Quantcast
Channel: WEMBLEY MATTERS
Viewing all 7143 articles
Browse latest View live
↧

Brent faces up to the challenge to plan for the next 20 years - details of report going to Full Council on November 25th

November 16, 2019, 8:19 am
$
0
0


Brent Council, with partners, has faced up to the formidable challenge of devising an 'Inclusive Growth Strategy' for the next 20 years.

The report on the Strategy which is to be discussed at Full Council on November 25th  states:


The Inclusive Growth Strategy (IGS) is a long term strategy that identifies choices available to meet the challenges and seize the opportunities of growth over the next 20 years. Broader in scope than a Regeneration Strategy, the IGS is supported by a detailed evidence base drawn up in-house by officers across all the council service areas, with early support provided by the LSE Cities programme. The IGS builds on the medium term Borough Plan and takes a longer term scan of the horizon of different futures. Headline growth trends and impacts considered in the IGS include: 

Brent’s population projected to grow 17% and reach 400,000 people by 2040

Brent’s population over 80 years old projected to double by 2040

Automation placing a third of jobs in Brent at higher risk

Employment growth in creative and circular economies 

Rise of older workers driving demand for retraining and flexible employment 

Increasing housing unaffordability, as house prices outstrip wage growth 

Private renters increasing to be 40% of London’s households by 2025 

Growing water demand and widening deficit versus available water supply

Sewer capacity at critical levels by 2050 in north and west parts of Brent 

Transformation of Brent’s energy mix to reach zero carbon by 2050 – requiring fossil fuel use reduction of 80% and increased renewable energy use of 500% 

Ageing population, obesity levels and increased risks for black and minority ethnic groups, driving even higher levels of diabetes in Brent’s population 

Continued decline in traditional retail and greater high street diversification
-->
The full report with an attached Action Plan is a hefty 73 pages and embedded below for convenience. Click bottom right square for full page view.

↧
Search

Consternation over Brent Council's removal of 8 mature trees in Furness Road

November 17, 2019, 8:19 am
$
0
0

Brent Council's consultation on climate change actions closes today (make a last minute submission HERE) and unfortunately it coincides with what appears to be an act of environmental vandalism by the Council.

Residents report that the Council is to remove 8 mature trees on Furness Road, Harlesden, 5 of which are outside Furness Primary School.

Apparently the removal is due to a 'pavement renewal project'  which suggests confusion over priorities when the Council recently declared a Climate Emergency.

Elsewhere local authorities are recognising the importance of trees in combatting air pollution and climate change and some are encouraging schools to plant trees in their grounds and on the playground perimeter.

This is the response one resident got from Cllr Krupa Sheth, lead member for the environment:
 I nor the council want to remove trees unless they absolutely need to be removed. Yes if there are issues where we would be liable for insurance claims then we do have to remove the trees as the insurance pay outs worth thousand of pounds from the council’s already diminishing budget would not be the wisest choice for the residents nor the council.
We do our best to look after and preserve our trees and are constantly looking for funding including Brent’s CIL funding to plant more trees as well.
Cllr Sheth said that she would get back to the resident but nothing further has been heard. Meanwhile the removal signs have gone up.

The removal of the trees is due to start tomorrow - is there time for a last minute attempt at saving them?
↧
↧

Who's kidding Brent Council? Signage mystery deepens

November 17, 2019, 8:56 am
$
0
0

These signs appeared in the north of the borough  out of the blue a while ago but seem to have  suddenly disappeared.

Their positioning seemed quite random, a Salmon Street slip road had 6 or 7 over a short distance and they were often fixed facing the wrong way. I drew Brent Council's attention to the fact that they were so poorly fixed that they often slipped down to the base of the post and suggested that they get the contractor back to attach them properly. They said they would do so. Nothing happened and they were blown in all directions, broken and dangled forlornly to much derision.

Most seem to have been removed as suddenly as they appeared leaving just a few remnants apart from the lone survivor above. Is there is a market for stolen skid signs?


But seriously, several questions arise, this is all money that could be spent elsewhere:

1. Why was it deemed necessary to install these signs and was there any consultation on their installation and the speed limit imposition involved?

2. How much did it cost to buy and install them?

3. Was the contractor asked to put poor installation right or had their fees reduced because of poor performance?

4. How much did it cost to remove them?

4. Are they going to be replaced?

If only we had an opposition on Brent Council to ask such questions...

Note: all pictures taken today.

↧

Dawn reprieve for the Furness Road trees

November 18, 2019, 1:35 am
$
0
0
The trees outside Furness Primary School this morning

Cones stacked this morning

Local residents report that the parking restrictions outside Furness Primary that had been imposed to make ready for the removal of five trees this morning LINK have been removed.  News of the proposed felling spread like wild fire yesterday on Facebook and Next Door with the vast majority of local residents opposed. Another three trees were scheduled for removal elsewhere in Furness Road.

Children left their own messages nearby:




Whether this signals a temporary reprieve or a major re-think is not yet clear. Meanwhile the chair of  Harlesden Area Action has written to Cllr Krupa Sheth, lead member for the Environment and Gary Rimmer, Trees officer:
I am receiving feedback from many residents (nearly 50 comments on Nextdoor), far and wide within both the Harlesden and Kensal Green wards, voicing their grave concerns related to the rampant removal of trees. It has come to our attention that a number of trees (8?) are to be removed on Furness Road tomorrow. In addition, one tree, located near 56 Furness Rd has now been removed, and the cutting down of another located at 88 Furness Road has taken place. 

As you are aware, Brent has declared a Climate Emergency; you spoke of this at the Clean Air for Brent meeting last Tuesday. In that light, we would like to understand the rationale behind removing these trees, for each individual tree.  

Would you please provide us with the following: 

1. Specific reason for the removal of each tree.
2. Specific reason for the removal of the tree outside of 56 Furness Road
3. Specific reason for the removal of tree cut down at 88 Furness Road

Lastly, we have understood that you have "asked the officers and contractors to put a hold on the felling of the trees until I have further information, nothing will happen this weekend”.

Please also confirm that no tree will be removed as you noted in your email to residents until we have received further information and have had time to review it.

Cllr Jumbo Chan sent this written request to Brent Council nd promised to keep residents informed of the response:



My thanks to Caitlin for the photographs.

↧

Brent Council defends removal of Furness Road trees

November 18, 2019, 4:50 am
$
0
0



A spokesperson for Brent Council asked to comment on the proposed removal of eight mature trees in Furness Road , five of which are outside Furness Primary School, said this morning:
"These trees have been identified by our tree experts as poor quality that would need to be removed in the near future and so it makes sense to take advantage of the footway works and replace them at the same time. 

"It's our responsibility to maintain a healthy and safe tree stock across the borough and we replace every tree that is cut down so that there is no net loss."
Cllr Claudia Hector tweeted:
 The trees in Furness Road are going to be replaced. Brent has been planting more trees every year.

A different view was given by a resident who along with others had an impromptu meeting with a council officer at the site this morning:

Brent’s response is completely incorrect. I have just spent the last 2.5 hours with an officer of Brent looking at each of eleven trees that have been selected by Brent’s so-called experts for removal. All but one are healthy. The trees are removed either to make paving around them less difficult/costly, to avoid future subsidence claims, or because they are deemed to costly to maintain. This is a budget issue. Unfortunately environmental costs don’t feature in their cost: benefit analysis. Makes a mockery of their Climate Emergency Declaration. I do appreciate the officer having taken the time to explain his position today and reconsider which trees they will remove. He seems to be between a rock and a hard place.
↧
↧

Asphalt wars break out again as Mapesbury residents challenge Brent Council

November 18, 2019, 6:49 am
$
0
0

Residents in Dartmouth Road have taken on Brent Council over the proposed asphalting of their footway LINK. They claim that while there are strict rules involving the protection of their Conservation Area regarding changes to their properties, Brent Council is ignoring the spirit of such legislation in its plans to replace paving with asphalt.

The policy was challenged three years ago over the asphalting of Chandos Road with a petition launched on 38 degrees. LINK

There are, I understand, now getting on for 150 signatories on the Dartmouth Road petition to the council opposing the action and the operation which was due to start today has been suspended for a week.

Meanwhile the image above shows Grendon Gardens in the Barn Hill Conservation Area which was re-paved with brick blocks and paving stones after the asphalting policy was introduced.  When I tweeted a photograph of the work at the time someone suggested a Brent councillor must live in the street - I am sure that is not true but residents are looking for consistency in Council policy.
↧

Massive blow to Mapesbury conservation as developer wins appeal to demolish the Queensbury Pub

November 18, 2019, 8:07 am
$
0
0
The scheme refused by Brent Council now approved by Planning Inspector
What we will lose

Sad news from the Save the Queensbury Campaign who have shown such determination in their fight to save a much loved pub. Commiserations and solidarity.

From their website LINK

The developer (Redbourne) has won its appeal to demolish The Queensbury pub and erect 48 flats at 110 Walm Lane NW2. The Queensbury, as we know it, is to be demolished and replaced with a six storey box-shaped building with a metal roof which should include a new, glass-fronted public house.

This is the result of the appeal of late August 2019, following Brent Council refusing permission in May 2018. We defended the building in a five day public inquiry, when both Redbourne and the pub operator set out a case to demolish the pub. The inspector has concluded that the building can be demolished and (importantly) the replacement should incorporate a new public house.

The community has fought hard to retain the historic building at 110 Walm Lane which has been used continually by the people of Mapesbury and Willesden since 1896. We successfully fought off three other planning applications and one previous appeal since the building was purchased by a developer in 2012 but without proper protection by Brent Council (and a poorly handled defence at appeal) the battle has been lost.

A little bit of heritage will be lost when The Queensbury is demolished and conservation in Mapesbury is no longer.

We have “won” a new pub, to be on the ground floor of the development, so have we Saved The Queensbury? Only time will tell.

At best, the character of The Queensbury will be lost and the current outdoor drinks terrace will be turned to paving, surrounded by cycle racks and blending onto the pavement with café style tables and chairs rather than pub beer garden. The replacement does have a larger floor area, but with shorter licenced hours to sit outside. The kitchen is tiny and inside is a more sterile, glass building which locals have described as a hotel lobby or railway station waiting room. There is a dedicated community space, with a small outdoor area attached and the current operator has committed to keep that relationship going.

Our worry is that the track record of developers actually including a pub in a mixed development (even though the plans approve this now) is dire. It is not always their fault, but developers tend not to like pubs in new builds. This is because the value of the “market” flats (which are at the front) will decrease by having a pub below.

Too often during construction the “viability” of including a pub is thrown into doubt and developers return to the council for a change of use. Even if it opens, complaints about noise follow, rates are increased, pub viability is questioned and the developer seeks permission to change use to a café or retail in the future.

We are not paranoid nor distrustful; this is happening all over London and when we asked Brent Council and the developer for examples where they have done this successfully neither could offer a response. Given this, a pub at 110 Walm Lane is still some years from being a permanent fixture.

On the bright side, we won two major commitments during the appeal.

1. The developer will have to return to Brent Council if they want to change from a pub to another use. This enables the public and local residents to scrutinise any plan to change use.

2. The developer has to work with Busy Rascals (the baby and toddler community group) to find them an alternative space if and when building work begins. This is so they can carry on their brilliant work in the community, returning to the replacement pub if and when one emerges. Again, the plans look promising.

But what’s promised today does not always appear tomorrow.

All in all we started this process in 2012 with a 10 storey tower and no  pub. We end 2019 with a smaller block and commitment of a pub, if best intentions are delivered.
↧

Palestine-Israel: A Jewish Perspective Thursday Granville Centre

November 19, 2019, 12:47 am
↧
Search

Did Brent Council do enough to save the Queensbury?

November 19, 2019, 2:18 am
$
0
0
Although it was the Planning Inspector who gave the go ahead for the demolition of the Queensbury Pub there is also an issue of Brent Council's role.  Brent Council never got round to listing the building which would have been a first line of defence but the Planning Inspector himself seemed doubtful that they had properly prepared for the case.

The Save the Queensbury campaign on social media accused the Council of dithering:

Because this was Brent's own doing. Inept officers dithering about new plans in front of them, dancing to the developer tune, rather than preparing for an upcoming Inquiry. Car crash of an Planning Committee in June, officers desperate to approve led to zero prep for the Appeal.

The campaign  are asking Cllr Butt, leader of Brent Council and Carolyn Downs for an explanation of the Inspector's comment on the Council's preparation for the Inquiry (Para 46)

The evolution of the design of the proposed building was clearly set out in the appellant’s evidence, and was carefully analysed by the appellant’s architectural and conservation witnesses. In comparison the Council’s evidence was far less detailed and was given by an architect with apparently very limited experience of comparable developments, and who was doubtless hindered by being instructed only a week before evidence was submitted.

In contrast after considering objections to the Save the Queensbury's website inclusion of an image of a previous application which he said could have been misleading, he writes (Para 70):
That said, the STQ evidence was clear and relevant, and there could be no suggestion that their clear evidence was in any way misdirected
This is the Inspector's conclusion:

Planning balance and conclusion

I have already identified the policies which are most important for determining the appeal above. There is no persuasive evidence that any of the policies are out of date. Considering the policies as a whole, the policies are not out of date and I conclude that the ‘tilted balance’ under paragraph 11 of the Framework is not triggered.  


I am conscious of the considerable importance and weight to be given to the desirability of preserving the character and appearance of conservation areas. However, in this case I have found that the proposal would overall have a neutral effect on the designated area, which is to say that its character and appearance would be preserved. 


The proposal would generate the following main benefits, to which I attach significant weight: 


a.     It would deliver 48 new homes, including 35% affordable housing at the Council’s tenure split. This is accepted as the maximum reasonable amount and is subject to a late review mechanism. The percentage of family sized units is unusually high for a development of this sort.

b.    The re-provision of a larger public house in purpose built accommodation.

c.     The provision of a larger and dedicated community space, along with secure arrangements for the existing and future occupiers.

d.    The development is in a highly sustainable location opposite a tube station and on bus routes, and with a PTAL score of 6.


            For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.

-
 The full report is below. Click on the bottom right hand corner for full size version: 


↧
↧

Brent children need clean air NOW!

November 19, 2019, 3:15 am
$
0
0
Dr Ian Mudway addressing the meeting

A packed meeting held at Queens Park Community School last week (Tuesday 12 November) heard from experts and campaigners how severely our children’s health is being affected by air pollution, and what should happen now to stop it.

Over 60 parents and campaigners from across Brent came together to hear Dr Ian Mudway, a respiratory disease specialist at King’s College London, explain how children’s lungs are damaged by daily exposure to diesel emissions, even when they don’t display any apparent symptoms.  Dr Mudway, a global expert on the subject, said:
I now believe that there’s no doubt that children who grow up in polluted areas have stunted lung development. Their lungs don’t develop properly. We’re seeing that in our children in Tower Hamlets and Hackney. Their lungs at the age of nine were already smaller than they ought to be. And that’s a burden that they’ll carry with them for the rest of their lives.
The meeting also heard from Rosamund Kissi-Debrah.  She became a passionate campaigner after her daughter Ella, who had a rare and severe form of asthma, died in 2013.  She was nine years old.  The pathologist who carried out her post mortem said it was “one of the worst cases of asthma ever recorded in the UK”. The family were living next to the South Circular road at the time. 

Rosamund said:
It is unacceptable that children in Britain today die from asthma. There are 240,000 under-19s with a diagnosis of asthma in London.  Government and local authorities are not taking strong enough action…there needs to be new Clean Air Act.  Air pollution is related to many other diseases as well, costing the NHS millions each year to treat…My daughter suffered terribly, and hopefully her death will not be wasted.
In May 2019 Ella’s inquest was re-opened, to determine whether "unlawfully high levels of air pollution" were partially the cause of her death. Air pollution has never previously been officially recorded on an individual's death certificate.

Cllr Krupa Sheth, Cabinet Member for the Environment at Brent Council, attended to outline various Council initiatives to combat air pollution including measures to increase awareness about the dangers of idling, and a piloting of School Streets.   She said that “air quality has become a high priority in the council.”

Cllr Thomas Stephens who is currently chairing a Scrutiny Committee Air Quality Task Group said:
Air pollution is an invisible killer.  It’s hard to persuade people to take action when you cannot see it.  For example there’s a perception that people are safer inside a car, when this is not the case. We need to do a lot and need to do it quickly.
Mark Falcon, Chair of Clean Air for Brent, which is taking part in the Air Quality Task Group said:

Brent contains 4 out of 10 of London’s most polluted roads (1).  We believe the time has come for traffic control measures in the worst pollution hotspots, particularly those near schools. We urge Brent Council and Transport for London to take bold action now to protect our children’s health.
↧

Pensioner's heating restored after a week of cold

November 19, 2019, 3:22 am
$
0
0
I am pleased to hear from John Healy that his heating was restored yesterday by Oakray. His South Kilburn flat was without heating and hot water for more than a week following a boiler breakdown.  Vaillant were distinctly unhelpful and attempts to make a complaint via Brent Council failed. LINK
↧

Council pauses work in Furness Road to re-assess the situation

November 19, 2019, 7:48 am
$
0
0





A spokesperson for  Brent Council told Wembley Matters this afternoon that the Council had paused the work in Furness Road 'for now so that we can re-assess the situation.'

Earlier in answer to a request from Wembley Matters they gave the background to the issue:
“When a footway is selected for renewal based on a condition survey, we make an assessment of all the trees in that street to identify those that are either dead, diseased or dying, and so which can sensibly be replaced by a new tree as part of the work.

“It’s actually a means of taking advantage of the work in order to be proactive in the management and replacement of poor quality trees.

“There are also other factors that may need to be taken into account regarding these trees, not least if their roots are presenting a significant trip hazard that cannot be overcome or if their health is likely to be impacted negatively by the new footway work so that they perish soon after.

“Of those considered a safety risk, a further site assessment is carried out specifically to see if there may be a workaround so that we don’t take them out unnecessarily.   

“Whenever we decide we must remove a tree as part of these works, it’s always a case of one out and a new one. There is no net loss. We are very mindful of air quality and climate change considerations and the council is committed to a much wider programme of planting new trees all over Brent.

“There’s a balance to be struck. As the local highways authority, we do have a duty to provide safe footways for our residents, particularly for the elderly and for those with mobility issues.”
↧

'If not now, when?' Read the Green Party's radical Manifesto here - '

November 19, 2019, 8:12 am
$
0
0
Click on bottom right corner for full screen view:


↧
↧

Public urged to support the Roe Green Strathcona staff on strike today

November 19, 2019, 11:41 pm
$
0
0

NEU staff at Roe Green Strathcona School will be on strike today following the failure of attempts to negotiate an arrangement with Brent Council that would avoid compulsory redundancies and facilitate redeployment from the Strathcona site to the main Roe Green Infants site.

Striking staff will be demonstrating outside Brent Civic Centre from 8am to 9am this morning. This will be the sixth strike in a campaign that initially started to stop the closure of Strathcona but following confirmation of the Labour Council's decision has now moved to protecting jobs.

Battles over school closures were last prominent in the 1970s when the number of pupils in schools fell.The strike is significant because it will set a precedent for how closures are handled by local authorities. It is thought that closures are likely in some of Brent's neighbouring boroughs. Falling pupil numbers are likely to be affected by movement out of the UK by some European families in the event of Brexit.
↧

Roe Green Strathcona strike again to save jobs

November 20, 2019, 9:29 am
$
0
0

When talks with Brent's Strategic Director of Children and Families on Tuesday evening failed to win a guarantee of no compulsory redundancies, NEU members at Roe Green Strathcona decided to take a sixth day of strike action today.

Jobs are threatened following Brent Council's decision to implement a phased closure of the Strathcona Site.

The NEU is asking for funding to enhance voluntary redundancy, retrain staff and to pay the existing staff who will be deployed at the main site in the expectation they will gradually leave for new jobs.
↧
Search

Green candidate calls on Brent Council to review Mapesbury asphalt & Furness trees decisions

November 20, 2019, 11:43 pm
$
0
0
William Relton, Green Party  parliamentary candidate for Brent Central is calling on Brent Council to review two actions that were due to be implemented on Monday morning in the night of its Climate Emergency Declaration. William said,
Quite why this is happening so soon after The Climate Emergency Declaration was made is quite staggering.The Climate Emergency Declaration must be more than a public relations stunt. It will only have credibility if residents can see that it affects Brent Council’s every environmental action. I support Mapesbury residents concerned about the detrimental environmental impact of asphalt replacing paving in Dartmouth Road and the people of Furness Road who have managed to delay the cutting down of trees in their road, five of which are outside Furness Primary School. Both cases indicate that the Council is prevented by a bureaucratic interpretation of its own guidelines in making sensible decisions that contribute to   the fight against climate change. 

I call on Brent Council to review both decisions and ensure that all such actions are seen through the lense of the Climate Emergency Declaration. Coincidentally I responded in the comments section of the CED specifically about Brent needing to implement a large scale tree planting programme, and this removal of healthy trees seems to be completely at odds with its own policy.
↧

Help plant 250 trees in One Tree Park tomorrow!

November 22, 2019, 12:27 am
$
0
0


Predictable comment but I haven't had my second coffee of the morning yet...    I expect they will have to rename it 'Twohundredandfiftyone Tree Hill.'  Great stuff after the Brent Council tree removal controversy.

From Wembley Central and Alperton Residents' Association

WCARA will be holding another tree planting event this year. Planting over 250 trees in One Tree Hill Park on Saturday 23rd November between 2:30 pm and 3:30pm.

We will be joining many other community groups during the National Tree Week whic is the UK's largest annual tree celebration, marking the start of the winter tree planting season.
Trees do so much for us every day. They give us oxygen, store carbon, improve air quality, conserve water, preserve soil, support wildlife and are a key solution to climate change. They also make our communities more beautiful and improve our wellbeing.

But trees need our help now. We need to champion them, by planting many more trees and caring for the ones we already have, to ensure a green, tree-filled future.

National Tree Week is an opportunity for everyone to plant a tree and help ensure a tree-filled future. So dig out your sturdy boots, grab a spade and become a Tree Champion today!


↧
↧

Street meeting on Furness Road street tree removal Tuesday 26th November

November 23, 2019, 3:49 am
$
0
0


After the uproar that arose when residents found out that Brent Council was about to remove 11 mature trees in Furness Road, five of which were outside the Furness Primary School playground, Brent Council has arranged a street meeting outside the school for 5pm on Tuesday 26th November.

The tree removal was postponed while the council reconsidered the issue.

The meeting will include local residents, Brent officers, ward councillors and the lead member for the environment Cllr Krupa Sheth.

People intending to attend should email chris.whyte@brent.gov.uk to confirm their attendance.

It is possible that the venue may be moved to somewhere more conducive to a discussion so please watch this space,

↧

Brent's Interim Climate Emergency Plan - is it enough?

November 24, 2019, 8:21 am
$
0
0


Monday's Full Council Meeting will be presented with Brent Council's Interim Climate and Ecological Emergency Action Plan. This needs to be seen in the context of the Council declaring a Climate Emergency and the setting up on a Climate Assembly  and the recent  consultation on climate change actions concluded last week. The wider context is of course the global climate crisis and at street level issues such as the Mapesbury asphalting of walkways controversy and the community battle to save mature trees in Furness Road.

The Report going to the Council Meeting sets out the following framework which is elaborated in the Action Plan. There has already been criticism that the detailed actions, whilst welcome, are not sufficiently radical and joined up across the Council and such criticisms are likely to be raised at Wednesday's Round Table meeting at Brent Civic Centre which is discussing a Brent bid to the National Lottery Climate Action Fund. 

Community leadership: As the democratically accountable body, we will provide the necessary leadership on this issue to bring the community together to address this issue with a positive and collaborative agenda, ensuring that the carbon neutral transition is fair for all.

Leading by example as a council: Reducing emissions from our own estate and   operations (corporate properties, vehicle fleet, street lighting/signage), from council housing and from our construction programmes; improving the environmental sustainability of the Council’s procurement of goods and services, reducing our dependence on damaging materials such as single use plastics.

Strategic planning and infrastructure:  Ensuring that environmental sustainability goals are fully integrated in strategic plans such as the Borough Plan, Local Plan, Inclusive Growth Strategy, Housing Strategy, Transport Strategy, Parking Strategy, Waste Strategy, Digital Strategy, Joint Strategic Needs Assessment. Creating better recycling, walking and cycling infrastructure; supporting green enterprise and reskilling the workforce; delivering borough-wide decentralised energy schemes including community owned renewable generation.

Partnership: Developing pan-London and cross-borough initiatives where these can improve our impact. Build on existing and create new partnerships with key sectors in Brent including public sector partners, business and industry, energy suppliers, schools, residents’ fora and community groups.

Attracting investment: Ensuring that Brent secures funding from existing and future national and regional programmes for carbon reduction, energy efficiency, waste reduction, air quality, sustainable urban drainage, biodiversity and tree planting.

Enabling: Making it easier for people in Brent to reduce their own impacts, for instance, allocating the Carbon Offset Fund for household, business, school and community carbon reduction initiatives.

Community engagement: Providing direct advice, for instance on recycling, and signposting residents to advice and support from other agencies such as the Energy Saving Trust.

ACTION PLAN (click bottom left for full size version) 


↧

The road to Hell is paved with Brent's good intent (or asphalt)

November 25, 2019, 6:46 am
$
0
0
 
Recent paving in the Barn Hill Conservation area - why not Mapesbury?



A Mapesbury resident who is a retired Civil and Structural Enginer (MIStructE and MICE) has carried out a pavement survey of Dartmouth Road where Brent Council wishes to replace the paving in this Conservation Area road with asphalt.

The survey has been forwarded to the  Council and members of the Mapesbury Residents Association.

The works have been temporarily suspended giving time for  review and it is hoped that in the light of the Council's Climate Emergency Declaration an assessment will be made of the comparative carbon footprint of renewing broken paving compared with taking paving up and replacing with asphalt.




Dartmouth Road Pavement Survey.
Carbon footprint of proposed replacement of paving slabs by asphalt
Date:  20.11.19

This report is based on a detailed survey of the pavements on both sides of Dartmouth Road:
A:  between nos. 103 to 131
B:  between nos. 60 – 92
Which is ¼ of the length of Dartmouth Road.
C:  between nos. 1 – 24.  This last section has recently been repaved and is in excellent order.  See appendix for the survey results for this section.

Pavements are on average 2700 mm. wide and are formed using 600 x 750 and 600 x 600 precast concrete paving slabs. The width consists of two of each size staggered: 
(2 x 750 ) + ( 2 x 600 ) = 2700.

Each property is approx. 10 m wide and so there are theoretically 16 ½ x 4 = 68 slabs per property. But many properties have vehicle crossovers which reduces the number of slabs. The crossovers are either of concrete or block paving construction or a mix of one of these plus paving slabs.  There are also a very few tarmac crossovers.

Where trees occur the paving is extended upto the tree or there is a resin gravel type infill upto the tree, or occasionally tarmac or nothing with the soil visible. Whatever has been installed next to the tree has usually failed in some way and is uneven.  These areas have the most trip hazards.

Concrete and concrete block vehicle crossovers have performed best and are often in good serviceable order. Any area of crossovers that is surfaced with paving slabs is in poor condition with on average over 1 / 3 of the paving slabs cracked.

Good condition slabs
.
Cracked slabs
.
Between crossovers
At vehicle crossovers
Total
Between crossovers
At crossovers
Total
1540

243
1783
129
72
201



% of total 129/1540= 8.3 %
% of total 72 / 243= 29.6%

Whole length of Dartmouth Road pro-rata  (i.e. x 132 / 32 )



6350
1000

7350




It can be seen that paved crossovers contribute nearly 4 times the rate of cracking that occurs  in areas between crossovers.

It can also be seen that within crossovers there are 243 – 72 = 171 uncracked slabs which is comfortably more than the 129 cracked slabs within the paved areas between crossovers. So when the defective crossovers are replaced there will be sufficient uncracked slabs recovered to replace all the cracked slabs between the crossovers.


We can extrapolate this detailed survey to the whole of Dartmouth Road because a visual inspection indicates that the area surveyed in detail here is of the same configuration as the whole of Dartmouth Road and the total figures for the whole road are shown in the table. 
The plan proposed by Brent Council is to remove all the paving and replace the crossovers with block paving and to infill between the crossovers using asphalt.

Therefore the number of paving slabs to be removed from between crossovers and dumped is 6350 slabs.  The slabs are 50mm thick

The average weight of a slab is (.6m x .675m x .05m) x 2000 kg / m cube = 40.5 kg
Therefore the weight of slabs to be removed = 6350 x 40.5 / 1000 = 257 tons. These slabs have to be lifted, piled up and then grab loaded onto a lorry and taken to a dump. Such loading will achieve about 10 tons per typical 8 wheel lorry giving rise to 26 lorry movements. And the dumping will attract landfill tax. More seriously, these slabs will remain in landfill unchanged for centuries.

Asphalt requires a well compacted base layer of stone which will have to be imported because the sand / soil / clay found under the existing slabs when lifted will need improvement. 

The area of new asphalt will be the same as the paving removed = 6350 x 0.6 x 0.675 = 2570 m square. 

Allow for a restored formation thickness of 75mm, this will require the removal of 75mm of existing soft material ( to maintain existing levels) and reinstatement using 75 mm of stone material. So the volume of material removed and replaced will be 2 (1 removal and one replacement) x 2570 x 0.075 = 385 m cube = 770 tons. Which at 15 tons per lorry for this type of material gives rise to 51 lorry movements.

The amount of asphalt required if 20mm thick will be 2570 x .02 = 51 m cube = 100 tons at least, requiring another 10 lorry movements.

So the total weight of materials being lifted and moved is 257 + 770 + 100 = 1,127 tons requiring 26 +5 1 + 10 = 87  lorry movements. 

The lorries will have to travel to a dump outside London and the asphalte and stone will have to be brought in from a quarry, also well outside London.  This represents a lot of diesel at 10 mpg! And this is just Dartmouth Road. For the whole of Mapesbury Estate there will be at least 6 x these quantities, i.e nearly 7,000 tons of materials dumped or imported, involving 500 plus lorry movements. 

Furthermore, since Brent plans to change all the pavements in the Borough for asphalt, the quantities will become huge.

It is obvious that the proposed use of asphalt to replace existing slab paving is totally unacceptable on carbon foot print grounds for material handling and transport and the energy intensive manufacture of the asphalt itself, which is a heavy crude oil hydrocarbon based product. Levelling the slabs in situ would have minimal carbon foot print and lead to a pleasing durable solution appropriate for a Conservation Area. 

Appendix:  P
Appendix:
The section of Dartmouth Road between Mapesbury Road and Exeter Road has also been surveyed in detail as follows. This section was re-laid using slabs 5 years ago and is in very good condition and shows how successful slab paving can be when well laid.

Survey on Dartmouth Road between numbers 2 and 14 and the opposite odd numbers side which is in equally good condition

Good condition slabs
.
Cracked slabs
.
Between crossovers
At crossovers
Total
Between crossovers
At crossovers
Total
1043
No paved crossovers, all are conc. or blocks or tarmac
1043
19 *
No paved crossovers, all are conc. or blocks or tarmac
19


% of total 19/1043 = 1.8 %
% of total 19/1043 = 1.8 %


About half of these cracked slabs are so finely cracked it is difficult to see the crack because they have not moved having been very well laid.

This table applies to only 15 % of Dartmouth Road and so would not affect the pro-rata totals used above very much and in fact further support the case for retaining all the existing paving in Dartmouth Road.

↧
Viewing all 7143 articles
Browse latest View live
Search