Children's activites at the Welsh Harp (Barnet end) starting on Sunday

 

 

I saw a lot of delighted children and parents leaving the Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre today after a school holiday session, One parent, said it was 'Awesome. I didn't even know the reservoir existed.'

The above events are at the other end of the Harp and go beyond the summer holiday. 

Sign up for these FREE nature workshops for kids!  Happening at the Welsh Harp. First event this Sunday! Sign up: http://tinyurl.com/WHtreekids

 

Join us for FOUR FREE summer workshops for children at the Welsh Harp (Brent Reservoir)! SIGN UP FOR EACH OF THE FOLLOWING WORKSHOPS!

 West Hendon Community Hub Marsh Drive London NW9 7QQ

1. Let's Create a Nature Diary

Date: August 13th, Time: 2-5pm

Calling all young adventurers and nature enthusiasts! In this immersive workshop, children aged 6-14 will get the chance to create their very own nature diaries. They will explore the Welsh Harp's diverse ecosystem, observe plants and animals, and document their findings through drawings, descriptions, and personal reflections. Encourage your child to connect with nature and nurture their artistic talents in this engaging and hands-on experience.

2. Forest Bathing & Believing

Date: August 19th, Time: 2-4pm

Immerse your child in the magic of nature and inspire their belief in the wonders of the natural world. Through mindful forest bathing techniques, storytelling, and imaginative activities, children aged 6-14 will experience the healing power of nature and discover their own connections to the environment. Join us for a unique workshop that nurtures belief, imagination, and a deep appreciation for the Welsh Harp's serene forest.

3. Litter Scavenger Hunt

Date: August 27th, Time: 2-4pm

Calling all eco-warriors! Join us for an exciting and educational litter scavenger hunt at the Welsh Harp. Children aged 6-14 will become environmental detectives, exploring the area and uncovering hidden litter in a fun and interactive way. They will learn about the impact of litter on our environment and participate in a rewarding cleanup activity. Let's empower our children to make a positive change and keep the Welsh Harp beautiful!

4. Exploring Nature through Imagination & Writing

Date: September 10th, Time: 2-4pm

Unleash your child's creativity and curiosity as we embark on a journey of exploring nature through imagination and writing. Through interactive activities and guided exercises, children aged 6-14 will learn to observe the natural world around them and use their imagination to create captivating stories inspired by the Welsh Harp's scenic beauty. Let their creativity flourish in this enchanting workshop!

The boring stuff:

• All children must be accompanied by a parent/guardian
• Please dress children sensibly and for outdoors - that means waterproof gear, sunscreen, sturdy shoes etc
• Please register for one or more of the workshops using the 'more options' tab under 'When and Where'.
• If you have any queries or have trouble registering please email friendsofwelshharp@gmail.com
  

Residents urged to write opposing threat to Welsh Harp SSSI

  Route of new bridge across north marsh wetlands as they were in 1990s (IMAGE: COOL OAK)

Ben Watt, founder of the the Cool Oak group (Welsh Harp) has written a disturbing blog post LINK about the proposed 200 metre long steel and concrete footbridge across the Welsh Harp from the private estate that has replaced the West Hendon estate. 

This goes straight through the north marsh threatening breeding species and may also endanger the area's  SSSI (Site of Special Scientic Interest Status).

Ben Watt points out that this undermines the Joint Vision for the Welsh Harp that Barnet Council and Brent Council and other agencies have recently signed.

Brent Parks Forum is urging everyone to write to Barnet Council along the lines below:

Email Councillor Alan Schneiderman, Cabinet Member for Environment & Climate Change for Barnet Council at cllr.a.schneiderman@barnet.gov.uk, and Anne Clarke,  London Assembly Member for Barnet and Camden at anne.clarke@london.gov.uk

Dear Cllr Schneiderman and Cllr Clarke,

We object to the new bridge due to be built over the North Marsh of the Welsh Harp by Barratt PLC. We understand Barnet Council has statutory powers under s.97 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to stop this. The Wildlife and Countryside Act of 1981 clearly states: "It is an offence to intentionally or recklessly destroy or damage the listed features of a SSSI or disturb its listed fauna, without reasonable excuse".

Unless the bridge is cancelled or the route altered, all of the signatories to the newly published Joint Vision for the Welsh Harp - which includes Barnet Council - will be party to the partial destruction of one of the oldest and most famous SSSIs in the UK.

Sign off with full address for your objections to be lodged with the Councillor.  Keep a record of the email. 

It is also important that Brent Council, as a signatory to the Joint Vision, also opposes the plans.

619 bed student towers in Wembley Park approved. Prospect House double towers in Stonebridge Park approved

 Student towers from Empire Court, North End Road

Consented towers are the blue images

Despite opposition from nearby residents who said they had not been consulted and would lose light and suffer ASB from students, the planning application for 619 bed student accomodation in Watking Road, Wembley Park, was passed by Brent Planning Committee last night. The committee were told there was demand for such accommodation from London colleges as well as the Football Business University in Wembley.  They were also told the provision would relieve pressure on other accommodation including HMOs  and would deliver the equivalent ot 247 units towards Brent's Housing target. Officers argued that students would support the local night-time and cultural economy.

 

A double tower on the site of Prospect House on the North Circular Road was also approved. The site is on a flood plain and framed by the River Brent and the Grand Union Canal, as well as the polluted North Circular Road.

The site has some dubious history worth reading in this article by Alison Hopkins. LINK

UPDATED: Decision making shambles on Mumbai Junction planning application leads to deferral

 

 

 

 

UPDATE

 This is the official one sentence Minute of the Deferral Decision:

On the basis that a majority of Members on the Committee had indicated they were minded to refuse the application, it was agreed to defer a final decision to a future Committee meeting in order to  enable a further report to be provided addressing the indicative reasons outlined as the basis for refusal, relating to affordable housing and viability, the height and design of the scheme  in relation the surrounding area and whether the development of the site had been optimised  in order to maximise the potential planning benefits.

After more than two hours of discussion, possibly a record, at the end of Brent's Planning Committee's consideration of the Mumbai Junction application, only Chair Matt Kelcher and Vice Chair Saqib Butt (Council Leader Muhammed Butt's brother) voted to approve the planning application. The other six councillors voted to reject the application.

Rejecting an application against the advice of planning officers is highly unusual and usually results in warnings of costly appeals to the Planning Inspectorate and the likelihood of losing the case if the reasons for rejection are not sustainable in planning terms.

This is what happened last night when the members of the committee who had voted against had difficulty in articulating their reasons for rejection. In one case their reasons were also in conflict, with most members against the bulk of the design while Cllr Liz Dixon wanted the building to be bigger, claiming that increased height could enable affordable housing to be included in the development.  It wasn't a conservation area so why not build higher? Tower Block Tatler watch out - you have a rival!

Councillors'  concerns over the lack of affordable housing in the development were answered by officers in terms of two viability reports that, despite different figures, claimed that the development would not be financially viable if affordable housing was in the mix. As it was the developer would only return a profit of 13% against an industry standard of 17.5%

Interventions by the Head of Planning and a senior planning officer stated that the reasons given for rejection would not be sufficient to win an appeal and could incur costs on the council, were accompanied by a suggestion that instead of rejecting the application, the committee should defer it. This was taken up with relief by a shaken Cllr Kelcher who sought to persuade his committee members that this would be the best approach: officers would return with a new report that would address some of their concerns at a subsequent meeting.

One by one the councillors who had voted against the application agreed to deferral, although it was hard to see what could be changed in order to satisfy the critics who were concerned about the impact of the develoment on the wellbeing of local residents (including traffic), the design being out of character with the local suburban area, the height (2 different views) and environmental concerns - as well as the lack of affordable housing.

There were several public speakers the first of whom was ex Labour and Conservative councillor Wilhelmina Mitchell-Murray who asked, 'Is Brent Council there for the residents or for the developer?'

Cllr Bajwa (Northwick Park) opposed the development citing environmental issues, access to parks, parking and traffic. There was nothing in the application for local people.

Cllr Collymore (Northwick Park) who was only supposed to answer questions from fellow councillors became very angry and seemed to suggest that the commitee were letting down the Labour Group (I can't be sure so please check the video above that begins with her intevention). She said that the way Cllr Kelcher was behaving meant that the decision would not go in favour of her residents who paid Council Tax.

Cllr Kennelly in his submission emphasised the importance of the hospitality industry and the continuation of a hospitality venture on the Mumbai Junction/John Lyon site. He said that the application offered nothing in terms of afforable housing which should be a council priority.

Cllr Lorber (Sudbury) said that the committee should have had a site meeting with residents. The developer had paid £2,000 for a pre-application meeting with committee members but residents were unable to speak to them on site. He spoke of 'devious moves'.  Cllr Kelcher reacted angrily saying that that the pre-application meeting was part of the normal process and said that the way Lorber had raised it was 'Trumpian'. He gave an assurance that the decision on the application would be madse in accordance with guidance.

The applicant, the owner of the Mumbai Junction, said it was a family run business that for various reasons including ageing and illness in the family, they had dcided to discontinue. Despite looking busy they had never had the current level of difficulty in running the business until now. He rejected Cllr Maurice's suggestion that he was using covid as an excuse.

Twitter was busy during the meeting with one person tweeting that information given on traffic accidents by officer was wrong: '12 single RTAs in the last 12 months. Road rage every day at the exit of the roundabout' and 'at least 3 vehicles in the last few years went straight on the roundabout (literally) and a lady died in an RTA 50 yards away. Officers do your job properly, speak to residents.'

Cllr Collymore's references to the Labour Group perhaps reveals misunderstanding. The Planning Committee is supposed to be non-political in its quasi-judicial role and members are not whipped. The Labour Group should play no part.

Or perhaps it is not a misunderstanding and just revealing.

UPDATE: APPROVED BY BRENT PLANNING COMMITTEE! Next to highly polluted road, on a flood plain, no nearby amenities - what's not to like about the Prospect House development?

 

 UPDATE: BRENT PLANNING COMMITTEE APPROVED THE APPLICATION

 

Councillors on Brent Planning Committee had no questions for Alperton Councillor Anton Georgiou after he gave this presentation on the Prospect House development at tonight's Brent Planning Committee.

I wonder why?

I am here to speak against the application for the development of Prospect House on the border of Alperton ward and on the edges of the North Circular.

 

I will start by re-iterating the palpable local anger at never-ending development in our area. Alperton has experienced more than its fair share of large development in recent years. Schemes that have been completed and those currently at building stage are already causing countless issues for local residents. Whether to do with limited investment in needed infrastructure, traffic congestion, pressures on parking provision.

 

This is not the first time I have said this at Planning Committee, but decisions being taken by this Council are driving people, many who have lived here for most, if not all of their lives, to move away from Brent.

 

I therefore plead with members of the Committee to keep this in mind when making the decision about the application in front of you today.

 

The possible approval of yet another large, unsightly tower block, in this instance 23-storeys high, would continue what seems to be Brent’s principal objective of trying to achieve its housing targets outlined the borough plan. Fitting as many units in as possible, without acknowledging their impact on the wider community.

 

Housing targets are important, particularly targets for the right type of housing.

 

We all recognise that London is experiencing a shortage of genuinely affordable homes for local people and importantly a distinct lack of Council homes for Council tenants. However, are the units being proposed at Prospect House and indeed others already approved in Alperton actually meeting that need? I and many others would argue no.

 

I would like to refer the Committee to the report paper which breaks down the tenure types in the proposed development.

 

Once again, we see a distinct lack of genuinely affordable units and a reliance on Shared Ownership units to beef up the supposed affordable units in the development.

 

A significant percentage of the supposed affordable units are made up of Shared Ownership units. I’m confused at this, as I had thought the Council had previously been quite clear that Shared Ownership is not an affordable housing model, and not something that should be lumped under the umbrella term ‘affordable’.

 

I would refer the Committee to comments made by Senior Council Officers and Councillors on this matter at a Scrutiny meeting in November 2022 and elsewhere.

 

By approving yet another development that incorporates Shared Ownership into the ‘affordable offer’ you will be legitimising this controversial housing model once again and in doing so trap potential shared owners into a housing scheme that will cause years of financial and mental misery.

 

Seeking to develop another large tower block on the edge of one of the busiest, polluted roads in Brent, is alarming and should alarm members of the Committee too.

 

The area around the North Circular is notorious for bad air quality.

 

This issue has become more and more prominent in recent months, given incoming changes to ULEZ. There is universal acceptance that air quality in London is poor. People in London die as a consequence of bad air quality. Therefore, why would this Committee seek to approve the development of dwellings in an unsuitable, polluted area like this?

 

What will the quality of life be for those who might consider living at the Prospect House development. What will the long-term impact on their health be?

 

A lack of required amenities in the vicinity of the proposed development is also a concern and something the current owners of Prospect House have highlighted as a reason for limited appeal from potential tenants. Quite frankly, it is in the middle of nowhere and access to shops and other amenities is very limited.

 

As is access to open green space, which I still believe is very important to enhance the quality of life for those who may choose to live there. A diagram in the plans show some distance would need to be travelled for a potential resident to get to the nearest green space. It is highlighted in the diagram that a child would need to be accompanied by a parent or carer to get to the nearest open space, in this case Heather Park. Will it now be the norm that young people will only have access to local green spaces in exceptional circumstances?

 

For any potential residents with a disability or mobility issues, where would the Committee suggest they do a food shop or pick up prescription medication?

 

Prospect House is also located within Flood Zone 3a and sits between the Grand Union Canal and close to the River Brent. Whilst the Flood Risk Assessment is considered to be acceptable, I continue to have concerns about the potential for flooding, particularly in light of recent major flooding very close to the site in Tokyngton Avenue. In recent weeks this has been flooded three times.

 

There is always a risk of flooding when buildings of this size and scale are built so close to a watercourse, coupled with it being in an area known to be vulnerable to flooding.

 

The fallout from flooding has a major impact on all residents in the area, I can only imagine the huge inconveniences we will have to put up with if indeed flooding occurs at this site in future. Are you confident that enough has been done to mitigate this potential risk?

 

I ask that the Committee reject this application based on all the points raised and in view of the unsuitability of this site for another large housing block.

 

I also request that the Committee take the time to visit Alperton in the near future to understand the concerns residents and I have long raised with you.

 

It is time that this Council pauses and takes stock of the negative impact developments like this one will have and have had in our area. If you do not, you will continue to drive lifelong residents out of their borough.

 

I think I know why...

 

Keep Kensal Green - Ladbroke Grove Sainsbury's development site contamination issue VIDEO

 

Brent Renters Picnic in Roundwood Park on Saturday August 12th 12 noon

 

Asylum seekers' protest outside Wembley's Holiday Inn: Homes not Hotels

 

 

When asylum seekers currently accommodated at the Holiday Inn, Wembley, protested yesterday they were joined in solidarity by local people sick of the anti-refugee propaganda put out by the Government and much of the press.

In a leaflet given out at the protest they said:

Homes Not Hotels: The vast majority of us have been waiting for over 9 months for a decision - many of us for two years and more. Imagine what it is like, waiting with daily anxiety and sleepless nights to know if you are safe. With no right to work, nutritionless food, a few pounds a week, guards at the door. Theses are more like prisons than hotels. But with no fixed sentence or check out time.

Compassion not Cruella: We know we're not the only group in need. Other people are using food banks, struggling with rents and health services. When our claims are processed that will be us too! But asylun seekers are being blamed for all the problem of this country. We hope that everyne can see that this is the divisive strategy of Home Secretary Suella Braveman.