Skip to main content

Planning – Application Comments

Help with this page (opens in a new window)

201695FUL | Demolition of all existing buildings and erection of replacement leisure centre (Use Class D2), facilitating affordable and market housing residential development (Use Class C3) in 6 blocks, flexible retail floorspace (Use Classes A1 - A3), plant room and energy centre, leisure centre coach parking, basement residential and leisure centre cycle and car parking, refuse/recycling storage, new servicing, vehicular and pedestrian accesses and associated highway works, new and replacement play space, public realm and public open space, landscaping and associated ground works to existing public open space. | Gurnell Leisure Centre Ruislip Road East West Ealing London W13 0AL
  • Total Consulted: 0
  • Comments Received: 1674
  • Objections: 1656
  • Supporting: 12
  • View all comments icon

Search Filters

Collapse All|Expand All|Showing 1-10 of 1,674|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|

Mr Steven Telfer 4a Rathgar Ave London W13 9LP (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 14 Nov 2020

I strongly object.

This proposal appears to be another attempt to develop local green spaces for financial gain leaving behind a blight of ugly high-rise.

No real consideration is being given for using this site for leisure. If it was we'd see a low-rise pool & sports complex surrounded by acres of green fields and parkland for games and sports - somewhere that would attract visitors from miles around and, as locals, we'd be proud of. Instead this proposal just changes the site into very dull high-density housing that will probably ruin the River Brent and block sun on the sports fields.

There's an opportunity here to create something truly great, that future generations would be proud of, but this is not it.

Mrs Isobel Grant 24 Disraeli Road London W5 5HP (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Thu 29 Oct 2020

I object to this proposal on the following grounds:
- The designs shown by the developer are ugly and unimaginative, and out of keeping with the local area.
- The area to the north is a flood plain for the river brent, so there must be an increased risk of flooding not only to the basements themselves under climate change (who is taking on the insurance for that?) but also putting pressure on the local area general flood risk.
- There is inadequate medical facility provision, as well as the increased pressure on schools which are already under-provided, for the increase in number of residents.
- In theory car use/parking is restricted, but that won't stop people with cars parking them in neighbouring streets, especially putting pressure on the Gurnell estate area.
- I can't help feeling that the number of flats being proposed and built across the borough is significant. Where are the family homes with gardens? These can be high density if well designed - there are good designs out there, why can't we have them in Ealing?
- Good design doesn't have to be unaffordable - I think you need to think a little harder.

Mrs Sylvia McLennan 243 Argyle Road Ealing London W13 0AY (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Wed 28 Oct 2020

I wish to object in the strongest possible terms to the proposed development at Gurnell, for the following reasons:
The six tower blocks up to 17 storeys high are totally inappropriate for the area and would dominate the neighbourhood.
The land is designated Metropolitan Open Land, which has the same protection as the Green Belt. If developers are allowed to build a housing estate here, what is to stop them building on our precious parks next?
The loss of trees and open spaces would impact disastrously on local wildlife.
The influx of 600 new residential units will put even more pressure on already overstretched local services such as schools, GP surgeries, hospitals, police and council services.
The junction with Ruislip Road and Argyle Road is already frequently blocked with traffic trying to get on to the A40. The additional cars coming in and out of the development would add enormously to this congestion.
The provision of only 168 parking spaces for 600 units is obviously totally inadequate. Where would the excess cars park? Not on Ruislip Road East, and the residential roads are already full of parked cars.
Closing the leisure centre for more than three years would have a serious impact on young families in the area.

Comment submitted date: Wed 22 Jul 2020

A development or six tower blocks up to 17 storeys high would completely overshadow existing homes and is totally unsuitable for the area.
Traffic is already very heavy and is often at a near standstill in busy times at the junction with Ruislip Road East and Argyle Road. Traffic from the development would greatly add to this congestion.
The destruction of so many trees would mean pollution would greatly increase and would be an additional health hazard. New trees take decades to grow.
The proposed development is to be built on land designated as open land, which is similar to green belt land.
Such a development would impact disastrously on wildlife in the area.
A sudden influx of around 1,800 additional residents would put added pressure on already over-stretched services such as schools, GP surgeries, hospitals, police, transport etc.



Mrs Linda Joyce 30 Crossmeand Avenue GREENFORD UB6 9TY (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Wed 28 Oct 2020

should never have been considered for housing in the first place. The closure has caused so many mental health issues with many of the members, so with COVID it is a bit late now. This application for planning should never have gone ahead in the beginning, perhaps think more about local peoples welfare and mental health. COVID is the time we needed the leisure centre most....

Mr Neil Fanneran 117 Harp road London W7 1JQ (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Tue 27 Oct 2020

There will be no compensating for the loss of this land to our community and the scar you will replace it with .
This has been a playground , nature area and area of enjoyment for decades and you are will to sell it out from under us for a promise of a new building .
Disgraceful and rather dubious that this project even got this far .
Sinking an RC framed structure into a flood plain then claiming its builders will be environmentally friendly is a joke .
It is the most polluting construction material on the planet and will destroy the river and everything around it .
This project complied with few of the requirements for a development this size and is still being considered, why ?
I have worked for Ecoworld and they have no concern for our neighbourhood or flora or fauna just profit and it seems they have met a perfect partner in Ealing council.

Mr jass singh bilton road perivale greenford UB6 7HW (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Wed 21 Oct 2020

absolutely disgracious, only part of ealing which was natural, will be overshadowed by this concrete jungle.

literally from wood land to concrete land

Mr Stelios Kalisperides 86 Ealing Village Ealing London W5 2EA (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 17 Oct 2020

I object to the demolition of Gurnell Leisure Centre and development into blocks of flats. This will impact the quality of life of residents in Ealing in a negative way. It will also negatively affect the ecology, increase noise, pollution, traffic and cause overdevelopment. Furthermore, the proposed blocks are not in keeping with the character of the area. Instead, Ealing Council should invest in the renovation of Gurnell Leisure Centre as it is a very valuable asset to the area, offering health and fitness facilities to the London Borough of Ealing.

Mrs Lisa O?Driscoll 9 Jordan Road Perivale Greenford UB6 7BT (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 17 Oct 2020

Object to the height of the proposed development

Mrs Mary Codrington 4 Mount Pleasant RD Ealing W5 1SG (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Mon 12 Oct 2020

I have already commented on this development. I feel it is a disgrace. Just upgrade the existing leisure centre and do not sell off the land to greedy developers. The housing estates opposite this land are severely short of space and rely on the green areas provided to exercise and maintain their mental health the covid experience proved this. In addition, the last two weeks rainfall must have made the council realise the folly of building on a flood plain. Given our experience of your rebuild of the cinema, we will never get our pool back. For the borough's sake, pull out now before more money is wasted.

Comment submitted date: Sat 20 Jun 2020

I know that by sticking the boxes I have you will regard my objection as Nimbyism but I cannot believe that you can consider building more high ris blocks after this corona pandemic. Ealing parks struggled at times to be big enough for the population that needed to use them either for exercise or to escape from the confines of a living space without a garden. The land near the leisure centre has been a haven for the residents of Gurnell grove and surrounding areas. Building on that precious site, especially the unattractive blocks you propose, is unfair to the many taxpayers of Ealing who look to you to preserve our boroughs moniker as Queen of the suburbs. I beg you to turn down this proposal and any other that involves blocks of more than 4 stories and do not include communal gardens and playing areas.

Mr Pardip Mudhar 27 Bleasdale Avenue Greenford UB6 8LB (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Fri 09 Oct 2020

Hello,

Here is latest news on tall building safety.
A building being destroyed by fire in South Korea.
Fire engulfs 33-storey South Korea tower block https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-54474168.

Having so many tall building in close proximity it would be devastating to local area as well as the residents. The planners must also consider the recent history tall building fire that amounts to very high collateral damage. With all these tall building fire safety issues throughout the world including UK this type of concentrated tall buildings should not be allowed. Most recent incident, September 23 2020, at Heathrow Airport highlighted that the fire engines were too to big fit inside the car parks. It appears the planner, architect and health and safety experts are thinking for small details.

Some of tall building fires that have been in the news.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grenfell_Tower_fire
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40273714
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1284939/london-news-depford-fire-high-rise-tower-block-flats
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/video/2018/jun/14/fire-breaks-out-in-lewisham-tower-block-on-grenfell-fire-anniversary-video
https://uknip.co.uk/breaking/sources-at-the-scene-are-saying-the-fire-engines-are-too-big-to-fit-inside-the-car-park-at-heathrow-blaze/238702/

Just brining fire safety into perspective due to latest fires in buildings.

Thanks

Showing 1-10 of 1,674|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|

an Idox solution