Forum Topic

Lammas Park works - Information

Over the past couple of months I have gathered information from various sources to better understand the works going on in Lammas Park.Of course I am only one person, and so I invite everyone here to add any sources they have, so that a comprehensive database can be formed. Hopefully this will mitigate any misinformation, deliberate or otherwise.I have posted the following elsewhere, and attracted more information, which is encouraging, as social media often splits people rather than brings people together.Please feel free to add more links in the comments. Obviously if this does not interest you, read no further. 1. The works in Lammas Park are designed for two main aims: to increase biodiversity, and to act as an outlet for coping with flooding in the area.2. A local resident tested the water in February claiming in an ITV interview  that the coli levels he found were ‘over 10,000 cpu/100mls’ which was ‘ten times what is found in the Thames, at 1,000 cfu/100mls’. The truth is that the Thames had an average of 2,869 cfu/100mls, while his own Lammas Park pond test came back at 2,600 cfu/100mls.3. Nevertheless, contamination is a serious issue, and so immediately after this, on the 7th March, Thames Water traced the contamination to a nearby house which had misconnected its waste pipe. The pond was cleaned, and the pipes were closed until the house in question remedies their error. There has not been any new water in the ponds since Thames Water performed the operation (the ponds have dried up) and they await confirmation of the pipes being properly connected. The ponds are currently empty, and have been for some time.4. The biodiversity aspect is to encourage natural wildlife to the area (eg. Frogs, hedgehogs, bats) as well as various plants and flowers which in turn attract insects such as bees. This type of biodiversity has been on the wane due in part to green spaces primarily covered in manicured lawns, and the decline in natural gardens and front gardens of houses in urban areas. The park will provide shelter, food, and places to breed for these animals, which is not just beneficial for the environment, but educational for us, especially children. Not all the flat lawn will be lost, in fact a large part will remain (as can be seen in the attached plan). The rest will resemble more of a ‘meadow’.5. SUDS are designed not just for wildlife, but they also benefit us in the long term through reducing carbon in the air. (See attached pdf for more information).6. The area is more susceptible to surface water flooding partly due to an increase in extreme weather (climate change) and an increase in paved areas which were previously green and porous (eg. driveways). There is a map available for you to see how the area is/will be affected by flooding, which is used for planning and insurance purposes.7. The cost to us, the residents of Ealing, is £150,000. This includes all landscaping and completion of the project. The remainder of the cost is covered by The Environmental Agency and Thames Water. This is a one-off cost, which in my opinion, when compared to the annual cost of something like pothole repair (£410,000) sounds like a good investment.8. The majority of Lammas Park will still be flat and football-friendly, as can be seen by today’s aerial viewI am happy to provide the following to anyone who wants it (I don't know how to add attachments here)* I have the results of a FOI from Ealing Council showing the breakdown of the cost of the project.* I have a transcript of communication with Thames Water, with a job reference number, should anyone wish to find out more re. the surface water pipes.* I have the Ealing resident’s original Lammas Park test, and comparison to tests carried out on the Thames.* A flood map for planning can also be viewed here: https://flood-map-for-planning.service.gov.uk/map?seg=sw,hr&cz=516824.1,179928.9,16.599058* The council has published a plan of how the finished park will look, as well as an aerial photo of works in progress.* Here is a link to the news re. Funding for pothole repair in Ealing: https://ealing.news/.../ealing-council-welcomes-pothole.../* Here is a link a pdf with comprehensive and clear explanation of SUDS and how they work. There are many such documents available, however this one happens to use Ealing as one of its case studies https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/rba-gla_guide-parks_and_greenspace_final.pdf

Dominik Klimowski ● 26d31 Comments

Here you go Dominik. Saved you the bother of trying to read other opinions backed up with facts. This was by Raymond Havelock last November. Do please add it to your ‘database ‘.‘ New posters have appeared in Lammas Park.  They still do not explain in any detail the rationale for the failed works.They still do not have a single name of anyone in charge.The pictures though are hugely misleading.They show " Flooding in and Ealing Street"The pictures are actually the flooding in and around two 'Speed tables" in Church Lane/ Culmington Road.In actuality the cause of the flooding dates back to the installation some years ago of the traffic calming speed tables - which serve their purpose.But the construction of these blocked the fall of rainwater to the drains and caused problems from day one.The road rises slightly after the Junctions of Elers Road and Lammas Park Gardens and the rainfall cannot soak away as the Drains are the wrong side.This has worsened because of two other factors.1.The drains have not been routinely descaled for decades ( They used to be done every 10 years by a local company based in Derwent Yard ). I know this for sure as it was one of my first student summer jobs ) Simple rudimentary stuff but highly effective.2. The huge trees produce a lot of leaves which are not dealt with and full the galleys and rot and again block water flow and drains up.  This is a problem locally around the parks.The roots have disturbed the level flows of the gullies. Again something that form time to time is easily remedied.Does it really take huge earthworks to remedy a lack of basic urban maintenance?Why use misleading pictures with the very cause in the pictures? Water unable to reach the drainsThe third Picture shows a flooded western end of the park.  This was in winter and after a very long dry period.  A very heavy rainstorm caused this and it was no more than water logged - just like a level playing field.  It took longer to drain away as it was much colder in that period.Theres used to be a slightly boggy area no more than a few metres in diameter near there that was down to a leak from an inspection chamber.Fact is Lammas Park has had minimal maintenance since the 1960s. Always the poor relation to Walpole Park which was looked after really well. Lammas Park has lost a lot of it's once equally good amenities to free and open access to all, but it at least remained a very safe park for children to play in,  be it sport or the swings or the long gone adventure playground.That is no longer even a consideration. Boggy Water and Playground? Irritant fauna and biting insects?  Why do you think Victorian Parks were created? Especially when surrounded by open meadows?  Because they were made to be safe and healthy places.With this bird brained scheme which has no evidence of proper risk or impact assessments is frankly, shameful and those behind it ought to be made accountable.But putting pictures with misleading captions is stooping to the level of regimes that this nation fought to quell.Tell the truth. And explain everything properly.  And produce the independent risk assessments.’

Simon Hayes ● 4d

I wonder how you got these facts and whom your sources are?Residents around Lammas Park some of who are suffering and recording impacting effects in a myriad of ways have not been able to glean any verifiable and actual facts for near two years. A wall of silence from Walpole Ward Councillors ( in which the park in The park is entirely located) and a load of conflicting and deflecting responses from the Northfields Councillor who is part responsible for the mishandling of this project.Your facts as presented are far removed from the reality. You are either gullible or putting up on someone's behalf.You certainly do not know the history of the district, or indeed want to know.Why indeed Public Parks were created when 80% of the surroundings were meadows, orchards and open land. Why indigenous but safe fauna and flora and trees were selected.Some of the most environmentally effective tree species that have been felled without justification , far older than the park and the trunks reveal no disease or decay.  Met with silence. Pure environmental vandalism. Public Health Thames water using a public park with a very cheap solution to enable large developments.  Benefits them, the council and its developer chums. But not the residents of this district.Unverifiable claims of homes at risk - but unable do explain where and exactly how.The geology of the site - Which I possess a full  survey of the entire district but strongly recently removed from the LBE website.  Unless there has been an earthquake in the last 25 years this does not change but water fissures do.No Impact assessment. No H&S assessment. No proper and comparable wildlife assessments. Cooked tree assessments and again complete ignorance about the Five Spires Chestnut trees.The "rare important skill"  is verifying these 'facts' and as several professional researchers have found. They are unsound and untrue and wanting.As are many of the documents that are accessible. However, they are not open publicly to question in detail and you won't get an answer.  You have to know your subject inside out to be able to verify some of the claims.  And these are written in a way to deflect rather than inform.As for safe ponds, you clearly have not grown up here. So can be forgiven for not knowing of the drownings and incidents in four local ponds. The worst in Gunnersbury Park, Potomac Pond around 1991.  But if you don't know don't make claims or assumptions. Go and check, and check and check again. Which is what those researching diligently do.The Boating pond was closed for being too dangerous for its purpose. This is far less shallow than the ponds in Lammas park and with no fall.Then there are all the issues with contamination and ground disturbance.Fact: That is verifiable in only one context  No-One knows because the data is not being made public or the data has never been gathered and tested.The Fact the LBE remain silent and refuse to be open and honest says more than any fact.  Why the silence?Unless of course you have that in your possesion too.

Raymond Havelock ● 17d

Thank you Rosco.Unfortunately people like Dominik aren't interested in the truth, only in confirming their preconceptions any way they can.What people like Dominik don't comprehend is that one can oppose the Lammas Park scheme but not oppose the principle of SuDS in general. Just because he likes this scheme doesn't mean that the majority of local people do.This is not about Nimbyism (and how people like Dominik love to accuse others of that), it's about an inappropriate scheme in a popular park.Swallowing the lies (and there have been many of those) from dimwitted councillors like Driscoll and Shaw doesn't give much confidence in how people like Dominik do their day jobs. Gullible is the word that springs to mind.The Lammas scheme has been investigated by the Local Government Ombudsman and revealed all the serious flaws in the project, things that should have been evident to any reasonably intelligent individual. Quite why nobody at the council, Thames Water or the Environment Agency considered crucial things like risk assessments and health and safety is inexplicable and unforgivable. Will it take a serious accident for someone in authority to stand up and accept that they are wrong?The trouble with people like Dominik is that they view everything through the prism of their own entitlement, and cannot understand why anyone might disagree with them, even when the facts don't support them.And I do hope he's getting a shower at work after his cycle commute in this hot weather. Not fair on anyone else there otherwise.

Simon Hayes ● 25d

You have omitted a lot of important and relevant information for your 'database' Dominik. Must be a quiet day for you.1. No flood risk assessment was carried out by the council, Thames Water or the Environment Agency before the works were signed off. Without that, there's zero justification for the scheme, particularly considering its scale in relation to the rest of the park.2. No health and safety assessment was carried out by the council. As the authority with responsibility for the park this is a crucial omission, with liability for any accident lying with the council. A belated assessment was carried out in January by RoSPA and it concluded that there were 'serious concerns' about aspects of the scheme. The mitigations carried out by the council - closing a gate from the children's play area and putting some inadequate fencing above the swale pipes, won't prevent anyone falling in.3. The council failed to get planning permission for the original SuDs at the top end of the park, and has failed to ensure that the correct planning consents for the big scheme currently being 'finessed'. That's a massive oversight and if you think that's acceptable then you must live in some sort of fantasy land.4. There was no biodiversity study carried out to assess whether the scheme would indeed bring the benefits claimed. Considering these ponds will be empty during low rainfall periods any wildlife or plant life requiring a wetland to survive will have a problem. A study was carried out in December, but wasn't relevant as it fell outside the correct period for carrying out such studies.5. The costs to residents is more than you state. The works have taken far longer than envisioned and costs have inevitably increased. We also pay Thames Water, or maybe you don't and have a magic well in your back garden.6. If you think the pdf images from the council will accurately reflect the finished scheme, then you are simply wrong. The soil from the excavations isn't being removed from the park, just redistributed and then smashed down. Go and look up soil compaction if you are so concerned about drainage.7. The water that flows into these pools during heavy rainfall is not going to be clean. It will be overflow from drains and roads and full of contaminants. There has been no commitment from the council or Thames Water to monitor the cleanliness of the water.8. The new ditches now pose a risk to those using the area for sports. Plenty of footballs in them now, or is that magically going to stop when they remove the Heras fencing? Maybe you and Cllr Driscoll can volunteer to patrol the park in your Speedos and fish out any balls that go into the ponds to avoid youngsters falling in.All this has been found out from FoI requests from the council over the past few months and has been published here and elsewhere, though you don't seem to read anything that doesn't tally with your world view.You see, Dominik, in the real world people might not have opposed this scheme if it was put somewhere that wasn't so inappropriate. It's not there for biodiversity, it's there to enable further massive developments in central Ealing without the need for cash-strapped Thames Water to upgrade or even clean the existing sewer system.If you are happy that a previously well-used park has now had a major hazard imposed on it, then that says more about your arrogance than anything else you have ever posted.

Simon Hayes ● 25d