planning an "incinerator".

"Instead of burning our domestic waste, we need to move towards a "zero waste system", where rubbish is considered a resource to recycle.

“Incineration and gasification detract from recycling, since they don’t work without burning good recyclable materials.  They also emit more greenhouse gases than when the organic component is treated by digestion."

Viv Stein, Brent Friends of the Earth Spokesperson, said, “Incinerators are a dead technology, sold on spin.  No new plants have been approved in the United States since 1995.  The UK is now being targeted by companies keen to make a profit here – at the expense of the public purse, local communities and the environment.


“Incinerators bind local Councils to costly and inflexible long term contracts which are bad news anytime, but madness when Councils are so strapped for cash.  Councils sometimes even have to pay penalties because they are not providing enough material to burn.

“Brent Cross Developer Jonathan Joseph and former Barnet leader, now MP, Mike Freer, strongly defended incineration at Barnet planning committee, promising  information was readily available that these plants are safe.  Yet one year on we have yet to see any independent evidence this is the case.  We challenge Mike Freer and Hammerson to tell us why.  If Freer wants to stick an incinerator amongst his constituents, he should have joined us to listen to experts’ concerns.”

Phil Fletcher, Barnet and Enfield Friends of the Earth Co-ordinator said, “Far from producing “energy from waste”, incinerators are a “waste of energy”.  Electricity from burning waste is extremely inefficient.  It is actually better for the climate to landfill plastic - and not incinerate it - if it cannot be recycled.

“There is no safe level of toxic nano-particles from the incineration processes.  They are small enough to get into our bloodstream, and can do long-term damage to our health.  The ash created from incineration still has to be sent to landfill [8].  We learnt how monitoring of these toxic particles at hazardous waste landfill sites can be flawed – it depends where detection points are actually positioned.  It was quite shocking to see these are operating as open sites - here in the UK - with clouds of dust visibly affecting the local area.”

Julian Kirby, Waste Campaigner, Friends of the Earth [9] who also addressed the meeting said, “The UK buries or burns over £650 million of recyclable materials every year.  That’s not just bad for the environment, it’s a massive waste of resources and a huge cost to our cash-strapped economy.

“Over seventy thousand new jobs would be created if the UK recycled 70% of its business and Council-collected waste.  Given the Belgian region of Flanders exceeds that already, and Wales and Scotland have both set 70% as a 2025 target, why must England be left behind?

“As the latest statistics show, we are producing less waste every year, and recycling more of it.  That is the direction we need to be heading – there is no need or place for incineration in a genuinely zero waste future.”

Other speakers at the meeting were Barbara Farmer from Sward, a Gloucestershire group opposing incinerators, and Jonathan Essex from Bioregional who promote reuse of waste, which creates jobs and puts disused land into use.

This meeting follows recent news that North London Waste Authority – including Barnet - has lost its Government agreement to borrow around £700 million for its seven-borough PFI waste plan.

Monday, 1 November 2010

Brent Cross - Flawed Plans and Wasted Opportunity will Destroy Local Communities

The Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood (BXC) Plan has condemned last Thursday’s decision by a single unelected official at Barnet Council (leader Lynne Hillan -pictured below) to approve the fundamentally flawed planning application.

Lynne Hillan

The BXC Coalition fears the demolition of hundreds of local homes and road works on a massive scale will cause devastation to local communities.

Pauline McKinnell, Chairperson of  Cricklewood Community Forum and Hendon Way resident, says, “This scheme will cause huge disruption to the community for years to come. Hundreds of homes will be destroyed, with residents not knowing where they will be moved to. Home owners, many of whom have lived in the area for years, will be offered shared equity deals if they wish to stay locally, but details have not been worked out.

“The area is bounded by major roads - the North Circular, A5, A41 and Cricklewood Lane - that already experience frequent traffic congestion.  Adding 7,500 new housing units and 27,000 jobs will lead to complete gridlock.

 Boris Johnson who ridiculed protesters
“The concentration of new housing in such a small area is ludicrous. The only way you can get 7,500 homes into the area is to build enormous blocks of flats all over the place. Who on earth would choose to live in a tower block overlooking the North Circular?”

Navin Shah, Labour party Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow says, “The scheme fails to conform to a significant number of key planning policies. It is unambitious, and wastes the opportunity for a successful, green, long-lasting alternative to the car-orientated Brent Cross plans of the 1960s, by exacerbating that outdated vision.

“The planning process has been a complete shambles from start to finish, and required a much closer scrutiny by Barnet Council, the Mayor of London and the Secretary of State. This has not happened, and as a result the residents and stakeholders of Barnet, Brent and
Camden have been left exposed to a bleak future.

“The green light for the project means a huge letdown for my constituents in Brent and
Harrow, and thousands of residents in other parts of London. Every single authority responsible for the assessment of the planning application has abjectly failed. Barnet Council’s entire process was a complete mess.

“Super-hub projects such as this are condemned in the recent London Plan amendments, but Mayor Boris Johnson rubber-stamped approval of the application, and the Coalition Government too has shown no vision, and let people down by not calling a public inquiry.

My constituents are now left facing the prospect of hugely increased traffic and congestion, and an incinerator with a 140m high chimney, equivalent to a 50-storey tower block on their doorsteps.” 

Eric Pickles
Dr Shahrar Ali, Brent Green party spokesperson for Environment and Planning says, "Secretary of State Pickles, Mayor Boris and now Barnet Council seem determined to put the building of giant shopping malls ahead of the future sustainability of the planet. This decision betrays the short-termist political ideology of local, regional and coalition government. Local residents will renew their campaign to kick this over consumptive fantasy into the long grass!" 

Demolition of the Whitefields Estate, Clarefield Park, Claremont Way and the Rosa Freedman Residential centre, one of the biggest day care centres in Barnet, is part of phase one of the development, due to commence in 2014.  Many residents face a highly stressful future because of the developers’ failure to offer adequate compensation for the demolition of their homes and the cost of relocation.

The Coalition will continue to fight the plans building by building to ensure a sustainable scheme – one that the local community wants – is put in its place.  The developers have now suddenly stated that they want “meaningful engagement” with the local community and the wider area. This is laughable, because it should have happened years ago, before the plans were set in stone.   Instead, we face the existing housing and modern sports centre, and the modern parts of local schools, all being demolished.   We face future light railway and cycling routes being destroyed, with major increases in road congestion instead.  And we face toxic chemicals being emitted every day by the Brent Cross domestic waste incinerator.

To date, there has been no press release about this £4.5-billion redevelopment from Barnet Council.  Given the enormous impact on the Borough, and the rather minor nature of SOME of their releases, this is amazing.  After all the justified criticism perhaps Barnet is now too ashamed to publicise its folly.

Monday, 11 October 2010

Bestway takes on Barnet Council in Brent Cross Battle

Barnet Council has been given an ultimatum of the likelihood of impending legal action by a major local company who fear the loss of their successful business to a massive waste dump.  The controversial Brent Cross Cricklewood (BXC) regeneration plans, which are fiercely opposed by thousands of local residents, politicians and campaign groups, call for the compulsory purchase and demolition of Bestway cash and carry and its replacement with a huge waste handling facility and incinerator, taking refuse from all over north London.

Bestway have discovered major flaws and inconsistencies in the plans and proposals put forward by Barnet Council and their development partners.  An official letter from the North London Waste Authority in early September stated that they no longer needed the site.  This was hastily retracted a few days later, quite likely following discussions between Barnet Council and the Waste Authority. Bestway are now challenging the whole scheme on the basis of this and other serious flaws and irregularities.  A letter from Bestway on the 8th October asks Barnet to meet with them, the developers and the North London Waste Authority as a last ditch attempt to resolve matters, since Barnet has stated that it is likely to confirm the BXC application by October 29th.  Otherwise, lengthy and costly legal action would likely follow.

Malcolm Carter, Head of Property, Bestway Holdings says, “I cannot understand why Barnet is still pursuing the Bestway site as it is patently not required any more.”

Alison Hopkins, member of the Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood Plan and Dollis Hill resident says, “Barnet Council is allowing a single unelected official to decide the future of much of North London.  This is clearly undemocratic, especially in view of the cosy relationship that seems to exist between it and the developers.  Barnet’s motive is for financial gain to cover the massive losses made by ill-advised investments in Iceland banks and huge project overruns.

“A judicial review could kill the project altogether.  This will likely cost Barnet millions of pounds better spent on services for local residents.” 

The Brent Cross Cricklewood scheme has been formally opposed since last year by both Brent and Camden Councils. It was wrongly stated at Barnet's Planning Committee that Brent had withdrawn its opposition, and that brought a stinging response from Brent's Head of Planning to Barnet officials.

The Coalition has been fighting for several years the proposals for a Brent Cross incinerator, the demolition of houses with gardens, and the massive increase in road congestion.  It is now calling on Barnet Council to reconsider before it is too late.

Wednesday, 28 July 2010

Barnet Rushes Through Brent Cross Plans

This Thursday 29th July, Barnet Council planning and environment committee will be discussing the controversial Brent Cross Cricklewood planning application. The proposals have been recommended for approval by the committee. The Coalition of groups opposing the controversial scheme is questioning the need to rush through the detailed proposals, given that the planning application has to come before the committee in October in any case.

A number of Brent Cross Coalition members have applied to speak in opposition at the meeting, and the opponents will be holding a demonstration outside Hendon Town Hall at 6.30pm .

David Howard, Chair, Federation of Residents Associations in Barnet and BXC Coalition spokesperson, says:
Barnet Council’s decision to rubberstamp plans for the Brent Cross Cricklewood redevelopment at the end of an ordinary planning meeting this week is suspicious, but not surprising.

The scheme has been inadequately negotiated between the Council and developers, and reneges on conditions applied in November. Given that section 106 documents have largely been rewritten, it is completely unclear what the Council is being asked to approve at this week’s meeting.

We would like to know why Barnet have brought the Brent Cross report to committee this week, with barely a week’s notice and at the end of July, when it could have been more fully considered in October. We believe that documents sneaked through without proper scrutiny now will become more difficult to challenge at the October meeting - or at least, that is the Council's intention.

Friday, 18 June 2010

Private sector backed - public sector hacked

A monster, squatting in the north west London suburbs, spewing out pollution and noxious fumes... the proposed Brent Cross Cricklewood Plan gets the government go ahead. Simultaneously the same government announces cuts to hospitals and schools and thousands face unemployment and wage reductions.

Welcome to the Land of the ConDems!

Eric Pickles, Communities Secretary, has announced via the doomed Government Office for London, that he is not going to call in the Brent Cross Development for a Public Inquiry. Having considered the matter he believes that despite the massive opposition locally, increased traffic pollution,  the impact on neighbouring boroughs, the health threat posed by unproven incinerator technology, and the fact that the Westfield Shopping Centre has been built since the initial application, that his 'intervention would not be justified'!

Co-ordinator Lia Colacicco of the Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood Plans spoke for many of us when she said, "This ill-conceived decision by the secretary of state does not bode well for future planning decisions, and is completely at odds with new Conservative Party policies on planning, and the recent Coalition Government planning statement.

"We will continue to fight this regressive, unpopular scheme, to replace it with a sustainable development that meets both 21st century standards and the needs and aspirations of the whole community."

Monday, 19 April 2010

Dinosaur Battles Toxic Chimney

Yesterday, Brent, Barnet & Enfield and Camden Friends of the Earth local groups flew an inflatable flying dinosaur, the "Brentcrossasaurus", and released balloons at Clitterhouse Playing fields in Cricklewood.  An attempt was also made to fly a kite to the height of the 140metre incinerator chimney proposed for the Brent Cross Cricklewood development.  The groups were warning of UFD: not unidentified flying dinosaurs, but Unidentified Flying Discharges.

The stunt was part of an event organised by Barnet Green party, supported by members of the Brent Cross Coalition, of which local Friends of the Earth groups are members.

Jim Roland, Friends of the Earth member and Golders Green resident said, "Waste gasification, like conventional incineration, emits toxic nanoparticles we can't see.  Just as volcanic ash damages jet engines unlike normal fire ash, so the nanoparticles that the gasifier will emit are far more toxic than regular car exhaust soot and tyre dust.  Nanoparticles from municipal waste gasification can transmit heavy metals and other toxins into delicate organs like the brain, as with conventional incineration.

"Municipal waste gasification is actually a dinosaur technology: it's still turning the products of oil extraction into global warming gases and pollution, it requires that recyclable material such as plastic is burnt to help provide a heat source, and it leaves large quantities of toxic ash."

Lia Colacicco, Brent Friends of the Earth member, Brent Cross Coalition Co-ordinator, and Mapesbury resident said, “If anyone has seen any of our five balloons released, then they will also receive emissions from the proposed chimney.  We would love to know where the chimney products are blowing to! 

“I used to think that it would be a good idea to get heat from vapourising rubbish. But after hearing the evidence from a world leading environmental chemist, Professor Paul Connett, I was shocked. Apparently the nanoparticles produced are so small they can’t be regulated, and can travel for miles.  Rather than getting stuck in your lungs they pass through into your blood then brain. The scientific evidence is so clear.  He told us that it would be stupid to site a gasifier near any community”

 “We think that district heating and power stations are a good thing, but this is incineration in disguise; the developer is misleading people.  It is not the gasifier that provides heating to local homes- it’s the combined heat and power station.  It is perfectly feasible to run that with natural gas or other safe fuels not produced by incineration techniques, which as the professor states are not proven for domestic waste.  In fact plants in Karlsruhe and Woollongong were unsafe and had to be closed.”

If anyone finds a Brent Cross balloon please email bxc@brentfoe.com.

Friday, 2 April 2010

Boris turns Brent Cross protests into a joke

Boris Johnson, the London Mayor, demonstrated his cosy relationship with developers and contempt for democracy when he spoke at the London Planning Awards 2010. He dismissed the widespread opposition to the environmentally disastrous Brent Cross Cricklewood Regeneration with a flippant 'Never Mind'.

The fact that the Mayor gave the opposition such contemptuous and cursory consideration must reinforce the pressure on the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to call in the application for a Public Inquiry.

Darren Johnson, Green Party AM said,

This sound clip reveals that beneath the Mayor's chuckling veneer lurks a cavalier disregard for the views of Londoners and a reckless abandonment of any pretence of reaching an informed and balanced view of major development applications and their environmental impact. A public inquiry is essential.



Tuesday, 16 March 2010

DENHAM ISSUES 'STOP' ORDER ON BRENT CROSS APPLICATION

The Government Office for London yesterday issued  a 'stop notice' on the Brent Cross Cricklewood Development.  This instruction, under Section 14 of the Town and Country Planning Order 1995, directs Barnet Council not to grant planning permission on this application without specific authorisation from John Denham, the secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

Denham has now given himself more time to consider whether to call in the application for a public inquiry. He has wider powers than Boris Johnson and will need to consider the massive local opposition, sustainability issues and the views of neighbouring councils.

Brent Council's reservations are summarised in a letter from Paul Lorber, leader of the Council and Cllr. Alec Castle (Dollis Hill):

We have restated Brent’s formal opposition to the plans, and made clear that until key wider planning aspects of importance to us are resolved, our strong objections will remain.



The developers have paid little attention to transport issues, and without measures in place to alleviate the likely problems of thousands of extra cars and heavy freight lorries navigating the streets off Cricklewood Broadway and Edgware Road, the impact in Cricklewood, Dollis Hill and Dudden Hill would be devastating.


In our view, no work should begin until appropriate traffic measures and parking restrictions have been formally agreed and put in place. These in turn must be properly informed and influenced by a long-awaited study on the wider traffic flow around the A5 Corridor.

The stop notice does not definitely mean that Denham will call in the application or order a public inquiry but does indicate that the Coalition for A Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood Plan have made a considerable impact. They deserve our congratulations and thanks.

Saturday, 13 March 2010

Boris Approves Brent Tox Development

According to the Harrow Times, Boris Johnson has approved the Brent Cross Development, and therefore well deserves Darren Johnson's award  for bad planning decisions: "By waving through a development that will create a surge in traffic and air pollution, the Mayor has undermined city-wide efforts to improve air quality, and has done nothing to help severely affected centres in neighbouring boroughs."

Boris Johnson claimed the development would help lead London out of recession: “This is another great example of pushing ahead with major development and infrastructure improvements to create jobs, and boost the capital’s economic growth, while transforming the quality of life of thousands of Londoners.”

So there you have it we will all benefit from increased traffic and pollution, a monstrous shopping centre feeding over-consumption and indebtedness, a shopping centre that will destroy local high streets in neighbouring boroughs, and an incinerator that will impact on the health of our children: nice one Boris!

Let's hope that John Denham, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, will have a little more wisdom and foresight and call in this pernicious scheme.