Cllr Anton Georgiou has received a response to his complaint that its Wembley store is not safe in terms of enforcing Covid safety measures such as mask wearing and social distancing. Cllr Georgiou said that the store was putting its customer and staff at significant risk. LINK

I leave readers to decide whether the answer is satisfactory and will publish any reply that Cllr Georgiou passes on to Wembley Matters,

Hello Councillor Georgiou

Thank you for speaking with me on New Years Eve, I hope you were able to celebrate the new year safely.

Since the start of the crisis, our highest priority has been keeping our customers and colleagues as safe as possible in line with the latest Government guidance.

All colleagues were encouraged to wear face coverings when in our stores and were provided with masks. With the new update all colleagues will be wearing a face covering, who are able to do so. 

We have also implemented Marshals at the entry to our stores to offer face masks for customers to use if they have forgotten theirs and they are also monitoring the volume of customers entering our stores to ensure the volume of customers entering the store is not near the maximum total.

By asking colleagues to confront members of the public who are not wearing a face covering, it can lead to situations where they are subject to verbal and physical abuse. We have a responsibility to protect the welfare of our colleagues, so encourage them to intervene only when they feel it is safe to do so.

I should emphasise we are continuing to maintain our other social distancing measures, including limiting the number of customers in store (well below the usual occupancy level) and having regular reminders on the need to maintain distance. This is done via extensive signage and colleagues wearing t-shirts emphasising the need to distance. There is also hand sanitiser and disinfectant available to all customers. Our social distancing measures are monitored by store leadership and our regional compliance teams. If government guidance changes, we are able to adapt quickly to it.

We have put in place increased cleaning protocols, further reduced the customer limits and have supported our vulnerable colleagues by moving them to roles in the store with less customer contact.

I have also raised yours and your constituents concerns to the General Store Manager to ensure customers are abiding to the guidelines, whilst in our stores and any abusive behaviour from customers will not be tolerated.

If there is anything in the future I can assist with, please feel free to contact me directly. 

Many Thanks and Stay Safe

Elliott

Asda Executive Relations

Following pressure on social media over the weekend, as the focus moved to children unable to access on-line learning durign school closures, the BBC has announced a programme of curriculum based learning.

The BBC announcement

Reacting quickly to the news of UK schools moving to remote learning, the new offer from the BBC will ensure all children can access curriculum-based learning, even if they don’t have access to the internet.

Starting on Monday 11 January, each week day on CBBC will see a three-hour block of primary school programming from 9am, including BBC Live Lessons and BBC Bitesize Daily, as well as other educational programming such as Our School and Celebrity Supply Teacher and much loved titles such as Horrible Histories, Art Ninja and Operation Ouch.

BBC Two will cater for secondary students with programming to support the GCSE curriculum, with a least two hours of content each weekday.

Content will be built around Bitesize Daily secondary shows, complemented by Shakespeare and classic drama adaptations alongside science, history and factual titles from the BBC’s award-winning factual programming units.

Bitesize Daily primary and secondary will also air every day on BBC Red Button as well as episodes being available on demand on BBC iPlayer.

Tim Davie, BBC Director General, says: “Ensuring children across the UK have the opportunity to continue to follow the appropriate core parts of their nation’s school curriculum has been a key priority for the BBC throughout this past year.

“Education is absolutely vital - the BBC is here to play its part and I’m delighted that we have been able to bring this to audiences so swiftly.”

This TV offer sits alongside a wealth of online content which parents, children and teachers can access when and where they need it:

• For primary, BBC Bitesize online has an expanded offer of structured lessons in Maths and English for all year groups - these can be used at home or in the classroom. ‘This Term’s Topics’ also covers other curriculum subjects and curates learning content that works for the Spring curriculum. This content can be easily incorporated into a learning plan or used to explore different topics at home. Visit bbc.co.uk/bitesize, click on the year group and subject and all the content is there.

• For secondary pupils, Bitesize is also home to two-week learning packs for English and Maths in KS3 (years 7, 8 and 9) as well as This Term’s Topics for other subjects to be used at home or to support teachers in the remote classrooms.

• For students in Years 10 and 11, the Bitesize GCSE offer allows students to pick their exam board and subject to find everything they need to help with their studies. Visit bbc.co.uk/bitesize/secondary for details.

Oliver Dowden, Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, says: “The BBC has helped the nation through some of the toughest moments of the last century, and for the next few weeks it will help our children learn whilst we stay home, protect the NHS and save lives.

“This will be a lifeline to parents and I welcome the BBC playing its part.”

Educational content for all nations will also be available.

 From the Mayor of London

 From Brent Council Climate Emergency Strategy Team

 Brent Council is holding a virtual workshop to discuss its draft Climate Emergency Strategy. This event is being held specifically for residents with a disability, their carer(s) or a representative from an organisation that supports people with disabilities and/or carers. Below is the invitation to the workshop, which has also been sent out via the Disability Forum. Please send this on to anyone you feel may wish to attend:

Brent Council is working on a plan to tackle climate change in Brent. Climate change is happening because the planet is being damaged. This plan will be called the ‘Climate Emergency Strategy’.

Brent Council are currently asking all residents what they think of the plan. Brent Council also want to ask if anyone has any ideas about what else the council could do about climate change. This draft plan is being put into easy read.

Brent Council has arranged a Zoom meeting to discuss the draft plan. This meeting will be called a workshop. It will take place on:

Wednesday 13th January 5pm – 6.30pm on Zoom.

The easy read plan and a Zoom link to the meeting will be sent around before the workshop for those that would like to attend.

Please send an email to climateemergency@brent.gov.uk if you would like to receive the easy read plan and attend the Zoom workshop. 

Also if you would like to join the Brent Climate Emergency Planning Group and get involved in shaping Brent's approach to the Climate Emergency, you can sign up here:  https://www.mutualgain.org/brent-climate-emergency-planning-group-registration-form/

Published on UK Homesearch LINK

US private equity group Lone Star has shelved the £3bn sale of its UK residential property company Quintain, blaming the worsening coronavirus situation. 

Formal bids for Quintain, which owns the Wembley Park development site, were due to be submitted later this month with the company expected to fetch about £3bn, said a person briefed on the deal.

A sale at that price would make the deal the largest ever in the UK’s rented housing sector. But the sales process was aborted after a dramatic spike in coronavirus cases prompted a third national lockdown.

“Lone Star has decided to terminate discussions because it’s crazy trying to do this deal now with the backdrop of Covid. It’s a huge asset, with a lot of financing involved,” said the person briefed on the deal.

The end of the sales process was first reported by React news. 

The 85-acre Wembley Park site in north-west London has planning permission for 8,000 rental homes, with 1,500 of those already built. As well as paying for the existing properties and the land, prospective buyers of Quintain would need to fund any further development on the site.

The company had attracted interest from three bidders: German fund manager Patrizia; Li Ka-shing-backed investment manager Long Harbour; and a consortium of investors behind Get Living, another major rental housing developer which owns the former Olympic Village in east London, said two people with knowledge of the process. 

But Lone Star pulled the deal after deciding it might complete a smoother transaction and for a better price once the pandemic had eased, said a banker advising one of the prospective bidders.

The banker said: “January 2021 is not the ideal time to execute a £3bn transaction in London which is based on a bunch of assumptions about [who will rent] homes, the future of retail and when Wembley Stadium might reopen. There are a raft of things which it would be difficult for a lender or an investor to take a view on . . . I can completely see why they would wait for a brighter day.”

It is the second time in a little over two years that the private equity firm has had a potential sale fade as it neared the finish line. In 2018, Lone Star came close to a sale to Get Living’s backers — Delancey, Oxford Properties, Qatari Diar and the Dutch pension fund APG — but the parties could not agree on a price. 

Lone Star, which took Quintain private in 2015 for £1bn including debt, will now continue to invest in the estate, developing the remainder of the planned apartments.

“Lone Star looks forward to continuing to work with the Quintain team to deliver on the next development phase for Wembley Park — with an another 850 units already under construction,” said the company.

 Continuing his hapless mismanagement of the education service during the pandemic, Gavin Williamson has changed guidance on the opening of nurseries from that initially sent out at the beginning of term.  The opening of school-based nurseries had initially been left to headteachers to decide and in schools open to only vulnerable and critical workers (the latter a widened category compared with key workers) it made little sense to open nurseries to all children and thus increase the potential of contagion.

The DfE has now issued guidance that nurseries should be full open.

 Brent NEU has written a letter to Brent MPs Barry Gardiner, Tulip Siddiq and Dawn Butler; Muhammed Butt leader of Brent Council and Cllr Tom Stephens lead member for schools asking them to intervene in what could be a life or death matter.

Dear Brent Councillors and MPs,

 

As you know, there is great pressure to open nurseries and special schools fully during this lockdown despite the fact that Sadiq Khan has today declared a major incident and school settings have been shown to be a major transmission factor with the new variant of Covid-19.

 

In Brent our nursery and special school headteachers have, as usual, put safety first, and resisted opening to increased numbers of children. As you know this is in line with the policies of all education unions, the NEU included.

 

However they are now being pressured to implement this government's shameless edict just at the moment that deaths and cases reach a record high, the virus is out of control, we hear of deaths of our workers every day and the NHS in London is at breaking point.

 

I'm afraid I have to be brutally honest with you here. I cannot morally bring myself to advise my members (when they write to me concerned that their settings are going to fully open to children and staff) that they must go into their school or nursery, because the reality is that I know that if I give this advice, some will subsequently become seriously ill or die. This is the reality.

 

I feel I have no option but to advise against this. However it is within the gift of the council and MPs to come out publicly and state that you will not require your schools and council officers, in Brent, to adhere to DfE advice where that advice contradicts with the evidence we have on safety, risk and the headteachers' own risk assessments.

 

With that in mind I am asking you now if you can offer this support? Of course, not only would this protect my members from harm but it would help halt the spread of the virus, help save hospital beds and also prevent the deaths of pupils, bearing in mind that children with learning disabilities are six times more likely to die from Covid-19.

 

I am happy to meet with any of you to discuss this further, or indeed, organise a public meeting so that you can hear the views of our Brent community on this.

 

I look forward to hearing from you on this matter, as soon as possible.

 

Jenny Cooper

 

Brent NEU Joint District Secretary.

Vice Chair, NEU National Health and Safety Organising Forum.

Meanwhile the National Governors Association (NGA) has drawn attention to the problem of more than the expected number of vulnerable and critical worker children attended school, undermining the intention of school closures to stop the spread of the virus. Boris Johnson had insisted both that schools are safe and should close as they are vectors for the spread of the new strain:

One of the main issues we are currently in dialogue with the DfE is on the number of children who are attending schools despite there being a national lockdown with a stay at home request from the Prime Minister with supposedly schools closed to most pupils: significant numbers of governing boards are reporting that they have between 40 and 70% of their pupils attending in strong contrast to the first lockdown.  We are also aware that there are particular challenges for special schools, alternative provision and those with large numbers of disadvantaged children, but it is helpful to make the case if we have your stories to bring the points alive.

Mail to: covidfeedback@nga.org.uk

The Partnership Development site

 The new spine/access road (Download PDF HERE)

Brent Cabinet is expected to approve a £10m Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy underwriting of the new spine/access road to be built on the Northwick Park One Public Estate development. The money is required upfront for the road building but should, if conditions are met, be repaid from the Housing Infrastructure Fund.

The development is a partnership between Network Housing, University of Westminster, London North West Health Authority and Brent Council. The Brent Council Highways Team will be responsible for the project.

The project as a whole is expected to raise  £19m CIL from developers.

It should be noted that the future of Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy are currently under review by the government.

OFFICERS REPORT

Slow Worm

Steve Whitbread, Harrow Council’s Biodiversity Officer, has responded to the concerns expressed by Emma Wallace (Green Party GLA candidate for Brent and Harrow) over destruction at the Ridgeway development site LINK.  It appears that slow worms (often called ‘legless lizards) a protected species may come to the aid of the struggle against environmental vandalism. Protection of slow worms has delayed development elsewhere. LINK

The destruction carried out by the Plymouth Brethren

He wrote:

Whilst I can't comment on whatever reason the owners of the site might have had for the clearance of the trees and shrubs on their land, they were within their rights to carry out such work since these had no direct impact on protected species or  their shelters. I have advised the local Wildlife Crime Officer accordingly.

There was nothing that the Council could have done to prevent the clearance. However, I can assure you that the consideration of any planning application for the site will still take the vegetation into account as if it had never been carried out.

This has already been emphasised to the applicant and their agent and they have confirmed that there will be no disturbance of the felled area where protected slow-worms are likely to be hibernating.

The Council is due to hold a meeting with local residents and councillors to address resulting concerns next week. For your information, I have appended the comments I provided to interested parties last month, attempting to ensure that everyone understood the both the situation and the constraints within which the Council is working:

Dear Residents, Councillors and Colleagues,

Beverley Kuchar, the Chief Planning Officer, will be seeking to organise a virtual meeting, early in the new year, to discuss the situation in relation to the Ridgeway development proposals and the weekend clearance of the trees and shrubs along the boundary with the allotment site.

Ahead of that meeting, I thought it might be helpful to address points raised in relation to biodiversity matters. That is mainly to separate out what legal protection measures might be relevant to the species found on or adjacent to the site from what will be of 'material consideration' in relation to any planning application.

What I should emphasise is that the belt of woodland and its role within the green corridor and local ecological network will continue to be of material consideration regardless of the recent clearance. The recent actions will make no difference to how the scheme will be appraised and, where evidence is lacking, the approach will be to assess what has been lost at the highest reasonable value, taking account of other information as needed.

Considering protection for biodiversity relevant to the site, the ecological consultancy Ecosa was appointed by the applicant to undertake required surveys and prepare an Ecological Impact Assessment in the wake of the comments I provided on the original Preliminary Ecological Assessment (produced by Ecology By Design in 2018).

The Ecosa consultant discussed the survey proposals and inquired about potential offsite compensation opportunities. He also contacted Simon Braidman for his views based on the investigations that he and others had already undertaken. I had the opportunity to view the draft EcIA and provided my comments on this. I have no definite knowledge of whether a final version has yet been provided to their client, but I would assume that this was done some time ago.

Taking different species groups in turn, whilst all birds and their nests, eggs and young are protected from destruction during the breeding season, this does not extend to protecting habitat in which they might nest. Whilst there are exceptions and additional protection for certain vulnerable species, these don't apply in this case.

Similarly, whilst bat roosts and hibernacula are protected, whether bats are in occupation or not, habitat areas which bats use for commuting or foraging purposes aren't protected, unless the sites of which they are part are appropriately designated, e.g. as a Site of Special Scientific Interest.

It should be stressed that under current legislation, this would not extend to the SINC area. Whilst such wildlife sites identify important areas for wildlife locally, and their protection is of material consideration within the planning system, such designation does not preclude the landowner from damaging or removing the features of interest unless this would otherwise conflict with the law or statutory obligations, such as harm to protected species.

Simon Braidman, Huma Pearce and others have done an excellent job of recording wildlife in the environs of the proposed development site, and there is every likelihood that West Harrow Allotments now has a longer recorded species list than any other Harrow allotment site.

Protection for badgers also relates mainly to the animals themselves and their setts. The report of a sett entrance having been filled is necessarily of concern, but this appears to have been carried out at some time in the past. The information provided via surveys of the development site indicate that whilst it provides some suitable habitat for setts and foraging there was no evidence of any onsite activity that could be attributed to badger.

It is likely that common newt and potentially common frog and common toad occur within the development site, at least at its margins as part of meta-populations centred on the allotment site. However, protection for these species only extends to sale or barter. Nothing protects habitat on the basis that these species are present.

The situation is somewhat different in relation to slow-worms, however. Whilst these do not enjoy the same level of protection as rarer reptiles, it is not only an offence to sell but also to kill slow-worms. Whilst the felling of the belt of trees would be unlikely to have caused any direct harm to slow-worms, any efforts to excavate ground in which slow-worms are presently hibernating would be likable to result in mortality. This would constitute a criminal offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act. The developer's agents have been advised accordingly.

In recognition of its alarming decline, the common hedgehog will be added to Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act under the provisions of the Environment Bill, and it is presently protected from being killed or captured. It is highly likely that hedgehogs would move between the allotment and the development site and, whilst the latter does not contain a significant area of foraging habitat, there is certainly potential for hedgehog to be hibernating within the felling area.

Whilst not subject to legal protection, the other species mentioned in correspondence and reports, taken as a whole and, in some cases, individually would be of material consideration in relation to the determination of the planning application. It is useful to have knowledge of what is found in the vicinity in this regard.

Lastly, queries were raised about the making of a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) to cover the trees in the identified area. TPOs are made a local planning authority in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), for amenity and landscape purposes, where these would be impacted adversely were the tree(s) or group of trees to be removed. Usually this depends on how visible the trees are from highways and publicly accessible space, but trees that have landscape value, contribute to the character of a conservation area or have historical importance may be TPO-worthy.

Given the nature of the trees and the fact that, other than from the development site, they could only be viewed from allotments to which access is restricted, they did not satisfy the necessary criteria. I should add that whilst biodiversity, as well as climate change considerations, might be taken into account in the making of an order, a TPO could not be applied on such grounds alone.

In a move that is quite unusual in Brent, planning officers are recommending that the Planning Committee refuse the application for a major development on an industrial site that lies between Dudden Hill Lane and Willesden High Road.

Adjacent sites are also earmarked for development and other nearby developments are a major housing project at the College of North West London  and flats on the Learie Constantine Community Centre site. This application would form part of a Masterplan for the area.

Taken together the developments will change the face of this part of Willesden and continue the proliferation of high rise developments in Brent. Although the maximum height of these blocks is less than half of those around Wembley Stadium they would still make a major impact on the local streetscape as can be seen from the images above. The two storey terraced houses on Colin Road would be dwarfed by this development and experience a significant loss of light.

The proposal

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of 5 mixed use blocks ranging from 4 to 10 storeys plus basement levels, comprising; 245 residential units at 1st to 9th floors, and light industrial floorspace (Class B1c), food retail floorspace (supermarket) (Class A1), gym (Class D2), nursery (Class D1), commercial units (units 7 and 9) (flexible use for Class A1, A2, A3, D1 and/or B1c) and HA office (Class B1a) at basement, ground and part 1st floors, together with associated vehicular access, car and cycle parking spaces, bin stores, plant room, substations, landscaping and amenity space (Amended description)

Housing

Given the current controversies over the short-comings of shared ownership it is noteworthy that the officers' report states that  95% of those in affordable housing need cannot afford intermediate products such as shared ownership. There has been considerable dialogue between the developer and the council over the housing provision and compliance with policy:

The Brent Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2018 identified a need for 42,000 additional homes between 2016-2041. Using a limit of 33% of gross household incomes to be spent on rent/mortgages, affordable housing comprises 52% of that need. Of the affordable need identified 85% was for social rent (council house type rents) and 10% was for London Living Rent-LAR (pegged at a percentage of median incomes). Just 5% was for people able afford to between that and 80% of median local rents (typically these people might seek to buy shared ownership units). Whilst the headline figure provided by the applicant, being 66% affordable housing, is well in excess of the 50% overall target set out in DMP 15 and emerging policy BH5 , this figure is weighted heavily in favour of intermediate product (shared ownership units) and therefore the proposal is not in accordance with this policy. As stated above, the SHMA identifies that intermediate products are essentially unaffordable to 95% of those in affordable housing need and are more likely to be occupied by people who have a choice within the market for alternative accommodation e.g. market rent.

The final offer presented by the applicant shows that even with 100% affordable workspace and on a policy compliant tenure split the development could reasonably deliver 13 additional London Affordable Rented homes which would help the most specific needs of the borough. Whilst this would be at the expense of a large proportion of intermediate units, there is far less need for this type of housing.

Given that primary need in the borough is for LAR homes (as reflected in adopted and emerging policy) the overprovision of Intermediate Housing and other benefits of the scheme are not considered to be of sufficient benefit to outweigh the harm associated with the under-provision of affordable rented homes to meet local need.

Comments on the planning consultation portal were fairly evenly split between those in favour and against.  The provision of a supermarket (named as Lidl in the drawings) was seen as positive as was a nursery, but the impact on traffic and parking in the are was a negative factor, as well as the loss of daylight to the local two storey terraced houses in Colin Road.

Officers' recommendation

Whilst the proposed development would undoubtedly bring forward significant benefits, largely in the form of modern affordable workspace and the provision of a large number of homes to meet borough housing targets, including a high overall number of Affordable homes, the development would also fall short in a number of policy areas. In particular, the proposal fails to deliver the maximum reasonable amount of Affordable housing on a policy compliant tenure split. Whilst the headline affordable housing figure is high, this is not considered sufficient to justify the number of London Affordable Rented homes, which are proposed at less than the maximum reasonable number. There is a significant need within the borough for the lower cost Affordable Homes (Social or London Affordable Rent) which look to cater for those most in need in accordance with adopted and emerging policy. 

 

 Furthermore, at the scale proposed the development would result in significant daylight impacts to a number of neighbouring properties. The benefits of the scheme are not considered to outweigh the harm identified to these properties. 

 

Finally, the development would provide parking for the supermarket well in excess of standards without an appropriate parking price regime to encourage non-car access and would therefore encourage additional unnecessary car journeys to and from the site and from the area in general. Again whilst policy deviations can be accepted when having regard to a wider planning balance, in the case, the benefits of the scheme are not considered significant enough to outweigh the harm associated with the failure to provide adequate means to encourage non-car access to the supermarket. 

 

To conclude, the development is contrary to policy, and would fail to deliver the degree of benefit necessary to outweigh the harm associated with the proposal.

The statement on shared ownership will be significant for future planning applications in the borough.

 Following concern over the lack of Covid safety measures at some supermarkets, Simon Roberts, CEO of Sainsbury's, issued the following message today:

Following this weekend's letter to Brent Council from the National Education Union  LINK expressing strong fears about the safety of fully opening early years settings, Cllr Tom Stephens made the following statement:

I fully share the concerns which have been raised, by the NEU, GMB and others, about the Government’s position on the opening of early years settings. The Government has failed to set out the scientific basis of closing primary schools to face-to-face teaching whilst keeping early years settings open. 

The decision to fund early years settings based on attendance this term also needs to be urgently reversed. Settings should be given the funding they need to sustain them throughout this crisis, based on their 2019 attendance. These twin issues have put early years settings under a period unprecedented pressure and confusion.  

Guidance on the opening of these settings is set nationally and not locally, and is a matter for each relevant governing board. 

 

Given this, Brent Council is regularly and actively engaging with unions and schools to support them in developing robust risk assessments and management arrangements, as we have done throughout this crisis. 

The council will continue to support settings in developing these. Given the current context, this is the best way of navigating these issues in a way which supports schools, staff and children.

Matt Kelcher, Chair of Brent Planning Committee, announced that the planning application for the very large development between Dudden Hill and High Road, Willesden, would not be taken at tonight's meeting.

The reason given was that the developer had submitted 'significant' late changes to the application, presumably to address the reasons planning officers had given for, unusually in Brent, recommending refusal of the applciation LINK.

Sceptics on social media had already suggested that 'the developer will be back with a few changes and then the planners and committee will back it.'

It may come back as early a next month when officers have had a chance to assess it and committee members have had time to review revised documentation.

Existing store

The site

Responding to Cllr Matt Kelcher, Chair of Planning Committee, who had said he would feel better if the accommodation was genuinely affordable, Plotnek said, 'I appreciate people saying its not affordable but that's not this developer causing the problem. The housing marker in London is in the situation it's in. So this will be a range of unit types, studios and one bedroomed flats, that will be at the affordable end of the school. A huge CIL [£3.5m] contribution will go to the council to deliver wider benefits across the borough in whatever way the council wishes to spend it and the developer will contribute £75,000 towards a Controlled Paking Zone (CPZ) consultation.

A large scale vaccination site in Wembley Park is to be opened by North West London NHS at the former Network Homes headquarters in Fulton Road at the corner of Olympic Way. The building is awaiting redevelopment as the new site for the College of North West London.

The NHS Vaccination Centre will open next week to vaccinate people aged 80 and over abd health and care workers.

Brent Council said:

The large-scale site in Wembley is capable of delivering thousands of the life-saving jabs each week and offers a convenient alternative to GP-led and hospital services that are already set up across NW London.

Letters are being sent to people aged over 80 who live up to a 45 minute drive from the new centre, who have not already been vaccinated, inviting them to book an appointment either by phone or online through the national booking system.

People should wait until they receive their invite letter and should not call their GP but use the booking line, when their invite arrives. If an appointment has already been offered by the GP, please keep this appointment.

More Vaccination Centres will be launched in NW London in the coming weeks to increase the numbers of people who can be conveniently vaccinated each day.

The NHS vaccination programme, the biggest in the health service’s history, is being delivered as health service staff are treating record numbers of seriously ill patients with COVID, caused by rapidly rising infection numbers.

Please don’t contact the NHS to seek a vaccine, the NHS will contact you. When you are contacted, please attend your booked appointments. And whether you have had a vaccine or not, please continue to follow all the guidance to control the virus and save lives – that means staying at home as much as you can, and following the ‘hands, face, space’ guidance when you can’t.

Invites to book at the centres are being sent to people aged 80 or over who have not yet been vaccinated and live within a 45 minutes’ drive from the site, with more sites opening in the coming weeks.

The letters will explain how they can book a slot over the phone or online through the national booking service, and NHS leaders are urging people not to turn up at the centres or try to book without receiving them.

The new vaccination centres will each be capable of delivering thousands of vaccinations each week, scaling their operations up and down according to vaccine supplies and demand.

People who book in to a vaccine centre should note marshals will be on hand to help people to the right place. Bookings are staggered to allow social distancing and please don’t arrive until five minutes before your appointment time. Travel information will be available from Monday at www.tfl.gov.uk/jabs

In answer to a Freedom of Information request Brent has reported that over the  4 week period 21.12.20-14.01.21 they identified 875 positive Covid cases at their nine operational Lateral Flow Test sites across the borough.

They conducted a total of 24,628 tests of which 21,519 were negative and 875 positive. I presume the remainder were inconclusive.

As these tests are for those without symptoms it appears the 875 were asymptomatic so a positive result and subsequent quarantine will have removed a source of contagion from the community.

The information is not collected by ward.

INFORMATION ON BOOKING A TEST FROM BRENT COUNCIL

 f you don’t have symptoms of COVID-19, you can book a free rapid Lateral Flow Test, with results available in less than 40 minutes.

You will need to book two tests, two to four days apart, in order to ensure the results are completely reliable.

If you are a critical worker or can’t work from home, or if others in your household still go out for work, it’s recommended that you get tested twice a week, every week.

>> Book a free rapid Lateral Flow Test (please note that this link will not work using the Internet Explorer browser)

If you do have any symptoms of COVID-19 (a cough, high fever or a loss of taste or smell) or have been in contact with someone who has tested positive, you should not book a rapid Lateral Flow Test. You should stay at home for 10 days and if you develop signs of the virus, call 020 8937 4440 to book a PCR test.

How do I book a rapid Lateral Flow Test?

You can book a Lateral Flow Test via the link below. Remember to bring confirmation of your appointment with you when you arrive for your test.

Lateral Flow Tests are only for those without symptoms of the virus. If you have symptoms, you should book a free standard PCR swab test at one of Brent’s local testing sites.

>> Book a free rapid Lateral Flow Test (please note that this link will not work using the Internet Explorer browser)

You can also walk-in without booking an appointment however this will be subject to availability on the day.

Where are the Lateral Flow Testing sites?

Rapid Lateral Flow Testing is available at the following sites Monday to Sunday, from 9am-6pm:

• Brent Civic Centre - Engineers Way, Wembley Park, Wembley, HA9 0FJ
• Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre - Brentfield, Harrow Road, London, NW10 0RG
• Central Mosque of Brent - Station Parade, Marley Walk, London, NW2 4PU
• Ealing Road Library - Coronet Parade, Ealing Road, Wembley, HA0 4BA
• Father O'Callaghan Centre - 22 Hay Lane, London, NW9 0NG
• Harlesden Library - Craven Park Road, Harlesden, NW10 8SE
• Kingsbury Library - 522-524 Kingsbury Road, Kingsbury, NW9 9HE
• The Granville - 140 Carlton Vale, London, NW6 5HE
• The Library at Willesden Green - 95 High Rd, Willesden, London, NW10 2SF

These are asymptomatic testing sites, meaning that only those without symptoms should visit. If you go when you have symptoms or have been in close contact with someone who has tested positive for COVID-19, you will be turned away.

 Leon Street

Detectives investigating a fatal stabbing in Brent are appealing for information and witnesses

The victim has been identified as 48-year-old Leon Street of Neasden Road North. He lived near to the murder scene with his fiancée. Mr Street was a father and step-grandfather and he worked as a delivery driver.

Police were called to Neasden Lane North, NW10 shortly after 21.30hrs on Monday, 11 January to reports of a man stabbed near the junction with Hazelwood Court.

Officers attended along with paramedics from London Ambulance Service (LAS) and London’s Air Ambulance and found Mr Street suffering stab injuries. Despite the efforts of emergency services, he died at the scene.

Police Appeal

• saw a man running near Neasden Lane North between 9pm and 10pm on Monday 11 January
• has seen a man hanging around the area in recent weeks
• knows anyone who has been acting suspiciously on Monday or since then
• know anyone who has been disposing of clothes
• knows anyone who seems agitated for no apparent reason.

The Brent Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee meets at the earlier time of 4pm today, which is unfortunate as many residents with a direct interest in the issue  under discussion will still be at work. The Committee is usually held at 6pm.

You can watch the meeting at 4pm HERE

The Committee will examine a report on the New Council Homes Project (NCHP) and reports on the two arms length council organisations that provide housing by various routes. This article concentrates on the former.

 Brent has a very long housing list and the report covers the two most needy categories: (December 2020)  1924 homeless households in temporary accommodation and 971 homeseekers defined by the allocations policy as in acute need. This is the accommodation needed:

 1bed–464

2bed–770

3 bed – 1167

4bed–424

5bed–64

 6bed–7  

      The table below (Table 1) sets out the projected number of new homes including all of those included in the NCHP based on known development sites and opportunities identified to date as at November 2020. It breaks delivery down by the different types of accommodation:

· TA: Temporary Accommodation

· S106: Homes delivered due to a s106 obligation

· DLP: Developer Led Project

· SSU: Supported Specialised Units

· NAIL: New Accommodation for Independent Living

UPDATE: In answer to a query from Wembley Matters about the table above Brent Council said all rented properties developed by the council and counted in Table 1, will be let at London Affordable Rent levels or less.
 

The large anount of shared ownership housing  will be a concern to many given the recent comment by planning officers on the Willesden development that 95% of intermediate products (such as shared ownership) are not affordable to 95% of Brent residents LINK.

Shared ownership is currently in the news over large bills for repairs post Grenfell that fall on the leaseholders rather than the freeholder and big hikes in service charges.  Which? LINK lists the pros and cons:

The report  states that the current position in terms of delivery of the NCHP can be summarised as follows:

· 231 new homes have been built and let

· 610 homes are currently on site and being built

· 332 homes have been given planning consent and are now going through procurement to identify a building contractor. 

· 566 homes currently being assessed for feasibility.

The council''s ambition is to deliver 1,000 homes at 'genuinely affordable' rents. Table 2 below, shows some of the sites that are currently being explored. The pipeline consists of four elements.

Sites with building underway (on-site)

Sites with planning permission awaiting start on site

 

Sites deemed feasible submitted for Planning Permission

 

Sites currently being assessed for feasibility and financial viability.

A decision has to be made between redevelopment and infill on St Raphael's Estate. The redevelopment option would deliver 2,065 new homes a net increase of 550 'affordable' (definition?) rented homes, while the infill proposes to deliver 370 'new homes' (tenure details?)

Regarding South Kilburn the report says:

Officers continue to explore opportunities in South Kilburn to deliver an increased number of Council homes while still ensuring a sensible balance between different housing tenures, as required in the Master Plan. (What's a 'sensible balance?) 

 

New housing provided by Registered Providers and funded by the GLA is also planned over the next two years. (No mention of tenure):

 

 

In a report relevant to this afternoon's Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committe  a new report by Sian Berry, Green Party Assembly Member and Mayoral candidate  reveals London is set to have lost more than 13,500 social and council homes in estate redevelopment schemes since 2003 if currently approved projects are completed.

The report, Estate redevelopment in London, reveals that completed demolition schemes on sites with existing social housing have led to the net loss of 6,748 social and council homes since 2003. It also shows that a further 6,791 will be lost if currently approved schemes go ahead.

Estate redevelopment schemes funded by the Mayor now cannot involve demolition without residents approving schemes via a ballot. This is part of a new policy finally introduced by the Mayor in July 2018, after a long campaign from estate residents and Sian Berry.

Today’s report reveals that this policy has yet to take full effect. It also describes how the losses have been worsened by the Mayor quietly agreeing to fund dozens of schemes in the months ahead of the new ballot policy coming into force. This allowed many thousands of potential home demolitions to slip under the wire of new rules.

The new research found that 1,430 social rented homes will be demolished and not replaced in schemes given planning permission since April 2018 alone.

Sian Berry AM said:

London simply cannot afford to lose 13,539 council and housing association homes through demolition. Waiting lists of Londoners in urgent need of housing continue to grow and people are more squeezed than ever by the housing crisis.

 

My research today shows we have already lost thousands of social housing homes, and that thousands more are under imminent threat. Demolishing estates in this way not only reduces the amount of housing for families in need, it also breaks up communities at the heart of life in the city.

 

The Mayor’s decision to sign off on dozens of redevelopment schemes in 2018, allowing them to dodge incoming rules for resident ballots, has prolonged the damage to our city. I have found that the new ballot policy is not yet making a significant impact on schemes that have reached the planning stage as a result.

 

And now estates are under even more threat from the Government’s proposed new national planning rules. These would force councils to define whole areas for rapid or automatic planning approval and do not give a single mention to the rights of people already living in these areas to have a say.

Key findings from the report 'Estate Redevelopment in London: Have things improved under the current Mayor?, are shown in the tables below.

Total impact of London estate redevelopment schemes: -13,539.
A map showing boroughs' net loss of social housing in estate redevelopment schemes (all schemes on sites with existing social housing) granted planning permission since 2003, overall.

Total impact of completed schemes: -6,748.
A map showing boroughs' net loss of social rented housing in estate redevelopment schemes granted planning permission since 2003, where construction has been completed.

Total impact of schemes in the pipeline: -6,791.
A map of boroughs set to lose social rented homes in estate redevelopment schemes granted planning permission since 2003, for which construction has not started, or has begun and not yet been completed: