Forum Topic

Wow, getting away from the housing issue here.What Ealing Council is proposing is removal of protected status for certain green spaces, particularly Warren Farm and the land around the now closed Gurnell Leisure Centre, both of which are currently designated as Metropolitan Open Land (MOL). Neither site is really ideal for building on. Warren Farm is poorly served by transport links and has become a thriving and bio diverse nature reserve. Gurnell is situated on the River Brent flood plain and suffers regular breaches of the banks which cannot be ‘mitigated’, despite the assurances of those who wish to build there.Ealing Council has a financial elephant in the room in the shape of a £400m loan taken out to service its development arm Broadway Living. Key components of its business plan were to stick tall towers on Gurnell and on the site of Perceval House in central Ealing. The former proposal was rejected by the planning committee two years ago while the latter scheme has been abandoned, largely because it was unviable. If the business plan fails it’s ealing taxpayers who pick up the tab, as happened in Croydon.Meanwhile private developers have been given carte blanche to build across the borough simply by the council’s failure to produce the legally required annual Authority Monitoring Reports for seven years. These are supposed to give up to date housing figures for the borough and failing to provide them has enabled developers to successfully appeal against planning decisions. Nobody has been held to account for this, nor has any explanation been forthcoming from the council.Of course much of what is built isn’t solving any housing crisis. It’s largely overpriced ‘luxury’ apartments beyond the means of most to either buy or rent. There are no plans to address this, since social and affordable housing don’t meet the needs of developers to make a profit. Ealing Council has the opportunity to build old-fashioned council housing (yes, it does still exist), with much lower rents and secure tenancies but like many a modern Labour Authority it preferred to view itself as a high flying property developer instead. Julian Bell was the chief brain behind this, ably supported by Peter Mason when he was cabinet member for housing as well as current Chief Executive Tony Vlemejt, who was previously Ealing’s Head of Place.Simply accusing people of nimbyism is lazy and arrogant. There are very good reasons why building densely packed tall towers is not the way forward, not least of which are the looming crises of energy and water supply. Big towers are expensive to maintain and failure to do so is ultimately catastrophic.

Simon Hayes ● 1149d

Claire, have they actually removed it or is it just in the pipeline?What you may not know is that some years ago Ealing Council drew up an comprehensive list of assets which it could cash in if required. The pretext, as usual, was cuts from central government although there always seemed to be plenty of cash about for spurious ‘consultations’ (for example £15k on a library reorganisation plan that was ultimately adopted despite overwhelming opposition).Every park, public building and amenity was included, with each one allocated a potential repurposing, mainly housing. In Carlton Road, for example, the old community centre has been replaced with expensive housing. Every time such an asset is lost it is never replaced, and councils are notoriously bad at negotiating anything so this land is practically given away. Removing protections is part of the process of ultimate disposal.If you want to see where Ealing is heading look no further than the appointment of Tony Clements as Chief Executive last year. He left his Director of Place post in Ealing in 2019 with a £74,000 pay-off. Theoretically he should have been ineligible for the CE post under the terms of his severance (though mystery surrounds exactly why he departed). But he is Peter Mason’s pal and, crucially, his enforcer when it comes to pushing through building projects. They worked closely when Mason was housing cabinet member, and enjoyed the odd jolly to MIPIM in Cannes at the developers’ expense.Clements’ return prompted a raft of resignations among higher management echelons at the council, giving some indication of his popularity there.There is a plan (and not the one published last year that has rightly been rubbished). Mason is politically ambitious and wants to prove himself as a go-ahead young star in Labour with an eye on Virendra Sharma’s parliamentary seat in Southall.There will be the usual spin about affordable homes (80 percent of market value isn’t really affordable for many who really need decent housing) and there will be more sites flogged off for development. I suspect the parks will be the last to go as they are so visible and well used, although smaller ones in the borough such as Bramley Gardens next to Northfields station could be sacrificed because the locations are attractive and they will say, hey there’s another park down the road.This won’t change if Labour form the next government. The likes of Mason, and his counterpart in Hounslow, have a taste for property development now and shoving several thousand more people into council tax farms is just too tempting.

Simon Hayes ● 1148d