Latest Friary Park Plans 'Unacceptable' Say Campaigners |
|
Cap The Towers urges council to refuse to validate application
September 19, 2024 Campaigners opposed to the continuing development of the Friary Park Estate are encouraging Ealing Council to refuse to validate the planning application for latest phase of the scheme. Mount Anvil and Peabody have recently been holding further exhibitions in the local community centre in which they unveiled a new 3-D model of what the estate might look like after the development is complete. This contained more details of the buildings yet to be completed. It is understood that the planning application for the third phase of the scheme has been submitted to Ealing Council. It will only if the application is validated that the full details of the designs will be available to view. Permission has already given for an outline design for this last part of the project, but approval is now being sought for changes to the masterplan by HTA Design LLP that will see over 100 extra flats. The Cap The Towers (CTT) group, which is campaigning against the proposals, believes that Ealing Council should not let the full application get beyond the first stage, that of validation, because it says that what is being proposed contradicts earlier advice given as to what would be acceptable for the site. Councils can refuse to validate applications if they deem that pre-application advice has not been followed. Based on what can be determined from the 3-D model and earlier documents submitted for outline permission, the group says of the plans, “They represent a considerable increase in height, bulk and massing from what Ealing Council has previously approved. The next step would be for the Council to formally accept the application as valid before proceeding to a full assessment culminating in a recommendation to the Planning Committee to either refuse or approve this planning application. The Council finds itself in a very difficult position when it comes to validating this application or allowing it to proceed at all.”
CTT points to Ealing Council planning department documentation relating to the last application submitted in 2022 which sets clear parameters as to what can be permitted in this final phase including the height and footprint of buildings. It says that the model indicates clearly that the parameters have been disregarded by the developers. Ealing Council’s earlier guidelines were that the maximum height for any building in this block was 22 floors but the latest plans indicate a tower 24 storeys high. Additionally, the footprints of the buildings are now well outside the council’s original parameters. CTT adds, “As can be seen in the 3D model, all the towers in this Block are jammed hard against each other: the 28 floor tower against a 15 floor tower and a 14 floor tower against a 22 floor tower. It is hard to imagine that this kind of massing and density could possibly be acceptable.” The group has also reiterated its concerns about the amount of public space provided in the development saying it is less that a quarter of what would be required by Greater London Assembly guidelines. It claims this will result in a development which is unendurable to live in and dangerously overcrowded. The final phase of the development mainly contains flats for market sale only which CTT claims will be sold mainly to investors from the Far East and Middle East. There is no social rent housing in the final scheme and the overall proportion of housing classed as affordable in the scheme will fall from 46% to 41% should the third phase go ahead.
Furthermore, CTT says a spokesperson for the developer told one of its members at the Exhibition last Saturday (14 September) that it is considering reducing further the number of flats available for those on the council’s social housing lists (currently 237 out of 1,345 units in the development. The group concludes that Ealing Council would be breaking its own rules were it to validate the application. Mount Anvil previously has not responded to our requests for comment.
|