The developers of the Perceval House scheme (essentially the council itself led by Julian Bell's Labour group) have tweaked its terrible scheme slightly. The scheme is not improved at all by taking out 42 two bed flats and putting back 21 three beds and 21 one beds. This really is an insulting rearrangement of the deckchairs (internal walls). Nothing else has changed and the stage has been set for the scheme to be nodded through by the whipped Labour group councillors on the planning committee. The scheme remains otherwise tall, ugly, cramped and intrusive. The scheme is grotesque over development. The planners would not let any other developer, other than council itself, pursue such a nakedly rapacious scheme. The council is essentially selling the looks and height limit in the town centre for a free, new building for itself.The scheme replaces an ugly building that only a council could build with a larger, uglier one. The old building was out of keeping and the new one will be worse.Of course the scheme is way too high and sets a precedent.Only the council could be this venal.Do not be confused. This is not "developers" stuffing us. It is Ealing Labour group.
Phil Taylor ● 231d17 Comments
There will be an Independent Enquiry into Labour LBE one day.Modern fornsic techniques are pretty hard to evade. 😉
Rosco White ● 220d
What a surprise. Bell’s reconvened planning committee of patsies passed the project 7-3. Three abstentions.That’s what happens when a local authority is also the developer and the guy in charge thinks he’s some sort of property developing wizard.
Simon Hayes ● 220d
My post referred to the monster towers going up in Acton by the A40. If there was any sort of emergency then all the residents would have to congregate somewhere at the foot of the building on what is effectively a traffic island.But there’s been no publication of the strategy despite numerous requests, including from the local MP.The Perceval House plan is being pushed through - and it will be approved tonight because Bell wants it - because it’s a key plank in the Broadway Living business our council has set up. Along with Gurnell, and I expect the soon to close Acton recycling centre, they need to get these things underway to justify the £400m loan they recently approved. A loan, incidentally, underwritten by Ealing taxpayers.There’s nothing here for the people who genuinely need homes. Bell has spent too long with the likes of Berkely and St George down at MIPIM and fancies himself as a hotshot property developer.
Simon Hayes ● 221d
Fire safety is the domain of building control, not planning. Although building control is a council function, it can (unfortunately) also be carried out privately by so-called “approved building control inspectors”.I say unfortunately because there is an obvious conflict of interest when a developer gets to choose and pay for their “regulator”. A bit like marking your own exam paper, really.Grenfell exposed serious weaknesses in the building control system.It would be very interesting to know who is responsible for the building control aspects of this proposed project.
David Marshall ● 221d
Gordon. It’s not me who has made the enquiries, it’s the Ealing Matters group and Rupa Huq.Answers? None.
Simon Hayes ● 221d
Simon, what was the response from the planning officer when you raised these concerns about the inadequate fire safety?
Gordon Southwell ● 221d
It does give some insight how little care and attention goes into the design of these buildings that the layout of the flats can be shuffled about a new plan presented in just a few days. It is hard to be confident that safety hasn't been inadvertently compromised.
Tricia Arbuthnot ● 222d
I thought he was resolutely silent on all matters west of the Iron Bridge as well?(Or was that just the previous fellow...?)I too having a growing admiration for Dr. Huq - which is a most peculiar feeling indeed given the colour of the party that she belongs to.
Tony Colliver ● 227d
"The council refuses to publish any such assessments." ........ of all things, on Fire Safety?!!!!!IF true, that is seriously out of order, people's lives are potentially at stake here. And for what, Cheap Political Point Scoring?!!Does BellEnd & Co's chicanery know no decent bounds?I think most of us, wearily, know the answer to that.There needs to be a Full & Independent Enquiry or Somesuch into LBE, from Top to Bottom, this Stalinism has to be stopped once and for all.
Rosco White ● 229d
Its not been taken into account at all. None of the big towers (particularly the 55 and 45 storey monsters going up in Acton) has adequate fire safety. The council refuses to publish any such assessments.But then none of the councillors will be living in these buildings.
Simon Hayes ● 230d
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTWx83lG6ZgIt's just enormous and having visited Walpole Park recently I don't see how that could be used as amenity space for so many more people. Having recently watched the Fire Safety Bill debate in Parliament and with the upcoming Building Safety Bill I wonder whether enough of this has been taken into account.
Philippa Bond ● 230d
My admiration for Dr.Huq is growing as, by all accounts, she is a good community representative.This contrasts sharply withe the honourable member for Ealing Southall who is resolutely silent on all matters east of the Iron Bridge and who never criticises his parliamentary employee Julian Bell.
N V Brooks ● 230d
Pretty much the whole district is going to get overshadowed by this but I think the Local MP is right and again brave enough to speak upon issues that her party and the establishment would rather keep battened down .
Raymond Havelock ● 230d
Good to see that our local MP is getting involved in the discussion, it wouldn't be because her house is going to be overshadowed by this monstrosity is it?
peter king ● 231d