If you go down to Roundwood today, you're sure of a big surprise...

 Aerial view of the southern edge of Roundwood Park (Bowling Green in centre)

I certainly got a big surprise when I visited the Gardening Club and other activity areas on the edge of Roundwood Park on Thursday at the invitation of Katie Mills of social enterprise Forest and Family. Full of passion and energy Katie has a vision for this space that already includes an independent gardening club, a Nature Connection Centre where events, talks and half-term activities are held and a Forest School area in a woodland glade. Working with children and their families from diverse backgrounds they reconnect with nature in an era of keyboards and screens.

 

The Gardening Club, made up of volunteers, even have their own resident poet in the person of Susan Carberry and I arrived just in time for a tea break and Susan's reading of one of her poems from her booklet Eternal Ephemera. (On sale in the Roundwood Cafe to raise funds for the Gardening Club)

 Susan told me of the benefits of the Gardening Club. It combines physical hard work, poetry, and socialising and in the process opens up new horizons for participants. People with little previous exposure to poetry become interested in Susan's poetry and that of other poets that she shares with the group, leading to a developing interest in literature.  Susan said that being: 'It fires me up to write!'

The hard work was visible in the garden area with its recently planted orchard, herb and strawberry raised bed and other beds being prepared for planting.

A toddler investigates the orchard

Raised beds

Weeding the herb and strawberry bed

Getting out the compost for use in the potting shed

Seedlings were being hardened off outside

Also in the Cafe compound is the Nature Connection Centre that can be used for events, work with children and all sorts of other possibilities.

A woodland garden is being developed behind the cafe. 

Beyond the Cafe area, walking towards Longstone Avenue, a tall fence and shrubbery conceals a bowling green and pavilion. Like that at Edward VII Park in Wembley it has fallen into disuse. The green has recently been mown and I understand that the pavilion, although currently full of rubbish, has a kitchen, centre space, toilets and changing rooms attached. It clearly has great potential, and it is a pity to see, in a borough lacking in green space, that it is unused.

But there is hope. Brent Council intend to lease it out and a consortium consisting of Forest and Family, the Scouts and others are interested in making an application.

The Bowling Green

The Pavilion

Walking on from the bowling green you come upon an asphalt path which used to be a vehicle entrance to the bowling green and next to it the children's playground currently being refurbished with the rather garish equipment common to most Brent Parks.

However,there is another surprise at the end of the asphalt path. The rustic entrance to semi-woodland that is used as the Forest School with visits from local primary pupils, enabling them to get in touch with nature and immerse themselves in activities. Katie Mills has brought the previously abused area back into positive use and given the right arrangements with Brent Council it could have a fully sustainable future and contribute to the Council's Climate Emergency Strategy and engagement with young people.

What child would not be thrilled to enter through this gate?

Another of Katie's projects, which has become a national outdoor campaign but runs locally with the cooperation of Brent Libraries, is Stories by Moonlight. Participants get an outdoor story book sack of activities to do at home with parents and carers on summer evenings, but even better, a network of participants has been formed. Children can come in their pyjamas to a park or green space and take part in storytelling and read books surrounded by fairly lights or lanterns in a magical space as day becomes dusk and night.

Looking again at the aerial view,  you can see that taken together the area around the cafe with its edible woodland gardens and meeting space, could be linked with environmental projects on the disused bowling green, and linked on again to the Forest School woodland area. This would be a tremendous facility that could serve as a model for other Brent spaces as well as further afield.

It just needs people to match Katie's passion and vitality and get behind the vision to the benefit of all.

I'll leave the last word to Katie: 

This is a big vision project about how Nature connects us to better health, wellbeing, and each other. I wanted to show how parks can become dynamic and innovative centres for Nature connection, outdoor wellbeing, green prescribing, and community cohesion in Brent. 

 

With support from NCIL funding we're achieved that; we're impacted so many people through the project and create an ambitious template with huge potential to be scaled. We're shown a huge appetite alongst local residents, schools and families for what we're doing. 

 

This work is urgent and vital, especially in Brent, and it needs a joined up, strategic and multi-partner approach. The council's buy-in to this vision is critical and if we can get the right level of support and momentum the benefits for all are huge.

 

LINKS

 

https://www.katiemills.co.uk/business/stories-by-moonlight/

 

 

https://www.katiemills.co.uk/business/forestandfamily/

 

 

 

Phil Porter to leave Brent for Chief Executive post in Sefton

 Phil Porter

 

Brent Council Announcement

 

Phil Porter is leaving his role as Brent's Corporate Director for Adult Social Care and Health to become the new Chief Executive of Sefton Council just north of Liverpool.

 

Phil has worked for Brent Council since 2011 in a number of senior management roles culminating in his current role overseeing adult social care, public health and the council’s leadership of the Integrated Care Partnership.

 

During his time in Brent, Phil has played a key role in improving health and well-being outcomes for residents, including better targeting of resources to vulnerable people and playing a significant role in the council’s successful housing building programme and Covid response.

 

He is due to take up his new post in the summer.

Trial of bin provision for paper and card recycling rather than sacks delayed until September 2024

 

In October Brent Council will be introducing changes in its waste and recycling collection. This will include providing each eligible household with a sack for paper and card collection. During the trial there were complaints that the sacks were not robust enough. As a consequence the December 2022 Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee recommended Brent Council undertake a feasibility study on the potential for introducing a mixed approach to paper/card recycling collections, to explore whether any recycling collection rounds in the borough would be more suited to the use of bins rather than sacks.

 

The Council’s response (below) indicates that any such trial will only take place after the new scheme has been operating for almost a year and will only take place if that operation is unsuccessful. It also refers to the potential impact of the bottle Deposit Return Scheme to be introduced by October 2025.

 

 

Veolia will introduce a 1 year wheelie bin trial for around 6,000 street level households in total, divided into the five Brent Connect Areas, to start in September 2024. Veolia’s feasibility study did not enable them to accurately calculate the split between those properties that could receive an additional wheeled bin for paper/card and those that could only accommodate a reusable sack. Veolia concluded from their study that to minimise disruption to households and to measure the impact of introducing a wheeled bin for the
paper/card stream, a trial should take place. The rationale for the timing of the trial in September 2024 is summarised below:

· Allows for the introduction of the alternate weekly twin stream dry recycling collection service to fully settle down

 
· May reduce the impact of contamination from introducing wheeled bins as residents would have been segregating streams for a year allowing a more robust comparison of the data from the trial

 

· It could be the case that after a year, if the reusable sack is proven to be working and successful, then the bin trial wouldn’t be needed, resulting in cost savings for the Council

 
· Allows a full 12 month period of data for the new service, including seasonal variations relating to volume, participation and contamination

 
· Allows time for any legislation changes to be accounted for – the Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) for beverage containers will be introduced in England by October 2025. Drinks containers made from PET plastic, steel and aluminium cans are covered by DRS. This could lead to a migration of some volume of material streams away from the kerbside to the DRS. This migration could open up a number of possibilities for the Contract including but not limited to; switching streams for the paper/card sack and container mix wheeled bins, and downsizing residual bins and using existing residual bins for paper/card etc. Whilst this could be done earlier, undertaking these changes once the impact of DRS is known would be beneficial, this would include limiting the number of containerisation changes undertaken during the contract period.

 
· Allows for a significant period of time for the Council’s ECO team to carry out targeted communication, education and enforcement with those residents not using the service or not using the service correctly e.g. contamination etc.

 
· If the trial was to take place sooner, e.g. March 2024, a further disadvantage is that the planning for the rollout of the trial would take place during the mobilisation period for the new alternate weekly collection service, which would significantly add to the workload of Council staff and the Veolia Contract Management Team which could take the focus away from the key objectives of the new contract and services.

Will Bob Blackman offer teachers brunch on Thursday?

 

Thames Water responds to some of Brent Scrutiny's requests for information - others remain unanswered

UPDATE Kilburn Life tweet on Monday April 25th

 

With recent experiences of flooding in the Brent area and the prospect of extreme weather events increasing, along with the large number of new developments in the area, Thames Water has been questioned at the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee. There appearances have resulted in more questions and requests for information. The Tracker table for the meeting on Tuesday April 25th includes updates for information requested at the February  22nd Meeting. LINK

Responses are still awaited on these important requests:

 

Below I list the Committee's requests and the answers received:

9^th February 2023

To receive a copy of the independent review into the events of and response to the floods experienced across London in July when published and Thames Water’s response to the review.

 

Thames Water: All reports can be found here - London flooding response https://www.thameswater.co.uk/about-us/investing-in-our-region/london-flooding-response

 

Remainder requested  22^nd February 2023

 

In relation to the Belsize Road burst water main incident in December 2022, provide detail on how Customer Guarantee Scheme (‘CGS’) compensation is calculated; the criteria for residents to receive compensation; and detail on how many residents’
compensation claims remained outstanding.

 

Thames Water: Where flooding has occurred, we have not paid out compensation directly.

However, as part of their insurance claim customers are entitled to pursue a claim for distress and inconvenience as part of their claim settlement.

For customers who lost their water supply, we have in place our Customer Guarantee Scheme (‘CGS’).

 

This is a scheme by which we automatically pay money into a customer’s account if they lose water for a 12 hour period. If someone is without water for 12 hours, then we will credit their account £30 without them having to contact us. For every extra 12 hours, we will credit another £30. Ofwat’s CGS is entitled in the below scenarios:

i. CGS 2 – Emergency interruption over 12 hours in duration
ii. CGS 6 – Planned un-warned interruptions over 4 hours in duration.
We defined a ‘planned job’ as a job that Thames Water have been notified of but not attended for over 24 hours.
iii. CGS 8 Overrun of a warning. Any duration if the interruption continues after the time we said the water would be restored.

Our process is to use the data available to determine the earliest start time of an interruption. This can either be valve operations, pressure telemetry data from assets such as Critical Pressure Points, Pressure Reducing Valve and various others, customer contacts advising of No Water or NST site feedback such as a 0 pressure reading. There are various systems for our team to gather this information, which we collect as evidence for audit purposes so each reportable interruption has an evidence pack to prove our reporting is accurate. Ofwat also have a rule called precautional principle, this is where we have 2 sets of data given us different results, such as 2 different times recorded of a valve operation. In these scenarios we have to take the worst case.

The average time people were out of water was 7.5 hours but as a number were out for over the 12 hour period, we have made 538 payments. We have written to more than 300 other properties which qualified as they are listed in the name of a housing company or local authority so we are finding out who will receive the payment.

 

With regards to recommendation 3 in the London Flood Review (LFR), provide further information on how many planning applications Thames Water had commented on/objected/challenged/made a recommendation for additional mitigation to avoid flooding over the last 5 years.

 

Thames Water: We do challenge planning applications, especially where they fail to meet London Plan / Local Plan policy requirements, although we can only object where there is clear evidence of not meeting existing planning policy requirements.

 
Planning applications reviewed in Brent over the last 5 years:

i. 214 sites reviewed
ii. 321 planning applications relating to those 214 sites
iii. Of those 321 planning applications, we received 213 applications direct from the Council, the other 108 we identified ourselves.

iv. Of the 241 sites, 42 sites had planning conditions requested
v. 63 specific conditions sought on those 42 sites
vi. Of the 27 sites where we sought conditions and planning has been granted, 20 sites have had them attached but on 7 occasions the council chose to approve without our requested conditions.

 

Provide detail on the investment in flood risk management in the Brondesbury Road area as this area has been prone to flooding.

 

Thames  Water: Regarding Brondesbury Road, our reports don’t extend pre-2008. We have the following reports of flooding:

• 2021 - Hydraulic (very heavy rain)
• 2013 - 1 Blockage
• 2009 - 2 Blockages

As such with only one internal flood reported due to heavy rainfall, this Road is not high on the priority flood action list. If Cllrs are aware of any unreported flooding, their assistance in encouraging its reporting would be much appreciated.

 

Building Wembley Stadium, 100 years ago - a special anniversary article

Guest post by local historian Philip Grant

 

1. (Photo of the new Wembley Stadium in 2007 by Roy Beddard)

 

This month sees the centenary of the opening of Wembley Stadium. Most of us will have watched the new stadium being built, between 2003 and 2007. This article will share the story, and some pictures, of the first stadium being constructed.

 

It was on a snowy day in January 1922 that the Duke of York ceremonially dug out the first turf for the stadium, but it was another three months before construction really got underway. The stadium had been designed by Sir John Simpson and Maxwell Ayrton, with consulting engineer, Sir Owen Williams, to be built of reinforced concrete. Sir Robert McAlpine & Sons were appointed as contractors, because they had experience of using this relatively new technique. They hired more than 1,000 men, many of them unemployed ex-servicemen from the First World War, to provide the labour.

 

2. The early stages of constructing the stadium at Wembley Park, mid-1922.
(From Geoffrey Hewlett’s 2002 book “Wembley”)

 

The site chosen for the stadium was at the top of a hill, where the ill-fated Wembley Tower had once stood in the Wembley Park Pleasure Grounds. The four craters, where the tower’s foundations had been dynamited, had to be removed, to prepare for where the football pitch would be, while construction of the terraces and stands which would hold 125,000 spectators went on around it.

 

There was a very tight schedule for the work, as the organisers of the British Empire Exhibition, which the stadium would form part of (that’s why it was known as the Empire Stadium for many years), had agreed that the Football Association could hold their Cup Final there in 1923. Britain’s top playing fields expert, Charles Perry, was tasked with preparing the pitch, and on his instructions sections of the fairways and greens on the former Wembley Park Golf Course were fenced off to provide the turf.

 

3. The stadium construction site, September 1922. (From Geoffrey Hewlett’s 2002 book “Wembley”)

 

The clay ground at Wembley would not provide good drainage, so Perry sloped this down towards the edges of the pitch, allowing water to run-off. Then he laid layers of clinker and cinders, 10 inches (25cm) thick, across the area, and topped this off with at least 5 inches of top soil. By September he was ready to start laying the turf, which was cut in 18” x 12” (45cm x 30cm) rectangles, 2½ inches thick. These were moved to the stadium on flat-bed trolleys and butted together straight away. Laying the pitch took a month, but by keeping the grass growing the “hallowed turf” of the Wembley pitch was ready by the end of October 1922.

 

 4. The structural steelwork for the stands and terraces, winter 1922/23. (From an old film)

 

By this time, the 1,400 tons of structural steelwork that would support the stands and terraces was being put in place. From then on, it was concrete which would be the main material used, 25,000 tons of it in all. Wooden formwork was put in place, miles of steel reinforcing rods were cut and inserted, and the concrete poured in by the workmen, from barrows or buckets.

 

  5. Workmen building the outer concrete wall of the stadium, winter 1922/23. (From an old film)

 

There was little in the way of “health and safety” then. The men wore their ordinary working clothes, with cloth caps, not hard hats. It was heavy, physical, manual labour, with wages only around £1 a week, plus extra for any overtime. And with their hard work, the stadium was beginning to take shape.

 

6. The North Stand under construction, December 1922. (From an old film)

 

It was on the north side of the stadium, looking out over the British Empire Exhibition site and towards Wembley Park Station, that Ayrton and Williams had designed their feature wall. Using the ability of semi-liquid concrete to run into moulds, then keep that shape when set, they delivered the iconic frontage that would symbolise Wembley Stadium for the next 80 years. This was emerging from the site by February 1923.

 

 

7. Work on the North Front of the stadium, February 1923. (From a 1923 McAlpine’s brochure)

 

The domed tops of the twin towers, with their concrete flag poles capped with concrete crowns, were the last parts to be finished. The photograph below gives an idea of the fairly primitive (by today’s standards) method of getting the concrete to the top of the formwork. It was carried by teams of workmen up ramps in buckets, which were then raised by rope and pulley to the men above!

 

 

8. Constructing one of the twin towers, February 1923.
(From “Glorious Wembley” by Howard Bass, 1982)

 

By April 1923, the stadium was finished. It had taken just 300 working days to build (not four years, like the new Wembley!). Sir Owen Williams, speaking about the choice of concrete for Wembley, said: ‘Its architectural possibilities, its adaptability, and its rapidity of construction demanded attention, but these alone were not the decisive factor. It was the economy of concrete which compelled its use.’ Wembley’s Empire Stadium had cost £750,000 to construct, equivalent to around £57m today. The new Wembley Stadium, when completed in 2007, had cost £798m.

 

Just one thing remained to be done before the 1923 FA Cup Final could take place on 28 April. The structure of the stadium had to be tested, to make sure that it was safe for spectators to use. All 1,200 workmen on the site had to march round the stadium as a group, visiting all parts of the terraces and stands. Following instructions and in unison, they had to stamp their feet, lean against the safety rails, and sit down then up on the seats, to recreate the effect of the crowds at an actual event.

 

 

9. 1,200 workmen, testing a section of the terraces, April 1923. (From an old film)

 

One of the first aerial photographs of the completed stadium was taken by the Kilburn-based Central Aircraft Company. In this picture (below) you can see the open terraces at either end, and the covered sections along the sides, which included the seats for 30,000 spectators, as well as the Royal Box. The pitch has been mowed, ready for a football match. But outside the stadium walls, it still looks like a construction site, and there is little sign of the pavilions which would house nations from across the British Empire at the exhibition that would open just one year later.

 

  

10. An aerial view of the stadium, from the east, April 1923. (Image from the internet)

 

 

11. The stadium during the British Empire Exhibition in 1924. (Brent Archives – WHS Collection)

 

Sir Robert McAlpine (proud of his firm’s achievements) called the stadium: ‘... a triumph of modern engineering.’ Through the efforts of Arthur Elvin and others, it would go on to become a world famous “Venue of Legends”, host an Olympic Games, World Cup and Euros football finals, numerous other sporting events, and many concerts, including Live Aid. But in 2002/03, it was demolished to make way for a new Wembley Stadium. 

 

  

 12. The concrete flagpole base in Brent River Park, near Pitfield Way. (Photo by Philip Grant, 2013)

 

The concrete marvel, built 100 years ago, has gone from Wembley – apart from one small fragment. The base of a concrete flagpole, from the top of one of the twin towers, was donated to the Council by the new stadium company in 2003, and now sits in Brent River Park, as a memorial to the original Wembley Stadium.

 

Philip Grant,
Wembley History Society,
April 2023.