Keith Taylor MEP: 'Airport expansion remains a climate-wrecking decision that is bad for the British people and the planet'

The World Meteorological Organization's findings that concentrations of CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere surged to a record high in 2016 must rule out any airport expansion, according to Keith Taylor, Green MEP and a member of the European Parliament's Environment and Transport Committees.

Responding to the news that last year's increase in CO₂ emissions was 50% higher than the average of the past 10 years, Mr Taylor, the European Chair of the Climate Parliament, said, in light of the Government's relaunched Heathrow expansion consultation: 

"The Government's analysis on air pollution alone must rule out a third runway at Heathrow. But before the Gatwick airport PR machine leaps into action, today's shocking news about the levels of CO₂ pollution in our atmosphere is a timely reminder that the only climate-viable option is no new runways."

"Aviation is a top ten global polluter and emissions from the heavily subsidised industry are set to balloon by 300% if action is not taken sooner rather than later. Not accounting for any airport expansion, emissions from aviation are already expected to use up more than two-thirds of the UK's carbon budget by 2050. At the same time, the Government's so-called 'Clean' Growth Strategy just this month revealed that the UK is already set to miss its legally-binding carbon targets under the Climate Change Act. Again, without building any new runways."

"Despite what the exceedingly what well-funded PR machines of Heathrow and Gatwick airports would have politicians believe, the UK doesn't have an airport capacity crisis. Britain is already amongst the most frequent flyers in the world, in fact, more passengers fly in and out of London than any other city in the world. Every airport but one is operating under capacity. And the cases put forward by Gatwick and Heathrow to solve the manufactured 'crisis' rely on vastly inflated job creation predictions and hinge on a dubious demand assumptions."

"Nine of the ten most popular destinations from Heathrow involve short-haul flights. In fact, almost half of all flights in Europe are 300 miles or less. Existing rail services could offer genuinely workable alternatives on most of these routes. As trains are less polluting than planes, by a factor ten, this would help reduce aviation emissions, and free up landing slots for longer haul flights."

"Three-quarters of international passengers are disproportionately wealthy and travel for leisure. The vast majority of the UK’s airport capacity, 70% of flights, is used by a minority of frequent flyers, 15% of passengers. The current taxation system means those who don’t fly and those who fly even just once a year are subsidising the jet-setting lifestyles of a privileged few. We must, instead, reject the ‘crisis’ myth, and work to reduce demand while making the industry fairer."

"Airport expansion remains a climate-wrecking decision that is bad for the British people and the planet. By continuing to back a new runway, the Government is displaying a shocking disregard for the UK’s legal and moral obligation to tackle the very worst effects of climate change. Expansion will breach Britain’s carbon budgets and make a mockery of Theresa May’s legal-binding commitments under the Paris Agreement.”

"As Greens, we support a fairer frequent flyer levy that would help reduce demand driven by the privileged few and reduce costs for the average UK holidaymaker."

Potty 'Park and Stride' scheme exposed by Perrin in Byron Court car mayhem debate

Streets around Byron Court Primary School (click on image to enlatrge)

Cllr Keith Perrin claimed at the Planning Committee on Wednesday evening that the officer's report to the Planning Committee showed that currently the school experiences 'outrageous and dangerouus tarffic movements.' He said that the school had 'patently been unable to enforcde their Travel Plans' mainly because they have no enforcement tools.  He claimed that only last week someone was convicted of assaulting a resident.

Perrin went on to say that police and parking enforcement had been ineffective, even with camera cars.  The situation was exacerbated by lack of parking spaces and public transport and pressure on parking space from the increasing number of staff at nearby Northwick Park Hospital.

The result is that local roads are choked during the day and the Northwick Park Car Park had to apply restrictions to allow park users to park there.

Cllr Perrin said that the travel plans had failed and that the revised plan was deficient because it relied on 'Park and Stride'. (parents dropping children in Northwick Park Car Park and the pupils walking to school from there).  He had analysed the current pupil role by postcode (see LINK - I had the postcodes but deleted them to safeguard the identity of the children).  His analysis showed that of 697 pupils  only 319  are under 20 minutes adult walk to the the school,  100 come by tube, 11 travel for almost an hour on the 245 bus - in all at least 200 currently travel by cars that  'create absolute mayhem.'

That was the current situation but the report says that with expansion 299 extra pupils will travel by car.  Using Northwick Park Car Park for 'Stop and Stride'  would mean 162 cars needed to enter and exit via a single carriagewat - 324 car movements in 30 minutes, or a car movement every 5.5 seconds.

Perrin raised a number of issues regarding the proposal to use Northwick Park Car Park for 'Park and Stride':

• the logistics of staff collecting and controlling 160 children and marching them to the school through 'rain or shine'
• the chances of cars arriving within the same 10 minutes - one every 2 seconds
• where wouldl children wait in the park
• will there be sufficient staff to manage them
• would there be any shelter or holding area?
• a zebra crossing would be required at Norval Road - would this be a dangerous?
• what were the chances of parent ignoring Park and Stride in the event of bad weather and attempting to drop their children off at school?
• how would staff know which children to expect to be dropped off and what action woudl be expected if they don't turn up?
• clear safeguarding issues
• condition of the children if they have to wait in the rain for 10 minustes and walk 0.4 of a mile for 15 minutes in the rain to get to school
•  

Cllr Perrin called for the Park and Stride idea to be abandoned and said he felt that the Highways Department did not really support the scheme despite their report: 'I know these officers to be some of the best and they are definitely not stupid.'

 To help inform readers here is an extract from the memo sent to the Brent Head of Planning from Transportation on November 23rd 2015:

 
-->

Parking

Parking standard PS12 of the UDP-2004 will allow 1 car parking space to be provided per 5 staff, with visitor parking to be provided at 20% of the staff parking, but a minimum provision of a single car space. This standard also urges close attention to pick-up and set-down facilities at school sites, and the impact of on-street car parking on local residents.

The school currently employs 75 staff; 41 teachers, 29 support staff and 5 admin staff. This will increase to 105 staff members as a result of the proposal.

The school currently has 23 unmarked parking spaces, 22 cycle parking spaces and 15 scooter spaces and the proposal will provide 26 parking spaces including 2 disabled and 60 cycle spaces. This is sufficient to satisfy standards.

Cycle parking

62 cycle parking spaces will be provided and the cycle sheds appear to be located by both accesses; Spencer Road and Nathans Road. The cycle spaces should be in a secure and covered shed to protect against theft and weather in compliance with PS16 of the UDP-2004.

Site observations

The main issue observed was the number of vehicles parking in obstructive manners at the junctions on double yellow lines, blocking resident’s driveways and in some cases actually parking in the residents drive and overhanging the footway. This obstructive parking as well as parents wanting to park directly outside the school, or as close to the school as possible, was resulting in a tail back of traffic up to the junction of Norval Road. This in turn was leading to dangerous crossing behaviours by parents and pupils. Due to the nature of the road, it only took one or two vehicles to park in this manner or travel against the informal flow, for severe congestion to occur.

It appeared that on the days that teachers were outside the entrance encouraging traffic to move on and signs were placed out on the highway, vehicles were less disruptive as the teachers and signs were a deterrent to stop them parking so close to the school. However, this deterrent does not stop vehicles carrying out obstructive parking at the junction with Norval Road or vehicles trying to mount the footway and still did not stop vehicles blocking driveways, parking in the resident’s driveways and parking on the single yellow lines outside the school. On the days teachers were not always outside the entrance, parents appeared to revert back into bad habits of parking.

This illegal and inconsiderate parking by parents is a major concern for pupil and pedestrian safety and for access into and out of residential properties in the street. 

It was disappointing to see that Northwick Car Park was not used at all. Two parents were observed driving up to the entrance of the park looking for on street parking on The Fairway and then turning around when they did not find any.

Having discussed this with out School Road Safety Team, they have advised that they do encourage the school to make use of Northwick Car Park and name and shame parents who park dangerously. However, our observation on site shows that illegal parking and inconsiderate parking still occurs and in many instances it was the same vehicles parking in this manner. The traffic congestion is still an issue and the school should be more active to reduce this problem and address pupils safety concerns. 

Transport Assessment

Table 2.1 illustrates that 66% of the students live in same postcode region as the school (HA0), with 13% living nearby in HA9 and 12% living in HA1.

Point 2.26 refers to collision data retrieved from TfL. The data shows one slight collision at the junction of Abbots Drive/Spencer Road in 2011, involving a child pedestrian hit by a vehicle. Transportation’s accident statistics in the last three years showed show 2 slight accidents in 2014/2015, involving vehicle accidents on The Fairway at junctions with Norval Road and Abbots Drive and is unlikely to be related to pupils at the school as the children in the vehicles were aged 13 and 15 (Please see attached documents).  Please note that the accident statistics only report data whereby injury had occurred and near misses or slight accidents where no injuries were reported will not be included in the data. Therefore, statistics do show that no accident has occurred in the vicinity of the school.

Table 5.1 shows the mode split data of existing pupils taken in the summer 2014 and winter 2015. The results show 490 pupils walking in the summer and only 249 in the winter resulting in 50 pupils travelling by car in the summer and 96 travelling by car and 33 car sharing in the winter. Pupils’ travelling by bus doesn’t seem to change however, those using the train’s increases in the winter by 4.6%.

Northwick Car Park is in the vicinity of the site and the parking survey (carried out March 2015) shows that the car park provides 96 spaces with 79% occupancy. Due to the recent enforcement of commuter parking, within this car park, Transportation had requested for a more recent parking survey to be carried out. This was carried out in May 2015 and table 5.28 and 5.29 showed an average availability of 96%.

An all day parking survey (05:00 and 21:00) was carried out on Thursday 12^th March 2015, by the consultants. Roads included Abbots Drive, Nathans Road, Norval Road, Spencer Road and The Fairway. The results showed an average of 57% occupancy in the morning peak between 07:30 -10:00 and an average occupancy of 70% in the afternoon peak between 15:00 – 17:30. The parking survey for Spencer Road showed an average occupancy of 64% in the morning and a high occupancy of 112%-127% in the afternoon during school pick up time.

The survey was carried out again in May 2015 after the enforcement of the car park and results in table 5.30 show that there were still spaces available on street and that the displacement of parking from the car park had not affected on street availability. Further to Transportation’s site observations on 23^rd, 25^th and 26^th November, it was noted that there was no on street parking spaces available in the vicinity of the school on either Nathans Road or Norval Road due to the high number of commuters parking in the vicinity before 8.30am.

Please note the parking survey shows two figures for Spencer Road; 49 and 26 spaces. The 49 spaces are counted on both sides of the road as there are no legal restrictions for parking on one side only. However, the road is too narrow to allow parking on both sides and therefore the figure is incorrect and the realistic figure for a total of 26 spaces should be used for assessing parking availability. In addition to this, parking on Spencer Road should be discouraged due the width of the road and danger to pedestrians/pupils crossing the road near the school entrance and therefore parking availability on Spencer Road should not be considered.

Northwick Car Park

This car park is proposed to be used by parents for park and stride to school and table 5.23 shows a break down of occupancy in the between 08:00-09:00. The car park occupancy does gradually start increasing by 08:30 however, the average occupancy is 39% and therefore less then half the car parking is being occupied giving scope to use the car park for parents to park and stride.

A follow up survey was carried out 12^th May 2015 and showed 115% occupancy on Spencer Road in the morning school peak and 146% occupancy in the afternoon school peak. However, Northwick Car Park shows only 4-5% occupancy both in morning and afternoon peak which is a significant change in results.

Since the enforcement of the car park, only approx. 5-10 parked cars have been counted during our site observation and the survey carried out by the consultants shows a low 4-5% occupancy. The car park is therefore ideal for parents to park within to ease congestion on the surrounding residential streets. However, the access into the car park is 200m long and does not have segregated footway, which is a concern for pedestrians walking on the carriageway whilst vehicles travel in and out of the car park. The grassed area either side of the carriageway can probably be walked along in the summer months however during the recent site observations, it was found that it was to muddy to walk on leaving pedestrians to walk on carriageway. This is Brent Council Parks land and Transportation would suggest that the school seriously consider the use of this car park for parents when dropping and picking up children and if this option is to be taken forward then discussions with Parks Department should be made to implement a segregated footway for pedestrians, especially the school children, to be able to use.

Automatic traffic counters on Spencer Road showed 100 vehicles travelling southbound between 08:00 -09:00 and at speed of 11mph and 63 vehicles travelling at 10mph between 15:00-16:00. Automatic traffic counters on Nathans Road showed 61 vehicles northbound and 34 vehicles southbound between 08:00-09:00 and 29 vehicles northbound and 23 southbound between 15:00-16:00. Traffic on Nathans Road travelled between 17-18mph.

Table 5.34, 5.35 and 5.26 shows a pupil and staff modal split for the existing and proposed as balanced however transportation would like to see an improvement to these figures via the Travel Plan targets and initiatives.

One of the initiatives the school proposes is to increase the ‘soft start’ from 10 minutes to 20 minutes between 08:30-08:50 to allow a staggered drop to reduce number of vehicles in the vicinity at any one time. Based on this and the assumption of extra school activities, table 5.49 proposes 20% of pupils to arrive 07:00-08:00, 25% between 08:00-08:30 and 54.7% between 08:30-09:00. The departure figures proposed 39.6% to leave between 15:00-15:30, 24.7% to leave between 15:30 -16:00 and 30% to leave between 16:00-17:00.

Table 5.58 anticipates an additional 83 - 299 during the morning and afternoon peak of summer/winter. These vehicles will be staggered between 7am – 9am and 3pm- 6pm and these vehicles can be accommodated within the Northwick Car Park, which can accommodate 50 or more spaces, alleviating on street parking concerns.

Travel Plan

After assessing the travel plan (dated October 2015) using the attrubte tool, it has failed for the following reasons:

·       The submitted travel plan will be effective from the proposed development 2016 and this is not acceptable. A revised travel plan should be submitted with initiatives already in place in order to address and reduce existing problems. 

·       A travel plan coordinator should already be appointed and working towards implementing measures

·       Targets should also be set out for 3-5 years after occupation

·       or adhere to a standardised approach.

·       The travel plan shows a target in Autumn (2016) when the proposed site is due to open and the vehicle target is 16%, which is as existing. By 2020 the target for vehicle travel is 12% (winter) when the proposed site should be in full occupancy. The staff targets show a reduction in vehicle travel by only 8% in 2020 with targets for walking to remain the same and the cycle travel increased by only 2% by 2020. These targets should be increased to encourage more sustainable modes of travel.

The travel plan does not mention use of Northwick Car Park, which was initially discussed as part of the pre-app and our School Road Safety Team have also discussed this option with the school as well. Transportation have suggested the car park to be used for parents to park and then walk to pick up or drop of their children particularly since enforcement of the car park has meant only 5-10 vehicles park in their with over 50 parking spaces available for parents to use. However it has been very disappointing to see that the school are currently not encouraging this option and that this is not mentioned as one of the travel plan measures.

The school currently uses a voluntary one way system in the morning from northbound on The Fairway and southbound on Spencer Road. The streets are too narrow to accommodate a two way flow and therefore the voluntary one way system in the morning attempts to alleviate traffic. The afternoon pick up attempts to keep to a one way system however, parents park to pick up their children so the one way system can provide difficult. However, this is simply a case of dealing with the symptoms of the travel problems and not addressing the underlying cause of too many car-borne pupils being brought to the school gates by car along a road that is unsuitable for the level of traffic generated.

In conclusion, the school has an existing parking and traffic congestion problem and they have failed to be proactive in addressing these existing problems by implementing sufficient measures in order to mitigate these issues before proposals of expansions were put forward. The travel plan should address measures to start mitigating these issues and should be enforced. Only then could any comfort be provided that the school would be able to expand without significantly worsening existing traffic problems in the area

Servicing Management Plan

During construction, the school proposes to continue using the access of Spencer Road for their deliveries and refuse, as is the current situation.

After construction, the school proposes to use the access on Nathans Road for their deliveries and refuse.

Drawing number SP21A proposes a 5.3m wide access leading to a 21m long and 20m wide hard standing area. The drawing shows the vehicle tracking for a refuse vehicle, which is 8.3m long. The drawing shows that a refuse vehicle can turn around within the site and leave in forward gear, which is acceptable. Refuse storage is proposed near the rear access for straightforward collection.

Swept path analysis has also been provided for ‘transit’ sized vans, which can also turn around and leave in forward gear. The van deliveries will be made for groceries/food deliveries and drawing number 941N200J does propose the kitchen near the rear access, allowing straightforward unloading into the kitchen. There is also an office by the rear access which will presumably allow deliveries such as post to be collected.

The hard standing area reserved for unloading/loading and turning area, will not be marked out with bays or ‘keep clear’ signage and therefore could potentially lead to off street parking by the school. This is not acceptable as it would lead to obstruction of large vehicles being able to turn around or park. Clear signage should be implemented or the school should strictly enforce no vehicle parking in the area other than deliveries.

The applicant also states that the area will be used for coaches and a swept path analysis should be submitted for this.

The school currently restricts deliveries between 08:00 – 09:00 and 15:00 – 16:00. As the access from Nathans Road will be used by pupils during the start and end of school and the expansion is likely to result in pupils using the after school activities as stated in the TA, Transportation would request the restriction to be placed from 15:00 – 17:00.

It appears that delivery vehicles will have to wait on Nathans Road whilst trying to access the school and this is not acceptable. The vehicle should set the gate back 10m to allow a refuse vehicle to wait within the access whilst they are pressing the intercom to gain access into the school.

'Park and Stride' won't mitigate congestion at expanded Byron Court Primary school

This is one of the speeches delivered at tonight's Planning Committee on the application to expand Byron Court Primary School. The Commiittee later approved the application with some issues regarding potential conditions, raised this afternoon  in an email by Cllr Perrin, and later in his speech to the Committee, to be followed up by Officers. Several members of the Committeee said they had received phone calls from Barry Gardiner MP about the application.

-->

My name is Suzanne D’Souza.  I am the Chair of the Sudbury Court Residents’ Association.  I am here today representing the 1500 residents who object to the expansion of Byron Court School.

We understand that the Council have an obligation to provide schools places.  However, the Council also have an obligation to protect residents from overdevelopment.  And building one of the largest primary schools in the country, in the middle of a residential estate, accessible only by narrow roads, is an overdevelopment.

There are many reasons we object to this proposal, but as I only have 2 minutes I will focus on transport.  

The school currently has 3 forms of entry and the traffic problems at school run times are significant.  Brent Council’s own Transportation Officers visited the school and confirmed this.  

The Officers’ view is that the parking and traffic flow issues on these residential streets is a major concern for pupils and pedestrian safety.  Their observations confirm current unacceptable and unsafe conditions on Spencer Road, and surrounding streets.

Over many years, the school have tried, and failed, to solve the problems.  Our local police team have tried, Council Officers have tried, and our local Councillors have tried.  All attempts at solving the traffic problems have failed.  

This is at 3 form entry.  Now imagine we almost double the size of the school and bring in children from further away so their parents are forced to travel by car.  This isn’t just a logistics problem, it’s a health and safety problem.  It is dangerous.  

Brent Council’s own Transportation Officers have acknowledged that there are serious safety problems at present, which will only be exacerbated with the conversion of the school from 3FE to 5FE, and the Travel Plan submitted was considered seriously inadequate.

The Officers go on to say the use of a Park and Stride scheme based on the Northwick Park Car Park would mitigate the negative impact of congestion.  This is described as an essential factor to support the school expansion.

However, the report states that the recent trial of this had a low take-up.  Despite senior school staff campaigning for parents to use Northwick Park car park for park and stride over recent weeks, very few parents have complied. 

This begs the question then, how this, the apparent key to the acceptability of the scheme in highway terms, is to be enforced?

There are a great many reasons why the use of Northwick Park Car park for Park and Stride will not work.  Cllr Perrin will take you through the detail of this.  All I have time to say is that if Brent Council Transportation Officers have said this is an essential factor to support the school expansion, and we know that it cannot work, then the logical conclusion is that this expansion is not feasible and, from a Planning perspective, cannot go ahead.

Decision time for mega primary plans for Byron Court next week

'Mega' primary schools are another consequence of the government's policy banning local authorities building new schools where needed. Instead councils are forced to expand existing schools, some as large as 5 forms of entry - 1,050 4-11 year olds in one building.

The expansion of Bryon Court Primary school was firmly rejected in the public consultation:

The objections included:

 Impact on the character and ethos of Byron Court 


             Affect child development and integration – including behaviour, language barriers and the impact of 
proposed ‘zoned areas’ in the expanded school 


             Reduce attention to pupils and affect school results 


             Impact on teaching standards 


             Limit facilities after expansion, especially green spaces for outdoor play and extra curricular activities 


             Affect education because of the building work 


             Over-expand an existing school when a new school should be built 


             Queries over the need for school places in Brent 


             Queries over the need for school spaces in the Sudbury Court Estate (SCE) – particularly in view of the 
new primary school at Wembley High Technical College 


             Health and safety considerations of expansion- particularly playground accidents and illness 


             Potential car accidents 


             Implications of long distance travel to school on parents and pupils 


             Noise, litter and wildlife 


             Suitability of the site for large development; particularly its residential nature, narrow roads and 
susceptibility to flooding 


             Traffic, congestion and pollution 


             The relationship between parents and staff 


             Effect of building work on residents 


             Potential to attract further regeneration, housing and leisure in Brent 


             Parking and inconsiderate parents 


             House value and amenities- especially the right to light and privacy 


              Previous promises from the school against expansion 

Objectors include parents from the school, residents and Barry Gardiner MP.  However Cabinet approved the scheme and  the legal advice to the Planning Committee when the application is heard on Wednesday LINK  will be that only planning issues should be taken into consideration. 

 
 The following extracts are from the  current Planning Application:

Comments supporting the application have been received from the school and one individual householder.

The reasons for supporting the school expansion are set out below:

School expansion is needed to meet the increased population demands in the Borough.
The school has to teach some pupils off site in the Ashley Gardens annexe. These children wouldotherwise not have a school place.

School is suitable for expansion as it has OFSTED Outstanding status, teaching school accreditation, and has committed and talented staff and vision.

The school needs a canteen, a bigger hall and also the classrooms outside requires refurbishing.
Additional space and facilities will greatly enhance the teaching and learning opportunities and will provide children with a better environment in which to learn.

In contrast 1,469 people signed a petition expressing support for the ojections below:

An objection has been received from Sudbury Court Residents Associatio raising the following items:

1.  March Cabinet decision to proceed based on incorrect data - Primary driver for 5FE expansion no longer applicable
2.  Adverse Traffic Impacts
3.  Flooding risk: Proposed development will cause surface water / sewage flooding
5.  Parental concerns regarding the expansion
6.  Educational risk - Risk of jeopardizing Byron Court rating and standards
7.  Highway regulations and Health & Safety compliance failure for proposed Nathans access.
8.  Inadequate separation of new Nathans access from adjoining property.
9.  There should be appropriate segregation between pedestrians and vehicles
10.       Vast Majority of parents and residents opposed to proposal
11.       Ecological concerns
12.       Traffic problems expected during construction works.

The above objection is accompanied by a petition supporting the objections raised above. The petition is signed by 1469 persons.

Councillor Perrin- objections have been received on the following grounds:

Transportation and safety - congestion, cars parked illegally on yellows, no loading, school zig zags andof course the pavements and across (sometime in) driveways.

Failing to comply with Travel Plan - no school staff in the street at all.
  
Parents from Alperton and Wembley want a school place closer to home, so they do not need to drive. 

Query on amount of runoff (using averages) that will flow into the sewers and changes to local groundwater/table.

Proposal should comply with SUDS policy

Good turnout for show of solidarity with Heathrow 13 in Willesden today

There was a great spirit of comradeship, vitality and determination at the Plane Stupid solidarity demonstration this morning at Willesden Magistrates Court where the Heathrow 13 are currently appearing.

Independent local environmental campaigners

Green Party leader Natalie Bennett, deputy leader Shahrar Ali and other Green Party activists

Cabinet approves expansion of Uxendon Manor and Elsley Primary Schools

I was unable to attend the Brent Cabinet Meeting this afternoon as I was travellig back from a long weekend in Bristol. This is the Brent Council website statement on the decisions taken (unfortunately they got the spelling of Elsley wrong!):

Plans to expand two schools in Brent were given the green light at a meeting of Brent Council's cabinet this afternoon (24 August 2015).

Uxendon Manor and Elsey primary schools will be expanded to accept an additional two forms. Uxendon Manor will expand from September 2015 whilst Elsey will begin accepting additional places from September 2016.

The Cabinet also agreed to buy 35 new homes using around £2million of income generated from the Government's Right to Buy scheme. It was decided that the council should seek a partner to build 200 new, affordable homes with the remaining money generated from the scheme.

Councillor Muhammed Butt, leader of Brent Council, said: "We have today taken some key decisions in-line with our borough plan priorities which are based on what local people told us matter most to them.

"We have approved the expansion of two local schools to meet the increased demand for primary school places.

"We have approved the purchase of 35 new homes and we will build around 200 new homes to ensure local people have somewhere affordable to live."

Mega primary proposals for Byron Court sparks education debate

Proposals to expand Byron Court Primary School from 3 forms of entry to 5  (the current 90 children per year group  going up to 150  per year group, making a total of 1,050 children from 4-11 years old) with an additional nursery, have caused concern amongst parents.

341 parents have signed a petition against the proposal and 760 residents have submitted their own petition.  Signatures have been collected on a stall outside the school gates.  The TV documentary about Gascoigne Primary School,  'Britian's Biggest Primary School' , on Channel Five seems to have increased fears rather than allayed them.

Parents feel that an emphasis on crowd control, rotas for lunchtime and play times, children not being known personally by the headteacher, high pupil mobility associated with children from a long way outside the catchment taking up places and then eventually moving to a closer local school, are all issues that could impact on the quality of education offered by the school, and more importantly for some, children's happiness.

"I would rather my child was happy, felt he was safe and that he belonged, and known to all the staff than the school had all these glossy new facilities," was how one parent put it to me.

The parents have challenged Brent Council on whether there is actually an increased demand in the area of the school, and point to the fact that a satellite class at Ashley Gardens is not full. They also say that the new 4 form of entry (120 pupils per year group) primary school at Wembley High will provide any new places needed in the locality.

Parents acknowledge the need for a new school building but suggest that they are being bribed by the Council who say that a new building cannot be provided unless the school expands.

The Executive Headteacher of the school is said to be keen on the expansion and new build because it could include facilities for specialist subjects such as sport and drama, with its own theatre and a hall that could seat 1,200. A radio station is also mentioned as have rooftop playgrounds.

It would enhance a school which was deemed 'Outstanding' by Ofsted some time ago and which is part of the Teaching School Alliance.

Residents in turn suggest that a 'jumbo sized' school in a quiet area with narrow roads will simply be out of place. They see problems with access for builders and particular the cranes required for the installation of the modular buildings that are proposed. There is also a longer term issue over increased parent car parking  due to the higher pupil numbers. It is already a major problem which no intervention has succeeded in tackling.

The proposal has two  prongs: the decision for expansion in principle following consultation goes to Cabinet on March 16th and if approved the planning application will go to the Planning Committee in April.

Brent Council to expand & merge schools & seek free school partners to tackle places crisis

The Brent Cabinet will tomorrow consider the School Place Planning Strategy 2014-18. It includes the above actions and the following schemes:

Expansion of the following schools in 2015 at a cost of £19.5m:

• Byron Court Primary to increase by two forms of entry (2 additional classes in each age group)
• Leopold Primary school to increase by two forms of entry on the site of the Gwenneth Rickus Building in Brentfield Road (2 additional classes in each age group)
• Oakington Manor Primary to increase by one form of entry (one additional class in each age group)

Amalgamations of the following separate infant and junior schools into all-through primary schools. It should be noted that the second two  involve expansion as well as amalgamation and in the Kilburn case a new building. This is a significant challenge to headteachers in terms of disruption.:

• Lyon Park Infants and Juniors (currently operating under one  headteacher)
• Carlton Vale Infants and Kilburn Park Juniors (subject to agreement on a suitable shared site for an expanded school in the South Kilburn regeneration area)
• Malorees Infants and Malorees Junior  (subject to agreement by the governing bodies of both schools to amalgamation and expansion)

 The Cabinet will also consider the use of a former school site in The Avenue, Brondesbury for educational use. The site is currently owned by a developer. The site could potentially be used for SEN provision.

The report notes that proposed free schools in the borough will potentially provided a total of 10 forms of entry for primary pupils and 9.3 for secondary pupils in the 2014-18 period.

The report notes:

....to be funded directly by the Education Funding Agency (EVA) at no cost to the council. There is a risk to the council that if all of these places are not provided via this route that the council will need to provide places  and fund the associated expenditure.

This September both Gateway and Gladstone secondary free schools failed to open despite recruiting pupils.

The council's policy to seek free school partners (Action 5 above) will be controversial in the light of problems associated with free schools not opening on time, having fewer pupils than designated so provided at considerable expense, and often without the backers having a proven track.

The report can be found HERE and the full Strategy HERE

Brent turns to academies and free schools to help solve school places crisis

As the video above shows the Green Party and Brent Council are united in the demand that local authorities should be given back the right to build their own new schools in areas of need.  The current Coalition requirement that bans any such new build and instead states any new schools should be academies or free schools is based on furthering the Coalition's privatisation agenda.

It has meant that local authorities have to rely on free schools or academies setting up in areas of need to provide extra places, rather than being able to plan new schools themselves. T address the places shortage Brent has resorted to bulge classes in existing schools (an extra class for one year group that then moves through the school as a 'bulge'), fitting more children into an exisiting building with subsequent loss of shared rooms such as libraries and IT suites, addditional building on the site-often reducing play space, or 'satellites' - use of buildings some distance from the existing school that come under the management of the parent school.

These solutions can sometimes work but I am concerned that they may also be storing up problems for the future in terms of overcrowded school sites, lack of play space, and over-large primary schools catering for more than 1,000 primary age pupils. When satellites are beyond walking distance from the main school it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to include all children in the special events that build a shared ethos and sense of community.

The Brent Executive will tonight consider going out to consultation on a new school places strategy  that includes the above actions but also advocates working with free school and academy providers. At a time when the DfE has barred 14 academy chains from taking on more schools because of their inadequacies LINK and there has been a furore over restraint of children at a Harris academy in Haringey LINK that approach will need very careful consideration.

The desperation of Katharine Birbalsingh's Michaela Free School revealed by it advertising in a fried chicken shop window in Bridge Road, Wembley Park, does not indicate that free schools are what parents want for their children.

The Executive document states:

Working with preferred promoters to open free schools is a means of reducing the call on council capital spend since the Education Funding Agency  will meet the cost of construction. The council’s Executive agreed in August 2012 a set of criteria for working with a free school partner. These are attached as Appendix 4. Where a site is identified as available and appropriate for a new school, a suitable promoter for a free school could be selected, using the criteria and an informal selection process used. This approach has been used in a number of London authorities, including Ealing, and can be used for the site which is definitely coming on stream in Brent, namely the Oriental City site.

 It is less clear on the academies route:

The academy presumption route whereby the council would put forward a school proposal which it could advertise and promote to potential academy sponsors. Under this route, the council would supply the site and use its own capital to build the school.

This becomes a strategy:

We should develop local capacity to sponsor or promote new schools, working with academies in the primary sector

 In the light of problems surfacing in academies and free schools this would mean the council providing the site and the cash for the building and then handing it over to a trust, charity or private company with no further control or oversight.

Obviously this is not  problem of the council's own making but the document does seem to make a virtue out of necessity, brushing over some of the issues I have discussed. In reality some school governing bodies have found themselves considering options for expansion or satellites that may provide extra places but could also impact on the quality of provision and education of chidlren currently in the school. Some have rejected requests to expand on this basis.

The report notes:

In respect of community schools only (so not for academies, foundation or voluntary aided schools), the local authority has the power to instruct schools to expand. This is not a power that this local authority has exercised hitherto

Ironically, if it were to use such a power, the council may find local authoirty schools converting to academy status in order to avoid what they see as damaging expansion.

The council lists a number of principles and then 21 strategies:

• All Brent schools should be good or outstanding

• All Brent schools should be part of a ‘family of schools’ which promotes resilience, mutual support and improvement

• The council and schools should work together to meet the challenge of providing sufficient school places

• Schools should operate in good quality, safe premises

• Children should be educated close to home

• Schools should work with their local communities

• Meeting the needs of children with special educational needs and disabilities should be central to our vision for education in Brent

• We should make efficient use of resources

Principle 1: We should only undertake expansions with good or outstanding schools where leadership is secure.

Principle 2: We should promote federations between primary schools, both to address quality issues and to address the future viability of one form of entry schools

Principle 3: We should actively consider two-site schools and 5FE schools and 5FE schools where there is leadership and management capacity

Principle 4: We should develop local capacity to sponsor or promote new schools, working with academies in the primary sector

Principle 5: We should work towards the amalgamation of separate infants and junior schools

Principle 6: We should not currently seek to develop more all-through schools

Principle 7: The local authority should establish a joint body with schools which oversees school place planning and school organisation, monitors the impact of the plans and programmes and makes recommendations to the council, diocese or DfE.

Principle 8: We should expect expanded and re-structured schools generally to meet government guidance on space standards but be prepared to consider innovative design solutions to achieve this.

Principle 9: We should seek to minimise disruption to schools during expansion and support school leaders to manage the challenges.

Principle 10: We should continue planning primary places using planning areas.

Principle 11: We should consider expanding voluntary aided schools where there is local Brent demand, working with the relevant partners.

Principle 12: We should continue planning secondary school places on a borough wide basis, with analysis of how admissions policies can be used to maximise choice and intake to Brent schools

Principle 13: We should consider how community benefits from school facilities can be maximised when we expand or build new schools

Principle 14: We should consult with local communities as part of the planning process to minimise/mitigate the impact of new school developments.

Principle 15: We should build inclusive provision into expansion and new school proposals

Principle 16: We should improve accessibility for all pupils, ensuring that all our secondary schools are physically accessible.

Principle 17: After assessing educational suitability, schemes for expansion

or new schools should be judged in terms of value for money and deliverability

Principle 18: We should identify potential sites for new schools where there is no capital cost of acquisition on the basis of suitability and location

Principle 19: Where a site is identified, we should seek a partner who could apply to the DfE under the free school route, using the criteria already agreed by the council

Principle 20: We should explicitly adopt the DfE recommended 5% surplus places to enable choice and to reduce the need for temporary accommodation

Principle 21: We should be ready with contingency plans for temporary accommodation, given the population fluctuations in Brent.

The problems outlined in this article makes it even more urgent to put on as much pressure as possible for loacal authorities to be given back the power to plan and build new schools. They are best placed to know the needs of the local area and have the resources to plan on a rational basis.