Heron House campaigners issue urgent call for support before October 25th deadline

The site

Second Pre-application design

From campaigners against Heron House redevelopment plans LINK

We urgently need your support to sign this Letter of Objection to stop the  huge redevelopment of Heron House, Wembley Hill Road, Wembley.  Please make any changes you see fit.

The deadline for comments/objections is October 25th 2016 

1)  Copy the letter below making any alterations you think fit. Insert your full name and address, including postcode, in FROM
2)  Paste into an email with Heron House Ref: 16/4156 in subject line and send  to: mandeep.chaggar@brent.gov.uk
3)  Now please forward to family members over 18 years and as many people as possible anywhere in the UK.

FROM:  

I strongly object to the proposed redevelopment of Heron House, Wembley Hill Road, Wembley by Plowden Limited,  for the following reasons and I urge Brent Council to refuse planning permission.  Brent Council Ref:  16/4156

1)  Stadium & High Road Regeneration: Those who live in Wembley can expect 11,000 high rise dwellings in the massive Regeneration of the Stadium and High Road Areas ("Regeneration").  As this regeneration was planned and agreed many decades ago, its progress will continue and one can only hope it will  be of benefit to all the residents of Brent. Will this now be copied in other locations throughout the country?

2) Smaller High Rise Developments: Our greatest fear is the  smaller high rise developments, which are intrusive and are rapidly creeping into residential streets everywhere,  whose impact is adversely affecting our quality of life.  One of these is the proposed redevelopment  of Heron House on Wembley Hill Road, into expensive higher rise flats and commercial businesses and I am very concerned that if permission is granted, similar developments could very well happen on my street next!

3) Not in Keeping with the Character of the Street:  Wembley Hill Road and all the street off it are totally residential and the existing Heron House was built in the '60s and is not as intrusive, overbearing or dense as the proposed development will be. The proposed development is much larger and certainly not in keeping with the character of the streets  and its visual effect will totally spoil the area.   Our streets consist of houses, bungalows, maisonettes, small blocks of flats and gardens.

4) Too close To Existing Regeneration:  As  the "Regeneration"  has already planned 11,000 dwellings, any more higher buildings in the same vicinity is surely excessive and would have a negative impact on the area, overshadowing all the houses around it, with an increase in noise pollution.

5) Loss of light, privacy and the existing outlook:  Although the Developers apparently plan to block some of the balcony glass partitions, they cannot possibly do this in all directions, so many residents will still be overlooked and lose their privacy and existing outlook. The dense building will also block out a significant amount of light for all the nearby residents.

6) Parking:   The proposal by Plowden mentioned a number of parking spaces smaller than the number of flats proposed. Therefore there will not be enough parking spaces for all the vehicles from the flats and the commercial businesses.   This will be putting even more pressure on the streets around  Wembley Hill Road, where there is already a huge demand for parking spaces and it is almost impossible to find one.

7) Traffic and Air Quality:  The transport implications have not been taken fully in consideration. The traffic at the nearby junction at the London Designer Outlet  is already gridlocked every day, so how will our roads cope with all the extra traffic that will be generated? There will always be disruptions around this junction, as road works never seem to stop and with all the extra traffic from the "Regeneration", we cannot allow even more traffic chaos from this new development.
The air quality in the area which has already been impacted by the "Regeneration", will only get worse. The main pollutants of concern, nitrogen oxides,  are lung irritant and especially liable to harm children and those with chest problems such as asthma. Surely the Council has a duty to enhance the health and wellbeing of the local community and not encourage every one of these smaller developments?  Heron House in particular  is right on the door step of the "Regeneration", it surely is not vital?

8)  Setting A Dangerous Precedent:  If this large higher development is allowed in a residential area, it will also set a dangerous precedent and before long even more developers will want to do the same. How much more destructive impact on our residential areas is the Council going to allow, despite huge opposition from its residents?  It is very unfair, as we are all already trying to retain the residential areas we live in, despite the looming high rises of the "Regeneration"

9)  Likely Purchase of Land Opposite:  These same developers have already expressed an interest in purchasing St Joseph's,  the land opposite Heron house, with a view to building yet another higher rise block! We cannot just sit back and do nothing and allow the development of these buildings, as local people are being priced out of the area, which impacts on other areas of the Borough.

10)  Other Sites:  There are many brown-filled and derelict sites in Brent, where these part/commercial development can be situated and these should be used before encroaching onto our residential streets.

11) Impact on Infrastructure:  What provision has been made for the infrastructure needed to cope with the extra people? As this is a new development,  provision obviously was not made when creating the "Regeneration".

12) A Concrete Jungle:  I am trying not to be too pessimistic, but  these smaller high rise dense developments,  which are causing great concern amongst residents, could happen anywhere and before you know it the whole of Brent could  become a concrete jungle!  I wish I could say with certainty that this will not happen, but the speed with which  these smaller high rises are going up, makes me and my neighbours truly fearful. The lack of transparency when making these decisions is very worrying, as they have an adverse effect on all our lives.

13) Love Where You Live:  On the one hand Brent Council is encouraging residents to "love where you live" and improve our environment and yet on the other forcing us to accept even more higher rise developments.  I know things have to change and progress, but do we have to loose our precious existing residential areas for even more high rises? Surely Brent Council should be aiming for both?

14) The Attitude of Developers: Developers everywhere are undermining and exploiting planning authorities, with planning performance agreements and other inducements.  They must be opposed and cannot continue to completely ignore the wishes of residents.

 15)  Historical Significance: High Street which runs along one side of the proposed development is of great historical significance, more so since there is little left of the old Wembley after the thatched cottage down the road was burnt down. High Street was the main street in Wembley 250 years ago and it is the only public way in Wembley which carries the name "street". As such, we ask the Council to give this due consideration and protect this area and not allow such a massive redevelopment to spoil the character of this quiet historic part of Wembley, , which is so much part of our low rise suburban area.

16)  Lower Level Affordable Housing: We of course appreciate that more houses are needed, so we propose and would be happy to support lower level affordable family accommodation perhaps some with small private gardens, as this is just the sort of dwelling which is in very short supply in the borough. The proposed plans for Heron House are excessive, damaging and totally inappropriate for the area and as such they should be rejected.

(Petition Organiser: Zerine Tata, Tokyington Ward, Email: zerinetata@hotmail.com)

Guantanamo Prisoners: Perpetual hostages to War on Terror

Click to enlarge

Upcoming Welsh Harp events starting on Sunday

Sunday October 23rd Conservation Day

 

Sunday November 20th Canoe clean up on the Welsh Harp.

This is going ahead. A detail in the last notice LINK  was incorrect. Only if you have a ‘one star level’ award and bring it with you on the day, will you be able to collect little from a canoe. Apologies for this. A team of volunteers will be needed on the bank as well  if you are not of a ‘one star level’.  Final infromation next week.

London Wildlife Trust Brent Reservoir walk, 6th November

LWT are hosting a Bird walk on the Brent Reservoir on Sunday 6th of November. Attendees will have an informative walk led by WHCG officer Roy Beddard and also get to visit the hides on the eastern marsh. After the walk there will be a tea/snack break followed by an arranged litter pick to help conserve the area.

We will be meeting by the Barnet information board by the Cool Oak Lane Bridge entrance at 11am, running to approx 2pm,  limited to 12 people due to space in the hides/equipment. More information on where/what to bring will be provided on booking.
              
Please direct any bookings/queries to myself on welshharp@wildlondon.org.uk  or to Rosie on rchambers@wildlondon.org.uk.


LINK
 

Tenants demand 'If BHP goes its replacement must be better and include tenants representation'

Brent Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee met last night to discuss options for a new housing management system system in the borough which will go to Cabinet on Monday. LINK

The meeting was extremely well attended by Brent Housing Partnership tenants and lease holders. At least two of the options would mean the end of BHP which is an ALMO (arms length management organisation) and semi-independent from Brent Council.

Tenants were forthright in stating that any return to an in-house housing management service would have to be much better than that which existed in Brent before BHP was formed.

Strong contributions to the discussion were made by Cllrs Conneely and Nerva but there may have been others as I arrived late from the Planning Committee which met at the same time.

In the current Brent Cabinet structure an in-house service would be monitored and overseen by an operational director and the lead member for housing.

This was felt to be be unsatisfactory given that lack of accountabulity and monitoring  contributed to BHP's current difficulties.

The first strong recommendation  from Scrutiny therefore was that if housing management is brought in-house there has to be a formalised, housing specific, oversight/scrutiny/sub-committee made up of councillots and residents represenattives of all types of tenure (eg tenants, leaseholders) preferably elected and with clear links with other levels of residents association.

A further recommendation was that if the in-house option was chosen that there should be complete transparency regarding the HRA (Housing Revenue Account) and it should be ring-fenced. 

Thirdly a much better and effective communications strategy needs to be put in place.

Lastly. if Cabinet opts for a joint venture any contract must come back to Scrutiny before being agreed.
 

Speak Up. Be Safe. Harrow Mencap Forum Nov 9th

From Harrow Mencap

Do you have a learning disability, or are you a friend / carer of someone with a learning disability? Would you like to come to an event where you can meet people, learn new things and express your opinions? Then come to the Harrow Forum for People with Learning Disabilities!

Our theme for this Forum is "Speak Up, Stay Safe!" - a day of sharing tips and tools for how to stay safe in Harrow. Please join us for a packed day of discussions, activities, guest speakers, performances and plenty of chances to speak up about your own experiences!

The next Forum, supported by Harrow Mencap, is on Wednesday 9th November, 10.30am – 2pm, North Harrow Methodist Church.

We welcome friends, carers, professionals- anyone who is interested to learn more about people's experiences in Harrow.

Check out our film of one of our previous events to get a flavour of what the day will be like LINK
As one guest said about a previous Forum: "The energy in the room, people talking about different issues- it was buzzing!"

Looking forward to seeing lots of you there!

From Grunwick to Deliveroo - migrant workers, trade unions & the new economy

A one-day conference on migrant workers, trade unions and the new economy.

Forty years ago Asian women at Grunwick led a strike for basic human dignity at work and for the right to join to a trade union. Today these battles are still being fought, often by migrant workers in precarious employment conditions. The experiences of workers at Byron revealed the extent to which migrant workers can be exploited by 'the new economy' and tossed aside when no longer needed, while those at Deliveroo showed that resistance is both necessary and possible.

This one-day conference will bring together campaigners, trade unionists, activists and thinkers to examine the changing nature of work and the terrains for resistance.

SATURDAY NOVEMBER 26TH 10.30AM-5.30PM

Willesden Library Centre
95 High Road
London
NW10 2SF

Willesden Green tube (Jubilee line)

Although a free event, please ensure you book your place HERE as spaces are limited.

Sessions will include: 

• The legacy of Grunwick
• Do we need independent trade unions?
• Building community support
• What does Brexit mean for workers
• Resisting immigration raids
• Building community support
•  

Confirmed participants are:

• Rita Chadha (Refugee and Migrant Forum Essex and London
• Dr Sundari Anitha
• Suresh Grover (The Moniroring Group)
• Anti Raids Network
• Amrit Wilson (writer, activist)
• Durham teaching assistants
• Jack Dromey MP
• Unite Hotel Workers Branch
• United Workers of the World Union (Deliveroo and other campaigns)
• More to be announced

Quintain reveal plans for Stadium Green Car Park

Quintain presented an overview of their proposals for the Wembley Stadium Green Car Park at Brent Planning Committee last night ahead of any formal planning application.

Sarah Marquis, the Chair of the Planning Committee said she had an interest in this item and removed herself from the room while it was being discussed.

Quintain said they were working with officers on detailed design and negotiations on Section 106 were in process and close to being signed.

The plans were displayed on slides with no paper copies available to the public. No public representations were allowed.

Seven buildings were planned with a 'signature' building of 26 storeys to the north of the plot  and six lower blocks.

There will be 743 dwellings ranging from studios to 3 bedrooms. Residents of the tallest block would have access to a roof top terrace as well as long views of a proposed 7 acre park and the stadium.

Quintain claimed that 50% of the dwellings would be affordable but Mike Kiely Interim Head of Planning  said they were not affordable in the strictly statutory sense. The proposal was for 'discounted rent' at 80% of market rent and that for only 7 years although Quintain said that was in 'theory' and it would not be a case of 'time's up - it's time to go'.   These would be in addition to the 27% affordable dwellings Quintain were providing.

There was little detail of the park except that it would include  tree planting and seating with hard landscaping.  Family units would be sited around the park.

There was concern from councillors about the affordability issue as well as plans for a covered coach park that would accommodate 91 vehicles. The latter was mainly about the impact of coach passengers on the area as they left their coaches or waited at the end of events to join them. Coaches would arrive from the south and leave from the north of the site.  There would be residential gardens on the roof of the coach park with natural ventiliation to cut down on fumes. The coach park might be available for 'meanwhile' uses on non-event days.

Councillors were assured that there would be no 'poor doors' and no difference in quality between the 'affordable' and 'market' properties.

At the ground floor level there would be a mix of  business and community uses although the proportions of both had not yet been decided.

Quintain waxed lyrical about how wonderful their consultations on the Wembley Master Plan had been but were unable to give examples (except for the coach park) to changes they had made as a result of consultees comments.

Future arrangements for Brent Housing Management to be scrutinised tonight

The Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee will tonight discuss a report on the options for the future of Brent Housing Management.

They are due to go before the Cabinet for consideration on November 15th 2016.

These are the options:

1.The Reformed ALMO (Arms Length Management Organisation) is the most straightforward option to implement. No consultation is required after Cabinet in November, and a new management team would be in place by April 2017. Therefore, by April 2017 the implementation of wider transformation should commence and be well advanced over the first half of 2017-18. 


2. In-House is the middle ranked option in terms of complexity. There will need to be a consultation (test of opinion) running from December to February before coming back to full Council in March. If in light of the consultation, the Council then decides to proceed with this option, there will need to be a process to transfer the service to the council and the permanent recruitment of a new leadership team by October 2017.

 3. Joint Venture is the most complex option to setup. The first step would be to undertake consultation over 12 weeks on this preferred option and then report to full Council in March 2017. If Cabinet then decided to proceed with this option the process to select a partner and implementing the new JV would follow:

Consultation and Cabinet decision – March 2017
o Partner Identification, selection and approval – 6 months o Negotiating Agreement with partner – 3 months
o Implementation – 3 months
o New organisation established – April 2018.

FULL REPORT WITH EVALUATION OF OPTIONS HERE

More than half of Londoners feel health impacted by poor air quality

From London Councils

Nearly half of Londoners feel their health has been impacted by poor air quality, according to research commissioned by London Councils. The public polling sought to gauge the public’s understanding of air quality issues, and the impact it has on their lives. This briefing provides an overview of the findings.

Overview

Boroughs have been active in encouraging improvements in air quality, through a number of different projects and approaches across London. We now welcome the fact that Sadiq Khan has made air quality one of his key priorities as Mayor of London and is carrying out a series of surveys and consultations around the issue. This began with a month-long survey in July and its purpose was to shape the focus of the next two, more detailed consultations, and to sound out potential policy solutions. 

London Councils submitted a detailed response to this phase of the consultation and will do the same for the next two phases. These will take the form of more detailed consultations into the Ultra-Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) and its boundaries (expected in autumn 2017), as well as introducing the emissions surcharge (t-charge). You can find more information about this, HERE:. The consultation on the emissions surcharge has started today, 10 October 2016. London Councils will be working with the boroughs to submit co-ordinated responses to these consultations. 

Background

Air quality is a rising issue on the political agenda. Recent research from the World Health Organisation (WHO) announced that not only are 92% of the world’s population living in areas where air pollution exceeds WHO limits, but that some 16,000 British citizens are killed each year due to poor air quality. 

According to research by King’s College London, the figure of deaths brought on by long term exposure to air pollution in London is nearly 9,500 per year¹. But the effects of air pollution vary greatly in severity, ranging from high impacts that are seriously debilitating, such as chronic or obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and cardiac events, to those that are less serious individually but which affect a larger number of people, e.g. when people’s activities are restricted, or symptoms flare up (such as coughing and wheezing). The costs of these impacts, for welfare, healthcare and productivity, are considered to be large².

Current government policy
The UK government’s policies covering air quality are currently in line with EU legislation. Following Brexit, it is unclear whether the government intends to drop the current air quality targets; although the Great Repeal Bill suggests that all laws will be transposed into UK law in the first instance. But there will obviously be the opportunity to scrutinise, amend, improve or drop any aspect of EU law once the bill is passed. The EU Air Quality Ambience Directive currently states that UK limits of PM10 cannot exceed annual mean levels of 40μm (and not exceed a 24 hour mean of 50μm more than 35 times in a year); that background urban levels of PM2.5 must be cut by 15%, and that Nitrogen Dioxide levels must be kept at an annual mean of 40μm (with levels of 200μm not being exceeded more than 18 times a year).

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Efra) select committee have questioned the government’s approach to meeting current air quality targets, and in September the government responded to the Efra Committee’s report on air quality. Responding to the report, the government clarified its position in a number of areas.

The government rejected the need to provide additional specific advice or support (including financial support) for local authorities to address air pollution, stating "Local authorities can take action as and when necessary to improve air quality and we encourage them to do so.” They also dismissed plans for a national diesel scrappage scheme saying “We have considered the use of scrappage schemes [...] and have concluded that this may not be an appropriate and proportionate response”. On the criticism of a lack of cohesion on policy across governmental departments, the government pointed to the new Joint Air Quality Unit between Defra & DfT that has 'recently' been set up. And crucially, the government rejected calls to publish a comprehensive air quality strategy with annual reports, saying they viewed their 'air quality plan for nitrogen dioxide' as being adequate.

Analysis

London Councils Air quality polling
London Councils carried out the first specific air quality polling to find out how much Londoners know about pollution and the impact it has on their lives. 1,000 Londoners took part in its online research. Below are some of the key findings.

Awareness
Three quarters of respondents (76%) said they agreed tackling air quality should be a priority issue, with 38% strongly agreeing. This rises to 84% among those who are newer to London, 85% of those who cycle, 79% of those who use public transport and 83% those whose health is affected by air quality. In general, there were high levels of awareness overall amongst the public, reflecting the growing profile of air quality as an issue in London, and around the world. 

Causes of pollution
Private vehicles, vans and Lorries were seen as some of the main causes of pollution, followed by delivery vehicles and taxis/private hire vehicles. Nearly a quarter of people think air pollution blown in from the continent is another one of the main causes of air pollution. Longer term residents (5+ years) consider road transport to be one of the main causes, more so than newer residents.

Awareness of GLA air quality service
Less than a quarter of respondents had heard of the GLA’s air quality advice service. Of the people who didn’t use the service a third would consider using it, and over half said they would find it useful.

Impact

 
Nearly half of respondents said poor air quality had had a direct impact on their health, with asthma, breathing difficulties and coughing reported most frequently. People aged 25-34, those who live in inner London, and those who cycle or use public transport and those with children felt most affected. 

39% of people said air quality impacted on decisions they made regarding their health.

Nearly a quarter of people (22%) say air quality affects their choice of school for their children. When asked if their children’s health had been affected by air pollution, 12% of respondents said yes.

Over a third of people say air quality affects where they choose to live in London. People aged 16-44, as well those with children, and those from a BAME background were more likely to say this.

Over a quarter of people said they changed their behaviour on days when air pollution is high. People aged 55+ were more likely to stay indoors.

Nearly half of people questioned said they would change their transport habits in order to improve air quality. Actions people were willing to take included walking/cycling more, followed by using public transport more, and reducing the number of car journeys they make.

Car Ownership by engine type
Less than 0.5% of respondents who owned a private vehicle owned a fully electric model. This is in contrast to 69% owning petrol, 25% owning diesel, and 5% owning a hybrid model.

Transport modes
71% of people in the survey said they didn’t cycle in London. Of the people who did, 12% cycle as part of their commute. These cycle commuters are more likely to be male, younger and living in inner London. Over half of people who cycle say that high air pollution negatively influences their decision to ride, especially those whose health is affected. 

Over half of respondents use public transport as their main commute – this is across all ages apart from those of retirement age. Those from a BAME background are more likely to use it for commuting, as are those who live in inner London. 

Commentary

Alongside the earlier stated aims of this research, London Councils hopes that it will flag concerns of Londoners and ensure air quality gains more attention and traction from key decision makers. 

London Councils and boroughs have a key role in tackling the issue and putting it front and centre of the capital agenda for improvement. London Councils supports a number of measures to tackle air pollution. We support the early implementation of the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) (in 2019) to ensure that the benefits of this policy are manifested as soon as possible for London residents. We also support, in principle, plans for an expanded ULEZ beyond the current Congestion Charge Zone, although this would need to be done in coordination with the boroughs to identify the best possible boundary route. We seek assurances from TfL that any surplus income from the ULEZ and emissions surcharge will be ring fenced and used for measures that improve air quality standards in London, for example investment in electric buses, electric taxis, electric charging points or more sustainable modes of transport, especially walking and cycling.

Related to this, we believe the government needs to review financial incentives, such as Vehicle Excise Duty, so as to encourage the take up of the lowest polluting vehicles to reflect concern for both CO2 and NO2 emissions. Linked to this are plans for a diesel scrappage scheme in London, but also nationally, which London Councils support despite recent government rejections of this proposal.

Another key priority of the new Mayor is to encourage modal shift. We believe that plans to increase in modal shift to more active and sustainable modes of transport is key to London reducing air pollution, but also providing a raft of other benefits to its residents. As the polling shows, residents are willing to change their travel behaviour. Additionally, we support increased investment in cycling infrastructure as this will help people feel comfortable to cycle in London, whilst making it more convenient, where this might not have been the case before. We encourage TfL to work with individual boroughs and sub-regional groups to ensure that the best possible solutions can be applied in different contexts across London. 

Nationally we call for the national government to ensure that EU air quality regulations and targets remain in place, or are strengthened, post-Brexit. With this in mind, we support calls for the government to draw up a new overarching Air Quality Strategy for tackling all air pollutants, produced by all sectors from transport and industry to energy and farming, with annual reports on progress.

¹  Understanding the health impacts of air pollution in London (2015) 

² Royal College of Physicians (2016) Every breath we take: The lifelong impact of air pollution

Owain Mortimer, Principal Policy Officer - Transport, Infrastructure & Environment

The Grunwick Lions roar again in Willesden

The 40th Anniversary Grunwick Exhibition opened to private view at Willesden Green Library  this evening and will be open to the public from tomorrow (Wednesday).

The Exhibition commemorates the Grunwick Strike which from small beginnings in 1976 grew to national proportions affecting the relationship between trade unions and the Labour government of the time and changing the nature of British trade unions and their attitude to women and migrant workers.

Among the guests this evening were several of the original strikers and some of those who organised in their support as well as younger activists who were inspired to organise and mount this Exhibition.

The Exhibition, on the 2nd floor of the Willesden Green Library is free and open from Monday to Friday  9am-8pm and Saturday to Sunday: 10am-5pm (Willesden Green tube - Jubilee line)
95 High Road, Willesden NW10 2SF.

Brent Labour Group's Away Day Blues

Word reaches me that Brent Labour Group's recent Away Day with senior officers in a Cricklewood Hotel gave some councillors the blues  - and it was nothing to do with the Tories!

Apparently Carolyn Downs, Brent Chief Executive, gave them a pep talk, explaining that it was difficult for her and the officers to work constructively with a Group suffering from such a marked lack of cohesion and goodwill,

An external facilitor worked with the Group on exercises to improve bonding. There may even have been a little mindfulness.

Reports indicate that it didn't work very well as later some critics of Cllr Butt's leadership were allegedly accused by at least one councillor of racial bias against him.

Meanwhile questions are being asked about the £18,000 plus allowance being saved by the non-appointment of a replacement for Cllr Pavey.  Is it going back into Council coffers? When the Cabinet was reduced from 10 to 8 the saved allowances were distributed amongst the remaining members of the Cabinet.  LINK

Hear Melissa Benn on motherhood, daughters, selective education and much else on Thursday

From Brent Culture:

Melissa Benn will be giving a talk at Kilburn Library this Thursday 20th  October

6.30-7.30pm

Kilburn Library, 42 Salusbury Road, London, NW6 6NN

Melissa is an author, commentator and journalist and member of the famous Benn political family, daughter of the late Tony Benn and sister to Hilary Benn MP.  She is also a local resident.  She has written and campaigned on many issues but is most known for her views on education.

On Thursday Melissa will talk about the seven books she has written; Public Lives, One of Us, Madonna and Child: Towards a New Politics of Motherhood, School Wars: The Battle for Britain's Education, What Should We Tell Our Daughters?: The Pleasures and Pressures of Growing Up Female, The Truth About Our Schools, Death in the City. 

She will also be talking about her current campaign to end selective education.

It promises to be a lively evening and will include a question and answer session so get ready to voice your own opinions!   

Get involved with 'meanwhile' plans for Corrib Rest tonight

From Transition Town Kensal to Kilburn

Transition Town Kensal to Kilburn, working with other local groups and individuals, plans to re-open the Corrib Rest pub on Salusbury Road as a community hub. This is with the owners permission (of course!) for six months, possibly longer. We’re opening the doors on Tuesday 18th October so everyone can see the space, find out more and get involved. We want as many people as possible to contribute to setting up, running and enjoying the new pub!

Address: Corrib Rest pub, 76-78 Salusbury Rd, London NW6 6PA

7pm - Doors open and time to look round the building
7.30-7.45pm - Welcome and presentations
7.45-9.30pm - Mingling - this is your chance to find out more, meet the people planning to run each section, give your input and get involved:

Community pub
Spice Caravan and other catering
Cycletastic bike repairs and sales
Maker and skills workshops
Freelancers co-working space
Core planning group - open to new ideas and help with marketing, graphic design, admin and all locals with time to volunteer to help the project.

We are looking for help in many areas including graphic design, marketing, admin, running a pub and everything relevant to setting up a new not-for-profit enterprise in a meanwhile space. Your experience and skills are valuable to us. Can you volunteer some time in the set up or regular running?  Come along and let us know.

A bar will be run by QPCS PTFA and snacks will be supplied by Spice Caravan - both in return for donations.

Let us know if you are coming (if you haven't already) corribrest@gmail.com  and please bring friends and neighbours, and tell us if you have a particular interest.

Best,
Meanwhile@Corrib team

PS For anyone not aware of the term 'meanwhile' in this context it means using an empty space for a limited amount of time until it is developed by the owners.

Health Partners Forum on Wednesday will discuss Brent STP

The STP is going to NHS England on Friday!

Brent Patient Voice calls for no action on STP until public properly involved and consulted

Robin Sharp of Brent Patient Voice has submitted a critique to Carolyn Downs (Brent Council CEO) and others responsible for the NW London Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) which will have a major impact on health provision for years to come.

This is Robin's covering email:

Dear Colleagues

I am pleased to enclose for your consideration a critique by Brent Patient Voice of the draft NW London Sustainability and Transformation Plan of 30 June 2016, as placed on the NW London Collaboration website on 5 August.

You will see that this is a long document, though by no means as long as the draft STP.

Rather than simply complain about the proposed cuts in finance and services, as would be tempting, we have spent quite a lot of time examining the document in detail. This has been challenging because so much critical information has been withheld.

Nevertheless our conclusion is that at the level of detail the Plan, if it is a plan, does not withstand scrutiny and in that sense is not fit for purpose.

This is disappointing, though we do understand that the haste of preparation and the non-involvement of clinicians, councillors, CCG Governing Bodies and the public were ordained by NHS England.

We are asking you to advise NHS leaders to slow down this process dramatically and to open up the issues of radical change to primary care to doctors themselves and the public.  Surely it must be obvious even to the top of the NHS that this will not work without substantial consent?

We understand that you are ready to share with the public the next version of the STP shortly after 21st October. We urge the relevant bodies not to sign any agreement or contract by 23 December without fulfilling both the letter and the spirit of the law requiring the involvement of and consultation with the public in major changes to the provision of healthcare or without explaining how the bodies involved can lawfully commit to these plans. We also believe that the STP relies on a level and type of data sharing that has neither the consent of the public, nor the sanction of data protection law, and that the latest National Data Guardian review is unlikely to resolve this.
 

With best wishes

Robin Sharp
Chair Brent Patient Voice

Robin Sharp
Chair Brent Patient Voice

John Lister speaks about the NW LONDON STP here LINK

Wembley Green Car Park pre-application proposals to be presented at Planning Committee

The Brent Planning Committee on October 19th (7pm at the Civic Centre) will be given a Presentation by Quintain on one of the biggest sites  in the Wembley Masterplan.  This is a pre-planning application so most of the information will only be divulged that evening. No plans are published in advance.

Given the controversy over recent developments at the stadium and elsewhere in Wembley this is an opportunity for residents to get a glimpse of what is in store. This is a large housing development with blocks of flats up to 26 storeys.

This is what is published on the Committee Agenda:

Green Car Park, First Way, Wembley

SCHEME:

The Reserved Matters for the development of Plot E03 pursuant to outline planning application reference 15/5550 (the Quintain Masterplan).

Proposed construction of 1 to 26 storey building to provide 743 flats (397

 private rent and 346 discount market rent), 490 square metres of communtiy

or employment floorspace Use Class D1 / B1), 91 coach parking spaces for Wembley Stadium events, energy centre for outline consent area and associated external amenity space, cycle storage, hard and soft landscaping and accesses to the highway

PART 1 DEVELOPMENT PRESENTATIONS

Introduction

1.     This part of the agenda is for the committee to receive presentations on proposed developments, particularly when they are at the pre-application stage. 


2.     Although the reports are set out in a particular order on the agenda, the Chair may reorder the agenda on the night. Therefore, if you wish to be present for a particular application, you need to be at the meeting from the beginning. 


3.     The following information and advice only applies to reports in this part of the agenda. 


Advice to Members

4.     These proposed developments are being reported to committee to enable Members of the committee to view them at an early stage and to comment upon them. They do not constitute applications for planning permission at this stage (unless otherwise stated in the individual report) and any comments made are provisional and subject to full consideration of any subsequent application and the comments received as a result of consultation, publicity and notification. 


5.     Members of the committee will need to pay careful attention to the probity rules around predisposition, predetermination and bias (set out in the Council’s Constitution). Failure to do so may mean that the Councillor will not be able to participate in the meeting when any subsequent application is considered. 


Further information

6.  Members are informed that any relevant material received since the publication of this part of the agenda, concerning items on it, will be reported to the Committee in the Supplementary Report.

Public speaking

7.  The Council’s Constitution only provides for public speaking rights for those applications being reported to Committee in the “Applications for Decision” part of the agenda. Therefore reports on this part of the agenda do not attract public speaking rights.