Posted on

Responding to Ealing Council’s local plan

Ealing Council, like all other councils, has to produce a local plan. The plan lays out how the Council would like to see the borough developing over the next 15 years. This plan is now at the very last stage before it goes for approval, or not, by a government inspector.

West Ealing Neighbours, along with many other local residents groups and umbrella organisations in the borough, is working on its response to the plan. Putting together a response is quite a daubnting task. The plan itself is over 500 pages long plus supporting information on top.

The deadline to respond is 6pm on 10th April. As we complete our response we will put our documents up on our website for you to read. You are welcome to take any elements of our responses to use in your own. The first three of these documents are at the bottom of this page. They cover planned tall builsings in central West Ealing, no plans for a publically accessible police station and serious questions over the supply of electricity to the planned developments.

As a starting point, here is the link to the local plan on the Council’s website.

There is also an interesting article on the Ealing Today website about Friends of the Earth’s view that needing to build 43,000 new homes to accommodate the planned growth in population mean that it is impossible for the Council to meet its target Net Zero target.

Chapter 4 is the most relevant section of the plan to look at as it includes the information about the development plans for the 43,000 new homes across the ‘seven towns’ of Ealing borough. West Ealing is included in the Ealing Town Plan and Development Sites. Below are some initial thoughts and comments on this section:

Chapter 4 general points

20-minute neighbourhoods, to the detriment of “place making”

4.2.17 says “Across Ealing town its smaller centres and local parades (i.e. Northfields, The Avenue and Pitshanger Lane) are not meeting their full potential. These smaller centres are often comprised of single storey buildings that provide opportunity for mix-use intensification of retail, commercial, and residential uses that would support Ealing’s priority to reimagine local centres as a network of 20-minute neighbourhoods.”

They seem to assume that single-storey buildings are incompatible with 20-minute neighbourhoods. In fact most of us can easily get to almost everything we need on a typical day with less than ten minutes of walking – and so can most other West Ealing residents. We don’t need taller buildings in order to have a 20-minute neighbourhood.

Many key businesses on Northfield Avenue have a second storey above them providing income that makes the property sustainable. These two-storey buildings are part of, or harmonise with, the Victorian feel which makes this area so attractive that the council proposes declaring it a Conservation Area.

Thus why do we have “new community infrastructure that would encourage these areas to act as social hubs”. They are social hubs already, and partly because of their low-rise charm.

In 4.2.49 (page 167) there are sweet words about “low rise premises in South Ealing and Northfields centres which offer a particular opportunity for sensitive intensification above existing commercial premises”. But what is their idea of “low rise”?

Electricity supply

4.2.29 includes Table E1 which predicts improvements to the electricity supply at a date “TBC”. This doesn’t give much confidence about the proposed near-term intensification of housing and high-tech businesses. It conflicts with 4.2.56 which says “infrastructure is expected to be delivered in earlier phases of development”.

Police station

Table E1 also says the Police station will be refurbished at a date “TBC”. Having said that central Ealing is the thriving hub of the borough, the plan seems not to care that this thriving hub has no police station that anyone can use.

West Ealing station area

Policy E2 on page 160 makes it clear that growth around West Ealing station is to be “optimised” to bring more people into the borough. Why should this be the aim, since they’re already saying we have too many people looking for housing here?

Ealing Character Study

4.2.56 says that all development proposals “must respond to relevant contextual design guidance provided in Part 2 of the Ealing Character Study”. Part 2 can be found here:

https://www.ealing.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/17176/part_2_-_typologies_and_scope_for_growth.pdf

It has 118 pages. One interesting statement, on page 14, says “retained historic fabric [of buildings] provides a human scale and fine grain of unit size”. This was written specifically about town centres like Ealing and West Ealing. So this is useful for seeking to avoid the destruction of historic building scales.

Further information for our future use: on page 17 regarding neighbourhood centres, “create a consistent datum and roofline in plots where buildings are lower, such as Northfields single storey buildings”. In other words, don’t put tall buildings there.

On page 49 it says “height should not be a precursor for the location of other tall buildings; careful consideration of clusters, the sensitivity of context and setting needs to be considered”. In other words, the presence of one skyscraper doesn’t justify another.

Overall, the recommendations of this study form a recipe for sensitive development, and we may want to refer to it when proposals are put forward.

Housing Design Guidance

4.2.56 says that “development proposals must comply with latest design guidance provided by … the council’s Housing Design Guidance” which can be found here:

https://www.ealing.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/17171/housing_design_guidance_november_2022.pdf

This includes design guidance for tall buildings. It does say (page 10) that the surrounding area and heritage must be considered:

Consider the local architecture and building typologies and the local pattern of built form. How can new development respond to this in terms of building line, scale and massing?

Submision 1 – Sainsbury’s site and other tall buildings planned for central West Ealing

3. To which part of the Local Plan does this representation relate?

Paragraph: Chapter 4, pages 192-193

Policy: E2 Ealing Metropolitan Town Centre, paragraph G.

Policies Map: Site 11EA (Sainsbury’s and Library, West Ealing)

4. Do you consider the Local Plan is: (please tick)

4.(1) Legally compliant   

4.(2) Sound   NO

5. Please give details of why you consider the Local Plan is not legally compliant or is unsound or fails to comply with the duty to co-operate. Please be as precise as possible.

Chapter 4 says on page 192 “design analysis indicates a maximum height of 16 storeys”. But I see no design analysis in the Local Plan or its supporting documents which would support that assertion. On the contrary, the “Tall buildings strategy, main report” gives guidance for West Ealing overall on page 28, with prospective tall building heights being 7-13 storeys.

The “Tall buildings strategy appendix – Guidance for study sites” includes on page 49 a map more specific to this site’s area, clearly showing that no building taller than 13 storeys is desirable.

In addition, a maximum height of 13 storeys for this site was proposed at the Regulation 18 stage of consultation. I have found no explanation for the increase between stages 18 and 19.

If the council’s aim was to add a certain number of new homes in the area, the new increase to this site’s target height was not necessary, because sites 12EA and 14EA will inevitably produce significantly more homes than envisioned for them in the Local Plan. (See further Part B representations below.) The sum of new homes across sites 11EA, 12EA and 14EA will be enough to meet the council’s aims even when the 11EA target is reduced back to 13 storeys where it stood at Regulation 18.

If I may refer again to the “Tall buildings strategy, main report”, it says on page 6: Examples of inappropriately tall buildings include developments that … exceed the upper limit of the guidance set out for an appropriate location for tall buildings. The proposed 16-storey replacement for West Ealing Sainsbury’s would thus be inappropriately tall, by the council’s own definition.

NPPF paragraph 31 says the preparation and review of all policies should be underpinned by relevant and up-to-date evidence. This should be adequate and proportionate, focused tightly on supporting and justifying the policies concerned.

Ealing’s Local Plan does not conform to the NPPF, because no relevant evidence has been shown for increasing the height of site 11EA beyond 13 storeys.

6.  Please set out the modification(s) you consider necessary to make the Local Plan legally compliant and sound, in respect of any legal compliance or soundness matters you have identified at 5 above. 

Chapter 4, pages 192-193 should be changed to set a maximum height of 13 storeys. Any other references to the height of 11EA should be changed accordingly.

I would also suggest that the Design Principles on page 193 state that car parking will be required for the supermarket and community facilities.

7. If your representation is seeking a modification to the plan, do you consider it necessary to participate in examination hearing session(s)?

 No, I do not wish to participate in hearing session(s)XYes, I wish to participate in hearing session(s)

8.  If you wish to participate in the hearing session(s), please outline why you consider this to be necessary:

Very few people feel that they have understood the 516-page Local Plan and all its related documents. The Council has in effect stifled objections by structuring the plan in this unnecessarily cumbersome way. Therefore those few of us who have spent hours reading the plan must be prepared to speak on behalf of our neighbours.

Part B (Please use a separate sheet for each representation).

3. To which part of the Local Plan does this representation relate?

Paragraph: Chapter 4, pages 194-195

Policy:  E2 Ealing Metropolitan Town Centre, paragraph G.

Policies Map: Site 12EA (Chignell Place, West Ealing)

4. Do you consider the Local Plan is: (please tick)

4.(1) Legally compliant

4.(2) Sound   NO

5. Please give details of why you consider the Local Plan is not legally compliant or is unsound or fails to comply with the duty to co-operate. Please be as precise as possible.

The plan for site 12EA is not deliverable, since Ealing Council has already approved application 215125FUL for an 8-storey development on this site.

The draft Local Plan calls for a maximum of 4 storeys, and specifically states that the site “is not in principle suitable for a tall building”. But these words and these aims have no meaning, following the council’s approval of the 8-storey development.

6.  Please set out the modification(s) you consider necessary to make the Local Plan legally compliant and sound, in respect of any legal compliance or soundness matters you have identified at 5 above. 

The appearance of site 12EA in the Local Plan is misleading, because the council has already given away control, and it is now undeliverable. I leave it to the Inspector to decide whether there is sufficient merit to keep it in the Local Plan at all.

7. If your representation is seeking a modification to the plan, do you consider it necessary to participate in examination hearing session(s)?

 No, I do not wish to participate in hearing session(s)XYes, I wish to participate in hearing session(s)

8.  If you wish to participate in the hearing session(s), please outline why you consider this to be necessary:

Very few people feel that they have understood the 516-page Local Plan and all its related documents. The Council has in effect stifled objections by structuring the plan in this unnecessarily cumbersome way. Therefore those few of us who have spent hours reading the plan must be prepared to speak on behalf of our neighbours.

Part B (Please use a separate sheet for each representation).

3. To which part of the Local Plan does this representation relate?

Paragraph: Chapter 4, pages 198-199

Policy:  E2 Ealing Metropolitan Town Centre, paragraph G.

Policies Map: Site 14EA (Western Gateway, West Ealing)

4. Do you consider the Local Plan is: (please tick)

4.(1) Legally compliant

4.(2) Sound   NO

5. Please give details of why you consider the Local Plan is not legally compliant or is unsound or fails to comply with the duty to co-operate. Please be as precise as possible.

The plan for site 14EA is not deliverable, since Ealing Council has already approved application 225080FUL for a 9-storey development on this site.

The draft Local Plan calls for a maximum of 6 storeys. But this has no meaning, following the council’s approval of the 9-storey development.

It seems likely that the council will also approve application 235015FUL making the 9-storey building wider.

6.  Please set out the modification(s) you consider necessary to make the Local Plan legally compliant and sound, in respect of any legal compliance or soundness matters you have identified at 5 above. 

The appearance of site 14EA in the Local Plan is misleading, because the council has already given away control, and it is now undeliverable. I leave it to the Inspector to decide whether there is sufficient merit to keep it in the Local Plan at all.

Submission 2 – lack of infrastructure to support planned new homes including no new police station open to the public

3. To which part of the Local Plan does this representation relate?

Paragraph: Chapter 4, pages 154-155, 159, 169, IDP Part Two section 3.9

Policy: E1 Ealing Spatial Strategy, paragraph P

Policies Map: Site 06EA (49-69 Uxbridge Road, pages 182-183 of Chapter 4)

4. Do you consider the Local Plan is: (please tick)

4.(1) Legally compliant   

4.(2) Sound   NO

5. Please give details of why you consider the Local Plan is not legally compliant or is unsound or fails to comply with the duty to co-operate. Please be as precise as possible.

The Local Plan is not consistent with national policy.

I quote from the NPPF:

(paragraph 8a) an overarching economic objective is coordinating the provision of infrastructure

(paragraph 11a) all plans should promote a sustainable pattern of development that seeks to … align growth and infrastructure

(paragraph 86c)  planning policies should seek to address potential barriers to investment, such as inadequate infrastructure

An item of infrastructure that every large community needs is a police station where the public can go to seek help or, for example, to leave goods which appear to have been stolen. Central/West Ealing, a town of 91,149 people, has been without such a police station for several years.

The Local Plan does not address this in a timely way. In Chapter 4 page 159, Table E1, the refurbishment of Ealing Police Station has a target date “TBC”. The table at the end of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan, Part Two also says “TBC”. Chapter 4 site selection 06EA sets a target for completion of 2038.

This is not soon enough. New housing developments adding tens of thousands more people should not go forward until there is water, electricity, transport … and a fully functional police station.

The Infrastructure Delivery Plan, Part Two: Infrastructure Delivery Schedule, page 20 does not give one further hope: In terms of planned service provision, the Metropolitan Police Service identified the ‘Strongest Ever Neighbourhood Policing’ initiative, which would see investment by the Metropolitan Police in more local police officers and police community support officers (PCSOs) in the neighbourhood. There is nothing concrete in this statement. It is not a plan nor a schedule. It’s what is commonly called “waffle”.

6.  Please set out the modification(s) you consider necessary to make the Local Plan legally compliant and sound, in respect of any legal compliance or soundness matters you have identified at 5 above. 

The 06EA site plan on pages 182-183 should be changed to specify a timeframe for delivery within 5 years. Corresponding changes should be made to Table E1 on page 159 and to the table at the end of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan, Part Two. The 06EA site plan should make it clear that the new police station will have a public-facing desk, open all hours every day.

The Inspector may wish to review other site allocations to ensure that housing builds do not outrace infrastructure preparations.

7. If your representation is seeking a modification to the plan, do you consider it necessary to participate in examination hearing session(s)?

 No, I do not wish to participate in hearing session(s)XYes, I wish to participate in hearing session(s)

8.  If you wish to participate in the hearing session(s), please outline why you consider this to be necessary:

Very few people feel that they have understood the 516-page Local Plan and all its related documents. The Council has in effect stifled objections by structuring the plan in this unnecessarily cumbersome way. Therefore those few of us who have spent hours reading the plan must be prepared to speak on behalf of our neighbours.

Submission 3 – significant questions over electricity newtwork capacity for planned new homes

3. To which part of the Local Plan does this representation relate?

Paragraph: Infrastructure Delivery Plan, Part Two: Infrastructure Delivery Schedule

Policy: E1 Ealing Spatial Strategy, paragraph P

Policies Map:

4. Do you consider the Local Plan is: (please tick)

4.(1) Legally compliant   

4.(2) Sound   NO

5. Please give details of why you consider the Local Plan is not legally compliant or is unsound or fails to comply with the duty to co-operate. Please be as precise as possible.

The Local Plan is not consistent with national policy.

I quote from the NPPF:

(paragraph 8a) an overarching economic objective is coordinating the provision of infrastructure

(paragraph 11a) all plans should promote a sustainable pattern of development that seeks to … align growth and infrastructure

(paragraph 86c)  planning policies should seek to address potential barriers to investment, such as inadequate infrastructure

The electricity supply in the West Ealing area is already overburdened. There have been power cuts – such as that of 19 January 2024 caused by a major fire at the ageing Dean Gardens substation in early 2024. This substation is just one of many ageing substations that need replacing.

The Local Plan does not address what is already a critical issue. Please consult the table at the end of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan, Part Two: Infrastructure Delivery Schedule. Near the beginning of this table are five “Electricity Supply” projects. All five are marked “Critical”. Four of them have a delivery period of “TBC”, including both of the projects earmarked for Ealing.

With the current situation liable to cause further outages and fires, and the impending creation of hundreds of new homes, it is simply not good planning to leave electricity supply projects for a date TBC. This is not a plan that conforms to the NPPF.

6.  Please set out the modification(s) you consider necessary to make the Local Plan legally compliant and sound, in respect of any legal compliance or soundness matters you have identified at 5 above. 

Establish target dates in the immediate future for all Electricity Supply projects in the IDP final table. Make corresponding changes to Chapter 4, Ealing Town Plan, Table E1, page 159.

Furthermore, the plan should include a statement, agreed between the council and the relevant electricity providers, guaranteeing that sufficient electrical supply will be available for all site allocations in the Ealing Town Plan.

7. If your representation is seeking a modification to the plan, do you consider it necessary to participate in examination hearing session(s)?

 No, I do not wish to participate in hearing session(s)XYes, I wish to participate in hearing session(s)

8.  If you wish to participate in the hearing session(s), please outline why you consider this to be necessary:

Very few people feel that they have understood the 516-page Local Plan and all its related documents. The Council has in effect stifled objections by structuring the plan in this unnecessarily cumbersome way. Therefore those few of us who have spent hours reading the plan must be prepared to speak on behalf of our neighbours.

Posted on

Information and suggestions on responding to Live West Ealing’s consultation

Draft response from West Ealing Neighbours to Live West Ealing proposals.

The deadline for comments is 31st March 2024 and the survey can be found here

General points:

There are no reasons given in the proposals as to why £8.6 million is to be spent on these ‘designs’. There are no explicit references to problems which need to be solved. What is more, no evidence is presented to support these changes to be made to deal with ‘unknown’ problems’.  Finally, there is no evidence presented as to how these design changes will perform both quantitatively and qualitatively.

These plans will potentially create new areas for anti- social behaviour as detailed below. How do the police fit in with this plan in terms of dealing with anti-social behaviour?

With the creation of new seating, green spaces and play spaces, what are the long-term maintenance plans for the upkeep of these? How will the immediately local community be encouraged to get involved to ‘oversee/supervise’ these new spaces?

Singapore Road and Witham Road are basically service roads and they, and the nearby areas, are frequently very badly littered despite the efforts of the volunteer litter picking group LAGER Can. If this littering isn’t tackled these areas will stay deeply unattractive and no amount of attempts to enliven them with seats and greenery will encourage anyone to stop and enjoy the new spaces. How can the buildings along these roads have more active frontages to deter flytipping, littering and anti-social behaviour?

What analysis has been undertaken to assess the impact of the loss of car parking spaces, e.g. Leeland Road and Witham Road car park, on local shops and businesses?

1.Broadway

It makes sense to align road crossings with main north-south streets to improve and speed up access for pedestrians

WEN supports plan to stop parking and loading on Broadway as long as this can be enforced and there really is access for deliveries on parallel roads such as Leeland Terrace, Singapore and Witham Road.

2. Lido Junction

Will pedestrians still be able to cross in all directions on the red-light phase?

3. Dean Gardens

The widened shared cycle and pedestrian paths should be segregated with markings to keep the two groups separate and avoid possible collisions. Some cyclists travel fast, too fast, along the existing route.

With the proposed one way traffic on Leeland Terrace – with eastbound vehicles and westbound cycles – will cyclists from the west use the eastbound vehicle route to enter Dean Gardens and on across to Mattock Lane? If so, is this desirable?  Westbound cyclists can simply ride through Dean Gardens and continue westbound along the cycle route.

Good that area taken by new and/or wider cycle paths to be compensated for by path removed from south-west corner.

No commitment to major improvements to the lighting in the park.

4. Green Man Passage

Will the proposed new planting and greenery need maintenance? If so, who will do this as it’s unlikely the Council will do much maintenance. What efforts will be made to encourage nearby business and residents to ‘look after’ the area?  Green Man Passage can get very badly littered. What plans are there to keep the area clean and tidy?

Improved lighting is essential along the full length of Green Man Passage.

What is happening to the seemingly derelict piece of land next to the Serbian Church? This has been empty for a good few years since the church’s plans for it were rejected.

5. Witham Road Car Park

As above, what plans are there to maintain the public seating area so it does not attract anti-social behaviour? Again, this area can get very badly littered, so how will this be tackled?

This is a well-used car park. A loss of five spaces for yet more cycle stands is not ideal. Nor is the loss of some parking on Witham Road. These spaces are vital for the survival of local businesses.

6. Jacob’s Ladder

 Again, how will the play features/area be maintained? This area has great potential for anti-social behaviour. How will this be managed?

What has happened to the original plans for a pedestrian route from Jacob’s Ladder, through the Green Man Lane Estate, to Singapore Road? This should be a key pedestrian route but it is currently blocked and no sign of it being opened up.

Funds would be better spent improving the fabric of Jacob’s Ladder and the route to the north where there is poor visibility between the bridge and the road.

7. Manor Road

Plans seem sensible

8. Leeland Road

Priority here must be ensuring pitches for the weekly market. Allied to this, what are the plans to ensure the market traders will have access to enough parking spaces on Saturday mornings? They have lost parking in Maitland Yard and no immediate prospect of that returning. Will they be able to continue parking in the library car park? Will adequate power supply points be made available for stall holders?

Yet more parking spaces lost to the detriment of local businesses and local residents.

9. Green Man passage (south of Witham Road)

This alleyway can get badly littered, not least by charity shop donations being there for the Cancer research shop. Improved lighting is essential.

10. Singapore Road

Is this cycle route one that cycling organisations have called for?  Is there any evidence Singapore Road is used as a ‘rat-run’ – it seems unlikely?  It’s not a very convenient short cut to avoid the Broadway. The loss of 24 parking spaces looks likely to be a major problem, not least for the West London Islamic Centre for Friday lunchtime prayers.

11. Leeland Terrace

Makes more sense as a safer cycle rote than Singapore Road as it links to route through Deans Gardens and on to Mattock Lane. Even so, what evidence is there that it is used as a short cut to avoid the Broadway.

Funnelling all  Sainsbury’s traffic along Leeland Terrace from the junction with Coldershaw Road is a questionable move as it is likely to cause jams at the junction of Leeland Terrace and the Broadway with traffic wanting to turn right in to he Broadway. Much local traffic from the streets to the south wanting to go west will also end up in this queue or start using alternative routes via side streets to reach Coldershaw Road or Boston Road to avoid likely queue on Leeland Terrace.

12. St James Avenue

Again, how will the proposed seating and play area be maintained?  This plan could be widened if an agreement is reached with the church authorities to use its green spaces in front of and to the side of the church.

13. Melbourne Avenue

One major problem for Melbourne Avenue is the poor drainage. The narrow gulley is never cleaned so quickly blocks up and the area is easily flooded when it rains.

Better lighting is essential as the area is dark late night.

This is an area plagued by anti-social behaviour almost all day long. It attracts street drinkers and drug dealing. The police know this but little ever happens to tackle this problem.

Once again, who will maintain the planters and seating? The planters are largely full of rubbish and do not often get cleaned by the street cleaners.

There is already public art in the form of a mural on Sainsbury’s front wall. I suspect most people aren’t aware of it.  Any new public art should be managed by OPEN Ealing  –  soon to be running the library. It would be more of an attraction for the area for the public art to change of a regular basis – could tie up with SET in St James Ave?

14. Walsingham Road, Bedford Road and Brownlow Road

Again, seating in Bedford Road will need maintaining.

David Highton

March 25th 2024

Posted on

Notes from West Ealing Neighbours’ public meeting on 15th February at the Drayton Court Hotel

Background to Ealing’s housing needs

Cllr Shital Manro, Cabinet Member for Good Growth and New Homes, outlined Ealing’s situation. The borough has a major shortage of housing.  It is not meeting its housing target of 2175 homes a year in the London Plan. There are:

  • 169 families in hotels
  • 300+ in bed and breakfasts
  • 2500 families in temporary accommodation
  • 7500 on the waiting list
  • The Council seeks 35% (going up soon to 40%) affordable homes in new developments

1.Major developments in West Ealing

Arden Road – a legal dispute with the next door church over access to parking spaces so work delayed until this resolved

Chignell Place – quite a few applications put in but none have been acceptable to the Council so far. Awaiting a decent proposal.

Maitland Yard/Dean Gardens car park – Builders Henry have gone bust. The Council is putting the work out to tender again.

Felix Road – An A2Dominion development as part of the Green Man Lane Estate. Again, the builder Real has gone bust. It is the responsibility of A2Dominion and Rydon to find a new contractor.

Complaints about blocked pavement on south side of Felix Road due to stalled development. The Council is trying to resolve this to re-open footpath. Also a complaint about rubble dumped on children’s playground. Cllr Manro not aware of this but will look in to it. (WEN to track these actions)

Green Man Lane Estate – development stalled due to rising costs and builder Real going bust. Complaint about Bramley Road being blocked which Cllr Manro will look in to. (WEN to track this action)

Gurnell – Cllr Polly Knewstub, Cabinet Member for Thriving Communities, said this is the Council’s own site. A new 50m swimming pool will be part of the redevelopment of the leisure centre. The Council will be submitting a proposal for the whole site, to include housing, in mid-March.

Kwik Fit – the developer has now bought the site next door so has submitted a new application. Comments due by 7th March

Majestic Wine Warehouse– an application is in for student accommodation. Questions asked as to why students and not housing for residents?

Manor Road – builder Henry has gone bust. Whilst looking for a new contractor MTVH have amended the design to include a 2nd staircase. Aware it’s a difficult site next to railway line. Hope to start work again in about two months. Question about site hoarding blocking footpath – MTVH to check on this. (WEN to track this action)

St James Church – awaiting information from local diocese about its future

St James Place/Artist’s Corner – application in and comments deadline is 21st February. No comments yet received. Query raised about building over part of St James Ave and creating an unsafe area at night similar to Melbourne Avenue

Waitrose – original application was not supported by the Council as not enough affordable housing. Awaiting new application but doubts raised given the change at top of John Lewis. Will the new management team continue with their housing plans?

Shops near Costa in high street – no application received but suggestion from owner of nearby shop that it will become a special needs school

Woolworths site – long empty and now bought by a new developer

2.Dean Gardens – part way through construction of a rain garden funded by Thames Water. Much unhappiness with its current waterlogged state. A handout made available explaining the next stages of its development

3. Electricity supply

West Ealing has had a series of recent power cuts and a major fire at the Dean Gardens sub station. SSE not able to send a representative to the meeting but have given an update. Cllr Manro explained what the Council has been doing to try to alleviate the pressure on power supply, especially given all the housing development across the borough.

Later: see below for information provided by Scottish and Southern Energy Networks about power supplies.

4. Uxbridge Road – Cllr Polly Knewstub said there will not be a segregated cycle lane as not enough room, She recognized the need for better enforcement on the question of cars parked on yellow lines and hoped this would improve soon with the new in-house enforcement team starting in a few months

5. Leighton Road/Elthorne Park Road

Cllr Paul Driscoll said rumours of road closures and £1.5M to be spent on redesigning the roads are false. He has been talking to a residents group on this road about the problems of the 1 Million plus vehicle movements a year along these roads. Still early days and no plans or proposals yet and no plan to close the road altogether. Worth noting that Swycombe Ave was closed by Hounslow Council and Ealing Council has been unable to persuade them to re-open it.

6. Policing – this was raised by a number of people. A lot of dissatisfaction with the current state of policing in the area with anti-social behaviour and drug dealing a common problem. Cllr Knewstub aware of these concerns. One suggestion is to attend the Safer Neighbourhood police meetings held in each ward. (WEN to publicise these)

7. West Ealing Library

Cllr Knewstub announced that OPEN Ealing is in final stages of negotiation to take on the library from start of April.

8. Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy

Cllr Manro admitted that the Council had not had the systems in place to track where Section 106 moneys had been spent. However, this will soon change with new systems coming in. Also, later than most other London Boroughs, the Council will start to charge CIL on new developments.

David Highton for WEN

19th February 2024

Power Supply – information from SSE provided by Regional Customer Relationship Manager for Scottish and Southern Energy Networks

‘Thank you for inviting us to attend the meeting on 15th February. Further to our conversation last week, we are unable to attend however would like to provide an update below on the issues you raised and discussed.  ‘Thank you for inviting us to attend the meeting on 15th February. Further to our conversation last week, we are unable to attend however would like to provide an update below on the issues you raised and discussed.  

Dean Gardens substation 

We would like to thank residents of West Ealing for their patience during the disruption caused on January 19th when unfortunately, one of our assets failed in the Dean Gardens area causing a power outage to some of our customers. We have since replaced this asset and are undertaking a thorough review to understand the cause of the failure alongside a review of our network circuits in the area to see what further reinforcements may be required. 

Constraints   

Regarding concerns around constraints on our network and connection timelines we have been an active driver of industry-wide connections reform which is aiming to accelerate investment in the grid and cut queue times.  

In addition to this collaborative response to this challenge, we have also been trialing an innovative solution in West London which has helped several projects progress. This involves using a ramping approach to connect developments in increments to allow projects to progress whilst capacity becomes available.

We are working closely with both Government and industry to implement recommended solutions and approaches that will make the connections process more efficient and free up existing capacity on our network.  

Local Authority engagement  

We reached out to Ealing Council last year to engage with us on their net zero plans. We are planning on hosting in person workshops this Spring to support our local authorities on local area energy planning and will be in touch shortly with details on how to register for these. As part of our distribution operating area, representatives from Ealing Council will receive an invite and we would encourage them to attend if possible. This is part of our wider offering to local authorities within our license area to provide support to develop a coordinated and effective delivery strategy for the whole system and net zero initiatives that interact with our network, as part of Local Area Energy Plans. More broadly as part of our wider engagement we have been in regular conversations with the Greater London Authority.  

We’re currently rolling out our new tool Local Energy Net Zero Accelerator (LENZA), for local authorities in our network area. This software provides data on network constraints, empowering planners to make better informed decisions about where to install new energy assets in their local area. We’ll be rolling this out to our local authorities in the south of England including Ealing. 

If you have any questions on the above or anything else, I am more than happy to organise a meeting to discuss any of the above in more detail.’

Posted on

Builder of local Council homes goes bust

Henry Construction which won £40m contract from Ealing Council to build over 130 homes has gone in to liquidation. Henry were building the new homes on the Dean Gardens car park site and the 20-storey tower by West Ealing station amongst other local developments. The constructionenquirer.com website says ‘Insolvency experts took control of the London-based residential tower builder’ last week.

It seems hundreds of suppliers and sub-contractors are left out of pocket. The website says ‘One rival main contractor said: “Henry’s have been buying work for years and it all seems to have come to a head as soaring costs and labour caught up with them” ‘.

I imagine it will take a while to hear what the Council will do to re-start these building projects.

Posted on

19-storey tower proposed for Waitrose site

Following on from their initial consultation last summer, John Lewis have now put forward their more developed plans for redeveloping the Waitrose site in West Ealing in a new round of consultation. Yesterday afternoon was athe first of two open sessions for the public to view these more detailed plans. The second session is on Saturday morning (25th February) at West Ealing Library.

I dropped in to the first session and it was crowded with people so there is clearly a lot of interest in these plans. The stand out feature is probably the proposed 19-storey tower, one of four towers, which contribute many of the homes in the planned 430 homes for this site. The towers range from 10 to 19 storeys. if you are unable to get to Saturday morning’s viewing then you can find out the details on their special website.

The Ealing.News website has more useful information and, in particular, some questions from the Stop The Towers campaign with answers from a John Lewis spokesperson.

David Highton

Posted on

Leeland Terrace – transforming a neglected green space

For a long time, the Seaford-Leeland Terrace corner was just a neglected spot with brambles and always far-to-reach blackberries. All that changed when I saw a notice at the West Ealing Neighbours notice board near Sainsbury’s in Melbourne Avenue (a good source of info) asking for neighbours willing to help spruce up a few forgotten council-owned green corners.

It was a good call as I was looking for volunteering activities now that my kids are mutating into teens. The first meeting was very lively, full of people bursting with ideas; and finished with the creation of a WhatsApp group, of course. The subsequent Saturdays were busy, with many hands trying to control the aforementioned bramble, the creeping and in some places overhanging ivy; and trying to devise ways to keep the fence from toppling over.

And then it happened as with some chemical reactions: after a big burst of effervescence the contents of the beaker calm down and nothing seems to happen, but if you look carefully crystals start to appear where the liquid evaporates. And so around those first crystals, a group of a few regulars (always open to newcomers and occasional passers-by) has formed, creating a new group called West Ealing Green Spaces of which the core (and to whom thanks and admiration are due) is bubbly Simone!! And Simone will say it’s not true, but when she is in the plot more people stop and chat than if it is just Mary and me, say.

Thanks to this group friendships are being created, we get to meet new people with fresh (and sometimes different) points of view, and we have created a place to be proud of. It even makes me more willing to pick up litter! For me, it has been amazing to be spreading mulch (several layers of it), to build up the raised beds, and to receive the spontaneous “thank you”, “good job” and once or twice a helping hand from passersby. Being part of this motley crew is also a great reminder that when people get together with a common objective, great things happen!

So thank you David for giving the initial push and to all helpers, be they regular or one-timers. And I have plans to tutor a bramble along the (not toppling now) fence for ease of berry picking.

By Andres Requena Gutierrez, WEGS founding member


If you want to get involved in this project then drop by on a Saturday morning at 10am and one of the group will be there. Also, if you have a site in mind you’d like to see transformed please contact westealinggreenspaces@gmail.com.

Posted on

Draft 2023 Ealing Local Plan – a West Ealing Perspective

Apparently this plan ‘will shape and guide the future development (of Ealing) and help ensure this is sustainable’. This plan is expected to become approved in 2024. (The current Ealing Local Plan – the oldest in London – was published in 2010).

Ealing Matters (a group of over 60 Ealing community and residents ‘organisations) has produced a 14-point checklist of broad areas of comment and objection

To view the whole draft plan go to: www.ealing.gov.uk/info/201164/local_plan

You have until 8 February 2023 to send your comments on the plan to the Council. Comments can be sent to localplan@ealing.gov.uk

Planning Committees do not have to follow the new plan. Ostensibly all Planning Applications are judged on the merits of the application. The Local Plan will offer ‘guidance’.

There is no dedicated section on West Ealing – not even on the centre of West Ealing. This is because the Council does not view West Ealing (W13) as a separate community – but part of Ealing (W5). This is strikingly perverse as both the centre of Ealing and the centre of West Ealing have recent Council approved Neighbourhood Plans.

There is no specific plan for West Ealing but what does exist are summary details of 14 development sites. All the sites are primarily residential sites. So the message here is that the development of West Ealing is primarily about enabling an increase in the population of West Ealing.

The details of these West Ealing development sites (EA14 to EA28) can be viewed on pages 174 to 203. There are no details given about density of development i.e. how many homes can be built on each site. Below is a list of the sites with small descriptors and some comments from me:

EA14 – Arden Road car park, W13 8RA. Residential and commercial. Already has an approved Planning Application. Height can be up to 21 storeys.

EA15 – 1-19 Broadway, Aviation & Pioneer Courts, W13 9AN. Pioneer Court is a fairly new co-ownership residential block. This seems like wanton destruction of existing modern flats. Residential and mixed use. Up to 13 stores.

EA16 – 66-86 Broadway, W13 0SY. A residential and mixed use scheme which is an extended version of the 2010 Local plan site. Up to 13 storeys.

EA17 – 59-65 Broadway (Lidl), W13 9BP. This sits with the rumour that Lidl will move its supermarket across the road to the current Wilko site (90 – 94 Broadway). Apparently Lidl owns the site on which Wilko sits. Residential and retail. Up to 8 storeys.

EA18 – Sainsbury’s and Library, 77-83 Broadway, W13 9BA. This site is somewhat different to the site in the 2010 Local Plan. It includes West Ealing Library and O’Grady Court (Sheltered accommodation). In the proposed use statement there is no explicit reference to a supermarket or a library. The open space which currently runs from Leeland Terrace to Broadway is part of the development site. The northern part of this is effectively West Ealing’s town square. There is no indication that this open space will be preserved. (Some/all? of EA18 site was purchased in recent years by a developer who specialises in hotel development). Up to 13 storeys.

EA19 – 1-10 Chignell Place and 112-126 Broadway. Up to 13 storeys. If this is a tower of 13 storeys it will tower over the rear of the West London Islamic Centre. Residential-led and mixed use.

EA20 – 99-115 Broadway, W13. this development includes the St James Court open space. It’s unclear whether the open space will be retained. Up to 12 storeys. Residential-led and mixed use.

EA21 – 130-140 Broadway. W13 0TL. Residential and mixed use. Up to 13 storeys.

EA22 – 131-141 Broadway. Mostly Kwik Fit. W13 9BE. Up to 6 storeys in height. Residential-led with retail.(see separate articel below for more details of the application for this site)

EA23 – Green Man Lane Estate (GMLE). W13 0RJ. This presumably is the last stage(s) of the development began with demolition in 2011. 714 homes were agreed in the Planning Permission of September 2010 – with completion scheduled for 2022. Now over 1,000 homes are being built with an actual final completion date of who knows when. Up to 13 storeys.

EA24 – 2 Alexandria Road (Waitrose). W13. The proposed use is ‘residential and community’. There is no mention of a new supermarket. Up to 13 storeys.

EA25 – ‘West Ealing Station Approach’ 44-54 Drayton Green Road and 41/42 Hastings Road. W13 8RY (Majestic, Halfords, plus parade of shops) Residential and community. Up to 13 storeys. The latest development intention if for 408 student flats

EA26 – 119 Gordon Road, Castle House. W13 8QD. This is the second stage of developing the old BT building. No reference to building heights. . Residential-led with some affordable workspace.

EA27 – Access House & T. Mohan, Manor Road. W13 0AS. No indication of building heights. The site plan shows Jacob’s Ladder (footbridge) but gives no indication of access to the bridge from the development site. Mixed use.

EA28 – Gurnell Leisure Centre. W13 0AL. ‘Leisure-led with enabling residential use’. No reference to building heights. The Council’s first attempt at this development failed at the Planning Application stage.

It’s surprising that these other sites are not included in the plan:

+ Orion Park, Northfield Avenue. W13 9SJ

+ The old Woolworths site at 96-102 Broadway. W13 0SY

+ The remaining phase(s) of the Sherwood Close Estate (recently, bizarrely christened ‘The Bowery’).

Eric Leach

Posted on

Deadline looming for objections to plans to add new storeys to Azalea Close and Court

Information about this application was posted on our Facebook page and it is covered in full detail on the Ealing Today website. In brief the freeholder wants to add a new storey to Azalea Court and two storeys to Azalea Close. The extra height will affect all the surrounding roads such as Shirley Gardens and Nightingale Road as well as the visitors to the nearby Kensington and Chelsea cemetery.

The deadline for comments is 15th August and the Ealing Today article has the planning application reference details.

Thanks to the local residents who posted this on our Facebook page.