Perceval House Decision Will 'Destroy the Character of Ealing Town Centre'
Approval given to development at third attempt
CGI of how the tall tower in the development might look from Walpole Park
The Ealing borough planning committee has once again given its approval to a plan for a massive development in the town centre.
At the end of a three hour virtual meeting this Wednesday (31 March) the councillors on the committee voted by 8 to 4 in favour of the scheme with one abstention. Cllrs Conlan, Ball, Young and Sumner voted against with Cllr Anand abstaining.
This was the third time the proposal had been before the committee within a month with the last decision ruled invalid due to technical difficulties during the broadcast of the vote.
The council had dismissed concerns raised by local MP Rupa Huq that it was irregular to make such a key decision during an election period.
The project, which is being developed by the council in partnership with Vistry, will see a 26-storey tower built in the centre of Ealing, almost twice the height of any building in the area. It will contain 477 flats (potentially accommodating more than 1,400 people) in a further five buildings of 6, 8, 10, 11 and 15 storeys. According to opponents of the scheme, residential density (in terms of units per hectare) would be 28% higher than in Dickens Yard.
A briefing document was distributed to planning committee members on behalf of 15 residents' associations and community groups from the area outlining the reasons they believed the scheme should be rejected.
The document stated, 'Not only would it would fail those for whom it is designed, but it would also seriously harm the quality of life of its neighbours and set a precedent that would destroy the character of Ealing Town Centre.”
A number of grounds were put forward why the scheme might be deemed deficient and not in line with planning guidelines including the shortfall of parking space for disabled residents, the lack of sufficient play space for children in the area and the new library being provided with the scheme being only 28% of the size of the old Central Library.
CGI of how the development might look from the Red Block Rebels
Representations from campaign group Save Ealing Centre warned approval of the plan could leave the council open to legal challenge. It said consistent feedback has been given that the tower block is too tall and overbearing, and would have a harmful impact on nearby listed buildings and conservation areas.
A video was also played of residents at social housing for the over 55s, telling the committee the impact the loss of light would have on their lives.
One Apsley House resident said, “There’s 70 people in this block, most of us are over 65. Quite a few of us can’t go out, we rely on the sun coming through our windows which is why we have such large windows, and we’re going to have no sun all of a sudden.
“What are we supposed to do, sit in the dark all day? I know we’re pensioners but we’re still citizens and we’re still your constituents..it’s about time instead of thinking about the mighty pound you started thinking of your constituents.”
Speeches in objection were also given by Ealing Broadway councillor Seema Kumar and Ealing Central and Acton MP Rupa Huq.
The MP slammed the proposal in a five minute speech during the meeting saying, “477 new homes - but none at social rent? Shameful! No consultation for a year. But 2300 and rising objections - huge local opposition.”
After the meeting, Rupa Huq told us, “I am deeply disappointed by the decision to approve the hideous Perceval House redevelopment plans. The commercial developers, Vistry, are calling all the shots here. They haven’t listened to locals for over a year and refuse involvement of Ealing Council's new standing panel to assess planning application quality. Its internal design review gerrymander was back in 2019. So much of what is being proposed here completely goes against the Council’s planning policy.
“Ealing needs more genuinely affordable housing for working families, not high-rise luxury flats that will sit empty. Despite the thousands of objections, despite the many legitimate concerns that have been raised, the planning committee has given carte blanche for these greedy developers to transform municipal land into a series of ugly blocks that don’t adhere to fire safety best practice.”
Justine Sullivan of Stop The Towers said: “I’m disappointed, but not at all surprised with the result, because Ealing have failed to keep their local plan up to date. This has allowed mass over-development and tall buildings to be built in inappropriate places with no regard to the negative impact they have.
“We are really shocked and saddened that some of the councillors totally dismissed the voices and concerns raised by the pensioners at Apsley House. This is a very poor legacy for the future of Ealing.”
And Will French, co-founder of Ealing Matters and Chair of Save Ealing's Centre, said: “This is a huge scheme that will impact on many local residents and change Ealing for ever. If you look at it carefully you’ll see there are next to no real benefits from the plans particularly in our new post-Covid world when the demand for both council office space and high rise blocks of flats looks to have peaked. Ealing needs to pause for a while to reflect on what it is trying to do and consult with stakeholders including the Ealing public about what’s best for the Borough.”
In favour, Sarah Parkinson representing the applicant spoke in response to concerns that the development drawn up several years ago was not relevant in a post-pandemic world.
She said, “The coming months will see Ealing residents return to normal after a year of lockdown, while some things will change the need for an affordable place to live, work and shop will not. If anything, Covid has increased the desire for people to live, work and shop locally and this scheme responds to that desire to stay local and delivers all of that in the heart of Ealing Broadway.”
Among councillors’ concerns were the separation of affordable and market housing blocks instead of ‘pepper potting’, harms to heritage assets and the surrounding areas.
Cllr Jon Ball also called for the push for more affordable housing for what is the council’s own scheme on its own land.
Cllr Miriam Rice however, supporting the development, said, “I think this development is the kind of thing we need in order to meet those needs of people in Ealing that are suffering in poorer accommodation in Ealing so I’m very supportive of what’s being provided there when I think about everything on balance.”
Rupa Huq, said prior to the meeting that such a critical decision should not be made during an election period. The London Assembly is currently in 'purdah' due to the forthcoming elections which will decide who is to be the Mayor of London. It is normal practice for key decisions relating to London Assembly matters not to be made during this period.
She questioned the 'indecent haste” and 'completely unprecedented rush”' adding, 'Moving forward with yet another planning meeting, the third in almost as many weeks, during an election campaign is illogical and smacks of an attempt to ram through a controversial proposal with limited scrutiny. The process needs to be far more transparent than it currently is.
'I have received previous correspondence from council officers who have suggested it would not be possible to hold another meeting after Monday 22 March. As soon as rumours circulated I pleaded with council bureaucrats that the vote must be pushed back after the election season when with both occupants of City Hall and Ealing Broadway council ward both to be decided - at least one set to undergo change. The proposal is huge in scale – 477 households and does not deliver the genuinely affordable housing that working families in Ealing are in desperate need of.”
She has published a video opposing the scheme in which developers Vistry, who are in partnership with the council, are described as greedy.
Conservative opposition councillors met with the Chief Executive and Director of Legal Services of Ealing Council before the meeting to express their concerns about holding the Planning Committee to hear the Perceval House application.
They claimed that the council was pushing ahead for political reasons. Cllr Gregory Stafford, Leader of the Conservative Group said, 'This planning application has been dogged by mistakes, misjudgements and incompetence. It is rightly opposed by the vast majority of residents. The Council's refusal to listen to residents and to push ahead with the meeting on the 31st is a further example of how little Ealing Labour and its Administration cares about this borough and its residents”.
Ealing Council did not respond to requests for comment on the criticism of holding the meeting.
The scheme will now be referred to the Greater London Authority and the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government for final planning approval. The demolition of Perceval House could start as soon as this December if they agree.
Written with contributions from Anahita Hossein-Pour - Local Democracy Reporter
Like Reading Articles Like This? Help Us Produce More This site remains committed to providing local community news and public interest journalism. Articles such as the one above are integral to what we do. We aim to feature as much as possible on local societies, charities based in the area, fundraising efforts by residents, community-based initiatives and even helping people find missing pets. We've always done that and won't be changing, in fact we'd like to do more. However, the readership that these stories generates is often below that needed to cover the cost of producing them. Our financial resources are limited and the local media environment is intensely competitive so there is a constraint on what we can do. We are therefore asking our readers to consider offering financial support to these efforts. Any money given will help support community and public interest news and the expansion of our coverage in this area. A suggested monthly payment is £8 but we would be grateful for any amount for instance if you think this site offers the equivalent value of a subscription to a daily printed newspaper you may wish to consider £20 per month. If neither of these amounts is suitable for you then contact info@neighbournet.com and we can set up an alternative. All payments are made through a secure web site. One-off donations are also appreciated. Choose The Amount You Wish To Contribute. If you do support us in this way we'd be interested to hear what kind of articles you would like to see more of on the site – send your suggestions to the editor. For businesses we offer the chance to be a corporate sponsor of community content on the site. For £30 plus VAT per month you will be the designated sponsor of at least two articles a month with your logo appearing if supplied. If there is a specific community group or initiative you'd like to support we can make sure your sponsorship is featured on related content for a one off payment of £50 plus VAT. All payments are made through a secure web site. |
April 4, 2021