Brent pupils, artists and community to benefit as Punchdrunk Enrichment move to Wembley Park for three-year residency

 From Punchdrunk Enrichment

 

Punchdrunk Enrichment – the UK’s premier education and community-led immersive theatre company has announced a three-year residency in London’s Wembley Park from April 2023, which will deliver the first ever co-created immersive arts space.

 

The residency will be Punchdrunk Enrichment’s largest in scale and ambition to-date. The company will engage with local artists and community groups to co-create an immersive space that will support local artist development, deliver exceptional experiences for families and provide training opportunities for Brent-based young people. The 8,000 square feet of space will also provide the opportunity for the Company to foster new work.

 

Alongside the public programme, the company will introduce a range of inspiring immersive projects for primary schools across Brent including The Lost Lending Library, Punchdrunk Enrichment’s flagship literacy project in which a mysterious travelling library appears overnight in a primary school. The Lost Lending Library has visited over 75 schools and benefitted more than 40,000 children by unlocking creativity and a love of literature in children aged 6-11 years and their families and carers.

 

The residency in Brent has been conceived by Punchdrunk Enrichment’s Artistic Director, Peter Higgin – one of the founding members of the world’s leading immersive theatre company, Punchdrunk – and will be delivered with the support of Arts Council England and the developers behind the transformation of Wembley Park, Quintain.

 

It will draw upon Punchdrunk Enrichment’s historic practice and expertise in immersive storytelling, which are brought to life in unexpected spaces. Previous projects include Greenhive Green, which transformed a room in a care home into an immersive village green complete with a florist, a phone box and the smell of fresh cut grass; and Fallow Cross, a fully functioning townlet in a set of warehouses in Tottenham Hale, Haringey

"Where is the justice when defendants cannot explain their motives, hopes and aims for taking action to save thousands of other people's lives in the UK and around the world?"

 From the Good Law Project

Two climate change protesters, who were sentenced to seven weeks in jail after telling a jury their reasons for taking peaceful action, are challenging that they were found in contempt of court, thanks to Good Law Project. 

Amy Pritchard and Giovanna Lewis were given custodial sentences of seven weeks in prison by Inner London Crown Court last month after they disobeyed a Judge's order not to refer to climate change or fuel poverty as their motivation for blocking traffic with the group Insulate Britain. 

Good Law Project believes it is in the interest of the public to stop the silencing of protesters and will argue that the court was wrong to have withdrawn the protesters' defences and limited what they could say to the jury. 

Amy Pritchard, 37, and Giovanna Lewis, 65, were on trial for causing a public nuisance after sitting in the road to block traffic between Bishopsgate and Wormwood Street in Central London on 25 October 2021. Jurors failed to agree a verdict on their trial but the protesters were found in contempt of court and given seven week prison sentences after they addressed juries at their trials to speak about climate change and fuel poverty as their reasons for the direct action. 

Inner London Crown Court has been ordering Insulate Britain protesters not to refer to climate change or fuel poverty whilst addressing the jury in their trials, saying that their motivations for acting the way they did had no relevance to what the jury had to decide. Many campaigners and lawyers have expressed concern at what they believe to be an extension of the more punitive treatment of protesters following the 2022 Police Crime and Sentencing Act.  

Jennine Walker, Legal Manager, Good Law Project said:  

We cannot celebrate the protests of the suffragettes yet stand by and do nothing as people protesting peacefully against climate change are silenced and punished by increasingly repressive laws and judicial system. We hope the Court of Appeal will put an end to these disturbing decisions that silence climate protestors and undermine the crucial role both protest and jury trial play in upholding our democracy.

Appellant and activist, Amy Pritchard said: 

The Judge's order to keep silent about our motivations is outrageous, and I could not follow it. I think this Judge's decision, and the direction it moves us in, is deeply disturbing.

Appellant and activist, Giovanna Lewis said: 

It is shocking and unbelievable that a UK crown court Judge could, or would even want to, prevent ordinary people from mentioning the words fuel poverty and climate change in a British court of law.  Where is the justice when defendants cannot explain their motives, hopes and aims for taking action to save thousands of other people's lives in the UK and around the world?

Brent Council to let several floors of the Civic Centre to commercial clients

 Cash-strapped Brent Council is advertising some 19,309 square feet of space at the Brent Civic Centre at £32.50 a square foot to realise a planned income of £680k in 2024-25. If the Council  fail to let the space it will mean further cuts.

At the same time the Council is reviewing existing commercial contracts.  Earlier this year Cabinet approved a £2m remodelling claiming it would improve 'customer experience' and also make the building more attractive to commercial tenants.

The planned lets include the first floor restaurant space that closed during the pandemic and has since been used by voluntary organisations as a commnity kitchen.

The space has been freed up via a 'restack' operation that moves existing staff around to maximise space for letting out.

As well as seeking commercial companies the Council is also looking at letting to a 'flex-operator', an organisation that lets flexible space to start ups and other small companies. LINK

Delegated authority is being sought to enter into new leases with the following:

· A new lease at an agreed market rent with the Valuation Office Agency
(VOA to relocate from the 8th Floor North to the 8th Floor West that was
recently vacated by Air France.

· A new lease at an agreed market rent with the Old Oak and Park Royal
Development Corporation for their current demise on the 1st Floor West - or
a suitable alternative space.

· A new lease at an agreed market rent with the NHS to co-locate them with
Brent’s Adult Social Care and Health department on the 2nd Floor.

· A new lease at an agreed market rent with Warren Bakery who occupy a
retail unit on the ground floor.

· Any other existing tenants as appropriate in line with the re-stack project
and any new prospective tenants seeking space within the Civic Centre

I am not sure about the status of Starbucks which is not mentioned in the Cabinet Report.

This is the brochure already available to potential clients:

1 Morland Gardens –Brent’s latest NON-development (and a planning complaint).

 Guest post by Philip Grant in a personal capacity

1 Morland Gardens on 1 April 2023. (Photo by Margaret Pratt)

 

The photograph above is similar to one that introduced a previous guest post in January 2023 (1 Morland Gardens – How many more times can they get it wrong?). It was taken on 1 April, but this is no joke. The “April Fools” are at Brent Civic Centre. 

 

If the Senior Officers, Council Leader and Cabinet members had listened, to me and others opposing their plans for redevelopment of the (now former) Brent Start college at 1 Morland Gardens since early 2020, they could have amended their project. They could have retained the heritage Victorian villa they seem determined to demolish (in complete contravention of the Council’s own heritage planning policies), and had a scheme which still delivered perhaps 20 affordable homes as well.

 

The wide footpath, from Hillside, with community garden on the right. (Photo by Margaret Pratt)

 

Instead, they pressed ahead with plans which were supposed to deliver 65 affordable homes, built partly on land that is a wide footpath and a community garden. They currently have no legal right to build on that land, despite claiming it is part of their site, and there are objections to the Stopping-up Order they would need. That is because their plans would force pedestrians to walk through heavily polluted air, and remove many trees, in breach of Brent’s Air Quality Action Plan and Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy.

 

The funding for the project, which Brent’s Cabinet approved in January 2020, included £6.5m from the GLA’s Affordable Housing Programme 2016-2021. Although this programme was extended to 2023, local authority projects for funding under it had to “start on site” by 31 March 2023. As a number of photographs taken around 1 Morland Gardens on 1 April by a Willesden Local History Society member show, no actual work had begun on the site by then.

 

Blue hut in the car park at 1 Morland Gardens, 1 April 2023. (Photo by Margaret Pratt)

 

An “Oasis” self-contained welfare unit (including canteen and toilet facilities) had recently been delivered to the former college’s car park, ready for any workers to use. But none of the “Start on Site Works”, as defined in the GLA’s funding agreement, had been carried out by the key date. Brent Council has therefore lost that £6.5m funding, for a scheme it was already admitting, in the November 2022 affordable housing report to Cabinet, was unviable. So the Cabinet approved recommendations to “value engineer” the 1 Morland Gardens project.

 

Construction details from the February 2023 Construction Logistics Plan.

 

From the latest documents I have seen, that “value engineering” means ditching the more environmentally friendly “award winning” design which was given planning consent in 2020, and switching to a traditional concrete frame, with precast infill panels. This will require much stronger foundations, involving 454 20-metre-deep concrete piles across the site. It seems all too reminiscent of the methods used to build Brent Council’s Chalkhill and Stonebridge estates in the late 1960s / early 1970s, which had to be demolished around 30 years later!

 

Construction of a “Bison” concrete block of flats at Chalkhill, c.1967.

 

My title mentions a planning complaint, and I will ask Martin to attach a copy of my open letter of complaint to Brent’s Head of Planning at the end of this post, for anyone interested in the details. It concerns the Construction Logistics Plan (“CLP”) for the Morland Gardens development (application 22/4082) which I wrote about in my January 2023 article.

 

That application could and should have been refused, yet I found out last week it had been granted consent on 27 March. But it wasn’t the CLP submitted with the application in December 2022, it was a completely new one submitted in February 2023. That new CLP was not published on Brent’s planning website until 17 March, there was no consultation on it, and even those of us who had commented on the original CLP were not notified of its existence!

 

I don’t think the secrecy over it was part of a “plot” to try to get the CLP approved in time for work to “start on site” at 1 Morland Gardens by 31 March (it was too late for that), but this is far from the transparency Brent residents are entitled to expect, especially when the application relates to a proposed Council development.

 

Will the loss of the £6.5m GLA funding make Brent Council finally accept that their current plans for 1 Morland Gardens are hopeless? It should do, but the past 3+ years have shown that their foolishness is not just confined to April.

Philip Grant.

 

New Government measures to tackle sewage dumping scandal are a drop in the ocean

 In response to the Environment Secretary's announcement of the Government’s new ‘Plan for Water’, Legal Director of Good Law Project, Emma Dearnaley, said:
 

Overwhelming public outrage has finally forced the Government’s hand on the sewage scandal blighting our country.

But the reality is that the Government’s ‘new’ plan, some of which is repackaged from previous years, only aims to reduce the number of sewage spills by private water companies through storm overflows into our rivers and beaches by 10,000 per year - to a mere 290,000 a year based on recent figures. This is a drop in the ocean.

We need more robust and urgent action to bring the shocking practice of sewage dumping to an end if we are to protect our waters for generations to come. That is why Good Law Project is supporting a number of legal challenges to hold this Government and water companies to account over what has become one of the biggest environmental scandals of our times.

Controversial Barham Park planning application returns with new proposals

 

Existing houses

 Rejected proposal

New proposal

Proposals for the redevelopment of the modest ex-park keeper's 'cottages' in a corner of the much-loved Barham Park have returned after proposals made in 2021 were rejected, opposed by both the local residents' association and local councillors. LINK

The planning situation is complicated by conditions on the land  LINK and the role of the Barham Park Trustees chaired by Brent Council leader, Muhammed Butt.

 

 

The new proposal is for demolition of the existing 2 houses and replacement with four 3 bedroom, 5 person, 3 storey houses. 

 Although the Brent Council planning portal states that there are 11 comments on the planning application at present one is from Chiltern Railways and another from a resident which just records their objection to the proposal. I have asked Brent Council about uploading the other comments and also if restrictive covenants on the land have been taken into consideration.

Brent Council's Heritage Officer has submitted a comment:

• A Heritage Statement has been submitted with this application which describes the significance of theheritage asset(s) and to understand the potential impact of the proposal [NPPF 194].
• It should have included a Statement of Significance and the Greater London Historic Environment Record consulted.
• Notwithstanding this, I am satisfied with the overall design approach based on the half-timbering present in the existing locally listed buildings.
• I am also satisfied that the new build will not harm the significance or setting of the park given the location.
• The western part of the park was outside the original ‘Sudbury Lodge’ grounds and only became part of the park in the 20th century and is not the most significant part of the park. The proposed development, although more visible in relation to this area, will not harm the importance of the public open space nor impact upon the ability to experience the area of the original historic landscape park.
• Views from within the heart of the park show that the development will be mainly masked by trees and in any case, its overall scale and design would not be seen as out of keeping.
• In terms of the setting of the locally and listed buildings, they are set within a very secluded area where they are screened from view from the wider area of the park.
• The Council can be content that the proposal will preserve the character and setting of the park of local special architectural or historic interest.

The site is close to the Chiltern Railways line and they have submitted a comment:

Chiltern Railways have no objection to this proposed development. We would, however, point out that it is in the best interests of the developer, Brent Council and Chiltern Railways to ensure that the proposed three storey dwellinghouses are built to a standard that mitigates any impact the operation of railway services will have on the inhabitants.
 

Looking at the proposed development site, the 4 new houses would be located within a 20m distance of the Chiltern mainline. The line provides regular commuter railway services connecting the West Midlands, Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire with London Marylebone Station.
 

As per the Acoustic Assessment Report enclosed in the planning documentation, we would like to raise the fact that Chiltern trains run on the mainline from approximately 05:00 to 01:00 the next morning, so their will be significant noise and vibration impacts for the future residents of the site. There may also be freight trains running during the night-time, which create additional noise due to their slower speeds and heavier weight. As such we would like to stress that the proposed property be given suitable noise insulation to mitigate the impact of the railway line nearby.
 

We also operate Sudbury and Harrow Road Station which is located approximately 70m from the proposed development site. Whilst the station is used a limited number of times for example it recorded 15,352 entries and exits in 2021/2, many through trains travel through the site creating noise impacts for the proposed development. The station will also have automated service and safety announcements, including warning announcements when fast trains are passing. As such we agree with the contents of the acoustic assessment report, that suitable noise proofing and glazing be put in place in this development to mitigate these impacts on the future residents.

The Thames Water submission is more detailed than is often the case:

 EXTRACT

The proposed development is located within 15 metres of a strategic sewer. Thames Water requests the following condition to be added to any planning permission. "No piling shall take place until a PILING METHOD STATEMENT (detailing the depth and type of piling to be undertaken and the methodology by which such piling will be carried out, including measures to prevent and minimise the potential for damage to subsurface sewerage infrastructure, and the programme for the works) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with Thames Water. Any piling must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved piling method statement." Reason: The proposed works will be in close proximity to underground sewerage utility infrastructure. Piling has the potential to significantly impact / cause failure of local underground sewerage utility infrastructure.

 

We would expect the developer to demonstrate what measures will be undertaken to minimise groundwater discharges into the public sewer. Groundwater discharges typically result from construction site dewatering, deep excavations, basement infiltration, borehole installation, testing and site remediation. Any discharge made without a permit is deemed illegal and may result in prosecution under the provisions of the Water Industry Act 1991. Should the Local Planning Authority be minded to approve the planning application, Thames Water would like the following informative attached to the planning permission: "A Groundwater Risk Management Permit from Thames Water will be required for discharging groundwater into a public sewer. Any discharge made without a permit is deemed illegal and may result in prosecution under the provisions of the Water Industry Act 1991. We would expect the developer to demonstrate what measures he will undertake to minimise groundwater discharges into the public sewer.

As far as I can see no mature trees are proposed to be removed, although at present Tree Preservation Orders have not been made on them. 

Full documentation and comment opportunity HERE,

98% of NEU Members Who Voted Reject Government Pay Offer

 

From National Education Union

The NEU consultative ballot on the Government's pay offer has been rejected by an overwhelming 98% of NEU teacher members in England on a turnout of 66%.

191,319 serving teachers in state schools in England have voted to reject Gillian Keegan's offer in less than six days.

It is not surprising that the offer has been rejected. The offer was not fully funded, would have meant teachers in England would see their pay fall even further behind their counterparts in Wales and Scotland and it would represent another two years of real-terms pay cuts.

It would do nothing to reverse the problems of recruitment and retention in our schools.

Commenting on the result, Dr Mary Bousted and Kevin Courtney, Joint General Secretaries of the National Education, said:

This resounding rejection of the Government's offer should leave Gillian Keegan in no doubt that she will need to come back to the negotiating table with a much better proposal.

The offer shows an astounding lack of judgement and understanding of the desperate situation in the education system.

We have today written to the education secretary informing her of the next two days of strike action on 27 April and 2 May that NEU teacher members in England will now be taking.

These strikes are more than three weeks away; Gillian Keegan can avoid them.

No teacher wants to be on strike. Nor can they accept this offer that does nothing to address the decades of below inflation pay increases making them the worst paid teachers in the UK. The offer will do nothing to stem the teacher recruitment and retention crisis which is so damaging to our children and young people's education.

The education secretary has united the profession in its outrage at this insulting pay offer. It is now for her to rectify that situation by starting to value education. The NEU is ready as we have stated all along to negotiate with ministers, but this time we hope a lesson has been learnt.  Gillian Keegan needs to start negotiations with respect for the profession she is supposedly representing in Government.

To parents we say that we have no wish to disrupt education, indeed our action is aimed at getting the Government to invest in the education of this generation of children and the people who teach them.

We are asking our school reps to plan with head teachers to ensure that year 11 and year 13 students have a full programme of education on the upcoming strike days.

Let’s talk about the Monarchy - K&KBetter2023 Wednesday April 19th 2023 7pm

 

From Kensal and Kilburn Better 2023

#NotMyKing, April 19, 2023 at 7:00 PM is an event where Kilburn and Kensal people can ask, ahead of the coronation: do we want this monarchy?

 

Recent polls show 30% of the British public want to end the monarchy and 55% want to keep it. It is surprisingly difficult to have a proper discussion in public - in Parliament or on the TV or radio - about the future of the monarchy. This is a chance to do that!

 

We have two brilliant speakers for this event!

 

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is a multi-award-winning journalist, author, and commentator

Graham Smith is CEO of the group Republic & author of upcoming book "Abolish the Monarchy"

 

Some of the many questions!

• Can hereditary public office be justified in 2023?
• Does monarchy prop up the whole edifice of privilege in the UK?
• How much power does the monarchy have?
• How much wealth does it have and how much do we pay for it?
• What is the truth about the monarchy's value to the tourist industry?
• How much power are governments able to hold without accountability because of the existence of the monarchy?
• What about Prince Andrew?
• If we have an elected Head of State - maybe similar to the president in Ireland - would that be better?
• Can we fix our broken democracy without ending the monarchy?

 

Everyone very welcome! Including, of course, strong royalists! Let's discuss!

 

VENUE:  St Lukes West Kilburn, Fernhead Roa,d London W9 3EH

 

TICKETS  £5 to cover costs LINK