Monday 10 January 2022

Officers recommend most Brent Emergency School Streets to be made permanent

When I attended Kingsbury Green Primary School in the 1950s I cannot remember any of my fellow pupils arriving by car. Now things are very different and with St Robert Southwell Primary now a close neighbour to Kingsbury Green I witnessed some chaotic and bad-tempered scenes with drivers at home time a few years ago when I left the premises after working with pupils in Fryent Country Park.

They are two of the schools involved in the Emergency School Streets schemes introduced partly as a result of the pandemic and the need for social distancing, as well as the overall health benefits of walking to school and reduction in traffic pollution.

In contrast to the Low Traffic Neighbourhood schemes the great majority of School Streets are recommended to be made permanent despite concerns about the impact of Covid related school staff absences impacting on supervision. The decision will be taken by Brent Cabinet on Monday January 17th.

There was consultation in the neighbourhood of the schools as well as with the parent body and detailed reviews published for each scheme.

Officers’ report:

Closing the road outside of a school to vehicles at pick up and drop off times helps make the route safer for pupils, promotes walking and cycling, and cuts the number of polluting cars contributing to local air pollution. It also helps the school community with social distancing as more pupils return to school.

Residents who live within the school street zone, blue-badge holders and emergency vehicles are exempt from restrictions.

An independent review has been conducted of the 30 emergency school streets schemes that have been operation since September 2020 to see if they should become a permanent arrangement or be removed.

Thank you to everyone that responded to the consultation, your feedback will be used in the decision making process. A report will be considered by the Councils Cabinet at the meeting on 17 January 2022.

 

 

Area

School

School Street locations

Recommendation

Brondesbury Park

Queens Park Community School (.pdf, 568.6kB)

Aylestone Ave between Chudleigh Road & Christchurch Ave. Christchurch Ave between Aylestone Ave & Brondesbury Park

Remove

 

Malorees Infant and Junior Schools (.pdf, 568.6kB)

Remove

Church End

Brentfield Primary (.pdf, 385.7kB)

Meadow Garth by Homefield Close

Make permanent

St Marys CoE Primary School (.pdf, 394.2kB)

Garnet Road j/w Mayo Rd

Make permanent

Cricklewood

Mora (.pdf, 396.9kB)

Mora Rd J/W Temple Rd & Wotton Rd/St Michael's Road

Make permanent

Our Lady of Grace Infants (.pdf, 417.0kB)

Dollis Hill Ave at A5 & Mount Road

Make permanent

Fryent

St Robert Southwell RC Primary (.pdf, 483.9kB)

Slough Lane

Make permanent

Harlesden

John Keble (.pdf, 585.3kB)

Crownhill Road Manor Park Rd to Harlesden Gdns

 

Make permanent

MapleWalk (.pdf, 585.3kB)

Make permanent

St Claudine's Catholic School for Girls (.pdf, 585.3kB)

Make permanent

Harlesden

Minet Ave j/w Acton Lane

Make permanent

Kensal Green

Princess Frederica CE VA Primary School (.pdf, 489.2kB)

Purves Road

Make permanent

Kensal Rise

Ark Franklin Primary Academy (.pdf, 414.7kB)

Kempe Road between Chamberlayne Road & Peploe Road

Make permanent

Kenton

Mount Stewart Infant & Junior school (.pdf, 486.3kB)

Mount Stewart Ave between Abercorn Gdns and Manning Gdns

Make permanent

 

Uxendon Primary School (.pdf, 577.6kB)

Greenway and Falcon Way

Make permanent

 

Claremont Primary School (.pdf, 577.6kB)

Make permanent

Kilburn

Christchurch (.pdf, 427.9kB)

Clarence Road, Willesden Lane & Torbay Road

Make permanent

Kingsbury

Kingsbury High School (.pdf, 394.6kB)

Bacon Lane from school to Roe Lane

Make permanent

 

Kingsbury Green Primary School (.pdf, 459.6kB)

Old Kenton Lane

Make permanent

Neasden

Northview (.pdf, 428.0kB)

Northview Cres j/w Southview

Make permanent

Wykeham

Annesley Close j/w Aboyne Road

Make permanent

Preston

Preston Park (.pdf, 483.2kB)

Preston Manor Upper School (.pdf, 464.8kB)

College Road Glendale Gdns & Thirlmere Gdns

 

Hollycroft Avenue j/w Highfield Avenue

Make permanent

 

Remove

Stonebridge

Stonebridge Primary (.pdf, 485.1kB)

Wesley Rd at Hillside

Make permanent

Our Lady of Lourdes (.pdf, 485.1kB)

Make permanent

Sudbury

Sudbury Primary School (.pdf, 439.4kB)

Perrin Road

Make permanent

Tokyngton

Elsley (.pdf, 478.7kB)

 

Oakington Manor Primary School (.pdf, 460.8kB)

Tokyngton Ave & Berkhamsted Ave at Gaddesden Ave

Oakington Manor Drive, Chippenham Avenue, Chalfont Avenue j/w Brent Way

Make permanent

 

Make permanent

Wembley

St Joseph Infants (.pdf, 542.9kB)

Waverley Ave j/w Harrow Road

Make permanent

St Joseph Juniors (.pdf, 542.9kB)

Chatsworth Ave j/w Harrow Road

Make permanent

Willesden

St Mary Magdalen’s Catholic Junior School (.pdf, 401.7kB)

Linacre at junction with Acland Road

Remove

Convent of J & M Infants (.pdf, 418.8kB)

Access Road to school between 19 & 25

Make permanent

St Joseph Primary (.pdf, 476.0kB)

Goodson Rd, Brownlow Rd & (Amendment: Northcote Rd between Brownlow Rd & Leopold Rd to be introduced also)

Make permanent

Leopold (.pdf, 412.9kB)

Hawkeshead Rd j/w Oldfield Rd & Roundwood Rd

Make permanent

 

 

UPDATE - case taken up by ward councillor. LETTER: A letter to Brent Council regarding my safety in the event of a serious fire in my high-rise block

 Dear Editor, 

How can I get Brent Housing Management to fix the self closing fire doors in my high-rise, William Dunbar House, South Kilburn.

At the Grenfell Inquiry, self closing fire doors that did not self close were identified as the second highest issue after unsafe cladding and as a result I have been emailing the council to fix 2 self closing doors that do not self close and which are part of my only fire escape in my high-rise, one on the 3rd floor & one on the 5th floor but after 3 years, they still have not been fixed and everyone's safety is under threat because of this.

I had a response to one of my emails from a housing officer who said "Fire Safety is not included in my job description" and he failed to pass it on to another officer, who did have Fire Safety in their job description.

After 3 years I decided to ask the London Fire Brigade to solve the issue but I was shocked by their reply, which said they were not responsible for Fire Safety in council blocks and they forwarded my email back to Brent Council who failed to take any action as usual.

Now I am asking Wembley Matters to get a response from Brent Council and get them to fix the 2 self closing door in my block.  However if there are at least 2 damaged doors in my block, I am sure there must be many more damaged doors throughout the rest of Brent's high-rise stock and the council should carry out an urgent inspection of all their high-rises to check to see if there are any other self closing fire doors that do not close.

I realise how important this issue is after the tragic fire in the Bronx that was caused by a non self closing door that stayed open, allowing fire and smoke to escape to the rest of the building, resulting in so many tragic deaths.

My fear is that my block could be next, unless Brent Housing fix all the damaged fire doors across the borough, or we could end up like Grenfell or yesterday's fire in the Bronx..  

Thank you Martin.
John Healy
 
UPDATE: Following publication of this letter on Wembley Matters a ward councillor has got in touch with John to take up the case.

Saturday 8 January 2022

'There's a sense the Council is not acknowledging its responsibility in the chaotic implementation and subsequent failure of this programme' - Brent Cycling Campaign on Healthy Neighbourhood schemes

 Reacting to the news that Brent Council officers are recommending the withdrawal of some of the Healthy Neighbourhood schemes in the borough, Brent Cycling Campaign said:

 

We are still reading through all the reports (19!), and we will have a better clarity on the overall picture soon. The first impression, however, is that there's a sense the Council is not acknowledging its responsibility in the chaotic implementation and subsequent failure of this programme. These interventions were never fully implemented, operational (beyond a couple of weeks in places) or even enforced but this has been completely omitted in the decision making process.  This is a rather large caveat to ignore.

As a result, it's difficult to draw meaningful, evidence led conclusions from them.  There also seems to be a stark difference, a contradiction even, between insights drawn from the engagement process and the result from quantitative data via the online consultation. Without knowing the unique responses numbers - as you could respond more than once, or what is the modal split among respondents, it is hard to tell whether or not the online consultation is genuinely representative of residents' views. This is an important point, given that seems to be the main basis on which officers made their recommendation. As evidence shows, after the introduction of such measures, people start thinking whether or not some driven trips could be made differently as more choices become available to them. Driving is no longer seen as the default option for short local trips and people feel supported by a new enabling environment. But this happens gradually so it is expected that they may not be agreeable at first because they are the ones asked to make the biggest change.

The schemes were meant, and indeed funded, to be live trials with engagement and modifications during the consultation period. Instead, rather than engage with the process, many councillors either remained silent, not communicating about the trials or vocally encouraged residents to petition against them straight from the start.

We have no doubt that future schemes will be proposed, because the council knows they will have to tackle the many negative impacts of a car-centric environment, as part of the response to the climate emergency they declared.  Residents want safe, healthy, quiet streets as well as clean air and low traffic neighbourhoods achieve that when done right alongside other supporting measures to enable people to switch to more sustainable modes of transport.

All in all, the way things have gone, this feels like a waste of public money, a waste of people's time and hopes for a better future.

 

 

 

Brent officers recommend removal of current Olive Road, Dollis Hill, Preston Area and Tokyngton and Wembley area Healthier Neighbourhood (LTN) schemes pending further consultation and engagement

 

*Lockable bollards removed from some restrictions following concerns raised by local Brent London Ambulance Service representatives.
** Restrictions removed to improve access to the Covid-19 testing centre on London Road.

 

The Brent Cabinet will consider a review of Brent Active Travel at its meeting on January 17th which includes Healthy Neighbourhood Schemes and School Street Schemes. The former have been controversial and School Streets less so.

Of the implemented Healthy Neighbour schemes officers recommend  removal of Oliver Road, Dollis Hill, Preston Area and Tokyngton and Wembley Central Area schemes with further consultation and engagement with residents. Future schemes will be subject to the availabilityof funding.

The report to Cabinet recognises the benefits of such schemes but also issues around the trials which are attributed to the way the Government introduced them. It iis admitted that public opinion is polarised on the policy and the generally low response rate to consultation noted:

The Healthy Neighbourhood schemes aim to change the way in which people travel by reducing motor traffic on residential streets, creating safer, quieter, cleaner, healthier and more pleasant neighbourhoods that encourage walking and cycling. The benefits of these schemes are well researched and documented and the Government (link) and TfL (link) continue to support measures that encourage active travel.

Furthermore;

 

· Air pollution shortens the lives of Londoners, leading to nearly 10,000 premature deaths each year. In Brent, it is currently estimated that air pollution directly causes200 deaths per year (Public Health England, 2016) in Brent and that it is a contributing factor to many more conditions.


· Information provided by TfL (2016/17–2018/19 average) show that 50% of households in Brent do not own a car and there would be a 60% increase in private car travel if car owners switched their public transport trips.


· Around 1.6 million, or 22%, of all car trips made by London residents every day are under 2km and could therefore be walked (2.7 million more could be cycled).


· Almost 55% of Brent’s adult population are overweight, 34% of whom are classified as obese with a chronic lack of physical activity. By 2050 levels of obesity are projected to reach 50% of the adult population in Brent. Similarly, the most recent figures show that over 28% of Brent children in reception are overweight, 14% of whom are classified as obese


· Reducing car journeys reduces the potential of injuries from road traffic collisions.

 

Healthy Neighbourhood schemes have proven to be controversial and representations were considered at an Extraordinary Meeting of Full Council on 16th October 2020, details of which are available on our website. 

 

Representations were received from residents from the Kilburn and Brondesbury and Queens Park areas following initial consultation with statutory stakeholders, (including the emergency services), for an Experimental Traffic Order, before notices were sent to residents in the area. The Council also received high numbers of objections and several petitions opposing the trial schemes.


At the Extraordinary Meeting of the Full Council in October 2020, it was recognised that these schemes can provide benefits in relation to climate change, air quality,health and that many of the concerns raised were in relation to the engagement and consultation process, which was as a result of the way in which central government had sought to introduce active trials.


Following the meeting of Full Council in October 2020, the decision was made to focus on community engagement prior to deciding on the implementation of the remaining five schemes. It should be noted for the Brondesbury and Queens Park and Kilburn areas, the major junction improvement works by Westminster City Council at Ladbroke Grove and Harrow Road may also have resulted in congestion in the area

 

Officers have also made the following recommendations and observations:


· The outcome of the consultation during the trial period indicates that none of the five Healthy Neighbourhood trial schemes were supported by the majority of local residents. From the responses from the community from within the Healthy Neighbourhood areas, between 70 and 91% of respondents opposed the current schemes.


· Generally, public opinion is polarised and officers have and continue to receive a high number of enquiries, particularly during the public engagement exercise and mainly from those that oppose the schemes.


· There is a misconception of a lack of consultation, this is a result of the way in which the Government sought to introduce active trials and limited TfL funding to deliver schemes at pace.


· There is also a lack of public understanding on the benefits of these schemes and the need to encourage active travel to improve air quality, health and wellbeing and respond to the climate and ecological emergency. The council will need to do more work on this.

 

· The effectiveness of these schemes have been negatively impacted by changes in circumstances with the spread of coronavirus and the need to remove physical measures so not to impede access to test and vaccination centres, and responses by the emergency services. The local London Ambulance Service raised specific concerns in relation to access and recommended the use of restrictions enforced by CCTV enforcement cameras so that they can gain access when needed. The effectiveness of the schemes was adversely affected by lockable bollards and plastic barriers being removed by unknown parties, and the lack of CCTV enforcement cameras.


· The community engagement exercise carried out by Living Streets provides some useful feedback on measures that may be successfully introduced in the future that would provide benefits to the area and potentially be supported by the community.


· Collaborative design with the community would help to engender public support for future measures, and these will need to be effective in preventing through traffic and trialled for a longer period, potentially 12 months. This would provide sufficient time for residents to experience the benefits and also for establishing the effect of the scheme in terms of monitoring changes to travel behaviour, traffic and congestion and the effects road safety and air quality.


· Officers have made recommendations for each of the five healthy Neighbourhood trial schemes in Appendix A. These are that; the Olive Road, Dollis Hill, Preston Road and Tokyngton and Wembley area schemes are removed, and the Stonebridge and Harlesden area scheme remains, with the exception of the restriction at Mordaunt Road, which will be removed.


· Officers will prepare a report for consideration by the Council’s Cabinet on the future approach to developing and delivering Healthy Neighbourhood schemes and a policy on the use of CCTV enforcement cameras and exemptions.


· The development and implementation of future schemes will depend on future funding being made available for that purpose

 

These are the officer comments and recommendations for each of the trial areas extracted Appendix A see the full Appendix for detail HERE.

Stonebridge and Harlesden Area

 

• There is a very low response for this area. Responses from roads where modal filters were installed (Lawrence Avenue, Mordaunt Road and Nicoll Road) a total of 22 responses were received. Of these 10 (45.5%) supported the scheme and 12 (54.5%) did not.
• The Mordaunt Road restriction is suspended / removed, this is also a route used by the LAS who raised concerns.
• The Nicholl Road closure remains but is not fully closed, as concerns have been raised by the LAS. Plans are developed for moving this to the junction of Craven Park Road. Consideration is given to a CCTV camera restriction with exemptions, subject to consultation and future funding. From the consultation responses 8 residents in the street supported the restrictions, two opposed.
• The Wembley to Willesden Healthy Streets Corridor would provide an opportunity for improved cycle infrastructure in the area over the next two years.
• It would not be feasible to restrict Lorries on the A404 Craven Park Road, but discussions will be held with TfL on lorry routes and signage to encourage alternative HGV routes.
• The Council will encourage play streets in the Borough and this area.
• There is further engagement with the community to develop ideas from the community engagement exercise, which would be subject to consultation and future funding

 

Preston Area

 

• There is very little support for the scheme overall.
• The restrictions are suspended / removed, Grasmere Avenue is also a route used by the LAS who raised concerns. From the consultation, 2 residents in Grasmere Avenue supported the scheme, 9 opposed. This will include the covering or removal of signage indicating restrictions, planters may remain in place and potentially be used should further
measures be introduced.
• One way systems are considered as an alternative means to restrict through traffic.
• Improvements to the Lulworth / Windermere roundabout, providing improved pedestrian and cycling facilities will be considered.
• There is further engagement with the community to develop ideas from the community engagement exercise, which would be subject to consultation and future funding

 

Tokyngton and Wembley Area

 

There was a very low response rate to the consultation on the Brent portal. For the Wembley and Tokyngton Hill scheme, there was a very low response rate of 4%.
• There is very little support for the scheme overall. Responses from roads where modal filters were installed (London Road and Tokyngton Avenue) a total of 18 responses were received. Of these 4 (22%) supported the scheme and 14 (78%) did not.
• Restrictions on Cecil Avenue and Rupert Avenue were removed early in the scheme to accommodate access to the London Road Covid testing centre

• The restriction on Tokington Avenue should be removed. Only 1 resident supported the restriction, 7 opposed.
• An inspection of the pavements in the area will be arranged and defects meeting the intervention level programmed for repair
• A traffic speed survey will be carried out and speed reduction measures considered, subject to prioritisation and funding.
• A Controlled Parking Zone would reduce non-local traffic and this would be considered if there is evidence of wider support
• There is further engagement with the community to develop ideas from the community engagement exercise, which would be subject to consultation and future funding

 

Olive Road Area

 

• There was a good response to both the consultation during the trail and the community engagement exercise.
• There is very little support for the scheme overall.
• There were several reports of lockable bollards being removed
• The introduction of ANPR Cameras, potentially with exemptions for residents may be supported.
• Restrictions should be suspended / removed, including the St Michaels Avenue restriction as from the consultation, 1 supported and 8 opposed the scheme.
• There is potential for a new scheme to be developed taking into consideration the feedback from community engagement.
• A 7.5t ‘access only’ restriction could be incorporated into the design of a new scheme.
• The School Street Scheme is subject to a separate evaluation and review process.
• There is further engagement with the community to develop ideas from the community engagement exercise, which would be subject to consultation and future funding

 

Dollis Hill Area

 

• There is very little support for the scheme overall
• Restrictions should be suspended / removed. From the consultation for Dollis Hill Avenue, 1 supported and 21 opposed, for Oxgate Gardens, 6 supported and 14 opposed and for Gladstone Park Gardens, 8 supported and 72 opposed. The London Ambulance Service also raised some concerns about the restriction in Gladstone Park Gardens, access should be retained and CCTV enforcement should be considered.
• Dollis Hill Lane could be incorporated into the scheme area, but this is a bus route and access would need to be provided. The implications of restricting traffic on a main route would need to be considered.
• Measures to reduce speeding will be considered, subject to surveys, consultation and funding
• School street measures for the Jewish school can be considered within the school streets programme.
• Safety outside our Lady of Lourdes will be considered, along with the request for a pedestrian crossing. This would be subject to consultation and funding.
• Cycle lanes on the A5 Edgware Road ad Dollis Hill Lane could be considered in the future if funding becomes available. The council have an extensive programme for introducing Cycle Hangars, 50 new Hangars will be implemented in the spring of 2022. Consideration will be given to the area if there is demand.

• There is further engagement with the community to develop ideas from the community engagement exercise, which would be subject to consultation and future funding

 FULL REPORTS CAN BE READ HERE

LINK to the Motion on Healthy Neighbourhood Schemes passed at extraordinary Meeting of Full Council in October 2020.