Not much time left to reply to TfL consultation on extension of 223 route along Harrow View and Kodak site - ends June 4th

 From TFL website LINK

The affected section of the 223 route

Route 223 extension to Eastman Village

We are proposing to extend route 223, so that it terminates at the new Eastman Village Kodak housing development on Harrow View in the London Borough of Harrow. We want to hear your views on our proposals. Our public consultation is open, and you have from 24 April to 4 June 2023 to have your say on the suggested extension.

Your views are important to us. On this page you can find out more about our proposals, how these may impact you, and how you can have your say.

 

 

Overview

London’s bus network is our most affordable, accessible and available form of public transport and offers the main sustainable alternative to cars for those journeys that can’t easily be walked or cycled. It is also London’s most flexible mode of public transport, and we continuously review and adapt the bus network to ensure that services reflect changing customer needs.

Following the Mayor’s announcement that the Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) will be expanded London-wide in August, we are undertaking a number of bus consultations across outer London to strengthen alternatives to private cars and maximise the benefits of expanding the ULEZ.

This includes proposing adjustments to existing bus routes to ensure services are operating in areas where our customers need them most and considering where else the network should serve, and in areas where emerging redevelopment is bringing new homes and building new communities.

These proposals relate to route 223 in the Harrow and Wealdstone Opportunity Area.

What is proposed

Route 223 currently operates between Wembley Central and Harrow Bus Station. We are proposing to extend the route, so that it no longer terminates at Harrow Bus Station, but instead continues its route along Harrow View, terminating next to the new Eastman Village development on the former Kodak factory site.

The proposed extension would serve over 3,200 new homes, as well as homes and businesses along Harrow View. The extended route would create new journey opportunities to locations such as Pinner and Hatch End and would create new interchange opportunities. We believe that the proposals will help to make the Eastman Village development, employment, health care and the wider community more accessible, as well as improving journey times. You can find our Equalities Impact Assessment (EqIA) in the Documents Library, which explains the potential impacts in more detail.

How you can find out more

We have provided more information to help you respond, and we want this consultation to be accessible for everyone. Visit the Document Library for:

• A map of the proposed extension section only
• An overview map of route 223 with proposed extension
• Our initial Equalities Impact Assessment document
• A copy of our consultation survey in case you would prefer to respond in writing
• An Easy Read version of our proposals
• An Easy Read version of our survey
• A copy of our bus stop poster with QR code
• A copy of our consultation flyer

We also have a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) section which we will keep updated throughout the consultation.

If you need to translate this page into another language, please use the ‘select language’ button in the bottom-left hand corner of this page.

Connecting with London’s deaf community on our consultations

To enhance how we engage and consult with London’s deaf community, we are trialling a British Sign Language (BSL) consultation conversation service for this consultation. This service will allow the TfL consultation lead to have a two-way BSL translated discussion on any aspect of this consultation with a BSL speaker.

To request a BSL consultation conversation, please contact us at haveyoursay@tfl.gov.uk and we will be in contact to arrange this at a convenient time. Following this trial we will evaluate the service to determine if this is something we are able to offer on other consultations in the future.

What happens next

The proposals are subject to the outcome of our consultation. Once the consultation ends on Sunday 4 June 2023, we will spend time considering all the responses we received and will prepare a consultation report.

The consultation report will help us reach a decision about whether we extend route 223 to the Eastman Village. A copy of the report will be published later this year. It will be available to everyone that takes part in the consultation and a copy will be published on our website.

 LINK TO SURVEY

Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt accused of having Scrutiny chairs 'in his pocket'

The Annual Meeting of Brent Council which had proceeded with its ceremonies as expected burst into life this week when it considered a Liberal Democrat amendment to the Council Constitution based on their interpretation of the 2017 recommendations of the  House of Commons Communities and Local Government Committee on 'Effectiveness of local authority overview and scrutiny committees '(Extract above) Link to full report.

 

Cllr Georgiou moving the amendment said that that there needed be a real and visible indpendent role for scrutiny and proposed that Scrutiny Committe recommendations should be discussed at Full Council, rather just Cabinet. Further, the Liberal Democrats felt that just having two scrutiny committees, unlike some other councils, meant that their agenda were too packed for effective scrutiny. They proposed a further 3 scrutiny committes to spread the load and make scrutiny more effective. Given the political makeup of the council 3 should be chaired by Labour councillors and the other 2 by a Liberal Democrat and a Conservative  councillor. The leader of the Conservative group backed the call.

 

 

 

Responding, Brent Council leader Cllr Muhammed Butt said that this was a Labour Council chosen by the people of Brent. Gesturing to his Labour colleagues he said that on his side of the chamber 'we have the people's choice', and went on:

I have two great Scrutiny Chairs who are doing a superb job...we have no need to make any changes.

The Liberal Democrats had not taken account of the expense and officer time need for 3 more committees when there were financial constraints. The Labour Group would oppose the amendment.

 

 

 

Exercising the Lib Dem's right of reply Cllr Paul Lorber said:

Thank you for the advert for democracy in the borough.

He then jumped on the possessive ' I ' that Butt had used and asked, 'Are they [scrutiny chairs] excellent because they are independent or because they are in your pocket? Which is it Cllr Butt?'

Addressing all the councillors he said that non-executive councillors all had a responsibility to ensure there was effective scrutiny:

If the leader of this council has 'my' chairs of scrutiny in his pocket there can be no confidence that the scrutiny process is independent and fair because of the words he used. Because of the words of the leader we now know that scrutiny is a rubber stamping of everything, a 'yes' to everything and no effective scrutiny.

 

Cllr Miller raised a point of order asking that the Mayor (chairing her first council meeting)  should make Cllr Lorber apologise for his 'unparliamentary' language but this was ruled out on a technicality by the council's legal advisor.

 

Cllr Kelcher, chair of the planning committee, raising another point of order/information said that the chairs of scrutiny were elected  within the Labour Group on a vote that excluded members of the executive. Therefore a misleading picture had been painted about their independence.

 

The motion was put to the meeting and lost with as far as I could see only Lib Dem and Conservative councillors voting for it.

 

A  futher Lib Dem amendment on  the 6 Brent Connects area suggested that Wembley being much larger that the two others should be split into 2.  In addition, reflecting the  political representation in the areas that one of the Wembley areas should be chaired by a Lib Dem councillor and the kingsbury and Kenton by a Conservative councillor.

That amendment was also lost so the 5 Brent Connect areas remain chaired by Labour councillors.

 

 

 Extracts from the House of Commons Report (LINK)

We have found that the most significant factor in determining whether or not scrutiny committees are effective is the organisational culture of a particular council. Having a positive culture where it is universally recognised that scrutiny can play a productive part in the decision-making process is vital and such an approach is common in all of the examples of effective scrutiny that we identified. Senior councillors from both the administration and the opposition, and senior council officers, have a responsibility to set the tone and create an environment that welcomes constructive challenge and democratic accountability. When this does not happen and individuals seek to marginalise scrutiny, there is a risk of damaging the council’s reputation, and missing opportunities to use scrutiny to improve service outcomes. In extreme cases, ineffective scrutiny can contribute to severe service failures.

Our inquiry has identified a number of ways that establishing a positive culture can be made easier. For example, in many authorities, there is no parity of esteem between the executive and scrutiny functions, with a common perception among both members and officers being that the former is more important than the latter. We argue that this relationship should be more balanced and that in order to do so, scrutiny should have a greater independence from the executive. One way that this can be achieved is to change the lines of accountability, with scrutiny committees reporting to Full Council meetings, rather than the executive. We also consider how scrutiny committee chairs might have greater independence in order to dispel any suggestion that they are influenced by partisan motivations. Whilst we believe that there are many effective and impartial scrutiny chairs working across the country, we are concerned that how chairs are appointed can have the potential to contribute to lessening the independence and legitimacy of the scrutiny process.

 

The Centre for Public Scrutiny states that:

Legally, the Chairing and membership of overview and scrutiny committees is a matter for a council’s Annual General Meeting in May. Practically, Chairing in particular is entirely at the discretion of the majority party.

Majority parties can, if they wish, reserve all committee chairships (and vicechairships) to themselves ... the practice of reserving all positions of responsibility to the majority party is something which usually happens by default, and can harm perceptions of scrutiny’s credibility and impartiality.

 

Chairs from a majority party that are effectively appointed by their executive are just as capable at delivering impartial and effective scrutiny as an opposition councillor, but we have concerns that sometimes chairs can be chosen so as to cause as little disruption as possible for their Leaders. It is vital that the role of scrutiny chair is respected and viewed by all as being a key part of the decision-making process, rather than as a form of political patronage.

 

Newcastle City Council where all scrutiny chairs are opposition party members, states that:

This has taken place under administrations of different parties and we believe that it adds to the clout, effectiveness and independence of the scrutiny process; it gives opposition parties a formally-recognised role in the decision-making process of the authority as a whole, more effective access to officers, and arguably better uses their skills and expertise for the
benefit of the council.

 

A venture to build on? Brent Cabinet set to approve the borough's first Community Land Trust homes project

This is a welcome venture challenging the usual developer led nature of design, planning and management of homes in Brent. A small step but important.  The link of 'affordable rent' to the average income of local residents is key. The project will be carefully watched by all those interested in truly affordable housing based on the needs of local residents rather than maximising market prices.

Brent Council press release on the proposal to be discussed at Brent Cabinet on Monday:

A group of local residents are leading on a venture to develop the first Community Land Trust homes in Brent.

The cabinet is set to approve plans to look at Brentfield Road in Stonebridge as the site for new homes.

Plans were brought forward by the Brent Community Land Trust (BCLT), a group of local residents who came together, supported by Community Led Housing London, in their ambitions to provide affordable housing across the whole of the borough.

If the project secures planning permission, it would transform a small parking lot and eight disused garages into much-needed homes for Brent residents. All of the homes would be priced at an affordable rent in line with the average local income for people already living in the area.

Atara Fridler, Chair of Brent CLT, said:

We’re so pleased to be working with Brent Council and the local community to realise our vision of delivering much-needed homes in Brent.  We can’t wait to see how a community led approach to the design, planning and management of homes at this site can help us deliver more affordable housing for local people controlled by local people.

BCLT is exploring designs that would maximise use of the site, recognising how difficult it for people on low incomes to be able to secure affordable housing in the private rented sector.

Cllr Promise Knight, Cabinet Member for Housing, Homelessness and Renters’ Security, said:

This is the first, exciting step in BCLT’s journey towards providing genuinely affordable homes for Brent residents.

I am looking forward to seeing how this project progresses in its engagement with the local community who will be invited to share their ideas throughout the design, planning and construction stages.

Notes:

Brent CLT was established in 2020 and is an independent, not for profit, membership organisation. You can find out more about Brent CLT and register for updates on how to get involved on www.brentclt.org.uk

Community Led Housing London supports people to create their own homes together. They work with community groups, councils, developers, and housing associations to provide advice, mentoring, and project management. They were established by the Mayor of London, and are hosted by CDS Co-operatives, a small specialist housing association. www.communityledhousing.london

BSL Chat & Relax, fun activities and games with Brent Deaf and CODA Youth Club - Chalkhill Community Centre Monday 5pm-7pm Free Entry

 

'Green and Fit Day' Chalkhill Park Saturday 27th May - 'Cultivating Health and Nature'

 

Thinking of cutting down on meat and dairy for personal and planetary health? Tune into Chalkhill Radio and join the conversation tomorrow 10am

 

From Brent Friends of the Earth

We hope to have a regular slot on the local Community Radio station, Chalkhill Community Radio. I'll be kicking off tomorrow, talking about how we can cut down on meat and dairy consumption.

You can tune in by going to www.chalkhillcommunityradio.com and clicking on 'listen live'. Recording available later.

Studio number for texts and calls 07956 548 781

Brent lags on delivery of 'Climate Safe Streets' - disappointment over lack of meaningful action

 

From Brent Cycling Campaign

London Cycling Campaign (LCC) has released a new report on borough and Mayoral progress on delivering on ‘Climate Safe Streets’ – schemes designed to decarbonise roads transport, boost walking & cycling rates and cut motor vehicle use.

 

The ‘Climate Safe Streets: One Year On, One Year To Go’ report names the boroughs doing best and worst on decarbonising their roads, with borough leaders one year into their current term and with the Mayor having one year to go in his. It tracks London’s progress by assessing action the boroughs and Mayor have taken in line with LCC’s Climate Safe Streets campaigning and makes use of key data on transport mode shift away from private motor vehicles over the last decade too.

 

Prior to the 2022 local council elections, LCC members and activists in Brent asked the council leader to commit to delivering on a set of specific schemes to enable more people to walk and cycle in the borough and to shift the borough away from private motor vehicle use (wherever possible) and the climate-changing emissions, road danger, inactivity and pollution they cause.  Brent 'Asks'.

 Party responses to request for pledges in the May 2022 Brent Council Elections:

The  report released yesterday by the LCC in conjunction with its local group Brent Cycling Group, says the following about Brent council’s progress over the last year:

 

Given that the current council leader Muhammed Butt, not only has committed to climate targets for the entire borough of 2030 – marking it out as one of London’s bolder boroughs –it’s quite startling to see the gulf here between the talk and actions. Brent is failing to deliver on just about every sensible approach to roads transport decarbonisation going. It will need to do far, far more and far faster than rely on TfL to deliver one short cycle route to enable active travel, or commercial providers to roll out freight mode shift. 

 

PROGRESS IN BRENT

Sylvia Gauthereau, of Brent Cycling Campaign said.

 

It’s disappointing to see the lack of meaningful action and lack of emergency over climate action in Brent. The tendency for the Council to over rely on everyone else, may it be TfL or community groups to lead, is more evidence that the political will is just not there despite ambitious, electoral promises. The fragmented and slow-paced approach is no longer suitable given how time sensitive tackling road decarbonisation is. The time to do something bold is now.

 

Four boroughs are failing to deliver any real ‘Climate Safe Streets’ for residents in their boroughs. In descending order of mode shift away from private motor vehicles pre-pandemic, they are:

 

1. Tower Hamlets
2. Bromley
3. Hillingdon
4. Bexley

 

Tower Hamlets is the only London borough where a higher proportion of journeys were being made using private motor vehicles before the pandemic than a decade ago (mode share rose by over 4%). The inner London borough has very low levels of car ownership, but did nothing to constrain car use pre-pandemic. And since the local elections, Tower Hamlets has elected a Mayor on a manifesto of ‘reopening roads’ by removing active travel and car restriction schemes.

 

The remaining boroughs

 

12 further boroughs are significantly behind on delivering schemes asked for by LCC’s ‘Climate Safe Streets’ campaign (beyond the already-named bottom four). Of these, the leaders of both Greenwich and Kingston Upon Thames councils both made full commitments to LCC’s campaign ‘asks’ prior to the local council elections but are thus far failing to deliver on those commitments. (Barking & Dagenham, Barnet, Brent, Croydon, Ealing, Hammersmith & Fulham, Harrow, Kensington & Chelsea, Redbridge and Sutton are all significantly failing to deliver on Climate Safe Streets schemes). 

 

LCC’s report provides specific recommendations to the leadership for each London borough to help them get on track delivering on roads transport emissions, against their climate emergency declarations (in London, only Bexley and Bromley appear to have not declared an ‘emergency’).

 

Mayoral delivery

 

As well as assessing the boroughs’ progress to delivering ‘Climate Safe Streets’, LCC’s report also assesses the  London Mayor’s progress.

 

The good news is the Mayor of London’s commitment to a ‘Vision Zero’ of eliminating serious and fatal collisions from London’s roads by 2041 is broadly on track – likely due to the roll-out of 20mph zones, active travel schemes and the Met Police’s increasing speed enforcement (the Met is due to enforce 1 million speeding offences annually by 2024). However, improvements to dangerous junctions remain slow to roll out, and the Mayor’s self-set target of making London ‘Net Zero’ on climate emissions by 2030, requiring a 27% cut in road km driven according to his team, is not on target. Vehicle km driven were rising pre-pandemic, private motor vehicle mode share was not coming down fast enough and patchy delivery by boroughs remains a serious issue.

 

LCC’s recommendations from the report are that the Mayor must accelerate his programme, particularly ensuring ULEZ expansion set for August is not delayed or weakened, get bolder on the schemes and roads he has direct powers over, and solve the current siloed working inside TfL in favour of schemes that deliver for buses and active travel. 

Simon Munk, Head of Campaigns, London Cycling Campaign

 

We need a lot more boroughs delivering ‘Climate Safe Streets’ like Hackney and Waltham Forest and fewer, like Tower Hamlets and Bromley, failing to deliver as our new report shows. Every London council and the Mayor must deliver more streets fit for cycling, walking and children playing, and faster, if we’re to help London escape the grip of car dependency and the cost of living crisis. Our new ‘One Year On, One Year To Go’ report highlights what needs to be done, for future generations, and to make London now a better city today.

 

 The full report can be read and downloaded HERE,

A dribble of information on Islamia Primary says the Governing Body and Brent Council are considering 'mitigation measures' over move No information on what they are mitigating!

 It has proved really difficult to find out what is going on regarding the proposed move of Islamia Primary School to the Strathcona site in Preston ward. The informal consultation finished in November and there has not been a whisper about the results leaving parents and the community in the dark. I submitted a Freedom of Information request to Brent Council and as you can see the response still gives no details of the results of the consultation but does say the Islamia  Governing Board and the Council are working togather to 'consider mitigations measures'. What they are mitigating remains a secret.

The Council also fails to answer the question about the opening date of Islamia on the new site. As statutory consultation has not yet started the original date, negotiated with the Yusuf Islam Foundation looks most unlikely as either complete demolition and new build, or partial refurbishment and a new block, were proposed for the site.

This is the formal response to the FoI:

Details of the outcome of the public consultation on the proposed move of Islamia Primary School that was completed in November 2022.

The informal consultation that ran until November 2022 was managed by the Governing Board of Islamia Primary School. The responses and the concerns raised have been considered by the Governing Board and the Governing Board has been working with the local authority to consider mitigation measures. At this point in time, the Governing Board has not made a decision to proceed to statutory consultation.
 
2. Update on when the school will move and operate on its new site
(previously proposed for September 2024).

Operation of Islamia Primary School from the proposed Strathcona site will depend on the timing and outcome of the statutory process to relocate the  school and the completion of required capital investment works, should a decision be made following any statutory consultation to proceed with the relocation.

3. Update on any statutory consultation.
Statutory Consultation will be managed by the Governing Board of Islamia Primary School. 

As well as the above FoI I  submitted an additional FoI to Islamia Primary School itself on May 11th, This is due to be answered by June 9th.

Please provide the following information:

1.The outcome of the consultation on the proposed move of Islamia Primary School to the Strathcona site to open in September 2024 and copies of the breakdown of the consultation result.

2. Copies of all correspondence with the Yusuf Islam Foundation and Brent Council regarding the eviction notice on the school and the subsequent search for alternative premises, survey/s of the Strathcona site and refurbishment/new build proposals.

3. Up to date information on the current pupil numbers in the school by year group.

4. Current pupil mobility rates by year group since September 2022.