Skyscraper Should Go back to the Drawing Board

---

Lib Dems point to local oppositition and critical report

Commenting on the news that the government's architecture watchdog CABE has released a strongly critical report on the proposed development on the Arcadia site, local Lib Dem councillor and campaigner Jon Ball said, "Local opposition to the Ealing skyscraper scheme has been unprecedented, and with a government-funded body such as CABE now adding to the chorus of criticism, it is time for the developers to go back to the drawing board and not come back until they have a scheme that is suitable for Ealing. The current proposal is clearly unacceptable both to the local community and to design experts, and I challenge Glenkerrin to recognise that by withdrawing it immediately."

Jon Ball, local Lib Dems and other concerned local residents have been collecting signatures for a petition against the development since it was announced. Cllr Ball's petition reads "We the undersigned object to proposal P/2007/4246 by Glenkerrin because the proposed development, especially the 40-storey block, is overbearing, excessive in terms of bulk, out of character with the surrounding conservation area, contains insufficient affordable housing, will overload the local infrastructure and fails to provide the public transport integration badly needed on this site."

The damning comments from CABE's report include:

"... there now seems to be a complete lack of connection between the tower and the previous scheme.

"If constructed, a tall building in this location would be a radical departure from the predominantly suburban character of Ealing. We are aware that Ealing is a town on the verge of significant development pressure but there seems to be no vision in place for the nature of this transformation. Development of the nature of this scheme may set a precedent for further developments of similar intensity and height in the area."

"The relationship between the three rising fingers and the tall tower is uncomfortable.

"We sense that an approach that creates separate buildings, rather than a single mega block and that possibly re-distributes some of the development could be more successful. Overall, in our view, this area of the scheme is demonstrably struggling to accommodate this quantum of development at a satisfactory quality of internal and external spaces and requires a fundamental rethink."

November 9, 2007