UPDATE: APPROVED BY BRENT PLANNING COMMITTEE! Next to highly polluted road, on a flood plain, no nearby amenities - what's not to like about the Prospect House development?

 

 UPDATE: BRENT PLANNING COMMITTEE APPROVED THE APPLICATION

 

Councillors on Brent Planning Committee had no questions for Alperton Councillor Anton Georgiou after he gave this presentation on the Prospect House development at tonight's Brent Planning Committee.

I wonder why?

I am here to speak against the application for the development of Prospect House on the border of Alperton ward and on the edges of the North Circular.

 

I will start by re-iterating the palpable local anger at never-ending development in our area. Alperton has experienced more than its fair share of large development in recent years. Schemes that have been completed and those currently at building stage are already causing countless issues for local residents. Whether to do with limited investment in needed infrastructure, traffic congestion, pressures on parking provision.

 

This is not the first time I have said this at Planning Committee, but decisions being taken by this Council are driving people, many who have lived here for most, if not all of their lives, to move away from Brent.

 

I therefore plead with members of the Committee to keep this in mind when making the decision about the application in front of you today.

 

The possible approval of yet another large, unsightly tower block, in this instance 23-storeys high, would continue what seems to be Brent’s principal objective of trying to achieve its housing targets outlined the borough plan. Fitting as many units in as possible, without acknowledging their impact on the wider community.

 

Housing targets are important, particularly targets for the right type of housing.

 

We all recognise that London is experiencing a shortage of genuinely affordable homes for local people and importantly a distinct lack of Council homes for Council tenants. However, are the units being proposed at Prospect House and indeed others already approved in Alperton actually meeting that need? I and many others would argue no.

 

I would like to refer the Committee to the report paper which breaks down the tenure types in the proposed development.

 

Once again, we see a distinct lack of genuinely affordable units and a reliance on Shared Ownership units to beef up the supposed affordable units in the development.

 

A significant percentage of the supposed affordable units are made up of Shared Ownership units. I’m confused at this, as I had thought the Council had previously been quite clear that Shared Ownership is not an affordable housing model, and not something that should be lumped under the umbrella term ‘affordable’.

 

I would refer the Committee to comments made by Senior Council Officers and Councillors on this matter at a Scrutiny meeting in November 2022 and elsewhere.

 

By approving yet another development that incorporates Shared Ownership into the ‘affordable offer’ you will be legitimising this controversial housing model once again and in doing so trap potential shared owners into a housing scheme that will cause years of financial and mental misery.

 

Seeking to develop another large tower block on the edge of one of the busiest, polluted roads in Brent, is alarming and should alarm members of the Committee too.

 

The area around the North Circular is notorious for bad air quality.

 

This issue has become more and more prominent in recent months, given incoming changes to ULEZ. There is universal acceptance that air quality in London is poor. People in London die as a consequence of bad air quality. Therefore, why would this Committee seek to approve the development of dwellings in an unsuitable, polluted area like this?

 

What will the quality of life be for those who might consider living at the Prospect House development. What will the long-term impact on their health be?

 

A lack of required amenities in the vicinity of the proposed development is also a concern and something the current owners of Prospect House have highlighted as a reason for limited appeal from potential tenants. Quite frankly, it is in the middle of nowhere and access to shops and other amenities is very limited.

 

As is access to open green space, which I still believe is very important to enhance the quality of life for those who may choose to live there. A diagram in the plans show some distance would need to be travelled for a potential resident to get to the nearest green space. It is highlighted in the diagram that a child would need to be accompanied by a parent or carer to get to the nearest open space, in this case Heather Park. Will it now be the norm that young people will only have access to local green spaces in exceptional circumstances?

 

For any potential residents with a disability or mobility issues, where would the Committee suggest they do a food shop or pick up prescription medication?

 

Prospect House is also located within Flood Zone 3a and sits between the Grand Union Canal and close to the River Brent. Whilst the Flood Risk Assessment is considered to be acceptable, I continue to have concerns about the potential for flooding, particularly in light of recent major flooding very close to the site in Tokyngton Avenue. In recent weeks this has been flooded three times.

 

There is always a risk of flooding when buildings of this size and scale are built so close to a watercourse, coupled with it being in an area known to be vulnerable to flooding.

 

The fallout from flooding has a major impact on all residents in the area, I can only imagine the huge inconveniences we will have to put up with if indeed flooding occurs at this site in future. Are you confident that enough has been done to mitigate this potential risk?

 

I ask that the Committee reject this application based on all the points raised and in view of the unsuitability of this site for another large housing block.

 

I also request that the Committee take the time to visit Alperton in the near future to understand the concerns residents and I have long raised with you.

 

It is time that this Council pauses and takes stock of the negative impact developments like this one will have and have had in our area. If you do not, you will continue to drive lifelong residents out of their borough.

 

I think I know why...

 

Brent Council calls for 'properly funded' diesel scrappage scheme & expanded ULEZ transitional arrangements

Press release from Brent Council (unedited)

The Government should bring forward a properly funded diesel scrappage scheme to help residents when the Ultra Low Emission Zone expands in 2021, Brent Council said today. The ULEZ and expanded ULEZ will replace the recently introduced T-Charge but the Congestion charge will remain.

The council has been a big supporter of the Mayor of London's campaign to bring cleaner air to the capital, but wants solid measures in place to ease the transition for residents and businesses - in some of the poorest parts of London.

The expanded zone will stretch to cover the south east of the borough, including Stonebridge, Willesden, Harlesden and Dollis Hill. Areas above the North Circular, such as Neasden, Wembley and Kingsbury, are not part of the scheme and neither is the North Circular Road itself.

Residents inside the expanded zone and vehicles with a disabled or a disabled passenger tax class will have a three year sunset period, with a 100 per cent discount ending on 6 September 2023, to give them an additional chance to meet with the standards. Also, minibuses operated by charities will have a two-year sunset period until October 2023 to replace their vehicles.

Although welcoming these concessions the Council wants protection for people who live on the edge of the zone, in addition to a discounted rate within a buffer zone along the new boundary for those residents who need to travel across it regularly to get between work and home if no cost effective travel alternative is available.

With 33% of households in Brent living in poverty, the Council wants to be sure that the expanded zone will not place an extra burden on residents.

It comes as the Council marked National Clean Air Day with stalls and activities at the Civic Centre.

A number of leading clean air groups including; Vehicle Idling Action and Friends of the Earth hosted stalls outside in the Market Square, with local MP's Barry Gardiner and Dawn Butler joining Brent Councillors and others to sign a clean air pledge.

Cllr Krupa Sheth, Cabinet Member for Environment, said:

We fully support the Mayor's commitment to getting London's air cleaner, but we need the Government to do more to encourage us all to adopt more sustainable forms of transport. The expansion of the new zone will help, but as it cuts our borough in half we want to make sure that residents won't be unfairly penalised. Hardworking Brent residents and businesses, many of who struggle to make ends meet, should not be adversely impacted.

Brent Cyclists reveal possible cycling bridge over Neasden Underpass

Brent Cyclists have revealed tentative plans to build a new bridge over the North Circular to provide a safe cycling route between North and South Brent, long an impediment to cycling in the borough. They deserve recognition for their tireless campaigning backed by detailed research on behalf of local cyclists.

Neasden road works to impact on Wembley road and bus travel for 6 months

Traffic has been very heavy along Blackbird Hill/Forty Lane/ Forty Avenue during peak hours since new schools have opened in Wembley and they are still not operating to full capacity.

Now roadworks at Neasden are due to cause more problems and TfL has issued a delay warning LINK

These are their disruption maps for October:

Details of the impact on bus services and closure of bus stops can be found HERE

Brent addresses air quality in Transportation Strategy but needs to be key issue in GLA campaign

Target Summary - note walking target should be 10% increase in schools with Gold Standard Travel Plans

Brent, faced with a growing population, new schools and several major regeneration areas along with infrastructural projects such as Cross Rail and HS2, as well as ongoing problems of road congestion and poor air quality,  is clearly in need of a long Term Transportation Strategy.

Following feedback from organisations, individuals and Scrutiny Commitee the Plan going before Cabinet  on Monday has undergone substantial changes.

The full document can be found HERE

This is a summary of the Objectives from the plan:

Objective 1: Increase the uptake of sustainable modes, in particular active modes.

2.13.    Increasing the uptake of cycling and walking will actively contribute to a reduction in congestion and air pollution and improve the health of Brent residents. Use of public transport or car clubs instead of the private car also contributes to reduced congestion and is important in enabling access to services. Uptake of all these modes can be influenced by effective travel planning measures and infrastructure.

Objective 2: Reduce conventional vehicular trips on the network, particularly at peak time


2.14. This is not about reducing the total number of trips on the network as mobility is highly important for local economic growth and for those residents who struggle to travel by other means, and require motorised travel to facilitate independent travel. However, trips can be re-timed to avoid peak hours or take place in less polluting vehicles.

Objective 3: Support growth areas and town centres to enable acceptable development

2.15.    Brent is expected to see high levels of growth over the next 20 to 30 years, focussing on the growth areas.Adequate transport investment will be required to ensure this development takes place on a sustainable basis, is accessible for all users and does not place undue pressure on the transport networks.

Objective 4: Reduce KSI incidents and slight accidents on Brent’s roads

2.16.    Over the last 10 years roads in Brent have become safer, however there is still considerable amounts of work to do in further reducing accidents to create safe and accessible streets for all users.

Objective 5: Reduce the exposure of Brent residents to particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) generated by the transport network

2.17. It has become apparent that particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide generated by a variety of sources has a significant adverse impact on the health of those who are regularly exposed. A proportion of these pollutants are generated by transport. Reduction in exposure of Brent residents could result in significant health benefits. 

This blog has had several articles expressing concern about air quality in Brent, particularly on the North Circular Road, in Neasden and as a consequence of the Brent Cross development. A further consideration has been the number of Brent schools sited close to major roads.

Air quality monitoring statins in Kingsbury, Harlesden and IKEA on the North circular have been closed.

Clean Air in London  estimates that there are 7,500 premature deaths in London annually due to nitrogen dioxide and particulate pollution as wellas the 3,400 caused by toxic air. Barry Gardiner (Brent North) told the Evening Standard Standard in June LINK:

So far this year 1,337 people have already died as result of air pollution yet the mayor’s proposals will not bring this down to safe levels until 2030.

We need a new national framework of low and ultra-low emissions zones within which London must roll out the electrification of buses and the highest vehicle standards for all new fleet vehicles within four years. We need decisive action now to protect our children not vague promises for 15 years down the line.

Air quality should be a major issue in the upcoming London Mayoral and  London Assembly elections as the Green Party attempted in the 2012 campaign (see video below):
 
 

This is the detail of the proposed Brent  Long Term Transportation Strategy  (LTTS) Objectives on air quality:

7. Reduce the exposure of Brent residents to Particulate Matter (PM) and NO2 generated by the transport network 

.        5.36.  Air quality improvement measures have previously been focussed on the reduction of carbon and CO2 production. However, in recent years it has become apparent that particulate matter and NO2 pose the most significant risks to the health of those exposed to them on a regular basis. 


.        5.37.  Evidence shows that fine and ultra fine particulate matter present in air pollution increases the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Conventional vehicles are responsible for 41% to 60% of air pollutants in the UK, which have an impact on cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. 


.        5.38.  It has been shown that NO2 acts as an irritant, exacerbating respiratory conditions and contributing to premature deaths, particularly in vulnerable members of the population such as those with asthma. NO2 is generated as part of the combustion process that takes place in conventional cars. 


.        5.39.  Particulate matter can enter the body through the lining of the lungs and creates inflammation. In particular, particulate matter has been shown to contribute to conditions that have an inflammatory element, such as heart attack and stroke. It is uncertain precisely how many deaths are brought forward by the presence of particulate matter, however, it is estimated to be a significant number. 


.        5.40.  Though not all particulate matter is generated by transport, diesel engines do produce significant amounts as does friction on the road surface and other moving parts. 

.        5.41.  Reducing the exposure of Brent residents to both of these substances will directly contribute to improved health and longer life. Though it is not achievable through this strategy to reduce exposure from the transport network to 0 due to the nature of transport and the built environment, there are some measures that are achievable that will both reduce overall levels of air pollution and lessen the exposure of individuals. 


Reducing exposure

5.42.    There are two main ways in which the exposure of Brent residents to this type of pollution can be controlled and reduced. These are reduction in the overall production of the pollutants and avoidance of the pollutants that are still produced.

Reduction

5.43.    All the objectives of this LTTS will contribute to improved air quality through reduced vehicle trips on the network. In particular increased use of sustainable modes and reduced peak-time freight movements combined with greater use of LEVs and ULEVs will contribute to improved air quality. However, there are some specific measures that relate more closely to air quality.

.        5.44.  The Transport Emissions Road Map (TERM) produced by Transport for London in 2014 identifies a number of measures that may be implemented in the boroughs to reduce the production of pollutants. Among these is the introduction of Low Emission Neighbourhoods which identify particular areas as zones in which heavily polluting vehicles are limited or controlled. 


.        5.45.  Though the introduction of these would be supported by the LTTS it should be noted that the terms on which they are implemented should be considered carefully to avoid inequitable impacts on residents. 


.        5.46.  It must also be considered that the current Transport for London bus fleet runs on diesel, which produces high levels of particulates. There are no current plans for this fleet to be changed for one running on alternative fuels, so this restriction must be considered when introducing restrictions. 


.        5.47.  However, due to the large number of bus routes running through Brent and in particular certain strategic corridors Brent will continue to lobby TfL for changes to the local bus fleet to reduce dependency on diesel. 


.        5.48.  The TERM also identifies the possible introduction of an Ultra Low Emission Zone covering greater London which would operate on similar terms to the current Low Emission Zone but would enforce tighter emission standards on vehicles entering greater London. 


.        5.49.  Though it is uncertain as yet how this will come forward on a London wide basis, the LTTS would support the introduction of a borough-wide low emission zone. This would give Brent Borough Council control over implementation and therefore the ability to mitigate any potential negative impacts on local residents. Further research would be required to take this forward should the opportunity to gain funding arise. 


Avoidance

.        5.50.  It has been shown that for particulate matter distance from the source of pollution makes a significant difference to the level of exposure suffered. Therefore, increasing the distance and introducing barriers could help to reduce the exposure of residents to this type of pollution. 


.        5.51.  In some areas this may not be achievable due to the constrained nature of the network. However in new schemes and in particular schemes that incorporate a strong element of place making, enabling a greater distance between the road surface and shop fronts and footways would be of benefit to the health of local workers and visitors. 


.        5.52.  In some areas is may also be possible to introduce barriers such as plating, that constrains the particulate matter and reduces the amount that reaches the footway and frontages. 


Stonebridge Adventure Playground is NOT SAVED yet - fight goes on

Rumours are apparently going around Stonebridge Estate saying that the Adventure Playground has been saved. This is not true. The Council's granting of Asset of Community Value status helps but on its own will not stop the redevelopment.

What will stop it is a determined campaign by the whole community united in protecting this asset and using every peaceful means necessary to bring the message home to councillors:  THIS PLAYGROUND MUST STAY!

Last night amid the fireworks I seemed to be the only person who turned up for the consultation meeting at the Hub. Unsurprisingly for a day when children and their families are busy having fun.

Either the timing was deliberate to discourage attendance or the Communications Team at Brent Council are extremely poor at their job.

We will need a huge turnout of the generations of Stonebridge and Harlesden people who want to keep the playground at the next consultation meeting which is on November 12th 5-7pm at Stonebridge School.

If you are unable to attend fill in the consultation form here: www.brent.gov.uk/stonebridgeconsultation

or email your response to stonebridge.consult@brent.gov.uk
 

The consultation closes on November 17th

I told the consultation team:

• Stonebridge and Harlesden children need a playground in a high density area to provide space to play, experience challenge and develop physical and teamwork skills
• They need a staffed playground so they and their parents know they are safe
• The playground is a place where parents and carers mix and get to know each other
• Children from many different primary and secondary schools mix happily at the Centre
• The staff are known and trusted by the community and have their respect
• In turn the staff know several generations of local people and have seen them grow from children into youth and adulthood
• This makes a unique contribution to the stability of the area
• The Council is in danger of concentrating on the 'accountancy' in housing and school place provision and missing the social value of what Stonebridge Adventure Playground provides
• Increased density of housing with no 'safety valve' such as the Playground provides will build up potential trouble for the future (more flats are to be built on the site of Bridge Park and Wembley Point across the North Circular Road may be turned into flats)
• The kickabout area (see illustration below) is next to the main road posing a danger both from traffic accidents and traffic pollution
• The Playground's holiday and weekend provision for children with special needs and disabilities is unique and its record of integration very positive
• The Playground also contributes to the mental health and well-being of children and young people through the care and support it offers
• Any Equalities Impact Assessment would have to recognise that in closing the Adventure Playground the Council would be depriving an already disadvantaged community further as well as removing support from children with special needs, disabilities and mental health problems

Stonebridge School and Our Lady of Lourdes next door - kickabout area next to main road and NO Adventure Playground

It is worth noting that the Brent Council website  consultation page introduction does not mention the plans involve the closing of the Sdventure Plkayground ad it merits just two sentences on page five of the consultation booklet.

From the Council website:

We are consulting on the redevelopment of Stonebridge Primary School between 6 October and 17 November 2014.

The current proposals are for the redevelopment of the Stonebridge Primary School site and the area around it.  This site is located off Hillside and is bordered by the canal off Johnson Road, Milton Avenue and Our Lady of Lourdes RC School.

The redevelopment includes the site currently being used as the Stonebridge Primary School annexe on Twybridge Way.

Stonebridge is your community, so it’s important that you tell us what you think of these plans.

These are proposals and no decision has as yet been taken.

Not very transparent is it?

Brent's cycling hopes punctured by Mayor's Office

The Brent Highways Committee, which meets on December 10th, will hear disappointing news about the prospects for cycling highways in Brent. Brent Council was not chosen for the Mayor's 'mini-Holland' scheme and it now appears that secondary projects are also encountering problems.

Brent's initial proposals to the GLA included:

• ·  The Jubilee/Metropolitan Superhighway - a direct route between Wembley and Willesden to include a “green bridge” crossing over the North Circular.
• ·  The Jubilee/Metropolitan Quietway - to run parallel to the Jubilee line between Northwick Park and Wembley Park, and again between Dollis Hill station and Kilburn station.
• ·  The Bakerloo Superhighway - along the Harrow Road between Wembley and Kensal Green towards central London; and
• An Orbital Quietway - to run along the canal between Alperton and Stonebridge Park, and also along the River Brent 

Despite an initial favourable response Andrew Gilligan the Mayor's Cycling Commissioner,  later supported just two routes. The first was a route following the Jubilee Line  linking Wembley ith Neasden, Willesden and Kilburn and an orbital route paralleling the North Circular, linking to Brent Cross.

Brent Council was interested in promoting local routes while Gilligan wanted routes into Central London.  Brent Council believe the latter would be of only limited benefit to Brent residents.

Officers summarise their reservations over content and progress of the proposals: LINK

Brent officers are very supportive of the Mayor’s cycle initiative. It complements sustainable transport, employment opportunities, public health and regeneration objectives for the Borough as well as contributing to improving cycle safety. At the same time we have some concerns about its delivery. These concerns are as follows:

a)      Officers are concerned that there is a focus on strategic routes into central London rather than more local cycle routes, which is where the greatest growth in cycling is likely to be achieved – only a certain population of our residents work in central London and we believe that the proportion that could be persuaded to cycle to central London would not be as great as the number of local cycle trips that we could encourage through local infrastructure investment;

b)      Selection of routes and local priorities does not appear to be as collaborative as expected, with priorities being set and defined by the Mayor’s office rather than being discussed and agreed in partnership with Brent;

c)      TfL have appointed consultants to develop the feasibility and design of local cycle routes, which intimates that Boroughs will not have the freedom and flexibility to commission and develop cycle projects on Borough roads – Brent has recently entered into the London Highways Alliance contract, which has the flexibility to enable delivery of consultancy services and we are concerned as to why alternate consultants are being used outside of the LoHAC framework;

d)      We are also concerned about decision making powers and processes by which local councillors and communities will be engaged given that design consultants are being employed by TfL to develop schemes on local roads; and

e)      At present, none of the boroughs have received any of the published funding and there is no indication of how and when any funding will be made available and what the role of Boroughs will be in utilising and receiving this funding. To date all development costs have been borne by the Boroughs and we have been given no indication as to when funding will be made available.

Call for action on air pollution at local, national and European level

A Green member of the European Parliament has called for increased urgency in the fight for clean air after the World Health Organization (WHO) labelled polluted air as carcinogenic.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the WHO, pointed to data confirming that 223,000 deaths from lung cancer worldwide in 2010 resulted from air pollution. [1]

Air pollution, which is primarily caused by emissions from vehicles, has already been linked to other lung problems as well as heart failure and premature death. In the UK alone 29,000 people every year die because of air pollution. [2]

Despite air pollution’s impact on people’s health the UK Government has been accused of trying to water down European laws which could reduce the levels of the noxious fumes in the air. [3]

Keith Taylor, the Green Party’s MEP for the South East of England and a leading campaigner for clean air, said:

The evidence from the WHO suggests that the risk from air pollution is similar to that from second hand tobacco smoke. Surely then we should expect controls on air pollution from transport similar in strength to those brought in to protect the public from passive smoking. With this new evidence being published it's clear that failing to act on the air pollution problem would be utterly unforgivable. 

Try as it might the UK Government can no longer pretend that the air pollution problem can be ignored, not when the World Health Organisation classify it as a group 1 carcinogen.

It’s time for the EU to adopt stronger air pollution laws that fall in line with World Health Organization guidelines and it’s time the UK Government works on behalf of the health of its citizens and stops trying to undermine this vital legislative programme.

I'll continue to campaign for clean air across and fight against any moves to weaken vital air pollution laws.

Neasden, North Circular Road and Park Royal are areas of Brent which already suffer from air pollution problems and this will be exacerbated by proposals such as the Harlesden Incinerator. Brent Green Party wants to see action at national, London and borough level to tackle the issue.  We believe that within the council a joint approach through the environment and public health departments, supported by transportation and planning, could result in an effective medium and long term solution to the problem.

Ends

1)     “Air pollution is a leading cause of cancer”- http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/17/us-cancer-pollution-idUSBRE99G0BB20131017

2)     Government report on deaths in UK linked to air pollution: http://www.hpa.org.uk/ProductsServices/ChemicalsPoisons/Environment/Air/

3)     Blog post by Keith Taylor (with links to government proposals to weaken air pollution laws): http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/keith-taylor/air-pollution-kills_b_2457096.html

Invisible menace threatens children's health

The North Circular at Neasden

I spent more than 10 years teaching at a primary school which was close to the North Circular in Brent. In contrast to other schools where I had taught there were high numbers of children on medication for asthma at the school. Classes often had 6-8 asthmatics compared with only one or two per class where I had taught before. Sports Day could be a nightmare. Although  local GP prescribing policies  may have contributed it appeared that the high level was down to the proximity of a very busy main road.

The impact of London pollution became clearer when we took children on residential trips. Children who had used an inhaler daily at school were able to do without them almost within hours of arriving at the Gordon Brown Outdoor Education Centre in Hampshire or the Youth Hostel in Epping Forest.As the coach reached the borders of London they began to request their inhalers.

New research by the Campaign for Clean Air has found that 1,148 schools in London are within 150 metres of roads carrying 10,000 or more vehicles per day and a total of 2,270 schools are within 400 metres of such roads.

This revelation comes at a time when new scientific research indicates that children exposed to higher levels of traffic-related air pollution at school and home may be at increased risk of developing asthma. Scientists say living near roads travelled by 10,000 or more vehicles per day could be responsible for some 15-30 per cent of all new cases of asthma in children; and of COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and CHD (coronary heart disease) in adults 65 years of age and older.

Jenny Jones, the Green Party London Mayoral candidate says:

* parents and teachers must be told when there are high pollution days
*  the Mayor of London has to act immediately to lower fares and reduce the total number of cars on our roads.
* create a very low emission zone which only allows the very cleanest vehicles to enter central London.
*  the Mayor must stick to the promise that all new buses will be hybrids from next year
* reinstate the plans for hybrid taxis which he dropped last year.

A map which shows the schools affected across London, and enables you to see Brent in details can be found  HERE 
or you can download a PDF listing the schools 150metres from a road carrying more than 10,000 vehicles per day HERE

Among the Brent schools listed are Copland High, Gower House, Jewish Free School, Oliver Goldsmith Primary, Our Lady of Grace (Dollis Hill) Our Lady of Lourdes (Stonebridge), Park Lane Primary, Preston Manor High, St Augustine's Primary (Kilburn), Stonebridge Primary,

Simon Birkett, director of Clean Air in London, said:

The government and Mayor Johnson must tackle an invisible public health crisis harming as many people now as we thought during the Great Smog in December 1952.

We need one or more additional inner low emission zones that ban the oldest diesel vehicles from our most polluted roads, and a massive campaign to build public understanding of the dangers of air pollution with advice on how people can protect themselves.