Ealing Council refuse to insist Catalyst Housing undergo an EIA (environmental impact assessment) for the Friary Park proposals which see a 3-fold increase in dwellings, a 5 to 6 fold increase in population and a 20-29 storey skyscraper. However, across the A40, by the railway, directly opposite the Friary Park location, more or less, a planning application (PP/2014/5330) was refused in March this year. It comprised "construction of part 4 -storey, part 5 storey and part 6 storey building to provide 61 units comprising 1 x studio, 16 x 1 bedroom and 44 x 2 bedroom apartments(class C3) and associated landscaping".The reasons for refusal were given as:1. The application proposal fails to make any provision for affordable housing. (fair enough but the Friary Park overdevelopment provides NO MORE SOCIAL HOUSING exists and plenty of private housing for overseas buyers.) 2. The proposed development by reason of non-provision of a legal agreement securing appropriate mitigation measures, would have an unacceptable impact on air quality, education provision, energy efficiency and carbon reduction measures, highway safety and efficiency and amenity space provision. The application proposal is therefore contrary to the policies of the development plan ......... (hey, wait a minute....isn't this incongruent....won't the mega-development of Friary Park create a far greater impact?)3. The proposed development by reason of the inadequate set back from the A40 and lack of landscaping and biodiversity detail provided fails to demonstrate that the scheme would protect and enhance the Acton Green Corridor which runs along the A40 to the west of the site. As such the proposal fails to comply with Green Corridor policies, London Plan......(er, what about the Premier Inn and flats planning application that Ealing Council thought was ok to stick besides the green corridor?)4. The proposed building by reason of its bulk, scale and lack of setbacks fronting the A40 and Railway edge would create an overly bulky building with a building footprint that is too large, leading to excessive site coverage to the detriment of the character and appearance of the application site and would impact the character and appearance of the surrounding area. As such it is considered the proposal fails to comply with Policy......(errrrrrr, it's FAR smaller than the Friary Park! What's going on??)5. The applicant has failed to demonstrate Ealing that the proposed development by reason of its size, height, position, orientation and layout would not incur a loss of light, privacy and outlook to the occupiers of the adjoining properties and would not provide a poor level of residential accommodation for the future occupiers of the development in terms north-facing single aspect flats and in terms of light, privacy and outlook. As such the proposal fails to comply with Policy ..........(THIS IS ALL MAKING SENSE TO ME, BUT HEY, WHAT ABOUT FRIARY PARK?!)6. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the future occupiers of the proposed development would not be exposed to significant levels of noise pollution from the A40 orDEC_TPR Feb 09 the adjoining railway lines. The application therefore fails to comply with Policies......(ER, YEAH, BUT THIS COULD BE FIXED.....AGAIN, WHAT ABOUT FRIARY PARK?)7. The proposed development would introduce new residential receptors into an area of high exceedance of the air quality objectives within an Air Quality Management Area. The applicant has failed to demonstrate adequate mitigation for the future occupiers of the proposed development. The application therefore fails to comply with policies....... (AND EALING COUNCIL SAY THAT FRIARY PARK DOESN'T NEED AN EIA PERFORMED?)
Angela White ● 4105d