Forum Topic

Flood risk to Brook, Grosvenor, Lateward rd & Mafeking

Does anyone know if L B of Hounslow has informed any residents of the flood risk to these streets if the garage site flood relief duct is removed?I called Hounslow today and they have no idea.Further to this the  Griffin Park development will increase water use and  drainage displacement by a very high margin which will increase the load to the brook and sewer outlets which will increase the chance of a return to flooding of streets as far as Braemar Road.Cannot understand why residents well over 200 households will be put at risk are or being kept in the picture and informed properly.Anyone heard or know anything?

Anthony Waller ● 4837d14 Comments

Iain ... Two pointsThe planning application that was approved was for is for two 3 bedroom houses, not 4 bedroom houses.......Do you know something we don't?Hounslow Homes also promised to do a second parking survey after their 'display ' of the proposed development where residents were invited to give feedback before the planning decision was made. They never carried out this promise.  The fact is that for a variety of reasons parking, which was never a problem until recently, has become very difficult in the area. The four new spaces created are not for use of existing residents ....just 2 each for the  affordable homes owners

Claire de ST Croix ● 4834d

Thanks to those who have been in touch and given me some advice.I duly contacted a council officer and have had a reply.Unfortunately they are " Obviously proud of the contribution our development will make to the area'That does not really answer the question. Obviously the development is also wiping off £50,000 of other nearby properties. Maybe that's what it's so proud of.They do indicate that they will be carrying out site surveys but surely that should have been done before the application was granted.Anyway, it is apparent that nobody is prepared to take responsibility and the buck is just being passed and we in the middle are meeting a wall of silence or indifference.The vendor has in any case now decided to take the place off the market and is looking at legal action against the council for the losses incurred.Our loss for the present but not our problem now.

Raymond Havelock ● 4834d

The risk of flooding is the only issue for me. My back garden runs between the 2 sites. The fact that HH are doing exstensive surveys on the sites and a local residents mortgage being declined due to the issue suggest there is likely to be a problem.

Mark Sherred ● 4835d

The consultation was no such thing. More of a notice of intention. It did not consider more than a small handful of properties.The following is gleaned with permission from a neighbour who has been following this more closely than myself:The garages are small but like most garages it's the cars that are bigger but they were all in use. Safe Storage is permitted. There is a 9 year waiting list so the demand is there and the rents are not cheap unless you are a council tenant or an MP.The fact is the consultation was not carried out and questions raised were not answered.There are a lot of different objections ranging from the design of the houses, The opening of a rear access road to constant vehicle movements, the vulnerability that this brings to 18 properties in Grosvenor road, The restriction of safety and maintenance access to the electricity sub station (currently only practicable via a partition between the garage blocks.)Then there are the objections to the removal of designated amenity spaces these two are almost the last in a densely populated and cramped district which is being increasingly hemmed in.The sites could have been better used for dutch style bicycle storage, car share spaces and electric car charging points. All things that are in the pipeline in other places.Then there is the merit of the scheme.Aside from the flood issue, there are 8 750V cables right under the site feeding into Brook road and Mafeking Ave.Nobody has suggested where they can be rerouted and they cannot be directly under the new dwellings or within 5m of a dwelling. They are already too close for current regulationsThe cost of removing the drainage relief (which can be viewed on the site - the cover is central to the site about 6ft from the 5th garage along) and moving the sub station is way in excess of a viable build.This will be picked up by the council - the ratepayer. Not the developer.So 'affordable' homes will be the most expensive homes in the area. The council will sell them for a premium but it won't profit as the outlay cost will exceed the market value of the building.The flooding was a problem in the 1960's and is a combination of the Brook and the sewerage and the general fall of land towards the Thames.These old victorian houses all suffered from damp and it was only when plans to demolish the whole area were completely dropped the Metropolitan water board remedied the problem. Additional drainage/ducting was placed to drain the north east corner of the Park and the Brook road south area. The garage sites are where the siphons are located.None of this was presented to the council by planners.None of the objections were taken seriously or even investigated.I wonder what will be said if as a result damp and flooding returns to these streets?If this is not enough to object on I don't know what is.

Michael Brandt ● 4835d

I am genuinely puzzled by this thread and the previous one which also addressed the danger of flooding. Is the concern about the flooding potential?, the loss of the garages? or the building of two 4 bedroom council houses for rent?I looked at the planning documents available on line, see http://planning.hounslow.gov.uk/Planning_CaseNo.aspx?strCASENO=P/2012/0133In the planning report of c. March 2012 28 reasons for objection are listed and replied to which suggests that neighbours were consulted. The site plan shows that the new houses are located onto Brook Rd Sth. The culverted Brook is presumably located to the rear of the site (used for parking) as in maps posted on the previous thread it followed the rear garden line of houses on the west side of the road. There may be more evidence of the Brook further north but I do know that it lies under the entrance road to the recent newbuild development in Kingsleigh Close, opposite the Griffin. There is a planning condition to the effect that it must not be interfered with as part of the development.I presume Thames Water will view the Brook as a major sewer and they have quite strict rules about building over or restricting access to same. So the proposed houses will not interfere with the Brook/sewer. It has been suggested that some form of flood control device within the sewer exists on site. Is there any evidence for this??The presence of the Brook as a historic natural watercourse might impact on current surface flooding risk maps but this can be argued against through lack of incidents/claims. I presume flooding associated with the previous Brentford stand build can be discounted The planning report describes the garages as small for modern cars and hints they are mainly used for storage. It lists available alternative garages in the area.So is it the building of two new homes on a small brown field site which is objected to? because they are council and for rent? or because they have 4 bedrooms and will be wider than the typical terrace in the street? or what is it exactly that you are worried about???I look forward to enlightenment.........Iain

Iain Muir ● 4835d

Anthony, That's a fairly accurate account.You missed a bit out.Just one concern was raised by a ward councillor,  about the status of one garage in particular. - Which is to remain.  A garage, rented by no less than a former local Labour MP. Says it all really.Residents were well and truly stitched up by local councillors who really have let the district down.Notable is the total absence of all references to this issue in any communication from Labour but equally the Lib-Dems and Tories are also burying their heads in the ground.Pure politics over common sense and a failure of service to the residents and the well being of a very dense local community.Really, really disappointing that they have behaved this way.

Michael Brandt ● 4835d

According to reports that I've heard and read, (I was not there) a group of residents did attend the planning meeting and were prevented from highlighting issues relating to the Electricity sub station and the drainage relief as well as security issues affecting the rear of properties in Grosvenor road.All were flippantly dismissed with no debate or consideration whatsoever.The council officers had even removed the sub station from the ordnance survey map presented to the councillors that evening.Concerns were raised in advance to all three local councillors. All of whom expressed that they supported the policy of building on amenity sites. One of whom failed to respond to any specifics and others who chose to fall silent on the matter even to the point of not assisting in the protocol of the meeting.The whole thing was a sham, presided over by a councillor who lives in the vicinity and knew of the concerns.  The scenario and history presented by the planning dept. was in less detail than a pre school nursery rhyme.The councillors do and did know but they have put their own egos and policies first and residents be damned.

Anthony Waller ● 4835d

Raymond, not really sure that the general public were aware of the issues when the application was made. I spoke with the gentleman who issued the planning and he was not aware of the issue until after he had agreed the application, so work that out! What road do you live in? I would be interested in seeing your environmental search report. Also, in the original application, the question is asked "is the development within 20 meters of a watercourse" which they replied No.

Mark Sherred ● 4836d

Is this not what local councillors are supposed to do?Were these facts not raised with them ?

Raymond Havelock ● 4836d

I have spoken to Hounslow Homes today and they have informed me that works will begin in April. They advised me to write to the planning officer who gave permission and my local MP with any concerns.

Mark Sherred ● 4837d

Hi Anthony. I live in Lateward and have heard nothing from the council

Mark Sherred ● 4837d

In relation to the possible new build at Griffin Park, the responsibility for determining the capability of existing water and sewage facilities to cope lies with Thames Water.

John Connelly ● 4837d

I have sent you a direct mail re this....

Rod de St Croix ● 4837d

That's a bit worrying. We are trying to buy our rented house here and the survey has highlighted a potential threat from flooding and safety issues due to a planning application. It does not specify exactly what but refers to a flooding diversionary drain.It's knocked about £50,000 off the valuation but the mortgage company are unhappy with the survey information as to not allow things to proceed.Does anyone know more about this?

Raymond Havelock ● 4837d