Islamia Primary parents petition for the school to be allocated the planned 2 form entry South Kilburn school site

Following the unsuccessful but hard fought campaign to keep the Roe Green Strathcona site open LINK, including suggestions for additional educational use, there was speculation about the future use of the site.  Recently Islamia Primary parents were told  it would be offered to Islamia, a voluntary aided school which is due to leave its present Queen's Park site and requires larger accommodation to meet a strong demand for places.

Islamia parents have launched a petition to have the new two form entry primary school planned for South Kilburn to them, citing low pupils numbers at Carlton Vale Infants and Kilburn Park Juniors as not justifying their occupation of the site.   They argue that Strathcona in Kingsbury is too far away from Islamia's present site in Queen's Park and the move and travel involved will impact on less well-off families.

Brent Council will point to an anticipated increase in pupil numbers in the future as the redevelopment of the South Kilburn estate continues. as justifying allocation to Carlton Vale and Kilburn Park. It would be an estate school serving the whole local community and minimise the need to travel, thus addressing climate emergency goals.

This is the petition LINK:

We the undersigned petition the council to Allocate the brand new 2FE school (that will be built as part of South Kilburn's regeneration area) to Islamia Primary School. There is no shortage of mainstream primary school places in the area, most primary schools in the area are operating well below capacity. However, Islamia is oversubscribed and needs a permanent new building to house its 420 children.

Islamia Primary School (established in 1983) is a two form entry faith based voluntary-aided school situated in Queen's Park, North West London.

Islamia Primary school's children have been served with an eviction notice from the Yusuf Islam Foundation. The school is at risk of closing down if a new site is not found soon.

Islamia's parents feel extremely anxious and have already outlined how the current proposal to use the former Roe Green Strathcona school site (which is over 6 miles away from the school's current location) to house Islamia's children is highly unsuitable, unaffordable, unsafe and impractical for current families. It will sadly leave behind the most disadvantaged and vulnerable families.

Brent Council has informed Islamia families that there are no options at the moment due to the shortage of land in the area.

Nevertheless, the council is in the process of delivering a brand new 2 Form Entry school as part of the current regeneration scheme in South Kilburn.

The future school is currently earmarked for Carlton Vale infants school and Kilburn Park school.Government data shows that these split site 2FE schools are currently operating well below their full capacity:

Kilburn Park ( NW6) currently has 110 pupils enrolled although it can accommodate 240 and Carlton Vale (NW6) has a capacity of 230 spaces, currently only 78 of those are filled.

Moreover, most neighbouring Brent schools are also operating well below their full capacity and can easily accommodate children from the demolished schools.

On the other hand, Islamia is a heavily oversubscribed and popular faith school and the hardest primary school to get into in Brent. There are currently 420 pupils enrolled and the school also has to manage a long waiting list.

Islamia is the only state funded Muslim denomination school in the area therefore, if the school closes down, this will have a detrimental impact on the lives of the Muslim children currently attending.

For these reasons, it is utterly incomprehensible why Islamia, an oversubscribed Brent school is not being considered for the new school.

Please secure the future of Islamia

Started by: Jamad Guled

This ePetition runs from 07/07/2022 to 18/08/2022.

395 people have signed this ePetition.

 

Historic High Court ruling finds UK government’s climate strategy ‘unlawful’

In a landmark victory for climate justice that comes as the UK faces its hottest day on record, the High Court has ruled that the government’s Net Zero Strategy breaches the Climate Change Act.

 

The three legal challenges brought by Friends of the Earth, ClientEarth, Good Law Project and environmental campaigner Jo Wheatley, were heard together at the Royal Courts of Justice in June.

 

In a judgment published today – amid the Met Office’s first ever red alert for extreme heat – Mr Justice Holgate finds that the Net Zero Strategy, which sets out plans to decarbonise the economy, doesn’t meet the government’s obligations under the Climate Change Act to produce detailed climate policies that show how the UK’s legally-binding carbon budgets will be met. 

 

It also finds that parliament and the public were effectively kept in the dark about a shortfall in meeting a key target to cut emissions.

 

The ruling states that Greg Hands, the minister for business, energy and industrial strategy, who was responsible for signing off the Net Zero Strategy, didn’t have the legally required information on how carbon budgets would be met. However, he nevertheless approved the strategy.

 

Now that it’s been found unlawful, the government will have to update its climate strategy to include a quantified account of how its policies will achieve climate targets, based on a realistic assessment of what it actually expects them to deliver. The updated strategy will have to be presented to parliament for scrutiny by MPs.

 

The refreshed plan should include sound policies that stand up to the scrutiny of the Climate Change Committee (CCC), which recently found that credible plans exist for just two fifths of the government’s required emissions reductions. The judgment strengthens the critical expert role of the committee by stating that their advice must be given “considerable weight”.

 

During the court proceedings, it emerged that behind-the-scenes calculations by civil servants to quantify the impact of emissions cuts from policies in the government’s Net Zero Strategy did not add up to the reductions necessary to meet the sixth carbon budget – the volume of greenhouse gases the UK can emit during the period 2033-37.

 

This 5% shortfall over the sixth carbon budget is significant in climate terms and totals around 75 million tonnes of CO₂e – equivalent to almost the total annual emissions from all car travel in the UK*. It’s also possible that a realistic estimate of the shortfall would be much greater than 5%, given concerns raised at the hearing about the robustness of the methodology used for the calculation. 

 

These figures were not shared with parliament, or made available for public scrutiny. The judgment stresses the importance of government transparency and the essential role of parliamentary accountability in efforts to tackle the climate crisis.

 

Friends of the Earth lawyer Katie de Kauwe said:

 

“We’re proud to have worked on this historic case. Taking strong action to cut carbon emissions is a win-win. Not only is it essential to preventing climate breakdown, but we can also tackle the cost of living crisis with cheap, renewable energy.

 

“This landmark ruling is a huge victory for climate justice and government transparency. It shows that the Climate Change Act is a piece of legislation which has teeth, and can, if necessary, be enforced through our court system if the government does not comply with its legal duties. 

 

“More than a decade ago, Friends of the Earth spearheaded the grassroots campaign that led to this vital piece of legislation. Today, we have strengthened its enforcement, which is so crucial to our country’s ability to tackle the climate crisis.”

 

Sam Hunter Jones, senior lawyer at ClientEarth, said: 

 

“This decision is a breakthrough moment in the fight against climate delay and inaction. It forces the Government to put in place climate plans that will actually address the crisis.

 

“The court has emphasised that the risks to delivery of the UK’s climate targets are “all- important” – the Government must now address those risks when it prepares a revised strategy that meets the requirements of the Climate Change Act. 

 

“This is also an opportunity to move further and faster away from the expensive fossil fuels that are adding to the crippling cost of living crisis people are facing.  

 

“The decision confirms that the government must show how its plans will deliver the carbon budget targets in full. 

 

“Its approach must also be realistic and based on what it actually expects its plans to achieve. And the Government must set out the emissions reductions expected from its individual policies so that the public and parliament can properly hold it to account. This is a huge win for climate justice and accountability.”

 

Jolyon Maugham, Director of Good Law Project said:

 

“The illegality of its flagship climate change strategy is a huge political embarrassment to the Government. The Net Zero target must be a road map to a sustainable future - not a lie we tell our children.  

 

“We are thrilled to have worked alongside our friends at ClientEarth and Friends of the Earth to deliver this landmark victory.”

 

 

LETTER: Windmill Court residents join others in pinpointing flaws in Brent Council's infill proposals

 

The site in context. Red rectangles are the development areas

 Brent Council's Key Plan

Dear Editor,

In your earlier article on controversies over Brent Council infill proposals, Common threads emerging as council tenants rebel over Brent's infill plans, you missed out Windmill Court on Shoot-Up Hill which is close to Watling Gardens.  We are one of the three in the Cooperation Agreement with Network Homes alongside Watling Gardens and Kilburn Square.

The Windmill Court application went before the planning committee on the same night as Watling Gardens.

One councillor objected to the application and one, Cllr Kennelly abstained on fire safety grounds (he’s no longer on the committee).

The head of planning, Mr Ansell, chose to ignore the legislative requirements under land use planning for fire safety and even directed the committee members that it was not a matter for them and could be dealt with at building control.(See video  below)

This is against the current fire safety requirements and a breach of the legislation on fire safety in high rise buildings that came into force on 1st August 2021. 

The legislation, Planning Gateway One, came from the Dame Judith Hackett recommendations to ensure that fire safety and access is dealt with at the earliest possible stage. 

Under Planning Gateway One Windmill Court tower block at 17 storeys with 120 households is a relevant building. The legislation requires a change in culture in that the existing building and the land around it has to be part of the planning process and taken into proper consideration regarding fire safety and access. This should be done at planning committee but Brent have clearly not incorporated the necessary change in culture to take proper account of the legislative requirements. 

You would be aware that planning would usually have been concerned only with what was being proposed and not the existing buildings and residents. I am unsure whether they deliberately chose to overlook the legislation on a proposal where the design concept being put forward is fundamentally flawed.

I noticed you picked up on the sale of some of the properties at Watling Gardens. Under the Mayor’s affordable housing this does allow for shared ownership to be included under the banner of affordable housing.

Windmill Court is financially unviable to the tune of millions and we did notice in an early Cabinet document where they included us along with Watling Gardens in a mention about increasing sales!

Whilst this is all being done under the banner of new council homes the chance is that they will be offloaded onto another housing organisation and a large number will be sold.

As for the affordable rent and local lettings policy. This is problematic for existing residents wanting to downsize or requiring a larger property. The council quite recently produced a document showing council rent’s for all sizes of homes with regards this year’s increase of 4.1%. 

 

When you compare this to the Mayors affordable housing rent benchmarks and include the service charge the differences are quite stark. Someone downsizing from a two bedroom property to a one bedroom property would be paying an extra £60 per week. Someone here at Windmill Court in a one bedroom flat with a child or children requiring a two bedroom flat would have an increase above an extra £60 a week and would lose having a separate kitchen and lounge. The option to consider staying in their one bedroom property with a kitchen that is large enough for a table and chairs and utilising the lounge as the parental bedroom would save them over £60 per week.

This is creating a two tier system on Brent estates where existing residents are having amenities removed to allow for new residents at higher rents being given what was previously shared communal space as private outdoor space as per GLA requirements.

We have had the same shoddy work with misrepresentations and misinformation and lack of communication. The submitted documents for planning also have misrepresentations and misinformation.

 

The submitted fire statement contains erroneous information and this has to be the most concerning. 

Our committee members have been researching every area including the council submitting the Lambeth Methodology Survey on available alternative parking spaces which includes 37 spaces on the A5 Shoot Up Hill that have 0% stress! That’s because they don’t exist! And listing CPZ’s in Camden as being available to Brent residents!

An anonymous consultant appears to have been paid  £43,340:00, mostly in £1,750:00 amounts, according to the Windmill Court submitted invoices.

I am attaching the video from the planning committee where fire safety is discussed. The first part with Mr Ansell explaining the change in legislation and stating this is a genuine serious concern then proceeding to direct members that it’s not a matter for them which is advice that is against the law. The second is Clr Kennelly expressing dissatisfaction with the reply and suggesting deferral of the application.

Yours sincerely,

A Concerned Windmill Court Resident

(Name supplied)

TfL 'strongly advise' not to travel on Monday and Tuesday unless essential

 We’re strongly encouraging customers not to travel on Monday 18 and Tuesday 19 July unless your travel is essential. Our services are likely to be impacted by the predicted extreme hot weather conditions and we expect delays, cancellations and short notice changes to all our services.

During periods of extreme hot weather:

• Rails, overhead power lines and signalling equipment may be affected
• We might need to introduce temporary speed restrictions on some services as a precaution, which may mean journeys take longer than usual
• Track temperature checks are regularly carried out across the Tube, DLR, Overground, Elizabeth line and Tram networks to ensure they remain safe and the track is not at risk of bending or buckling

We will work hard to keep as many services running as possible. If you must travel, please check before you travel and carry water with you. Don’t board a train or bus if you feel unwell. If you feel unwell, please get off at the next stop and contact a member of staff or speak to the bus driver. Where possible, consider retiming your journey to less busy times.
 
You can find more advice about coping in hot weather on the NHS website.

Brent youth are the champions - and they rock! Brent Makes Music 2022

 

 The Finale of Brent Makes Music 2022 takes the roof off

 Brent's young musicians and choirs returned after a covid forced absence to the Arena on Wednesday and dazzled the audience with an amazing display of musical virtuosity and an energy, if it could be tapped.  would end the current energy in an instant.

The music was as diverse as the participants and the overall them of  'There's a Place for Us' reflected the borough's values - there's a place for everyone in Brent.

Congratulations to Brent Music Service, teachers, parents and especially the children. This will be an evening that will stay in the memory of thousands throughout the borough.

Common threads emerging as Council tenants rebel over Brent's infill plans

 Newland Court, Wembley Park

Brent Council's project to use space on existing council estates to build new council homes is running into trouble from current tenants.  In a nutshell the council's commendable commitment to house people on the waiting list in council accommodation puts puts the backs up of existing residents  who feel patronised and treated with carelessness, if not disdain.  

Early on the building of 4 bungalows on existing car park and garage spaces encountered opposaition but is now nearing completion.  The saga of Kilburn Square has been frequently covered on Wembley Matters and more recently Rokesby Close, Watling Gardens, Clement Close and Newland Court have all provoked opposition.

There are several themes emerging across the borough. Claims include:

1. Consultation letters not delivered

2. Poor information, wrong information and lack of detail on the consultation letters

3. Consultation web portals that are difficult to access

4. Questions phrased  in  such a way as to provide the answers the council wnts

5. Insufficient time to respond to the consultation

6.  Loss of open space that was previously designed into estates by enlightened architects and planners that became essential during lockdown and loss of mature trees,

7. Estates picked out to cram in much needed affordable housing while the council encourages the building of unaffordable housing, often sold abroad, in other parts of the borough. 

8. The proposals are being made despite the council's lack of response to long-term issues on some of the estates.

Some residents feel that estates are being picked off one by one and suggest that those affected should get together to campaign on these themes.

 

This letter sent to Cllr Promise Knight and Barry Gardiner MP (Brent North) covers some of the issues and more:

OBJECTION LETTER AGAINST A NEW DEVELOPMENT AT INITIAL STAGE OF CONSULTATION IN NEWLAND COURT WEMBLEY HA9 9LZ 

 

I am a tenant living in Newland Court for the last 22 years. I OBJECT to this planned development going ahead at Newland Court in its entirety. I am aware that currently we are at the initial consultation stage of the planning. I am also aware that there will be a further consultation in September 2022. 

 

It is important that I express how this new development will affect residents. 

 

Whether we are tenants in Newland Court as well as adjacent Grendon Garden feel about these new development plans. Several residents feel insignificant at both locations because they did who not receive the Newsletter with the Feedback form when it was supposedly hand delivered to all. 

 

After making a call to Brent Council last week, I found out that the Newsletter was delivered to every household sometime around mid-June 2022. I can confirm I did not receive it. I found out about this after speaking with a neighbour in early July 2022 only to find out that we have to respond by the end of the day of the 12th July 2022. 

 

I was aware of some plans regarding improvements to the Newland Court area has been on the agenda for about by Brent Council for the past three years. However, I as well as other residents knew nothing about this plan until a few weeks ago. We have a very short time to consider the development plan with vague and misleading information provided on the Newsletter. The majority of residents do not see this plan as an improvement like me. It is important to take into account that all residents want a pleasant space. Brent Council could be prioritising the development needs for the existing residents. We will collectively resist any new development that would prejudice safety and the livelihood of our local community. 

 

I recently supported my neighbour Marc with getting a petition signed with residents who oppose this development plan and we asked residents in Newland Court if they got the Newsletter. We went door to door and spoke with many residents. We asked them if they were aware of the development plans and most people did not read it, or did not receive it. I think it is unreasonable to expect to get a realistic input or feedback from the majority of residents and for all of us to consider the information carefully. It is important for all of us that you should provide a more realistic plan. The full extent of the development including all the dimensions and how this will affect our day-to-day lives. We believe that this development will have a direct negative impact on all the community both short term and long term at Newland Court and Grendon Gardens. 

 

It would have been more appropriate if the development plan information had not been casually sent in a Newsletter; when there was a deadline for feedback of the 12th July 12.00 midnight 2022. It is only reasonable to expect this information to have been received via recorded delivery by each resident and leaseholder at Newland Court. Ideally, a reasonable amount of time such as 30 working days to be fair. This would give us more time to raise concerns individually. We should have been provided with links to easy to understand and access drawing; maybe both to scale and a 3D Plan to give clarity. 

 

At Newland Court, we had the impression that the garages were going to be knocked down to make more car parking spaces for the residents. For many years we have been aware of that, all the Garages have Asbestos on the roofs. It is more important to address the problem with Asbestos as well as the drainage in the grounds around and between the Garages. The drains haven’t been cleaned for many years and there are issues already with flooding. However, it makes perfect sense for Brent Council to demolish the existing Garages and make more parking spaces for the existing residents instead of building these 7 town houses planned. 

 

EXISTING MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLOOKED & IMPACT OF NEW DEVELOPMENT ON THE LOCAL RESIDENTS 

 

Brent Council has done nothing about tackling the ongoing problems with Fly tipping, lighting in communal areas, not enough refuse bins both general and recycling, no proper security gates at the entrance, no marked parking bays, no disabled parking bays; just to name a few safety concerns raised with Brent Council over at least the last 5 years. 

 

The gate for emergency access at one end, towards the end of by 55-60 Newland Court, which has been broken for at least 10 years, it has never been repaired or fixed. The padlock on the gate has been stolen or removed many times in the last few years; Whenever it has been reported to Brent Council, they still take up to 3 weeks to replace a lost or stolen padlock every time . This is supposed to be an emergency access but because it is adjacent to Forty Avenue, many drivers normally using the busy Forty Avenue have been using it as a short cut speeding down the road without a care in the world. This is dangerous especially as many families with young children live here and they play in the little greenspace by this road after school, weekends and in school holidays. This space is close to the road and we need Brent Council to consider the safety concerns we have as existing residents’; not ignore the safety concerns we have raised many times and then decide to erect 7 houses directly on top of us. 

 

This development plan will damage the character of our street. It will psychologically affect all the residents, local community as a whole and it is not in the public interest to proceed. In accordance with the new plan, Disabled and Older Person’s walking access will be restricted as well as Wheelchair user access to name just a few concerns. 

 

We have had significant problems with the Refuse bins are overfilled. There are no cameras to deter fly tipping and it is happening on a regular weekly basis. There are no consequences for fly-tippers and this has been going on for years. There are Refuse bins for general waste as well as Recycling but they are not enough for the 60 flats at Newland Court. At present, they are located between garages, some under the flats on the greenspace, and some in the designated area .The new plan shows only one designated space for the placing of the existing bins; which residents in that Block deem to be unacceptable. This simply is unrealistic and inconvenient, as the bins will not be able to fit in that small space .It looks like we will have lines of large bins right outside the blocks to ensure there are enough bins. We strongly believe this will be impractical, very unpleasant, and dangerous for children to have to play in the small green space left. Local Infrastructure, as well as the green space will be practically gone; especially if you erect a concrete jungle, looking play area for the children. This consideration in the development plan to entertain the new kids on the block; or do Brent Council think its compensation for taking the greenspace. The reason I bring this to your attention is because it t has never been a consideration in the past for us residents with kids in Newland Court. 

 

Brent Council has not considered the current issues with parking at all. There are no allocated spaces for the disabled residents or wheelchair users and not enough spaces for the current residents. The new plans show that there will be 11 parking spaces only .I am sure they will be pay and display too. How can this be a consideration for Brent council? when we currently have maybe 30 parking spaces and these are not enough for the residents now. Some Garages are in use for some residents to park their cars; this development plan will be detrimental to those needing access for emergency services, those residents who drive and park here as well as resident motorcyclists, where will they go? Where will delivery drivers park? Where and how will the Refuse Collection vehicles get through to the Refuse Bins when you are narrowing the current road plan? We have no dimensions to view in the space between the proposed development plan and the current layout. Many parking spaces will disappear along with Garages. Are there any safety considerations that Brent Council have identified for drivers? All drivers should be able to see any potential hazard in time to slow down or stop before reaching it. 

 

We have a reoccurring issue with parents picking up their children from the Ark Academy and they use our parking spaces, park their cars blocking the emergency exit. I have reported this to WING many times over the years and they do not do anything. This issue is between Mondays to Fridays. At weekends, residents cannot park at Newland Court because if it is not an event day parking is free. So it is FREE for anyone to park here and leave their car for whole day or all weekend .There are no consequences for them only the inconvenience for residents. What can we expect from the new plans that would not make this problem a lot worse? 

 

OUR VOICES MATTER 

 

Instead of addressing the problems, we currently have and listening to us, you are going ignore us and plan to try erect 7 houses to make it worse. How many of the 7 houses will be affordable homes? If you want to reach your target to build affordable homes then stop selling all the land to developers and use the land, you own only for affordable homes that would be fair. Brent Council have already sold enough land in Wembley to private developers. Wembley Park is a concrete jungle of new developments. Why it is that existing residents at Newland Court and Grendon Gardens have to pay the price for your greed? 

 

We have no idea about the dimensions of the planned new development. It will block light for us and for Grendon Gardens. We have come to know that the roots of the large trees will damage the new development because you will need to dig the foundation for the new development. You will have to cut the Trees down the middle at the back of Grendon Gardens because so many are leaning over to Newland Court. 

 

You destroyed the beautiful Tree on the Corner at Masons Court so why  are you providing us with misleading information .We know that you will be removing the Tree at the entrance of Newland Court on the Corner of Corringham Road. You will most likely destroy the smaller existing trees in our greenspace too. How does existing destroying existing Trees and then planting new trees feel justified to you. The new trees cannot replace the charisma of the existing trees by a long shot. 

 

The impact of the construction work alone will cause mayhem on the green area and the road. There is no indication of how long this construction will take and I know residents have a lot a great deal of concern about the disruption, noise, increased safety risk as well as the inconvenience of delivery vehicles and trades people increase. Disabled and Elder residents will not be able to walk freely or use most of the parking spaces as they will be taken up by the construction for a significant period of time most likely a few years.. This will be very disturbance to the residents and the local community; as access roads and footpaths will be restricted and narrowed during works. They will not wide enough for residents who use a wheelchair , mobility scooter or a pushchair .The lack of outdoor space will have an impact on wellbeing and mental health of the local residents. 

 

There will be a significant Loss of privacy for all the residents affected. This has not been a consideration in this new development plan by Brent Council. I strongly believe the planning of the new 7. houses proposed at Newland Court with the windows that will not be able to open will cause problems of natural lighting in the new houses and a deficit in our natural lighting because these houses will block the natural light. 

 

WE DO NOT HAVE ALL THE FACTS IN THE PLANS FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT I would like to draw your attention to the following

5.1 Privacy and amenity Development should ensure a good level of privacy inside buildings and within private outdoor space. Directly facing habitable room windows will normally require a minimum separation distance of 18m, except where the existing character of the area varies from this. A distance of 9m should be kept between gardens and habitable rooms or balconies. Reduced distances between new frontages may be acceptable subject to consideration of overlooking and privacy as well as high quality design and solutions, which can sometimes mitigate impacts and allow for efficient use of land. For sites within an existing street scene, the distance between front elevations should normally be determined by the character of road widths or setbacks from roads in the area. Windows may be designed to direct views in certain ways and to avoid overlooking in other directions.

https://legacy.brent.gov.uk/media/16411795/brent-design-guide-spd1-nov-2018.pdf

 

We all believe that it is only fair that Brent Council provide us with all the answers to the points myself and other residents at Newland Court and Grendon Gardens have raised. Also provide us with an accurate scale plan with transparency on the dimensions in reference to the above for us to consider further. 

 

Yours faithfully. 

 

TONYA NIAZI

 

Rokesby Place  https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/05/brent-councils-infill-housing-plans.html

 

Gauntlett Court  https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/07/letter-lack-of-information-on-brent.html

 

Clement Close  https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/07/clement-close-residents-set-out-reasons.html

 

Newland Court https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/07/newland-court-residents-objection-to.html

 

Watling Gardens https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/06/watling-gardens-rushed-and-incorrect.html

 

Kilburn Square https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/02/kilburn-square-residents-present-900.html

 

Potential Compulsory Purchase Orders  https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/07/cabinet-to-approve-last-resort.html

 

Brent's "secret" Council Housing Projects: https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/08/brents-secret-council-housing-projects.html

 

Ditto - the Council's Response: https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/09/brents-secret-housing-projects-councils.html

 

Gauntlett Court, and Airspace explained: https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/10/brents-secret-council-housing-projects.html