Wembley Park 'regeneration v gentrification' revisited 6 years on - do the warnings in this article still hold?

Wembley Matters has been following the development of the Wembley Park 'regeneration' areas for some time. In October 2017 LINK  I published the guest post below which attempted to look forward to the impact of what the author termed 'gentrification' rather than regeneration.  Some might argue that 'gentrification' doesn't fit as very few residents lived in the largely light industrial and warehouse area that were displaced, but it could apply to the wider area with many working class people unable to continue to live here.

Since then we have seen what residents claim is over-development in Alperton, further demolition and building on South Kilburn estate with shrinking green space; masterplan for the Neasden Stations area with high rises on the College of North Wesr London  Dudden Hill site and the light industrial area between Willesden High Road and Dudden Hill; and the huge re-development of the 'one public estate' (comprising Network Homes, NHS NW London, University of Westminster Brent Council) of what will almost be a new town in Northwick Park.

This is the original article with my introduction:

 

There have been many postings on this website about Quintain's Wembley Park 'regeneration' and even more comments, particularly as the development has accelerated recently eating up warehouse and industrial units and apparently squeezing tower blocks into any spare space. In this guest posting Dilan Tulsiani stands back and considers the implications for local people as well as the locality itself.
 

On the 29^th of August 2017, Quintain, a property investment and development business, announced via its website that it was ‘spending £1m a day on construction making Wembley Park one of the UK’s biggest construction sites’. According to Quintain, there will be over 8,500 jobs created, with a further 3,000 homes under construction ‘delivered at a pace not seen at any other London development site’. The construction framework consists of six contractors, the notables being: McLaren, Wates, Sisk and Carillion. Quintain have recently shifted their construction policy from ‘build to buy’ to ‘build to rent’. They aim to build over 7,000 new homes, with 5,000 labelled as ‘build to rent’, and a further 2,300 as “affordable”.

 

Quintain and Brent Council have both resisted using the term ‘gentrification’ to describe their partnership in transforming the area. Instead, you’ll see ‘regeneration’ on practically every website or poster promoting the ongoing process. This is understandable, as the critics of any form of gentrification, are quick to label the selective description by property developers as deceptive and dishonest. Technically speaking, regeneration is embedded within the process of gentrification. The Cambridge Dictionary defines regeneration: ‘to improve a place or system, especially by making it more active or successful’. Gentrification is defined as: ‘the process by which a place, especially part of a city, changes from a being poor to being a richer one, where people from a higher social class live’. Wembley Park’s ‘regeneration’ process factually falls under both definitions (for the remainder of this article I will use the term ‘gentrification’ instead of ‘regeneration’, as it is more accurate to my subject matter). Although, to prevent an ethical breakdown, new tenants would probably cling to ‘regeneration’ as an ontological justification for staying in Wembley.

 

Residents who have lived in Brent for more than a decade will remember the industrial abyss that used to exist just a short walk from the station. In this sense, the gleaming metallic towers, illusory designer outlet and newly placed pavement are well relished. However, there are a few fundamental concerns that have simply been swept aside. Firstly, the effect on the surrounding areas. There is no surprise, that most, if not all the flats in Wembley are not “affordable”. In fact, that term is usually used to provoke a narrative of relativity concerning financial status. Quintain has invested £900 million into Wembley Park, without careful consideration and evaluation from the residents of Brent, this could lead to some serious socio-economic disparities. David Fell, a research analyst at Hamptons International states that property prices in HA9 “have risen by 14% in the last year [2016], compared to a London average of 10%.” Just down the road from Wembley Park, a two-bedroom flat is valued around £335,000. A flat of the same size, less than 10 minutes’ walk away, is valued at £450,000 - £500,000. Recently, Alto has sold two-bedroom flats in Wembley Park for £800,000.

 

A similar problem was highlighted in 2014 during gentrification processes in South Kilburn, where a member of the Residents’ Association claimed: “Those who have been living in the area are essentially being driven out. This all amounts to a social cleansing of South Kilburn.” Moreover, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants’ and Residents’ Associations emphasised that the residents who have lived in South Kilburn for generations could no longer afford to live in their homes. These are not trivial or isolated matters. They’re simply the effects of gentrification. Wealth concentrated in one single area in this manner, will have drastic consequences. The surrounding populations will be allowed to use facilities, shops and walk the newly paved streets, but there is a cap on their indulgence of this ideology. Consider what the residents of Chalkhill think when their homes are (literally and metaphorically) overshadowed by the new apartment towers. When they, like so many other communities, have a lack of funding within their own neighbourhoods, along with other serious social issues. To name one, in Brent and Hounslow 34 high-rise buildings failed fire cladding tests issued after the horrendous disaster at Grenfell Tower. In contrast, I think it would be perfectly safe to assume that the newly built apartments in Wembley Park have some of the best fire safety systems available.

 

 Attached to this disparity of wealth is the subsequent problem of crime. There is no doubt that the new properties will have a well-maintained police presence, due to the proximity of the stadium, along with security guards for each building. Due to the disparity, crimes in the surrounding areas may increase. Let’s take some of surrounding areas as examples (take these as approximate averages): From January - August 2017, Alperton has had the average total crime rate of 118/month, Dollis Hill’s average total crime rate was 137/month, and Tokyngton stands at an average of 188/month. Tokyngton is the closest of the three areas to Wembley Park, and in recent years it has had a subsequent increase in total crimes committed. If the investment in selective industries and areas remains or increases in the next decade, there should be no surprise at the increase in crime. This correlation was well represented in gentrification processes in New York, especially Harlem. As living standards get higher, the price of property increases, more people will forcibly turn to crime – both petty and serious. The socio-cultural divide will only widen.

 

One last fundamental issue is an assessment by The FA (for those like myself who are not sport literate: The Football Association). In May 2016, The FA complained that Brent Council was considering those who visit the stadium “an afterthought”. The recent constructions sites, which appear directly outside the stadium, could present potential hazards to fans, according to the FA. In fact, these new apartments would present the highest, and thus the most expensive flats, with their own personalised view of the games below them. Wembley is already set to be overcrowded, yet with ongoing construction, and busy venues/rush hour, there should be an effective policy by the council to counter this.

 

Ultimately, I see no realistic counter-movement to what seems to be an unchecked gentrification process at Wembley. In the next decade, Wembley, just as many other towns in Greater London, will be injected with huge sums of money, none of which will aid ingrained social issues, but will make these issues less noticeable for those living in the newly ‘regenerated’ areas. In the meanwhile, surrounding populations will attempt to readjust and comfort themselves from their high price of living with the luxurious shopping outlets built on the borders between their areas and the ‘newly regenerated Wembley Park’.

 

South Kilburn 'Carnivale' Saturday 15th July - 12-5pm - Carlton Vale

 

£765,000 project to save and improve the deteriorating Kilburn Library

Photographs from collection submitted to Cabinet

Brent Cabinet will be considering major plans to rectify structural problems at Kilburn Library and improve the facility at its meeting on Monday. The project will cost £765,000 of which  £534,000 would come from Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy and £231,500 from an application to the Arts Council of England's Library Improvement Fund.

A dossier of photographs (see above) are submitted alongside the proposed works.

Offices explain:

This investment will:

 
· Upgrade the library facilities and building, including the substantial but
underused garden;
· Implement a flexible design to expand the use of the library and enable
hires outside of core opening hours;
· Improve the accessibility of the building through improved design and
signage;
· Extend the footprint of the building to create a dedicated event and
learning space which could also be used for community hire.

The last refurbishment undertaken at Kilburn Library took place in 2009/10.
Structurally, the building is in a poor state. There are large cracks forming in the
structure of the building and there is concern that debris may fall. Furnishings
are mostly fixed and offer limited flexibility to develop the library offer or adapt
the space for different audiences and uses. There is no dedicated event space
despite the strong demand for cultural programmes in the area. Local
consultation for the Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2022 also identified
community priorities of food growing and access to green space. Kilburn Library
has an underutilised garden and will meet this need, but it requires investment to
make it fully accessible and be used more extensively by the community.

 

The works would entail building an extension to the existing building and
reconfiguring the layout to create a larger more flexible space. The driver for this
is a need to increase engagement with residents in the South Kilburn area and
to meet an increased demand and need for services, with a particular focus on
digital, learning, culture and health, following the large amount of growth that is
currently taking place and expected to take place. The new spaces and design
would enable us to increase our programming in these areas and work more with
local partners to expand our reach and library usage in the area.

The increasing population of South Kilburn is cited as a further reason to improve the facility.

Costings:

The Project Plan

Difficulties with South Kilburn redevelopment?

We know that rising costs of regeneration schemes in the pipeline have led to proposals for changes in tenure. There is a clue to possible similar problems in South Kilburn in the last paragraph of the Finance Report going to Cabinet on Monday morning that follows information on slippages totalling £16.2m.

South Kilburn

South Kilburn has a budget variance of £16.2m, owing to slippage.

There is a £5.2m slippage due to acquisitions being forecast in future years primarily on Austen House and Blake Court. A £4.9m SCIL contribution from the NWCC projects will not be used within the financial year. There is a £4m slippage on the Carlton and Granville project, the project has moved into the construction phase after procurement and the forecast now reflects a more realistic schedule. There is slippage of £1m on the District Energy Network
project which will be used in future years due to the concept design being reworked to meet the amended requirements of the London Plan. There is also a £1.1m slippage on the infrastructure works at Peel and Carlton Vale Boulevard.

Risk and Uncertainties

The mixed-use nature of the scheme relies on developers making the schemes viable and providing the affordable housing alongside the private units. Possible difficulties with high inflation could make this more difficult, so the programme is reviewed regularly to ascertain the potential impact on future phases.

LETTER: The rotten stench of neglect

 

Dear Editor,

I've often written on Wembley Matters about how South Kilburn is neglected by Brent Council, the apparent thinking being that if they put up nice looking new buildings (don't look too closely inside), no-one will notice the lack of concern for the maintenance of the area.

I could do so again, since so little changes, but of immediate concern is a single example of the extent to which Brent shows little concern to sort out the most extreme of issues.

Since the heavy rain early last week, there has been a pool of stagnant, stinking water at the bottom of Coventry Close, just off Kilburn High Road (photo). This has been reported to Brent almost since it appeared, and repeatedly by several residents since. Apparently there was an unsuccessful attempt to clear it towards the end of last week. Since then nothing.

As with so many issues, reports to the Council receive little useful response. Repeated messages to officers and Councillors have had no reply until this morning (Monday) when we are simply told by Council officers that they know about it. It may (?) be that they deal with it today, but why does it take the best part of a week to sort out an extreme health hazard. People walking past think it smells of raw sewage, residents close by cannot open their windows. How long would it take for Brent Council to act if this was in the more affluent areas of the borough or even outside the Civic Centre?

Pete Firmin

SCANDAL UPDATE: Brent Council's remediation costs for Granville New Homes, puchased from Higgins for £17.1m, could rise to £22m plus VAT. Number of residents due to be decanted during works is uncertain.

 

The buildings known collectively as Granville New Homes sold by builders Higgins to Brent Council for £17.1m now look likely to cost Brent Council taxpayers  £20m-£22m to bring up to standard. Market conditions, including the cost of materials means that officers warn the council that costs could rise further. If more people have to be decanted than allowed for whilst works go on, that will also add to costs.

The whole thing is a scandal and a nightmare for residentts and tenants in which Higgins seem to have got away scot free. They have even been given additional work by Brent Council:

 

The report going to Cabinet on November 14th clearly outlines the poor quality of the build:

4.0  Survey Findings

4.1  There are two main issues with the blocks. These are the water ingress at various locations in the blocks and uncertainty about the fire rating of the external and internal walls and floors. These two issues are interlinked as they are generally related to the same construction elements. Thus, both issues will be resolved in tandem.

Fire Safety

4.2  The fire risk assessment for the blocks, and the subsequent intrusive investigations have identified that the construction is poor. The blocks have two distinct methods of cladding. One is formed of cementitious panels and the other is of brick effect panels. Both of these appear to have a variety of insulation materials, including expanded polystyrene, mineral wool and void spaces. Because of this, the fire rating of the blocks is uncertain. However, they will certainly not comply with current building regulations and are unlikely to have complied with the class 0 requirements at the time of construction.

4.3  The panels and insulation will require to be removed and replaced with A1 or A2 rated materials to comply with building regulations.

Water Penetration

4.4  The properties have suffered from water penetration for many years. Attempts at remediation have been unsuccessful.

4.5  Ridge Consultants were commissioned to undertake an intrusive survey of the blocks and to identify any significant areas of defect.

4.6  Ridge’s findings are as follows:-

o The external envelopes on these buildings have been constructed from relatively inexpensive materials and there is evidence of poor-quality workmanship.

o There is a lack of information available, relating to the original build and it is clear that what has been installed on site has not worked.

o The doors and windows are suffering rot and timber decay, which is not, a defect readily associated with buildings of this age.

o The horizontal surfaces to the external envelopes (roofs, balconies and walkways) have been poorly finished.

o A further note is that none of the components that have been installed should have failed because of age.

4.7  Ridge’s recommendations are as follows:

o   ·  The defects noted in relation to the buildings’ external envelopes are not easily repairable in a way that will offer a guaranteed and satisfactory solution. On this basis, the only available option is to replace the facades, roof coverings and balcony waterproofing systems.

o   ·  All specified systems and products will have long insurance backed guarantees. All designers and the main contractor will provide warranties. The Council’s legal team will review these before making any appointments.

 

4.8  A key to being able to complete these works without decanting residents is being able to work without disturbing the internal blockwork leaf of the system. It is likely that once the cladding is removed, the blockwork wall behind it will remain intact. This may mean that not all residents require being decanted. Only vulnerable residents may require decanting.

Energy Efficiency

4.9  As a consequence of the fire safety works specification. The energy efficiency rating of the properties will also be improved.

5.0  Works undertaken to Date

5.1  It was identified that the blocks have suffered from a number of defects, which included fire safety issues, water penetration, window and cladding defects.

5.2  In addition to the above the Fire Brigade served FWH with Enforcement Notices, which led to a waking watch to be introduced in the blocks.

5.3  A comprehensive communal and dwelling interlinked fire alarm system has been installed into the properties. This has now been set up with alarm monitoring arrangements.

5.4  In addition, combustible materials have been removed from communal areas and additional fire stopping has being installed. The waking watch has been removed as the alarm monitoring has been commissioned and now in use.

5.5  The fire alarm system will be monitored in order that any suspected smoke or fire is alerted to the London Fire Brigade.

6.0  Budget Requirements

6.1  The nature of the works is significant and therefore costly. The estimated cost of the works and associated works and consultancy services is £19,870,804. This includes costs associated with supporting more vulnerable residents such as respite care and temporary decanting, inflation and a contingency. The works are high risk and the market is currently extremely volatile in terms of costs and pricing, hence the large contingency. In addition, it is prudent at this stage to make provision for the potential decant of a significant number of residents who may not be vulnerable but who may not be able to stay in their homes during some or all of the works. Therefore, Cabinet is requested to allocate £22M plus VAT to this project.

6.2 The difference in cost from the 6 December Cabinet report is due to ongoing uncertain market cost conditions, and the addition of VAT. Some allowance has been made for ongoing building cost inflation. However, due to several uncertainties in the marketplace and world events, there may be further building cost increases. Cabinet will be advised of this should this become apparent during the course of the project.

 HISTORICAL INFORMATION

Brent Executive Plans including Wembley and South Kilburn when there was a Liberal Democrat-Conservative Coalition LINK

Impact Needs Assessment completed by Robert Johnson, then Housing and Community Care Project Manager, South Kilburn, now a Labour councillor.  LINK

Reponse to a Freedom of Information Request re the South Kilburn Redevelopment LINK

The London Flood Review’s Stage 3 findings re the Kilburn and Maida Vale Area

 Guest post by David Walton

This review https://londonfloodreview.co.uk/ published in May 2022 states that:

 

"New sewer systems are typically designed such that all flows are contained within the sewer (no flooding at ground level) up to a 1-in 30 year return period. Older sewer systems do not have the same requirements and often have a capacity much less than the current 1-in-30 year standard. While the Victorian sewer system for London had ample capacity at the time of its construction, the evolution of the cityscape has had an effect on the ability of the sewer system to cope with the current flows which drain to it. This results in areas of London with sewers which cannot cope with a 1-in-5 year event, despite Thames Water’s continuous upgrade in the sewer network where performance issues are identified".

 

See London Flooding Review Maida Vale Study Area. Its red line includes the South Kilburn Growth Area Tall Building Zone.

 

"We confirm that the scale of the events experienced in July far exceeds any design standards for sewer systems and acknowledge it may not be economical or practicable to implement schemes to eliminate risk for a similar event. Whilst we report specifically on the performance of Thames Water’s assets, due to the scale of the events in July 2021, and the flooding mechanisms, multiple organisations had a duty of care and responsibility to their customers, so the responsibility does not lie wholly with Thames Water."

 

"Typically, Thames Water uses a 1-in-30 year return period design standard for new flood protection schemes; with a range of duration storm events….it is recommended to apply climate change factors to design rainfall, increasing the intensity of the rainfall event."

 

The question, is can South Kilburn Growth Area Tall Building Zone re-development ongoing for 21 years thus far, in legal terms be classified as 'new'? Maida Vale Flooding Review Study Area includes South Kilburn Growth Area Tall Building Zone a  low bowl with hills around in the  stage 3 report.

 

"Analysis of the current network identifies that some drainage systems can be predicted to flood in less than a 1-in-5 year return period rainfall, with properties being affected by frequent flooding. This is true of all major cities in the UK and is not specific to London."

 

"Maida Vale is situated in a low spot, and has the Ranelagh trunk sewer (River Westbourne), Mid Level No. 2 sewer and the North Western Storm Relief sewer running through it. When the Ranelagh sewer is surcharged, flows can back up into connected basements."

 

"Cambridge Gardens (Brent) consists of a new Flooding Local Improvement Project (installation of package pumping stations for individual properties with non-return valves) to isolate individual properties from the sewer network."

 

5 homes in South Kilburn fitted so far by Thames Water.

 

"The Maida Vale Study Area was defined using LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging topographic) data to identify the topographic area where surface flows could contribute to the tank, which is located in a low spot. The extent of the (low spot) study area can be seen in Figure 5.5."

.

Page 55 of the London Flooding Review pictures Chippenham Gardens, Brent, that in July 2021 become a sewage lake.

 

"We confirm that the scale of the events experienced in July (2021) far exceeds any current design standards for sewer systems and it may not be economical or practicable to implement schemes to eliminate risk for a similar event. We will also look at more holistic recommendations, such as ways of Thames Water responding to similar incidents in the future, increased monitoring and warning systems, engagement with customers, and how TW, and possibly the wider industry, could consider setting out their modelling approach and design criteria for flood alleviation schemes in the future. Due to the scale of the events in July 2021, multiple organisations had a duty of care and responsibility to their customers, so the responsibility does not lie wholly with Thames Water. We will look at how data and communications are shared across organisations, what community groups and individuals can do to improve their own resilience and how planning policy can be changed to reduce flood risk and the impact of flooding."

 

Brent the  Lead Local Flood Authority should protect and invest in what remains of South Kilburns public owned modern natural parks and bowls flood defence system built in the 1960's and 70's.

 

David Walton

FLASK (Flood Local Action South Kilburn)

 

Call for heat network protection as government’s backstop fails to protect these customers - price rises of up to 700% reported

Wembley Matters has publicised the difficulties ahead for residents whose new blocks are linked to a District Heating Network. These include blocks in South Kilburn and Wembley.  Because there is a single heating source for all the flats in the block  the gas is counted as commercial rather than domestic and thus the cap on bills is not applicable. In addition residents do not have the option of changing their heating supplier as that can only be done by the managers of the block.

Huge bills are anticipated giving rise to great anxiety, particularly those residents of South Kilburn who are being moved from Brent Council properties with their own domestic heating to housing association blocks on District Heating Networks.

There has been next to no information on how this will affect residents although one pensioner anticipates that heating bills alone will be more than his total income.

The Heat Trust issued this statement on Friday:

As approximately 22 million customers brace themselves for Ofgem's price cap rise today, more than half a million households on communal and district heating networks remain locked out of any protection – leaving them exposed to even bigger, unrestricted price rises.

Consumer protection body Heat Trust is warning that urgent government action is needed to support those living on heating systems that are not protected by the price cap.

Heat Trust, the independent national consumer protection scheme for heat networks, says those living on communal or district heating systems are set to be amongst the worst affected by the soaring cost of gas – with residents facing the prospect of being unable to afford to heat their homes.

The government’s price cap does not currently apply to the heat network market, where operators buy gas on the commercial rather than the regulated domestic gas market.

The Director of Heat Trust, Stephen Knight, has written to Kwasi Kwarteng, Secretary of State at BEIS, to request that 500,000 households are not overlooked as the government looks to ease the financial pressure on families and has been promised a meeting with the Secretary of State, alongside others from the sector, later this month.

Heat networks are seen as a major part of the UK’s decarbonisation plans, and can deliver low-carbon, low-cost energy to homes. However, as the market is currently unregulated, consumers are not protected in the same ways as other energy markets. 

The wholesale gas price, which until last autumn had averaged around 1.5p/kWh for decades, peaked at 27p/kWh at the start of March and has averaged around 10p/kWh in recent weeks. This means that when heating operators renew their commercial gas contracts, they are seeing massive increases, which are often passed straight on to consumers.

Consumers and landlords operating heat networks are already reporting examples of price rises of up to 700% - the equivalent of the price of a pint of milk rising from 60p to £4.80.

Heat Trust is calling for government intervention to include:

• Ensuring heat network operators and their consumers receive government support to ensure that their bills rise no faster than those of domestic gas customers.
• Bringing forward its plans to regulate the heat network market via Ofgem which were confirmed in December last year,
• Bringing forward plans to help heat networks improve their efficiency to reduce heat wastage.

Stephen Knight, Director of Heat Trust, said:

The government is committed to making heat networks a key part of its energy policy, and must not leave families living on these schemes behind.

Heat networks have the potential to offer low-cost, low-carbon heat, but without intervention, hundreds of thousands of families are facing horrendous and unaffordable heating bills.

Heat network operators are keenly awaiting further news of the government’s Heat Network Efficiency Scheme (HNES) aimed at improving the performance of communal heating projects.

The HNES Demonstrator £4.175m grant scheme has already supported a number of communal networks to improve their performance, but the full scheme is not currently due to be launched for another 12-months (spring 2023), and Heat Trust wants to see this scheme brought forward and expanded to cut bills by reducing heat wastage.

Heat Trust is also calling for changes to the Landlord and Tenant Act rules which currently make it difficult for landlords to buy gas more than 12 months in advance, making them vulnerable to price fluctuations. If they could buy gas for longer periods of time, it might protect consumers from market volatility.

Knight added:  

Our mission is to protect heat network customers.

Commercial gas price increases of this magnitude are simply not sustainable for heat network customers. They are driving up household bills in unprecedented ways – many people will have to choose between heat and food.

Heat networks are commonly used in blocks of flats and are becoming increasingly common with social landlords, meaning the most vulnerable people in society are the ones most affected by the current crisis. We can’t let that happen.

UPDATED: South Kilburn: Flagship or neglect?

Guest post by Pete Firmin, chair, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants’ and Residents’ Association.

 

Brent Council – with the support of planners and architects - likes to praise its regeneration of South Kilburn as a model for others.

 

Yet, beyond the issue of the dubious quality of some of the new housing built in the area, raised in Wembley Matters many times, there is also a big issue around general neglect of the area.

 

To be clear, the area described here, a small part of South Kilburn, is not due for `regeneration’ anytime soon. It does not figure in any masterplan. Not that, even if it was, this would excuse the level of neglect shown here.

 

Everything here has been reported to Brent Council, individual officers and Councillors dating back to November of last year if not earlier.

 

To start at the steps at the corner of Coventry Close and Kilburn High Road. These broken steps have been reported with no response received.

 

 

This rubbish dump has been growing steadily for the best part of a year and reported many times on the Cleaner Brent App. It just gets closed quickly with no explanation. It is not directly on Brent land but is clearly a health hazard.

 

 

This patch of ground (known to residents as the Bermuda Triangle) was created when regeneration hit the area 7 years ago. They still haven’t sorted out whether Brent or Catalyst is responsible for its upkeep, so it just accumulates rubbish.

 

 

Clearly Brent’s responsibility, overflowing like many bins along Cathedral Walk footpath.

 

Mattresses abound, this one was photographed by an estate officer two weeks ago. It is propped up by the metal frame for previous recycling bins. We were promised when they were replaced (a year ago) that they would be removed.

 

 

Broken pane of glass in door of Gorefield House, reported last November.

 

The wonderful bin store next to Gorefield House. Erected by Catalyst during regeneration. For their residents they put up a brick  bin store, but Brent tenants only get a wooden one, which has been falling apart since it was put up. Too near the flats, overflowing bins, never fully cleared. We’ve been told someone in an office worked out how many bins are needed for the number of households…..

 

 

5 of these 7 lights along a footpath created in regeneration have been out for more than 5 months. We’ve been told the issue has been escalated…..

 

 

Damage caused by the flash flood last July. Brent had to be pestered to do anything at all, but we have been left with this botched job which is causing accidents. 

 

 

I could go on, like the numerous street lights not working (one of which has never been connected to the mains), the lift out of order for over a year, and much else, but I hope you get the picture one of a Council which doesn’t seem to care.

 

Pete Firmin

 

EDITOR'S NOTE: Pete's problems in getting responses is well illustrated by this exchange that took place only yesterday.