2021 Census data: Population change 2011-2021 for Brent and its neighbours

 

The River Westbourne flood defences, the tale of two boroughs

 An update post by David Walton of FLASK

  

Brent used to have more River Westbourne flood defences but still has some, publicly owned natural parkland flood defences throughout South Kilburn Vale, that were built in the 1950's and 1960's. These flood defences have been incrementally built on since 2000 and the impacts are already being felt.  The new intention is to establish this as a tall building zone as set out in the Brent Local Plan to 2041 which awaits final approval.  Population growth is planned to rise from 6,000 in 2000 to 36,000 by 2041. Brent has no plan to mitigate growing flood risk which is exacerbated yet further by excavating giant underground car parks. A mainline electrified railway luckily severs South Kilburn Vale from the rest of Brent.

 

For its River Westbourne flood defences, the City of Westminster uses complex and expensively engineered solutions built inside its borough boundary, but it also ( cf July 2021 major Incident) clearly relies on Brent playing its full part in the  flood defence of the City of Westminster upstream of the River Westbourne.

 

Westminster has the Carlton Hill natural hill (pending new developments area) which drains down onto the Brent floodplain vale, with Kilburn Park Road on the east bank of the River Westbourne (Westminster) relying on Brent's depleting natural parkland flood defences for safety. Then at the main borough boundary at Shirland Road, Westminster engineered flood defences start and which though of considerable scale failed in July 2021 and will with certainty fail again unless Westminster and agencies look at the bigger River Westbourne flood attenuation cross borough boundary picture. (See key Kilburn Park Road flood defences already removed like the 40 veteran trees roundabout flood defence or the Granville Road park flood defence three-quarters removed).

 

New map fragments recently obtained from Thames Water show how the culvert straightened high speed River Westbourne takes a dramatic giant sweeping curve from Kilburn Park Road into Shirland Road, and at this point (underneath the zebra crossing) also connects to the North West Storm Relief Sewer which heads west down to the River Thames at Hammersmith, while the Mid Level 2 Interceptor Sewer which heads east to Beckon Sewage Works connects to the River Westbourne nearby at the south east end of Shirland Road. Flood protection support is also supplied by two new large flood storage reservoirs underneath Tiverton Gardens and Westbourne Green. Both are rivers connected and were built in 2016 at a cost of £22 million. To quote from this new project’s 2012 description:

 

"The Sewer Flooding History Database (SFHD) lists 105 properties that have a flooding category of either AI or BI; however, it is known that the flooding issues affect many more properties in the area. Optimise (the contractor) are targeted with removing 177 properties from the SFHD flooding register and contracted to remove a minimum of 147 properties.

 

Primarily, the identified flooding areas are located around Formosa Street and Shirland Road. Prior to 2005 the problem was much smaller with far fewer properties affected; however there have been severe flooding events in 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2009. In both areas the flooding occurs incommercial and residential property basements.

 

Having considered a number of options, the preferred option proposed by Optimise is to construct a 20m dia, 20m deep storage shaft in Westbourne Green. From this a 3m dia tunnel will be driven to a 7.5m dia reception shaft in Formosa Street. In conjunction with managing flows at the Kings Scholar’s Pond and at a number of bifurcations in the Formosa Street area this will effectively resolve the flooding issues at Formosa Street. Flows from the shaft in Westbourne Green will be returned to the Ranelagh sewer (River Westbourne) by means of a pumping station with a return pump rate of 400 l/s. The Shirland Road flooding will be resolved by diverting more flow to the Mid-Level 2 sewer and constructing a 20m dia, 20m deep storage shaft in Chippenham Gardens.

 

In order to remove properties from the SFHD it has also to be proven thatthe properties flood due sewer surcharge / local incapacity. This information was collated through existing databases already connected to the properties, and via interviews with current residents in the area. There was an initial reluctance to complete the survey by residents and this was for a number of reasons, including many residents were not living at the properties at the time of the flooding events and property owners do not want their property on a flooding register.  As such, the verified model has and will continue to be used to validate the number of properties that suffer from flooding".

 

The sheer scale of the City of Westminster's engineered flood defences that are place and   being rapidly extended  indicate that the wild River Westbourne is a major environmental risk to lives and property for this entire area of London. Yet this river is deregulated from Environment Agency responsibility and often commercially driven boroughs so Thames Water must work out what to do in an ad hoc and uncoordinated way instead. 

 

The City of Westminster does seem at least to be trying seriously to take mitigating actions to protect its own residents and businesses on a borough boundary frontline siege basis, but these actions have clearly failed to accept this area’s wider geography and factor in the housing infrastructure in Brent’s urban growth zone.  Brent seems to think that leaseholders and tenants in Brent and City of Westminster should 'learn to live with' traumatic flood risk escalation  and then pay the costs created by its tall buildings growth area, built on a flood plain.

 

Liability is being cleverly being passed entirely to leaseholders and tenants for the moment, as this area’s big freeholder housing block owners will just make sure that flood repairs are actioned in a timely manner and that costs are then fully recovered from block leaseholders and tenants. They will be  paying literally forever for the extreme over development of this floodplain. This, when natural parkland flood defences (that Brent is destroying) had proved excellent in protecting South Kilburn and North Westminster for decades.

 

 

David Walton

FLASK (Flood Local Action South Kilburn)

Messages from the crowd at yesterday's Stop the Coup protest at Westminster

Westminster Labour opposes waiver on affordable housing in stark contrast to Brent Council

While Brent Labour Council approves developments with no, or very little affordable housing, their Labour colleagues in the City of Westminster appear to be taking a different approach. Background on the Jubilee/Moberly Sports Centre background can be found HERE

Wesminster Labour released this statement today:

Labour Councillors have objected to the proposal that the condition requiring a contribution of £500,000 towards affordable housing on the Jubilee Sports Centre development should be waived.

In a letter to the Council in advance of the Planning Committee on this evening, Labour Leader Councillor Paul Dimoldenberg, Queen’s Park Ward, said:

The reasons given for not following the Council’s planning policy arebased on a revised viability report on the expected profits of the Council’s development partner.  

The viability assessment dated December 2013, which has not been made available for inspection, is a year out of date. Since 2013 house prices in  London have risen 16.2% and 11% in the City of Westminster (Source: Rightmove property index November 2014). As the Council’s independent viability report has not been made public we have no way of knowing whether the model used by the viability consultants does or does not ignore residential growth in values that occurs between construction start on site and the commencement of marketing and phased release of the dwellings.

Moreover, unlike Brent Council, Westminster Council does not require a second viability report following the completion of the development to assess whether overage payments should be made by the developer so that the Council can share in the profit from developing its own land. This is a serious failure by the Council in failing to capture the increase in value for the public benefit. This is something on which we will be contacting the District Auditor.

In addition, it is now common knowledge that the Mayor’s fund for affordable housing is substantially unallocated. It has not been proved that the Mayor’s Fund has been taken into account when drawing conclusions on viability.

The Committee should also be aware that the current balance of funds held in the Council’s Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) at 10 November 2014 was £87.4m. Of these AHF balances £48.6m is contractually committed to ongoing affordable housing projects. A further £16m is currently earmarked for further affordable housing projects that are currently being worked up.

This leaves over £20 million unallocated. In addition, at the end of March 2014, there were c.£34m in payments due to be paid into the AHF from consented schemes that had been partially implemented.

There is clearly sufficient money in the Council’s AHF to build more social rent homes on this site.

Moreover the application should be rejected as unacceptably contrary to the following policy grounds:

POLICY S16 AFFORDABLE HOUSING

• Affordable housing and floorspace that is used or was last used as affordable housing will be protected.

• The council will aim to exceed 30% of new homes to be affordable homes, and will work with its partners to facilitate and optimise the delivery of new affordable homes.

• Proposals for housing developments of either 10 or more additional units or over 1,000 sqm additional residential floorspace will be expected to provide a proportion of the floorspace as affordable housing.

The development proposes to replace 12 existing socially rented housing units with five socially rented units and seven shared ownership units. The ratio of shared ownership has now been altered to 80/20, amounting to a further unacceptable overall reduction in the number of social rented units. The Council’s policy requirement requirement to protect floorspace last used as affordable housing has not been met.

The overall number of units available for affordable housing amounts to 16% of the total number of units proposed, far short of the 30% target specified in policy S16. The Cabinet Member Report on the Supply an Allocation of Social Housing and Low Cost Home Ownership 2014/2015 dated 9th May 2014 recognises at para 3.2.1 that: “demand for social housing in Westminster continues to outstrip the supply of available accommodation to let “. The report goes continues: “Thirty four per cent of households need larger home (3 bedrooms or more) and ethnic minority households have a higher than average need for them at 38%.” The report is a material consideration for the determination of this proposal. The mix of units proposed does not reflect the demand projected by the Council’s Supply and Allocation Report.

The Committee has heard in the past about the extensive local opposition to this unwanted proposal.

In summary, the Committee should refuse permission for the conditions to be waived.

Three boroughs near solution after long 'dangerous junction' campaign by residents

Crossing photographs from Father David Ackerman

Guest blog by Jay of Kensal Triangle Residents' Association about a long persistent campaign that now looks as if it will yield results.
 

Positive movement on the Harow Road/Ladbroke Grove Junction!  A solution may well be in sight.

On Friday 7th February representatives from Transport for London, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea and Brent councils, West One ( the infrastructure management company employed by Westminster Council to manage its traffic planning) and Kensal Triangle Residents Association joined in a meeting kindly organised  and hosted by Fr David Ackerman for a meeting at St John's Vicarage to discuss the Harrow Road /Ladbroke Grove crossing. 

This brought together professionals and locals to address the need for immediate action. The campaign for the provision of safe pedestrian crossing facility has been going for nearly eight years now, and the meeting was arranged to give updates on plans formulated by West One as a result of the last round of surveys.

The meeting proved to be positive on all counts.  It was agreed by all that the attempt to improve the situation by providing wider refuges in the middle of each arm of the junction had not worked at all. West One, in conjunction with TfL are now recommending to all parties that a system be installed with a phase where all vehicle traffic is stopped at the junction to allow a pedestrian crossing phase with the traditional ‘green man’light.  This will allow pedestrians enough time to cross any one arm of the junction.  (it was not proposed to encourage crossing diagonally over the junction as is the case at Oxford Circus)  

There will also be consideration of lane confusion, signage and the hold-ups on Kilburn Lane. 

West One needs to consult with the two other councils to ensure that this solution us agreed by all parties, and further modelling needs to be done to ensure that congestion will not be increased by the new scheme, but the overall message was that positive and effective action is being taken  to make the junction safer for pedestrians and drivers. 

West One could not give a precise timetable for implementation for the plan, but hoped to finish the modelling by the end of March, and installation of the new lights by the end of 2014

The meeting was also notable for its focus on a solution, and Fr David was glad to host a meeting that brought together the most important people who can affect change.  It was extremely helpful and positive to have a meeting so close to the junction concerned, where everyone could see the scale of the problem.

The Background to a Long Campaign

The Harrow Road/Ladbroke Grove Junction

KTRA have been campaigning to get ‘green man’ lights at this junction for 8 years.

It took a long time to find out which Borough took responsibility for the junction as it is on the boundary of three boroughs.  Westminster is the lead borough, as it has the south east and north east corners.  R B K and C has the south west corner and Brent the North West.  This is one of the difficulties, as funding is complicated due to shared responsibility between the three boroughs.

Further, as it is a main road, Transport for London is involved, and has to survey the junction to determine what difference a change in phasing would make.  This also has implications on funding any changes.

Almost everyone who lives in the area agrees that the junction is dangerous. It is particularly hazardous for anyone with impaired mobility or eyesight, and it is a nightmare for parents with children, or teachers with school groups trying to cross. It is a huge barrier in the way of any attempts to get more children walking to school

Over the years we have delivered a petition of over 1000 signatures (the previous incumbent at the church collected some of them from the congregation) two long scrolls of wallpaper covered with drawings and comments, many form children, asking for the junction to be made safe, and attended two meetings at Portcullis House arranged by Glenda Jackson with representatives from all t he boroughs to try and find a way forward.  Martin Low from Westminster Council has said in one of these meetings that he is not averse to the idea of a pedestrian phase at the lights, but it depends on TfL and price.

Our position is

1).  Even though there have not been any fatalities or major injuries the junction is dangerous.  There are people who get the bus one stop to Sainsbury’s rather than cross the road there.  There is no time when it is safe for pedestrians to cross any arm of the junction

2) It can only get worse. The junction is used by several different groups of school children as well as  anyone getting off the number 18 to get a bus going down Ladbroke Grove.  In the morning and evening rush hours it is particularly bad.  As the area is developed more and more there will be more pressure on the junction – especially as Sainsbury’s remains the only large supermarket in the area.

3) Widening the refuges in the centre of each arm has not made a difference - most of them did not last a week.  They did not tackle the central problem; that it is unsafe to cross the road.

4) Every junction on the Harrow Road from Harlesden clock to the Edgeware Road has a pedestrian phase, except this one.  There are also numerous pedestrian crossings along the Harrow Road.

Every Junction on Chamberlaine Road from Kensal Rise Station down to the Harrow Road has a pedestrian phase.

There are no traffic lights  on Ladbroke Grove until you get to Ladbroke Grove Station, where there is a separate pedestrian crossing controlled by lights.  It is obviously generally accepted that on all of these roads pedestrian safety needs to be ensured by the provision of light controlled crossings.

5) We consider that putting a pedestrian phase into the Crossing will not cause more traffic queues. 

Coming down Chaimberlaine Road from Kensal Rise the traffic is held up by the lights at Harvist Road and Bannister Road: it is more often than not fairly clear after both of these junctions until cars reach the bend by Ilbert Street: congestion is caused there by the narrowness of the road and parked cars at any time of day or night.  Crossing the Harrow Road is relatively straightforward, except for right turning vehicles.

Coming up Ladbroke Grove, congestion is caused by the two roundabouts at Barlby road and the entrance to Sainsbury’s.  This can cause tailbacks to Ladbroke Grove Station.  Once over the roundabout at Sainsbury’s cars move freely to join a short queue at the Harrow Road lights

There is congestion all along the Harrow Road from Harlesden: it can take seven minutes to get from the Scrubs Lane Junction to the lights at Kensal Green Station.  There is then usually some clear road before the tailback at the Ladbroke Grove Junction.  This tailback is caused by the poor layout of the junction and the bus lane.  The road essentially becomes single lane, with space for only four or five cars to pull into the left hand lane at the junction in front of the number 18 bus stop. Consequently, most of the cars wishing to continue east along the Harrow Road are stuck behind cars attempting to turn right into Ladbroke Grove – and only about four of these make it across the junction in any given phase of the lights.  Moving the bus stop back a few yard would help – it is still set up for the now defunct bendy buses,  and does not need to be anything like as long as it is. 

There is much less problem for traffic coming out of Central London on the Harrow Road: there are two lanes and a left filter lane at eh junction, and although it is still nerve-racking for vehicles turning right up Kilburn Lane, cars going straight on or turning left are not impeded.

A light system with a pedestrian phase, and with right turn filters on the traffic phases would be of benefit to pedestrians and drivers alike

Solution in sight for dangerous Harrow Road junction?

Guest blog from Kensal Triangle Residents' Association who appear closer to a solution that they began to campaign about in February 2008. (pic from Kilburn Times above) Six years on a solution may be in sight.
.

On Friday 7th February representatives from Transport for London, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea and Brent councils, West One ( the infrastructure management company employed by Westminster Council to manage its traffic planning) and Kensal Triangle Residents Association joined in a meeting kindly organised  and hosted by Fr David Ackerman for a meeting at St John's Vicarage to discuss the Harrow Road /Ladbroke Grove crossing. 

This brought together professionals and locals to address the need for immediate action. The campaign for the provision of safe pedestrian crossing facility has been going for nearly eight years now, and the meeting was arranged to give updates on plans formulated by West One as a result of the last round of surveys. 

The meeting proved to be positive on all counts.  It was agreed by all that the attempt to improve the situation by providing wider refuges in the middle of each arm of the junction had not worked at all. West One, in conjunction with TfL are now recommending to all parties that a system be installed with a phase where all vehicle traffic is stopped at the junction to allow a pedestrian crossing phase with the traditional ‘green man’light – an All Red Phase.  This will allow pedestrians enough time to cross any one arm of the junction.  (it was not proposed to encourage crossing diagonally over the junction as is the case at Oxford Circus)  

There will also be consideration of lane confusion, signage and the hold-ups on Kilburn Lane.

West One needs to consult with the two other councils to ensure that this solution us agreed by all parties, and further modelling needs to be done to ensure that congestion will not be increased by the new scheme, but the overall message was that positive and effective action is being taken  to make the junction safer for pedestrians and drivers. 

West One could not give a precise timetable for implementation for the plan, but hoped to finish the modelling by the end of March, and installation of the new lights by the end of 2014.

The meeting was also notable for its focus on a solution, and Fr David was glad to host a meeting that brought together the most important people who can affect change.  It was extremely helpful and positive to have a meeting so close to the junction concerned, where everyone could see the scale of the problem.

Moberly Sports Centre proposals available for comment

The future of the Jubilee and Moberly Sports Centre on the borders of Brent and Westminster have been the subject of much debate.Kensal Triangle Residents have said because so many different views have been expressed they will remain neutral.

Follow this link to see the Kilburn Times  report on the proposals:  LINK

However the KTRA have issued this guide:

Go to the Planning Application by clicking on this LINK

When you comment on the application remember to State 'Object', 'Support' or 'Comment'. At the time of writing of the on-line returns there were 22 Objecting, 9 Supporting and the rest were Comments.

Because of a delay due to an independent financial assessment of the scheme comments can by made up until the end of March,

Declaration for People's Assembly June 22nd

 

The declaration below represents the beginning of a democratic process leading towards a second People’s Assembly in early 2014. This declaration represents the views of all those who initially called for the People’s Assembly. We hope it will be endorsed by the People’s Assembly on 22nd June. It will then be open to the local People’s Assembly’s, union bodies and campaign groups who support the People’s Assembly to suggest amendments, additions, or deletions. These will then all be discussed and decided upon at the recall People’s Assembly in 2014.

  

The plans for action are simply the most obvious rallying points for a national anti-cuts movement for the remainder of 2013. They are not intended to supersede local or sectional action by existing campaigns or trade unions. They are intended to be focus national, collective action by the whole anti-austerity movement.

The People’s Assembly, meeting in Westminster Central Hall, declares:

We face a choice that will shape our society for decades to come. It is a choice faced by ordinary people in every part of the globe.

We can defend education, health and welfare provision funded from general taxation and available to all, or we can surrender the gains that have improved the lives of millions of people for over more than 50 years.

We do not accept that government’s austerity programme is necessary. The banks and the major corporations should be taxed at a rate which can provide the necessary resources. Austerity does not work: it is a failure in its own terms resulting in neither deficit reduction nor growth. It is not just: the government takes money from the pockets of those who did not cause the crisis and rewards those who did. It is immoral: our children face a bleaker future if our services and living standards are devastated. It is undemocratic: at the last election a majority voted against the return of a Tory government. The Con-Dem coalition has delivered us into the grip of the Tories’ whose political project is the destruction of a universal welfare state.

We therefore choose to resist. We refuse to be divided against ourselves by stories of those on ‘golden pensions’, or of ‘scroungers’, or the ‘undeserving poor’. We do not blame our neighbours, whatever race or religion they maybe. We are not joining the race to the bottom. We stand with the movement of resistance across Europe.

We are clear in our minds that our stand will require us to defend the people’s right to protest, and so we support the right of unions and campaigns to organise and take such action as their members democratically decide is necessary.

We stand with all those who have made the case against the government so far: in the student movement, in the unions, in the many campaigns to defend services, the NHS, and in the Coalition of Resistance, the People’s Charter, UK Uncut, the environmental movement and the Occupy movement.

We do not seek to replace any organisations fighting cuts. All are necessary. But we do believe that a single united national movement is required to challenge more effectively a nationally led government austerity programme.

We have a plain and simple goal: to make government abandon its austerity programme. If it will not it must be replaced with one that will.

We will concentrate on action not words. We aim to provide the maximum solidarity for unions and other organisations and others taking action. We support every and all effective forms action and aim to build a united national movement of resistance.

Our case is clear. The government’s austerity programme does not work; it is unjust, immoral and undemocratic. Alternatives exist. Debts can be dropped. Privatisation can be reversed and common ownership embraced. A living wage can begin to combat poverty. Strong trade unions can help redistribute profit. The vast wealth held by corporations and the trillions held by the super rich in tax havens can be tapped. Green technology, alternatives to the arms industries, a rebuilt infrastructure including growth in manufacturing are all desperately needed. We are fighting for an alternative future for this generation and for those that come after us.

Proposed actions:

The People’s Assembly will support every genuine movement and action taken against any and all of the cuts. We support all current industrial actions by the unions. We encourage and will help to organise the maximum solidarity action with the PCS and teaching union members taking strike action the week after the People’s Assembly, as well as with other action by unions planned for the autumn.

Peoples Assemblies against the cuts should be organised in towns and cities across our nations, bringing all those fighting the cuts together into a broad democratic alliance on a local basis.

The national and the local Assemblies, in partnership with Trades Unions, Trades Councils, campaigning and community groups, can unite our movement and strengthen our campaigns. Local Assemblies will help us to organise a recalled National Assembly to review our work in the early spring of 2014.

We will work together with leading experts and campaigners both here and abroad, and friendly think tanks, to develop rapidly key policies and an alternative programme for a new anti-austerity government. We will continue to welcome support from all who fight the cuts.

We will call a national day of civil disobedience and direct action against austerity.

We will call a day of co-ordinated local demonstrations in the early autumn.

We will work with the trade unions and others to call a national demonstration in November.

Anti-fascists far outnumber BNP in Westminster demonstrations today

BNP demonstration opposite parliament

When I arrived at around noon to today's unity demonstration against the BNP's attempt top stir up racial hatred in the wake of Woolwich,  only 20 or so BNP members were present and 2 hours later there were still below 100. Anti-fascist demonstrations far out-numbered them and it was heartening to see how many were spirited young people determined to show the BNP that they would be resisted..

When I left the ant-fascist demonstration was in two parts with the first, mainly young,  arrivals clustered around  BNP but separated from them by a line of police. The later arrivals, who included many trades unionists, were separated from the others by police vans.

I spoke to an officer just before I left who said that the police were trying to negotiate with the BNP and anti-fascists for each to march in a different direction - but so far there was stalemate.