Forum Topic

Hounslow's planners make 'Private Eye' yet again.

Just who do Hounslow council pay any attention to?In this latest 'Eye' Nooks and Corners column Hounslow are heavily criticised for approving a development called Albany Riverside on the old Watermans site. These will be'significantly higher' than existing buildings which are 'largely screened from view to anyone standing in Kew Gardens'.'Historic England says the buildings, the tallest of which will be seven storeys, will cause multiple instances of harm to the setting. In a letter to planners they show how the new buildings will clutter the backdrop to the palace. At present, their letter explains "the parkland and historic buildings are framed by trees and sky alone. The whole effect is picturesque, humane and has taken centuries to develop". This goes on to say "This clearly harms the experience of visitors to Kew and obscures the Arcadian qualities that are a defining feature of the environment".The Chiswick Curve turned down by Hounslow is due to go to appeal in June. apprently Historic England 'have warned Hounslow planners that allowing Albany Riverside would set an "uncontrollable precedent for further new buildings within the hinterland of the world heritage site." I just wonder how a member of the planning committee one Cllr. Lambert thinks supporting closing 'picturesque' Church St.  which in the great scheme of things is pretty small beer squares with this decision which will impinge on such an important national and international heritage site?

Vanessa Smith ● 2715d28 Comments

Whilst professionals and developers will discuss and highlight the core problem of over development.Is it not rather concerning that not one politician, anywhere, local or national will take on the issue of over population and over concentration of population.Developers are revelling in the benefits of an excessive demand market.as are all those who feed off of developers plans.Unfortunately the fall out of overdensification is already becoming other visible in the social problems and limitations of human well being and the complete imbalance of social infrastructure from Health and elderly care to places of recreation for all.It seems one party sees votes in cramming in people and another sees profit in cramming in people.But no-one dares to take on the issue head on.  One can only speculate that it is fear of being labelled.  But his issue is far from that taboo. It affects all who live here and all of the UK which is far from a land of equal quality.

Raymond Havelock ● 2711d

Thank you Lorne.As I have suggested before, my impression is that the Morrison’s development is unlikely to proceed in the short term at least.

Guy Lambert ● 2712d

At the end of the day it appears the Acton Lodge site is to be developed in a perfectly appropriate manner.  All organisations have a degree of infighting and conflicting interests, but here at least doing the right thing has come out on top, so I’d like to say thank you to Guy.  Involved or not, it confirms my belief that you’re a decent and honourable chap.Turning to other matters – Morrisons and a 40 m high block of high density, predominantly studio and one bed flats aimed at young professionals that will rent for a year or two and then move somewhere nice.  Doesn’t really fit in with the local plan does it.  With interest rates on the rise and the developer of the site possibly highly geared with debt, do you think there’s any chance of one of those delaying manoeuvres that are perfectly legal?  I tried instigating the maladministration approach, but then the director of the relevant council department went and departed, which weakens it somewhat.

Lorne Gifford ● 2712d

The “interpretation” contained in the petition, as I understand it, was based directly on the programme upon which the most recent general election was fought. So does the clique currently controlling Hounslow Council have a different policy platform?

Phil Andrews ● 2713d

Just with regard to the lack of new family sized houses, I'd entirely agree with posters on this.The problem however is that, from national level downwards, planning polices encourage developers to make the most effective and efficient use of land, i.e. high density, especially on previously developed sites.  So as long as the proposed residential units meet the technical housing space standards, Councils are pretty much powerless to prevent new development being predominantly flats, especially within the capital where land is so scarce that the only option is to go up.Saying that, I have worked in recent years on sites in both Hounslow and Richmond where either 100% or 50% of the proposed residential accommodation was houses rather than flats.  Although in the case of the former, after all the effort of getting permission, the Board of this particularly major housebuilder then decided not to implement that permission...From a entirely personal perspective I hate all the towers I see being erected all over the capital, from an entirely professional perspective I know it's inevitable.

Adam Beamish ● 2713d

Sorry Guy but to shout about how Sarah Trimmer hall was restored and preserved as a heritage listed building is wide of the mark. What is left, in my opinion, is a copy. You and your fellow cllrs were told time and time again what was happening to the building and you were all slow in acting on it.

Neil Chippendale ● 2713d

No. We will follow party policy, not an interpretation of the general election manifesto from a particular group within the party. Had we won the general election, different policies might be expected, but sadly we did not.

Guy Lambert ● 2713d

So the petition is being acted on in full?  Thank you for coming back to me on that Guy, I’m sure the party membership will be delighted by the news.

Phil Andrews ● 2713d

Bernard, how much are you betting? Most if not all the 19 council homes being built on the Acton Lodge site are individual houses.A number of the flats being built in 'Block D' on the High Street will be 3 and 4 bedroom. You might not think they are family homes but there are many living in cramped accommodation who will be very happy to get these.

Guy Lambert ● 2713d

I really don't understand Vanessa's problem with us building council houses on the Acton Lodge site.The Trimmer Hall was bought by a private developer. It has been partly saved and partly rebuilt using mostly the original materials. We have refused planning permission umpteen times to turn it into flats and it is currently under appeal to the Planning Inspectorate because we have refused permission for it to be split into 2 dwellings.I'm very happy that this historic listed building, that had been redundant and neglected for years, perhaps decades, is now in excellent condition and has a future providing a home for somebody.

Guy Lambert ● 2713d

and surely not a Council Home?

Jennifer Selig ● 2713d

"I am not an expert on school buildings, unlike Vanessa it seems."No - I at no time claimed to be an expert - but what I do recognise is the smell of bullsh*t when it wafts around. Acton Lodge site was up For Sale for a considerable time - or are you going to deny that? It is only now way down the line that it has been decided there will be 19 council homes there. As for Sarah Trimmer Hall - it has been vandalised to b*ggery, it is in no way near the orignal listed building it was.

Vanessa Smith ● 2713d

BernardCommunities talk - they engage with one another, exchange ideas, discuss problems, organise.  That's the very last thing people like this want.

Phil Andrews ● 2713d

We want council houses in Brentford and that's what we're getting.Guy I honestly believe that you do want council houses for Brentford.But I bet not one normal two or three bedroom house ever gets built, Those who are responsible for the planning of building homes in Brentford have forgotten what a normal House looks like. The only building they know is a high-rise block of flats.In my book a flat 20 floors up is not a family home, most occupants dont know their neighbors on the floor below as their lift goes down two floors. this is hardly the the best way to create a community, which is something that helps control anti social behavior as nieghbours can get together and sort things out early which also creates respect of young, old and ethnically diverse people.If a another new town were to be built today, it would probably end up with rows of 20 story high rise buildings instead of Houses that create a much better home environment for people to live in.

Bernard Allen ● 2713d

I am not an expert on school buildings, unlike Vanessa it seems. I tend to trust experts, unfashionable I know.Nothing crafty about anything. We want council houses in Brentford and that's what we're getting.In case you haven't passed it recently, Sarah Trimmer Hall has indeed been saved. Not claiming agency in that but I was not inactive on the matter as those who genuinely care about it know very well.As Adam says, the World Heritage Site is not significantly impacted by this development - other developments like the Kew Bridge apartments and the Brentford 'Skylon' and indeed the football ground enabling development are more significant - after all the football ground will impede the views from Kew Gardens to that very lovely 1960s block known as Vantage West. So yes, as a Brentford councillor I'm more interested in the future of a town I represent and love, than I am in marginal issues with Kew Gardens/Palace. If this is a serious issue the Mayor or the SoS can intervene.

Guy Lambert ● 2713d

"For clarity about the Acton Lodge site. It was too long and narrow to house a school."Really? I don't know whether you attended the public meeting when the council were plotting to plunder a local park to accomodate a free school? I can't count the times that people asked the question as to why the Acton Lodge site wasn't suitable - answer came there none. Acton Lodge housed a training facility for people with special needs for years, the site has two entrances one off London Rd. and one from Hawthorn Rd. at the rear. I think Guy would have difficulty trying to persuade local people of the validity of his claim of unsuitability. It is true to say that the site was originally For Sale by Hounslow council so it wasn't earmarked for council housing, so now Hounslow have craftily tried to kid people that they had the best of intentions all along, it smacks of pulling chestnuts out of the fire. As for the argument of securing Waterman's future - so what you are saying Guy is - that's more important than a World Heritage site? Really, did the proposals have to allow such high buildings there? I'd have thought that Sarah Trimmer Hall was a 'vital component' and a real link to the history of Brentford too but I didn't see any of you busting a gut to try to protect and retain that.

Vanessa Smith ● 2713d

Are you a back seat driver by any chance, Phil?

Anne England ● 2714d

How did you get on with that petition Guy?

Phil Andrews ● 2714d

For clarity about the Acton Lodge site. It was too long and narrow to house a school. It will contain 19 council houses to take families off the waiting list or from temporary accommodation. Momentum were simply wrong about that, though to be fair the ultimate ownership of those houses was not decided at the start of the process.I won’t revisit the arguments about the Watermans development, other than to say that, if it goes ahead we have secured the future of an important arts centre in Brentford. I think this is a vital component of our town, and it was hard to see another way of retaining it. Moving it to the town centre was the unanimous preference of its trustees.

Guy Lambert ● 2714d

Philippa’s comment of ‘worryingly poor sales for flats in Ealing - in the last quarter only two apparently’ is, I think, one of the first signs of a bubble that’s going to burst.We’ve had a decade of remarkably low interest rates, quantitative easing and risk adverse investing by banks that have combined to direct money at all forms of property.  The majority of property development companies have only existed in this environment so have business models that rely on those low interest rates to fund their builds and eager buyers for anything they do build.  Similarly, the majority of buyers have only known affordable mortgages and property prices that go up, so not unnaturally are keen to get in regardless of the cost or quality of what they buy.It’s a market held up by ultra-low interest rates and the belief that things will go on like this. – classic bubble.And then along comes the Bank of England with a small comment that interests rates are going to rise. 

Lorne Gifford ● 2714d

"Ambitions for developments on local sites such as the former Acton Lodge site on London Road. This is Council owned and vacant for four years but now with a current application for 100% private housing from a firm now fronted by a recently departed Hounslow Council employee.“The hiving off of Council-owned land for development where the level of council housing to be built will not exceed 40%, despite reserves of £170m and availability of low interest money to deliver 100% social rent properties.“The readiness to build a Free School on Brent Lea Recreation Ground when other sites were available, only aborted following a strong, local community led campaign.”I'm sure that's just as biased as anything Private Eye might say, but it is interesting."No - far from being biased - Hounslow tried to commandeer Brent Lea  rec.for the Floreat Free School while at that same time the old Acton Lodge site almost directly opposite was being termed 'unsuitable' for the school site. What no-one would say at the lively public meeting, that was very well attended, was quite why the site was deemed so 'unsuitable'. Well, we know now don't we? Also Floreat have now decided to take a hike leaving both students and parents up the proverbial creek, even though there was a site finally identified in Layton Rd.

Vanessa Smith ● 2714d

I also enjoy reading Private Eye and whilst a lot of what they write might well be biased and opinionated, on a simple count of frequency of being slandered it does point a slightly worrying finger at what might be going on in Hounslow council.  Personally, I think identifying individual councillors for criticism has the problem that (a) they’re individuals and therefore perfectly entitled to vote for what they consider the best overall solution to a particular site, and (b) I suspect a lot of Conservative calling anything Labour ‘looney’ and Labour calling anything Conservative ‘uncaring’ may go on. As I see it, the root issue appears to have been a significant move towards approving nothing but overly large developments of private flats, and I’m being deliberately polite when I say ‘significant’ and ‘large developments’.  Due processes of local plan, public consultation etc goes on, but then these things appear to be utterly ignored, along the lines of ‘ticked the consultation box, now let’s get on with it’.Perhaps the root cause is somewhere within the corporate side of the council; those people who weren’t voted to their positions and might be far more interested in career building and maximising personal income than actually doing the decent and correct thing.To balance my readership of Private Eye I also read the articles in the Hounslow Momentum website.  Here’s a quote from a recent one:“Ambitions for developments on local sites such as the former Acton Lodge site on London Road. This is Council owned and vacant for four years but now with a current application for 100% private housing from a firm now fronted by a recently departed Hounslow Council employee.“The hiving off of Council-owned land for development where the level of council housing to be built will not exceed 40%, despite reserves of £170m and availability of low interest money to deliver 100% social rent properties.“The readiness to build a Free School on Brent Lea Recreation Ground when other sites were available, only aborted following a strong, local community led campaign.”I'm sure that's just as biased as anything Private Eye might say, but it is interesting.

Lorne Gifford ● 2714d

Much as I enjoy reading Private Eye occasionally, and I personally think the height of the proposed building on the current Watermans site is 2 storeys too high and should step back away from the river, I always feel Historic England go rather overboard when they're commenting on schemes on the northern side of the river to Kew Gardens.Most of the northern side of the river is only visible from within Kew Gardens from 3 points, the top of the pergoda (when it's open), the top of the tree walk, and the lawn looking towards Syon House.I get no particularly pleasure looking from the north of the river towards Kew Gardens and seeing all the cars parked at the end of Ferry Lane.  I can't subscribe to the logic that because you'll be able to see this building if you're sat in your car driving along Ferry Lane to park up to go to Kew Gardens, in some way that's directly harmful to the heritage asset which Kew Gardens is, yet the presence of the car park seemingly has zero impact.As I say, I do personally think this particular development is too high and bulky, but by the same token I think the consultation response from Historic England was excessive and arguably weakened the credibility of their objection.

Adam Beamish ● 2714d

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/mar/05/british-cities-developers-affordable-housing-manchester-sheffield"affordable"  No.  Interesting article on the big sell overseas as well and how Manchester's residents are now being given first dibs.

Philippa Bond ● 2714d

Worryingly poor sales for flats in Ealing - in the last quarter only two apparently.  And still they build on...http://www.ealingtoday.co.uk/default.asp?section=property&page=stats1802.htm

Philippa Bond ● 2715d

wow, its a shame, Is there anything we can do to stop this? or try and reduce the level of build? 

Rakia ● 2715d

It's hard to believe that such a brutal, overbearing design that is too high and entirely unsympathetic with its surroundings and the World Heritage Site across the river could possibly be approved, but... this is Brentford and it seems that anything goes. Yet more shoebox flats, yet more high blocks without architectural merit. Shocking decision to give this approval, but par for the course I'm afraid. Normal for poor old Brentford.

Jo Francis ● 2715d

Watermans should have been left where it is alongside the river and should be underneath an office building and better designed/updated so that it can make better use of the site and consequently be more successful.Haven't there always been complaints re industrial Brentford from Kew?

Philippa Bond ● 2715d