Skip to main content

Planning – Application Comments

Help with this page (opens in a new window)

201379OUT | Hybrid planning application for comprehensive phased redevelopment of the site comprising: Full planning permission for demolition of existing buildings and structures (Phases 1 to 2) to provide up to 550sqm (GIA) of Business Use Class B1a/b/c floorspace, up to 125sqm (GIA) of flexible commercial Use Classes A1 / A2 / A3 / A4 / A5, up to 200 new affordable and market dwellings in a block up to 25 storeys, replacement Train Crew Accommodation (TCA) building, new footway to Bollo Lane, relocated bus stop, new pedestrian crossing, new open and amenity space and associated public realm works. Outline planning permission (Phases 3 to 4) for demolition of existing buildings and structures to provide up to 1,800sqm (GIA) of Business Use Class B1a/b/c floorspace, up to 175sqm (GIA) of flexible commercial Use Classes A1 / A2 / A3 / A4 / A5, up to 700 new affordable and market dwellings (up to 61,940sqm(GIA)) in 8 Blocks of between 8 storeys and 18 storeys, new open and amenity space, vehicle and cycle parking, rear service road, alterations to vehicular accesses and associated public realm works. Appearance to be a 'reserved' matter. | TfL Landholdings At Bollo Lane Acton Ealing Bounded By The Railway Lines To The West Acton Town Station To The North Bollo Lane To The East And The Bollo Lane Level Crossing To The South. London W3 8QU
  • Total Consulted: 0
  • Comments Received: 650
  • Objections: 633
  • Supporting: 10
  • View all comments icon

Search Filters

Collapse All|Expand All|Showing 1-10 of 650|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|

Mrs Caffy Nolan 8, Oaktree Court, 25 Pierrepoint Rd Acton W3 9JL (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Wed 17 Feb 2021

Ealing once known as "Queen of the suburbs" Ealing now beginning to resemble Hong Kong. Sky line was of trees, past 5 years cranes & red safety lights. Far too many people crammed into Acton already + Acton's roads used as rat-runs twice a day don't need any more traffic & pollution.

Mr Guillaume Varlet 32 Kelton House Corbet Gardens Acton W3 8TF (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Feb 2021

By accepting this 25 storey tower the council has created a dangerous precedent that will pull up all future applications in the area. This is already happening where two already approved 9 storey buildings on the other side of Bollo lane are now asking permission to increase up to 15 and 11 storeys high (Application Number: 204553FUL )

While I welcome a development along Bollo Lane, it needs to be realistic and aligned in terms of height with already existing buildings (typically 7-14 floors high). We don't need a landmark.

No contribution to creating local amenities (GPs, Dentists, ...) will strain existing ones further.

A money contribution to education won't cut it unless it's invested in Acton south for a new School. Existing ones are already packed or oversubscribed: assuming there's on average 1 child for every 4 flats sold, that's over 200 additional kids that need to be placed in a local school. This is without taking into consideration all the additional children that will be living in the remaining developments in Acton Gardens...

Mr David Hardy 70 Antrobus Road Chiswick London W4 5NQ (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Wed 20 Jan 2021

This massive development, far far too high is totally out of keeping with Chiswick, Acton and the current buildings in this area. This is suburbia and not central London.

The density of population will be ridiculously high placing strain on traffic, access, pollution and safety.

Frankly, it's total and utter madness driven by greed and lack of democracy. No body in this area wants this development.

Chiswick used to have character, this is helping the ruination of an area which used to be a great place to live.

Ms Helen Martin 89 antrobus road London W4 5NQ (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sun 17 Jan 2021

I live next door to these proposed monstrosities, in a low rise area south of the railway lines. The will be an eyesore.
I very much object to lib dem councillors and others being denied the right to speak at the Jan 20th meeting.
This is authoritarian and undemocratic. Who on earth do you think you are that you can go round forbidding people to participate in meetings and representing the viewsof local residents to your greedy and ugly plans.
Corruption is rife and something we have come to expect.I don't see why I should pay rates to a council that isn't interested in my views as represented by these people. i think others might feel the same. Tfl are simply building to repay the costs of Crossrail which is non existent. You already changed the route of the 440 bus which isolates me in my home.
Bollo Brook - yes exactly and although I have asked and asked you have not explained to me the flooding arrangements you are making for an area that already floods and which is being overloaded with new apartment blocks which estate agents assure us cannot be sold.
I hope you feel proud to work in a council that is completely unaccountable and unethical
I want the councillors to be able to represent my views or a good reason why they can't.
And then you lie and say you have a consultation process. You are scumbags, real scumbags.

Mr Bo Laugesen 28 Hopkins Court London W3 8TB (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Wed 06 Jan 2021

I object to the current scheme on ground of adverse impact on amenity, daylight and infrastructure, lack of meaningful amenity, social facilities and parking, overdevelopment of low rise site and height.

I acknowledge that the scheme seeks and create work spaces and interesting architecture and succeeds in creating character, however it does not balance out the negative impact of the scheme.

The proposed buildings will have a documented negative impact on existing and coming properties along Bollo Road in terms of daylight, as well as impact negatively on the outlook and privacy of these properties. No meaningful justification has been made for this impact on more than a hundred homes.
Further to this the proposal will eliminate almost all long views that are currently enjoyed by properties along Bollo Lane, Bollo Bridge Road and Stanley Road facing on to the low rise industrial area. This visual amenity is an important part of the enjoyment of our homes and our wellbeing staying in these homes, something that has already been comprised by the Magenta Storage building and is at further risk from other overdevelopment schemes within the industrial area. There is no official requirement for safe guarding private views, but it is an asset and something that impact us all mentally when it is put at risk.

The current schemes in South Acton are creating new wind conditions in the area because of the density and height, and the Pocket Living scheme between the rails has demonstrated how even taller buildings impact negatively on the surroundings as on windy days people are blown over on the road. The TFL scheme will risk creating a wind tunnel along Bollo Lane and creating extreme wind conditions around the tallest proposed block. bringing elder, kids and bicyclist at risk because of the scale of the scheme.

There is a severe lack of amenity for the number of proposed units, and the ones proposed are too small for most play and social interactions and will be negatively impacted by wind and weather.
Currently Bollo Lane enjoys a treed perimeter down that western border something that breaks the wind and which could be attractive if the road itself is made good and the industrial estate was more outward facing. But removing the trees would remove this feature and impact on the ecology and visuals along the road.

The social infrastructure in this area is under pressure as it is, the addition of development will put extra pressure, and given the size this should be addressed on site with addition of social facilities, like nursery, GPs and the likes.

Parking is contentious in most scheme these days. But we need to think ahead and realise that we need parking spaces in the future when an alternative to combustion engines has been found. The lack of parking spaces and proposed removal of on street parking is not sustainable or forward thinking.

The scheme is an overdevelopment of a site that is long and narrow forcing the scheme upwards and to compromise on amenity and seperation distances. TfL are oversupplying homes. The impact on neighbours demonstrates this.

Building heights along Bollo Lane varies, but the approach to the heights in the proposal is not in line with the character along the road, even the emerging character. It boxes in the industrial estate and create a wall of tall buildings, all going one up from other emerging schemes, who are now using this proposal to push up their proposals. This is an opportunistic approach which is setting a precedence of overly dense, under providing schemes with negative impact. And the southern tower is in particular contentious with absolutely no validity to go so high. The heights need to come down to a sensible scale where there is a balance between what the scheme can provide residents and where existing residents don't stress over

The council needs to step in on the schemes coming forward in South Acton and help control the development and consult locals on the future of the industrial estate and Bollo Lane. The industrial estate is safeguarded light industrial, but the safeguarding is by passed because of the lack of an area action plan that sets out heights, commercial space, social infrastructure, amenity on so forth. The desperate need for homes is well known, but there needs to be some regulation of this that has a meaningful consultation with locals.

The format of the application being partially overline application worries me as this in my experience means an intend to develop each scheme individually even with different building owners, meaning the proposal is likely to see future applications to increase density and heights coming along.

This proposal has impacted on my enjoyment of our flat and has cause me great distress over the possible loss of our great views across Richmond and Gunnersbury Park.

I sincerely hope this scheme is deferred or rejected on above grounds.

Mrs Ruth Pase 5 Shanklin Court Palmerston Road London W13 9LP (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Tue 29 Dec 2020

The proposed development is completely out of scale and character with both its immediate and wider surroundings. The majority of the streets in the surrounding area consist of 2 and 3 storey Victorian and Edwardian terraced housing. The 25 storey tower would be almost twice as high the tallest building in the vicinity - the 13 storey Pocket Living building. There is no precedent for buildings of this scale in the immediate or surrounding area. The visual impact report does not show its true impact on the immediate residential area and completely ignores the impact on with the wider Acton/Chiswick areas and beyond.

Section 1.8 of the Planning Application Summary contains false information about local building heights, making the inaccurate claim that the 25 storey tower would be built within an existing context of tall buildings - saying that the proposed 22 storey building on Stanley Road is already under construction and is part of Acton Gardens. Stanley Road (193284FUL) is still being considered and is not part of Acton Gardens. Acton Gardens has a height limit of 12 storeys, and the proposed development conflicts with its scale and the masterplan principles.

Section 7B of Ealing's Development Management Plan requires that new development must have a positive visual impact on neighbouring development, defined as "development that is attractive and complementary to the character and value of the area". The proposed development is completely out of character and scale with neighbouring development, and so is in contravention of Section 7B.

Section 7B requires new development to achieve a "high standard of amenity for users and adjacent users by ensuring good levels of daylight, sunlight and privacy and appropriate levels of development on site." This development would cause loss of amenity by overlooking and overshadowing surrounding housing, private gardens and allotments, loss of daylight/sunlight and privacy and nighttime light pollution across a wide area, and so is in contravention of Section 7B. In particular, residents of 100 Bollo Lane (Pocket Living) are concerned that the 25 storey tower would lead to loss of light and privacy as the buildings would be so close together.

The site is inappropriate for this kind of development. The 25 Storey tower would be located next to a railway line and a tube line. In order to reduce resulting noise levels for its residents, mechanical ventilation units would be required, creating unacceptable levels of noise for nearby residents, particularly residents of Pocket Living.

Policy 7.7 of the London Plan states that tall buildings should only be considered in areas whose character would not be affected adversely by the scale, mass or bulk of a tall building. Also that tall buildings must relate well to the form, proportion, composition, scale and character of surroundings. This site is therefore not appropriate for tall buildings, as the character of area would be severely affected by the proposed development. Because it has almost no relationship to the form, proportion, composition, scale and character of its surroundings, it would actually destroy the character of the area.
The scheme represents an overdevelopment of the site and contravenes the London Plan's permitted density. See Section 6.34 of "Planning Statement (Bollo Lane) Final". It would also significantly increase pressure on local public services and infrastructure, and cause increased traffic congestion. Local public transport capacity is already under pressure, especially at rush hour. With the capacity upgrading of the Piccadilly line now in doubt it's questionable that local transport provision could cope with the increased demand. The development would create additional demand for school places and pressure on social and health care provision. However the application makes no mention of supporting infrastructure such as schools, doctors' surgeries, health care provision.

Other concerns: The whole development, in particular the 25 storey tower, would cause permanent changes to the skyline for a wide area of west London, dominating it and impacting residents and communities for miles around. The application contains no assessment about the risk of Covid-19 in a high rise/high density development. There is inadequate explanation of fire safety provision post Grenfell. Tall buildings are inherently less sustainable than lower ones because they need more energy for lifts and air conditioning. It's questionable that there is actually the demand for an additional 900 flats in this area - 200 flats in Acton Gardens are still unoccupied. Public consultation was minimal for a development of this size. Although the majority of respondents to the consultation were concerned about the height of the development and the pressure it would put on local services, TFL decided to ignore these concerns and proceed with the development as exhibited.

Mr Morgan Nelson 11 Montgomery Road London W45lZ (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sun 20 Dec 2020

We object to the development on the following grounds:
1. Gross over development
2. The extreme height of the buildings
3. It is a blight on the area and neighbouring buildings
4. It disrespects the adjoining conservation area
5. It uses designated green space for development
6. It does not provide 50% affordable social housing

1. Gross Over Development
The scheme is shoe horning in 852 apartments and 2,350m2 office onto a small strip of land, that is just 3.6 hectares. If the scheme is compared to Acton Gardens it equates to 45% more development per hectare. Acton Gardens provides at grade parks and public and private gardens. The TfL scheme has no at grade green space and it is just a continuous wall of development.
TfL/GLA should not be promoting a scheme of such over development that does not comply with the planning guidance set out in the London Plan.

2. The Extreme Height of the Buildings
The scheme proposes blocks of 14, 15, 18 and 25 storeys, which is totally out of keeping with the buildings on the opposite side of the road. The buildings on the Northern section of Bollo Lane vary between 6-9 storeys, with one small element at 12 floors. On the Southern section they are 1-3 floors, but with planning for two 9 storey buildings. The Pocket Living building to the South is 14 floors.
The TfL scheme should mirror Acton Gardens in height, as this is the new context, of 6-9 storeys and with a small element maybe at 12 floors. The Southern tower could go up to 14 floors to reflect the Pocket Living building.
25 floors high is clearly unacceptably tall and 80% taller than anything around it. The London Plan states in D9 that tall buildings are only to be allowed when:
The local authority designates an area in the Development Plan. Ealing have not designated Bollo Lane for tall buildings.
Ealing states in their Development Plan that:
Ealing should not become a place of badly-planned high rise buildings scattered around..... development potential of a particular site with respect to the heights, bulk, scale and massing of buildings nearby.
Tall buildings are acceptable where they contribute positively to the urban environment.
Ealing also states that tall buildings will only be allowed if they are of the highest architectural quality and do not impact their surroundings, or a conservation area. The TfL scheme fails on all these criteria set out by Ealing Council and therefore the council should not be recommending approval for the scheme.
Plot 3A of 25 floors, is 11 storeys, 80% taller, than the nearest and neighbouring tall building of the 14 storey Pocket Living block. 3A clearly does not respect the heights and scale of the buildings near by and should not be allowed. To present a tower at North Acton 3 miles away as context is totally spurious.
Plot 1F at 18 storeys is also 50% too tall and should be a maximum of 9 storeys, to respect the heights of Acton Gardens.
Plot 2C at 15 storeys is also 50% taller than the Acton Garden buildings opposite and should be reduced to this height.

The present scheme proposed by TfL is totally inappropriate for the area and will be a huge blight on the existing neighbourhood. The council should reject it with out question and the planning officers should have never recommended, such a bad scheme that is gross over development and 11 storeys too high.
The overall masterplan should be rejected on the grounds of overdevelopment, height, blight on the area both visual and light, disrespecting conservation areas and listed buildings, removal of green space and not providing enough affordable housing.
We understand redevelopment needs to occur and are supportive of it at the right scale. We would support the scheme if the following changes are made:
Height The buildings are reduced down to match the Acton Garden buildings on Bollo Lane of 6-9 storeys, with one building at 12 storeys and the Southern building (plot 3A) at 14.
Over Development The GIA of the development is reduced down to match, or less than the Acton Garden buildings on Bollo Lane. We estimate this will be by 45% reduction.
Green Space The green space at grade accessible to the public is doubled.
Affordable Housing 50% of the housing is social rental tenure.
Plot 1A The building is reduced down to 3 & 4 storeys and the fašade redesigned to be in keeping with the listed station.
Plot 3A The building is reduced down to 14 storeys and the facades redesigned.

The web site does not allow us to fully list our objections and the word limit is highly restrictive.

Mr Tim van Tongeren 22 Marvell Court, Rosenburg Road Acton W38FX (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Wed 18 Nov 2020

Good to replace small industry area, but too much high rise

Mr Ben Rogers 120 Avenue Road London W3 8QG (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Tue 06 Oct 2020

Yet more flats but no more hospitals, GPS, schools or other amenities. Not to mention the carbon targets and more cars. The skyline is disappearing. Replacing the old Acton Estate and updating is one thing but new high rises here is madness. Enough

Ms Monika Hare 16 Hopkins Court Whelan Road London W3 8TB (Supports)

Comment submitted date: Mon 05 Oct 2020

Not Available

Showing 1-10 of 650|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|

an Idox solution