Ten Reasons for Objecting to the Planning Application


1.       The Development Ignores the Publicly Agreed Site Brief

The Council agreed planning guidelines for the site, which are still valid, with all local stakeholders in 2004. The development is now around twice what was agreed in terms of height, bulk, accommodation & parking.

Key differences include:

*              maximum height of buildings: increased from 8 to 14 storeys.
*             total accommodation: nearly doubled from 30,000 m2  to not less than 54,891 m2 and probably
*              car parking: nearly tripled from 200 spaces to 583 spaces.
*              traffic access: vehicle access is now planned via the residential roads north of the railway line, 
               even though the Council’s original brief said vehicle access should be from the Uxbridge Road
to the south.
*              Why did the Council set and agree one set of guidelines and then support the developer in 
               submitting an application for something very different? The Council owns the site and it should 
               have set a better example.

Why did the Council set and agree one set of guidelines and then support the developer in submitting an application for something very different? The Council owns the site and it should have set a better example.

2.       Creation of a precedent

Ealing is well known as a residential part of London, featuring low rise houses and flats.  If this plan is accepted, how will the Council manage the expectations of future developers (e.g. Glenkerrin)?

3.       Out of Character and Scale     

The developments proposed are completely out of character and scale with the surrounding town centre area which is predominantly Edwardian architecture and low rise buildings.

The design, bulk and height of the development will blight the Conservation Areas it sits in and borders. The 47 metres (150 feet) height of the 14 storey tower grossly exceeds the maximum 20 metres (65 feet) height for a building in a Conservation area.

The building materials will introduce a bland and nondescript look to the area that will dominate and detract from the landmark listed buildings on the same site ie the Town Hall and Christ the Saviour Church.

 4.       Height and Bulk of Development 

One 167 metre long building with several high towers, the tallest being 14 storeys and 45.5 metres (150 feet) high will cast a huge shadow across Gordon Road and beyond, especially in the winter.

Six other tall buildings will add to bulk and density of the site and dwarf the neighbouring listed buildings..

The 698 flats that will accommodate over 1,500 new residents will be packed in at very high density on the site. Living space is very cramped, many flats have little natural light and many flats will suffer noise from the railway 10m from their windows.

The development makes no provision for children in terms of play areas.

 5.       Too many Flats 

There will be 698 new flats in residential tower blocks on this site. Some 1,500 new residents might be injected into a very small area. This would be a 25% increase in the local population, with the no planned addition of new public community facilities and no additional infrastructure to support them.

 6.       No New Infrastructure

So many new residents will put extra strain on existing local infrastructure such as GP surgeries, dentists, primary and secondary schools, sewers, Ealing Police and Ealing Hospital, community facilities, transport services and traffic flows. None of these aspects is properly considered in the submitted plans. 

7.       No Community facilities and No Community gain 

Despite so many new residents, the development provides no community facilities, i.e. arts and leisure space, even though the Council’s guidelines and Tibbalds report recommend it. If the same developer gave Kingston a 1000-seat theatre why can’t it give something of community value back to Ealing?  

As part of the centre of a borough of over 300,000 residents, this Council owned, centrally located land should be used to provide community facilities for the all the residents of the borough.  

8.       Parking, Traffic and Transport 

Parking for 583 cars of which 300 are for residents and the rest for shoppers. More parking means more traffic.

All vehicle access (cars and lorries) from just one entrance on Longfield Avenue causing traffic congestion around the approaches from the south via Uxbridge Road and from the north via Longfield Road and Gordon Road.

No public access to and from Haven Green to access Ealing Broadway station. 

9.       Retail 

The claims which the developers have made for the Dickens Yard shops are unrealistic.  The retail floorspace in Dickens Yard will be far too small to compete against the massive new White City shopping centre.  At the same time it will add to the problems of oversupply and vacant shops in Ealing town centre.  

Their projections of retail growth in Ealing are massively overstated and contain a number of flawed assumptions.  The new shops in Dickens Yard will be targeted at high spending under 45 year old ‘aspirational’ shoppers, and will ignore the majority of Ealing’s residents.  There are very few of these target customers in Ealing and most will be attracted by the fifteen times larger White City.  None of the proposed Dickens Yard shops are large enough for a department store.  The largest shop will be smaller than just the ground floor of Primark/Beales/Bentalls.

All the new shops will be tucked away in a sunless and rain-swept area, off the beaten track and underneath huge tower blocks.  Why would retailers and shoppers want to go there?

10.     Not Part of an Overall Town Centre Plan 

This development does not form a part of an overall development strategy for Central Ealing and because of this it cannot hope to contribute to wider objectives for improving our Town Centre.