Planning permission was granted for the redevelopment of Alperton bus garage in April 2021. The Planning Committee were informed that previous policy had a 14 storey limit on the height of buildings in the area. However, planning officers said that the 'emerging' local plan allowed for tall buildings on the site. Buildings of 21, 25 and 28 storeys were approved. It is so close to Alperton station that residents are likely to be able to abseil on to the platform!
See 'Your neighbourhood turned upside down. Have your say on local plan'
Cllr Maurice voted against the application on grounds 'of over-development, height and its destruction of the area's once pleasant suburban character.'
Alperton councillor Anton Georgiou presented the case against the application quoting the views of local residents. Many cited over-development, height and density as concerns. See:
Alperton residents' trenchant views on the Alperton Bus Garage planning application fail to stop approval of the development
Above and below are views of the development as it takes shape.
Opposite the site is Minavil House where a low rise commercial site was demolished and replaced with a development that included a 27 storey tower, This development was valued at £64m.
From the Grand Union canal (developer before the bus garage development)
Last week
Emerging heights in the tall building zone (Alperton High School bottom right)
There several pipeline developments in the area. One on Ealing Road, wedged between two new developments is a former HSBC bank and the Plough public house.
In 2018 plans were approved for two buildings of 9 and 10 storeys on the site with a total of 92 flats. A member of the public asked a question at Full Council after doubts were raised about the application See:
Uproar over Brent's Alperton high rise approval, despite application “failing to meet requirements in 13 different matters”
Planning applications of this size raise a number of complex, and often competing issues; in this case, involving the redevelopment of the site to provide two buildings, 9 and 10 storeys, for 92 new flats, a pub and a community use, it raised many issues – the appearance and build of the new buildings, the amount of residential provided, the mix of units, parking arrangements, etc. Officers and Committee members balance all of the different issues, including the planning objections, and make their decision against national, regional and local policies. These issues are often finely balanced, and opinions will often differ as to the merits of a particular case.
Sometimes, one policy objective, (e.g. securing additional housing, or maintaining a public house on the site) might be given more weight than, for example, a reduced level of parking. In this case, the planning merits of the proposal were carefully considered. Officers made some pragmatic judgments around the proposal to achieve, on this allocated site in a housing zone, some 92 new units – a quarter of which are affordable – that works on the site. The committee report makes it clear that whilst some policies are not met, many are, and taking the scheme in its entirety, members felt that the benefits outweighed any harm.
The question does not mention what safety regulations are broken here. However, it is a long established – and correct – principle, that planning does not duplicate requirements set out in other regulations and laws; these will be assessed by other bodies at the appropriate time, whether that be under Building Regulations or Health and Safety rules.
A new application for the site was lodged in August 2024, for two buildings of up to 10 storeys on the site. Planning Officers noted that the previous application had lapsed because of new fire regulations and the requirement for additional evacuation cores. LINK
In addition to this development the Boat/Pleasure Boat pub, opposite the bus garage has been demolished and the site is now behind hoardings.
The last proposal I saw was in a consultation for a 22 storey tower and a replacement pub. Here, as at the Plough site this will probably be re-designated as a 'comunity facility'.
23 comments:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/05/grenfell-stop-building-stupid-useless-tower-blocks
https://www.brentlibdems.uk/news/article/alperton-residents-survey
https://alperton.org/contact/
https://www.brentlibdems.uk/news/article/new-tower-blocks-in-alperton
Barratt Homes will soon be launching resident engagement meeting/displays/consultations regarding building on Sainsbury's car park - looks like the supermarket car park will be underneath the new blocks of flats.
The Alperton Sainsbury's development may be like the one at the Hendon Sainsbury's, where the new store has just opened.
Developer builds on the car park, huge block of flats with new car park at ground floor level and new supermarket on the first floor, accessed via lifts or a moving walkway.
Once the Sainsbury's branch has moved to the new store, the old single storey one gets demolished, and another towerblock of flats built on its site (with a small amount of outdoor green space for the 1000+ homes to share).
Edited comment from reader: tower block tatler and [ ] mo are destroying this borough . they need to get out of admin in brent and be replaced with people who care about the heritage and community
https://www.ft.com/content/3b561a45-6866-4372-98b6-ff55ae55d69a
FT 'UK spending watchdog refuses to sign off government accounts'
This is so depressing. My Aunt Alice used to live on Carolyn Road and her husband Bob used to like to socialise at the plough after work. Back in the 1990s it was actually nice to live in the area and stroll to Sainsbury’s along the canal; but now it’s just horrible. Shame on Shameless Tatler and Mendacious Mo
Developers pack towers in as they are 'car-free' housing, yet then are difficult to sell/let as the 'car-free' newly housed want street parking permits in surrounding streets for their cars leading on to parking chaos for existing residents.... And so the car-free towering process/ opportunity expands.
And how many people in Alperton actually objected to any of these huge developments? With enough objections they could have been forced to reduce the height of some of these tower blocks.
Thst improved pub looks nice but steps into the canal for rats?
In planning terms its called "delivery" but would you want this delivered next to your home? Is population growth delivery only improving Brent life and keeping that equitable with other slow growth boroughs?
Even social care has to be infrastructure to this massive scale, at Upton Park once visited a tower care home early 2000's in days when there was council funding, seemed good.
Grand Union Canal towpaths widened for cycle routes into Central and out to the countryside. No developer will voluntarily see beyond their particular City 'site' fragment. In fact in last weeks papers claims that developers have connected sewage outlets direct into the River Brent, another West City key blue-green chain opportunity.
Government in late 2024 still seems overwhelmed by the global market to feudal tower all that it has unleashed on West London.
There are already two blocks of flats next to Sainsbury. One is already partly above a car park for the shop. Neither blocks have much if any green amenity space around them. Once the Pleasure Boat site, the Plough Pub and the ex Currys/PC World sites all get their tall tower blocks all of this part old Alperton will be gone - replaced by even greater traffic congestion and flats that local people cannot afford.
Flats that people don't want to live in!
Flats will all be looking at each other - very little privacy.
Was at Wembley Park today, a sunny day but so little sunlight there. Amazing that more sun spaces can't be designed in, sun also really helps heat homes for free. Explains why leases are on tower top floors, while affordable flats are on the lower floors.
Every Great Western City new tower should have a communal roof garden. How powerless do planners want to be?
Lack of sunlight also causes depression especially in the winter months.
I live in a flat at Wembley (4th floor) and at this time of year the sun is at its lowest and the stadium blocks it out. From March-September we get plenty of sun.
Maximising profit, could turn to maximising sunlight to Great West Feudal City tower homes. These new 'shadow lands' don't have to be and its good to hear that some get plenty of direct sunlight for most months, though the heat gain there needs careful design too for long hot summers.
The Great West City should be climate aware design best practice, hence why it shouldn't be a ghost mega city project.
Atleast the post box is listed and will stay.
Post a Comment