Skip to main content

Planning – Application Comments

Help with this page (opens in a new window)

203275FULR3 | Demolition of existing buildings and phased redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed-use development comprising residential, office, civic/community uses and flexible non-residential floor space, below ground ancillary space (plant, car and cycle parking space, etc.), replacement and relocation of the existing sub-station, associated enabling landscape and public realm works and provision of new pedestrian and vehicle access. (Regulation 3 Application by London Borough of Ealing) (Amended Plans and Additional Documentation). This application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement required by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations, 2017. The proposals comprise a Major Development that may be likely to affect the character or setting of listed buildings and/or of a Conservation Area. (Please note this is a Re-Consultation in relation to: (1) Amended Plans and Additional Documentation received in respect of the planning application below and (2) Further Information in relation to the Environmental Impact Assessment, for which a formal notice has been placed in the Press). | London Borough Of Ealing Perceval House 14-16 Uxbridge Road Ealing London W5 2HL
  • Total Consulted: 0
  • Comments Received: 1778
  • Objections: 1768
  • Supporting: 9
  • View all comments icon

Search Filters

Collapse All|Expand All|Showing 1-10 of 1,778|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|

Mr Stephen Hafenrichter 89 Kingsley Avenue Ealing W130EH (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Mar 2021

Completely inappropriate building - vastly too high, not good for mental health. Pays lip service to affordable housing needs. Parking a real problem.

Miss Jackie Mclean Deck Court Tentelow Lane Southall UB2 4FD (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Mar 2021

Do not approve of the demolition of Percival house for redevelopment of supposed affordable housing. A leasehold flat costing in excess of £600,000 is not affordable and never will be. This will end up the same as at what ealimg council did to Dickens Yard. They sold the council houses to the developers for a nominal fee and now Dickens Yard flats are sold to foreign investors for huge sums of money. These will go the same way, developers change their scope and no more affordable housing in Ealing. WAKE UP PLANING OFFICE YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM YOU HAVE THE POWER TO STOP THIS.

Comment submitted date: Fri 01 Jan 2021

Ealing has become massively over populated and doesn't have the infrastructure to deal with a huge site like this, it will increase traffic massively already at a time when the LTN has driven up traffic on Uxbridge Road and the community aren't even back to normal work practices because of covid.

†It's too tall:††The 26-storey tower will be Ealing's tallest. It will tower over Ealing's historic town centre - 4 storeys higher than the Apex building on Uxbridge Road and 8 storeys higher than the tallest tower in Dickens Yard. If it is built developers of other sites will claim it gives them a precedent for even higher buildings nearby.†

Poor Design†(which goes against the London Plan)†and destroying heritage:†The design, appearance and scale of the new offices next to the Grade II listed Town Hall are all wrong. The application includes no heritage assessment as Government policy requires it to. Historic England have criticised it but the application doesn't report what they say.†

I find it morally incomprehensible that Ealing doesn't consider the objections made by the public and steam rolls their plans despite major outcry from the community. A community that Counsellor Bell and his cronies are hell bent on destroying.

the fact that the council is an applicant and the planning authority supposed to judge against planning policies the council has both roles and this is inherently wrong and goes against any audit standards. The planning or the approval of said site should be judged by an impartial party and someone who is not the counsellors mate

Do Ealing the just it deserves, listen to the people who actually live in the borough and have to deal with the impact of shoddy planning permissions on a daily basis.

Mr Raymond Crosby 118 Midhurst road Ealing W13 9tp (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Mar 2021

Existing building not old so original lifespan calculations need to be taken in to account. Size of existing building fit for purpose based on percentage if employees working from home and no information on future occupation. Scale of of proposal not in keeping with existing sky line in Ealing and will set president for future developments. Additional occupation is not supported by funding of support infrastructure. Trans port schools hospitals doctors there fire severely impacting the existing council tax paying people of the borough and reducing their services

Miss Joanna Mikolajczyk 14 opal house Agate close London Nw10 7fb (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Mar 2021


Miss Sophie Reid 40 Lammas Park Road Ealing London W5 5JB (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Mar 2021

Totally too high for the area.
Out of keeping with the local vernacular.
Desperately ruining the local skyline and creating a huge shadow footprint.
Lack of additional local resources to cater from the increased residential numbers.

Mrs Pauline Orpin 30 Swyncombe Ave London W5 4DS (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Mar 2021

Despite changes to original design this proposal is totally out of keeping with a town centre development. It fails to meet local needs and I cannot express how strongly I object to this proposed development!

Mr Paul Stewart 8 mayfield Ave Ealing W139ur (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Mar 2021

I object

Ms Edwina Towey 95 Little Ealing Lane Ealing London W5 4EH (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Mar 2021

Too much development in Ealing by this council, ruining our lovely area.

Mrs Mary Devine 97 Southdown Avenue Hanwell London W7 2AE (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Mar 2021

This development is too high, and overdeveloped.

Comment submitted date: Tue 02 Mar 2021

This development is too high and over-developed.

Mrs Maggie Dode 8 Cunnington Street Chiswick London W45EW (Objects)

Comment submitted date: Sat 06 Mar 2021

Why destroy a perfectly good building. The Borough needs money spending on general upkeep not wasted on these unnecessary projects

Showing 1-10 of 1,778|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|

an Idox solution