Forum Topic

With a big thank you to the seven who submitted objections yesterday, but we still need more.It is very easy to do follow this link:https://pam.ealing.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=PVLSE9JM0GW00&activeTab=summary&fbclid=IwAR3SIwe7szLC6GG5zDO37CaTyJ7JM5SRUSxvxO9iNopXK-thBGdicQVRdSIClick on Comments and then Public Comments and follow through not forgetting to tick the Object box.Suggested Text:1. The height, scale and density of this development is incongruent with the local topography. 2. The lack of green space within the development is not enough for 900+ homes. We are also taking into account the development abutting the common land.3. The generic visual materials of this development are out of keeping with local housing stock.4. The ratio of social homes to private and affordable is very poor and does not meet the needs of Acton. We note that LBE waiting lists for 3/4 bed homes is 8yrs +.5. The height of the development will impact other residential homes with shadowing.6. The pollution and poor air quality in this area has long been suffered by residents. Hansons, Quattro and now a possible development taking 8-10yrs using heavy duty vehicles carrying dust laden materials to and from site, on narrow residential roads and a major road (Horn Lane) that just about copes with its traffic volume. The dirt, debris, noise pollution and large vehicular traffic suffered by residents and businesses in and around Churchfield Rd with the Oaks development is not something to be repeated.7. Local services eg GP's, schools are overwhelmed with the people they serve now. Building such a development with the hope that the services will be in place at the end stage lacks forethought, structure and business sense.8. A car free development does not encourage tradesmen to live in the area. Where are they to park their vehicles.9. North Acton station cannot cope with the volume of pedestrian traffic now. Resulting limited access at peak timesIt's no good moaning after the event, Object NOW

Libby Kemp ● 2395d

It is incredibly depressing to hear the news that predicated on the need for more housing all normal building controls from the last 30 off years should be thrown out.The one regret we have to moving to Acton is that we come under Ealing Borough. Having lived in Borough of Hammersmith for 20 years I can only say my experience is that their level of competency and ethics are poor in comparison. For what it’s worth I have set out my views below and will log these on Ealing’s planning site.Reason For ObjectionThe proposed tower blocks of up to 24 storeys are totally out of character and SCALE with the low-level suburban residential housing of this Central Acton area. The proposed development will adversely impact the attractive, liveable nature of this neighbourhood of Victorian, Edwardian and 1930s homes. The area chosen for development has a perfectly decent environment and community which is going to be destroyed by this extreme development proposal. Breaking PrecedentSince when has it been acceptable to put huge tower blocks in the middle of a RESDIENTIAL area of normal low-level houses?It is one thing to develop land which has been used for industrial and business use with Tower blocks but since when has it been allowable to build on existing Low level residential areas.Furthermore, the tower blocks will risk loss of light from the surrounding low-rise homes, and will create an eyesore and encourage more crime.Protecting Common LandI also note that Friars Green is Common Land and should not be included in any Friary Park development.Climate Change and Increased Carbon Footprint.It has been proven that the carbon footprint by building tower blocks compared to normal lower level housing is huge and goes against the climate Change strategy of the government. What’s in this for Ealing Council?I urge Ealing Council and Central Government to restrict the height of any new blocks in the Friary Park development, and in this neighbourhood, to the current 4 storeys or less. If we have to have buildings of these sorts of heights, these should surely be restricted to the Park Royal area, north of the A40, which is already being blighted by high-rise buildings and adverse environmental effects.My belief is that Ealing Council have a cynical interest in pushing through without any disregard to the people and lives who are already living on the site and the surroundings, driven by maximising financial returns. The larger the development the more money and Ealing Council will make in profits and Council Tax respectively. This proposal is not just about housing but about greed. For a supposed Labour Council they should be ashamed of themselves.Clearly it is a very easy option to succumb to the interests of greedy developers who’s soul aim is maximise profit per square metre.Finally, arguments that Central Government are imposing the need for more housing should not be an excuse a free rein to build housing developments out of complete proportion to anything that has preceded it in 50 years.

Robert Harris ● 2401d

Does no one not read The Gazette or GetWestLondon? I only ask because this application is entirely missing from their Pubic Notices.http://www.actonw3.com claims "Friary Park is owned and managed by Catalyst which is one the country’s largest housing associations, providing more than 22,000 homes in London and the South East". According to G15 CHG has over 440,000 so clearly they have sold a lot of social housing since the well know Cork money laundereer Killian Hurley became involved.From last year annual report CHG's income is based on Equity Loans. private rental and shared homeownership schemnes like their 132 rat infested units in South Acton and social housing hardly registers on their balance sheets or with JP Morgan and Nat West Bank.Ealing Council runs Locata, the system which allows everyone to buid for social housing so it is hard to see, even with all the backing of socialists like Yvonne Johnston who arranged the £30 million loan to set up this scheme 5 years ago, how all 379 social housing tenants on the Frairy park estate can be offered a new home in the development.Interesting CHG and Mount Anvil and their friends like Dan Crawford, Dr Abdullah Gulaid and Marie Lowe claim that there will be an increased number of family-sized homes for social rent to meet the needs of the families currently living on the estate. It's such a pity they fail to expalin how this will be done. Loooking at Anne Markey of Phelan Architects and CHG designs on www.homesbycatalyst.co.uk it is simply not possible.

Martin Cain ● 2413d