Forum Topic

Opinions from Regeneration meeting 21 November 2012

I attended the meeting last night, and have been wondering what other people's views of how the meeting went were.  Mine:- I thought Andrew Dakers, and the woman from the Chamber of Commerce made some very valid points (particularly about our invisible town centre manager who says £1.3m has been spent on Brentford - maybe some of that could have been used to fund a full-time town centre manager to focus on Brentford and not Hounslow)- Hounslow Council were superb at avoiding answering any question.  Density of 198 hrh, when guidance says it should be 70-170 hrh for the size of and PTAL rating of the site....hmmmmm....Is it really conceivable that Ballymore, who have had meetings with the GLA (who apparently are happy with the density figures), and who will have spent somewhere between £500,000 - £750,000 to have got the planning application to the to a point of detailed and outline design stage (not to mention the maquette of the proposed development) will have done so without guidance and input from several Hounslow Council departments? According to the Senior Planning Officer at the meeting - that is what we are expected to believe.  When asked about the density, the reply given was that the council are yet to assess Ballymore's planning application. - I saw one of our local ward councillors there - Ruth Cadbury. I think the meeting was a good use of her time - which was spent working on her Ipad.  good on you Ruth.  At least our MP sat in the middle of the crowd, gave the appearance of actually listening etc,  and stood up and spoke. Not too impressed by our local ward councillors though.Be interested to read anyone else's thoughts on the meeting.

Andrea Hall ● 4642d23 Comments

I thought it was a vey civilised and open meeting. Hopefully, the councillors and officers present took note that maybe that's the way some if it's own meetings should be conducted in particular, planning ones where currently no-one can contribute a single point that may get missed or surface during a discussion.I appreciate that councillors turned up and that they did not comment or steal the show, but I do hope they take on board the measure of feeling that this and other recent developments large and small are having on the residents of Brentford, be they rich, poor or in the middle.Not so reassuring were the matey handshakes in quieter corners after the meeting between a few councillors and the developers team, or the unwillingness of a few to engage even eye contact or conversation with anyone other than their pals.Nonetheless, Cllr. Cadbury's prompt input here is appreciated, and she can now be in no doubt that a lot of concerns are not about one's political colours but an overwhelming desire for residents of Brentford to see their home town properly improved and not further damaged by developments.I have to say I was disappointed with quite a few aspects, not least the architects somewhat poor interpretation of heritage and design.To single out just a few aspects:Parking has to be a major improvement and really if this town is to have any sort of  good retail and commercial and social future, it has to incorporate cheap parking for that as well as catering more than adequately for residential parking.The car is the most liberating invention of our age and for all it's ills it's here to stay, but already we are starting use it far more sparingly, but they have to be kept somewhere when not in use.It will also be no good if the developers incorporate a fully adequate parking space quota and then like GWQ, management companies charge a fortune for residents to use them. Leading to GWQ residents parking in streets outside the estate.These changes that occur need 'written in stone' rules to be prevented.Also not much has been said about those who will live in these estates.I don't think there can be enough mistresses left to fill yet another riverside apartment block.It really is important that these are flats for families, couples and singles to live in and lay down roots of a proper home. Not a load of buy to lets and short term tenancies. Which has happened in all of the other recent developments here and why we have such dead areas here.20 years from now the majority of the population will be over 55 and a very significant population over 65. No planning seems to incorporate almshouses, sheltered housing and easy access homes and quality homes for retirees and those who want to downsize but stay in the area. These places need gardens and pleasant restful surroundings and low level access. None of this is happening and given the length of this development the problem will be on us before it's completion. Now is the time to get this in order.

Michael Brandt ● 4640d

Thank you for kicking this thread off Andrea, and to Kath for making available the notes of the meeting - if I'd realised you were going to put them up I wouldn't have needed to do mine, on my iPad at the meeting.  So Yes I was there - to listen, as all Councillors were doing.  I wasn't there to make a speech.  Those of us who sit on the planning committee will be making the final decision (unless of course Eric Pickles takes that right away from us), so we cannot be seen to prejudge prior to the application coming to us some months from now.Being at the meeting was really helpful to see the strength and breadth of views.  People also raised important points that I would never have thought of - just one being the acoustic effect of aircraft noise in the lanes - all of which need to be considered thoroughly.This is the beginning of the process, not the end, there is a lot of work to be done by the Council's planning team to assess the application, as Cathy Gallagher said.  There will be modifications in the light of that,the views of residents, amenity societies and other consultees - and there will be further consultation on those modifications.On Watermans, Ballymore have promised to make space available on Phase 2, but we have no details on that at this point.On the Town Centre Manager - Patricia is working incredibly hard spending the Mayor of London's Outer London Fund money awarded to Brentford and Hounslow Town Centres.  (It's not available for other purposes, and Patricia is not tasked with the type of TC role that the Chamber rep perhaps alluded to.) This means she is: co-ordintating the events this summer with the High Street Steering Group, supporting traders on their business plans, implementing shop front improvements, and developing the project plan for the physical improvements of the canal link and high street.  There will be public consultation on the plans for these early next year.  It is clear, that if and when the south side gets developed, we would need an active town management strategy to ensure the 2 sides knit together and the whole High Street has a clear USP and is viable.Meanwhile, please could anyone with an interest in the future of Brentford, who hasn't done so already, make their views known about the application to planningcomments@hounslow.gov.uk and copy in your local Councillors.

Cllr Ruth Cadbury ● 4641d

One thing Hounslow does have is good schools a legacy of a stable period in the late 1960s and 1970s .The fact that all Brentford and Chiswick schools are massively over subscribed indicates the need for more schools.Again everyone seems to forget how big Brentford is. Lionel Road and Gunnersbury Park lie in Brentford and area devoid of any facilities as it is almost all residential and light industrial but does have a very good school.Syon ( a village in it's own right really is also considered Brentford but from Lionel Road it is over 2 miles away.That's why Brentford does not really have a proper town centre. It's not a radial Town like Kingston or Uxbridge or a mainline town like Ealing where everything congregates to one place.South Ealing is actually where proper Ealing originated but it is all focused around Ealing Broadway Station a mile away.Brentford has various focal points The former market site, ( If the football club move there that's time for possibly six pubs and several food outlets)The docks,  The railway yards, The water and gas works etc and all the residential areas are formed near their respective industries.The only major hub being Old Brentford but that is quite a small compact area.This is why any development should reflect that balance. But also why some facilities should remain in situ.The butter ought to be spread evenly across the bread.I would far rather see a swimming pool return to Brentford town  as in reality, the Fountain is something for Chiswick and really on the outer limb of the town. If it were right next door to Watermans and by the river that would be excellent.

Anthony Waller ● 4641d

It's not that Brentford deserves a world class development that is the issue.What it does not deserve is a third rate development.That is what was presented and that is why the church was packed to the rafters last night.I don't particularly agree with all that the intellectual clique of Brentford envisage.Most people I know, want Watermans staying put exactly where it is.But that apart, their vision was still far more all embracing and sensible than that presented by the Developers. As were other visions presented.We live in a terraced house over 100 years old and needs regular TLC but it far better as a home than the 1980's built 'luxury' flat I had before even though it was bigger. There was very little if anything that would make one want to live in such a development.It is more than apparent that it will be more of the same.and that is not good for this town.It also emerged that no plans, infra structure or sites have been laid for schools, health facilities and other amenities for an additional 1600 people on top of the 2000 or so that are also moving here imminently.Yet again, the fatigued and mediocre performance from LBH and the lack of engagement by local councillors left a lot to be desired and raises concerns that they cannot be trusted to represent the wishes and best interests of all the residents, future residents and businesses established in this town. If that's the best that can be offered then I for one would rather it stay the way it is for 10, 20 or 40 years until someone comes along and gets it right.

Anthony Waller ● 4641d