Thames Water updates on Wealdstone Brook pollution

Thames Water have suppied Wembley Matters with the folloing updates on the polution of Wealdstone Brook

Wealdstone Brook Pollution Update

Date: 13 May 2022 Watercourse clean

·       Daily pump outs at key locations have been undertaken to minimise odour.

·       Rainfall on 11 May appears to have provided a flush of the surface water system

·       The clean-up team will be onsite across the weekend in expectation of warmer weather.

·       A programme for routine flushing frequency is being finalised with the contractor.

Investigations to find the source of the Pollution:

·       Following multiple CCTV and man sewer entries, several point sources of fatty/oil waste have been identified in the Forward Drive/Cullington Close area and we are undertaking the formal gathering of evidence to establish if these are linked to the current pollution to the Wealdstone Brook.

·       From next week we will be beginning investigations into a different catchment area (Greenhill/Harrow) that feeds the Becmead Road outfall to continue the investigation.

Next steps

·       Thames Water Operations to begin investigations in Harrow Greenhill catchment.

·       Identified sources of fat/oil waste to be addressed through Thames Water’s formal

investigation and enforcement processes.

·       Further flushing and cleaning of the brook is planned to minimise the odour.

Next update: Latest Tuesday 17 May

Date: 10 May 2022 Watercourse clean

·       A manual clean of the section from Becmead Avenue to Kenton Road was conducted across Friday 6 May – Sunday 8 May. The cleaning crew also extended the section past Kenton Road.

·       Periodic flushes of the brook by Thames Water tankers are being arranged to limit stagnation and reduce odour.

·       A further pump out of the brook by the Kenton Lane trash screens is being conducted on the afternoon of 10 May following an increase in odour reported.

Investigations to find the source of the Pollution:

·       Following tracing work last week, the investigation crew found evidence of two potential wastewater inputs suspected to be linked to this current pollution event within the proximity of the Forward Drive area of Wealdstone.

·       Additional Operational resources have been present onsite at this location 9 May and 10 May working to confirm if these sources are the cause.

·       One input is a misconnected commercial premises – details of this property have been passed to our commercial and trade enforcement teams to resolve as an urgent priority.

·       The second input found was evidence of a previous fat/foul discharge from an unmapped surface line directly into the culvert. The source of this discharge is yet to be established as it is originating from an unmapped line which slows the ability to trace the source.

Next steps

·       Thames Water Operations continuing to trace the unmapped line on 10 May for the source of the fat/foul waste discharge.

·       Further flushing and cleaning of the brook is planned to minimise the odour. Next update: Latest Friday 13 May

 

A glimmer of hope on Wealdstone Brook pollution?

 Yesterday Thames Water tweeted to Wealdstone Brook campaigners:

Our teams are currently working hard to clean the brook up. They believe they have found where the pollution is coming from and have plans to CCTV the line over this weekend to determine that the pollution is coming from where they suspect. The minute there are any more updates we will let you know.

There  have been a few false dawns in this saga so don't hold your breath (rather than your nose!)

 

Brent FoE hit the LDO with climate change message

 

From Brent Friends of the Earth

We had a great afternoon with the Brent FoE stall in the sunshine at the London Designer Outlet, near the Brent Civic Centre on Sunday. Some re-elected and newly elected councillors were among the volunteers running the event.

 

We engaged with adults and children, using our bunting flags to get pledges and demands from members of the public. The bunting was hung on the railings of the children's playground behind the stall, and later transferred to fencing around a building site in Neasden, where it would be seen by people at the nearby bus stop. 

 

We also had some lively contact with people using our 'fortune-teller' gizmos, which opened up, after people made their choices, to give some advice on what people could do about climate change. 

We handed out a lot of our newly printed 'Climate Crisis - What you can do' trifold leaflets.Click bottom right corner for full page version.

 

 

Deputation on Poverty Commission Housing Update – Brent finally responds!

 Guest post by Philip Grant in a personal capacity

 

Brent Council’s written response to my Deputation to the 9 March meeting of the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee was finally received on 9 May! 

 

Opening paragraph from the Housing section of the Poverty Commission Update report.

 

The response was meant to be from Cllr. Eleanor Southwood, then Lead Member for Housing, as my Deputation had sought proper scrutiny of the housing section in the Poverty Commission Update report to the 9 March meeting. The response has eventually come from a Council Officer, the Head of Affordable Housing and Partnerships.

 

The Brent Poverty Commission housing recommendation on which progress was meant to be reported.

 

Before you read the response below, I would invite you to read my Deputation of 9 March (it should not take more than five minutes – the time allowed for members of the public to present a deputation to a Council meeting).

 

This is the full text of the Brent Council written response, as sent to me on 9 May. I have simply added, in square brackets, the full name of two items where abbreviations were used:

 

‘In reply to the presentation made by Philip Grant to the Scrutiny Committee I wish to make the following comments on behalf of the Affordable Homes & Partnership Department.

 

Firstly, to answer the comments made on the 655 homes already delivered and their tenure, taking each development in the order Mr Grant listed them. 

 

•         Gloucester & Durham in South Kilburn forms part of the Council’s Regeneration Programme. The regeneration of South Kilburn is an ongoing total regeneration of the area as a whole and the homes are actually replacements homes for tenants whose homes where demolished to make way for the development. 

 

•         Knowles House was purpose built as temporary accommodation to meet homeless needs it is not for permanent Council Homes.

 

•         Grand Union in Alperton, includes 23 Shared Ownership and 92 London Affordable Rent 

 

The above is a snap shot of some of the ways the Council meets its statutory duties to provide a number of different homes and tenures to suit its different legal responsibilities. 

 

The Council received £65.6m in GLA [Greater London Authority] grant within its 2016 – 2021 programme to provide 817 homes at LAR [London Affordable Rent]. 

 

LAR was the recommended GLA rental advice for many years and provided by Brent in earlier developments, following research by Brent Council on level of rental affordability within the Borough, the decision taken by the Council was to provide as much Social rented housing as was possibly viable on all future developments. 

 

In 2021, following discussions with the GLA the council received £111m of GLA grant, this falls within the 2021 – 2028 programme and will allow the council to build 701 Social rented homes, which are currently in development and feasibility stages. 

 

Delivering social rented homes remains a major priority of the council.

 

However with raising build costs it may be the case that in the future to achieve as many Social rented homes as possible the Council will need look at other forms of tenure, to cross subsidise the social rented.’

 

I asked the Council Officer who sent this to me to confirm ‘that a copy of this response will be supplied to members of the new Resources & Public Realm Scrutiny Committee, once that has been appointed at the Council's Annual Meeting later this month, and before the next meeting of that Committee’. That has now been confirmed.

 

Please feel free to add any comments on this response below. These could include suggested points that members of the new Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee might like to raise, under matters arising from the minutes of the 9 March meeting (which have yet to be published).

Philip Grant.

UPDATED: Raw sewage problems in the Lexington Building, Wembley Park, purchased by Brent Council from Quintain for key worker housing

 

Brent Council borrowed up to £110.5m for a property deal with Quintain Ltd, the Wembley Park developers, a proportion of which was to purchase Lexington Building in Wembley Park for key worker housing. LINK

 

Overnight the new build hit Twitter with reports of sewage flooding the apartments.

@KwajoHousing this is how Brent council treats key and emergency workers! They’ve said this is not a ‘high alert’ and haven’t taken this seriously at all. Residents homes are being flooded with waste and faeces. Contaminating and pouring out into their bedrooms and communal hall pic.twitter.com/2R5Kz8GLPF

— thatBP (@specialkamik) May 11, 2022

 In a series of Tweets Brent Council responded today:

We are working urgently to fix the blocked drains at Lexington. The two affected flats and the communal areas will be deep cleaned, and we’ve found alternative accommodation for the tenant who has been directly affected in the meantime

 

As soon as we were alerted to the problem yesterday, we dispatched an engineer to make urgent repairs and to remove the blockage. Officers were on-site talking to residents all day and delivered letters to flats with advice about the communal areas that were affected.

 

When our engineers left yesterday, it appeared the issues had been resolved.

 

Overnight, residents reported another leak in the bathroom of a different flat – we dispatched emergency engineers as soon as possible, and officers have been at the building speaking to residents all morning.

 

We’re treating this matter very seriously, and are on hand to help anyone at Lexington who is affected

 

However, resident Emma Clark commented on the community website Next Door:

 

This issue was reported days ago and Brent left it till Monday just after we called LFB (London Fire Bridgea) because the 4th floor flooded the 3rd floor. They did a half job fixing the issue on Monday and the issue deteriorated so right now the 4th, 2nd, 1st and the ground floor is flooded. They didn't treat this as a matter of urgency till we called out the press. A child slept in the flat shown. Disabled residents and a disabled child are affected. Took Brent 3 days to start looking for an emergency accommodation. Initially they said it's not a health hazard. Not to mention they hoovered the carpets and called it a day. After being called out on social media they reevaluated and deemed it necessary to change the carpets an floor boards This morning we called emergency repairs and we been told to call back at 0800hrs 🤦🏻‍♀️ Many of us attempted to contact Dawn Butler with no luck. Cllr Iman came to our building to reassure us. https://www.itv.com/news/london/2022-05-11/blocked-toilet-sends-raw-sewage-pouring-through-council-flats

 

The purchase of Lexington Building  was made via i4B Holdings a Brent Council owned company. LINK 

 

i4B's brief for tenants:

 

About i4B Holdings

i4B is a company set up to help Brent Council provide affordable accommodation to reduce homelessness. The company's aim is to provide permanent, high quality housing with the hope that tenants enjoy their home year after year.

Expectations

What you can expect from us:

• Tenants of i4B can expect high quality homes at an affordable rent with a responsible landlord.
• Tenants can expect their properties to be repaired when issues arise.
• Tenants can expect their views and concerns to be listened to. If you have any concerns about your property, please contact your management agent.

What we expect from you:

• We expect tenants to report any repair needs and to provide access to workers to complete the repairs.
• We expect tenants to abide by the tenancy agreement, this includes respecting neighbours.
• We expect tenants to pay rent. If you are having difficulty with rent payments, please contact your management agents as early as possible.

This incident follows the Granville New Homes scandal on South Kilburn Estate when  the bill for remediation of homes purchased by Brent Council from Higgins Homes exceeded the purchase price. LINK

 

Harlesden Mass Children's Bike ride on SUNDAY

 

The 'big metal gate' is at Roundwood Park

 We will leave from Roundwood park at 11.30am.

The ride is part of 200 rides happening across 15 countries at the weekend.

We will ride slowly and adults will secure junctions to make sure that everyone can cross safely at their own pace. It's a great opportunity to meet people, get some fresh air and discover Paddington Rec if you haven't been there already.

65 out of 91 Brent estates consulted reject an estate parking scheme, 13 going ahead, 13 to be consulted further - full details

 In  October 2021 Brent Council ran a consultation on the parking arrangements on its council estates (off Street Car Parking) and had to extend the consultation because of the poor response rate, On April 5th I requested a copy of the outcome from the council having seen an image of a spreadsheet that was barely readable LINK.  Search 'estate parking' on this blog for more background including a 'call in'.

They turned this, without consultation into a Freedom of Information request, which sucecssfully kicked it into the long grass with the answer due the day after the Council Election. This was duly sent to me yesterday:

My Request:

Could you supply a spreadsheet for each Brent estate where parking proposals were made including:

The number of residents affected
The number of returns
The number for the suggested scheme
The number against the suggested scheme
The Council’s decision.

 

Brent Council response.

I have attached the information you requested, which is on the attached spreadsheet. 

It shows a breakdown of the results including the amount of properties affected, number of returns, numbers for people that voted for the scheme, numbers that voted against the scheme, undecided votes, numbers of unconfirmed votes, and the council decision based on a majority of those that voted. 

To gather the above information, we proactively reached out to residents to garner their feedback in three main ways:

 

To gather the above information, we proactively reached out to residents to garner their feedback in three main ways: 

• We posted consultation materials to all residents in the proposed areas, with a prepaid envelope to make it as easy as possible to complete the survey and send back their responses.
• A web link was included in the consultation material, so that residents had the option to go to a dedicated web site to complete their survey and respond to the consultation that way.
• Face to face meetings were arranged for residents at locations near their estates to discuss the consultation and respond to the survey.

In addition to the above, we also placed posters of the consultation in communal areas on all estates that were consulted. 

In acknowledgement of the fact that the initial response rate was low, we extended the consultation period by one month to allow time for further engagement.

Basing the decision on a simple majority of those who voted made little allowance for the low response rate. I have added a column to the spreadsheet giving the response rate per number of households consulted.

So for example in  Chichester Rd, Canterbury Court, Gorefield House, Alpha Hs, Cambridge Ct, out of 373 households consulted only 30 responded with 15 for a scheme, 14 against and 1 described as 'unconfirmed'. The majority of one was enough for the council to go ahead with a scheme. Response rate 8.4%.

In  Blake Court, Austin House, Dickens House out of 341 household only 14 responded 5 supported, 7 against and 2 unconfimed ,the Council decided not to have a scheme. Response rate 4.11%.

The largest number of household consulted in one go was Lansbury Cl/Owen Way/Henderson a total of 483. Only 41 responses were returned 8 for, and a more emphatic 33 against.  Response rate 8.04%

Most clusters of households were much smaller so in Petherton Court there were only 2 responses out of 9 and both in favour so a scheme goes ahead.

There may be a lot of people out there who do not know the outcome for their estate which may become a headache for the new crop of councillors.

Out of 91 consultations only 13 parking schemes will be implemented, 65 were rejected and 13 will be consulted on further.

Note Pilgrims Way/Summers Close  result was not provided by Brent and my request has been treated as a  further FOI request! Do let me know if your estate is not included.

Spreadsheet below. Green fill means parking scheme going ahead, yellow it is going for further consulattion, no fill scheme means scheme not going ahead.  All spellings are those of Brent Council. Response rate column has been added by me. Click bottom right-hand corner for full page version. 

The Buttocracy continues in Brent - albeit slightly dented

 

Labour won 86% of the 57 Council seats on just 51% of the votes last night adding to the case for a proportional voting system.

However, the opposition doubled with 5 Conservatives elected (Kenton 3 and Queensbury 2) and Paul Lorber performing a convincing 'Come Back Kid' routine for the Liberal Democrats in Sudbury where Cabiner member Thomas Stephens was defeated, to join Anton Georgiou and his running mate in Alperton.

There had been plenty of nail biting during the final stage of the count when 'mixed votes' are laboriously recorded on tally sheets. These are votes where people give a vote to different parties (sometimes one for each!) rather than vote a party slate.

The Liberal Democrats will now qualify as a party group and like the Conservatives be entitled to seats on some committees although Labour will still have a hefty majority.

Although winning none of the 16 wards in which it stood a single candidate the Greens performed quite strongly in line with the national picture becoming the second or third party in some wards with a total of 7,580 votes. Their highest percentage votes were in Brondesbury Park, Cricklewood and Mapesbury, Willesden Green, Kilburn and Queens Park.

Attention will now turn to the Labour AGM where the new Labour Group will elect the deputy leader and chairs of the two Scrutiny Committees. Cllr Butt will exercise his patronage in other positions including Cabinet and the important Planning Committee.

The Labour Group AGM takes place on Saturday May 14th. The recommendations then will be rubber-stamped at the Council AGM on May 18th (5pm)  along with committee membership, the leadership of the opposition groups and the installation of a new Mayor, widely tipped to be Cllr Tariq Dar.

Conservatives and Liberal Democrats will also be electing their new Group leaders.

Detailed results on a ward by ward basis can be found on the Brent Council website:  LINK