NEU responds to PHE England report /Chief Medical Officer comments on return to school

 Commenting on today's report by PHE England and the Chief Medical Officer's comments on the full return of schools and colleges, Kevin Courtney, Joint General Secretary, of the National Education Union, said: 

 

"The NEU agrees with the Chief Medical Officer about the benefits a return to full time education will have for children and young peoples education and well being. 

 

"We believe that it is vital that the Government must take every step it can both to allow this wider re-opening and to keep the R rate below 1.

 

"Today’s report by PHE England shows that there were only a small number of outbreaks in schools after the partial wider opening in June, but as the report itself acknowledges there are limitations on the generalisability of its findings - both because there was little data from secondary schools and because in primary schools much smaller ‘bubble” sizes were possible in the summer. 

 

"It is very important that such monitoring studies are maintained during the period of wider school opening.

 

"Schools and colleges are currently doing all they can to ensure their buildings are as COVID secure as possible, as well as dealing with the fallout from the exams fiasco.

 

"However school staff, parents and pupils are being sorely let down by Government because of a lack of a Plan B and of ensuring robust track trace and test is in place throughout the country. 

 

"We believe the Government is negligent in the extreme. 

 

"Schools and colleges need to know what should happen if an outbreak of the virus occurs in individual schools or more widely with either national, regional or local spikes. Government advice needs to cover the possible self-isolation of bubbles and, in extremis, moving to rotas or to more limited opening. It needs to cover advice to heads about the protections needed for staff in high risk categories if infection rates rise.

 

"Government should be employing more teachers and seeking extra teaching spaces to allow education to continue in a Covid secure manner if infections rise. This should include employment of student teachers who have finished their courses and not yet found jobs, as well as mobilisation of supply staff."

UPDATED - SCANDALOUS! Brent Council accused of colluding in L&Q's leaseholder exploitation and neglect on 'flagship' South Kilburn Estate new build

For some time now I have seen increasingly desperate messages on Twitter pleading to  Muhammed Butt, Brent Council and L&Q Homes to do something about the state of a new building on the much vaunted regenerated South Kilburn Estate.  The pleas have been ignored so I have offered Lucie Gutfreund, founder of Homeowners of L&Q,  a platform on which to make her case.

This is Lucie's guest post:

Bourne Place with unidentified black cladding

Buying my first home in 2013 was a joyous occasion for me. I worked hard to be finally able to afford a small one bedroom flat on a 25-year mortgage. I couldn’t wait to move into the brand new and shiny Bourne Place development in South Kilburn, phase 1 of the regeneration project partnership of Brent Council and housing association L&Q. The brochure was promising: cost-effective energy through communal heating system, green landscaped spaces and a positive picture of a mixed tenure development, residents on different incomes, with the social purpose of bringing communities together.

I was very naive.

Window Panels

The shininess of my new home was quickly overshadowed by the reality. It didn’t take long before my flat was flooded from the mains; the rubber seals completely decomposed within a couple of years; something my plumber said he had never seen before. I noticed creeping wetness and mould all around the external walls of our block. Since the first winter I have battled with intermittent hot water; at best I would get about 30 seconds of hot water between November and March. I was left without hot water and heating for the majority of the last winter and even through the first months of the pandemic.

Service charges seemed reasonable at the point of sale at £1,100 a year, even though still a bit high considering I am in a ground floor flat with my own entrance and receive no cleaning or day to day maintenance of my property by L&Q. I don’t have access to communal areas of the building. Now I am being asked to pay £2,200 a year, plus  an extra £1,000 to pay this autumn due to L&Q’s overspend last year. That’s £3,200 to pay yearly on top of my mortgage, utility bills and council tax. I can’t afford this. The costs are even more obscene if your flat’s access is via communal areas; £4200 with service charge and overspend combined for one bedroom flat.

Leaks

We receive appalling service for the charges we are asked to pay. Maintenance is sporadic and often non existent. At one point we had mushrooms growing in communal areas from unattended leaks. Lift cables rusted in a mere few years and had to be changed and we were charged for it. We had rodents and ant infestation. Most landscaping died; we received a revamp of the grounds last year upon my years long complaints but by now most has died off again. Residents’ complaints get ignored and property managers, who change yearly. are nowhere to be seen. Staff on call lines are rude and dismissive and treat us like pests. Random additional amounts of £s are sometimes taken from residents' bank accounts via direct debit.

'Landscaping' 2019

New builds are sold at a premium price due to an assurance that there will be no major costs because the new build warranty is there - usually for 10 years. For years, L&Q would dismiss our concerns about building defects. A property manager would go as far as stating that leaking balconies are architect’s design. When balcony doors started falling off door frames, we were told that we are breaching manufacturer’s guidelines by leaving the doors open - i.e. that we should not be using the doors for what they are intended for. And that L&Q are responsible only for the actual door but we, as homeowners, are responsible for the frame. Eventually it became clear that neither the housing association or the warranty provider have any intention to pay for the repair of defects or do everything possible to avoid submitting a claim to their warranty partners.

Rusted Balcony

Eventually one of our neighbours paid for a survey of her leaky balcony. It finally gave us the proof that there are defects. Another one and a half years on since an estate-wide building survey was finally arranged by L&Q, we are yet to see the numerous problems fixed. We are dismayed by how our blocks could have ever been approved on completion by inspectors.

The communal heating system, promising efficiency and green energy, is another lie we were sold. Under the leasehold system residents do not actually own any communal equipment. L&Q own our communal heating system which means that we have no consumer rights to choose the energy provider. L&Q set up their own in-house energy company, L&Q Energy, and they force onto us their monopoly energy provision at any rate they please and with no service or rate explanation agreement. Worse, they also choose the supplier of electricity for the boilers and the pump as well as for the maintenance. This year they served our three blocks a bill for £138,000 for electricity and maintenance combined. This means a cost of over £1,000 per flat for the privilege of simply being connected to a communal heating system every year.  Energy charges come on top.

Rising Damp in Communal Areas

With the unfolding cladding scandal following the Grenfell disaster, we were in for a big shock last year when we found out our properties are now nil-valued, unmortgageable and unsaleable and potentially a fire hazard. We do have cladding and unknown fire safety status of our insulation and balcony materials. L&Q refuse to conduct the necessary survey, saying our block is the least of their priority being a low-rise and that it can take years for them to survey and remediate all their buildings. The costs are likely to fall in our laps too as the building warranty does not cover cladding defects in buildings completed prior to the amended fire safety regulations in 2018. We despair, realising we have fallen into a trap. We were sold a home, a product which was faulty, and we are now facing being asked to pay to make our homes safe. The new build warranty coming with our new homes is not worth the paper it is written on. We are trapped until our homes are made safe and we pay tens of thousands of pounds for it.

This year we found out that we are also affected by the ground rent scandal. The Competition and Market Authority published their report on leasehold mis-sells and abuses, with one aspect being unjust increases in ground rents. Brent council, via L&Q, sold us a lease with RPI ground rent increases, which the CMA now calls an exploitative practice and a mis-sell. If, at some point in the future, our ground rent exceeds £1,000, our homes will legally turn into assured tenancies and will become unsaleable. We are pleased to hear that the CMA will be bringing prosecutions and we hope they will shed the light on social landlords and councils as well.

Brent Council, the mastermind behind the South Kilburn regeneration project, our freeholder of land and partner to L&Q, has expressed little interest in helping us. Muhammed Butt, Brent council leader, states that our cladding problems have nothing to do with the council. Despite the fact that the council collects £18,000 a year from leaseholders in the three blocks for ground rent, making Brent our landlord, Mr. Butt doesn’t think that compels the council to even speak up on behalf their residents.

Discoloured Exterior Brickwork

A local housing councillor who visited our estate last year dismissed the majority of our defects as ‘just fine’ because her father is a builder and therefore she knows. Even though we have a building survey saying otherwise. We were promised support but a year on we have not seen any real action from the council and staff responsible for Brent’s relationship with housing associations continue to change. When we went to press in 2019 to complain about the state of our estate, Brent council stated in response in Brent & Kilburn Times, that L&Q are their trusted partner and ‘provider of quality housing’ and hence dismissing anything our residents had reported.

Despite our misery, Mr. Butt is proud to display his name on the walls of our development on a plaque celebrating our estate as a milestone in South Kilburn regeneration project. He seems to care little that behind these walls live actual residents, people who were mis-sold costly and potentially unsafe leasehold tenancies; homes with numerous defects under false promises of high-quality homes based on the South Kilburn Regeneration Master Plan. For us, our homes have become a noose around our necks and a major source of unhappiness and mental anguish when dealing daily with the rogue and incompetent housing association, the social landlord and partner of Brent Council.

From Anna O'Neill (@Annareporting)

Some residents have said they would need to look for second jobs to be able to pay for the ever increasing costs of service charges and our communal heating system. I have given up two years of my life raising awareness and fighting for our homes to be fixed and maintained by L&Q. I am getting nowhere. Some days I am finding this extremely hard. And there is no sight of end to this abuse or having our homes finally fixed.

The joint landlords of our homes, the housing association L&Q and Brent Council, continue to ignore us and exploit us financially. After all, that is what the intention of the cross-subsidy model of social housing is: sell a leaseholder a dream of homeownership, make them a mere tenant with no rights or control over their homes and use them as cash cows to fund social housing, under a threat of forfeiting their home if they don’t pay. Leasehold is abuse and councils actively participate in this web of exploitation.

Lucie Gutfreund
founder of Homeowners of L&Q

Since this article was published on Saturday it has nee folowed up by Harrow Times and the Brent and Kilburn Times and other media outlets.

The issue regarding EWS1 forms has been taken up by the LBC radio station.  These are the forms that have to be completed to indicate a property is safe before the owner can sell.  Without the form the owner is effectively imprisoned in a worthless property. LINK

BBC Radio London interviewed Lucie on Thursday August 27th in a programme about the leasehold scandal.  The main segment begins at 19.56 https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08mx67k

The Welsh Harp Reservoir Story – Part 1

A new local history series from Philip Grant. 

If you were standing in Kingsbury around 20,000 years ago, you probably would have had cold feet! The area was just at the southern edge of the ice sheets that covered much of Britain during the last Ice Age. The glaciers had left a covering of gravel over the underlying clay, and as they receded, the melt-water formed rivers that flowed south into the Thames. Over the centuries, they cut valleys into the landscape. Two small rivers, the Dollis Brook and Silk Stream, combined to form the River Brent, and that is where our story begins.

1. Looking across the reservoir towards West Hendon, c.2010.

Although some of this series is based on my own research, I could not have written it without the knowledge I gained from my friend and fellow local historian, Geoffrey Hewlett, who sadly died last year. I assisted him, mainly on the illustrations side, with his 2011 book “Welsh Harp Reservoir Through Time”. I learned so much of interest from him about this beautiful area, at the heart of our borough, that I want to share with you during this difficult Covid-19 period. 

We don’t know when people first lived in this part of Brent, but they were definitely here by the late Bronze Age (around 1,000 to 600BC). There are old records of pottery funeral urns, dated by archaeologists to the Deveral Rimbury period, being uncovered during work near the edge of the reservoir. Unfortunately, these have disappeared, and the exact location of the find was not recorded. Geoffrey worked at Brent Council, and when he was asked to suggest a “historical” name for a new road near the reservoir, off of Birchen Grove, he wrote down Rimbury. A typist misread his joined-up writing, so Runbury Circle commemorates the find!

2. C.3rd/4th Oxfordshire red-slipped ware pieces, from Blackbird Farm, 2013. (Archaeology South East)

Moving on into the Iron Age, farmers from Celtic tribes (originally from Central Europe) came to the area, and the Brent is thought to have got its name from their goddess, Brigantia. The Celts were pushed further west by later immigrants, and the next hard evidence we have of people living here is of farms during the Roman period, on the more easily cultivated gravel soils at the top of Dollis Hill and Blackbird Hill. Finds of 3^rd/4^th century Roman pottery have been dug up at both sites, as well as a Roman coin of Constantius II (337-361) in the reservoir.

3. The River Brent valley between Kingsbury and Dollis Hill on the 1745 Rocque map. (Brent Archives)

I covered much of the Kingsbury area’s agricultural history in The Fryent Country Park Story, so I will jump forward to the 18^th century, and developments which would lead to “the Welsh Harp” being created. Britain’s “Industrial Revolution” had begun, with the need for much greater quantities of raw materials and manufactured goods to be moved about. Roads were in a poor state, and a horse could pull much more weight in a boat than on a cart (as well as more safely for fragile items like Staffordshire pottery). It was time for canals.

Many shorter canals had been built since the 1760s, but it was the Grand Junction Canal, from the Midlands to the Thames at Brentford, that provided the main link to London. Even while this was being built (1793-1800), an Act of Parliament in 1795, allowed the construction of a branch from it direct to Paddington, on the outskirts of London itself. A new brickworks at Alperton, using suitable clay from a local field, provided bricks for some of the bridges required, and the branch canal opened to the Paddington Basin in 1801.

 4. The opening of the canal branch to Paddington Basin, 1801. (Image from the London Metropolitan Archive)

Canals need to be topped up with water, and this was especially the case after the canal company started supplying piped water (pumped straight from the Basin!) to homes in the rapidly developing Paddington suburb. The River Brent was soon identified as a likely source, and although a reservoir was considered, the cheaper option of a “feeder” was constructed in 1810/11. This ran from a bend in the river at Kingsbury, through the parish of Willesden, to the canal at Lower Place. You can see its course on a map from that time, and it is still there today. 

5. The Feeder, in light blue, on an 1816 map of Willesden, and by Johnson Road, Stonebridge, c.2010.

Water supply again became a problem when the Regent’s Canal was opened in 1820, joining the Grand Junction branch at what is now known as Little Venice. A drought in 1833 gave the final push to plans for a 61-acre reservoir at Kingsbury, and by late 1834 the canal company had accepted a tender from William Hoof, to build the dam and associated works for the sum of £2,747 (and six shillings!). 

 6. Hoof's letter to the Regent's Canal Co. of October 1834, agreeing terms for constructing the reservoir.

Work on the reservoir’s construction must have been carried out quickly, because a plaque inside Old St Andrew’s Church, Kingsbury, records the deaths of four Sidebottom brothers ‘who were drowned in the reservoir near this church on the 14^th of August 1835’. The inquest found that Alexander, William and Edward accidentally drowned while bathing, and that Charles died ‘while attempting to save the lives of his three brothers’ - a tragic start to the reservoir’s story.

7. The Sidebottom brothers’ memorial in Old St. Andrew's Church, Kingsbury.

Even before the original work was finished, the canal company was buying more land, so that the dam could be raised and the reservoir extended. Their haste was to have severe consequences. The winter of 1840/41 was so cold that the ground was frozen to a depth of 20-30cm. The six days from 10 to 15 January saw heavy snow and rain, and water was seen overflowing the reservoir’s dam via a “waste weir”. On 16 January there was a rapid thaw, and at around midnight a fracture occurred in the dam wall.

There was already some flooding at Brentford, where the Grand Junction Canal and River Brent met the Thames, but just before 4am on Sunday 17 January 1841 ‘a great body of water’ hit the town, lifting boats out of the canal, which then caused damage to other boats and property as they were flung about by the flood. Three men died, and around twenty barges and their cargos were destroyed or seriously damaged.

 8. A February 1841 newspaper illustration, depicting the flood at Brentford (with some artistic licence!).

Records of the inquest on William Spruce, a 19-year old “barge boy”, show the lengths the coroner went to in order to establish the cause of the flood, and reason for his death. A surveyor representing the Regent’s Canal Company said that the Kingsbury dam ‘was of a proper strength’, and claimed that the water which escaped because of the fracture would not have reached Brentford before 5am, so could not have been responsible. The jurors decided that it was flood water from the reservoir that caused Spruce’s death. The canal company’s directors ordered urgent strengthening of the dam, but continued to resist any claims for compensation!

9. A season ticket for fishing on the reservoir in 1846.

The rebuilding of the dam was completed by early 1843, and a cottage was built near the Kingsbury end of it for a keeper. He would control the flow of any excess water from the reservoir, using sluice gates above the new waste weir, reached along a wooden walkway above the dam. After this, the Brent or Kingsbury Reservoir (both names appear to have been used) settled down to a few quiet years, when fishing and birdwatching were enjoyed there.

10. An 1850 watercolour: 'Reservoir of the Brent, Kingsbury, Middlesex.’ (Brent Archives online image 1710)

Water supply for both the Regent’s Canal from the docks at Limehouse, and the branch through Alperton and Willesden, soon became a problem again. In 1851, Parliament passed an Act allowing them to increase the height of the dam and create a much larger reservoir. More land was purchased, including a public house just north of the Brent Bridge on the Edgware Road. Its tenant was removed, and an embankment had to be built, to protect the pub from flooding.

11. A Regent's Canal Company boundary post from 1854, near the reservoir. (Photo by the late Len Snow)

New boundary posts (bearing the Prince of Wales crest of the former Prince Regent, later King George IV) were put in place around the company’s land, and by 1854 the reservoir had been filled to cover around 400 acres. As the former meadows became flooded, and the habitat changed, the bird life around the reservoir was studied by two keen naturalists living in Kingsbury, Frederick Bond and James Harting. The latter’s 1866 book, “Birds of Middlesex” has a wonderful frontispiece showing the reservoir.

12. The frontispiece to Harting's 1866 book "Birds of Middlesex". (From an original copy at Brent Archives)

Around 1858, a new tenant took over the public house near Brent Bridge, and we will look at his part in the reservoir’s story next weekend. I hope you will join me then.

Philip Grant.

Lorber backs Philip Grant on Altamira's heritage value

Former Brent Council leader and Liberal Democrat candidate for Brent North has written to Carolyn Downs, Brent Council CEO, in support of Philip Grant's position on the heritage value of 1 Morland Gardens ('Altamira'):

In 1955 the then Wembley Borough Council demolished the Barham Mansion within the grounds of Barham Park which had been the home to first the Copland sisters, and later General Crawford-Copland, and ultimately the Barham family, including Titus Barham.

The Coplands and Titus Barham were major benefactors to various projects and activities within the Wembley area including Wembley Hospital, St John's Church, etc etc.

The old Mansion had been used during the war and due to lack of money was neglected and in poor state of repair. Its loss is felt to this day.

Brent Council has clear policies about preserving its ever diminishing heritage assets. The old Willesden Library building was preserved on two occasions despite it being in the way of new developments.

The Villa at 1 Morland Gardens is clearly unique and will represent a massive loss of heritage buildings in Brent. The decision is both odd and also clearly in breach of the Council's own policy developed only a few years ago. What is the point of a heritage policy at all when it is ignored in a case like this.

As you know I have been critical of the planning process in Brent. Planning officers with little connection or history with Brent have far too much power and influence and Councillors are bullied into making decisions with threats of possible appeals. Officers move on no doubt claiming on their CV the achievements of getting decisions through - however damaging those decisions may be to our local area.

In this case the failure to properly follow the Council's heritage policy means that the decision should be suspended and reviewed. We simply cannot allow the destruction of the Brent's heritage in this way. 

I recall walking the desolation of this area in Stonebridge in the early 1970s when all the terraced houses had been demolished and replaced by the unsuitable Bison Wallframe buildings. The Villa survived that onslaught only to face demolition now when we claim that we have learned of the failed policies of 'slum' clearance.

We should not make the same mistake and we should not allow for another important of Brent's heritage building assets to be lost.

I trust that you will instigate an investigation and review before it is too late.

Muhammed Butt missing from council leaders' letter calling for an extension of Covid-19 evictions ban

Muhammed Butt has not signed the letter below despite the leaders of neighbouring Camden, Harrow and Ealing councils signing. Our other neighbour, Barnet, is of course Conservative led.  This letter comes after the Brent Poverty Commission's report emphasising housing as a major issue behind poverty in the borough.

I wonder why he hasn't signed....


Below is the full text of the letter sent to Robert Jenrick yesterday afternoon. (LINK)

Dear Robert Jenrick,

We are writing as the elected representatives of millions of people across England to press the urgent need for an extension to the ban on evictions, which is due to end on Sunday 23rd August. We welcomed the government’s decision to introduce the ban and to extend it. However, you have not used this time to prepare for what comes next.

In March, you promised “no renter who has lost income due to coronavirus will be forced out of their home, nor will any landlord face unmanageable debts.” However, you have so far not introduced the legislative changes and support for tenants that would make this a reality.

Before Covid, two thirds of private renting households, and eight in ten social rented households had no savings. In short, people renting their homes have little resilience to the shock of the Covid-19 crisis.

On top of this, renters are likely to be hardest hit. Compared to homeowners, renters are more likely to have seen their work status change significantly and income fall, according to research from Citizens Advice. Unfortunately, the government has done little to prevent people from falling into debt arrears during this crisis.

Shelter now estimates that nearly a quarter of a million people are at risk of eviction because of Covid economic impact. Already, while the ban is in place, an estimated 20,000 people have been made homeless during the pandemic. Once the ban is lifted, under current law, anyone with two month’s arrears can be automatically evicted through the courts.

As with the A Level, BTEC and GCSE results fiasco, the government has had several months’ notice of a growing crisis affecting thousands of people. We have long been warning that current policies will lead to a wave of evictions and homelessness this winter, potentially coinciding with a rise in COVID-19 infections. But this crisis is avoidable if you act quickly and decisively.

Together, as the elected representatives of millions of people across England, we are calling on you to urgently extend the ban on evictions, and make good on your promise, that no-one lose their home as a result of Covid.

We look forward to your response. We will work with the government constructively to support everyone affected by this situation.

Yours sincerely,

Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London
Steve Rotheram, Mayor of Liverpool City Region
Jamie Driscoll, Mayor of North of Tyne
Councillor Darren Rodwell, Leader of the Council, Barking & Dagenham
Councillor Ann Thomson, Leader of the Council, Barrow-in-Furness Borough Council
Councillor Gavin Callaghan, Leader of the Council, Basildon Borough Council
Councillor Ian Ward, Leader of the Council, Birmingham City Council
Councillor Susan Hinchcliffe, Leader of the Council, Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Mayor Marvin Rees, Executive Mayor, Bristol City Council
Councillor Timothy Swift, Leader of the Council, Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Councillor Georgia Gould, Leader of the Council, Camden Council
Councillor Sam Corcoran, Leader of the Council, Cheshire East Council
Councillor Louise Gittins, Leader of the Council, Cheshire West and Chester Council
Councillor Tricia Gilby, Leader of the Council, Chesterfield Borough Council
Councillor Alistair Bradley, Leader of the Council, Chorley District Council
Councillor Tom Beattie, Leader of the Council, Corby Borough Council
Councillor George Duggins, Leader of the Council, Coventry City Council
Councillor Tony Newman, Leader of the Council, Croydon Council
Councillor Simon Henig, Leader of the Council, Durham County Council
Councillor Julian Bell, Leader of the Council, Ealing Council
Councillor Martin Gannon, Leader of the Council, Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council
Councillor Danny Thorpe, Leader of the Council, Greenwich Council
Mayor Philip Glanville, Executive Mayor, Hackney Council
Councillor Mark Ingall, Leader of the Council, Harlow Council
Councillor Graham Henson, Leader of the Council, Harrow Council
Councillor Anthony McKeown, Leader of the Council, High Peak
Councillor Steve Curran, Leader of the Council, Hounslow Council
Councillor David Ellesmere, Leader of the Council, Ipswich Borough Council
Councillor Richard Watts, Leader of the Council, Islington Council
Councillor Shabir Pandor, Leader of the Council, Kirklees Council
Councillor Jack Hopkins, Leader of the Council, Lambeth Council
Councillor Erica Lewis, Leader of the Council, Lancaster City Council
Councillor Judith Blake, Leader of the Council, Leeds City Council
Mayor Damien Egan, Executive Mayor, Lewisham Council
Councillor Richard Metcalfe, Leader of the Council, Lincoln Council
Mayor Joe Anderson, Executive Mayor, Liverpool City Council
Councillor Hazel Simmons, Leader of the Council, Luton Borough Council
Sir Richard Leese, Leader of the Council, Manchester City Council
Councillor Peter Marland, Leader of the Council, Milton Keynes Council
Councillor Nick Forbes, Leader of the Council, Newcastle Upon Tyne Council
Mayor Rokhsana Fiaz, Executive Mayor, Newham Council
Councillor Sean Fielding, Leader of the Council, Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council
Councillor Susan Brown, Leader of the Council, Oxford City Council
Councillor Mohammed Iqbal, Leader of the Council, Pendle Borough Council
Councillor Tudor Evans, Leader of the Council, Plymouth City Council
Councillor Matthew Brown, Leader of the Council, Preston City Council
Councillor Jason Brock, Leader of the Council, Reading Borough Council
Councillor Allen Brett, Leader of the Council, Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Councillor Steve Siddons, Leader of the Council, Scarborough Borough Council
Councillor Ian Maher, Leader of the Council, Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council
Councillor Julie Dore, Leader of the Council, Sheffield City Council
Councillor James Swindlehurst, Leader of the Council, Slough Borough Council
Councillor Paul Foster, Leader of the Council, South Ribble Borough Council
Councillor Iain Malcolm, Leader of the Council, South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council
Councillor Chris Hammond, Leader of the Council, Southampton City Council
Councillor Ian Gilbert, Leader of the Council, Southend-on-Sea Borough Council
Councillor Peter John, Leader of the Council, Southwark Council
Councillor David Baines, Leader of the Council, St Helens Council
Councillor Sharon Taylor, Leader of the Council, Stevenage District Council
Councillor Bob Cook, Leader of the Council, Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council
Councillor Graeme Miller, Leader of the Council, Sunderland City Council
Councillor Roger Truelove, Leader of the Council, Swale Borough Council
Councillor Brenda Warrington, Leader of the Council, Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council
Councillor Shaun Davies, Leader of the Council, Telford & Wrekin Council
Councillor Rick Everitt, Leader of the Council, Thanet District Council
Mayor John Biggs, Executive Mayor, Tower Hamlets Borough Council
Councillor Denise Jeffrey, Leader of the Council, Wakefield Metropolitan District Council
Councillor Clare Coghill, Leader of the Council, Waltham Forest
Councillor David Molyneux, Leader of the Council, Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council
Councillor Simon Greaves, Leader of the Council, Bassetlaw District Council
Councillor Eamonn O’Brien, Leader of the Council, Bury Metropolitan Borough Council
Mayor Norma Redfearn, Executive Mayor, North Tyneside Council
Councillor Elise Wilson, Leader of the Council, Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Councillor Doina Cornell, Leader of the Council, Stroud District Council
Councillor Russ Bowden, Leader of the Council, Warrington Borough Council

New urban wildflower sowings boost biodiversity along Brent’s roads and on its roundabouts

Barham Park (last year)

Sudbury Court Drive (recently)

Fryent Roundabout (May 2020)

From Brent Council

Newly sown verges and roundabouts are bringing life and colour to Brent's roads this summer, as the borough's biodiversity-boosting Bee Corridor is expanded for 2020.

Last spring, wildflower-rich urban meadows were introduced in 22 of Brent's best-loved parks. Together, they formed a 'bee corridor' - the first of its kind in London - and prompted a rare species of butterfly to return to the capital.

By building on the programme to rewild parks and open spaces, the Council hopes to encourage even more visits from pollinating insects. This year, 13 verges and roundabouts have been transformed into urban oases for bees, butterflies, dragonflies and moths.

Studies have revealed a huge drop in the number of pollinating insects across the UK since the 1980s, prompted in part by the loss of wild habitats. More than 97% of the UK's wildflower meadows have disappeared since World War Two.

Cllr Krupa Sheth, Lead Member for Environment at Brent Council, said:

Many of us have been lucky enough to reconnect with nature during lockdown. Seeing the human impact of this pandemic has brought home just how fragile life is, and that's why it's so important that we protect pollinating insects. They play a crucial role in our food chain. I'm incredibly proud of our commitment to boost biodiversity in Brent, and hope our residents enjoy the new splashes of colour too.

Locations for the new wildflower areas are as follows:

• John Lyon Roundabout
• Sudbury Court Drive
• Kingsbury Roundabout
• Fryent Roundabout 
• Fryent Way 
• Bridgewater Road 
• Sudbury Green Junction with Bridgewater Road
• Sudbury Roundabout
• The Avenue Mayfields Green
• The Avenue Basing Green
• The Mall 
• Queensbury Station green
• Neasden Roundabout

'Over-whelming' high-density high-rise development plans published for B&Q Cricklewood site

It is surely no coincidence that some of the London Borough of Barnet's most controversial developments take place on the borders with neighbouring boroughs.  This was circulated by the NorthWestTwo Residents' Association yesterday:

Montreaux have made their planning application:
up to 1,100 residential units and 25 storeys on the B&Q site.

Barnet have published it as planning application ref 20/3564/OUT. You can see all the documents HERE  – including drawings, there are 131 documents, so it’s going to take a little time to find the key ones and read them. What’s clear right now is that it is as Montreaux described it before, an application for up to 1,100 residential units in blocks up to 25 storeys tall, with the tallest being closest to Cricklewood Lane.

It's extraordinarily high-density and it would overwhelm the centre of Cricklewood, looming not only above its nearest neighbours in Barnet but all the Brent and Camden residents of Cricklewood too, and stress facilities to breaking point.

Barnet’s planning portal is already open for objections HERE . The deadline is shown as 16 September 2020, just 28 days away, which is surprising. Barnet had previously announced that during lockdown such deadlines would be extended and that should be the case for such a massive application as this, so that’s being queried.

After that, Barnet’s planning officers will also examine the application, write a report for the planning committee and make recommendations. The report will look at how the application fits in with council policy, and will summarise and respond to the objections they’ve been sent. Some types of objections can be considered by the committee, some can’t – there’s a quick guide on our website at https://www.northwesttwo.org.uk/developments/making-objections/ .

The report will hardly mention petitions and won’t consider them. There were five petitions against the Waste Transfer Station at Geron Way up the Edgware Road, but the report didn’t even mention what they said (you can see it HERE ). So if you’ve signed a petition in the past, do make sure to make your own objection on the planning portal too!

We’ll put more in the newsletter and on our website https://www.northwesttwo.org.uk/ when we’ve had a chance to look at the details, but as the clock’s started ticking we wanted to let you know right away.
 

Montreaux's picture of the bottom part of their 25-storey block, not showing the 2-storey and 3-storey buildings under it on the other side of Cricklewood Lane.