Forum Topic

Hi Adam.  No, the Acton Central Ward Forum was last Wednesday (which usually deals with requests for neighbourhood spendings and matters that need attention in the area by residents) and the Planning Committee meets this Wednesday evening at Ealing Town Hall to hear several planning applications - one of which is the Premier Inn and 2 blocks of flats in West Acton and several others, including 24 Messaline Avenue, Acton Central, which is for a conversion of a house into 8 flats!  There are others.  It's a big night for Acton and I'm sure our Council are trying to make a point.  The 2 applications above should never get past "go" and if Ladbrokes would take my bet, I bet that Ealing Council will wave them through.  I'm an optimistic person usually, but I'm sorry to say I can see a pattern and it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility for Ealing to "teach us a lesson".  Of course, this is one time I'd be delighted to be wrong!  Here are the details of the Messaline Ave plan:Reference number PP/2014/6581Application Type Full ApplicationSite Address 24 MESSALINE AVENUEACTONW3 6JXDescription Construction of three storey building, with basement, to contain 8 self-contained flats (2x3 bed and 6x2 bed), consisting of two lightwells on front elevation, two off-street car parking and bin stores within front building set back, amenity space and cycle stores to the rear, Juliet balconies on rear elevation at first and second levels, one rooflight on north and south side roof slopes, new 600mm high front boundary wall, and associated landscaping and site works (following demolition of existing building)Ward Acton CentralReceived Date 24/12/2014Valid Date 11/02/2015

Angela White ● 4120d

Hi, Angela, I've just had an email from Maire, as well, expressing the same astonishment, to which I've replied (hopefully coherently).  Let's just say I'm not crazy about equating anyone who voted for Huq in a General Election as being in favour of the building work,as in the post: "Wonder which side of this argument Rupa Huq will be on? Anyone opposed to this development who voted for her must feel like a right muppet now" (sorry, if you're unsure what side of the argument she's on, why are you calling the people who voted for her names?). There was sarcasm about her campaign statement:"Phew!  Blimey!  Thought we were done for there, for a moment" to which someone else replied, equally: "Well, that's all right then!"An earlier thread just after the election read: "Don't mean to nag but there were lots of people on here trying to insult Angie Bray, bigging up Rupa Huq's record of attending demo...Let's hear from you now about the consequences of your votes."Again, the equating voting for Huq as a vote for the tower blocks (interestingly, on another thread when I accused the council of covertly planning to cover us with blocks, someone accused me of being a conspiracy theorist. Can't win, really).  When nobody replied somebody else posted: "Trust me, the gutless bastards are to ashamed to reply. May they hold their manhoods cheap"Huq's been in office all of three weeks, and she's already been accused of being useless and not living up to her campaign promises, while those who voted Labour in the National Election are being accused of being complicit in the bulldozing of Acton. I don't recall Angie Bray being able to whip the Labour councillors into shape in all her time.  This development didn't spring up overnight as soon as Huq took office.  She's an MP, not Godzilla.We need a non-partisan movement going on here.  How, exactly, is language like "gutless bastards" helping?

Adam Kimmel ● 4120d

I've had a reply to my complaint that the Council waived the EIA (environmental impact assessment) on Friary Park.  Here is the reply.  Please tell me what I'm missing because of a build of the proposed magnitude (and in this case Catalyst quoted a 29 storey building) Ealing Council don't believe there will be significant environmental impact:Existence of an Environmental Impact Assessment The Council received a request for a Screening Opinion from the applicant Catalyst Housing as to whether an EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) would be required in order for the Council to properly assess a future planning application for the redevelopment of the Friary Park Estate. The Council concluded that the scheme would not require an EIA to be submitted in order for the impact of the proposal to be fully assessed which is the application you refer to in your email and also why such a document is not held by the Council. However, this does not mean that the Council considers that there would be no environmental impact as a result of the scheme, rather that the impact is capable of being satisfactorily assessed by the submission of standard supporting technical documents without the need for an EIA. So whilst the Council recognises the concerns you raise, it considers that these can be taken into account through the planning process once an application has been submitted. Lack of an Environmental Impact Assessment In relation to your request for an EIA to be undertaken, there is no mechanism for you to request an EIA to be undertaken. The planning application process is designed to assess the impact of even the largest scale developments meaning that it is only the cases where a significant impact on the environment could be anticipated that an Environmental Impact Assessment would be required which is not the case in this instance.

Angela White ● 4121d

"Know your planning policies!" is the exclamation by one of our Councillors when talking to residents about the Friary Park proposals "know your policies!"Dear Ealing Council, please read your planning policies!  You seemed to have overlooked The London Plan policy on Tall Buildings.  Here it is, I hope it's useful.  (For others, it's fairly long, but interesting and very enllightening!)Appendix 2 – Relevant London Plan policy on tall buildingsPOLICY 7.7 LOCATION AND DESIGN OF TALL AND LARGE BUILDINGSStrategicA Tall and large buildings should be part of a plan-led approach to changing or developing an area by the identification of appropriate, sensitive and inappropriate locations. Tall and large buildings should not have an unacceptably harmful impact on their surroundings.Planning decisionsB Applications for tall or large buildings should include an urban design analysis that demonstrates the proposal is part of a strategy that will meet the criteria below. This is particularly important if the site is not identified as a location for tall or large buildings in the borough’s LDF. (PLEASE NOTE, EALING COUNCIL, NEITHER ACTON CENTRAL NOR EALING HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS A LOCATION BY DEAR BORIS FOR TALL BUILDINGS)C Tall and large buildings should:a generally be limited to sites in the Central Activity Zone, opportunity areas, areas of intensification or town centres that have good access to public transportb only be considered in areas whose character would not be affected adversely by the scale,mass or bulk of a tall or large buildingc relate well to the form, proportion, composition, scale and character of surrounding buildings, urban grain and public realm (including landscape features), particularly at street level;d individually or as a group, improve the legibility of an area, by emphasising a point of civic or visual significance where appropriate, and enhance the skyline and image of Londone incorporate the highest standards of architecture and materials, including sustainable design and construction practicesf have ground floor activities that provide a positive relationship to the surrounding streetsg contribute to improving the permeability of the site and wider area, where possibleh incorporate publicly accessible areas on the upper floors, where appropriatei make a significant contribution to local regeneration.D Tall buildings:a should not affect their surroundings adversely in terms of microclimate, wind turbulence,overshadowing, noise, reflected glare, aviation, navigation and telecommunicationinterferenceb should not impact on local or strategic views adverselyE The impact of tall buildings proposed in sensitive locations should be given particular consideration. Such areas might include conservation areas, listed buildings and their settings, registered historic parks and gardens, scheduled monuments, battlefields, the edge of the Green Belt or Metropolitan Open Land, World Heritage Sites or other areas designated by boroughs as being sensitive or inappropriate for tall buildings.Local Development Framework (LDF) preparationE Boroughs should work with the Mayor to consider which areas are appropriate, sensitive or inappropriate for tall and large buildings and identify them in their Local Development Frameworks. These areas should be consistent with the criteria above and the place shaping and heritage policies of this Plan.PS.  I am writing to Dear Boris as we speak.

Angela White ● 4134d