Confusion over end date for Wembley High Road sewer works

 Street signs say that the sewer works in Wembley High Road will continue until January 31st 2018 but this is what Brent Council posted on its website yesterday with a completion date of January 5th LINK:

The sewer works on High Road, Wembley, are progressing well and the proposed end date for these works is now 5 January 2018.

To date Thames Water have:

• Removed the traffic island
• Excavated a shaft onto the sewer over seven meters deep
• Tunnelled four meters downstream, towards Park Lane, to a point where there is no concrete in the sewer
• Tunnelled upstream, towards Wembley triangle, eight and a half meters to the lateral connection from the former Brent House site and have tunnelled over fourteen meters to a point where all concrete has been removed.
• Sink another shaft on the sewer
• Replaced the sewer

Next steps:

• Backfill the tunnels

• Backfill the shaft

• Permanent reinstatement of carriageway.

  
   Note: From the top of the 83 bus today (Thursday) it did look as if the backfill works have been completed. I have asked Thames Water for clarification.
  

Brent kids can be 'Super Heroes' - lessons from the St Raph's Movie Fun Day

I think readers will enjoy this video showing the Brent community at its best with children and adults from all communities having fun together with a serious intent behind the fun.

London Mayor torpedoes Barnet's Grahame Park regeneration citing loss of affordable homes

From Construction News LINK

Sadiq Khan has rejected plans for a housing estate regeneration project in north London on the basis that affordable homes will be lost.

The mayor of London said the scheme in Barnet is “a classic example of how not to do estate regeneration”.

The project at the 1970s Grahame Park estate in Colindale includes plans to demolish 692 homes available at social rent and replace them with 1,083 units.

But only 435 of the new homes will be available for social tenants within what is Barnet’s largest housing estate.

Barnet Council approved the scheme, which is being developed by Genesis Housing Association, last month.

However, Mr Khan said after considering the evidence, the council must now work with City Hall planners to redesign the project.

It is the second time this year the mayor has intervened in Barnet, having called in the council’s decision to refuse Barratt permission for 462 homes in May.

The mayor said: “I fully support improving social housing on this estate and across the capital, but this scheme falls far short of what I expect of London boroughs.”

Mr Khan pointed to his London Plan, published last month, which said estate regeneration projects must replace homes for social rent on a like-for-like basis.

He added: “Londoners so urgently need more high-quality housing, not less, which makes this scheme completely unacceptable in its current form.”

Housing estate regeneration is a major issue in the capital, with Haringey Council facing fierce opposition to its £2bn plans to regenerate part of Wood Green in north London.

A Barnet Council spokesperson said: “We are clearly disappointed by this decision. We will now be reviewing this with our development partner to agree the next steps.”

A Genesis spokesperson said: “We are very disappointed to hear this decision and are in close dialogue with Barnet Council and the mayor’s office to review next steps.”

NOTE

Genesis Housing Association is associated with the Brent House development where only 30% of units are 'affordable' (ie unaffordable to most local families at up to 80% market rent) and the controversial Minavil House development where  'affordable' is 60% of market rent but only 13% of the units.  It is also facing a campaign by tenants over the merger with Notting Hill Housing Trust and its move away from its original remit of providing housing at social rent.

It will be interesting to see how Mr Khan treats applications from Brent which don't offer Londoners more high quality homes at social rent.

Wembley High Road sewer works until the end of January?

The street signs say the end of January but this is what Brent Council posted on its website yesterday with a completion date of January 5th:

The sewer works on High Road, Wembley, are progressing well and the proposed end date for these works is now 5 January 2018.
To date Thames Water have:

• Removed the traffic island
• Excavated a shaft onto the sewer over seven meters deep
• Tunnelled four meters downstream, towards Park Lane, to a point where there is no concrete in the sewer
• Tunnelled upstream, towards Wembley triangle, eight and a half meters to the lateral connection from the former Brent House site and have tunnelled over fourteen meters to a point where all concrete has been removed.
• Sink another shaft on the sewer
• Replaced the sewer

Next steps:

• Backfill the tunnels
• Backfill the shaft
• Permanent reinstatement of carriageway.

Cabinet approves Wembley Park-Harrow Weald Cycling Quietway

Click bottom right square to enlarge

The Brent Cabinet has approved the Wembley Park to Harrow Weald Quietway (purple on map) for cyclists to go forward for detailed design and consultation.

The plans also contains possible spurs to Wembley Central and along Churchill  Road to Kenton Road. The Council claims that the route will contain improvements for pedestrians as well as cyclists.

A spokesperson for Brent Cyclists said:

This could be a good thing for cycling, depending very much on the detailed design, which we expect to be given input into. 

Cycle routes on narrow, heavily parked, residential roads, as proposed here, can only attract new cyclists if they are really low-traffic, and this can only be achieved with 'mode filtering', whereby only cyclists, pedestrians and emergency vehicles can use the road from end to end (while still allowing motor vehicle access to all properties). 

In the case of the route suggested here, certainly Brook Avenue and Draycott Avenue, which are quite busy roads, and possibly others, would need mode filtering for a satisfactory Quietway route to be achieved.

Cllr Chan opposes The Village School move towards academisation

From this week's Kilburn Times LINK

Click on image to enlarge

Cllr Duffy encounters Kafka in Brent

Councillor John Duffy (Kilburn) recounts his experience of trying to represent workers and relatives over the Paddington Cemetery asbestos dump. Background HERE

-->

A strange thing happened to me last week (Tuesday 5^th December). I was made aware of a Internal Audit meeting concerning the discovery of asbestos in Paddington Cemetery. I had raised the issue sometime ago after the council stopped new burials in the cemetery and would only reopen graves to intern the  “next of kin”. The reopening takes place using a special contractor. The contractors are in breathing masks and white overalls. They remove the old soil and replace it with new uncontaminated soil for the burial.

I requested a copy of the report as the person who raised concerns in June. Originally I had asked for an independent report as I feared that the report would not be transparent and there could be seen as a cover-up, unless it was open to local residents and the relatives (bereaved) of the people who are buried in the area of concern. An independent investigation would allow the public to witness the impartiality of the report and the seriousness of the situation.

However this requested was turned down by the CEO Instead the CEO decided to have an internal audit report which would exclude the press and the public .The reasons given for the secrecy of the report was because there was information relating to financial affairs of a particular person or companies.” 

The Head of Legal informed me via officers that I would not be allowed to have a copy of the report. I challenged this and finally received an email from legal services stating  “All members are entitled to ‘inspect’ reports with certain categories of exempt information, rather than receive a copy. If you would like to come to the Civic Centre prior the meeting to inspect the report physically in this instance.”  Why do senior officer think its necessary to act in this bizarre way to stop me getting information. This was done even though in the terms of reference for the report, it states the reason for the internal audit report is “ following concerns raised by Cllr John Duffy in an email dated 10^th November” so the decision to exclude me from having a copy is strange to say the least.

Anyway I went to the Civic centre at 4pm,2hrs before the meeting was due to take place to read the report .I was met by 2 (male ) members of legal services with the report. I was informed.  I was allowed to read the report only under their supervision, but could not remove it or photograph it. I am bound by the secrecy imposed on me by the Head of legal , which means if I am approached by any member of the public , who has a relative buried on the Hill ,I have to tell them they are not allowed to know what happen or how the asbestos got there….. Now that is what you call transparency Brent Style.

At the meeting I ask the Chair of the Audit committee to overturn the Head of Legal decision  not to allow me a copy of the report.  He did this and his decision was supported by the other members of the  committee which included  Councillors Choudry, Nerva, Davidson and Perrin. However, even though I was then given a copy , I am still not allow to share the information contained within it.

I informed the chair of the meeting I will not make public anything I have read in the report after he released the report to me. I intent to honour that , with one exception .Officers were wrong  and misleading to say the reasons given for the secrecy of the report was because there was information relating to financial affairs of a particular person or companies.” There is no such information in the report and all names have redacted and the names of the companies involved have been disguised, therefore there is no information, which should be kept from the public.

Whereas I am committed not to discuss the contents of the report I will reiterate things I raised in my previous emails. The act of placing the contaminated waste in Paddington Cemetery was deliberate (any ordinary member  of the public could spot the difference between  a delivery of soil and a delivery of builders rubble) it was not an accident. The cost to the council will be well over a million pounds in lost revenue and I have further concerns about the way the public have been treated since the asbestos was discovered in May this year.

The whole thing is  a farce and is right out of a  Kafka  novel .Why senior officers think that it  is necessary  to stop the local residents and the relatives of those buried knowing the truth  so they can make plans for their  future family  burial arrangements is disgraceful..

As I said before this an attempt by senior officers to rely on the Cabinet, who will nod it through without question and ensure that the facts are kept from the public .

I will continue to seek an independent investigation for the sake of the relatives.

Brent councillors urged to attend fossil fuel divestment event January 27th

This is a welcome initiative taking place on Saturday 27th January 2018 10.30am to 1pm at Brent Civic Centre.

Please urge your councillors to attend. BOOKING

Brent Council & Labour Energy Forum invite Labour Councillors and members to come and discuss how divesting from fossils fuel can shape Labour's role in leading on safer pensions and climate action.

With May 2018 local council elections approaching Labour councils should consider their position on continued investment in the fossil fuel industry.

Over £14 billion of LG Pension Funds holdings are invested in oil, gas and coal - but these investments are no longer financially sustainable. Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of England, has warned that investments into fossil fuels will become stranded assets and contribute to financial instability.

As Labour Groups write their manifestos for the 2018 elections, we invite Labour councillors to come and consider how your local council should move forward in light of the growing consensus of fossil fuels holdings becoming stranded assets. We will interrogate the best approaches to achieving a world unpolluted by the fossil fuel industry, and how to reduce risk while maximising strategic influence over individual companies and the oil/gas/coal extraction sectors.

In September last year, Waltham Forest Council became the UK’s first Local Government Pension Scheme to announce that they will divest their Pension Funds away from fossil fuel companies over the coming 5 years, followed by Southwark Council in December. The place of fossil fuels in the world economy is changing. The Paris Agreement set the UK’s economy on a pathway to taking serious action on climate change that will require significant changes to our economies - changes that are incompatible with the business models of fossil fuel extraction companies. Come and discuss how Labour councils can maximise influence in shaping the transition while minimising the exposure to stranded assets.

The Labour Party can lead in building this new future and laying out how we make this transition just, fast and affordable. Divesting the £14 billion of LG Pension Funds away from fossil fuels would enable reinvestment into local housing and transport, strengthening local economies and supporting job creation.