Town centre: Battle won... but war goes on (Ealing Borough Liberal Democrats)

Ealing Borough Liberal Democrats <info@ealinglibdems.org.uk>

Town centre: Battle won... but war goes on

June 9, 2008 7:33 PM

Artist's impression of the DIcken's Yard development

Artist's impression of the controversial Dicken's Yard development

Following a huge local campaign by Lib Dem councillor Jon Ball and local residents, plans for a 40-storey tower on the Arcadia site in the centre of Ealing have been WITHDRAWN by the developers. A revised scheme is expected later this summer.

Hot on the heels of this scheme, another developer is proposing SEVEN towers on the Dicken's Yard site behind the Town Hall, which threaten to overwhelm the centre of Ealing. The two schemes together total 1,400 flats.

Lib Dem Councillor Jon Ball slammed the plans saying, "While the towers are lower, the total size of this scheme is similar to the Glenkerrin scheme that was so comprehensively rejected by local people. It is out of scale with Ealing's architecture and includes no facilities for the local community. The Council own this site, so must use their power to insist on development that will make Ealing better.

"What local people need is a pleasant, open centre on a human scale which people want to visit and spend time in," said Jon. "This monstrous set of blocks, which at up to 14 storeys are twice the height of the Council's original brief, would completely dominate the Town Hall, Christchurch and the shops between."

Jon continued, "Adding yet more cars and parking to local streets without a coherent traffic plan for the area as a whole, which the Council has totally failed to provide, is a recipe for disaster."

Cllr Ball first raised concerns about the proposals for the site over two years ago. He was quoted in the minutes of the Council's Overview & Scrutiny Committee from 1st December 2005 as follows: "Councillor Ball commented that none of the designs were completely acceptable to the Council and that all schemes were proposing significantly more retail than leisure facilities if compared to what was outlined in the brief. This according to Councillor Ball was a wasted opportunity considering the location. Cllr Ball also expressed his concern about the weighting given to financial factors when assessing bids and emphasized the need for consideration of traffic implications, the scheme's relation with the West London Tram and the disabled car access and parking spaces. "

Cllr Jon Ball has ruled himself out of his planning committee role in relation to these two sites so he is free to fight unsuitable schemes. The plans can be seen on the Council web site or at Perceval House. Comments must be made by 25th June.