Brent Council defends removal of Furness Road trees

A spokesperson for Brent Council asked to comment on the proposed removal of eight mature trees in Furness Road , five of which are outside Furness Primary School, said this morning:

"These trees have been identified by our tree experts as poor quality that would need to be removed in the near future and so it makes sense to take advantage of the footway works and replace them at the same time. 

"It's our responsibility to maintain a healthy and safe tree stock across the borough and we replace every tree that is cut down so that there is no net loss."

Cllr Claudia Hector tweeted:

 The trees in Furness Road are going to be replaced. Brent has been planting more trees every year.

A different view was given by a resident who along with others had an impromptu meeting with a council officer at the site this morning:

Brent’s response is completely incorrect. I have just spent the last 2.5 hours with an officer of Brent looking at each of eleven trees that have been selected by Brent’s so-called experts for removal. All but one are healthy. The trees are removed either to make paving around them less difficult/costly, to avoid future subsidence claims, or because they are deemed to costly to maintain. This is a budget issue. Unfortunately environmental costs don’t feature in their cost: benefit analysis. Makes a mockery of their Climate Emergency Declaration. I do appreciate the officer having taken the time to explain his position today and reconsider which trees they will remove. He seems to be between a rock and a hard place.

Dawn reprieve for the Furness Road trees

The trees outside Furness Primary School this morning

Cones stacked this morning

Local residents report that the parking restrictions outside Furness Primary that had been imposed to make ready for the removal of five trees this morning LINK have been removed.  News of the proposed felling spread like wild fire yesterday on Facebook and Next Door with the vast majority of local residents opposed. Another three trees were scheduled for removal elsewhere in Furness Road.

Children left their own messages nearby:

Whether this signals a temporary reprieve or a major re-think is not yet clear. Meanwhile the chair of  Harlesden Area Action has written to Cllr Krupa Sheth, lead member for the Environment and Gary Rimmer, Trees officer:

I am receiving feedback from many residents (nearly 50 comments on Nextdoor), far and wide within both the Harlesden and Kensal Green wards, voicing their grave concerns related to the rampant removal of trees. It has come to our attention that a number of trees (8?) are to be removed on Furness Road tomorrow. In addition, one tree, located near 56 Furness Rd has now been removed, and the cutting down of another located at 88 Furness Road has taken place. 

As you are aware, Brent has declared a Climate Emergency; you spoke of this at the Clean Air for Brent meeting last Tuesday. In that light, we would like to understand the rationale behind removing these trees, for each individual tree.  

Would you please provide us with the following: 

1. Specific reason for the removal of each tree.

2. Specific reason for the removal of the tree outside of 56 Furness Road

3. Specific reason for the removal of tree cut down at 88 Furness Road

Lastly, we have understood that you have "asked the officers and contractors to put a hold on the felling of the trees until I have further information, nothing will happen this weekend”.

Please also confirm that no tree will be removed as you noted in your email to residents until we have received further information and have had time to review it.

Cllr Jumbo Chan sent this written request to Brent Council nd promised to keep residents informed of the response:

My thanks to Caitlin for the photographs.

Buses contribute to dangerous air pollution in Kensal Rise claims campaigner

It seems counter-intuitive that clean air campaigners should aim some of their fire at buses - after all isn't good public transport one of the ways of addressing traffic pollution?

This is why I asked Fiona Mulaisho of Kensal Rise Residents Association to explain the issues for Wembley Matters  readers after she made a presentation at the last Council meeting:

1) There is an air related Public health crisis in Kensal Rise - in the Station Terrace locality which is most exclusively used by thousands of TfL diesel buses;

2) For the above area where Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)emissions from TfL diesel buses only were found to be almost triple the European Union's legal limit deemed fit for humams. This area  is heavily patronized by residents, shoppers, schoolchildren, bus users etc as there is a Tesco in the vicinity. These people are being involuntarily exposed to illegal levels of bus induced NO2.

Ark Franklin Academy on Chamberlayne is 1 of 50 worst polluted schools on London's most polluted roads in the Mayor of London's Air Quality Audit for schools 2018.

3) Brent Council needs to address this public health crisis immediately as exposure to pollution causes asthma, cancer, lung deformation, heart attacks with children and the elderly being the most vulnerable.

4) The Kensal Corridor Improvement scheme (KCIS) mentioned by Clkr Krupa Sheth in her response, and to be funded by TfL has no credible air pollution of congestion reduction measures, a real missed opportunity to address the longstanding and illegal air quality environment in the local area. There will still be 70,000 vehicles and nearly 12,000 diesel buses using Chamberlayne Road weekly.

5) The Kensal Rise Residents' Association, Clean Air for Brent, Brent Cycling Campaigb Group, Kensal Rise residents and local business are against the KCIS proposal to increase bus stands in the Station Terrace area - more bus stands = more diesel buses. 350 residents have signed petition opposing this bus stand proposal; 

6) 30 local Kensal Businesses have sent a letter to Brent Council and 3 Queens Park ward councillors objecting to the bus stand proposal and demanding for action on the very toxic and perilous air quality conditions along  the high street. (see below)

7) Instead residents and business want the Station Terrace area to be used for initiatives they would benefit the community, businesses and local economy and air quality environment I.e a weekly farmers market. They do not want the heart of their high street to be turned into a mini depot for TfL to increase and store more of its diesel buses, many of which travel to and from Kensal Rise more or less empty.

8) What I didn't say but implied is the Council is keen to get the KCIS money from TfL. However, given what we know about the serious air quality problems caused by TfL's 12,000 diesel buses, we are of stand strong that "Kensal Rise residents and businesses' lives, health and wellbeing are not for sale to TfL". And the Council should never put it's residents in this position. And it needs to take action on the bus induced air related Public health crisis.

Regarding Cllr Krupa's response:

1) There has been no evidence of analysis proffered with KCIS on how and by how much "congestion and associated pollution be reduced". We have asked for thus data and analysis but nothing forthcoming other than the response that "They just know!"

2) The highly illegal NO2 emissions were found to be coming from some of the newer supposedly cleaner buses  - Euro VI - in the Station Terrace area. Think diesel-gate but for buses.

3) There is a false belief within Brent Council that TfL is going to magic up a whole load of cleaner buses / electric. The fact of the matter is TfL has less than 250 electric buses and operates over 700 routes daily in London, each route assigned with 12 buses... do the maths! As at March 2019, TfL had a fleet of 9,142 buses of which:

A) 5,298 were 100% diesel;

B) 155 Electric; (it's got about 70 more since);

C) 2,669 Hybrid (Diesel and Electric)

4) The majority of TfL fleet will be diesel right up to 2038 when all buses will have to be zero emissions so we are in for the long haul with TfL!

OPEN LETTER TO TFL AND BRENT COUNCILLORS (Click bottom right for full page version)

CIPFA shows how important Brent libraries are to residents

The CIPFA report into public libraries compares the London boroughs with each other. In these tables Brent is 'h' with a black graph block. Brent controversially closed half its libraries creating two major hub libraries at Wembley and Willesden Green and four smaller libraries. Kensal Green, Barham and Preston are run by volunteers while Cricklewood is getting increasingly impatient with developer Octavia Housing as volunteers wait to start running a volunteer library there. (Note: CIPFA do not make judgements so all comments are my own.)

As can be seen from the diagram above Brent has far fewer libraries than the average borough but a slightly higher than average population.

I have long argued that Wembley Library has vastly inflated visitor figures because the electronic counters count Civic Centre staff who use the library entrance off Olympic Way as a short cut to their offices. Apart from entering and leaving at the start and end of the day, some also enter and leave for their lunch break.

As a result although Wembley has the highest number of visitors Willesden green has the highest number of borrowers. Watch our for media claims that Wembley Library has a record number of visitors:

Due to the closures Brent has a low number of what CIPFA call service points:

Overall Brent children borrow more books than average with 5 times more fiction than non-fiction borrowed. Primary class visits to the libraries will account for some of this. Adult fiction book issues is below the average but non-fiction higher which may reflect the large number of students who use the libraries.

 One area of concern is the low number of housebound readers. Some boroughs provide a delivery service, often run by volunteers, and this is something the Scrutiny Committee could investigate.

Book stocks are another measure of the quality of the service and here Brent lags. Children do better than adults which may explain the discrepancy in figures. Residents borrow more books than average even though book stocks are lower than 13 other London boroughs:

When the  'Libraries Transformation Project' was launched much was made of access to computers and other digital resources such as e-books. The figures show Brent is below the average for the number of devices available but that they are well used.

The Brent  libraries website is particularly successful and ease of on-line renewal may account for the low level of overdue fines in Brent:

A proposal to reduce the opening hours for Brent libraries, and the possible complete closure of one, was ruled out after the budget consultation.  CIPFA reports a very positive picture on opening hours with Brent out-performing the average for London boroughs.

The figures indicate that Brent is already spending lower than average on its libraries but it is also collecting less revenue, in terms of borrowing charges, fines and reservation fees. Given the low median income of Brent residents I would oppose an increase in charges but it may be an area that will be vulnerable in the future:

To access the full report follow this LINK

After closing half its libraries Brent Council agrees Memorandum of Understanding with volunteer libraries

The Brent Council Cabinet is set to approve a Memorandum of Understanding on Community Libraries at its meeting on Monday.  In 2011 the Council closed 6 of the borough's 12 libraries in what they called the Libraries Transformation Projects. Local residents launched campaigns to keep four of the libraries open: Preston, Kensal Rise, Cricklewood and Barham. Neasden and Tokyngton libraries, the former in a very needy area, appear to have gone for good.

The SOS (Save Our Six Libraries) campaign was faced with the dilemma of campaigning for the retention of securely financed, professionally staffed libraries or keeping a local facility going through a volunteer system and fundraising. Some campaigners thought that keeping some kind of service going temporarily would make it easier for a future administration to restore the library.

The Brent libraries issue became something of a national scandal and contributed to Cllr Muhammed Butt's overthrow of Cllr Ann John's Labour leadership. In the event Brent's closures were ahead of the field and other councils, of various political complexion, have since closed libraries  citing government cuts as the reason. Currently there is a militant campaign in Lambeth LINK.

Since then there have been attempts by various lead members to reach an agreement with the volunteer libraries with Preston and Barham facing particular difficulties because the Council is the landlord of their premises.

The Officers' report LINK sets out the current situation:

Brent’s community libraries receive no direct funding from Council library service budgets. They are wholly independent organisations. They are not included within the Council’s statutory service, and they have full flexibility to tailor their offer to local need and interest and are eligible for various funding streams as independent organisations. 


 The four community library premises are:

·      Barham Library, 660 Harrow Road Wembley HA0 2HB (15 year lease) 


·      Cricklewood Library, 152 Olive Road, London NW2 (999 year lease being finalised) 


·      Kensal Rise Library, Bathurst Gardens, London NW10 5JA (999 year lease being finalised) 


·      Preston Community Library, 2 Carlton Ave East, Wembley HA9 8PL (currently has a temporary lease arrangement). 


The MoU (see below) sets out various ways the Council will support the community libraries without committing to any additional expenditure.

The case of Preston Community Library, where uncertainty remains over its premises as Brent Council seeks to redevelop the site, is addressed directly:
 

A temporary lease arrangement is in place until the end of the 2016/17 school year as a short term solution. Long term plans for the site are at the development stage.
 In September 2016 Cabinet agreed to redevelop Preston Park Annexe for new homes and D1 space appropriate for library use. Since then the Council has appointed 5Plus Architects to lead the design of the redevelopment proposals and undertaken workshops with Preston Community Library to understand their long term service delivery needs and spatial requirements. The next stage of the design process will be to translate the findings into a design solution that is supported by Preston Community Library. Further consultation will then be undertaken on design proposals before final decisions are made. 


The development of the site will provide a potential long term solution for Preston Community Library. However at present the medium term options for the library are not clear. Officers will continue to work to address this with the library within the constraints of the Council’s property portfolio and market options. 


 Council officers recognise the strong social value provided by Preston Community Library and are keen to support the group in continuing to provide a service throughout the transition process

In a curious post on his blog LINK, former councillor James Powney, lead member at the time of the Transformation Project, says:

In Barham, Paul Lorber appears to be trying to play the Council for either financial gain or as part of his political manoeuvrings prior to the 2018 elections.  In Preston, the existing group appears to be given an undue influence that does not sit easily with either the Council's financial obligations or the building's ACV status.  Such arrangements can lead to ugly rumours about the integrity of Council decision making even where there is no legally proven case against them. 

  This is the Memorandum of Understanding: