[Reposted from Dec. 2009] NAVIN SHAH: CALL IN THIS FLAWED AND SHAMBOLIC APPLICATION

The Rt Hon John Denham MP
The Secretary of State
Department for Communities and Local Government

Dear Sir,

Brent Cross Cricklewood Outline Application, C17559/08

Local Authority: The London Borough of Barnet

I wrote to you in July with my concerns in regard to the consideration of this major strategic application in the London Borough of Barnet. Although the application was seriously flawed and will have a significant impact on proximate areas, the application was passed by Barnet’s Planning and Environment Committee on November 19th 2009.

By means of this submission I am reiterating my request to you to call in this planning application for the following reasons:

1.0 Background:

The outline application for this comprehensive mixed-use redevelopment of the Brent Cross Cricklewood regeneration area was first submitted on 25th March 2008, however the planned regeneration of the area has a much longer history. In 2000 The Secretary of State defined Brent Cross as a regional shopping centre in an out-of-centre location and should therefore be developed after local town centres which are favoured first. Following this, the aim became a new town centre, as defined in Barnet’s UDP as a ‘New High Street’ and the London Plan 2004. However, the outline application and permission for Stage 1 developments that has now been passed amounts to little more than an expansion of out-of-town retail provision, while the rest of the development is postponed to later stages and therefore not guaranteed. I am of the belief there is a significant danger ‘Brent Cross Cricklewood’ will proceed to provide an expansion of out-of-town shopping, contrary to the former Secretary of State’s wishes, and little else.

2.0 Flawed Consultation:

Throughout the process there has been a total lack of meaningful consultation with Brent’s residents west of the site. While I acknowledge that there have been some extensions granted for statutory consultation period very little, if any, of the details of the project have been conveyed by the Applicant and the Local Planning Authority (Barnet Council) to Brent residents through the consultation process. Brent Council’s Planners have had made formal representations to Barnet Council on this matter.

3.0 Waste Handling Facility:

Brent residents have received poor information as to the likely detrimental impact of the development of the proposed Waste Handling Facility. There are genuine and serious concerns about the waste handling facility which is perceived as a proposal for an incineration unit. While the Applicant claims this is not an incinerator, it is most regrettable that even fundamental and critical information such as emission levels and the actual process for waste management proposed by the Applicant are not clearly conveyed to the local residents and traders. Neither the Applicants, the London Borough of Barnet nor the North London Waste Authority have, in my opinion, reasonably addressed confusion over the type of plant technology and as a result its environmental and traffic impact on eastern Brent is not fully known.

4.0 Traffic and Transport:

This is one of the most serious issues which has received universal condemnation. Both Brent and Camden Councils raised serious concerns on the key components and residents are quite rightly worried about detrimental impact from traffic generated from this scheme.

My own comments on this issue are noted in the attached objection letter to Barnet Council.

The London Borough of Brent in its various communications to Barnet also objected to this aspect of the application because an overall assessment of the impact on Brent’s transport system was not forthcoming, neither was there a mitigation strategy from the applicant. In additions to the specific issues covering transport and traffic, ring-fenced Section 106 contributions to the tune of £5 million also need to be addressed by Barnet Council and the applicant.

Like Brent, the London Borough of Camden too has put in strong objections. Camden highlights the flawed transport proposals, which are heavily reliant on private car use and the resultant ‘avoidable and unnecessary increase on Camden’s roads. There’s also severe criticism of ‘undue attention given to increasing the capacity of road junctions’. The Council very justifiably commented that there is a great potential to improve public transport, walking and cycling and like Brent Council it has asked for fundamental review of a proposed transport strategy that does little to improve public and sustainable transport.

5.0 Retail and Regeneration:

I am of the belief the Brent Cross Cricklewood application as it stands presents the threat of out-of-town facility expansion to North West London’s town and district centre. As a Councillor, resident and a member of Harrow Council’s Local Development Framework Panel I am extremely concerned about the serious concerns this development would have on the ailing outdated Harrow’s town centre among other Local District Centres.

I further note that Camden Council has expressed their concerns in that its areas like Kilburn Town Centre (which forms the border between Camden and Brent) would be vulnerable to the significant increase of retail provision at Brent Cross Cricklewood.

6.0 Affordable Housing:

The London Plan in its current form (2004) and the UDPs quite rightly seek and demand a high level, up to 50%, of affordable housing. In addition the Mayor of London is struggling to meet his stated target of 50,000 affordable housing by 2012. The 15% affordable housing target does not meet these justified planning policies. I support Camden Council’s objection in that 15% is woefully short and that the development must aim to increased provision of at least 30% of the total proposed housing with an emphasis on the delivery of large family units of 3 and 4 bedrooms.

Furthermore, there is great concern that the majority of affordable housing will be pushed back into the later stages of the development. Only 795 residential units are planned for Stage 1, while the 2000 decision saw the 2000 residential units as “nebulous”. The Mayor of London has stated (in a public response to my question 3474/2009, Mayor’s Question Time, November 18th 2009) that “all remaining phases will have a 15% minimum level of affordable housing with the opportunity to go above this should viability allow.” I am of the belief this level is woefully inadequate and undermines the pretence and marketing that Brent Cross will provide a viable town centre.

7.0 Conclusion:

The application is flawed and does not conform to major planning policies. Whilst its understandable that the application of such sub-regional significance requires greater length of time for negotiations, amendments and deliberations it has been clear that Barnet Council’s oversight has been a complete shambles.

For the above reasons, I am of the belief that the outline application, flawed and unambitious as it is, wastes the opportunity of a successful, green, long-lasting alternative to the car-orientated Brent Cross plans of the 1960s by merely ameliorating this outdated vision.

I request the Right Honorable Minister ‘calls in’ the above planning application.

Yours sincerely,

Navin Shah AM

Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow

Camden New Journal: "CS11 bike route plans: Is it cyclists vs Tom Conti and the car drivers?"

Scoot to the web site

"Transport for London's controversial plans to re-draw the road map in Swiss Cottage to include a new cycle lane is facing criticism – but this week the man behind the project insisted the changes will help everyone.

"A petition against the scheme had last night (Wednesday) reached 1,200 signatures and a public meeting to hear arguments against the project has been set up by opponents for Monday night.

"But TfL's road chief Nigel Hardy told the New Journal the project was not about pitting bike users against car drivers – and if it goes ahead, the new lanes will make roads better for all."

Fri 18 Mar: Planey McPlaneface comes to Cricklewood

No, it's not Hammerson's plan for cycle lanes at Brent Cross

"Anger against Swiss Cottage ‘cycling superhighway’ grows as petition takes off"

Link to the Ham & High

"More than 1000 people have signed a petition in just five days opposing what they say is a 'catastrophically ill-planned' cycling superhighway, which they say will cause traffic gridlock in Swiss Cottage and the surrounding area.

"Transport for London (TfL) is consulting on the plans which will create dedicated cycling lanes between Swiss Cottage and Portland Place in the West End.

"But critics say the scheme is a 'vanity project' to enable Mayor Boris Johnson to leave London a 'cycling legacy', and claim there are not enough cyclists using the roads to warrant the upheaval they believe it will cause.

"The petition was started last weekend by Childs Hill resident, David Howard, who claims the scheme will wreak havoc for drivers and public transport users in Finchley Road, Swiss Cottage, Avenue Road, Regents Park, St John's Wood and Baker Street."

Brent & Kilburn Times: "Vanessa Feltz: ‘Scatter my cremated ashes over Brent Cross Shopping Centre’." (Fine. How soon?)

Link to web site

"The radio and television broadcaster, known for her gags [sic], returned to the UK’s first American-style mall in Prince Charles Drive to cut the ribbon on a replica animal installation.

" 'Here is my true spiritual home,' she said, a visitor since the centre opened in 1976 when she was just 14-years-old. 'It was so glamorous, it was so dazzling, of course I came here, you couldn't drag me out of the place.'

"She added: 'It played a huge part in my life. For loads of us it was the first place we could go on our own without grown-ups. You could go on the bus and your parents wouldn't worry about you'."

Estates Gazette: "It's time to get serious about suburban densification"

Link to web site

"Quod, with Shelter, have just produced a report into London’s land stock available for residential building. While the report is a good overview, it fails to grasp the potential of suburban densification.

"If the number of homes in these low density suburbs could be incrementally increased by 10% (still well below the current average London density), it would deliver around 75,000 homes."

When Brownfield Isn’t Enough, Quod/Shelter, pp29

"An increase of 10% is hardly ambitious and suggests simply building more houses in back gardens or, as the report suggests, subdividing existing houses leading to no net gain in floorspace.

"Other proposals suggested such as new towns are proposed without regard to the gigantic infrastructure cost they would require. Regional and suburban rail routes are already at capacity, and would require new lines – costing many billions – to create satellite towns. And for all the Ebeneezer Howard inspired hope of autarkic [autonomous?] new towns, the truth is they will be largely dormitory suburbs for existing employment centres in London, making this infrastructure necessary.

"Back of envelope calculations here, but surely it would be more efficient to redevelop suburban houses near London stations.

"... It might be hard to stomach politically, but for those examining the potential for land use suburban densification should be considered as something more than subdivision and houses in gardens. If people want houses with large gardens, they should be prepared to move to outside of London dormitory towns with their longer commuters rather than forcing ten times the number to either do this, or live in increasingly cramped conditions in house shares that are fast becoming room-shares."

1976: London's Criminal Underworld Part-Funds Brent Cross Shopping Centre in Money-Laundering Scam (but it's water under the bridge now)

Link to Hammerson web site

"Hammerson and Standard Life Investments UK Shopping Centre Trust, joint owners of Brent Cross Shopping Centre, are today marking the centre reaching its 40th birthday, a significant milestone for Europe's first enclosed shopping centre. [Apart from Elephant & Castle. And Birmingham's Bull Ring Centre. And ...]

"The launch of Brent Cross on 2nd March 1976, which had been 19 years in the making, revolutionised the face of London retail, which had previously been dominated by the West End. The first American style shopping mall in the UK, Brent Cross quickly became the blueprint for shopping centres across Europe.

"All three of the centre’s department stores, Fenwick, John Lewis and Marks & Spencer have remained in the centre, alongside a number of other original brands, including Boots, W H Smith, Mothercare, Miss Selfridge and Russell & Bromley, all of which also still continue to trade very successfully 40 years on."

The Great Corrupt-Brent-Cross-Planning-Consent Caper Continues: Barnet Press: "Concerns over public consultation on £4 billion Brent Cross plans"

Link to web site

"The London Assembly should hold 'a proper review' into the £4 billion Brent Cross and Cricklewood development where proper public consultation over the regeneration plans has not taken place.

"That was among claims made at The London Assembly’s Regeneration Committee meeting on Tuesday (March 1), where it was said that the firm carrying out part of the consultation asked 'leading questions' which made most people agree that the regeneration was positive.

"Pat Turnball, Chair of London Tenant's Federation [and representing 'Just Space'], told the meeting that residents on the nearby Whitefield Estate answered questions without even knowing a bridge would come at the cost of demolishing their homes.

"... Cath Shaw, of Barnet Council's Enterprise and Regeneration team, said she would be prepared to follow up specific details about concerns over the consultation." [Yeh, right.]

[Reposted from 2011] 'Broken Barnet': "Barnet Council - a culture of Decadence, Failure, Incompetence and Corruption"

Link to 'Broken Barnet' web site

"... [Barnet Council Audit Committee chair and noble Lord,] Lord Monroe Palmer moved to the MetPro Audit Report's recommendations, repeating his view that the report made:

" reading ... Horrendous . [I hope] we don't have to wait for the public, for the bloggers, to tell us, before another report like this had to be presented."

[We note: Barnet has paid £1.4-million over five years, without any contract at any time, to a largely-illegally-unregistered security company, MetPro Rapid Response Limited, which went into liquidation earlier this year, owing 'hundreds of thousands of pounds', to be replaced by a new company, MetPro Emergency Response Limited, which the Council started and continued to pay, again without any tendering or contract whatsoever. 

This company also made illicit video recordings of the public attending council meetings, within Hendon Town Hall (where the Pinkham Way protesters were called 'a rabble', by the way).]

"Barnet Council's Chief Executive thought the problem, guess what:

"Says something profound about the [London Borough of Barnet] culture."

 

Corruption in action

"Yes, Mr Walkley: it speaks of a culture of decadence and failure, incompetence and corruption.

"The trouble is that Captain Pugwash and his hapless crew ... are insisting on taking the listing vessel out onto the high seas, of massive outsourcing of public services, in the meanwhile, seaworthy or not ...

"Lord Palmer again raised the question of potential fraud. This was neatly deflected by Jeff Lustig, Director of Corporate Governance, by a mention of the 'Corporate Fraud Team'. Will we ever hear any more, I wonder?"

---

More material is at 'Barnet Eye'.

Edited by 'Pinkham Way Incinerator'.

---

More about the 'Barnet Blogsphere':

"Easy council" scandal puts Town Hall outsourcing reforms in the spotlight.

Investigations by local bloggers uncovered serious contract irregularities at a flagship Tory council. The case may have wider implications for public service reform.

---

Link to HOME (see all posts).

Tue 1 March: London Assembly Regeneration Committee discusses Brent Cross Cricklewood: Arrogance and Corruption by LB of Barnet

Hammerson giving evidence to a
House of Commons Select Committee in 2011:
"There's a danger redevelopment could be 
side-tracked by agitators, and that 
NIMBYS will undermine the process.
Therefore,
it is key to have strong local leadership
in the local authority."

"The Regeneration Committee is tasked with monitoring and reviewing the Mayor’s regeneration functions and spending decisions. This includes oversight of the London Legacy Development Corporation, the Mayor’s powers through the London Plan, which are being used to promote particular areas for regeneration, and the operation of his new Mayoral Development Corporation that covers the Olympic Park.

"You can find out more about the Committee's current work here or view the reports it has published in the investigations section.

"Agendas, minutes and other papers for meetings of this committee may be accessed at the link at the top of the page.  To be added to the distribution list for agendas and minutes, please use the contact information below.

"The Regeneration Committee’s terms of reference are agreed by the London Assembly and can be viewed here.

"Information about the Assembly’s former Housing and Regeneration Committee can be found here."

---

Agenda Frontsheet Tuesday 01-Mar-2016 10.00 Regeneration Committee[1]

Public Reports Pack Tuesday 01-Mar-2016 10.00 Regeneration Committee[1]

---

Intensification areas
in the next London Plan

Date published: 08 February 2016 
(Part of reports document above)

The London Assembly Regeneration Committee has written to the Mayor of London about the effectiveness of the Intensification Area designation on regeneration.

• The Committee has identified a number of findings and recommendations that the next mayor of London should consider when producing the new London Plan:
• The impact of Intensification Area designation remains unclear. In the next iteration of the London Plan, the GLA should set out the expected value of giving an area Intensification Area status.
• Areas selected for intensification must have adequate transport links. A transport impact assessment should be undertaken at the time of designation and made available to local people.
• In the next London Plan, the GLA should take greater account of when development in Intensification Areas spills over into neighbouring areas. This can have an impact on local services, like GP surgeries and school places and affect an area's local character.
• Future Intensification Area designation should also pay close attention to protecting and creating employment opportunities.
• The GLA should create a system to establish development timescales for areas with formal designation in the London Plan and improve communication with developers.

Ia Letter Final[1]

---

2016-02 GUEST BRIEFING- London Assembly Regeneration Committee 1 March 2016

This document above references, ahem, the Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood Development.

And Mr Reasonable:

Link to Mr Reasonable

Quoted by the London Assembly Regeneration Committee, Tue 1 Mar 2016: "Lobby on Tue 9 March 2010 for Call-In!"

Link to typical arrogant nursing of the
corrupt Brent Cross planning consent (2014)

"Tomorrow, the Brent Cross Coalition will be handing in petitions and letters to John Denham, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, to ask him to call-in the Brent Cross Regeneration Application for a Public Inquiry.

"The call-in is based on the following grounds:

1. The residents of the London boroughs of Brent and Camden were not consulted on this matter, despite the scheme having major impact on residents of the two boroughs. In particular, Brent  remains opposed to this development, despite suggestions to the contrary at the Barnet Planning Committee.

2. The development will have a major impact on North West London, in terms of traffic, increased pollution and the destruction of local shopping areas in surrounding localities. These issues were not considered by the Barnet Planning Committee which had a Barnet-centric approach to the application. A wider assessment of the application is vital and would be provided by a Public Inquiry.

3. The application does not conform to the Government’s Climate Change Law to reduce CO2 by 80% by 2050. The scheme will generate thousands more car journeys every day and become a net contributor of greenhouse gases and global warming.

4. The lack of clarity in evidence presented at the Planning Committee on the proposed waste handling plant and incinerator. In the face of expert opinion by a visiting US professor on the potential health hazards of the proposed gasification process, we believe that the Secretary of State should institute a Public Inquiry. This will ensure that the health and safety of the local population, and particularly that of young children who are particularly vulnerable to the impact of toxic substances, is safeguarded.

5. The major thrust of the application is to extend the Brent Cross Shopping Centre. Other components of Phase One of the scheme, such as affordable housing, have been cut back. A proposal to increase the size of the Shopping Centre was rejected by a Public Inquiry in 1999 and a Judicial Review and High Court judgement in 2003. The proposal represents the developers’ second bite at the cherry, in much changed and less favourable economic circumstances.

6. Although the Planning Committee is supposed to make an independent judgement, the application was compromised by the fact that the Barnet Borough Council is a major supporter of the scheme and has helped facilitate the process for the applicants. Importantly, they are also major landowners in the development area."

 
Who: Navin Shah AM, Brent Friends of the Earth, residents and other local groups

What: Hand in of petitions and letters, photo and interview opportunities

When: Tuesday 9th March 2010, 2pm

Where: Department for Communities and Local Government, Eland House, Bressenden Place, SW1E 5DU (nearest tube: Victoria)

---

Link to HOME (see all posts).

Regeneration: Already Happened at West Hendon; Coming Soon to Brent Cross: Heygate residents and broken promise of new homes that never materialise

Sample of Brent Cross Cricklewood in 2008: Stopping Evil Hammerson, Dastardly Standard Life Investments, and Pusillanimous Brookfield Multiplex (who bailed out as soon as they could). AH, HAPPY DAYS!

2008-12-13 Cricklewood Final Station

Sarah Teather MP: "[In 2010] Boris the Mayor Shirked His Duty On Brent Cross"

Link to London LibDems report
(2010 archived data, so there may be a delay)

"The Mayor is asleep at the wheel. 

"Instead of giving this controversial and divisive Brent Cross Cricklewood scheme the extra scrutiny it needs, he has waved it through, with barely a second thought."

Construction Enquirer: "Hammerson's £1bn Croydon shopping centre start pushed back to 2017"

"Hammerson is in ongoing talks with anchor tenants for the new shopping centre"
[which may mean John Lewis has so far failed to sign up]

"Developer Hammerson has put back until next year the construction start on its £1bn scheme to redevelop Croydon's Whitgift shopping centre.

"The project is one of three major schemes Hammerson plans to start in 2017 with a combined construction cost of up to £1.4bn.

"It is the second time the developer in joint venture with Westfield has pushed the ambitious scheme back a year."

"Goodsyard plan includes a 220,000 sq ft retail 'village', 1,350 flats and substantial public realm including a new park"

"... Hammerson in joint venture with Ballymore is also hoping to start its £800m Goodsyard scheme on the London City fringe in Shoreditch next year.

"Last September, the Mayor of London called in the 2.8m sq ft mixed-use development due to non-determination by local planning authorities Hackney and Tower Hamlets."

"If all goes to plan the revamped Brent Cross sopping [sic] centre could open in 2021"

"It is also hoping to start the 1m sq ft Brent Cross shopping centre extension and refurbishment next year, subject to CPO power being granted for development land at an inquiry in May." [Yeh, right.]

[Reposted from Dec 2009] BRENT COUNCIL REITERATES OPPOSITION TO BRENT CROSS DEVELOPMENT AND CALLS FOR A PUBLIC INQUIRY

Barnet Council passed the controversial plans for the Brent Cross Cricklewood regeneration on 19 November 2009, claiming that neighbouring Brent had withdrawn their objections. The Coalition opposing the plans is now slating Barnet planners for misrepresenting Brent Council’s objections. [2014: Brent STILL opposes it!]

The Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood Plan, who represent residents, politicians and campaign groups across Barnet, Brent and Camden were astounded to hear Barnet planner Martin Cowie at the meeting saying that Brent had withdrawn their objections to the scheme. Letters from Brent Council’s Officer and Brent Council’s Leader, Paul Lorber show clearly that Brent continue to oppose the scheme as it currently stands.

Lia Colacicco, Coalition Co-ordinator and Mapesbury resident says:

“When contacted, Brent planning department said that the Planning Committee members had voted unanimously to formally object to the scheme. This objection stands and there are no plans to go back to Committee with a recommendation to change this stance.

“Letters from Chris Walker, Head of Brent Planning, to Barnet on October 20th, and again on November 27th, make Brent's objections quite clear. We are therefore mystified as to why Martin Cowie claimed that Brent has substantially withdrawn its objections. Brent base their objections on major traffic issues and the nature of the waste handling facility."

“Barnet Officers have not only misrepresented the views of Brent residents, but have now withheld the truth about Brent Council’s continuing position in order to push through these disastrous plans.”

Chris Walker, Head of Planning in Brent, in a letter to Barnet's Stewart Murray dated 27 November 2009 makes it clear that:

“….while significant moves have been made to address Brent’s concerns in the draft heads of terms and conditions, Brent has not withdrawn their objection to the proposed development.”

Brent Council Leader, Cllr Paul Lorber additionally wrote to the Secretary of State on 25th November reiterating his continued objections to the plans, and calling for a Public Inquiry.

The Coalition believes this means the Secretary of State John Denham must now call in the plans for Public Inquiry.

---

Link to HOME (see all posts).

[Reposted from 2004] Mike McGuinness: "Do I HAVE to front the Brent Cross Cricklewood Public Exhibition 2014? Can't JJ - we pay him enough! Oh, he's a busted flush, is he? Gawd, give me the slanted wording then, London Communications Public Relations..."

"Hello, Gullible Punters! [He didn't say that.]

"I am pleased to inform you that the Brent Cross Cricklewood development partners, having gained planning consent for the masterplan earlier this year, will shortly begin a series of public exhibitions showcasing the detailed designs for the first stage of the regeneration.

"This first part of the scheme will:

• Renew and revive Clitterhouse Playing Fields and Claremont Park creating two beautiful community parks, as well as starting to create Brent Riverside Park
• Make major improvements to local roads and junctions for the benefits of drivers, pedestrians and cyclists
• Prepare the ground for a new town centre on either side of the North Circular, linked by a landmark new Living Bridge.

["Why aren't we saying anything about the !#@$%& shopping centre? And the waste incinerator? And the extra 29,000 cars per day? Oh, we deliberately don't mention 'em! I've never understood PR."]
 
"The public exhibitions will start on Friday 10 October at Brent Cross Shopping Centre and continue until Saturday 18 October, visiting two other venues in the area – the Crown Moran Hotel on Cricklewood Broadway, and the Hendon Leisure Centre. Details of the public exhibition times and venues can be found below. ["Did you see wot I wrote for the Commons Select Committee? They didn't ask me again. Funny that."]

"The exhibitions will provide an opportunity to learn more about Brent Cross Cricklewood and how it will be delivered over the coming years as well as ask any questions and meet the project team. ["Do we mention that Hammerson is clearing off as soon as possible, and Barnet is trying to find another poor punter to keep the miserable show on the road? Oh, we keep shtum about that? Mmm."]

"In the meantime if you would like any further information about the plans, please do not hesitate to contact the consultation team on 0800 881 5303 (freephone) or email info@brentcrosscricklewood.com. Our plans will also be available on our website www.brentcrosscricklewood.com from the 10 October. ["And not a second before. We're no fools!"]

"I look forward to seeing you." ["Do we do irony, then?"]

Mike McGuinness,
Development Director ["Can I go now?"]

---

BRENT CROSS SHOPPING CENTRE

Centre Court, Prince Charles Drive, London, NW4 3FP

on

Friday 10 October, 10am – 8pm

Saturday 11 October, 9am – 8pm

Sunday 12 October, 12pm – 6pm

CROWN MORAN HOTEL

Sala Room, 142-152 Cricklewood Broadway, London NW2 3ED

on

Tuesday 14 October, 12pm – 8pm

Wednesday 15 October, 12pm – 8pm

HENDON LEISURE CENTRE

Studio 1, Marble Drive, Brent Cross, London, NW2 1XQ

on

Friday 17 October, 12pm – 8pm

Saturday 18 October, 11am – 5pm

Evening Standard: "Number of London cyclists 'equal to a fifth of Tube passengers'"

Link to web site

"The number of people cycling in London is equivalent to a fifth of the daily number of Tube passengers, according to new research.

Transport for London revealed the latest rise in cycle journeys as it set out its vision of 1.5 million daily bike trips by 2026, double the current rate.

In a challenge to the next Mayor, the report sets out TfL's wish to 'normalise' cycling as a 'very cost-effective form of mass transit' at a time of falling Government investment and huge increases in the capital's population."

Brent & Kilburn Times: Contrasting the Developing Local Plan underway at Old Old Common, and the Corrupt Planning Consent given at Brent Cross

Evening Standard: Rubbish Hammerson, Mediocre David Atkins, Arrogant Barnet (Well, words to that effect)

Evening Standard: "Unflappable property company boss has a starring role in the Theatre of Retail"

"Hammerson's chief executive David Atkins with big plans for some of London's most popular shopping centres"

"... Hammerson is best known in London for Brent Cross. ... 'People love shopping centres,' Atkins says. 'Human beings are programmed to identify with real places in a way you can't get with a web site.'

"He cites Brent Cross, which will be 40 years old in a fortnight.

"... Hammerson is partnering with Westfield to deliver a much-needed redevelopment of Croydon's shopping centre, and has finally negotiated 'the minefield of the planning environment in the country', to extend and refurbish Brent Cross.

"I hazard a guess at how long the Brent Cross planning process took: four or five years? 'Try 15,' Atkins says. It's a mark of his calm personality that he doesn't get even remotely agitated on the subject, beyond deapanning; 'Let's just say that John Prescott [the secretary of state in charge of planning for much of the process] is not on my Christmas list.'

"The good news, he says, is that work will start soon in a project that includes building 7500 new homes to neighbouring Cricklewood. [sic]

"... With which parting patter, he buttons a thin overcoat up to his neck and paces out into the chill. I think he'll need a hot-water bottle." [continued.]

The Observer: "Empire of Things: How We Became a World of Consumers"

"Our role as obedient customers is put under the spotlight in an ambitious history of global economics"

Link to web site

"JG Ballard's last published novel, Kingdom Come, unfolds in a fictional London suburb called Brooklands, where a vast shopping mall [wonder which one] fosters a bovine social docility. In the book's wayward conceit, consumerism is a totalitarian device used to control people and their artificial wants. Fired up by dreams of wealth, Brooklanders indulge in Black Friday-style bargain-hunting in their local Metro Centre.

"Ballard was not the first to see shopping as a secular religion. Émile Zola, in his 1883 novel The Ladies’ Paradise, tells the rise of a department store in late 19th-century Paris and its role in the new mass consumption. With its silk counters and perfume department, the store looks forward to our age of indiscriminate purchase and credit binge. Far from aiding the French economy, Zola's cathedral of commerce heralds a new retail Europe of consumer anxiety, boom and bust.

"...Free-trade champions tend to see consumption as embodying the individual’s right to “consumer choice”. In their neoliberal view, money spent on material goods bolsters the values of democracy and prosperity for all. British prime minister Margaret Thatcher ('the priestess of neoliberalism', says Trentmann) sought to demolish anti-consumerist Marxist attitudes as a matter of urgency. When, in March 1987, she toured Soviet Moscow in a Cossack-style fur hat, the Russians embraced her as an emissary of barcode freedoms and wealth."

Much of the Barnet Planning Committee is being replaced (by sentient beings with greater capability)

"Robots will take over most jobs within 30 years, experts warn, and the rise of robots could lead to unemployment rates greater than 50 per cent"

Link to Sunday Telegraph

"Robots will have taken over most jobs within 30 years leaving humanity facing its 'biggest challenge ever' to find meaning in life when work is no longer necessary, according to experts.

Professor Moshe Vardi, a professor in computational engineering at Rice University in the US, claims that jobs of many middle-class professionals will be outsourced to machines within the next few decades, leaving workers with more leisure time than they have ever experienced.

Speaking at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in Washington, Prof Vardi said the rise of robots could lead to unemployment rates greater than 50 per cent:

"We are approaching a time when machines will be able to outperform humans at almost any task."

[Reposted from Jun 2014] "Have councils abandoned the poor, searching for economic growth?"

"From Hackney cosying up to the digital elite to regeneration in Southwark – councils risk forgetting they're part of the safety net.

"Some council choices are questionable, such as the displacement of social tenants in Elephant and Castle (below)"

Link to The Guardian

"Is the state abandoning the poor? The hyperbolic question started an interesting debate this week at the Chartered Institute of Housing Conference in Manchester, provoking a backlash against a perceived 'collusion' between the modern public servant and government.

"No, we can't reasonably argue that the state has walked away from the most vulnerable. For all its failings, we do still have a welfare state. A safety net is still set out beneath us, although the corners are becoming threadbare. But can we say the same about social housing?

"Faced with cuts to government welfare reform, the housing sector now stands accused of capitulating to government whims at significant cost to them and, more importantly, to their tenants. According to the Child Poverty Action Group, 'affordable rent' (which in some areas is replacing social rent) risks pushing more families below the child poverty threshold."