Harrow Public Health chief issues warning as Covid rates increase more than 97% when last 7 days are compared with the previous 7

 

UK Health Security Agency Omicron cases in Brent amd Harrow as of December 13th

 

 FROM harrow.gov.uk

The Head of the UK Health Security Agency has called the Omicron variant “probably the most significant threat” since the start of the pandemic.

• Omicron is serious and spreading fast
• Vaccination is the best defence  - get your booster jab
• Hands, Face, Space and Ventilate remain vital
• Think carefully about Christmas plans

Omicron and Christmas by Carole Furlong, Harrow Director of Public Health

Though we're all very tired of Covid and hoping to see people this Christmas, we must take this new threat very seriously. Omicron is far more transmissible than anything we’ve seen before. 

More than 77,000 new cases were recorded in the UK yesterday, 16th December – the biggest increase in a single day. This record though is set to be broken repeatedly in the coming days and weeks, with the number of Covid cases nationwide currently doubling every couple of days. This level of infection and the potential absences from workplaces could have serious implications for the running of services.

The data for Harrow shows a more than 97% increase in cases when the last 7 days are compared with the previous 7. As Harrow’s Director of Public Health I’m very concerned about this. 

London is once again on the frontline. One of the things that makes the capital more vulnerable is the relatively low levels of vaccination. Across the UK more than 81% of the population have had their first two doses of vaccine. In London that drops to 61%, and in Harrow it’s 64%. 

That leaves a significant proportion of our community less protected and we will continue to encourage people to come forward for their first, second and booster jabs. On our YouTube channel you’ll find a number of videos from local health professionals and members of the public talking about the benefits of Covid vaccination. Most compelling are those that were unsure about vaccination but are now advocates for it. 

Omicron is very new and is still little understood. Early reports that it is less serious than other strains should be treated with caution. These ideas have been drawn from study of Omicron’s area of origin in southern Africa, where the population is much younger.

What we do know is that Omicron is very highly infectious. Vaccination is our most effective tool, but we must use it alongside simple precautions like handwashing, wearing of face coverings and social distancing. 

We all know by now the steps we can take to limit the spread of infection and while we don’t expect that there will be any formal lockdown type restrictions imposed in England before Christmas, I’m appealing to everyone to do all you can to protect yourself and your family and slow the spread of this dangerous new variant. 

Face coverings are now mandatory in most indoor settings and a newly introduced Covid pass, confirming vaccination status or a recent negative test, is now required for entry to large gatherings, such as concerts.

I agree with Dr Chris Whitty, England’s Chief Medical Officer, who recommends we carefully consider our planned social contact this festive period and prioritise the important occasions, or otherwise risk contracting Covid and being unable to meet those people we care about most. 

The implication of this advice is that a significant proportion of the population is expected to contract Omicron, as it becomes the dominant variant in the UK.

Before you mix with other people, get a negative lateral flow test and encourage others to do the same. If you’re indoors, think about ventilation. Most Covid transmission occurs through the air. Keeping the air circulating is an effective way to reduce potential build up of virus and limit its opportunities to spread.

Vaccination 

Our best defence against Omicron is vaccination. Vaccines both protect the person receiving them – they are less likely to be seriously ill if they contract the virus – but also reduces the risk of them passing it on to others. Omicron’s remarkable transmissibility pits us in a race against time – vaccinating on a huge scale at the same time as Omicron is moving through the population at such worrying speed. 

Eligibility for booster jabs has now been extended to include anyone aged 18 and over. 
We've been working closely with the NHS to help meet the huge demand for jabs that has been created. Together we're opening a number of vaccination clinics offering booster jabs and, for those that still need them, first and second doses.

If you had your second jab at least three months ago, you can book your booster now. Appointments are being added all the time to the national booking system. 

Walk in appointments are available over the weekend and Monday at Civic 5, the building to the right of the main Civic Centre. We’re ramping up capacity in this clinic, which can also be booked through the national system, and hope it will soon operate 7 days a week.

If you’re coming to this clinic without a booked appointment, please arrive between 9am and 6pm, be prepared for a long wait outdoors and plan accordingly. Walk in appointments are also available at some local pharmacies. See further information about these and other vaccine centres across North West London. There are also special pop-up sessions at Chelsea FC on Saturday and Wembley stadium on Sunday.

Testing – without symptoms

Please use lateral flow tests regularly and before mixing with others. Many people can have Covid and not show any symptoms and even though they feel fine, are still able to infect others. Testing regularly helps to find these hidden cases and break the chain of infection.

If you are a contact of someone with Covid-19, the NHS Test and Trace Team will inform you, and decide if you need to isolate. This decision will depend on several factors but critically you do not need to isolate if you are fully vaccinated, instead you will be asked to undertake daily lateral flow tests. Please note if you are told to isolate it is a legal requirement.

After some disruption, the online ordering of test kits is working again. We understand some local pharmacies are running low on stock. 16 pharmacies in Harrow offer assisted testing, where your test is processed for you onsite, and this service is still working well.

Testing – with symptoms

If you have symptoms of Covid – a fever, continuous cough or a change in your sense of taste or smell – you must stay at home and not have visitors and get a PCR test as soon as possible. 

Self-isolation is the most effective way of limiting your contact with others and minimising Covid’s opportunities to infect more people. We’ve been working with the NHS to help increase the number of PCR tests that can be offered in Harrow. The mobile testing unit outside the Civic Centre is now open 7 days a week and will operate throughout the Christmas break.
 

LETTER: Council and developer push out our small family company in Wembley with a 'take it or leave it' CPO offer

 

Dear Editor,

We own a company supplying packaging to the jewellery and gift trade, which has been successfully trading for over 65 years.

For many years we were happily situated in our own approximately 20,000sq ft warehouse and factory in Highbury, Islington.

Then one day in 2000 we were presented with a proposed Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) to make way for the new Emirates Arsenal stadium and luxury flats. Arsenal working together with Islington Council decided they needed our premises and from that time on they made our lives a living hell. Eventually the CPO came through in 2005 and the offer of compensation and help they were obliged to offer, was derisory and to finally get a settlement cost hundreds of thousands fighting in court. We knew we could not fight Arsenal, especially with the Emirates and Islington council behind them. All we wanted was a fair deal to help us move and to compensate us for all the troubles, which unfortunately we did not get. The grief and heartache that went together with this episode is unforgettable and definitely took years off the Directors’ lives.

However, in 2007 having no option and with limited funds, we moved to much smaller premises in Wembley, Middlesex. This time we were renting commercial offices and warehouse from old business friends who were downsizing their business. We had a good relationship with them for many years and were offered favourable terms to stay. We had a solid business plan in place based on our income and expenditure, taking inflation into account on a yearly basis and we were all happy and contented.

Imagine our surprise when in 2019/2020 we were once again presented with a CPO situation. This time it was CBRE / St George who working with the local Brent council had bought up huge tracts of land in Beresford Avenue to redevelop for housing.

This means that we are once again confronted with a situation where we are going to be evicted from our premises with no recourse to help or assistance from the local council or CBRE.

Whilst we have no argument with the council for trying to put more family housing in place, we really feel that we should be compensated for, and in a correct manner. This means that we require realistic financial help to move to suitable premises that fit our requirements, and so far, this does not appear forthcoming, and all our requests have been refused.

It therefore appears that, to our shock and disgust, we will have to move shortly from our current premises and fund most of the move ourselves. The amounts on offer are derisive and are nowhere near enough to move comfortably and set ourselves up once again.

Whilst it is incumbent by law for CBRE to find us alternative premises, very little suitable places have been offered to us. Furthermore, any comparable premises that we have found suitable, are higher in costs than we have been paying and continue to pay currently and are rejected out of hand as ‘being too expensive’.

When we enquired why the financial offer re moving did not include help to meet these ‘forced on us’ increased costs, like higher rents and rates etc, for similar size area, we were basically advised that either you take our offer or suffer in silence!

This we feel is extremely unfair and definitely not what we require or wish to hear.

Financial blackmail is sickeningly ugly, and we who are the ‘piggy in the middle’ have no say whatsoever.

We cannot believe that in the 21st Century – a private company in bed with local government can run roughshod over a small company, that has been trading for many years and that offers employment to local people, and they can just push us out with no real recompense.

We are currently at a standstill.

We have a really sinking feeling that this is going the way of our previous CPO with no one to address these venture capitalists who can run roughshod over people with absolutely no comeback.

Finer Packaging

Lilia House

14 Beresford Avenue

Wembley Middlesex

HA0 1YP

 

You have until 5pm today to comment on the redesignation of the Kilburn Neighbourhood Forum

 

 The not terribly clear Kilburn Neighbourhood Area map on the council website

 

Brent and Camden residents have until 5pm this afternoon to respond to the consultation on the re-designation of the Kilburn Neighbourhood Forum for another 5 years.  This will allow the Forum to go ahead with its Neighbourhood Plan.

South Kilburn was originally part of the Forum but was withdrawn after intervention of the South Kilburn Trust. This is rather puzzling given the number of planning issues on the estate covered in this blog, including open spaces and flooding concerns.

Redrawing of the area covered by the Forum is not part of this consultation.

From Brent Council Website LINK

Kilburn Neighbourhood Area and Forum

The Kilburn Neighbourhood Forum have applied to the London Boroughs of Brent and Camden to be formally re-designated as a neighbourhood forum. The Forum was first designated in 2016.  After five years in operation it must now re-apply to continue to be formally designated for a further five years. 

We are seeking views and comments on the application from residents and other interested stakeholders.

The application shows the Neighbourhood Area in which the Forum has applied to use their neighbourhood planning powers. Representations should consider whether the Kilburn Neighbourhood Forum are appropriate to be re-designated.

• Kilburn Neighbourhood Forum Application (.pdf, 945.2kB)
• Kilburn Neighbourhood Area Map (.pdf, 1.70MB)

To respond to the consultation please send your comments to: planningstrategy@brent.gov.uk or to Paul Lewin, Planning Policy Team Leader, Brent Civic Centre, Engineer’s Way, Wembley, HA9 0FJ. They must be received by the Council by 5pm on 17 December 2021.

Please also indicate if you wish to be notified of other London Borough of Brent planning policy consultations. Please note that we will make summaries of consultation responses received available on our website and potentially in our main office and libraries for public viewing.  We will not accept anonymous representations. We will show the name of any organisations that respond, but not those of individuals or any other personal information. Please see our privacy notice for more details.

The next steps

If both Councils approve the application, the Kilburn Neighbourhood Forum will be able to continue the preparation of a neighbourhood plan in their area. 

Once a neighbourhood plan has been through the usual statutory processes and is adopted, the policies contained in the plan will be used, alongside national policy, the London Plan and both boroughs’ planning policy documents, to make decisions on planning applications in the designated neighbourhood area.

Neasden Winter Festival Saturday Dec 18th from 3pm

 

1 Morland Gardens – why Brent should not award a contract

 

 

 Guest post from Philip Grant in personal capacity

 

Despite being given many good reasons why they should not go ahead with their proposed redevelopment of the locally listed Victorian villa at 1 Morland Gardens, the current home of the Brent Start adult education college, notice has appeared on the Council’s website of the intention to award a contract for the work.

 

I have responded to that by sending an open letter to Brent’s Strategic Director for Regeneration, who can authorise that award, and to the Lead Member for Education, who should be consulted before that decision is made. I have asked Martin to publish my open letter, so that Brent’s residents are aware of the reasons why that contract should not be awarded:-

To: Alan Lunt, Strategic Director (Regeneration)
      Cllr. Thomas Stephens (Lead Member for Education)   

       From Philp Grant

      (copy to Neil Martin, Schools Capital Programme Team)

 

This is an Open Letter

                                                                                                              16 December 2021

Dear Mr Lunt and Councillor Stephens,

 

Proposed award of a Design and Build contract for work at 1 Morland Gardens NW10

 

I note from Brent Council’s website that Mr Lunt will be requested to decide, on 4 January 2022, to approve the award of ‘a contract to enter into a Two Stage D&B JCT Contract’ in respect of the Council’s proposed development at 1 Morland Gardens, Stonebridge.

 

There are a number of reasons why no such contract should be entered into, at least until several outstanding matters have been resolved. I would set these out as follows:

 

1. Stopping-up of highway and/or footpath:

 

There has been previous correspondence, and Freedom of Information Act requests, about this issue, yet Brent Council has still not sought to obtain a stopping-up order for the highway or footpath which runs in front of 1 Morland Gardens. Unless or until such an order is obtained, the land which that right of way runs across cannot be built over or obstructed with hoardings around a construction site.

 

This was confirmed by Brent’s Development Management Manager in an FoI response of 25 May 2021, when he said:

 

‘An application to formally stop up the highway has not yet been received. This would need to be submitted and approved prior to any development taking place on the areas that are currently adopted highway. Until the stopping-up process has been completed under S247 of the Town & Country Act 1990, works will not be able to start on the development insofar as it affects highway land.’

 

As the proposed redevelopment at 1 Morland Gardens is dependent on that highway / footpath being available to be built over, it seems reckless to award a contract for that development until it is clear that it is legally permissible to do that.

 

2. Appropriation of Land for Planning Purposes:

 

As with 1 above, it does not appear that either of the two parcels of land required for the proposed redevelopment have been appropriated for planning purposes.

 

The land and buildings at 1 Morland Gardens itself are currently used for educational purposes. That may well need to be appropriated for a mixed-use development to take place on the site.

 

The land in front of 1 Morland Gardens, as well as the highway / footpath, is open space used for a community garden. Its trees and gardens (although the Council has allowed them to fall into some disrepair) still provide an area of peace for residents, shielded from the busy traffic of Hillside and Brentfield Road, and a haven for wildlife. In a time of climate emergency, they also help to deal with air pollution and CO2 emissions. 

 

Can you honestly say that this land is no longer required for those purposes? If not, it cannot be appropriated for planning purposes. And as the plans for which the Council received approval depend on building over that land, the redevelopment could not proceed without appropriation, so awarding a contract for that work would be pointless (and costly).

 

3. Legal pre-requisites:

 

Both the stopping-up and the appropriation are legal requirements before the Council’s plans can go ahead. I would remind Mr Lunt of what he wrote in an email to me on 2 June 2021:

 

‘I confirm that the demolition of “Altamira” will not take place until all necessary legal pre-requisites are in place.’

 

The demolition of the locally listed Victorian villa, originally “Altamira” and now the Brent Start college at 1 Morland Gardens, is required if the proposed new development is to be built. If that cannot be demolished (and as a heritage asset, Brent’s own adopted policies should mean that it is not demolished!), there is no sense in awarding a contract reliant on that demolition.

 

4. Effect of the proposed demolition on Climate:

It is now well established that demolition and rebuilding on the same site emits far more CO2 than simply refurbishing an existing building, and the difference between the two figures is very large. Brent Council, having declared a Climate Emergency, should not be embarking on projects which contribute more to the harmful effects of Climate Change than is necessary.

 

I have argued before, and still believe, that Brent Start would be better served by building a new college facility as part of another redevelopment (such as that at Unisys / Bridge Park). That would mean the college only has to move once, and 1 Morland Gardens could them be the subject of a sympathetic redevelopment for social housing, which retains the historic parts of “Altamira”, and only demolishes the later additions. 

 

As well as being better for the climate, Brent’s acceptance of my proposed option would free up the Twybridge Way site, so that Phase 2 of Brent Council’s new housing plans for Stonebridge (including family houses and the much-needed independent living flats) can go ahead, rather than delayed for years by being tied to your flawed Morland Gardens plans.

 

Again, entering into the proposed contract would commit Brent to the current scheme, or incur substantial costs in getting out of it.

 

5. Design and Build contract:

 

In the “Authority to Re-tender Report” last summer, this type of contract was described as follows:

 

‘With a two-stage D&B contract, the first stage is the Pre-Construction Services Agreement (PCSA). The PCSA will define the services that are required of the contractor during the pre-construction phase and is generally similar to a consultancy agreement. It will make clear the contractor is undertaking design work, the design liability and what will happen to this liability if they are not appointed for the second stage. If the contractor operates within the GMP and approved budget, the Council triggers the second stage by entering into the D&B Contract and the building works then commence.’

 

Why is it proposed that ‘the contractor is undertaking design work’ and ‘design liability’, when full planning permission was given for a detailed design by architects Curl la Tourelle Head? That design was given an award in September 2020. 

 

The approved and award-winning design would have a ‘cross-laminated timber structure’ (and be one of the tallest buildings in this country to use that method), with ‘innovative hybrid steel reinforcement’ supporting external cladding. If the contractor given the proposed D&B contract wishes to keep within Brent’s maximum price (“GMP”) for the scheme, there is a severe risk that they would cut corners, both in modifying the design and carrying out the building work. 

 

That appears to be what happened over another award-winning innovative design, for the 2009 development called Granville New Homes in South Kilburn. You are (or should be) well aware of the problems and additional costs to Brent Council which that has caused! Awarding the proposed D&B contract for 1 Morland Gardens could well lead to similar results, and you should reconsider the situation very carefully before doing so.

 

6. Water Main:

 

Although the Officer Report to Planning Committee glossed over this point, Thames Water pointed out that because the footprint of the proposed building would take it within 5 metres of major water mains along Hillside and Brentfield Road, construction should not take place. This was “dealt with” by including a condition (No. 44) in the formal planning consent:

 

‘No construction shall take place within 5m of the water main. Information detailing how the developer intends to divert the asset / align the development, so as to prevent the potential for damage to subsurface potable water infrastructure, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with Thames Water. Any construction must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved information. Unrestricted access must be available at all times for the maintenance and repair of the asset during and after the construction works.’

 

In other words, the water main under these roads, and at a very busy junction, must be “diverted” before any construction on the site can take place. Has this major work been done, or has Brent Council set aside the money for this work? If not, there is again a built-in delay before any construction could take place at 1 Morland Gardens. No contract should be awarded until that matter has been resolved.

 

I hope that you, Mr Lunt, and Cllr. Stephens (who should be consulted as Lead Member on this project), will consider the points I have raised very carefully, before reaching a decision on whether to award the proposed Design & Build contract for 1 Morland Gardens. 

 

If you feel that the reasons I have given, for not awarding the contract, should be ignored, I would be grateful if you would write to me to explain why. Thank you.

 

Best wishes,

Philip Grant.

 

YOU can appear at Wembley Stadium on Sunday - for a Covid-19 jab! GIVE COVID-19 THE BOOT! Details

 

Pfizer Vaccination bookings for Wembley Stadium pop up event Sunday 19th December

About this event

Pfizer vaccination event Wembley Stadium

You can choose a booking in an allocated time slot. If there are no tickets left, then we will also be allowing walk-ins ( but bookings are prioritized )

12-15 year olds: First dose ( must be accompanied by an adult )

16-17 year olds: First dose and second dose ( 12 weeks after first )

18+: First dose, second dose ( eight weeks after first ) and boosters ( 3 months after second dose)

 

TICKETS CLICK HERE

Bridge Park v Brent Council ends. Draft Order available in due course.

 I was unable to attend today because I had to impersonate a mythical person in connection with an imminent festival.

Thanks to an attendee who was able to provide this summary.

The hearing commenced at 10:30 with Katherine Holland, QC, for Brent Council summarising her final legal arguments begun yesterday.  Lord Justice Lewinson questioned her on the issues of the the deeds for the land being dated some 6 weeks after the transfer documents dated May 5^th 1982,  when the sale was executed.  Neither Katherine Holland,  or her assistant Matthew Smith were able to provide answers to points raised.

There were further discussions on whether the real estate was at Brent’s free disposal, on legalities related to the deeds and to the matter of charitable trust.

Peter Crampin, QC, for Stonebridge Community Trist ended the legal arguments with,

“The question still remains ….a fiduciary obligation…owed to the public in Brent being the beneficiaries of a charitable trust…..something for the community in Brent to achieve…very ambitious political objectives, which the GLC had in mind”.

 

Lord Justice Lewinson ended the hearing at 11:43.

 

“Thank you for your interesting submissions…a lot of public interest seen by the attendance of a number of participants following remotely”.

The draft Order will be available in due course.

BREAKING: DECISION DEFERRED: Friends of Woodcock Park voice flooding and ecological concerns over in-fill proposal on site of Lidding Road garages - Planning Committee 6pm tonight

BREAKING:  After a discussion which focused on  the  foul water surface water flooding danger - of the Lidding Road site and immense concern that Thames Water had not addressed the long-standing issue, the Planning Committee decided tonight to defer a decision on the planning application.

Committee members wanted assurances that the sewage pipes, descibed as 'broken, damaged and collapsing' by John Poole making representations on behalf of residents, would be repaired, replaced and upgraded, otherwise the new development would exacerbate the problem.

Thames Water had said that the system had capacity for the new development but councillors were sceptical and did not appear to be reassured by the statement. 

Some members also wanted a construction vehicle management plan give the nature of the local road,

 

 

The development site from planning report (outlined in red)

 

Satellite view

Wembley Matters has been been covering concerns over fluvial (river) flooding and surface water flooding in the borough in the wake of climate change. Local residents are usually better informed about the history of such events than planning officers, but this local knowledge is often dismissed and plans go ahead.

Tonight's Planning Committee will be discussing a Brent Council in-fill development at Lidding Road, Kenton,  which residents say will exacerbate flooding problems from the Wealdstone Brook and current sewage draining problems. Trees and some green space will also be lost according to objectors.

This is what Friends of Woodcock Park had to say:

 The site is totally unsuitable. It is in Flood risk 3 area. Flooding in this area is a problem as is water run off.

On the opposite side of the Brook the grounds of the Kenton Synagogue are constantly flooded by rainwater run off. This development will only increase the problem of rainwater run off.


Sewer pipes are shown running directly under the proposed development. Plot 5 has been designed with a manhole underneath it. This is contrary to Thames Water's policy of building over sewers. Thames sewers are constantly being blocked and require access to clear the problem.

Only yesterday  (September 28^th) work was being carried out to clear a blockage in this sewer which runs from Woodgrange Close across the Park to Brookfield Crescent. These are old sewers which are prone to collapse, which has happened several times within the park itself and at the end of Lidding Road. The ground at Lidding Road is now sinking because of these problems.

The Wealdstone Brook is blighted by sewage, due largely to the infrastructure of dual manholes. We are in constant discussions with Thames Water, but this has been an ongoing problem for decades and will not be completely eradicated until the sewage system is rebuilt. This area is also plagued by rats which run along the Wealdstone Brook and there is often a foul smell of sewage. Who would want to live near an open sewer, liable to flood, where you are unable to open your windows.

To site properties so close to the Wealdstone Brook is contrary to NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK AND PRACTICE GUIDANCE, Chapter 11, making effective use of the land, sets out how the planning system should promote use of land in meeting the need for homes and other uses, while safeguarding and improving the environment and ensuring safe and healthy living conditions. Councillors would be failing in their duty to provide safe and healthy living conditions.


The land at the end of Lidding Road is a greenfield site. maintained by Brent Parks department, at the entrance to Woodcock Park. The loss of green space in Brent, which is already short of green spaces, should not be permitted.


The properties are situated too close to the SINC site, also known as the Wealdstone Brook Wildlife corridor.

Bats: A significant amount of foraging activity was recorded around the dense scrub and scattered trees in the southern portion of the site, and some commuting over this area. In accordance with best practice guidance relating to lighting and biodiversity (Miles et al, 2018; Gunnell et al, 2012), It is essential that any new lighting should be carefully designed to minimise potential disturbance and fragmentation impacts on sensitive receptors, such as bat species. Examples of good practice include:

- Avoiding the installation of new lighting in proximity to key ecological features, such as hedgerows and woodland edges.


The parking spaces allocated next to the Wealdstone Brook will create light disturbance from the headlights of the cars. In addition what guarantees are there that residents of these properties don't add their own external security lighting.


Security is a big issue in this area. Anti-social behaviour continues to be problem in and around Woodcock Park, we have drug dealing and have even had a stabbing in the Park. The footpath between Lidding Road and Shaftesbury Avenue across the Wealdstone Brook needs to have clear sight lines. The area should be kept open, with space either side of the footpath. The development should not go right up to the footpath.

 

Visualisation next to Wealdstone Brook

The officers report LINK  argues that the disbenefits are outweighed  by the benefit of supplying 8 housing units, 5 of which are family sized at London Affordable Rent and that the plans will actually improve drainage and mitigate the risk of flooding. Some failures to meet amenity space guidelines are said to be made up for by the proximity of Woodcock Park.

On the sewer over-load issue  the report airily hands over responsibility to Thames Water:

Concerns have been raised that the development would be impacted by on increase these issues. The local sewers are owned and maintained by Thames Water and as such Thames Water is responsible for the maintenance of this system.

 This is a common feature in many planning applications. 

 

LIVESTREAM 6pm HERE