Forum Topic

ERECTILE DEVELOPMENTS COURTESY OF AN EALING COUNCIL CLIQUE

It seems that the few at the top of Ealing Council are intent on imposing on the many their vision of urbanizing "the queen of the suburbs", Ealing. his involves imposing high level erectile developments (by that I mean buildings, not the other kind) that would surely result in dysfunctional communities. The ruling Labour Party on Ealing Council has degenerated, posing as caring, but they are really concerned about total control and possession. The Council clique that are in control are the disingenuous few imposing this urbanizing vision on the many, pretending to care, but being officious and narcisstic at the expense of the many. Power corrupts.I write this because I have written to the Council, concerning two proposed erections in the vicinity of West Ealing Station. Below is the text of my email letter I sent to Council Leader Julian Bell and his colleague Peter Mason, the Council Lead on planning. Others were copied in, including local MPs, the local GLA member and community groups such as the Stop the Towers campaign group.HASTINGS ROAD AND MANOR ROAD DEVELOPMENTSAs you may know there are proposals to erect two high rise complexes. This includes one complex with a 25 storey block on the corner of Hastings Road and Drayton Green Road (proposed by A2Dominion) and another 26 storey complex on the corner of Manor Road with Drayton Green Road where Argyle Road begins (proposed by Southern Grove...). This site is known as 55west. They are diagonally opposite each other across the strategic railway line/CrossRail route with West Ealing station separating them.I write to you both in order to object to these developments. The Fire Brigade would have difficulty in fighting/extinguishing a fire at such high level developments. These proposed blocks are a fire liability, especially next to the CrossRail route.The existing Victorian and Edwardian architecture of the area should not be further compromised by a so-called contemporary twist of monolithic utilitarian Soviet Socialist style architecture. That already exists in the form of Sinclair and Dominion Houses, and Luminous City diagonally opposite it, across the rail line. The proposed architectural aesthetics are poor.There is a shortage of family housing, yet A2Dominion's proposal only has seven 3 bedroom homes (out of 183 flats), and the 55west site proposed development only has eight 3 bedroom homes (out of 150 flats). These overbearing and over dense fire liability tower blocks with little rabbit hutch flats would also seem to be there as a kind of “Council Tax yield farm” for privileged Council management nomenklatura. Will these proposals actually address the concerns of the homeless, including families within the L.B. of Ealing and reduce it's waiting list?As far as access and aesthetics are concerned, could not something more in keeping with the area be proposed? As an example, on Hastings Road, by the sharp bend on that road there is a "post war infill" block of flats - Hastings House, 42 flats on three storeys. It is certainly less of a fire hazard and is more accessible than the proposals from A2Dominion and Southern Grove. Lower rise and less dense housing developments would almost certainly be better appreciated by homeless families and their would be  neighbours. It would also reduce concerns about overlooking. These proposed erections would not address problems of car use. It would simply "kick the can down the road".It seems that the development proposals are put forward by people who are just blinkered by money and meeting targets for their own supposedly virtuous egos, like some officious status and power hungry driven Komissar in the Soviet Socialist empire of Hitler's one time mass murdering ally in the Kremlin.These proposed erections will surely set out a further precedent for the "slow rape" of "the Queen of the Suburbs", Ealing. It seems L.B. of Ealing Planning Department is fond of doing this. They have already inflicted this around North Acton/Gypsy Corner. They seem fond of using Ealing Borough residents' tax money to destroy/inflict environmental vandalism on the people of Ealing Borough.(END)THE COUNCIL SPENT 18 MONTHS IN SECRET PREPARING THESE PLANS, WITHOUT "CONSULTING" LOCAL EALING RESIDENTS. WHEN THE PLANS BECAME "RIPE" THEY "EXCRETED" THE PLANS OVER EALING RESIDENTS AS A "FAIT ACOMPLI". POWER REALLY DOES CORRUPT.

Anthony Hawran ● 2357d9 Comments

If there’s such a demand for housing why is more than 50 percent of the Reynard Mills development at the bottom of Windmill Road still unoccupied?Yes, they are too expensive for some house buyers yet many of the new developments proposed for Ealing will be the same. As always, these things are really for those who have money rather than those who don’t. The Ealing proposals are really for investors not the people of the borough who need them.Of course, the real mischief of these high rise blocks is the lack of infrastructure and services included in them. More people to try to squeeze into overstretched GP surgeries and the like.

Simon Hayes ● 2352d

The real need is for family homes.It is all well and good providing rabbit-hutches for sole or dual occupancy but who, in all conscience, would ask anyone to raise a family in a 20th floor flat that just meets minimum space guidelines with no outside space either in the development or adjacent?These are just ‘future ghettos’ where there will be no community.There are bags of brownfield sites in Ealing the land behind castle House on Gordon Road is one almost immediately adjacent to the proposed blocks.Equally there are plenty of void retail units which could easily become family homes (this is what happens all over Europe).Ealing need to be creative and build, or approve developments which are, on a ‘human scale’.

N V Brooks ● 2353d

You are, Mr Hawran, correct of course. IMHO.  :-)

Rosco White ● 2353d

Having a home, either through renting or ownership, does not necessarily mean putting up sky high erections in the sky, just so that some council leader and his clique can show off how virtuous they are in meeting some Soviet Socialist "target". Lower rise housing with more respect for others in the area is actually an option. In the Evening Standard (03/07/2019) on the comments pages, page 15, Melanie McDonagh stated as much. It is feasible way of building  and achieving affordable housing.

Anthony Hawran ● 2353d

I put it to you that if you are suffering in the private rented sector where landlords exploit their tenants, then having a small chance to get an apartment that you can call your own would be a godsend. You would cut off your right-hand for it.In practice can I ask you what would you say to the person who could have a home of their own (without a car), who would pay less than the market rent, could take advantage of a scheme where they can save to have a greater share of their home, but all of this is denied because of the impact upon you? What would they say to you? Think of your own home. What does your home mean to you? - your emotional security;- your financial security;- a sense of being safe;- comfortable and relaxing;- being part of a stable community rather than a transient one;do add to the list. None of the above does one have when renting.People talk about a housing crisis. 45,000 affordable homes need to be built in London each year between now and 2025 just to keep up with demand. Where do you want them to live? People need to live close enough to where they work. Think about how your houses were once built on farmland and orchards in the late 19th or early 20th century. The property developers of 100 years ago destroyed the area 100 years ago. Food for thought?Finally, think about all the local independent businesses who would see growth in revenue from these newcomers. And they would arrive at their shops by foot, bike or bus. So no parking problems there.My top tip for those that don't want this development is that the majority of the dissenters are all homeowners! Tells you something.

Ben Owen ● 2353d

Too many yes men in Labour Council ranks now. Take Northfields ward councillors Driscoll and Block.These jokers fully support every crazy whim emanating from the cabinet cabal, not least the stripping out of our library service.They are incapable of reasoned debate (it’s Tory cuts - wonder where they get that line from) and are utterly not interested in what the people who actually elected them want.I was hopeful that two Labour councillors would stop our ward being the forgotten end of the borough but alas we have a pair of glove puppets more than happy to do their master’s bidding.Another three years of these clowns and there will be nothing left to destroy. Then we get the patronising leaflets for election campaigns telling us of all their ‘achievements’. I just Hope sense will prevail and they get kicked out and no longer pocket the £10k a year basic allowances.

Simon Hayes ● 2354d

I have no hesitation in saying that  I am beginning to agree with views expressed so far. Yes i am a  labour voter and perhaps i will consider voting for them again. They are the not endearing themselves to the issues that are a plague upon Lovely Ealing. There are however a few that i think are head and shoulders above the rest for service.  I am not sure how long will they be shoring up  the ones among them who can be criticised  for their utter uselessness.

Oswald Whittle ● 2354d

Perhaps the residents/voters within L.B. of Ealing have developed some variant of the Stockholm Syndrome towards the ruling party/posse after they won the local elections in 2010. This power has gone to the head of the ruling party/posse and the they think it is okay to impose the obscene erections on local residents, causing them stress and anxiety, and devaluing their homes (in order to meet Soviet Socialist "targets" at the expense of peoples' lives).

Anthony Hawran ● 2354d

Well, they got voted back in, with an increased majority.Those who didn't vote, or who voted Labour, only have themselves to blame.

Rosco White ● 2357d