Big blow for Bell. Planning committee refused the redevelopment tonight with 10 against, 1 for and 2 abstentions.It seems the main concern is the cost to Ealing taxpayers.
Simon Hayes ● 1873d7 Comments
It is a shame that the video made by the Apsley House residents wasn't accepted/played at the Perceval House planning meeting.
Philippa Bond ● 1872d
As I've said I haven't seen the full meeting online but what you say doesn't provide reasons to be confident in the competence of members of the committee (even though this time they seem to have made the right decision). As far as I am aware the financial viability of the scheme is not a matter for them to consider and doing so is counterproductive but it might give the developer the chance to say that any risk that they might not make a profit could be reduced by having fewer 'affordable' units. I'd repeat that anyone wanting to know the very sound reasons for rejecting this scheme should look at the brilliant video produced by the Save Gurnell campaign.
Gordon Southwell ● 1872d
Blimey, that's a turnup for the books.The peasants are revolting! ?
Rosco White ● 1872d
Gordon. Some of the committee expressed doubts about the financial viability of the scheme. Being a long way from Ealing Broadway would mean it was less attractive to potential overseas investors.The leisure centre should be refurbished and reopened. It was a huge health hub for a lot of people. However, I don’t think this council is too bothered about that.
Simon Hayes ● 1872d
Cost to taxpayer isn't a planning consideration so that is unlikely to have been the main reason although I haven't managed to sit through the four hour video of the meeting so can't say for sure. The main issue is likely to have been the use of Metropolitan Open Land as suggested in the article on this site and the amazingly professional video produced by the Save Gurnell scheme. The issue of MOL would not have been a factor for Perceval House. The unanswered question is what next for the existing Gurnell Centre — is it in a condition that it can be reopened or are we going to have an extended period in which Ealing is short of leisure facilities?
Gordon Southwell ● 1873d
How odd that the same criteria does not apply to the debacle at Perceval House.
Raymond Havelock ● 1873d