How will the Mayor's new London Planning Guidance impact on Brent?

From the London Mayor

 

The Mayor of London has adopted four new pieces of London Plan Guidance (LPG) that will help build a better London for everyone, delivering a cleaner, greener, healthier, and more sustainable London. 

This suite of Design and Characterisation LPGs includes: 

·       Characterisation and Growth Strategy LPG ·       Small Site Design Codes LPG ·       Optimising Site Capacity: A Design-led Approach LPG ·       Housing Design Standards LPG

These LPG provide further guidance on the implementation of London Plan 2021 policies, including: 

·       Policy D1 (London’s form, character and capacity for growth) ·       Policy D3 (Optimising site capacity through the design-led) ·       Policy D6 (Housing quality and standards) ·       Policy D9 (Tall buildings) ·       Policy H2 (Small sites) among others

All of the areas are relevant for Brent but probably the most important, given Brent Council's activities in building dense and high, is 'Optimising Site Capacity' although it will also be interesting to see how Brent characterises our borough now, after recent developments in Alperton, Wembley Park and South Kilburn and those such as Neasden that are in the pipeline.

 

EXTRACT

 

1. "Good growth across London requires development to optimise site capacity, rather than maximising density. This means responding to the existing character and distinctiveness of the surrounding context and balancing the capacity for growth, need for increased housing supply, and key factors such as access by walking, cycling and public transport, alongside an improved quality of life for Londoners. Capacity-testing should be the product of the design-led approach, and not the driver."

 

 LINKS TO DOCUMENTS

·       Characterisation and Growth Strategy LPG

·       Small Site Design Codes LPG

·       Optimising Site Capacity: A Design-led Approach LPG

·       Housing Design Standards LPG

 

GULEZ - was it Mo Butt of Brent who moved Sadiq into action on the scrappage scheme? Brent Council seem to think so.

So here we have it as set out in my earlier post LINK about media management of Sadiq Khans changes in the ULEZ scrappage scheme, Brent Council issued the following press release today complete with a picture of 'The Leader' who apparently helped influence the decision, with his letter written 2 days before the announcement:

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan has announced that tens of thousands more Londoners, including all those receiving child benefit and all small businesses in the capital, will be eligible for financial support to replace polluting vehicles from the end of July. 

 

This is part of a major extension of London’s biggest ever scrappage scheme ahead of the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) expanding to cover the whole of London - becoming the Greater Ultra Low Emission Zone (GULEZ) - on 29 August 2023. 

 

The changes include: 

• Allowing all Londoners receiving child benefit to apply 
• Allowing all businesses with less than 50 employees to apply 
• Allowing charities to scrap up to three vans instead of just one

 

A new grace period for sole traders, microbusinesses, small businesses, and registered charities who have ordered brand-new compliant vehicles, but have been informed that delivery will be delayed past 29 August when the larger zone goes live – or if they have booked an approved retrofit appointment for a non-compliant light van or minibus before that date. 

 

The Mayor has also asked Transport for London (TfL) to actively monitor applications from care workers to ensure they are also benefiting from the money available.  

 

The ULEZ expansion aims to take old and dangerous vehicles off the road to clean London’s air and tackle the health implications that come from pollution, like lung and heart disease. 

In 2019, air pollution caused an estimated 4,000 deaths in London and data shows that residents in outer-London boroughs, like Brent, are disproportionally affected by poor air quality, especially those from BAME and low-income backgrounds. 

 

Earlier this year, data showed that over a quarter of deadly particles have vanished in areas that expanded the Ultra Low Emission Zone last year. Pupils, students and local residents can breathe a sigh of relief at the expansion, as the report shows that ULEZ has cut toxic particles by nearly half in Central London. 

 

 Muhammed Butt, the Leader of Brent Council

 

The Leader of Brent Council, Cllr Muhammed Butt, wrote to Sadiq Khan earlier this week asking the Mayor to give more support to families and businesses. 

 

He said: "I am delighted that, having listened to feedback, the Mayor has announced a major expansion to the scrappage scheme meaning tens of thousands more Londoners will benefit. 

 

"Toxic air is damaging our health in Brent and affecting our children too. Your council is also doing its bit to improve air quality, including putting in place 30 School Streets, planting 4,533 new trees, installing over 454 charging points for electric vehicles and increasing the share of journeys made by walking, cycling and public transport to 69% - one of the highest figures in outer London.”

 

“We are proud of our work, but with the ULEZ expansion from 29 August - that is set to ensure five million more Londoners can breathe cleaner air - and an even bigger scrappage scheme, I am confident we can clean up Brent - and London's - air much faster, and for good.” 

 

Visit the TfL website to find out more about the ULEZ, including the scrappage scheme and to check if your vehicle is compliant. 

 

And Brent Council tweeted the claim on their official Twitter account:

 

 

UPDATE: Sadiq Khan response today on ULEZ expansion scheme suggests coordinated Labour campaign ahead of Mayoral election - Brent Council Leader Muhammed Butt calls on London Mayor to review current criteria for Scrappage Scheme ahead of ULEZ expansion

 

 Today (Thursday) Sadiq Khan announced some revisions to the scrappage scheme so it appears this was a coordinated Labour campaign ahead of the GLA elections to persuade the electorate that 'we are listening' and that the letters from Brent, Ealing and other Labour councils brought about the change.

 

 

Since this post was published other London Labour boroughs have tweeted the same message - clearly a concerted effort.

 

Today (Thursday) Sadiq Khan announced some revisions to the scrappage scheme so it appears this was a coordinated Labour campaign ahead of the GLA elections to persuade the electorate that 'we are listening' and that the letters from Brent, Ealing and other Labour councils brought about the change.

How will 2nd staircase requirement for 30metre plus buildings impact on Brent's current pipeline?

 I have asked Brent Council Press Office to provide a quote from the Council on how the requirement for a second staircase for buildings over 30m high will impact on developments currently in the pipeline in Brent. The requirement follows recommendations made after the Grenfell fire.

From Fire Protection Association LINK

As reported by Building, property consultants Lambert Smith Hampton (LSH) and Connells have analysed that up to 124,000 new London homes could be greatly affected or delayed by new fire safety regulations – schemes that had been previously approved.

Following the government’s recent 12-week consultation on proposed changes to Approved Document B (ADB), in February 2023, London Mayor Sadiq Khan announced, that he would be going ahead with the requirement for two stairwells in new buildings that were over 30 metres in height.

During his announcement, he stipulated that the Greater London Authority would only sign off on high-rise building applications that included two stairwells. As LSH and Connells note, this means that a current pipeline of 243 buildings (accommodating 123,632 new homes) will have to be scrapped as new designs are submitted by developers. The property consultants added that the new requirements could lead to current applications being “under threat of significant delay, or even being completely mothballed”.

The head of planning at LSH, Mary-Jane O’Neill, explained: “Given the tragic circumstances that led to the revision of fire safety regulations, there are few plausible grounds on which to oppose their implementation. But all of us involved in the process of development do need to process their implications and come up with some pragmatic solutions as a priority.”

The decision for a secondary staircase follows calls for better life safety measures for residents of high-rise buildings by giving them another means of escape in the event of a fire. It can also mean that fire crews have more access to take firefighting equipment to higher storeys when alternative routes might not be feasible. The need for a second staircase was one of the recommendations set out by Dame Judith Hackitt in her independent review and has also been backed by RIBA. The London Fire Brigade welcomed Sadiq Khan's decision, with further bodies wondering whether the height threshold should be reduced to 18 metres instead of 30. At the time, Charlie Pugsley, Assistant Commissioner for Fire Safety, said:

“Having pushed developers to include at least two staircases in tall residential buildings for some time, we support the government’s plans to bring in this clear limit for new buildings over 30m to further improve safety.

“This introduction of a clear threshold will give clarity to developers, local authorities and communities and prevent the continued practice of increasingly tall buildings being designed and constructed with only a single staircase.”

The new London-wide mandate, however, is expected to impact several London boroughs and their promises for more housing. Indeed, Architects’ Journal reports that construction work has stopped at 10 new residential blocks between three and 16 storeys in the east London borough of Havering. The £450 million residential scheme expected to replace 270 homes with 380 homes has now been halted over the current uncertainty around second staircase requirements. Developer Wates Residential, alongside Havering Council, has stopped construction until the government gives more clarity and reaches a “decision on new building safety legislation regarding taller buildings”.

In a statement, the developer said: “Regulations are likely to change to require two staircases in buildings over 30m, so we have taken the decision to pause the development at this early point in the construction process until we have a better understanding of what the new regulations will mean.”

Mary-Jane added that while legislative updates to fire safety measures are still ongoing, “housebuilders are unlikely to go back to the drawing board on these schemes until there is much more clarity around the required design standards”. In the meantime, developers will have put their existing plans on hold. 

“There is no silver bullet on the horizon that will unlock the uncertainty surrounding tall buildings,” she said.

 

Mayor of London criticises Government's 'watered down' post-Grenfell building evacuation plans and says PEEPs is the only way to ensure comprehensive & consistent implementation

Sadiq Khan has responded to the Government's post-Grenfell consultation on Emergency Evacuation Information Sharing which they undertook after rejecting the Grenfell Inquiry's recommendation on Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs).

It would be useful to know if Brent Council agrees with the London Mayor's  response.

 

Response to Emergency Evacuation Sharing Information Consultation
17 August 2022

Summary

 
The Mayor of London reiterates his view that legislating for Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) in all buildings of any height covered by the Fire Safety Order, and providing central funding, is the only way to ensure there is comprehensive and consistent implementation across the entire country.

The proposals set out in this consultation on Emergency Evacuation Sharing Information (EEIS) amount to little more than a watered-down version of PEEPs. The Mayor has identified several of limitations to the EEIS proposals and has detailed them below.

Government’s ongoing failure to implement this recommendation from Grenfell Tower Inquiry is disappointing and concerning. Government must ensure that the recommendations from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry do not become a missed opportunity for change, as was the case after the Lakanal House fire.

Five years on from the Grenfell fire, the Mayor pays tribute to the bereaved and survivors who are campaigning for change so that a disaster like Grenfell never happens again.

Response to consultation

Following the tragic loss of life in the fire at Grenfell Tower, in which 41 per cent of residents with disabilities died, the Grenfell Tower Inquiry recommended that owners and managers of every high-rise residential building be required by law to prepare PEEPs for all residents whose ability toself-evacuate may be compromised (such as persons with reduced mobility or cognition).

Given that 83 per cent of respondents to the original PEEPs consultation in 2021 supported the proposal, it is clear that there is significant demand for this recommendation to be implemented in full.

The Mayor is pleased to read that a working group of disabled groups and housing providers is being set up by government and would stress that the group membership must be diverse and reflect all views, including those who would benefit from PEEPs. It is vital that the working group considers and establishes the best way to implement PEEPs in practice.

While the call for evidence on PEEPs is welcome, government should also be conducting pilot schemes and undertaking research to make a more informed assessment of PEEPs in residential housing. The Mayor hopes that this would lead government to reconsider its latest position.

Following a commitment to implement PEEPS fully, the evidence collected from this process could then inform a nationwide protocol, guidance and training on how the housing and development sector could implement the requirements of any legislation on PEEPs.

The Emergency Evacuation Information Sharing (EEIS) consultation released on 18 May 2022 proposes alternative measures to protect the fire safety of residents who would need support to evacuate in an emergency. This proposal differs from PEEPs in a number of key ways. First, it only focuses on residents who are mobility impaired as opposed to those with other physical or cognitive impairments. Second, it only applies to buildings with a simultaneous evacuation strategy and not buildings with a stay put strategy. Third, it proposes five steps that involve conducting a Person Centred Fire Risk Assessment (PCFRA) as opposed to a PEEP, and then sharing information with the local Fire and Rescue Service (FRS). Fourth, it relies on the FRS to conduct rescues of those who would be unable to self-evacuate.

1. Scope

 
The Mayor is concerned that EEIS only focuses on residents that are mobility impaired and urges government to take a more inclusive approach. People who may be unable to self-evacuate include those with mobility issues but also those with other physical and cognitive impairments which may be permanent or temporary.

2. Building fire strategy

 
The Grenfell Tower Inquiry recommended PEEPs for all high-rise residential buildings and government consulted on that proposal on 8 June 2021. Government is now proposing to introduce EEIS – a watered down version of PEEPs – only for buildings with a simultaneous evacuation strategy in place. Under these proposals, those buildings with a stay put policy in place would not be required to provide EEISs for relevant residents. It is welcomed that government has moved away from using height as a distinguishing factor, but the new categorisation of fire strategy cannot be the correct approach either. A resident affected by smoke or fire must have a plan and means to get to a place of safety, regardless of whether the building has a stay put or simultaneous evacuation policy. Grenfell Tower was a building with a stay put policy and 72 people lost their lives. The Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 1 report recommended government develop national guidelines for evacuation of high-rise buildings as a result. It is clear that stay put cannot be the only strategy and all buildings must have a Plan B so that residents can evacuate to a place of safety if stay put is no longer viable.

Since Grenfell, countless buildings have been found to have fire safety defects and have therefore been forced to change their fire strategy to simultaneous evacuation until remediation is complete.

Linking EEIS to buildings with simultaneous evacuation risks suggesting building owners can retire EEISs once the building has been remediated. That was never the intention of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry recommendation around PEEPs.

3. Person Centred Fire Risk Assessments (PCFRAs)

 
A PCFRA is a risk assessment that helps identify residents who are at higher risk from fire in their own flat. It differs from a PEEP in that it is not a bespoke escape plan to assist residents who may have difficulties in evacuating a building unaided during an emergency.

The EEIS consultation proposes a process whereby the Responsible Person (RP) offers a PCFRA to residents who self-identify as requiring assistance to self-evacuate and then connects them with the local FRS to arrange a home fire safety visit.

The Mayor is content with the proposed reliance on self-identification but notes that its success relies on proactive communications from the RP. These communications should encourage residents to consider whether they need support and inform them of their rights.

PCFRAs will help identify residents who are at higher risk from fire in their own accommodation and measures such as fire-retardant bedding and fire safe ashtrays can be put in place for them in their homes. While PCFRAs are welcome and indeed already being undertaken now by some RPs, they focus on reducing the probability of fire inside someone’s flat and, unlike a PEEP, they do not incorporate an evacuation plan.

4. Reliance on FRS conducted rescue

 
The consultation makes the following argument against PEEPs: ‘the time between a fire being reported and the FRS mounting their operational response at the scene is the period in which a PEEP would be enacted. In a residential setting, there will inevitably be a limit as to what could be safely achieved by a single staff member or even a small team regarding support to mobility impaired residents in advance of the FRS attending with a greater number of competent, trained personnel.’ In other words, government is claiming there is insufficient time for a PEEP to add value and that FRS conducted rescue is always preferable.

The Mayor does not agree with this view for two reasons. First, the time that FRS takes to arrive at an emergency may be quick, but the time taken to actually set up a bridgehead, hoses and get into a position to fight fire and rescue residents in tall buildings is far greater. In reality there is more time for a PEEP to be effective than government is suggesting.

Second, expert evidence in the Inquiry has underscored the importance of timely evacuation to avoid serious and potentially fatal smoke inhalation. This highlights the risk inherent in the EEIS approach which relies solely on FRS conducted rescue instead of supporting self-evacuation.

 I asked the Green Party Disability Group for a comment on the issue. They said:

 

Personal emergency evacuation plans are critical to sustain human life in this climate crises-ridden world of today. For disabled people to be valued equally as human beings by those in power then society and safe & sustainable environments must be designed for everyone.

 

We are also living through a mass disabling event with an estimated 2 million people in the UK suffering from Long Covid. Tories view disabled people as having no value & as ‘other’. If those in power designed for us all equally & inclusively we would no longer be disabled.

 

We would be what we really are - people with impairments. And living equally with everyone else. Against the horrific backdrop of Grenfell & needless loss of life and great suffering each and every Tory voter must hang their heads in shame. Peeps are humane, this Govt isn’t.

Surging Omicron rates: Sadiq Khan declares a 'Major Incident' in London

 

 From London Mayor's Office

 

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has today declared a ‘major incident’ due to the rapid spread of the Omicron variant across the capital.

 

The Mayor took the decision as the formal Chair of the London Resilience Forum following discussions with leaders from NHS London, local authorities and emergency and other essential services in the capital.

 

It comes as the number of COVID-19 cases in London has rapidly increased, with 65,525 new confirmed cases in the past seven days, and 26,418 cases reported in the last 24 hour period alone – the highest number since the start of the pandemic. In the last week, the number of COVID-19 patients in London hospitals has gone up 29 per cent.

 

The impact of rising case numbers is already being felt across the capital with staff absences in frontline services causing challenges. By declaring a major incident it will help authorities support each other to reduce service disruption and allow more time to administer booster vaccines, as we learn more about the severity of the variant and the impact it will have on the NHS.

 

A major incident is defined as an event or situation with a range of serious consequences which requires special arrangements to be implemented by one or more emergency responder agency. It is “beyond the scope of business-as-usual operations, and is likely to involve serious harm, damage, disruption or risk to human life or welfare, essential services, the environment or national security”.  In addition, “the severity of the consequences associated with a major incident are likely to constrain or complicate the ability of responders to resource and manage the incident”.

 

It means that coordination arrangements between key public services will be further stepped-up with the re-establishment of the Strategic Coordinating Group, which will have a Government representative enabling London to seek further support from government to address the pressures facing the city.

 

The Mayor previously declared a major incident on January 8 due to the rapid spread of COVID-19 and its impact on the NHS, but was able to stand it down on February 26 as case numbers fell.

 

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said: 

 

The surge in cases of the Omicron variant across our capital is hugely concerning, so we are once again declaring a major incident because of the threat of COVID-19 to our city.

 

The Omicron variant has quickly become dominant with cases increasing rapidly and the number of patients in our hospitals with COVID-19 on the rise again. We are already feeling the impact across the capital and while we are still learning about this variant, it’s right that London’s key agencies work closely together to minimise the impact on our city, including helping to protect the vital vaccination programme.

 

We know that the vaccine offer our best defence against the virus. There are now more clinics in London delivering vaccines than at any point during the pandemic. I urge all Londoners to book their appointment or to go to one of the many walk-in centres across the capital as soon as you can.

 

Georgia Gould, Chair of London Councils, said: 

 

The rapid spread of Omicron across our city is of huge concern. Local councils have stepped up and played a vital role in supporting their communities through the pandemic, I know they will continue with these efforts but we cannot do this alone. Vaccines offer the best protection against the virus and now more than ever it’s important that Londoners take up the offer to get a booster as soon as possible. If you’ve not had your first and second dose yet, please do come forward and protect yourselves and others around you. Together we must do all we can to defeat this virus.

 

 

 

Brent Trades Council urges support for bus drivers over remote sign on - please sign open letter to Sadiq Khan here

 

Brent Trades  Council is urging local residents and trade unionists to sign an open letter to Sadiq Khan urging him to stop  attempts to change the working conditions of London bus drivers.

The change, called 'remote sign on', would mean drivers instead of going to a garage to begin their working day going to a bus stop or other venue and joining a bus. Their working time would begin at that point and pay would be reduced if the bus was late. Drivers would only be paid for the time they are behind the wheel. The bus stop would of course lack the facilities of toilets and canteens available at a garage and limit interaction with other bus workers.  It is believed that the change would equate to a 7% fall in earnings.

SIGN THE OPEN LETTER  HERE

We urge you as Mayor of London to stop remote sign on which bus operators are proposing to introduce on some bus routes. You have already instructed the Board of Transport of London (TfL) to order a moratorium on remote sign on in London which is conditional on “research” being done on its impact.

Why is this important?

Research shows that remote sign on is bad news for drivers, detrimental to passengers and risks the safety of all road users. If a bus is delayed the driver is left, unpaid and in the open, for considerable lengths of time in all weathers, increasing issues of tiredness and fatigue. Driver fatigue is a health concern and a tired driver places passenger safety at risk. Also Unite the Union, of which you are a member, calculated that remote sign on would equate to an immediate seven per cent cut in wages on average for affected workers.

Terms and conditions of London bus drivers are under attack by bus operators. The outsourcing of routes to 16 different operators means bus drivers have different rates of pay, different contracts and different sets of terms and conditions depending on the company they work for.

Drivers working for RATP London United are already taking industrial action across 7 bus depots for improved pay and in defence of their terms and conditions. Metroline and Metroline West bus depots have now won their ballot for industrial action opposing the introduction of remote sign on and in defence of their terms and conditions.

Only bus operators benefit from this scheme as they cut costs by reducing wages. This is why despite your moratorium Unite’s 4,000 members have vowed to fight remote sign on with everything they have as they are concerned your moratorium will not achieve a suitable outcome. 

They have given overwhelming support to taking industrial action in defence of their terms and conditions.

Please ensure that as Mayor of London, you give bus drivers a cast iron guarantee that bus companies are not allowed to compete on pay and conditions for staff, please set a minimum and equal standard of employment for all bus drivers and re-assure bus drivers, who are essential workers, that both their pay and their terms and conditions are in safe hands whilst you are Mayor of London? And please keep to your pledge if re-elected Mayor on 6th May.

TFL must follow Network Rail's lead and rethink their Biodiversity Action Plan for London Underground

Guest post by Emma Wallace of Harrow Green Party and the Green Party candidate for the Brent and Harrow GLA Constituency seat

 

Just over a week since its launch, the petition calling on Sadiq Khan and the TFL to ‘Stop the Removal of Green Habitat’ has garnered over 500 signatures LINK . 

 

This response shows that the wholesale destruction of habitat along our London Underground embankments is strongly opposed by many people from across London and the rest of the country.   We have heard numerous similar stories to the one most recently reported on along the Metropolitan line near Pinner LINK, from Wimbledon Park on the District Line LINK , to Hackney Downs and stations along the Overground Line LINK  and along the West and North of the Central and Piccadilly Lines.  These reports reveal a similar lack of public consultation with local residents and the resulting distress caused by the destruction and removal of sound and visual barriers that had been provided by the lineside foliage.  There has also been an absence of ecological surveys carried out by TFL before work commences, with contractors obliterating everything in their paths and showing little awareness of the biodiversity or wildlife they are displacing, including nesting birds or badger sets.

 

Network Rail has also been accused of devastating much of its lineside embankment greenery over recent years, carrying out a “secretive nationwide felling operation”, as reported in The Guardian 2018 LINK .   

 

This has caused much upset with both residents and train passengers, who have repeatedly decried the raising to the ground of the once verdant banks running along the hundreds of miles of our national train network.  The destruction along Lincolnshire railways in 2019 even led Tory MP, Sir John Hayes to state that the trackside vegetation removal looked like “a scene from Hiroshima” and to call for an urgent meeting with the then Environmental Secretary, Michael Gove LINK.   

 

In response to public pressure, Network Rail published a new environmental sustainability strategy in December 2020, including a ‘Biodiversity Action Plan’ LINK .  This plan contains a bold vision to improve the biodiversity of plants and wildlife lineside, committing “to the key goal of no net loss in biodiversity on our lineside estate by 2024, moving to biodiversity net gain by 2035”.  This culture change within Network Rail, viewing lineside vegetation as an asset, not a liability, must urgently be adopted by TFL and the Mayor of London when managing London Underground lineside vegetation. The last London Underground Biodiversity Action Plan (LU’s BAP) was published in 2010 LINK  and consequently urgently needs to be addressed and updated.  TFL must use the recent Network Rail example to rethink its biodiversity management policies to meet their commitment to protecting and enhancing London’s wildlife and green spaces.  

 

Darren Johnson, Green Party Assembly Member 2000 and 2016 and Deputy Chair of the Environment Committee, overseeing the 2012 ‘On the Right Lines?’ report  LINK , has backed our campaign, commenting on the petition: “Very happy to support this. Something I worked on when I was a London Assembly Member. Of course, vegetation removal is vital for rail safety, but the scorched earth approach is not the way.”  We have been overwhelmed by the support for the petition and many comments left, revealing how strongly people feel about this issue and their desire for TFL to change their policy on excessive vegetation embankment clearing and the need to replace it with a more nuanced and sustainably managed policy, which recognises and values these precious green corridors.  

 

See below a selection of people’s comment on the petition:

 

·      “The opportunities for ecological enhancement and support of biodiversity along rail lines are huge and cannot be overlooked! Partner with those who know, care and have the energy and resources to support projects.” Lisa Shell       

 

·      “We’re in the midst of a climate and environmental emergency and losing wildlife and biodiversity at an alarming rate. This type of habitat loss in totally unacceptable and must be stopped.”  Jean Gerrard

 

·      “Dreadful situation! I live right next to the train lines. The noise is really bad now and I can see all the passengers on the train from my kitchen window.  Such a sad loss of greenery. The birds have been going crazy too. What is TFL doing about rectifying this? I'm heart broken.” Pauline D’Jemil

 

·      “Please stop this unnecessary assault on what is left of our green spaces.” Ann Wilson

 

·      “Green corridors whether railways, canals or rivers are vital to wildlife and mature trees reduce noise nuisance from railways and air pollution.”  Martin Francis

 

·      “You're trashing animal habitat, increasing pollution and noise nuisance. Stop it.”  Anne Heritage   

 

·      “Stop making the world into a concrete jungle!” Asha Osman

 

·      “So depressing to see. Is there any one in authority who cares about our environment?” Jean Pannell

 

·      “Please try and think more creatively. Safety is a priority but there are surely alternatives that could be adopted. Shrubs and under planting wild grasses and low growing flowers etc.” Julie Curtis

 

·      “This has to stop; the railways are a natural wildlife corridor and should be protected from excessive and unnecessary cutbacks.”  Paula Hermes

 

·      “Vital for so many reasons. We all know what they are. Please stop cutting down the beautiful vegetation. It’s always such a joy to see.” Sarah Holford

 

·      “Stop destroying everything. Everywhere I look I see deforestation, destruction, the silent absence of life. Rail verges are one of nature’s last remaining lifelines. It costs nothing just to let it live. For our children and for the climate, please just stop this mindless destruction.” Anna Scrivenger

 

·      “We need these green corridors to cut pollution, keep noise down and a respite for nature.” Linda Quin

 

·      “These are critically important wildlife corridors.” Paul Allan-Smith

 

·      “Why on earth?? Railway embankments are some of the few untampered wildflower habitats left - leave them alone!!” Kate Hopkins

 

·      “I should like to see evidence of 'problem' trees and certainly do not want ANY vegetation removed in future without a previously approved assessment.” Keith Gissing

 

·      “We are losing trees and green spaces at an ever-increasing rate. Please don’t make things even worse.” Linda McKeller

 

·      “Trees and natural vegetation provide a vital transport corridor for animals and absorb excess rainwater.” Marc Sheimann

 

·      “Yes, stop cutting our trees down HS2 is doing enough damage to our nature.” Erica Locke

 

·      “We are currently seeing an unprecedented number of wildlife habitats decimated. Clearing TfL railway corridors of trees and hedges just adds to that and our climate crisis. Please consider planting more vegetation and maintaining what you have.” Elaine Persell

 

·      “I realise that trackside trees shouldn’t be a safety’ threat, but recently the decimation of lineside vegetation has been completely over the top.” Terry Hooper        

 

·      “This is criminal. I know safety is paramount, but this is more than that. Losing pollution soaking trees, habitats, shade, aesthetic enhancement is wrong.”  Polly Mortimer

 

·      “We need every INCH of green in this supposed green and pleasant land, especially in London which would choke on its own effluent if not for the green spaces as yet untouched by speculators. In a world where homeowners are ripping up their gardens to put down gravel, we need green that produces fresh air more than ever.”  John Mangan

 

·      We desperately need more biodiversity in our cities! Please use your brains and think of what you'll be leaving for future generations.” Julie Barber

 

·      “It's very important that Sadiq Khan shows us that he will stop the degradation of our precious environment, otherwise he'll not be voted for again!” Miranda James

 

·      “Every tree possible is needed for reducing pollution and climate change and for wildlife habitat. Please stop cutting them down.” Lisa Penney

 

Thank you to everyone who has signed the petition so far.  Please sign if you haven’t yet already done so. Thank you, Emma Wallace