Forum Topic

LAYTON ROAD

I have been a resident of Layton Road since for over 9 years.  I am shocked to fall upon this announcement because it's the first I've heard of any plans to build yet another development directly opposite my home.The first thoughts that came to me as I read the headline, with eyes wide open like a rabbit in the spot light, were;Is Brentford attempting to house the whole of London?On a serious note though;Is there no communication between a Council and it’s constituents anymore?How can a single member be allowed to make a decision like that?Good lord, will it have a detrimental impact on the value of my property?I would have thought there would be some consultation with the people who will be directly impacted by such a development.9 years of surrounding development, living in an overwhelming dusty environment which has caused so many helth issues, dealing with the rubbish from the builders who decorate the road with discarded lunch wrappers, paying for a resident's parking permit only to find you can't park because of the latest new delevopement dwellers sitting in their vehicles waiting for the clock to strike 8 not forgetting the nursery visitors. Just when you think all the chaos is coming to a close, you get landed with yet another development and discover that your opinions as a constitient do not count.Deep breath!I’d be interested to see what other people who live in Brentford think about it?

Louise Canavan ● 3420d78 Comments

Just hope there's no asbestos.

Philippa Bond ● 2660d

In 2011 the threshold rateable value on which empty national non-domestic rates would become liable was reduced from £18,000 to £2,600.  Any empty business property with a rateable value of greater than £2,599 will pay unoccupied business rates. If there is no property on the site there is no rates assessment, so it's makes commercial sense to demolish buildings no longer intended to be used. Perhaps, a good reason for thinking about reform of business rates to a site value rating basis.

Joseph Gerald Bourke ● 2663d

Can you not have some support from environment regarding the pollution from the demolition?  Also I have noticed more sound barriers going up around developments, there are some strung against the barriers at the road/ bridge works on Gunnersbury Avenue.  Sitting in the traffic jam approaching Chiswick roundabout I saw these padded plastic sheets which said they were sound barriers ...

Sarah Felstead ● 2663d

You and many of us can only hope!

Jennifer Selig ● 2663d

To be honest Steve it's a route I advise clients to go down quite often as (a) it avoids the imposition of pre-commencement conditions relating to demolition being imposed on the granting of planning permission, and (b) it gives developers a 'blank canvas'.'Goodfillas' is just a pet gripe of mine because there's usually posts on here about alleged relationships between big developers and local authorities and such like, yet I imagine lots of residents walk past Goodfillas everyday or even go there despite it operating in breach of planning control and despite having planning permission refused.Level playing field and all that.

Adam Beamish ● 2663d

Thanks Adam. I just don't understand why they would want to spend the money in demolishing a perfectly safe building without any planning permission for something else. I would be careful criticising 'Goodfillas'... they may make you a coffee you can't refuse! :).If Guy is reading this. Good luck today (genuinely mean it):)

Steve Allum ● 2663d

Don't you understand you live in the great socialist borough of Hounslow. How dare you question the decision of the Dear Leader. The Dear leader and his esteemed team have managed to turn Brentford into Developers heaven. They have turned our streets into a rubbish dumpThey have allowed our roads and footpaths to disintegrate to such an extent  that motor manufacturers the world over test there vehicle suspension systems here. In an effort to house the world the Dear Leader aka Tin Pot Dictator has reasoned that by allowing thousands of flats to be built he will be able to change face of Brentford to resemble the Gorski Projects outside Moscow.Today is a day the Dear Leader and his cronies dread  because its a chance for the people to whom they usually show contempt to kick there arses out.

Robert Ayres ● 2663d

To be pedantic, it's not actually correct that it is the right of the developer to demolish the building, there is a requirement to go through a prior approval procedure providing full details of the means/method of demolition, associated mitigation measures, and how the land will be restored once the demolition is complete.  And I may be wrong because I haven't followed this closely but I don't believe such approval has ever been sought or granted (a cursory search on LBH's website appears to confirm this).The mention of Layton Road always brings up a minor gripe of mine, that being how Goodfellas is still trading from the detached building at the back of No. 1 despite having been refused planning permission 5 years ago...

Adam Beamish ● 2663d

Thanks Guy. Seems very odd though. As I said, it's given more light so not complaining. I do have a gripe with the noise, dust and lack of notice though. But after being living in a construction site for 10 years I should be used to it by now. :)

Steve Allum ● 2663d

Steve - the demolition is nothing to do with Floreat. I believe the site is owned by a developer and when I asked a few days ago LBH were unaware of what his plans now are - he is entitled to demolish the existing building.

Guy Lambert ● 2663d

It's week two now in the demolition of the Suzuki garage with diggers and pneumatic drills going all day long with multiple staff on site. With no plans for the school now and the council rejecting housing plans (quite rightly due to over development in the area) why wasn't Susuki or another car manufacturer given a chance to procure the building before Floreat starting the demolition. On a plus note, it has given us much needed light on the road but just doesn't make sense. The New England pub stood derelict for 10 years before they started demolition as no planning permission was granted for that amount of time.

Steve Allum ● 2663d

Immediately after the last war, my sisters and I had to go to the local primary school where we had a great mix of rich and poor, male and female.  I always remember my first day sharing a desk with a real 'bover-boy' with enormous boots.  He spent the entire time swinging his legs and kicking my shins.  There were 60 of us to a class and we got the very best education - only possible because of extremely strict discipline and a short sharp whack of the cane for those not complying.  Most only experienced that treatment once!  How times have changed.

Jennifer Selig ● 2683d

The private schools have charitable status. So its lost VAT. So the rest of us pay to make up the lost VAT which could have been used for state schools.

Nicholas Beard ● 2683d

“The majority pay for the select few!”Nicholas, I can understand why people disagree with private education on an ideological basis but could you please explain this comment.

Barry Jacques ● 2683d

I dont think Labour will do anything. They are the same as the Conservatives education is for those who can pay. When they were in last they did not remove the charitable status of private schools. The majority pay for the select few!

Nicholas Beard ● 2683d

Why would anyone support that ? - surely smaller classes would mean more classrooms needed and so forth ?.When I was at primary schools class size varied between 20 and 30, I don't recall any problems with that.I do hope we're not going down the route of how there should be more opportunities for individuals to get more dedicated attention from teachers...load of left wing cobblers as my Dad would say.

Adam Beamish ● 2683d

I bet they promise to limit them to 10 if it will win a few votes

Paul Fisher ● 2683d

I wonder if a future Labour goverment will limit primary school class sizes to 12?

Nicholas Beard ● 2683d

Thanks Guy

Steve Allum ● 2684d

Steve, I believe the council owns the land and is currently letting it out for vehicle storage.The demise of Floreat came as a shock to everybody (especially the parents, staff and pupils) and last I heard the education team were focused on sorting out places in the short term for the displaced pupils, which seemed to go OK, as far as was possible (though very disruptive, obviously). Fortunately all our local schools are rated good or outstanding.I will enquire whether another school operator is on the horizon: certainly, the last I heard the belief was that a school is needed with Layton the likely site.

Guy Lambert ● 2684d

Thanks Guy. Any idea why they are taking down the building then? I wondered whether the garage owner was either coming back or building a new showroom. My neighbour states there is no planning applications in at present. However, in my opinion they never start any work unless there is something in the pipeline. The New England pub was left derelict for a decade until it got it's planning through. That is in keeping with the area as only a couple of floors high.

Steve Allum ● 2684d

Floreat are closing as a school business in Brentford. They, and the DfE, never came forward with a planning application for the Layton Road school essentially because Floreat were busy merging with another school business who did not want a Brentford branch.There is still a need for more primary school capacity in Brentford and Layton Road is seen as the most suitable site, but it remains to be seen whether another school business (they are known as Free school operators) is up for starting a new school. It is not possible for a local authority to start a school, though perversely the local authority is required by law to provide school places - just one of the ways in which this government makes councils' lives difficult.

Guy Lambert ● 2684d

Does anyone know what is occurring at the now derelict Suzuki garage? Lots of workmen on the roof and a large skip outside. I thought the school wasn't going ahead now or has the situation changed. I hope they build the much needed school.

Steve Allum ● 2684d

Does anyone know what is occurring at the now derelict Suzuki garage? Lots of workmen on the roof and a large skip outside. I thought the school wasn't going ahead now or has the situation changed. I hope they build the much needed school.

Steve Allum ● 2684d

I am a parent from Floreat and we are all very annoyed about the current situation. The trust and the council have sold our children short and neither one taking responsibility. Planning should have been submitted on 29th January for a permanent home for our school and children. we have now been advised at 4.30 on a friday before half term that we are without school spaces. My child is happy, well educated and well adjusted at Floreat with a staff team who love and cherish thier well being. This is the first communication we have had about possible closure and are outraged. please tune in to BBC news this evening as they have taken on our story. James O shaugnessey (founder and current under minister for health) and Janet Hilary (CEO) should be named and shamed for thier behaviour in this situation. Now a further battle that our children are expected to just take up spaces wherever they fit for thier school. this is just not good enough !!!!

Rachel Davies ● 2742d

I broadly agree with your view, but I do feel that Hounslow should have not allowed the Green School for Boys at the planning stage - totally the wrong place and causing mayhem. Another boys only school was not a priority in this part of the world. The Duke of Northumberland has decided to go to a public enquiry regarding his plans to build on the Park Rd. allotments, a stone's throw from the GSfB, oh! won't that be fun if he wins? One way in and one way out on to Busch Corner, as someone decided it would be a good idea to close Church St.  As a school governor I am fully aware of the pitfalls and stupidity of these policies, the next big scandal looming will be Multi Academy Trusts, many of whom are going to the wall already.

Vanessa Smith ● 2744d

http://www.brentfordtw8.com/default.asp?section=info&page=conschools005.htm

Margaret Wittich ● 2744d

"Either way you as a Labour politician cannot seriously be defending this bonkers 'free school' policy"Correct.When it was introduced I complained that this was a mad policy we were introducing just as the Swedes were abandoning it. Far and away the best education system in Europe is (or was then) the Finnish one which is based on radical ideas like paying teachers attractive salaries to attract and retain the best quality staff.Local authorities have little choice in the matter, however. We are obliged by law (and morally IMO) to provide school places and free schools are funded by the DfE whilst building any other school has to be financed entirely by the LA. Oh, and by the way, the DfE can decide to plonk a free school down wherever they choose even if it's only effect is to draw pupils from existing schools which may then become unviable. That's the advanced form of the madness.All free schools and most former LA schools become academies when built anyway - and by the way, I also oppose academies.

Guy Lambert ● 2745d

Hopefully it will be a school and low rise units. It would also be a good place to have part of it allocated as a secure residents van park which would generate an income and solve a lot of headaches for the many local residents who are self employed artisans.But a site for a school. Max Factor would have been better. At least the airs better there.

Raymond Havelock ● 2745d

"Debatable whether the school space is needed. I believe there is just about enough capacity for now but potentially shortfalls in later years."I think you will find that the expected bulge in school places will not now be happening - a lot of people returning to Eastern European countries because of Brexit will make a difference. Either way you as a Labour politician cannot seriously be defending this bonkers 'free school' policy?

Vanessa Smith ● 2745d

Ian, do you live in Brentford? It is over developed already and we don't need any more housing. Anti social behaviour has gone through the roof here by GWQ. The street cleaning is inadequate as well.

Steve Allum ● 2745d

Debatable whether the school space is needed. I believe there is just about enough capacity for now but potentially shortfalls in later years.

Guy Lambert ● 2745d

I think Vanessa is entirely right there. I think the best solution is lower rise housing now the school space is not needed.

Ian Speed ● 2745d

This is the result of the government allowing a free for all where building schools is concerned, you land up with schools not necessarily in the right place or in some cases no co-ordination with the existing schools or local council place planning. The Green School for Boys being a prime example - wrong type of school in completely the wrong location. We are lucky in that Hounslow has a good reputation for education. With local education authorities there was a co-ordinated, planned and sensible approach - once again children will lose out because of a government ideology.

Vanessa Smith ● 2745d

There have been workmen in high vis jackets digging down into the car park for the last few weeks. Why would the DfE pay for this if it wasn't a goer? Could a different school apply now or Suzuki move back in perhaps?

Steve Allum ● 2745d

Don't know. A week ago we were working on school plans with the DfE. So it'll take a little while to reset plans

Guy Lambert ● 2745d

Guy, thanks for the prompt reply. Do you know what will happen to the site now? Suzuki have vacated and it looks terrible down the road now. Audi are using it for vehicle storage and a staff car park now. I take it housing is still off the list? Thanks in advance.

Steve Allum ● 2745d

Plans for a school on Layton Road were progressing and would have been funded by central government, however Floreat as an independent schools company decided some time ago that it was not financially viable and has been in merger talks.https://schoolsweek.co.uk/floreat-avanti-trust-merge/. Mergers often lead to disruptions to the weaker partner.I had the privilege of a visit to the school a few weeks ago and the atmosphere and the head and staff (and, it goes without saying, the children) were a joy. It's very sad to hear that they won't now continue but a bit rich that the trustees are blaming anybody but themselves for their failure. I hope the staff are treated respectably and find good jobs quickly. I know the LBH education service will be working very hard to get the best answers for the children.Hounslow has some of the best schools in London and every school in and around Brentford is rated either Good or Outstanding. It will obviously be disruptive for the children (and their parents) but once they are settled in to new schools they will get excellent education.

Guy Lambert ● 2745d

I don't know what happened but it appears the school is not getting built now? The council has already turned down the housing being built on Layton Road but I thought the school was a goer.Local residents are in favour of a school but not housing. I feel really sorry for the parents as they are now closing the school altogether.Anyone care to comment. Very disappointing.

Steve Allum ● 2745d

Thanks Guy for the PM and looking into this. Your hard work is appreciated :-)

Steve Allum ● 2899d

Guy, thanks for your reply. The bins that have been removed are the following:1. Outside the Layton Road cafe by the corner of Brook Road North.2. The bin by the southside of the footbridge going over the railway by New Road. 3. The bin by the northside of the footbridge by  Layton Road.They have all gone within the last year. .Also seems really unclear where everybody can park now. It appears that you can park around the back of Layton Road running parallel with the railway without a permit. Any clarification on this please? Signs state residencial parking only from the 1980's. Will this get worse once the new development begins? Thanks in advance.

Steve Allum ● 2901d

Guy, thanks for your reply. The bins that have been removed are the following:1. Outside the Layton Road cafe by the corner of Brook Road North.2. The bin by the southside of the footbridge going over the railway by New Road. 3. The bin by the northside of the footbridge by  Layton Road.They have all gone within the last year. .Also seems really unclear where everybody can park now. It appears that you can park around the back of Layton Road running parallel with the railway without a permit. Any clarification on this please? Signs state residencial parking only from the 1980's. Will this get worse once the new development begins? Thanks in advance.

Steve Allum ● 2901d

Layton Road will end up the next Adelaide Terrace, Trapped by looming buildings, deprived of light and fresh airflow and will be probably the most polluted residential street in the UK as a consequence of almost any development.Quite why LBH do not lease the Max Factor building which would make a perfect school with good air quality and space and leave the Watermans where it is but do a development which will bring some low level development incorporated into the site is weird.On one hand they are banging on about air quality and yet happy to promote and green flag developments which are devastating to the air quality.When will they wake up to the fact that buildings and dense developments pollute as much toxins as vehicles and pollute in further ways?Joined up thinking is still way off.

Raymond Havelock ● 2902d

Steve, the lack of progress on this site has nothing to do with the proposed office building on the corner of the A4 and Ealing Road.As I understand it, the original plans for residential development on Layton Road were knocked back - not least because of feedback from local residents and ward councillors - and a (somewhat) smaller scheme is now being proposed. There are discussions with the planners about this proposed scheme and I understand one of the sticking points is over the level of affordable housing to be provided.For reasons that always escaped me, the school development and the housing were part of the same planning application so that the school, which as I understand it made a somewhat premature announcement of its move, has now taken another unit within the GWQ development.As to litter, I wrote to Hounslow Highways on Friday pointing out that the fortnightly attention to Layton Road, which should have happened on Friday had not taken place, nor had it by Tuesday (I wrote again) but it does seem to have been litter picked by this morning (though there are still plenty of cigarette butts etc)I don't know about any bins being removed. Where were the bins that have been taken away, exactly?

Guy Lambert ● 2902d

Does anyone know what is occurring with this development? Both thriving businesses moved out months ago from this non brownfield site. It appears the Audi garage are now using the car park for vehicle storage but no progress in the building works at all. With the further application of a 13 storey skyscraper by the A4, could that be affecting the original application? Also noticed that the council have removed a lot of the bins down the road. Surely more people should equal more bins and not the opposite. Road looking the worst ever with Mcdonalds bags and the like.

Steve Allum ● 2902d

Apparently the Morrisons development plans have been put back after the developers met with local councillors last week which is good news for Lateward Road residents. Haven't heard anything ref Layton Road except plans have been submitted. Buildings are huge and I would like to say out of character but after 10 years of developing around Layton Road it no longer is... genius. :-)

Steve Allum ● 3091d

I understand TfL provides them at no cost to the council. Some more are being offered (maybe just one - Cllr Savin is the expert). We will suggest Mafeking Ave/ Brook Road South area unless someone has a better idea.

Guy Lambert ● 3100d

I was trying to find the original consultation for the hangar in York Road (? July 2016) that was once athttps://www.hounslow.gov.uk/index/council_and_democracy/consultations/york_road_cycle_consult.htmbut failed to find any relevant info on the Hounslow website.http://www.cyclehoop.rentals/does give info saying that the charge for a space is between £10 and £60 for a year depending on the council. And clicking on Hangar 742 in York Road says that the charge is £36/year but it is currently full. Hackney apparently has over 150 hangars in the borough.

Tim Henderson ● 3101d

Does anyone know how these housing plans without adequate parking are progressing? Had 2 letters from the council this morning proposing a SECOND bike hangar in York Road which is off Layton Road. These is already 1 on Layton Road and 1 on York Road. How much do these hangars cost and who pays for them? Would it not be better to make developers pay for these?

Steve Allum ● 3104d

In Avenue Rd Acton in February there was a large house raided. It had 72 people living (existing?) in it. I'll bet this type of scenario is rife in every borough of just about every town in England now.

Keith Iddon ● 3309d

This is what's on offer around here. Full market value: £290,000•Share price: £101,500•Required earnings from: £34,100•Total mortgage: £91,350•Required deposit: £10,150•Total unsold value: £188,500•Service charge: £107.73•Monthly rent from: £392.71•Estimated mortgage PCM: £534Based on  % APR over  years Estimated monthly cost: £1,034

Vanessa Smith ● 3309d

I personally think every government of every political hue has dodged the bullet on housing. Until and unless there is an acceptance that a massive public housing programme must be undertaken this disgraceful inequality will last. All this laughable nonsense of 'affordable' housing and helping first time buyers - really? In London? I don't think so, most people on an average salary are priced out of the rental market, let alone buying. 'Relaxing' a few planning regs. is hardly the revolution that we need, and the failure and inability of local councils to really go after rogue landlords is a joke. They too have been ill-treated with the constant budget cuts and simply do not have the staff to deal with these issues. On the news today, a four-bed house with 28 people in it, the landlord raking in over £80,000 a year! Who will be able to afford these planned flats at Layton Rd. or will this be another buy to let paradise that enables landlords to screw desperate people?

Vanessa Smith ● 3309d

It is for this very reason that the Coalition Administration relaxed the rules on permitted development in residential areas although this has produced problems of its own. As you know Vanessa housing with multiple occupancy is not without its problems.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 3309d

Slightly off topic but there was an article in the Sunday Times about the writer Hunter Davies who lost his wife last year. He decided that his house was far too big for him and that he could make the third storey a decent flat (rent free) for a nurse at the hospice where his wife was treated. The facilities were already there, kitchen bathroom etc. so what was needed was a separate entrance. So he paid an architect, plans duly drawn and submitted - all this costing the best part of a £1000. The application was turned down - wait for it - because there was nothing on the plan regarding a covered area to store four bikes! This apparently was in Camden's local planning rules, then the whole thing started to get more and more tied up in bureaucracy, with the result he just decided it was all too much and abandoned the idea. There are reckoned to be over 70,000 unused rooms that could be utilised but just who would put themselves through all that? I point this out as support for the argument that the single householder is made to jump through some real impossible hoops in the planning process whilst developers can get away with murder.

Vanessa Smith ● 3309d

You should forgive someone for thinking there is something underhand going on, since there is a very distinct 2-tier planning  system in this borough. A large scale developer could get away with almost anything, and as a homeowner you hardly stand a chance of an extension getting a planning approval, unless it is a size of a shoebox.Hounslow planners love to use unquantifiable excuses, such as "harm to street scene", "loss of outlook" and the likes in case a pesky homeowner dares to dream of extending their tiny freehold property. And we need to prove we have sufficient parking in case we want to add another bedroom. None of these seem applicable to huge monstrocities that pop all over this borough?Could this be because council stands nothing to gain from a homeowner's extention in monetary terms, apart from a paltry planning fee?

Marina Thomas ● 3309d

It was a railway yard prior to the Petrol station and a watering point and stabling point for shunting engines.The ground will be contaminated with 100 years of sulphar, coal, oil and then diesel and light fuel.Which is why these bits of land have remained undeveloped for residential as they have been too costly to recover.But the issue is really over density and lack of normal living facilities which include somewhere to park a vehicle.

Raymond Havelock ● 3310d

Fair points Steve, it would probably most accurately be described as previously developed land and not brownfield.

Adam Beamish ● 3310d

Before I posted my last comment I looked up the definition of Brownfield as I wasn’t au fait with the correct term. Here it is;“'Brownfield' land is an area of land or premises that has been previously used, but has subsequently become vacant, derelict or contaminated. This term derived from its opposite, undeveloped or 'greenfield' land.”The site is neither vacant, derelict or contaminated. However, there was a petrol station on the site in the 1960’s.Be that as it may, my main gripe is that developers tend to use the term colloquially to make out to the general public that it is barren waste land rotting away.I think the presentation is a clear starting point to what will be submitted in the final plans.

Steve Allum ● 3310d

OK, I take that back in ref to that comment "someone is making some money on the side", it was a little harsh. However the development so far in Brentford have been pretty poor and questionable. 1- New Build next Waterman.2- Another new build next to the new build. 3- A massive sign in Junction of “Half Acre”, Change is coming…one year on so far not much……4- New Square, with a working fountain in Autumn.5- High Street with businesses unsure what to do (invest or let business fall apart).6- New School in a residential block…great for the kids to learn. 7- No upgrade to playgrounds.

Raki Smith ● 3310d

To be fair, the link is merely to exhibition boards, not to an actual planning application which hasn't been submitted yet.And there is absolutely no doubt that the site is brownfield, it is previously developed land, whether there's existing business or not on the site isn't relevant to the definition of brownfield land.And whilst I don't personally disagree with the comments about the amount of development going on, as I've pointed out before the fact remains that housing demand currently massively outstrips supply and the Government and local authorities are encouraged (through national planning policy etc.) to maximise development.And lets be careful again about making comments like "someone is making some money on the side" - as I always say such insinuations are serious and shouldn't be banded around easily - unless any of you fancy the same consequence as Sally Bercow following her tweets about Mcalpine.

Adam Beamish ● 3310d

Wow, is this a Joke? Let’s build a school and have no proper open space, oh and put it near the A4 and M4, great for the children to breathe in the lovely air. And to add to that lets build another development, which the area does not need. Why not make a proper playground for the kids, where they can run and do some exercise. We need some proper leadership, and I am sure someone is making some money on the side. As locals, is there a way to prevent this from happening or at least get them to change the plans. We need to organise something locally. The area is being Croydon, but smaller, we are losing our heritage for expansion. The area will pay for this in a few years.

Raki Smith ● 3310d

Utterly ludicrous set of plans and yet again total indifference and silence from those who are supposed to represent the interests of existing residents.

Raymond Havelock ● 3310d

These new housing developments do make me laugh. they always show fit, healthy, happy, lovely people all jogging and playing in the great sunshine. Are the new tenents of this complex only coming out 3 days a year? Will these lovelies walk their lovely smiling kids to school when its tipping down with rain on a monday morning and they need to get into Clapham on a train thats been cancelled? Or will they take  their scooter from their 0.5% alolocated parking and scooter share to work?

Sarah Thomas ● 3310d

I have just seen the design of the proposed new development. All they have provided is sketch type illustrations.From what I can see, there is large scale flats being proposed here with very few car parking spaces. It states there will be 0.5 car parking spaces per unit so where will the others park? Also the houses don’t have any garages or off street parking like the new houses on Baltic Avenue.  The houses don’t seem to have any gardens either but instead will have to share with the flatsThere is also mention that this is a brownfield site which is incorrect. Two businesses thrive on this site and according to a neighbour one of them doesn’t want to leave.I think after so many developments in this area: GWQ, Baltic Avenue, Windmill Road, New England and Reynard Mills the council should be scaling back any new large developments.  The school is welcome but they really need to rethink the housing project.Please view the link:http://www.jtp.co.uk/cms/pdfs/01060B_Layton-Road-Brentford_exhibition-boards_160718_S.pdf

Steve Allum ● 3310d

As a friend of mine has commented - 'Stalin would be proud of them'.

Vanessa Smith ● 3404d

Does it matter what colour the field is? Reading the latest curren disregard for his constituents id say its the colour of money that matters. How is this arse of a man allowed to carry on. But be careful all you Brentford People you're likely to have your phone taken away and put under house arrest for the mere suggestion that you think old curren is an idiot (i use the word idiot as my other choice of word may offend). I find the man so annoying I can’t even give his name a capital letter.

Sarah Thomas ● 3405d

Also this is not a brownfield site like Reynard Mills. Two successful businesses thrive on this site.

Steve Allum ● 3405d

Why 'purports to still live here'?

Anne England ● 3405d

And all to be pushed through by one councillor who is not even elected in this ward.But purports to still live here.Hardly democratic.

Raymond Havelock ● 3406d

Having now seen the plans it appears the original article was economical with the truth. It appears to be 2/3 of the area is for housing and 1/3 is for the school.

Steve Allum ● 3406d

Amazing that you have not been told or asked for your opinion about the development of the car park in Layton road, but then we are all incredulous that we apparently were consulted about wheelie bins and apparently demanded them.  With that in mind it probably wouldn't matter what your opinion was anyway.With proper consultation and consideration that site would probably be a good one for the school. With green grass playing fields and not a huge staff car park and not oodles of flats.  Just a simple school.

Sarah Felstead ● 3417d

And to save the little children from having to learn basic road safety and the green cross road, Leyton Road will be closed off at the junction with Ealing Road.

Reg Ghosh ● 3418d

Proposal for a new permanent home for Floreat Brentford Primary School This Press Release does rather jump the gun regarding planning permission, how fair will that process be if councillors have already made their minds up? Outrageous.  "Hounslow Council, Floreat Education Academies Trust, the Education Funding Authority (EFA) and Hodson Developments have agreed on a new permanent site for Floreat Brentford Primary School, a two form entry Free School.A single member decision will be made on 26 April about the Layton Road car park in Brentford (currently occupied by the Suzuki dealership) forming part of a mixed use scheme which will include the permanent site for Floreat Brentford Primary School.  The report will be published on the council’s website a week before the decision on 19 April.The site is located a short walk from the current temporary site for the school in the Great West Quarter development. The permanent school will be ready for the 2018/19 academic year, with the temporary site remaining at Trico House until then.Councillor Tom Bruce, Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services, Hounslow Council said he was pleased a way forward appeared to have been found, he said:“We’re determined to make sure every child in the borough receives the best education possible, and like most London boroughs we have a rapidly growing school-age population and an ever increasing pressure on school places. I’m delighted that by working together we have been able to propose a viable new site.”

Vanessa Smith ● 3419d

I live on the road as well. We had the first crane going up at GWQ in 2006 and the last one came down two weeks ago behind us on Baltic Avenue.The New England Pub has just been knocked down for more flats and now they are suggesting a school with a "mixed development"... i.e. more flats. I just hope they take this into account. I'm not against a school but am against more flats.

Steve Allum ● 3419d

Trouble is politicians, even when electioneering, only answer the questions they want to and duck and dive from the pertinent questions.It's even going on with the Mayoral elections now. Both main candidates are spouting away about how they are going to have huge builds of new homes.What they won't properly answer is where. What they won't answer at all is where the infrastructure, like schools and health centres and all the stuff to accommodate all these extra people will go.That's because the answer is on public and open spaces.This councils huge salaried director of Regeneration is the puppet master here and has the Council Leader dancing about like a faulty Thunderbirds Puppet, both, no doubt, on an under the counter Panamanian type promise for their future retirement.His dept. has eyed up just about every open space - Parks,allotments, playing fields, car parks, and all manner of public open and recreational space as well as amenity and service sites to be hawked off to developers either in partnership or as a rearguard measure to cover for the shortcomings of planning recommendations.The worst thing is it is quietly supported by the Tories and any Labour dissenter is simply frozen out by the culture of bullying and finger pointing that they hold so dear.  It might be a big game to them but it affects local people and will continue to do so.Read the property pages of yesterdays Evening Standard and you would think Brentford is a developers utopia ripe for complete redevelopment. Put together by a release from…Hounslow Council.What is very clear is residents, whatever our political colours or even not at all, are being completely sidelined and blocked from a series and culture of "Done deals" by officials both elected and unelected. It may or may not be loaded with backhanders but it is certainly morally corrupt.But they are so cosy with developers that a stand won't be taken and we end up suffering the systematic and reckless dismemberment of a once eclectic community that made Brentford such a unique place to live, work and play.It's time to contact MPs and ministers.

Raymond Havelock ● 3419d

I do not live in Brentford, but I do feel for people who are faced - yet again - with a dictatorial council making decision that affect their day to day lives. This 'single member decision' malarkey is just so wrong on so many counts, whatever happened to democracy?No-one disputes the problems with finding school places, and the government's policy on education certainly doesn't help, but never have I known a Labour council so willing to rollover instead of raising the very real problems there are with this policy. The fact their own residents have schemes like this dumped on them is just appalling. Not to even attempt to sound out local residents before bulldozing ahead I am afraid just all too typical of this shower. They soon forgot who the hell they were elected to represent.

Vanessa Smith ● 3419d

My wife and I, also as residents of Layton Road, had exactly the same reaction and feel pretty hacked off with the way in which we have been treated during the last few years ever since there has been construction work in the surrounding area.  Re this ridiculous plan, we've written to the councillors to express our thorough dismay about the total lack of any dialogue on such an important step and to highlight some significant issues if this gets the go ahead.  We have regularly had to contact the borough about the state of Layton Road - litter, traffic, disrepair - and not to be told about this plan is quite frankly appalling.  If there are a number of us fed up residents, then perhaps its time to get together and raise our concerns in the strongest manner

Dan Gilmour ● 3420d

Cllr Curran is making the single decision - he makes up the rules as he goes along!

Reg Ghosh ● 3420d