Forum Topic

The Oaks - And how this kind of thing is being fought across London

Interesting article about mass developments in London - http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2014/jan/29/boris-johnsons-abuse-of-planning-power-is-an-assault-on-democracy

Richard Grange ● 4612d25 Comments

Being fought unsuccessfully it seems. Looks like Boris does call in development schemes after all, but only where the developer has lobbied him to override the wishes of local communities. The only way he was ever likely to call in the plans for The Oaks was if the local planning committee had rejected them in the first place.

Phil Conran ● 4612d

Well worth reading - it skewers Boris Johnson's planning policy (and shows that any hopes that he would intervene in the Oaks case were naive). This expose of the mayor's strategy demonstrates how cynical local Tory are in trying to jump on the anti-Oaks bandwagon. Does anyone seriously believe they would have blocked their  private developer friends if they were still in power in Ealing?

Robert John Anderson ● 4612d

Nice try Robert, but it still remains fact that the Oaks development was shoved through by a Labour dominated council  who have more recently insisted on an appalling development plan for the west of the Borough which was opposed by thousands of residents not just the Conservatives. Credit where credit is due please.

Maire Lowe ● 4612d

Angie Bray has done everything in her power to stop this development. She actually cares for people in Acton!

Jean F Fernandez ● 4612d

None of this excuses what the Labour council did to Acton. They sold residents down the river.You will notice that in the Mount Pleasant case - it was the local councils who are FIGHTING against the developers.Sadly in our case we got a bunch of pliant, anti-community, anti-Acton councillors who did the developers dirty work for them.

Richard Grange ● 4611d

More debate on the topic of London development.http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/mayor-urged-to-stop-rise-of-monster-towers-that-threaten-historic-skyline-9095498.htmlInteresting thing is that property / flats have become a kind of currency - and are being built not necessarily as an answer to housing problem, but as an investment opportunity for internatinional owners who may then leave them empty. I wonder who will buy the Oaks flats?

Richard Grange ● 4611d

Yes it is interesting. If you walk along the Thames Path towards the barrier,you become aware that many of the new blocks appear unoccupied. More than that, you realise you can't see the usual London infrastructure; corner shops, pubs, children's playgrounds,little cafes, skateboarding youths. Empty and not in a good way. These blocks were built  ong before Boris was elected. I'd really love to see the strategy.

Maire Lowe ● 4611d

The front page story carefully lays the blame on Ealing rather than the fact that Boris clearly had the power to intervene but saw no reason to.  Does Angie Bray not dare criticise him?Eric Pickles, by the way, has indicated in the past that he wants to give up the calling in power used to stop the Ealing town centre scheme which was also passed by Ealing and rubberstamped by Boris.  If that power didn't exist in 2009 there'd be 26 storey blocks there by now.http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/general/news/stories/2009/dec09/2009-12-week-2/101209_4

Thomas Barry ● 4611d

"Sadly in our case we got a bunch of pliant, anti-community, anti-Acton councillors who did the developers dirty work for them."You're including the Mayor in that, I trust?  Sums him up quite well, too.

Thomas Barry ● 4611d

Sorry Thomas. The blame lies squarely with the Ealing Labour  who passed the scheme. The fiddling about with the planning rota clearly demonstrates the Leader's determination to ensure the scheme was passed. We always knew the appeal to the Mayor was a long shot. We would have loved him to call in the scheme but to blame him for the antics of the Council is plain wrong.

Maire Lowe ● 4611d

Hi Thomas,I am no particular fan of Boris (or of any particular political party - for that matter). And you are right - he didn't intervene to stop this crass development. But that doesn't excuse what the Labour  council did to the community on this occasion. It was a crass two-fingers to local opinion for which we still have very little explanation apart from "You'll get a Waitrose!" and (incredibly from a Labour councillor) - "Don't worry the fact that it has very little social housing is a good thing!"

Richard Grange ● 4611d

I'm not a particular Boris fan either - but his powers are much more limited than the council's. And at least he didn't gerrymander a committee (is that the right expression?)in order to thwart local residents. His actions were sort of predictable, the Ealing planning committee's were an outrageous affront to local democracy.Silly thing to do so close to local elections too...

Sara Nathan ● 4611d

and Ealing Council own the Churchfield Rd car park, so could negate any planning decision on the Oaks by not selling the land.

Vlod Barchuk ● 4610d

Ealing Council (Labour + Tories when in power), Boris, Pickles are all the same. They are desperate to get development, new housing to meet targets and money from developers to finance other projects. Opposing development is just something they do when in opposition to try and get votes. If anyone is really interested in changing things why don't they get together to form a slate of independent candidates from the local community to stand in the local elections?

Phil Conran ● 4610d

Phil,I am almost with you on this one. Not necessarily the bit about fielding independent candidates - but the idea that when it comes to planning, developers are sitting on all sides of the table and local people are simply not represented.I also think it is a sign of how bonkers (corrupted?) the system has become that people can legitimately set up shell companies - as in the case of the Oaks - to hide the identity of who is really behind these developments.

Richard Grange ● 4609d

But on another note - - here is another interesting article - about the London property market.http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/31/inside-london-billionaires-row-derelict-mansions-hampstead

Richard Grange ● 4609d

I thought we knew it was the chap from Spurs who is behind it...it's on this website somewhere.

Sara Nathan ● 4609d

'Ealing Council (Labour + Tories when in power), Boris, Pickles are all the same. They are desperate to get development, new housing to meet targets and money from developers to finance other projects.'Can someone tell me who all this new housing is going to be let/sold to? Local people who are presently homeless?If that is the case why are those huge blocks near to North Acton Station occupied by students who are, I am sure, not part of the homeless of Ealing.  Wouldn't they have solved Ealing's problem of housing Ealing's homeless and met Government targets?

Dee Cook ● 4608d

I thought it was the guy from Spurs too - but never knew for certain.My point more generally about shell companies - is that finding out who the real beneficiaries or who is behind these property schemes is often quite difficult.In fact it should be straightforward - if someone wants to build a house at the end of the garden there should at least be an automatic legal right to know who that "someone" is.

Richard Grange ● 4607d

The North Acton development was built by a student accommodation company called Downing Students and is only for students (who also need somewhere to live). Unfortunately the government makes it very difficult for councils to build accommodation themselves, so they have to rely on developers or housing associations.

Pete Grist ● 4606d

Sara, Daniel Levy (Spurs chairman) was a director but interestingly resigned from the Board in November last year.  The current directors are Matthew Collecott (who is the Financial Director of Spurs I believe and Vincent Daniel Goldstein.  Interestingly, I have been pressing Waitrose/John Lewis to provide me with information about the numbers of cars they anticipate coming to the supermarket each day, and they have refused to give me that information.

Anne Brown ● 4606d

The projected traffic flows are in the planning application, as you would expect. On page 14 of the Ealing website there is a document called Noise Impact Assessment. It has some numbers for the traffic increase in the surrounding roads and concludes:"The road traffic generated by the development is low in comparison with existing traffic flowsand therefore the increase in road traffic noise will be a negligible effect, such that nomitigation is required."

Pete Grist ● 4606d

Thank you Peter.  But I was asking Waitrose/John Lewis for THEIR figures, i.e. the number of customers in cars they anticipated at the store each day.  It is this information they refused to provide me.

Anne Brown ● 4600d

Actually I hear on good authority that Waitrose have not signed up for the Oaks yet. Could it be that they can't provide the figures Anne asks for because they have not invested in the necessary research?

Maire Lowe ● 4600d

No, Maire. I'm not an idiot! They have the figures, because they provided them to TFL. They just refuse to provide them to me despite the huge local importance of this information.

Anne Brown ● 4600d