Forum Topic

Gunnersbury park for exclusive private school?

Cut and Pasted from the Brentford TW8 forum. Cannot see it on the Ealing version but it is an Ealing issue, especially as the area in question will affect teh Ealing /Acton part of the park first.It's possible that this could be the beginning of the end of the park as a public park. Developers are salivating over the potential of grabbing slices of the place and it could become an exclusive facility for the wealthy.Topic: Gunnersbury Park in danger again. Forum HomePosted by: K DanielsDate/Time: 05/04/13 10:11:00Hello All,You may already have heard that the Councils have appointed a firm of developers to turn the Small Mansion into an extension of an Ealing private girls' school. If this goes ahead, the public will be barred access to a large chunk of the Park (in contravention of the legal covenant) as well as suffer increased traffic, noise, pollution, etc.There is a meeting of the Gunnersbury Park Joint Advisory Board on Friday 19 April at 6.30 in the Small Mansion. I don't know what's on the agenda, but do try to come along to find out more and express your views. Let's have a good turnout and try to nip this in the bud, or, once a precedent is established,  the rest of the Park will follow suit. every blade of grass belongs to the public. Gunnersbury is an amazing park, lets try & keep it that way. Gunnersbury is being regenerated, take a keep @ the official you-tube channel.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iLFCh1HAfQBest wishes.PLEASE ATTEND THIS MEETING & SHOW YOUR SUPPORT TO KEEP THIS PARK IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN ! APRIL 19TH @ 6.30PM AS ABOVE.

Michael Brandt ● 4735d55 Comments

Just shows that they are really only interested in the wallets of the little princesses parents.

Oliver Gregan ● 4581d

Jolly hockey sticks!Don't know about rioting Eric as I, for one, would be petrified at the sight of the massed ranks of the 1st Ealing Lacrosse infantry supported by the 2nd Chelsea Tractors.

Nigel Brooks ● 4582d

Crikey...how will life carry on with the loss of a private girls school?Could there could be rioting in the streets one wonders?The next thing you know will be people demanding universal State education for all....crikey....

Eric Alan Leach ● 4582d

Well looks like 'The Falcons' have had enough of Ealing.http://www.ealingtoday.co.uk/default.asp?section=info&link=http://nnet-server.com/server/common/eafalconsmove001.htmTo paraphrase the old adage "you pays your money and gets no choice".

Nigel Brooks ● 4582d

The fencing off of Public Open Space was contrary to the Restrictive Covenant so were the proposed private commercial operations (exclusive Girls School).Thanks to local residents who again were prepared to defend the Park and keep it as a Public Park rather than a developers' playground.

Victor Mishiku ● 4675d

Well, looks like the plan has collapsed after the sponsors withdrew.See the front page or here's the link.http://www.ealingtoday.co.uk/default.asp?section=info&link=http://nnet-server.com/server/common/falcons003.htm

Nigel Brooks ● 4677d

Gunnersbury Park shouldn't be used for schools or other businesses imo. It should be an amenity available to the public for rest and recreation.

Gerry Tan ● 4717d

Hi there, here is the web site were you may find the date of the meeting in June: http://democraticservices.hounslow.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CId=505&Year=2013

Giusi Ortu ● 4718d

Hi there, I am member of STIG - Save Trees in Gunnersbury, perhaps you have heard of this small group. We stopped the council from cutting down over 400 trees to for housing development in 2009. What is happening now is the same stuff that has been happening in the last 20 years and as Miss Bela knowns very well, the council will try even this time to get read of not of trees, but green spaces ... On an even sadder note, the rental of this space (up to 50,000 £ per year) to the school will not even go to Gunnersbury Park, according to one of the Project Managers, which says it all... so we will be loosing greens paces, and even not getting any money for the park development and maintenance - pretty bad indeed!So the only option is a new fight, and as it has been said, we might be in need to really chain ourselves to the school railings or to some trees that by chance (not really by chance I think ...) will be about to be cut down for the setting up of the school area.It would be useful to start by asking the project manager in Ealing, Kirby Jo (actually his role is Assistant Director of Mayor Projects), to have the proposal that the school presented in the first place to the Council, at least we can have a look at this... His  email is: kirb...@ealing.gov.uk he must made available this document as pdf to the public, so if he does not send it, another good reason to be suspicious and angry ... Then we can attack point by point this proposal - I believe that all those reassurances that both project managers gave during that meeting (not extra space taken from the park in front of the mansion, restricted perimeter of the school and not extendible, school premises available to the public during the weekend and so on...)were pure lies, and nothing of that is actually written in the proposal the school provided - So let's get this document and start our complaints -escalate during that meeting in June (it will be I guess the 7th of June) and have all the press talking about it - it worked in 2009 and it will work even now if we have enough strength to pursue this fight ...Of note, the meeting in June in which the community will have a say on this (see the web site above with this info), will not really give us the chance to have a say as the decision seems to be already made - but it will give us the chance to start our  fight ! I was pretty free in the past for this fight  - STIG has set up a google group that works and it is good for exchanging emails on this subject - Now I am a bit overwhelmed by my current job and I am really looking for somebody to give us help in this fight - we will need to do a big campaign as we did in the past and people are needed - if you are up to write to me!

Giusi Ortu ● 4718d

According to Ealing Council's Planning web site, a planning application was submitted on 6 July 2012 to build 5 houses on the old school site at 83 The Avenue, W13.The status of the application is 'Pending'.Check it out for yourself. The planning reference is P/2012/4537

Eric Alan Leach ● 4721d

Would you happen to know how the old Ealing (College?) Upper School building on the corner of The Avenue and College Road seems to have got planning permission to be pulled down and replaced with 5 houses, with no consultation with nearby properties (unless 100m is too far to be consulted).

Barbara Karayi ● 4721d

"bandied" (not banded  - sorry again - it's 2.45am and after a very long day in Walton-on-Thames trying to save a 115 year-old football playing field using covenants originally imposed by the Sassoon family, my typing is suffering - not helped by "tennis elbow")

Victor Mishiku ● 4723d

"A property tycoon's company has bought half the Olympic Village at a knock-down price, months after making a £50,000 donation to the Conservatives.Jamie Ritblat's firm Delancey  purchased the site where the athletes will stay during the Games for £557million – an estimated loss of £275million to taxpayers.The investment could net the firm  enormous profits, experts say. It plans to let out most of the 1,400 homes. Friends of 44-year-old Mr Ritblat say his firm's offer was the best on the table. They added that Olympic Village homes, which have no kitchens, require major refurbishment before they can be resold or rented out.But cynics will question the timing of the deal, coming so soon after Delancey's substantial donation to the Tories. In a further twist, Mr Ritblat's father, property giant Sir John Ritblat, was chairman of the Conservative Party's Olympics Oversight Committee. This was set up in 2007, while the Tories were in Opposition, to scrutinise London 2012 budgets. The section of the Village involved has been sold for almost £300million less than the Olympic Delivery Authority spent building it using taxpayers' money......."Sorry Paul, with so many millions being banded about, I typed the wrong figure!

Victor Mishiku ● 4723d

The donation is £50,000 not £50 million and as the decision is being made by Labour controlled Councils it isn't clear how this is relevant anyway. There is a Sir John Riblat on the board of Alpha Plus who I think are the company behind the Falcons School project. Possibly Jamie Riblat is his son but is there any evidence they are both involved in this project?

Paul Cavanagh ● 4724d

WE have an inclusive society. By law to boot.We have equality laws and this country has strived to put people as equals.We were the first major power to end slavery.And we have come a long way in dealing with prejudice.Far better than most developed countries.But now we have an age old poison geting a grip.  Greed and rule by division.I don't have a problem with people who have a lot of money.But when that money is used to take away something that is for all the people be they rich or poor then it is wrong.This school is for the privileged. But they want it all, nice surroundings, converted mansion, segregated grounds.And that is what is happening . Apartheid of the rich and everyone else. Segregating our society not by race or colour but by means.It is just as wrong and should not be encouraged.If they have that sort of money, then there are plenty of places they can have a private school.The school is a front for a large offshore company with developers in it's portfolio. They want the foot in the door.

Michael Brandt ● 4727d

In some people's eyes "exclusive" is the dirty word they use to cast a bad light on any educational establishment which dares to charge.

Tony Colliver ● 4728d

So, Falcon School is the tool - the patsy so to speak - to get a foothold.

Charles Campbell ● 4728d

Now it can be told.I have just received the web link below from a resident of Lionel Road. Apparently, this "real big spender" (£50 Million donation to the Government) is the party who is behind this parkland land grab.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2041229/Tory-donor-Jamie-Ritblat-snaps-Olympic-Village-knock-price--costing-275m.html

Victor Mishiku ● 4728d

With you on that. I`ll come chain myself to railings if it comes to it. Hopefully not :O)

Tom Clifford ● 4728d

Gunnersbury is a really nice park, please don't build over it or change its use.

Paul Teevan ● 4728d

Jaz, I get your thought process- however it isn't a case so much of a dislike for Muslims, but the danger and threat they represent as demonstrated many times, the latest being the Boston atrocities. Yes they may well attend this and any other school as did the two bombers in Boston but that doesn't mean that they will not follow a similar path since they ALL follow shariah law and have even tried to turn parts of London into shariah zones. Even the smallest numers are a threat for which we should all be worried. Their activities are clear to everyone and they have a stated mission to take us over. No other religion hates the west and randomly kills and maimes innocent people.

Marie OConnell ● 4728d

Marie, do you really think that there are no Muslim children n our mainstream schools? Our schools in London are truly comprehensive, socially, culturally and religiously. You really do dislike all Muslims don't you. You can not distinguish between fundamentalist and all other Muslims. If this school goes ahead, there will be Muslim children there, and Christian, Sikh, Hindu, maybe Jewish also and maybe Buddhist and Atheist. There will be children of whoever can afford to send their children there.

Jaz Brown ● 4728d

Gunnersbury Park was for nearly 50 years the playing fields for Gunnersbury Grammar School .The School Buildings still stand in Gunnersbury Avenue.If Falcons backers want a school they could easily afford to purchase this site.But clearly they are after the park.This is all starting to sound like another back door deal. Something that Hounslow Council are rather deft at.

Michael Brandt ● 4729d

Please let us know when the June meeting takes place. As a local, who knows, we might not hear about it due to some oversight.

Barbara Karayi ● 4729d

It hard to square the circle here when in essence planning should involve local stakeholders being involved in the formative stages of plan making. Myself and my wife have been walking regularly in the park for 30 years or more. I played football there in the 1970s. I even had a client in my own business who with my encouragement renovated The Orangery The formal proceedings a did not reveal the property developer aspect and details. Many of the audience would not have known about the rejected alternative uses - residential and catering. These slim details were only teased out through Councillor questioning. Councillor Mafouz from Ealing didn't ask any questions. One can only infer that he supports the plan.My gut feeling is that an island site in a heritage park is not an appropriate site for an elite private nursery school for 200 very young girls.The meeting was poorly conceived in a tiny room in which at least 12 people had to stand to listen to the proceedings.The Chair of the meeting had a loud 'command and control' style of meeting control. Once she completely lost the plot and loudly accused one of the Councillors of being rude when it was apparent to everyone that he was not being rude. The Chair also made it abundantly clear how keen she was on the plan which at best was honest and at worst was partial.

Eric Alan Leach ● 4729d

Ordinary Schoolboys Vs. Exclusive Schoolgirls! I am 13 years old and a schoolboy at the Gunnersbury School in The Ride. My friends and I love playing in the park and would hate it to see parts of it go forever. We were upset to lose "the rope pyramid" recently and would prefer renovation or refurbishment rather than private investments taking over the parts of the park under their control. This may become an investing opportunity for more developers to get their share of the profit from other commercial projects also to be accommodated in the park perhaps.

Cezary Robert Kos ● 4729d

I had no issue with a local school looking for a nicer site and doing the building in the park a favour in the process, but with big money from the tax haven BVI, it is totally to be opposed. Is this being used as a vehicle to excuse tax avoidance, reinvesting the avoided tax in the UK? Cameron may not be as supportive of park protection as Brown was though he says he is against tax avoidance.

Barbara Karayi ● 4729d

The Falcons School were not called upon to speak at the joint Councils' meeting but their case was amply presented instead by the officers from Hounslow Council and Ealing Council. The public were told that they could not ask questions or participate in the debate but that there would be a public meeting in June when they would be updated, etc with the planning process and so on.It appears that the two Labour Councils have already agreed and promised privately that they intend to push through this "exclusive school" project with the British Virgin Islands registered developers no matter what.It is not clear whether all of the Labour and other councillors are happy with what the officers are telling them  - the councillors, for instance, certainly have not been informed about the length of time that the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) is likely to take to consider Applications by the school or the two Councils to have the covenant lifted on this part of the Park.It is a somewhat dangerous situation because in a case in Wembley (where there is not a Trust Deed as in the instant case), a school carried out a breach of covenant in one far corner of its playing fields and has now applied to the UTLC to have the entire playing fields land freed from the estate' restrictions.  This would then allow unlimited school buildings over the entire area which is currently used as open space for sports and games. The residents on the "South Forty Farm Estate, Wembley" are now facing 4 Expert Witnesses brought in by the school (backed by Labour Brent Council) who have unlimited funds to tell them how wonderful it would all be!It is all rather strange when the previous Labour Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, invited Mrs "Bela" Cunha of Lionel Road to No.10 Downing Street to thank her for her gallant efforts to prevent the Park being compromised on an earlier occasion not long ago.I wonder how long it would be before Alpha Plus Group are applying to build houses and flats in the Park?

Victor Mishiku ● 4729d

Unlikely since they would not like the curriculum. Do you also think the events in Boston are boring ? Well just another proof that we don't need these people in our society killing and maiming people... 

Marie OConnell ● 4729d

Well, that sounds pretty horrible by the developers and hopefully will get nowhere much. You don't mention the Falcon School at all. Did they engage this funder? The school's clientele is not all white, this being Ealing.

Barbara Karayi ● 4729d

Pretty much as suspected. A front for developers to get a foot in the door and make it exclusive.It will only be rented out after hours to exclusive upmarket organisations.It will not be for the benefit of the community as a whole.The Park will be forever compromisedIt has to be a very firm NO.

Michael Brandt ● 4729d

Last night at the Small Mansion, councillors met to discuss the current proposals.A presentation set out the timetable for planning permission and cabinet approval, etc. The permission being assumed and a mere formailty, it seems both from the Council and the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).However, the timetable failed to include the time required for the Tribunal's consideration of the proposals  - last time it took 3 years (1992 - 1995)!It transpired that the developers taking the land for 200 years for the exclusive school are a Ritblat-owned company registered in the British Virgin Islands.The school is to be allowed to rent out the premises out of school hours.  The Lease arrangements give the school control of areas of the Park for staff car-parking, a playground and other parts of the Park are to be fenced off with high steel fencing and security CCTV cameras installed plus a caretaker's residence, although it was suggested that the school would only be there for 32 weeks a year.  Would the high steel fencing excluding the public be taken up and down then?The Friends of Gunnersbury Park spokesman, Mr James Wisdom, did not appear to favour what he thought would be an all-white very exclusive school run by tax-haven developers! Several councillors expressed reservations. Mr Wisdom queried why the restoration of the Small Mansion was being linked to the conversion to a private exclusive school, when the Large Mansion and other parts of the Park were being refurbished with monies received in grants in S.106 monies from Chiswick developments without linkage to development.Another meeting is to be held in June for residents to be told how wonderful it all is yet I cannot see these tax-haven developers parting with £6 Million Pounds whilst there are time-consuming legal issues remaining unresolved.Apart from all this and the binding restrictive covenant, it seems to have been forgotten that the Park is held on Trust for the public having been acquired under the Public Health Acts 1875 to 1925 and therefore, the Council is under a statutory duty to preserve the use of the Park as a Public Park or for Sports Playing Fields, etc. - even if there were no covenant!

Victor Mishiku ● 4729d

Surely access will be from where it is now, the back, as that is where the street access is. Then one can still run along the front, the side facing the green slope?

Barbara Karayi ● 4731d

> we will all have a more attractive building to look at and run aroundNot if it becomes a school you won't.Access will be strictly limited - in fact, likely completely denied.

Tony Colliver ● 4731d

The scary bit is that without private investment (even the National Trust is not interested in Gunnersbury), the buildings will be allowed to collapse into oblivion, e.g the East Lodge, the stables. We will always have the park, but without the heritage.  A decision has to made. It has gone on much to long.

Charles Campbell ● 4731d

A little history for fun:#12,13,14,15,and 16 Gunnersbury Avenue were built between 1906 and 1908 by J.H.Mills (could be Wills). He added "Motorsheds" to the houses in 1912. SOURCE: "Inspections of New Buildings" official Ealing Council document, held in the History Library, Ealing. The 1893 Ordnance Survey Map seems to indicate that this land may have been originally the Ealing Common Farm.  Rumour has it that this section contained greenhouses which supplied the village with produce.  Certainly this land was part of the Rothschild Estate (NOTE: The names of the streets in the area) e.g. Evelyn Grove (Evelyn Rothschild), Tring Avenue (named after Rothschild's estate in Tring), Leopold Road (Leopold Rothschild). Some of the buildings are restricted to residential use. These may have been cancelled in the case of #13 and #15 or there isn't anyone around who has a reason to challenge.

Charles Campbell ● 4731d

I think the proposal is for the building, not the park. You may have noticed a number of schools and organisations and clubs are already using the grassy bit, non-exlusively. The building is unsafe and needs to be rescued. What better way than to get it partly/wholly funded by someone and we will all have a more attractive building to look at and run around, and doesn't cost as much as having it saved and stand empty. Someone will have to make some use of it to generate money to keep it. Whether it is used for a restaurant, wedding venue, whatever and anything. Empty is useless.

Barbara Karayi ● 4731d

It's quite simple. The Park is for all of the people. Not for those who can afford it.If the idea is for a school or any other social use fine as long as it is for all and not just the select few who can afford it.Where does a private school find the sort of money that is being quoted to not only restore the building but also to bring it into use as a facility?They would never get a return. So something does not add up.If this is to be allowed there must be water tight restrictions with no loopholes.Once these corporates get a grip all that will be left of Gunnersbury park will be the open grass area and all the nice bits will be in the hands of private organisations

Michael Brandt ● 4731d

My deed for a flat said "private dwelling house or a girls' school" - clearly considered tame enough for the neighbourhood. But I believe you can buy one off covenant insurance indemnifying you against claims under these old covenants. Not sure how far you can overcome coventants. I will dig out our current deeds and have a look.

Barbara Karayi ● 4731d

In the magnificent Gunnersbury Avenue (part of the Rothschild Estate), I would have thought that the covenant only permits use as a private dwellinghouse on each plot?No.15 used by the Falcons School is perhaps in breach of covenant already?  Likewise, the house next door to it?I wonder what the deeds say?

Victor Mishiku ● 4731d

My gut reaction is that using the small mansion for a girls' school is a good idea. The current school is near my house, on Gunnersbury Avenue, and I think a park setting is a attractive alternative. The girls must be very cramped on the current site. Further, both mansion buildings are seriously delapidated so a scheme which encourages refurbishment and costs the council little is to be welcomed. Lastly, a few years ago we were consulted on using part of the park for private development and using the money to do up the mansion in order to save it. This clearly was rejected by most. The cash need to save the building is in the order of £10million, so it's not peanuts.Surely the school's use of the building can be restricted so no extensions are allowed etc. Just some thoughts.

Barbara Karayi ● 4731d

But some of the children may be Muslim. Will you, and others of your ilk, stand outside to complain?Sing a different tune, this one track of yours is so very boring.

Nigel Brooks ● 4732d

Well at least it isn't being used for another Muslim institution, so it seems a reasonalble use of the building.

Marie OConnell ● 4732d

Yes, She's a funny kid!  The girls are round the corner in a super building.But it does cost her parents a few bob.

Michael Brandt ● 4734d

Looking through some earlier papers, I have noted the following information regarding the Rothschild covenant.The original covenant was imposed by Mrs Marie de Rothschild on 29th December 1925 when 199.8 acres of landwas conveyed to Acton and Ealing Councils. This included the two mansions and all of the grounds.The 1925 Conveyance imposed restrictions on the two Councils that:-“they will not use the land and hereditaments for any purpose other than as a public park or sports ground and that the mansion houses and buildings on the said land…shall not at any time…be used except for such public purposes as may be ancillary to the use thereof as aforesaid…” A strip of land at the perimeter of the Park had been excepted where private houses were to be built by The Newcombe Estates Company Limited and a local builder, Albert Cox.This covenant was renewed on 11th December 1926 when two Conveyances of land took place to The Newcombe Estates Company Limited/Mr Cox with the Councils covenanting again to observe the Rothschild restrictions that the land (apart from the strip for the intended houses) would forever be used as a public park or sports ground.Some minor modifications have been allowed by the Lands Tribunal on three previous occasions, the last regarding the greenhouses allowing wholesale nurserymen to run them rather than Council staff only.  That case came before H.H.Judge Rich 18 years ago. Initially, Hounslow Council's Legal Department  told Mr Peter Blacker of the "Gunnersbury Park Covenant Group" that local residents had no say in the matter and that no residents were entitled to the benefit of the 1926 covenants.At the same time, the Council privately admitted to the then local MP Nirj Deva, that hundreds of residents were legally entitled to the benefit of the said covenants!Not long after, the Council admitted this publicly but then demanded that every single homeowner or tenant backing onto the Park produced their deeds from their mortgage companies, etc to prove their entitlement.Since the Court of Appeal had ruled that "even a weekly tenant may enforce a covenant" if they live on "benefited land", the local residents challenged the demands of Hounslow Council's Legal Department and wrote to Judge Marder QC at the Lands Tribunal protesting at the necessity of having to do all this.  Judge Marder decided that the Council knew perfectly well who resided at the relevant houses on the "benefited land" and that a Council Tax entry or Electoral Register would suffice to save residents having the expense of requesting solicitors to obtain their original deeds from mortgage companies, etc.At the Hearing some 50 or so Objectors were admitted as having the benefit of the covenants.  Dr Peter Cocking, their representative, did not object to the proposed wholesale nurserymen in the former Kitchen Garden and Greenhouses and the Tribunal allowed the modification sought by Hounslow & Ealing Councils.The case now under consideration is quite different.  There is no existing school operating in the Park.  It's not the same as allowing a greenhouse to be used by a wholesale nurseryman rather than a Council one.Schools often want to expand, having new buildings and areas to themselves and with young children there, they would want areas securely isolated and fenced off from the public and would also want their own private car-park for parents, staff, suppliers, coaches, etc. possibly with a new access road layout exclusively for the school.Private schools also often hire out permises to other outside organisations at weekends or at nights or both causing extra traffic disturbance to people living nearby.As we have seen, the private Khalsa Karate Club tried this in the Kingston case but was prevented by the Dyson covenant (which was imposed 21 years before the Rothschild covenant) and they only wanted a small pavilion building with some public access (but under the Karate Club's control).  I seem to remember that Heritage Money had been made available from the National Lottery which did not involve handing over part of the public Park to developers (Alpha Plus Group Ltd of 50 Queen Anne Street, London W.1).Once ensconced in the Park, perhaps other money-making developments may be contemplated?

Victor Mishiku ● 4734d

Sorry Mike - just kidding!

Charles Campbell ● 4734d

Your niece attends the boys school on Kew Road???  :)

Charles Campbell ● 4734d

LOL -  Then I must have the most "exclusive" plumber in the world, with what he charges.

Charles Campbell ● 4734d

They have girls and boys prep schools. Nearest one is in Kew Road Richmond where my niece on the wife's side attends.

Michael Brandt ● 4734d

Presumably because they exclude anyone who can't pay the fees?

Susan Kelly ● 4734d

Why is Falcon School for Girls considered "exclusive".  I couldn't even find them in the top 100 girls schools.

Charles Campbell ● 4734d

Apologies for my appalling grammar.whose, not who's!Must have been the sunday lunch!

Michael Brandt ● 4734d

I understand from the grapevine that Falcons school does not have the funds for this but it is coming from parents or former parents who are property developers and see it as a useful tool to get a foot in the door.So far this is just a rumour from friends who's children are at the Richmond Falcons school and who's mums have been lunching.But we should be very wary of exactly who is behind this.

Michael Brandt ● 4734d

As far as I recall, the restrictive covenant covers the entire Park.In another case in the "Latchmere Recreation Ground" in Kingston, the Council were supporting a private Martial Arts company "Khalsa Karate Federation" who had offered to rebuild a new sports pavilion.The previous pavilion (changing rooms, etc) for use by the public only had been demolished about 5 years ago.Mr Satinder Singh Sehra, owner of the private Karate Club concern, intended that his business would have occupied the main part of the proposed development with some parts of the building being available to the public.There is however a restrictive covenant imposed by Lord Dyson and supported by an Act of Parliament in order to maintain the use of the land for public recreation and sports use. Whilst a new pavilion is allowed under the 1904 covenant, it could only be used in connection with the public use of the open space  - not for private commercial purposes.The Council's legal experts at first considered that the proposals did not breach the Dyson covenant but later admitted that they were wrong after representations from local resident Mrs Margaret Levy and others. Khalsa Karate abandoned their scheme which the Council had backed fully for financial reasons.The problem with schools (as aptly shown in the Wembley case at Preston Manor) is that sooner or later, they wish to expand, add new buildings such as an Arts Centre, Concert Hall, New Classes Wings, Access Road & Car-Parking Areas, Swimming-Pool Building, etc and they would want control of these areas and may want to segregate parts of the Public Open Space for their sole use.  Some of the buildings might well be let out to outside concerns for use at weekends, at night, etc bringing traffic into the Park where there is no public vehicular access at present.The Councils must not allow the covenant to be breached which they hold on trust for the public.Any proposals to modify the Park covenant must be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) which is the only body able to modify a restrictive covenant under the Law of Property Act 1925.  Such proposals must be made known to all of the surrounding residents who are legally entitled to the benefit of the restrictive covenant on the former Rothschild Estate.V.Mishiku "The Covenant Movement" 14/4/13.

Victor Mishiku ● 4735d

I'm all in favour of using heritage buildings as a way of preserving them. All the buildings in our largest public park must be found meaningful and appropriate uses. Gaining consensus on 'recovering' the park and its buildings has been  difficult over the years as Gunnersbury Park is jointly owned by Ealing Council and Hounslow Council. The latter BTW is the Planning Authority for the park.But repurposing the Small Mansion as a private school for girls is just not on.I urge folks to attend the meeting.

Eric Alan Leach ● 4735d