Allegations of misleading information in Newland Court Planning Statement

Following what he sees as unsatisfactory answers to his questions at the Full Meeting of Brent Council, Marc Etukudo has returned to the fray with a comprehensive email to Brent planners citing what he alleges is misinformation in the Planning Statement prepared by Maddox Planning on behalf of Brent Council as the applicant. I have edited the email  to conform with editorial requirements - words in []:

The residents of both Newland Court and Grendon Gardens first found out of Brent Council's proposal to build 7 town houses by demolishing the garages in Newland Court for the very first time in late June 2022 and only gave us until 13th July 2022 to respond to the newsletter. Only because of this proposal has made me investigate the way LABOUR RUN BRENT COUNCIL operates and I am totally appalled with my findings. They tell their own residents across the borough what they think we want to hear and then do what they want to do when it suits them.

 

I have just been reading the Planning Statement from Maddox Planning dated September 2022 and have found out that these plans were first made in 2020 yet we only found out late June 2022.

 

On page 9 Community Engagement 2.6 it states.....

 

'The Community Communications Partnership, acting on behalf of the London Borough of Brent, carried out a communication consultation programme. A newsletter that included details of the proposed development was delivered to neighbours of the site. The newsletter was accompanied by a feedback form for residents to complete if unable to access the internet. Alongside the newsletter an online consultation was created on Brent Council’s Public Participation Platform (https://haveyoursay.brent.gov.uk) that hosted a PDF version of the newsletter that was delivered and the feedback form as a survey to be completed. Additionally, a virtual exhibition video was included on the online consultation that provided residents with a narrated video tour of the site and plans. The consultation has received 42 responses with the majority if residents expressing support for the proposed development'  

 

[Misinformation]. The communication consultation programme was completely flawed. They made sure that not everybody received the newsletters by delivering them to every other flat in Newland Court and to only a few houses in Grendon Gardens. I know this for a fact because a neighbour and I went to every flat continuously to get signatures for a petition and found out that some flats never received the newsletters. We also got signatures for our petition from the affected houses on Grendon Gardens and all the residents there except one were against this proposal. At Newland Court, 4 were not bothered, 1 said they supported it and 5 did not want to know since they were renting and said it was the leaseholders responsibility. We got about 55 valid signatures (since Brent is saying more than one objection from one household counts as one) from Newland Court and Grendon Gardens, so for Brent to say that they

received 42 responses from residents expressing support for this development is [Misinformation]!!!!! 

 

 On page 13, Loss of garages and principle of residential development 4.6 it states.....

 

'With regards to the loss of the garages, the majority of these are all vacant and underutilised. None of these garages are currently being used for car parking. As such, there will be no loss of car parking as a result of the demolition of the existing garages'. 

 

[Misinformation]. 3 garages are still being used for cars and rent is still being paid for them. One is used by a disabled badge holder who is so upset about this proposal and wants to know where she is going to park her car when the garages are pulled down . She claims a council vehicle reversed into her garage a few years ago damaging the door and roof. She had to wait 3 months for the council to repair the damage to  the door and roof and it was when the roof was being replaced that she discovered that all the garage roofs had asbestos. Less than a year later she contracted lung cancer and now only has one lung. She couldn't prove it was the asbestos from her garage so took no action.

 

 On page 14, Quality of Accommodation 4.20 it states that..... 

 

London Plan policy D6 states that housing developments should be of high quality design and provide adequately-sized rooms with comfortable and functional layouts which are fit for purpose. 

 

On page 15, Quality of Accommodation 4.22 it states..... 

 

Policy BH13 requires all new dwellings to have external private amenity space of a sufficient size and type to satisfy its proposed residents’ needs. This is normally expected to be 50sqm per home for family housing (3 bedrooms or more) situated at ground floor level and 20 sqm for all other housing. 

 

House 2 (3B5P) will have an amenity space of 41.6 sqm.

House 5 (3B5P) will have an amenity space of only 32.1 sqm.

House 6 (3B5P) will have an amenity space of 48 sqm.

 

The other houses, 3 and 4 will house up to 7 people. The size of these houses in the tiny plot of land with little amenity space and not fit for purpose.

 

How can Brent Council justify cramming families like tinned sardines in such a crammed site. At least 35+ people in 7 tiny houses.

 

 On page 16 of Neighbouring Amenity 4.29 it states....

 

The guidance states that 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.  

 

It says 'Reduced distances between new frontages may be acceptable subject to consideration of overlooking and privacy'. 

 

No consideration has been taken towards the existing residents of Newland Court as the 18m overlooking rule has been halved, yes halved. Brent Council's new plans states the overlooking distance is 10m but we have measured several times and the 2 angled out buildings that are closest to the new houses measure

8m and 9m from the windows. Do you know how close and imposing the proximity of these new houses are going to be???

 

In my previous emails to you I have highlighted the issues with...

 

PARKING

TREES
BINS 

 

I would now like to raise a point you highlighted in a letter to Mr. T Ghani who was the project manager then dated 31/07/20 where you pointed out....

 

REF: 20/0131/PRE Pre-application Consultation

 

In line with the Council's Statement of Community Involvement, we would encourage you to engage in preapplication consultation with the local community. This is recommended to be in the form of discussing the proposal with neighbours and other nearby occupiers/owners of properties/land / local interest groups. 

 

Equalities

 

In line with the Public Sector Equality Duty, the Council must have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination and advance equality of opportunity, as set out in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

 

The plans for the 'infill' of 7 TINY new houses in Newland Court were made since 2020 yet the first we ever heard about it was the end of June 2022. Brent Council have shown nothing but Systemic discrimination towards the residents of Newland Court over their proposed ‘infill’ plans of building 7 TINY town houses by demolishing the garages at Newland Court. They have shown no empathy, been dismissive and ignored our thoughts and feelings to go ahead with this ‘infill’ contributing to a less favourable outcome for the residents (especially the elderly and disabled) of Newland Court who they are treating like nobodies or a minority group.

 

With all the points I have raised above, the fact that there have been lots of misleading factors from Brent Council and the fact that if they are granted  permission to go ahead with these plans. I am sure they will just keep moving the post to suit them at the detriment of the existing residents of Newland

Court and I plead with you not to approve this planning application.

Yours Sincerely,

Marc Etukudo

Newland Court.

Forty Avenue. HA9 9LZ.

 

Celebrate 100 years of Working Class History in Brent Saturday 15th October

 Guest post by Mary Adossides, Chair Brent Trades Council

 

 

On 15 October Brent Trades Council will be celebrating the centenary of the Willesden Trades and Labour Hall’s constitution. The Trades Hall has played a crucial role in the political, economic and social history of Willesden and then Brent since the early 20^th century. 

 

The front of the Willesden Trades and Labour Hall and Apollo Club

 

In her detailed article in the Willesden Local History Society Journal Winter/ Spring 22 edition, Christine Coates,  documents this icon of labour movement history (WLHS website - in case anyone is interested https://willesden-local-history.co.uk/)

 

 The growth of the industrial estates in Park Royal and Cricklewood, saw the growth of trade unions and political organisations and the push to have a venue for meetings meant the Trades and Labour Hall. The Willesden Trades and Labour Hall Society was set up 1922 and bought the Hall in 1924. Through the 20s and 30s, the Hall was mainly used for union and LP meetings with popular speakers such as Sylvia Pankhurst who founded the Willesden Branch of the Communist Workers’ Movement there in 1924.

 

During the 1926 General Strike, the Hall became a strike HQ. A local Council of Action was formed by the Willesden Labour Party with all the local TU branches. A strike bulletin was published and mass meetings were held on local Pound Green with football matches to fill the time between activity. Through the 1920s and 30s, support for unemployed and hunger marchers was organised from the Hall and the National Archives show it was under frequent police surveillance during this period.

 

After WW2, the Trades Hall continued to be an important hub for union and political campaigns. Nelson Mandela was invited to speak but the meeting had to be moved because of numbers. Willesden and Wembley joined to form the London Borough of Brent in 1965 and it became the home for the merged Brent Trades Council.

 

In 1969 an attempt was made to solve financial difficulties of the building with a long-term lease of the ground floor hall to the Apollo Club, a venue for reggae nights and West Indian music. It was a great success (Bob Marley played there). The rent was expected to pay the running cost of the building but did not resolve the hall’s financial difficulties.

 

Tom Durkin, President of Brent Trades Council, speaking to the Grunwick Women strikers during their 2 year strike 1976-1978

From 1976-1978 the rest of the building was used as a base for the Grunwick strikers struggling against workplace exploitation. At that time the Trades Council was probably at its strongest with 21,000 members and 130 delegates affiliated in 74 branches. Thousands joined the mass picket in Chapter Road, outside Dollis Hill in a week in action in June 1977 in solidarity with the Grunwick strikers and marched through Willesden led by Arthur Scargill supported by miners, dockers, printers, post office workers.

 

By the 1980s industrial decline led to a reduction in trade union activity.  Unfortunately without income the building could not be properly maintained. The Hall gradually fell into disrepair but continued to be used by the Apollo Club, the Labour Party, Brent TUC and a few local groups until in late 2019.Its use had to be paused at the start of the pandemic.

 

The Society itself revived in 2019 as an unincorporated group.Any solution which involves retaining the building will involve further serious sums of money and are being considered by the Willesden Trades and Labour Hall Society.

 

On 15^th October from 7pm Brent Trades Council is celebrating its iconic hall :

 

Join our event 100 years of Working Class History in Brent at the Brent Black Music Coop (BBMC) from 7pm, 383 High Road, NW10 2JR, nearest tube Dollis Hill (Jubilee Line). Dawn Butler MP will launch the event, Chris Coates will speak about the history of the building, others will speak about the trade union movement and the Grunwick strike. There will be film, poetry and music. The all female Akabu reggae band will entertain us during the second part of the evening. Tickets available on Eventbrite:

www.tinyurl.com/brent100

 

Mary Adossides

Chair

Brent Trades Council

brenttradescouncil@outlook.com

Council of Europe calls on member states to recognise the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment as a human right

Strasbourg, 27.09.2022 – In a Recommendation on human rights and the protection of the environment adopted today, the Council of Europe calls on its 46 member states to actively consider recognising, at national level, the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, as a human right.

Considering that measures to address the triple planetary crisis of climate change, loss of biodiversity and pollution are essential to the better enjoyment of human rights, the Committee of Ministers underlines the increased recognition of some form of the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment in international legal instruments (including regional human rights instruments) and national constitutions, legislation and policies.

In the implementation of this Recommendation, member states should ensure respect for a number of principles, according to the Committee: general principles of international environmental law, such as the no harm principle, the principle of prevention, the principle of precaution and the polluter pays principle; the need for intergenerational equity; the no discrimination principle; access without discrimination to information and justice in environmental matters, participation in environmental decision-making and environmental education.

The Committee also expresses concern about the disproportionate effect environmental degradation may have and calls on member states to take adequate measures to protect the rights of those who are most vulnerable to, or at particular risk from, environmental harm.

In addition, the Recommendation stresses the importance for governments to co-operate with sub-national entities, civil society, national human rights institutions, regional institutions for the protection and promotion of human rights, environmental human rights defenders, economic stakeholders, indigenous peoples and local communities, cities and regions.

Finally, member states are encouraged to require business enterprises to act in compliance with their human rights responsibilities related to the environment.

 

Background

 
The United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 48/13 of 8 October 2021 recognised the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment as a human right.

The Council of Europe’s long-standing commitment to environmental protection has resulted in the adoption of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (“Bern Convention”), the Convention on Civil Liability for Damage resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment, the Convention on the Protection of the Environment through Criminal Law and the Landscape Convention.

The Council of Europe’s Manual on Human Rights and the Environment contains principles emerging from the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and decisions and conclusions of the European Committee of Social Rights.

LETTER: I accuse Brent Council of systemic discrimination against current estate residents

 

Dear Editor,

‘Systemic discrimination can be described as patterns of behaviour, procedures, routines, policies or practices that are part of the structures of an organization (Brent Council) and contributes to less favourable outcomes for minority groups (Newland Court Residents). Behaviours may include dismissive or derogatory comments, gossip, ignoring others, judgemental attitudes, isolating others, laying blame, lack of respect, labelling, intimidation, name calling, bullying, and physical altercations.’

 

Newland Court

 

  Brent Council have shown nothing but Systemic discrimination towards the residents of Newland Court over their proposed ‘infill’ plans of building 7 TINY town houses by demolishing the garages at Newland Court. They have shown no empathy been dismissive and ignored our thoughts and feelings to go ahead with this ‘infill’ contributing to a less favourable outcome for the residents (especially the elderly and disabled) of Newland Court who they are treating like a nobodies or a minority group.

 

These new 7 TINY town houses are so tiny that the width of the first unit is around 3.3 metres. The other units are between 5.8 and 6.2 metres in width and are going to be 3 and 4 bed roomed houses. These tiny houses are going to have their own gated security and their own bin and cycle storage with a front and back fore-court all within each unit. And Brent wants to reduce our urban green space and build a new playground for these new residents after all these years of ignoring our children’s needs for a play area. Our children are now adults.

 

For years we have asked for:-

1)     New security gates installed at both entrances for the safety of residents, to stop drug pushers, drug users and to stop fly tipping.

2)   Proper security lighting and cameras installed for the safety of residents.

3)   Not reduced parking spaces but more made with at least 4 disabled parking bays.

4)   Bins situated away from the flats because of the stench. (The bins have never been jet cleaned or disinfected and more bins not less to service 60 flats.

5)    Drainage sorted out because water accumulates when it rains heavily at the entrance of Newland Court.

 

We all know that there is a chronic shortage of social housing and the truth is, there always will be because the councils let it happen. Brent Council’s favourite slogan as an excuse is always ‘there’s a chronic shortage of affordable housing’ yet Brent Council are building 250 "New Council Homes" on the former Copland School site at Cecil Avenue in Wembley. They have had full planning permission for this scheme since February 2021, although it will probably be early 2023 before work begins (so much for the 'urgent need' for new homes that they talk about). 

 

And guess what? 152 of these new homes at Cecil Avenue, on land Brent Council already owns, will be for Brent's "developer partner" to sell privately, for profit. But under the proposals for Cecil Avenue, approved by Cabinet on 16 August, only 37 of the 250 homes will be for London Affordable Rent, and none will be for Social Rent (which the Brent Poverty Commission Report in 2020 said should be the Council’s priority for genuinely affordable homes). That is why Brent Council needs to squeeze 7 new TINY homes on the Newland Court estate, and other such Council "infill" schemes. 

 

Brent Council have known for years that the roofs of these garages that they want to replace with the 7 houses have asbestos but have deliberately let them run down and have done nothing about it. A few years ago an elderly disabled resident who still parks her car in one of these garages contracted lung cancer, believes she got it from the asbestos but can’t prove it. She only has one lung now. What measures are going to put in place to ensure the safe removal of the asbestos and the safety of the current residents? Probably none as the residents are just nobodies, a minority group to Brent Council. 

Asbestos roof

Three councillors, their architect and other team members met with residents living at Newland Court as part of the pre-planning stage of this development. This enabled residents to directly feed into the design of privacy, parking and trees. It was a waste of time and just a pen pushing procedure just to say that they had consulted with us. 

They said no trees would be removed during the site meeting. LIES!! In the final plans they are removing 13 trees from our view which were specifically positioned where they are many years ago to make a screen between Newland C0urt and the gardens of the residents of Grendon Gardens. They prevent overlooking between Newland Court and the residents gardens of Grendon Garden.

 

These trees which are a mix of sycamore, lime and ash were designed to make a pleasant landscape and form part of our URBAN GREENERY and are therapeutic to residents, especially those who can’t get out much as it helps their mental wellbeing and reduces depression and anxiety. They are homes to robins, magpies, parquets and even the occasional bats that have been sighted by keen residential bird watchers. Birds have their nests in these trees and the different chirping and tweeting sounds that they make will be greatly missed if these trees are removed.

 

Some of the landscaped trees to be removed

We spoke about the need to retain our parking spaces, being reduced from (around 40 down to 12) as we have at least 5 residents who are disabled badge holders, several cab and delivery drivers and other self-employed car users. They haven’t even factored any disabled parking bays in their new plans and to drive us into despair they intend to introduce pay and display all around the streets by Newland Court because of the impact of the overflow this will cause. Instead Brent Council are now trying to imply that parking along Newland Court is not designated for car parking (even though we’ve parked there for years) as there are no formal demarcated parking bays.

 

Loads of estates don't all have designated parking bays but have controlled parking with signage stating valid permit holders only just like Newland Court has. I have lived at Newland Court since 1988 and about 15 or so years ago Brent introduced parking restrictions and charged us £10 for permits and another £10 to have a visitors permit. Earlier this year we received letters from Wing Parking saying that we wouldn't be charged anymore for our permits. We still had to have them displayed or we would be ticketed. We all wondered why?? But guess what??? We were still all clueless about this proposal and now we know why.

 

They are actually reducing our residual waste bins from 14 to 6 and taking some of our urban green space to make way for the limited 12 car spaces they intend to leave us with and create a playground for the new residents. Not only is it unfair to have our residual waste reduced from 14 to 6 as the 14 we have is not enough for the current residents but we want them away from our urban green space so that the residents and visitors do not have to endure the stench every time we enter our flats. When emptied they stink and have never been jet washed or disinfected.

 

The 10 metre overlooking rule is actually around 8 metres at one point and around 9 metres at another even though Brent’s planning guidance recommends 18 metres for overlooking. Do you know how imposing and close the proximity of having buildings only 8-9 metres that close will feel like? So as you can see, there are lots of flaws in their plans apart from them ignoring a lot of their own Brent planning guidance. Brent Council DO NOT care about their residents’ interest. Brent Council have shown nothing but Systemic discrimination towards the current residents of Newland Court.

 

Marc Etukudo

Address supplied

 

Healthwatch Brent: Standing Together Against Cancer with Dame Cally Palmer, National Cancer Director, NHS England. Zoom Tuesday September 27th 6-7pm

 

Standing together against cancer

 

Most of us can share a personal story about cancer, whether from our own experience or that of a loved one. 50% of people in the UK will face cancer at some point in their life – and the vast majority will see it impact a family member or friend.

 

On 27 September Dame Cally Palmer, National Cancer Director for the NHS, will join us to talk about the importance of putting up a united front to make cancer easier to diagnose and treat. From raising awareness of vital health screenings to giving more patients access to the latest technology and treatment options, how can our communities, health professionals and politicians all come together to make a difference? 

 

Dame Palmer also brings first-hand experience as CEO of The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, and will share the reality facing our hospitals as they deal with backlog of patients caused by Covid.

Eventbrite link: https://lecture27september.eventbrite.co.uk

 

Join Zoom Meeting

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84114005040?pwd=TFBzZ29Xa1A5b1l3MnlUQ3FJTSs5Zz09

 

Meeting ID: 841 1400 5040

Passcode: 132308