Great West Corridor and West of Borough Local Plan Reviews - Issues Version: Draft Consultation Statement (With Council’S Responses)

Great West Corridor and West of Borough Local Plan Reviews - Issues Version: Draft Consultation Statement (with Council’s responses)

October 2017 1

1. Introduction

1.1 The London Borough of Hounslow is currently undertaking a Local Plan Review of the Great West Corridor (GWC) and the West of Borough (WoB). As part of this process each of the Local Plan Review will be subject to three stages of consultation. The regulations referred to below are from the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.

. Stage 1: (Regulation 18) Issues Consultation . Stage 2: (Regulation 18) Draft Local Plan Review (Preferred Options) Consultation . Stage 3: (Regulation 19) Draft Local Plan Review (Publication) Consultation

1.2 Consultation on the Issues version of the Great West Corridor (GWC) and West of Borough (WoB) Local Plan Reviews took place between December 2015 and February 2016. The consultations formed the first round of public consultation on the amendments to Hounslow’s adopted (September 2015) Local Plan. The consultation notified interested parties about the Council’s intention to review the Local Plan and produce further policy specific to these two geographic areas. The consultation identified the main issues that the Local Plan Reviews will need to address and invited representation on these topics.

1.3 This document provides Council responses to issues raised by consultees during the consultation. These issues been previously summarised and published in the Consultation Statement.

2. Consultation on the Local Plan Issues Version

2.1 Hounslow Council adopted a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) in June 2013 which sets out how it will engage the public when making planning decisions, including the preparation of planning policy documents. Consultation on the Issues version of the GWC and WoB Local Plan Reviews took place over an eight week period (22 December 2015 to 22nd February 2016). The extra two weeks was provided to take into account consultation over the Christmas period.

2.2 Section 110 of the Localism Act sets out the duty to co-operate requirement, this applies to all local planning authorities and a number of other bodies. Paragraphs 178 to 181 of the National Planning Policy Framework give guidance on planning strategically across local boundaries and highlight the importance of joint working to meet requirements that cannot be wholly met within a single local planning area through joint working, polices and plans. The duty to co-operate covers a number of public bodies in addition to neighbouring local authorities. The Council is under the duty to cooperate with the following bodies on issues of common concern to develop sound plans:

. The Environment Agency; . The Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England (known as English Heritage); . Natural England; . The Mayor of London; . The Civil Aviation Authority; . The Homes and Communities Agency; . Each Primary Care Trust established under section 18 of the National Health Service Act 2006 (or continued in existence by virtue of that section); . The Office of Rail Regulation; . Transport for London; . Each Integrated Transport Authority; . Each highway authority within the meaning of section 1 of the Highways Act 1980 (including the Secretary of State, where the Secretary of State is the highways authority); and . The Marine Management Organisation.

2.3 As part of duty to co-operate the following local authorities were consulted as part of the Issues consultation:

. London Borough of Richmond upon Thames; . Runnymede Borough Council; . London Borough of Hillingdon; . Spelthorne Borough Council.

2.4 In late 2015 the Council initiated the establishment of Heathrow Strategic Planning Group. The Group’s objective is to build collaborative working between Heathrow Airport Limited and all the authorities and bodies responsible for the areas most affected by the Airport. The member organisations hold a range of different views about whether or not a third runway should be built at Heathrow (and some participate in an ‘observer’ rather than a ‘member’ capacity only at present). However, all are united in the view that such collaborative work is essential to best mitigate and compensate the negative impacts and maximise the benefits of the Airport to local residents, businesses and environment. Hounslow Council officers ‘chair’ and administer the meetings of the Group which are attended by senior officer representatives from the following organisations:

2.5 The Council is a founding member of the Heathrow Strategic Planning Group (HSPG), which is made up of local authorities, Local Enterprise Partnerships and Colne Valley CIC which neighbour Heathrow Airport, and includes observers from the GLA/TfL, Government and Highways England, with Heathrow Airport Ltd an invited attendee. The Group recognises that the impact of the airport extends

across administrative boundaries and that the collaborative working of Local Authorities and other bodies surrounding Heathrow Airport will result in better spatial planning and the management of impacts, together with maximising the benefits of the airport to the local economy and community, whatever decisions are made regarding expansion of the airport in the future. Environmental, transport, spatial planning, and economic sub-groups have been established to consider these specific aspects. Essentially the Group's purpose is to fulfil duty to co-operate responsibilities in relation to planning across the area with Heathrow expansion as a focus, to shape and respond to Heathrow's Development Consent Order application for a third runway proposal, and produce a planning framework for the area to shape the DCO."

 London Borough of Hounslow (Chair and Administrator)  Heathrow Airport Limited  London Borough of Ealing  Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead  Runneymede Borough Council  South Bucks District Council  Spelthorne Borough Council  Slough Borough Council  Buckinghamshire County Council  Surrey County Council  Buckingham Thames Valley Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP)  Enterprise M3 (LEP)  Thames Valley Berkshire (LEP)  Greater London Authority (observer)  Old Oak Common and Park Royal Development Corporation (observer)  Transport for London (observer)  DCLG/ BEIS (Cities and Local Growth Unit) (observer)  Department for Transport (observer)

3. Issues Consultation Measures

3.1 A range of measures were used to engage the public in consultation on the Local Plan Reviews Issues Consultation. These measures were based on those set out in the SCI 2013. The SCI identifies a number of bodies that need to be consulted. These include specific consultation bodies (comprising various statutory authorities) and general consultation bodies. The general bodies include a large number of organisations with an interest in planning, including business and residents’ groups, amenity groups, civic groups, cultural organisations, places of worship and voluntary organisations.

3.2 Hounslow Council also maintains a consultation database of individuals and organisations interested in planning policies. This includes those who have previously responded to consultations on other planning documents, as well as the specific and general consultation bodies. Over 820 emails and letters were sent to consultees advising them on how to comment. They explained where the consultation documents were available and encouraged recipients to comment. Documents were made available and the consultation publicised via the council website, local libraries and at community area forum meetings.

a) Website: Hounslow Council’s website contained extensive information on the consultation. The Issues documents and questionnaires were made available for viewing and download. It was also explained where printed versions of these documents could be obtained.

b) Libraries: During the consultation period the Local Plan Issues version was made available for viewing at the council Civic Centre offices and all public libraries.

Table 1: Public libraries where copies of the Local Plan was available:

Beavers Library Cranford Library Heston Library Bedfont Library Feltham Library Isleworth Library Brentford Library Hanworth Library Osterley Library Chiswick Library Hounslow Library

c) Events and meetings: Officers from Spatial Planning attended the following Area Forum meetings to introduce the Local Plan Reviews and provide information on the consultation that was being undertaken. Officers presented the GWC document to Chiswick and Isleworth and Brentford and the WoB document to Heston & Cranford and Bedfont, Feltham and Hanworth. The council received interest group meeting requests and obliged, including meeting resident community group the Brentford Community Council on the 11th January 2016 at the Griffin pub in Brentford. Officers also presented the West of Borough to Central Hounslow area forum although only a small part of the study area is likely to be within the jurisdiction of this forum. The officers outlined the process for the Local Plan Reviews including research being written and the key issues identified for the areas and how to comment.

Table 2: Meetings attended

Area Forum Date Place Time Central Hounslow 28th January 2016 Hounslow Jamia Masjid 7:30 pm and Islamic Centre Chiswick 19th January 2016 Chiswick Town Hall 7.30pm

Heston and Cranford 21st January 2016 Civic Centre 7pm Isleworth & Brentford 21st January 2016 Brentford Free Church 7.30pm Bedfont, Feltham & Hanworth 28th January 2016 Feltham Library 7.30pm

3.3 Copies of the comments and notes of the public meetings are available on the Council‘s web site under Area Forums and for inspection at Hounslow Civic Centre (Lampton Road).

4. Call for Sites

4.1 The Council has undertaken a Call for Sites exercise which provided an opportunity for agents, landowners and developers to submit land which they believe could be developed to meet future demand for homes and jobs. This will inform the preparation of the Hounslow Local Plan Review and help to ensure that there is sufficient land available within our area to meet anticipated development needs.

4.2 The Call for Sites exercise ran for eight weeks from Friday the 12th of August to Friday the 7th of October. The planning policy consultation database was contacted and explanatory text added to the Council’s Planning Policy webpages to promote the exercise. The Council received 59 submissions all of which will be assessed against detailed criteria to determine if they represent suitable, available and achievable development opportunities. The Council is now assessing all of the sites to enable the most appropriate sites to be selected for inclusion as Site allocations in the Local Plan Review.

5. Sustainability Appraisal

5.1 The Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report was published July 2016 for which was followed by a five-week consultation with key statutory bodies in the UK. The scoping report forms the first stage of the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) by providing updates of relevant plan policies and programmes, updating the baseline context for Hounslow and identifies key sustainability issues to be addressed in the SA. The main purpose of the SA is to ensure that a plan or policy will have been effectively appraised for its sustainability impact.

5.2 A separate SA was produced for the Local Plan, which was adopted on the 15th September 2015 following a public examination.

6. Comments

6.1 Consultation comments were sought from consultees in the form of a questionnaire specific to both Local Plan review documents individual issues. Comments across the two Local Plan review documents were received from 161 respondents made up of a diverse range individuals (residents/employees) and organisations all with a firm interest in the progression of the borough.

6.2 The following chart breaks down the diversity of consultees who provided representation.

Chart 1: Breakdown of consultation representations

Breakdown of Consultation Representations

2% 9% 1% 1% 3% 2%

7% 50%

25%

Individuals Business/ Land Owners Government

Public body Councillors Political Party

MP NGO Community Groups

6.3 As part of duty to co-operate the council consulted around twenty seven government organisations, local councils and public bodies of which ten provided representations across the two local plan areas, which included:

 Sport England  Transport for London  Natural England  London Borough of Richmond upon Thames  Runnymede Borough Council  Spelthorne Borough Council  London Borough of Hillingdon  Mayor of London  Environment Agency

 Historic England

6.4 The Council received 89 responses to the consultation in the GWC Local Plan Review, the main key issues are set out in Table 3 below.

7. Summary of responses for Great West Corridor

The following section summarises the responses we received during the Issues Consultation and how the Council has responded to them in developing the draft Local Plan.

Study Area and Strategic Vision Summary of responses

. There was broad consensus among respondents that the extent of the GWC boundary need to be more clearly defined and not extend east of Chiswick roundabout/Power Road or west of Syon Lane. A number of respondents want to see the removal Brentford Town Centre from the GWC plan area. . Respondents also suggested any additional sites added should be commercial uses. . The opportunity area named ‘Kew Gate’ was seen by the majority as an inaccurate representation of the area, ‘Brentford East’ has been suggested.

Council Response

. The Plan Area has been more clearly defined and adjusted so that it does not extend beyond Syon Lane in the west or Chiswick roundabout/Power Road in the east. . Brentford Town Centre has been excluded from the Plan Area. . The name of the east of the Plan Area has been changed to Brentford East/Great West Corridor East.

Economic Development

Summary of responses

. Respondents were broadly in favour of supporting the digital and media sector in GWC as a catalyst for employment growth, but many felt that this sector should not be prioritised over others. There were concerns over the overreliance on one specific sector or employer and the risks that this . There was general consensus that maintaining a diverse range of employment sectors in the corridor would create a more resilient and adaptable local economy, which would safeguard employment opportunities for local residents. . Respondents called for a wide range of sectors be supported, including industrial uses, and companies of varying size, including SMEs.

Council Response

. The Council will seek to provide a mix of employment spaces that are attractive for the entire business community in existing and potential growth sectors. It will cater for larger companies, small and medium sized enterprises, microbusinesses, as well as the large freelance workforce by working with developers and stakeholders to deliver a sustainable and robust local economy that promotes Great West Corridor as a place for enterprise and innovation.

. Policy GWC1 safeguards the functioning, attractiveness and competitiveness of the Strategic Industrial Location (SIL) and Locally Significant Industrial Site (LSIS) in the Great West Corridor and its ability to support employment and economic functions by ensuring I. that there is an increase, or at least maintain, employment densities; II. retain and/or provide small business units; III. minimise and mitigate against any significant adverse impacts that development may have on surrounding land uses; . Policy GWC1 supports businesses of all sizes, in particular start-ups, small and medium- sized enterprises particularly in the east of the corridor. . The Council will work with affordable and shared workspace managers and providers to bring forward affordable and shared workspace as part of development proposals (Policy GWC1).

Transport

Summary of responses

. There was broad support for the proposed new rail stations and connections, but concerns over when these would be delivered. . Respondents provided their views on how to improve access to and from the area, of which the most common suggestions were: improved bus routes and frequency, including to Brentford Town Centre, and provide priority bus routes along the Great West Road, better cycle and pedestrian access, and improved access to existing rail stations. . Respondents felt that the main barriers to movement in the area were poor public transport provision, lack of cycle infrastructure, the A4 creating poor pedestrian environment and acting as a barrier, and the general traffic congestion on the A4, Chiswick High Road and South Circular, which is perpetuated by large proportion employment trips being made by car.

Council Response

. The Council recognises that public transport accessibility into the area is poor and reliant on limited bus services, with the exception of Brentford town centre, Chiswick centre, and Brentford East. Walking and cycling networks are poorly connected, car dominated and street legibility is restricted especially along the A4/Great West Road, under the M4, and along the A315. Infrastructure barriers, such as the M4 and A4 corridors, the South Circular Roads, rail lines, and large scale self-contained commercial development create segregation and restrict movement within and through the area. Existing infrastructure networks such as strategic road networks and rail services are nearing capacity which could impede development and growth if improvements are not made to secure sustainable transport and enhance connectivity. Air quality and noise pollution from traffic reduces the enjoyment and use of the corridor, especially along the M4/A4 route. . The Council’s goal is to create a stronger more connected area with greater physical integration between the corridor, the surrounding residential neighbourhoods, and supporting business services. The Council will work with stakeholders to enhance transportation infrastructure to provide a safer walking and cycling environment, ease congestion, and enhance public transportation networks . The GWC Local Plan (Policy GWC5) will support the delivery of major rail infrastructure, including Brentford - Southall Crossrail Link and Golden Mile Station and the Old Oak Common - Hounslow Overground Link and Lionel Road Station. The delivery of these

projects is closely linked to the designation of the GWC as an opportunity area and is dependent on funding from new development. . Policy GWC5 will improve cycling infrastructure throughout the area, specifically along the A315 (Cycle Superhighway 9) and Quietway networks to promote safe streets and healthy communities. . The Council will work with TfL to increase pedestrian safety along the A4 corridor by improving pedestrian crossings, especially at key intersections that provide access across the A4. . Policy GWC5 supports the expansion of reliable public transportation options for getting to and from the area including increased bus services along the corridor. The Council will work with TfL to deliver enhanced bus service along the A4 to provide improved transportation to employment sites along the Corridor.

Housing

Summary of responses

. Opinions among respondents were divided as to whether the GWC area could help meet demand for housing in the borough. Some favoured the building of homes along the corridor in order to provide homes for those working locally and reduce commuting. Others questioned the suitability of the area for new homes due to concerns over air quality and noise pollution and argued that development should be non-residential only. . Some respondents believed the Corridor should be considered as a last resort and that housing was only acceptable if design did not involve tall tower block, and incorporated mixed use development for housing and employment uses. . There were a range of opinions on the types of homes which should be provided, including apartment blocks, smaller-scale mixed housing, family homes, and a mixture of owner- occupied and social housing. There was a broad agreement on the need for more affordable housing. . On the mixture of residential and employment uses, most respondents welcomed a mix of uses, as long as it did not include heavy industry, and as long as businesses were located along the busy roads and homes away from them.

Council Response

. Evidence suggests that the Great West Corridor could contribute further to the borough’s housing supply – but only provided it is supported by game changing transport infrastructure. The designation of the GWC as an Opportunity Area would help secure funding to support this new transport infrastructure. . The Council believes that the GWC has the capacity to provide a minimum of 4.800 new homes over the plan period, but that this relies on the delivery of proposed transport and social infrastructure. . The demand for housing in Hounslow has been assessed by the Hounslow Housing Market Assessment (HHMA, 2016). Hounslow’s total Objectively Assessed Need (OAN) has been assessed as being 1,898 dwellings per annum (dpa) or 37,960 dwellings over the plan period 2015-2035. The OAN for the Great West Corridor has been assessed as to be 147 dpa. . The Council recognises the need for family homes. The HHMA 2016 identifies that the greatest demand is predicted for 2 and 3 bedroom dwellings across both market and affordable housing. The supply of housing in Hounslow and across London has not been satisfying need. The London Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) (2014) identified strategic housing land availability across London. For the period 2015 to 2025 the

potential for housing supply in Hounslow has been demonstrated as being 8,222 dwellings. This figure translates into a minimum housing supply target of 822 dpa up to 2025 (The London Plan – March 2015). . The Council will continue to pursue a strategic affordable housing target of 40% through private development as well as Council-led initiatives. Negotiations on the mix and tenure will be conducted with planning and housing officers and will be subject to viability and other requirements in accordance with Local Plan Policy.

Environment

Summary of responses

. Respondents felt that the main environmental issues in the GWC were the proximity to Heathrow, poor air quality, noise pollution, lack of street trees, poor maintenance, quality of access to parks and the Thames. . There was broad agreement among respondents that policies to encourage a modal shift away from cars were needed, including better public transport provision and an improved public realm with better landscaping and more trees. . There was broad agreement that green spaces and waterways needed to be protected and improved, including better access. . Many respondents raised concerns over the impact of new development and tall buildings on the open spaces in or near the GWC plan area.

Council Response

. Policy GWC4 will seek to mitigate against air and noise pollution by requiring the design and position buildings to minimise exposure to elevated levels of pollution by locating sensitive uses away from existing or planned sources of air and noise pollution, unless appropriate mitigation is provided to reduce such pollution to acceptable levels. Less sensitive non- residential uses should be sited adjacent to the Great West Road/M4, acting as a physical buffer between the road and more sensitive uses. . Policy GWC4 will improve the overall greenness of the area, through the planting of mature or semi-mature trees along all streets, integrating planting as part of SuDS systems, creating living roofs and walls which will help soften the harsh environment, mitigate air and noise pollution, and enhance the image of the corridor. . Policy GWC4 will provide safe, direct and attractive pedestrian and cycle routes that connect open spaces, rivers and canals with neighbourhoods and workplaces to enhance opportunities for recreation and a healthy lifestyle.

Urban Design and Heritage

Summary of responses

. Respondents expressed concern over the impact of tall buildings in the GWC and their impact on historic context and specific heritage buildings. . The general consensus was that policy guidance needed to promote and protect the existing buildings of historic significance along the GWR, by encouraging proposal that will include the maintenance and reuse of existing historic buildings and can add high quality architectural design that preserves the character of the area.

Council Response

. The Council has undertaken careful analysis of the appropriate heights of new development in the GWC and the impact of tall buildings on the surrounding area. The Council has taken the opposition against tall buildings into careful consideration. Consequently, the Council permitted heights have been significantly reduced to limit the visual impact of development in the GWC. . Policy GWC3 will protect and, where possible enhance, strategic and local views from Conservation Areas, Registered Parks and Gardens and the World Heritage site (Figure). Development proposals are expected to not have any significant impact and should reinforce the significance of these views where possible, especially views from and impact on surrounding heritage assets such as Gunnersbury Park, Kew Gardens World Heritage Ste, Strand on the Green Conservation Area, Kew Green Conservation Area, Wellesley Road Conservation Area, the River Thames Corridor, and listed buildings, such as the Campanile of the Water and Steam Museum. .

Community Infrastructure

Summary of responses

. Respondents suggested that in order to support growth in employment and housing a number of measures would be needed, including: improved and new public transport links before new development; provide a range of community facilities such as schools, medical centres, dentists, nursery places, and sports facilities; . Respondents we also asked to suggest locations for new schools the most common included: Commerce Road Bus Garage; Phase 3 Griffin Park; existing business parks and brownfield sites.

Council Response

. New housing to support the viability of local facilities and uses and bring investment in community infrastructure and the public realm. . Local Plan Policy CI1 promotes new community facilities in areas of growth and where identified in the Council’s Infrastructure Delivery Plan. . The emerging IDP update will be used by the Council, along with its partners and stakeholders, to guide development and ensure that appropriate infrastructure and funding is secured to support growth. Areas included within the IDP include physical infrastructure, social infrastructure, and green and blue infrastructure. The goal of the IDP is to outline infrastructure that is necessary to support the growth of the Borough, deliverable within the Plan period, and complimentary to the vision set out by the GWC Local Plan Review. The IDP will: o Provide a baseline capacity measurement of current physical, social, and green and blue infrastructure throughout the Borough; o Analyse the future predicted capacity needed to support growth throughout the Borough; o Estimate funding requirements needed to provide future infrastructure; o Prioritize infrastructure delivery; and o Ensure the feasibility of development sites within the Local Plan based on infrastructure projections.

Making it happen

Summary of responses

. Commenting on what should change about specific site allocations, respondents made a number of suggestions, including: o Limiting development development at East of Chiswick roundabout to 5-6 stories. o Site 9 (Gunnersbury Park) is not suitable for housing due to impact of M4. o Site 26 is more appropriate for housing only than for mixed-use development. o Greater flexibility on the terms of uses for the Gillette site (site 7). o Too many sites being earmarked for mixed use and suggested that more should be reserved for employment.

. Respondents were asked which sites they would like to see added to the site allocations responses included (most of which were also submitted as part of call for sites exercise) o The West Cross Industrial Estate - mix use; o B&Q at Chiswick roundabout - residential; o Osterley Park Hotel – mix use or residential; o 4 and 8 Harlequin Ave - mixed use; o 27 Great West Road - mixed use; o The Kew Bridge Distribution Centre – mixed use.

. Commenting on what additional planning ‘tools’ would help implement the plan, in particular transport proposals, respondents made the following suggestions: o TfL and other authorities will need to continue to review the impact of schemes individually and cumulatively, include the impact from emerging Local Plans and masterplans in neighbouring local authorities. TfL will expect to see contributions secured to implement the range of strategic and local transport interventions. o There were questions around the funding of infrastructure and to what degree the necessary transport improvements could be funded through development.

. Respondents made the following additional suggestions: o Request for policies that seek to protect, enhance and provide for sports facilities. o More details on proposed changes to the bus network were requested, particularly in relation to the new rail infrastructure. o The designation of the GWC as an Opportunity Area was questioned, on the basis that Opportunity Areas tend to be able to accommodate at least 5,000 jobs and 2,500 homes.

Council Response

. The proposed development at Chiswick roundabout has been refused planning permission, partly due objections to its height. As part of this Local Plan Review, height restrictions will be proposed for the Great West Corridor. . Any housing development at Gunnersbury Park would be sheltered from the M4 by offices. . Site 26 has been excluded from the Local Plan Review area following consultation (please see comments above). . Gillette Corner (site 7) is a unique grade II listed Art Deco building. Policy P1 (Great West Corridor West) supports the conversion of the Gillette building into a creative hub for smaller businesses and freelance workers in the digital, media and broadcasting industry.

. The Council has put in place a number of measures to protect employment sites and ensure that employment space is not lost through development in the Great West Corridor. This includes an Article 4 Direction which limits office-to-residential conversations (coming into force in January 2018) and Strategic Industrial Designations covering key employment sites in the GWC.

. The Council will assess all sites proposed as part of the site allocation process.

. The Council will undertake a Transport Impact Assessment to assess the impact of development schemes individually and cumulatively. The Council will be please to continue to work with TfL, GLA and other stakeholders on assessing transport infrastructure need and delivery. . Investment in transport infrastructure will come from a range of sources, including from new development. The designation of the GWC as an Opportunity Area will help to unlock further funding streams, including from the GLA.

. It is a Council Corporate Priority to promote active, healthy communities, and ‘promoting lifestyles that improve people’s wellbeing and quality of life with less need for health and social care. Supporting people taking an active part in community life and reducing loneliness and social isolation.’ The Local Plan Review includes a number of policies to encourage healthy lifestyles, including Policies GWC 4 and 5 to ‘Provide safe, direct and attractive pedestrian and cycle routes that connect open spaces, rivers and canals with neighbourhoods and workplaces to enhance opportunities for recreation and a healthy lifestyle’, and Policy T1 ‘Improving cycling infrastructure throughout the area, specifically along the A315 (Cycle Superhighway 9) and quietway networks to promote safe streets and healthy communities.’ . The Council will produce an Infrastructure Delivery Plan which will assess transport needs to support forthcoming development . . The Council is preparing a Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) to support the provision of key infrastructure set out in the Local Plan. The IDP is used by the Council, along with its partners and stakeholders, to guide development and ensure that appropriate infrastructure and funding is secured to support growth. Areas included within the IDP include physical infrastructure, social infrastructure, and green and blue infrastructure. The goal of the IDP is to outline infrastructure that is necessary to support the growth of the Borough, deliverable within the Plan period, and complimentary to the vision set out by the Local Plan and West of Borough (WoB) and Great West Corridor (GWC) Local Plan Reviews.

8. Summary of responses for the West of Borough The following section summarises the responses we received during the Issues Consultation and how the Council has responded to them in developing the draft Local Plan.

Study Area and Extent

Summary of responses

. There was general consensus among respondents that the extent of the WoB boundary is acceptable.

. A number of respondents suggested that the proposed re-designation of green areas would undermine access to green spaces to local residents. . Others expressed their concern that the general pro-growth vision for the WoB Plan would harm local heritage sites. . Respondents also emphasised the importance of full engagement between London Borough of Hounslow and adjoining local authorities in creating a joint vision for Heathrow Opportunity Area.

Council Response

. The inclusion of green areas and conservation areas does not suggest that these areas would be unacceptably affected. . The purpose of the Local Plan Review is to ensure a strategic approach to development including the protection and enhancement of green areas and heritage assets. . Any development affecting local heritage will be assessed against Local Plan Policy CC4 and West of Borough Policy WoB 3, which will take opportunities to conserve any heritage asset and also will ensure that new developments do not harm buildings of architectural or historic interest. . As regards to green spaces, new developments are currently assessed against Local Plan Policy GB1 which aims to protect Green Belt and Metropolitan Open Land by ensuring that any development is not inappropriate and meets the purposes of the Green Belt and Metropolitan Open Land. The Council however recognises that some of the existing Green Belt land no longer serves green belt purposes and is currently undertaking a review to establish whether this is the case. . The Council has commitment to joint working with the Greater London Authority, neighbouring authorities including the London Borough of Hillingdon and other stakeholders to progress the Heathrow Opportunity Area identified in the London Plan.

Strategic Vision

Summary of responses

. Residents were generally supportive of the aspirational vision and clear commitment to growth. . There was emphasis put on the fact that the vision needs to address each town individually and this would be best done by liaising directly with local residents associations and community groups to establish the needs of each town. Several residents highlighted the importance of protecting the distinctiveness and the character of individual towns in the West of Borough. . There was general consensus that the Council should be more proactive in tackling economic and health inequalities in the borough as well as improving connectivity between individual towns in the WoB.

Council Response

. The Council recognises the distinctiveness of town centres and wider areas in the West of Borough and will thus ensure that the development proposals respond well to their unique character. The Council has taken the consultations responses into account and developed a set of place-specific policies for the followings areas, which will help to ensure that any development promotes the local distinctiveness and the character of these places.: o Feltham;

o Bedfont Lakes; o Heathrow Gateway; o Airport Business Park; and o Cranford and Heston. . The Council recognises the health inequality in the WoB as a major challenge and has taken this issue forward as one of the major policy areas in the draft WoB Local Plan Review. The Plan includes a wide range of policies in particular policy WoB 6 which seeks to improve health outcomes and encourage healthier lifestyles, measures to reduce the impact from noise and air pollution, and improve access to green spaces for recreational use. . We recognise that there is limited access to public transport and significant levels of road congestion in the area. These issues will be addressed by: - supporting the proposal for Southern Rail Access to Heathrow Airport with a new station in proximity to Bedfont Lakes Business Park; - increasing the frequency of buses between towns, neighbourhoods, centres of employment and existing transport hubs; - improving access to Feltham Station; These investments will improve sustainable connectivity and enhance access to the West of Borough and Heathrow airport, and further will help in reducing road congestion.

Green belt

Summary of responses

. There is general support for maintaining the current Green Belt boundaries. Residents emphasised that the Council should enhance the current Green Belt land by improving maintenance and access. . Respondents suggested that if any Green Belt land is released, it should be compensated for by designating other areas as Green Belt. However, at the same time the re-designated Green Belt land should not be reduced significantly in terms of quantum and quality, and re- provided in well-accessible locations that would be fit for purpose. . A number of respondents called for preserving the environmental values of River Crane Corridor and Bedfont Lakes Country Park. . Respondents were concerned that no information about the Green Belt Review has been published and that there is a lack of clarity what extent of Green Belt is proposed to be released for development. . Numerous residents suggested that any Green Belt land should only be re-designated if it leads to a material improvement in the natural environment and its accessibility for local residents. Other respondents identified affordable housing, health care and education as the preferred developments, if any Green Belt land is released.

Council Response

. The Council is currently undertaking a Green Belt Review, which it will consult on as part of the wider West of Borough Local Plan Review consultation. . The National Planning Policy Frame requires that the function of the Green Belt is reviewed as part of the Local Plan Review process. The most recent comprehensive review of the Green Belt in Hounslow as undertaken in 1991. Development over time within and adjacent to green belt land has meant the openness and functions of parts of the green belt have

been eroded. Some land currently protected as green belt no longer serves green belt purposes, however, much of it still requires protection from inappropriate development and such the open space designation needs to be changed to Metropolitan Open Land . The Council is reviewing its Green Belt designations against the purposes set out in the NPPF. It will recommend sites for retention as Green Belt, sites for re-designation as Metropolitan Open Land or Local Open Space, and could propose a limited number of sites for development. Enhancement will be sought for the retained Green Belt land and newly designated Metropolitan Open Land to ensure the beneficial uses of green belt are realised through increasing public accessibility and opportunities for sports and recreation, enhancing landscapes, visual amenity and biodiversity and improving derelict or damaged land. In addition, new open spaces will be provided within new developments and existing open spaces will be improved to ensure they are best serving the needs of their communities. . A limited amount (8-9%) of Green Belt is recommended to be de-designated and allocated for development to help to ensure there is sufficient land available to meet the borough’s challenging housing, employment and infrastructure requirements. . In accordance with policy WoB 4, the Council will expect development proposals to maintain the openness, setting and visual amenity of Green Belt and Metropolitan Open Land where development is located adjacent to, in place of, or affecting the setting of the Green Belt and Metropolitan Open Land, with special regard to the location, setting, design, materials, height and massing, boundary treatment and landscaping. . WoB Plan Policy P1 (Feltham)will require development in the neighbourhood of River Crane corridor to contribute to a high-quality open space at Upper Crane Park with a well-managed nature reserve and de-culvert. Therefore, the Council’s view is that the proposed changes will have a positive impact on the setting of River Crane. . As regards to Bedfont Lakes Country Park, there are three sites which has classified as not meeting the Green Belt purposes by the recent Review. Nevertheless, the Council recognises the environmental value of these sites, and therefore any residential development on these sites would be required to compliment these sensitivities. . The Green Belt review is available to the public on the Council’s website. The WoB Plan will make it clear which Green Belt land will be released for development.

Employment and Heathrow

Summary of responses

. Respondents emphasised the need to create sustainable employment for local people rather than for those from outside the borough. . Numerous answers suggested that there is a need to identify additional sites for industrial and office uses, due to the planned airport expansion. These sites should take opportunities of existing and planner transport links. . There was general support for creating training and apprenticeship opportunities for youth residents. . Respondents felt that new hotels should be located both at or very near the Heathrow Airport and in town centres. Several residents emphasised that terminal-linked hotels are poorly represented at Heathrow and should be prioritised.

Council Response

. The WoB Plan sets a target to create 150,000m2 of industrial space and 180,000m2 of commercial uses. The Council will achieve this by the intensification of existing employment sites and provision of new Locally Significant Industrial Sites (LSIS) for employment activities particularly in Hatton Cross (Airport Business Park) and Cranford. . Local Plan Policy ED4 helps to encourage the borough’s businesses to employ local residents by providing training opportunities to local residents. . Heathrow Airport itself lies outside the boundary of Hounslow and the Council is therefore unable to comment on airport’s terminal-linked hotels. The WoB policy P3 (Heathrow Gateway) proposes Hotel uses adjacent to airport but within Hounslow borough boundary.

Surface rail access

Summary of responses

. Respondent are generally favourable to the proposed Southern Rail Access to Heathrow as this investment will help to ease road congestion and air pollution. At the same time, respondents suggested that the new railway should complement the existing environment and infrastructure. . Several respondents called for more comprehensive examination of the proposed route and locations of stations. . There was general consensus that the Council should promote cycle infrastructure and pedestrians over cars. . Respondent suggested increasing the frequency of local buses in peak times.

Council Response

. The Council is working with a number of stakeholders, including Network Rail, Department for Transport and Heathrow, to evaluate different route options and station locations for Southern Rail Access to Heathrow. The Council’s preferred option is for a station at Clockhouse roundabout. . One of the key transport issues identified in the WoB Plan is the limited access to cycling infrastructure. The Council is committed to undertake more work on implementing the Cycle Superhighways, Quietways, and improve existing cycle networks. Given the projected development growth, the Council will secure additional funding through S106 Agreements and CIL payments, which will directed to funding these projects. . Walkability is another major issue as it is currently significantly restricted by railway lines, water ways, developments and roads. Policy WoB 5 will expect developments to incorporate safe pedestrian access in site design. Further, the Council will work on facilitating the development of the Mayor of London and TFL funded shared-use Greenways route along the Longford River, to provide a link between Hanworth Park and Feltham Town Centre. . The Council will be working with the community and strategic partners such TfL and developers to improve overall connectivity in the Area, including bus connections.

Noise and Pollution

Summary of responses

. There was general consensus among respondents that the proposed Airport expansion will not bring any environmental benefits to the area. . A number of respondents suggested promoting sound proofing measures in the construction of new dwellings and upgrading of existing housing stock. . Residents suggested that environmental improvements such as landscaping and planting can assist in reducing noise and air pollution levels . Respondents felt that the Council should be promoting use of low emission or electric cars.

Council Response

. The Councils recognises that the expansion of Heathrow Airport on its own will not bring improvements to air quality and noise pollution. On the other hand, the third runway, albeit of its benefits to local economy, will bring £700m into the Heathrow’s noise insulation scheme. The cumulative impact of this investment and quieter aircraft and runway alternation will help in reducing the number of people affected by aircraft noise. . West of Borough Policy WoB 6 will expects that developments Incorporate planting, trees, open spaces and soft surfaces wherever possible in order to secure a variety of spaces for residents, visitors or employees to use and observe. This will also help in combating air and noise pollution. . The Council’s role in promoting the use of electric cars is by ensuring that developments incorporate suitable measures that encourage residents to use such vehicles. Local Plan Policy EC2 requires that developments provide electric vehicle charging points, in line with London Plan.

Housing

Summary of responses

. Opinions among respondents were divided as to whether the WoB area should allocate additional sites for housing or increase the density of existing. Those who favoured additional housing suggested that it should be supported with additional transport, education, and community infrastructure, and that the current infrastructure would struggle to cope with the additional demand. . Respondents suggested that new housing should be built upon first on brownfield sites. . There were a range of opinions on the types of homes which should be provided, including townhouses, apartment blocks, family homes, and a mixture of owner-occupied and social housing. . There was a broad agreement on the need for more affordable housing. . There are concerns the Feltham Masterplan may not deliver real benefits to local residents and the local community.

Council Response

. There is a requirement for additional housing land to be identified in the Borough in order to respond to the growing population of the Borough and meet housing targets set by the GLA. Hounslow Housing Market Assessment identified a need for 1898 dwelling per annum until 2035, whilst the London Plan requires at least 9000 new dwellings to be delivered in

Heathrow Opportunity Area. These targets and the needs of growing population can only be met through the re-designation of new sites and intensification of existing sites. . Part of the purpose of the Local Plan Review is to identify the additional infrastructure needs required to support existing and new homes. . Policy WoB 3 will ensure that new houses are of appropriate height, scale and massing to respond well the character of the area. . The Council will be working on a strategic affordable housing target of 40% through private development as well as Council-led initiatives. Negotiations on the mix and tenure will be conducted with planning and housing officers and will be subject to viability in accordance with Local Plan Policy. . Feltham Masterplan aims to create a vibrant town centre with a strong sense of place, which will benefit from good access to employment space and be well-connected with neighbourhoods. There will be improvements to the public realm, widening of pavements, transforming Feltham Green into an attractive heart of the town centre and improving the connection with the Leisure West complex to better integrate it with the town centre. The vision will also unlock investment into the local community and improvements to the transport infrastructure.

Employment

Summary of responses

. On the employment opportunities, some residents suggested that these need to support the skills and aspirations of existing local residents, whilst others emphasised the need for more high-tech jobs, which would be less polluting.

Council Response

. West of Borough Plan Policy WoB 2 will ensure that developments provide a range of workspaces and unit sizes, to support a wide range of businesses. Policy WoB2 will also help to ensure that employment space is protected.

Natural environment and open space

Summary of responses

. Many respondents suggested that the WoB benefits from quantity rather than quality of green spaces. There was broad agreement that the existing green spaces should be more accessible and better maintained. . Respondents suggested that green spaces should incorporate more playgrounds, leisure and recreational public spaces. . Respondents called for avoiding allocating industrial uses around close to green spaces. . Numerous respondents believe that regardless of the needs for jobs and housing, there should be adequate availability of good quality green spaces. The right balance should be explored by undertaking comprehensive research, which would investigate the needs of the existing and future population.

Council Response

. A key priority area in the WoB Local Plan is to improve the natural environment and open spaces. . In line with proposed changes to national policy the Council is expecting that funds from the sale or development of green belt land is invested back into green belt or metropolitan open land enhancement projects in the West of Borough. This will ensure local residents and their communities benefit from the impact of development on the selected development sites. The expected growth in the West of Borough is expected to see thousands more people call it home. These new residents, as well as those already living here, will require social infrastructure such as parks and open spaces to support them. Due to high land values and costs associated with maintaining parks the trend for local authorities is towards enhancement on the spaces we have and the provision of additional ones where appropriate in large scale developments. . A masterplan for Feltham Parks has been produced by the Council to enhance the existing open spaces and make the best use of them for the existing and additional residents expected to use them. Currently, 11,500 people live within a 12 minute walk of the parks with a possible additional 3,000 as a result of housing developments planned in the area. The playing pitches strategy suggested the designation of the Feltham parks as a community sports hub. The Local Plan will support the provision of this sports hub for the use of the whole community.

Feltham and neighbourhood centres

Summary of responses

. The general consensus amongst respondents was that Feltham is a disjointed town and that future development would need to create a community feel . Respondents believe that Feltham is a local community hub, which should focus on providing more leisure opportunities to residents and on attracting small local businesses. . There was general consensus among respondents that small local centres and isolated local shops should be protected. Respondents suggested that the lack of demand is often caused by inadequate provision of car parking or unavailability of safe cycling routes.

Council Response

. WoB Policy P1 (Feltham) will aim to create a well-connected, safe, and attractive network of cycle and walking routes linking the town centre and Feltham station with surrounding neighbourhoods. The Council will be working on reducing the dominance of road traffic by increasing the capacity of public transport infrastructure and providing better integrated public transport to encourage people to walk and cycle. . Local Plan Policy TC5 aims to protect isolated local shops, particularly where they are located in areas more than 400m/5 minutes walking distance of a town or neighbourhood centre, or alternative local shopping provision. The Policy goes on to state that the Council will protect the retail and community functions of neighbourhood centres to meet the key day-to-day needs of local residents, by ensuring that at least 50% of units are in A1 use and avoiding the overconcentration of non-retail uses.

Community Infrastructure

Summary of responses

. There were a range of opinions as to what is considered to be community infrastructure. The most common answers include community halls, a sense of safety, opportunities to engage local communities in planning for the region, accessible medical services and vibrant town centres.

Council Response . Local Plan Policy CI1 promotes new community facilities in areas of growth and where identified in the Council’s Infrastructure Delivery Plan. . The IDP is used by the Council, along with its partners and stakeholders, to guide development and ensure that appropriate infrastructure and funding is secured to support growth. Areas included within the IDP include physical infrastructure, social infrastructure, and green and blue infrastructure. The goal of the IDP is to outline infrastructure that is necessary to support the growth of the Borough, deliverable within the Plan period, and complimentary to the vision set out by the WoB Local Plan Review. The IDP will: o Provide a baseline capacity measurement of current physical, social, and green and blue infrastructure throughout the Borough; o Analyse the future predicted capacity needed to support growth throughout the Borough; o Estimate funding requirements needed to provide future infrastructure; o Prioritize infrastructure delivery; and o Ensure the feasibility of development sites within the Local Plan based on infrastructure projections. Urban design

Summary of responses

. Respondents expressed a wide range of opinions on the ways in which the local character and context should be preserved. Some respondents emphasised the need for new viable uses for historic buildings and introduction of preservation orders. Others suggested that local character is best preserved through high quality design of new buildings. . Respondents suggested that there are several heritage assets in the WoB that he Council should do more to protect. These include the Crane corridor, Bedfont Lakes, Duke of Northumberland River and the industrial heritage of Feltham.

Council Response

. The Council will seek to preserve and enhance areas which are of heritage value and have high quality well established coherent characters that are sensitive to change. The Council will also seek to transform those areas where opportunities exist to establish a high quality coherent urban form and character. By working with developers and partners, the Council will strive to establish a series of local places with their own strong characters and identities that build on their strengths and special features, and also distinctively display their role and function. . Policy WoB 3, seeks to ensure that the Council promotes the reuse of vacant or underused heritage assets and settings including improvements to open spaces and the public realm

associated with historic and heritage buildings, including Bedfont Green, Longford River, Feltham Green, Bridge House Pond, Hanworth Park House, and David Henry Waring in Bedfont.

Making it happen

Summary of responses

. Numerous respondents suggested that the current levels of development in the borough are excessive, and thus Council should be seeking way to reduce it. . Respondents believe that the vision should be supported through the preparation of background evidence to demonstrate that it meets the objectively assessed needs of the area, taking into account the national economic importance of Heathrow irrespective of the decision on the third runway. . There was general call for more public involvement in the decision-making process.

Council Response

. The Hounslow Housing Market Assessment (HHMA, 2016) forecasts the total Objectively Assessed Need (OAN) for the entire Borough is 1898 dwellings per annum over the period 2015-2035. The OAN for the West of Borough has been assessed as being 909 dwellings per annum. This figure represents 48% of the boroughs total OAN. . In 2016 the Council undertook an Issues Consultation, inviting the public to comment on the early plans for the West of Borough. Further consultation is taking place in autumn 2017, when the Council will seek the publics views on more detailed policy proposals for the West of Borough.

Appendices:

Appendix 1a - List of all respondents to the Consultation on the Local Plan Issues version of the GWC plan.

Appendix 1b - Summary of consultation representations on the GWC plan.

Appendix 2a - List of all respondents to the Consultation on the Local Plan Issues version of the WoB plan.

Appendix 2b - Summary of consultation representations on the WoB plan.

APPENDIX 1a List of GWC Issues Consultation Respondents:

Name Surname Organisation Respondent Type

Richard Mundy Individual David Rush Individual David George Individual Helena Payne Port of London Authority Public body Simon R Hill Individual Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Raakhee Patel Sport England Public body Sue Lewis Individual Aidan Allanach Individual Ken Munn Individual Cecilia Hodgson Individual Maggie Webber Individual Hugh Mortimer Individual Graham Seaman Individual Nick Delaney Legal and General Property Business Bernard and Sandra King Individual Stephanie Lang Individual Ross Garside Individual Stephanie Lang Chiswick Labour Party Political party Alastair Nixon Individual Dorothy Geary-Jones Individual Cecilia Hodgson Keep Osterley Green Community group Adam Jackson Individual Cristina Naulls Lionel Road Developments Ltd Business

Donald Osborne Individual Iris Hill Individual Christine Diwell The Isleworth Society Community group Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Martine Petetin Individual Roger Mason Kew Residents' Association Community group Victoria George Individual Peter Weatherhead Facilitas Engineering Services Ltd Business Kate Matthews The Day Group Business Kath Richardson Individual Judy Rees Individual Colin Bell OWGRA Community group Denis Browne Brentford Community Council Community group Sarah Hill Individual Samantha Davenport Natural England Government Andrea Kitzberger-Smith London Borough of Richmond upon Thames Government June Hoare Individual Marie Rabouhans West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Society Community group Rosalind Price Gillette Corner Holdings Ltd Business Katie Hale High Sense Securities Ltd Business Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor Caroline Brock Kew Society Community group Dorothy Boland Individual Oonagh M Boland Individual Ruth Mayorcas Individual Neil Rowley Concept Business Group Business Neil Rowley Urban Evolution (GWR) Ltd Business Stephen Hinsley Rentplus Business

Wakako Hirose LaSalle Investment Management Business Andrew Murray The Grove Park Group Community group Neil Rowley Columbia Threadneedle Business Tarun Singh Shetson Property Developments Ltd Business Suzie Willis Education Funding Agency Government M C Bull Individual Philip Allard Heinz Pension Plans Property Investment Business Fund Linda Tillman Individual Kate Ludden Rolfe Judd Planning Business Kath Richardson Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO John Williams Individual Jonathan Knight Individual Catherine Warwick-Wilson GlaxoSmithKline Business Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Daniel Rinsler Salley Ltd & A J Optimum Performance Ltd Business Edward Law Starbones Limited Business Philip Allard Electricity Supply Pension Scheme Business Geoff Dawes Spelthorne Borough Council Government Leo Cunningham-Baily Big Yellow Self Storage Ltd Business Luke Raistrick Tesco Stores Ltd Business James Guest Windmill Road Action Group Community group Ross Brereton McKay Securities PLC Business Tim Henderson Individual Geoff Megarity Betterphase Ltd Business Leo Cunningham-Baily Lendlease Residential (CG) PLC Business Celeste Giusti Mayor of London Government Dominic West St John's Residents Association Community group Sarah Dilley Environment Agency Government

Katharine Fletcher Historic England Public body Stephen Donnelly Hounslow Cycling Community group Rebecca Pullinger CPRE London NGO Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Julie Carne Royal Botanic Gardens Kew Public body David Pavett Individual Ken Newlan Individual Ian Speed Individual

APPENDIX 1b Summary of consultation representations on the GWC Local Plan Review.

Issue 1: The study area and the extent of the Great West Corridor

Name Respondent Type Q1 Are there any other areas which you feel should be added to or removed from the plan area shown?

Brentford Community Council Community group No sites should be added to the plan area. All sites not immediately fronting the A4 should be excluded. All sites west of Syon Lane or east of Power Road should be excluded. Historic England Public body It is important that the major heritage assets surrounding and in the environs of the corridor (e.g. Gunnersbury Park, Syon Park, The Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew) continue to be shown on the plan, so ensuring that the impact of proposals on their settings can be understood and evaluated. These historic open spaces should benefit, where appropriate, from funding arising from planning permissions for development within the GWC area to enable them to absorb the additional demands and sustain their historic significance. St John's Residents' Community group Removal: Given that Great West Road has developed due Association to the nature of its transport links, notably the A4 and M4 we consider that the area referred to as Kew Gate should be confined between the southernmost railway line and the M4 to the north. It should not encroach north of the

M4 or any closer to the river as due to the nature of these areas more sensitive development is required. Transport for London Government TfL is generally content with the extent of the GWC’s boundary as identified in the plan under Issue 1. There may be a case for extending the boundary or at least indicating the presence on the plan of two added railway stations, as discussed under issue 4 below. The A4 is a key component of London’s Route Network (TLRN) which is maintained by and the responsibility of TfL. While the A4, M4 plus tube and railway lines are indicated on the plan, however, as the document is refined, TfL would support the provision of a more detailed plan identifying transport interchange opportunities including bus and cycle routes along with a Public Transport Access Level (PTAL) map underlay. TfL would encourage a greater focus on transport investment in the area between Brentford and Kew – which currently has some relatively low density/ low quality. The paper should recognise the opportunities here and across GWC given the river frontage; the good (but could be improved) rail access; good highways connections and existing world class employment skills. The vision would benefit from referring to high density mixed use development, though the GLA would be the arbiter on this rather than TfL alone. West Chiswick and Community group The GWC needs to be defined as a narrow corridor Gunnersbury Society confined to the curtilage of the commercial buildings along the A4. It must not be allowed to extend eastward beyond the junction of the A4/M4 and the north Circular (A406) at the Chiswick Roundabout: i.e. the Chiswick Business Park, the Power Road estate and the residential streets (Thorney Hedge Road and Silver Crescent) need to be excluded. The residential areas to the north and south of the A4,

including Brentford town centre and all the area along the river also need to be excluded. The so-called “Kew Gate” area must not be included in the GWC; it is not part of the A4 corridor and is not an area suitable for the type of transformation/scale of development envisaged for the corridor. The massive scale and high density of the development associated with the Brentford Football Stadium was dictated by the need to pay for the stadium. The significant negative impact of this development on the surrounding heritage, low-rise residential areas, traffic and public transport was acknowledged but these Departures from the UDP were considered to be justified by the “community” benefit of the stadium.

What is needed in this area is modest development that seeks to mitigate the harm inflicted by the stadium scheme that fully respects the sensitive, low-rise surroundings and heritage and seeks to redress the balance. Any such development should provide the social and community infrastructure lacking in the stadium scheme. Brentford Chamber of NGO No sites should be added to the plan area. All sites not Commerce immediately fronting the A4 should be excluded. All sites west of Syon Lane or east of Power Road should be excluded. Sarah Hill Individual I do not want several extremely high tower blocks in the area resulting in no green areas and nowhere to park, inability to get on a bus etc. Windmill Road Action Group Community group This should be limited to the footprint of the existing employment building sites which front directly onto the Great West Road. The boundary of the corridor must exclude all of wider Brentford and also all of its Conservation Areas.

The Isleworth Society Community group The area should be strictly limited to commercial development sites adjacent to the A4; must not extend west of Syon Lane or east of Power Road. Low rise, terraced residential areas north and south of the A4 and Brentford Town Centre should be removed. Kath Richardson Individual The GWC area should only include sites fronting the A4 from Gillette Corner in the west to Chiswick roundabout in the east with Power Road and Chiswick Business Park. It is about businesses and A4 development, not Brentford Town Centre or surrounding residential centres. The Grove Park Group Community group The plan area extends too far into zones already covered adequately by the Local Plan. The Inspector's Report stated: These would delete Policy ED3 (MM9 and replace it with a new strategic Policy SV1 in the Spatial Strategy Chapter (MM1). Instead of a separate Area Action Plan that policy would provide for a partial Local Plan Review in relation to the GWC and it would set out the strategic objectives for that review. As a partial plan review it could itself identify the precise boundaries for that area, whether its strategic role by then is as an SOLDC or an Opportunity Area. The Local Plan Review would be subject to the same publicity and consultation requirements as this Local Plan. It would settle locally controversial issues such as the provision of adequate transport, infrastructure, suitable locations for taller buildings, and the area’s suitability or otherwise for large scale residential development.

The GWC (should it need to be named as such, since it is no longer a corridor into London, that function being now taken by the M4), should extend from Gillette Corner to where the M4 begins to overhang the A4.

The GWC should extend no further east for two reasons: 1. The Local Plan and the associated GWC papers go into great detail about how noisy and polluted the M4 /A4 stretch is, and the Local Plan explains that there are no current plans to mitigate either of these conditions. Therefore it is unsafe and unreasonable to site any further homes or offices closer than a noise level of 65dB. 2. There are no fewer than 51 separate areas in Chiswick and Brentford identified in the Context & Character Study: to paint a broad brushstroke of development across these in the manner depicted in the proposed GWC is to risk mixing all the separate elements of these areas' character into one developer-friendly pot, with a 'one-size fits all' result. This is not what the Local Plan Inspector intended and should not be implemented.

Simon R Hill Individual I wish to object to the proposal to extend the scope of the GWC beyond Chiswick Roundabout, as far as Power Road. The area to the east of the North Circular Road and Chiswick Roundabout is predominantly residential, with a little light industrial development (low-level) centred around Power Road. The building of the office block above Gunnersbury Station was an unwelcome anomaly which would not have been allowed under later planning regulations, and should therefore not be seen as an excuse for further high-rise, high-density development in this area. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Removal: Kew Gate should be confined between the southernmost railway line and the M4 to the north. It should not encroach north of the M4 or any closer to the river. Developments linked to the M4/A4 in TW8 should not be amalgamated with W4. They are totally different.

Aidan Allanach Individual No

Maggie Webber Individual 1) Improvement of the “Golden Mile” is worthwhile but this shouldn’t be at the expense of the communities living on both the westward and eastwards extensions from Chiswick Roundabout being proposed along Chiswick High Road. The GWC is basically a non-residential area and should end as it has always done before Chiswick Roundabout. Graham Seaman Individual The junction at Gillette corner is an important site for improvement for the cycle route, being very intimidating at the moment. The plan area should therefore cover both sides of the road at this junction. Bernard and Sandra King Individual There are some 6-storey office buildings and the Clayton Hotel in the immediate vicinity on the High Road which are accepted as part of our environment. There is one totally anomalous building nearby, the BSI building, which stands out as entirely inappropriate and ugly, but it is there. Across the road is the very successful and elegant Chiswick Business Park development.

Our concern is to maintain the nature of this environment and we are therefore very worried at the prospect of being included in the "Great West Corridor". This corridor should definitely not extend East of the Chiswick roundabout/North Circular Road, which clearly defines a line of demarcation between predominantly office/car showroom/business properties to the West and low-rise residential properties to the East. Stephanie Lang Individual The Corridor/Golden Mile should not extend east of Chiswick Roundabout along Chiswick High Road, and no existing conservation areas should be included in the plan.

Ross Garside Individual All areas west of Gunnersbury Avenue and the Chiswick High Road. Chiswick Labour Party Political Party This Branch resolves that the Golden Mile should not extend East of Chiswick Roundabout, and any existing conservation areas should not be included in the plan. Any additional buildings in Chiswick Business Park or Power Road should not be above the current height in these locations. Keep Osterley Green Community group The map is imprecise. We would request that Greenbelt and MoL’s are protected with special reference to the Green and Blue corridors which are important for wildlife and maintaining Biodiversity. Donald Osborne Individual The Chiswick Business Park and Power Road should not be in the GWC Iris Hill Individual Kew Gate should not be in this plan. You should take out any developments relating to the A4/M4 which are also in TW8. These are totally different in nature Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor The area south of the main railway line is NOT part of the Great West Corridor and should be removed. This area is largely residential and is characterised by proximity to the rivers and the town centre, not at all by the GWR Martine Petetin Individual Please do not extent the Golden Mile to the East of the Chiswick Roundabout. Some of your proposals confuse the Great West Road with the Golden Mile. The Chiswick Business Park on Chiswick High Road is not part of either and the Golden Mile should not extend to it. Between the Chiswick roundabout and the Chiswick Business Park, the Chiswick High Road is surrounded by residential conservation areas and the Victorian character of the Chiswick High Road needs to be preserved to form a coherent streetscape. Kew Residents' Association Community group No

Victoria George Individual Remove all of Brentford Town Centre, south of the A4. Judy Rees Individual Brentford town centre should be removed as it is not part of the GWC by any stretch of geography. June Hoare Individual The Golden Mile should be the focus, to build on existing development there and not extending by an added 3 miles or so of unrelated and unconnected areas: there is no real vision as such in the concept Masterplan. A key issue is the weakness of the infrastructure for the current capacity, and the poor quality of air. Ruth Mayorcas Individual I am writing to express my horror and dismay at the proposed development of the GWC as presented in the consultation. Linda Tillman Individual No. John Williams Individual Note: The Inspector in his report on the 2015 Local Plan said, 'this Partial Review is necessary to settle locally controversial issues such as the provision of adequate transport and other infrastructure, suitable locations for taller buildings, and the area's suitability or otherwise for large scale residential development.’

The area and the extent of the GWC has yet to be defined. It is not included in the 2015 Local Plan.

At its eastern end the GWC should terminate at Chiswick Flyover. At no point in its history did Chiswick High Road form part of the ‘Golden Mile’. The proposed extension to include Chiswick Business Park is without justification by LBH other than a catch-all statement that it ‘would be useful for future decision making’ (Chiswick Area Forum Jan 2016).

Such an extension brings a defined business development area to the very boundary of central Chiswick, a residential Conservation Area. Jonathan Knight Individual The area enclosed by the red line should be excluded from the GWC, because: A) This zone (as shown on LBH pollution map) is totally unsuitable for residential or commercial property due to the high levels of noise and pollution generated by the M4/A4. B) At its Eastern end it encroaches on an area of predominantly low rise buildings and housing as defined in the Local Plan Context & Character Study. C) Aside from the Power Road area, which would benefit from low rise commercial property development similar to Chiswick Park, the area bordering the M4 elevated section offers a limited number of poor quality sites. OWGRA Community group The map is imprecise, OWGRA would request that Greenbelt and MoL’s are protected with special reference to the Green and Blue corridors which are important for wildlife and maintaining Biodiversity. Shetson Property Business The area should include up to Wood lane and A4 junction, Developments Ltd edged and hatched red in plan.

Rolfe Judd Planning Business The site on the south west corner of Syon lane and Great West Road (former Syon Gate Service Station) as outlined in red on the map below. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Good that the areas of Metropolitan Open Land are acknowledged but these must be backed with stringent policy with no deviation to satisfy development ambitions otherwise. Special reference should be made for the maintenance, protection and additional enhancement of these spaces’ biodiversity and wildlife. Remove the Chiswick Business Park from the plan. Development there

has already reached maximum in relation to the scale of adjoining areas. It stands alone as an area of considerable architectural merit that would be harmed by further densification.

Ken Newlan Individual None David Pavett Individual The map is imprecise. OWGRA would request that Greenbelt and MoL’s are protected with special reference to the Green and Blue corridors which are important for wildlife and maintaining Biodiversity. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Ensure green belt land / metropolitan land is not developed without consideration to Brown Field sites first. Keep as much of canal paths/ river paths available to public, nothing worse than building right up to canal so people have to walk around the building and miss the enjoyment of canal/river. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Need to take account of the residential areas affected by the GW Road. From the Brentford ward boundaries with Ealing across to the Syon ward borders. There needs to be a full scale perspective of new, current proposed coexisting residential areas, business properties along the GW Road particularly, the existing roads adjoining the GW Road. Urban Evolution (GWR) Ltd Business We welcome the production of the Great West Corridor Plan and the inclusion of 3 Great West Road on the ‘Prospective Plan Area’ plan on Page 9. We also welcome the identification of Kew Gate as an ‘Area of Transformation’ as there are a number of opportunities within this area (our site included) for exciting and transformational regeneration projects. Electricity Supply Pension Business No Scheme

Heinz Pension Plans Property Business No Investment High Sense Securities Ltd Business We support the inclusion of Power Road within the plan area, and the wider suggested designated area. Power Road provides an important link between the relatively new Chiswick Business Park and Chiswick Roundabout / Kew Gate and is considered to be an integral part of the GWC. McKay Securities PLC Business The Plan area is too widely drawn. The corridor extends too far to the south. It contains too many areas of differing character, which makes it difficult to plan for on a consistent basis. Brentford Town Centre for instance has very different characteristics and problems from the M4 Gateway. The corridor should be much more tightly drawn to reflect the linear nature of the transport route corridor and the land use characteristics and issue to which it gives rise to. This Plan should focus on the purple area shown in the Brentford Spatial Strategy (Issue 2), and be restricted to this area only. The area south of the railway line should be removed from the GWC Plan area. This will leave a homogenous suburban area along the River Thames and its hinterland with issues that can be tackled more effectively in a single planning document that excludes the M4 and Great West Road. Therefore, River Brent/Grand Union Canal, Brentford Town Centre, Brentford Lock West, River Thames and Kew bridge area should be excluded from the prospective plan area. It would also be useful if the transformation areas were clearly defined on a map to identify their true extent. Lendlease Residential (CG) PLC Business The proposed boundary of the GWC plan area currently excludes the Lendlease’s site at 408-430 Chiswick High Road. Lendlease supports the exclusion of the site from the plan area and considers the proposed boundary to

correctly identify the extent of the GWC. Lendlease considers the current boundary of the plan area to represent a logical border to the GWC. It is considered that no element of Chiswick town centre should be included in the GWC. Whilst the north western extremity of the plan area deviates away from the route of the Great West Road (M4), it is considered that the inclusion of Chiswick Business Park is appropriate. However, the railway line between South Acton and Gunnersbury stations is considered to be a fitting boundary to the plan area. Big Yellow Self Storage td Business Policy SV1: ‘Great West Corridor Plan’ requires the Council to undertake a partial Local Plan review which identifies the extent of the Great West Corridor. The proposed GWC plan area currently includes Big Yellow’s site within the Kew Gate LSIS. Big Yellow does not have any objection to the boundary of the GWC and considers it to correctly identify the extent of the GWC. Tesco Stores Ltd Business The Tesco site on Syon Lane should be included in the site boundary. It has strong historic ties with the Great West Corridor being part of a site originally developed within the interwar period. The previous factory building is shown in one of the issues consultation photos. The site offers the potential to deliver a significant proportion of the housing need in this area. The site as a commercial use assists in creating an attractive destination for business (generating jobs and attracting investment). The corridor presents a fantastic opportunity to significantly boost LB Hounslow’s housing supply, commensurate with the amount of additional new homes sought by the London Plan. Tesco has identified an opportunity to substantially intensify the contribution its premises can make to housing supply and sustainable development. We would like to work proactively with the Council in identifying how it can move

towards effective delivery over the course of 2016 by participating in the development of the Opportunity Area.

Starbones Ltd Business We agree with the areas addressed in the draft document as areas of transformation and consolidation. We support the identification of the area referred to as “Kew Gate” for transformation, however feel that the name “Kew Gate” needs to be reviewed and made relevant to local names and not Kew. Naming aside, we feel this area is well addressed, through the acknowledgement of its existing constraints (posed by major roads and rail lines) and new opportunities offered through increasing demand and land values. It is positive that the Community Stadium has been cited as an example of one of the initial developments to kick-start regeneration within the area and the Chiswick Roundabout site is a further opportunity to bring early regenerative benefits. LaSalle Investment Business We agree with the area identified on the diagram on Page Management 4, as it includes 27GWR as part of the Kew Gate key transformation area. Hugh Mortimer Individual The council should concentrate on making Brentford High Street "a vibrant district centre" before allowing any more development on the Great West Road. As the council owns a lot of land south of Brentford High Street it should act to ensure a redesign of phase 1 the Ballymore development to include high quality shops, a large supermarket (as it appears Brentford is to lose Morrisons) and leisure facilities. The corridor should be limited to the sites required for Commercial development adjacent to the A4. It should not

extend west of Syon Lane nor east of Power Road. It should not include the low rise, terraced, residential areas north and south of the A4 nor Brentford Town Centre. Richard Mundy Individual No Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor I would like to see the scope of the plan extended along to Busch Corner which would allow the plan to look at the landscaping for this area and enhance the opportunities of the small businesses along this stretch. Dorothy Geary -Jones Individual I object to Brentford becoming an Opportunity Area. As a resident of Brentford for 15 years, I believe we do need an improved High Street but we have no more room or infrastructure for more residents. We have had many new developments over these years and should not have any more. Kew Society Community group Yes. The area is described as a commercial gateway to central London which has grown up because of historic transport connections, notably the M4 and A4 and Heathrow Airport links. The Brentford Town Centre area and river Thames frontage are quite inappropriate for this designation. This is more of a wedge than a corridor and the river frontage is particularly sensitive. It should be preserved wherever possible as a green and blue ribbon. These two areas should be removed. Particular attention should also be paid to the careful blending of the designated corridor with adjacent areas of low rise housing and town centre use developments. The policies and guidance of the Thames Landscape Strategy (2012), which the London Borough of Hounslow is signed up to, must be respected. That strategy states that any further flat roofed high rise buildings should not intrude into the Brentford waterfront. Support for tall

buildings in Brentford also contravenes policy CC3 of Hounslow Council’s Local Plan. Cecilia Hodgson Individual The map is imprecise. I would request that Greenbelt and MoL’s are protected with special reference to the Green and Blue corridors which are important for wildlife and maintaining Biodiversity. Brentford Community Council Community group A. The corridor should be limited to the sites required for Commercial development adjacent to the A4. It should not extend west of Syon Lane nor east of Power Road. It should not include the low rise, terraced, residential areas north and south of the A4 nor Brentford Town Centre. B. We accept that areas outside the limited corridor may be affected by the development plans and due regard should be had to any adverse effect corridor development may have on character areas, conservations areas, the setting of listed and locally listed buildings. I.e. historic estates like Gunnersbury, Boston Manor, Syon or Chiswick House. C. Development outside the immediate A4 corridor should preserve the predominantly Victorian street pattern and grain. The plan should ensure safe and easy movement across the A4. D. We reject the suggestion that the Council should urge the Mayor to nominate any part of the study area as a potential Opportunity Area.

Name Respondent Type Q2. Do you agree with the areas of transformation and consolidation?

Brentford Community Council Community group We do anticipate that plans for land immediately adjacent to the A4 should reflect both the residential character of Brentford to the north and south of the A4 and the need for additional commercial development on some sites fronting the A4. Historic England Public body It is not clear which areas on the map are proposed for transformation and which for consolidation. St John's Residents' Community group No. Chiswick Business Park does not require consolidation, Association just Power Road being brought to the same standard. Also you have lumped everything from Gillette Corner to Chiswick Park as consolidation. This is too big and too amorphous and in danger of being influenced by the concrete and glass already around Brentford Dock/Lock and River Thames. Transport for London Government There is nothing that warrants extending/changing the GWC extent (excepting the suggested station inclusions above): Crossrail if extended skirts the periphery but would not necessarily benefit the area unless there was an extension to the GWC study area. West Chiswick and Community group “Kew Gate” Please remove this area as an area of Gunnersbury Society transformation for the reasons given under Q1. Chiswick Business Park Please remove this area as an area of consolidation. Note that text on page 8 of ICD indicates that CBP is “located beyond the eastern end of the corridor” yet it is included in shaded GWC area shown in the diagram on page 9. The 12 buildings of the CBP are now built and the business park is complete. It has already undergone intensification; the total business floor-space of the completed park is over 30% higher than the original

44 threshold imposed. There is no planning rationale for including it in or linking it to the Great West Corridor. Power Road Please remove this area as an area of consolidation. As indicated above, the GWC should not extend beyond the Chiswick Roundabout. While there may be some opportunities for modest regeneration in this area, the sensitive location and the presence of several buildings of heritage value make it inappropriate for inclusion as a “consolidation” area within the GWC. Brentford Town Centre Please remove this area as an area of consolidation. Brentford Town Centre is a separate area for which the spatial strategy is already defined within the Local Plan. Surrounding residential areas, public open spaces, Important historic and natural areas with statutory designated areas must be respected. Inclusion of these is at best, very confusing and at worst deeply worrying.

Expanding the “GWC” to absorb large parts of the surrounding area as proposed under Issue 1 goes far beyond what the Inspector intended by calling for a Partial Review. In order to make the Local Plan sound, the Inspector required by means of Major Modifications (MM9 and MM1) (a) the removal of draft policy ED3, which would have committed the Council to amounts and types of development upon which there had been no public consultation and (b) the addition of policy SV1, which committed the Council to a Partial Review. The Inspector in his report section on the Great West Corridor (paragraphs 47 – 56) concluded (paragraph 54) that 'this Partial Review is necessary to settle locally controversial issues such as the provision of adequate transport and other infrastructure, suitable locations for taller buildings, and

the area's suitability or otherwise for large scale residential development.’ He did not suggest that the Partial Review was an opportunity to exclude the GWC from compliance with major sections of the Local Plan or that such sections should be rewritten to accommodate unfettered development in the GWC. Brentford Chamber of NGO The land fronting the A4 should be available for large Commerce business needs with commercial and light industrial space for SMEs. “Kew Gate” as a name should reflect pride in Brentford to encourage businesses to name themselves as Brentford rather than West London. A suggestion is Brentford East. Brentford is a destination Dorothy Boland Individual I do not agree that the Opportunity Area should be extended from Chiswick Roundabout to the Chiswick Business Park. The GWC should not come on to the roundabout from the A4. Oonagh M Boland Individual Should exclude Chiswick and all its conservation areas and be limited to the area of the existing commercial buildings along the GW road, and not be extended to Chiswick Roundabout and to the Chiswick Business Park. There is already a lot of development which has received planning permission, much recently built and in the pipeline. I would suggest this is completed before more is approved. The Isleworth Society Community group No the area for consolidation is too large. Chiswick Business Park does not require consolidation. Development Plans must give due regard to likely adverse effects on character areas, conservation areas and settings of listed and locally listed buildings as well as the distinctiveness of Brentford Town Centre. We oppose the idea of nomination of any part of the study area as a potential Opportunity Area.

Kath Richardson Individual No, the Golden Mile itself is for commercial development, with large prestigious businesses fronting the A4 with space for smaller light industrial behind. Other areas should not be included in this plan and are substantially residential. Kew is in Surrey. We are not in Surrey. “Kew Gate” should be removed as a name from all discussion. It’s East Brentford or Brentford East if you prefer. If we are to have pride in our borough the names should belong to the borough. The location is in Brentford. “Gate”, as “corridor” implies somewhere you travel through to arrive elsewhere, not a destination in itself. Golden Mile is a much better historic description. The Grove Park Group Community group No. This is because there are no 'areas of transformation and consolidation’ mentioned in the GWC Plan Issues Consultation. Please clarify. If you mean the idea of treating every street from Gillette Corner down to the river and across to Chiswick Business Park as the same in terms of Planning and development as a 6-lane highway (the A4) - absolutely not. Please see above (Q1). The Adopted Local Plan shows that these areas are all completely different and must be treated as such. Not to do so would repudiate the Local Plan as adopted. David George Individual There is no rationale to include Chiswick Business Park and Power Road. This area is already suffering from over development and it important to preserve the character of Chiswick, rather than seeing it lost in a creep of high rise and inappropriate new developments. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual No. Chiswick Business Park does not require consolidation, just Power Road being brought to the same standard. Also you have lumped everything from Gillette Corner to Chiswick Park as consolidation. This is too big and too amorphous and in danger of being influenced by the concrete and glass already around Brentford Dock/Lock

and River Thames. Too late to save historic Brentford but this is not suitable for W4. Aidan Allanach Individual Yes Ken Munn Individual Not entirely. I believe the site currently being considered for ‘The Chiswick Curve’ should be left undeveloped, planted with fast maturing trees so as to act as a buffer to the site west of it (currently B&Q and its car park) making that site more suitable for low rise residential development. Ross Garside Individual Apart from the areas as described in 1. Keep Osterley Green Community group In general terms the areas of transformation and consolidation appear reasonable. This is without prejudice to views on specific proposals as they arise. Lionel Road Developments Ltd Business The Club is keen to reinforce the connection of its new Community Stadium with its longstanding Brentford heritage and would welcome reconsideration of the branding of the area as “Kew Gate”. A possible new name for this area could be “Brentford Link” which builds on the road and rail connections as well as the more general ‘link’ between the West and central London (and the potential to create a new link between Kew and Gunnersbury Park). Donald Osborne Individual No. The GWC should end at Chiswick Roundabout Iris Hill Individual No I do not. Historic Brentford is being changed for the worst. The Chiswick Business Park has been well thought out and should not be changed. Power Road could be brought up to the same standard. The area from Gillette Corner to Chiswick Park is too big and diverse an area to be lumped into one. The glass and concrete already to be seen has nothing in common with the area past Chiswick roundabout going to Chiswick Park

Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor I think so. You must change the name from Kew Gate though – this infuriates Brentford residents – something involving Bees (Brentford FC), Gunnersbury, Carville (Car Ville as it seems to be filling up with car dealerships!) Martine Petetin Individual No, the Golden Mile should remain along the side of the M4 elevated section and stop at the Chiswick Roundabout. It must not include Chiswick, which is East of the roundabout and, except for the self-standing (not part of Golden Mile) Chiswick Business Park, is traditionally Victorian and mainly residential, Kew Residents' Association Community group Yes, but the major justification for including the Chiswick Business Park is to focus attention on the need to upgrade Gunnersbury Station which will provide a major transport link for the eastern end of the corridor. June Hoare Individual No, see above. It is not clear what ‘transformation’ or ‘consolidation’ is intended to achieve and why. The areas are simply unrelated and unlinked with no ‘common interests’ to link them. Insufficient attention to the quality of life afforded by residential and public open spaces and protection or enhancement of these: it is curious that the “important and natural areas with statutory designations that must be respected” are listed right at the end as an afterthought to the corridor definition with no explanation of how transformation and consolidation will affect these valuable assets. Linda Tillman Individual As a resident of Chiswick I have many issues with the proposed intensification of development in the so-called ‘Kew Gate’ area. See below. It is a travesty to use Kew in the name when existing planning applications will oppress the real Kew both visually and in making road journeys northwards an even greater ordeal than they are now. This area is designated as ‘community’ development in the

plan but the reality is that much of the newly-approved and proposed development in this area is ‘luxury’ housing much of which will do nothing to solve the local housing problems which need genuinely affordable solutions and not absent overseas investors. John Williams Individual Transformation, yes. Consolidation? Kew Gate is a puzzle. The whole triangle between the railways is about to be filled with the approved new Brentford Football Club stadium and residential tower blocks for 910 dwellings. An application for a 32 storey mixed residential and business tower block is under consideration for Chiswick Roundabout. An application for high-rise development on the adjacent B&Q site is anticipated. Transformation is assured but not for the better. Jonathan Knight Individual No. This area of West London is comprised of a range of areas of different character including historic riverside, conservation areas, world heritage site and green spaces, as identified in the Local Plan. It cannot be treated with the same 'transformation and consolidation' concept. OWGRA Community group In general terms the areas of transformation and consolidation appear reasonable. This is without prejudice to views on specific proposals as they arise. Shetson Property Business Yes, however more residential is required or mixed use Developments Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business Yes, with the addition of the site outlined in blue above. The proposal site has the potential to act as a gateway denoting the start of the Great West Corridor/Golden Mile. The site is identified within the Local Plan sites allocation (Site 26) and should also be included within the Brentford Spatial Strategy as outlined on page 2 and the GWC Prospective Plan Area. This site has the potential to accommodate a residential led mixed use development to

support employment activities to the north and east of the site. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor The Great West Road’s Golden Mile starts to the east of Syon Lane and any development west (Site 26) should acknowledge and respect the height and scale of the established residential developments as should any facing and abutting homes on Syon Lane itself.  There should be some means of consolidating the Blue Sky and Gillette Corner sites to avoid a future Sky campus overwhelming the listed Gillette Building and surrounding sites.  Brentford Town Centre does not need further consolidation, its traditional and historic layout should be respected and when development is proposed it should be on a human scale with building heights limited to no more than five stories. Ken Newlan Individual Yes David Pavett Individual In general terms the areas of transformation and consolidation appear reasonable. This is without prejudice to views on specific proposals as they arise. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Noted many green areas have been included, need to ensure protect these. Please be mindful for the future, it would be awful to end up with people perceiving Brentford could become a concrete jungle. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor A co-ordination of how this is going to create community cohesion would be welcome. Electricity Supply Pension Business The identified areas of transformation are supported, as it Scheme is considered that these have the maximum potential for growth. The Kew Gate area should include the Kew Bridge Distribution Centre. It is unclear from the various figures in the Issues and Options Paper whether this is the case.

Heinz Pension Plans Property Business The identified areas of transformation are supported, as it Investment is considered that these have the maximum potential for growth. The Kew Gate area should include the Kew Bridge Distribution Centre. It is unclear from the various figures in the Issues and Options Paper whether this is the case. High Sense Securities Ltd Business We consider that the Power Road estate has greater potential than simply the consolidation of the area. It is a well-established commercial estate, but is relatively low rise and low in employment density. Coupled with large areas of surface level car parking, the estate offers great potential for significant redevelopment and expansion. A number of the existing buildings are outdated and the sites that they occupy have the capacity to vastly improve the employment density of the estate. The north, south and western boundaries of the estate are relatively unconstrained and so have the ability to accommodate additional floorspace without impacting upon the amenity of any neighbouring residential areas. McKay Securities PLC Business It would be much clearer if the Brentford Lock North and the M4 Gateway were decoupled and separated as in the supporting Golden Mile Vision and Concept Masterplan. The areas are fundamentally different and should have their own individual planning documents to guide development in these areas. We do not agree with the concept of consolidation as we consider this contrary to the objectives of Policy SV1 and the NPPF Paragraph 182. The focus should be about growth to ensure the Plan is ‘positively prepared’. In addition, there is no reasonable explanation in either the Issues Paper or supporting Masterplan about what the consolidation involves.

Big Yellow Self Storage td Business The Brentford Spatial Strategy as shown in the Chapter 2 of the Hounslow Local Plan shows Big Yellow’s site as being within an employment area. This strategy is supported by Big Yellow and it is consider that no changes to this spatial strategy should be made through the GWC Plan. Tesco Stores Ltd Business Tesco’s aspirations for the site are likely to be ‘transformational’. Whilst the Blue Sky ‘area of transformation’ is identified as a ‘high profile business’ area, its scope could also be extended to include the Tesco site, which has the potential to make a substantial contribution to the Corridor’s and LB Hounslow’s housing supply. The magnitude of Tesco’s aspirations for the site is consistent with that proposed as part of the Sky campus and wider sites (e.g. Gillette). The site, if located within the ‘area of transformation’ will further assist with promoting the case to the GLA for this to become an Opportunity Area. It will provide greater certainty that the site will deliver a significant proportion of the Corridor’s necessary new homes. If not within an ‘area for transformation’, it will be within an ‘area of consolidation’ which is not consistent with Tesco’s aspiration for the site. LaSalle Investment Business We agree that there is an opportunity for transformation Management and plan-making to improve the Kew Gate transformation area. We also agree that the development of a new community stadium for Brentford Football Club and associated development (including the enabling residential development) would considerably change the perceptions and character of the area in the short to midterm. As such, there should be a clear vision for the area with appropriate designation/allocations that would maximise the opportunity while ensuring that there is sufficiently flexibility, in order to meet the changing economic

circumstances and the character of the area in the long term. 27GWR is a significant asset and long-term commitment in the Borough for its landowner (fund) that our client acts on behalf of. As such, it should be acknowledged that contributions it makes to the GWC, through ongoing maintenance, enhancement and creating an environment which is attractive to international and national companies, are significant. It is therefore important that the long term viability of the site is not compromised by inappropriate designation. Hugh Mortimer Individual I do not feel that the Council should urge the Mayor to nominate any part of the study area as a potential Opportunity Area. Richard Mundy Individual No. I believe that Brentford Town Centre and the area between this and the river should be subject to transformation, not consolidation. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor I agree with the areas but all future developments should be of a sensible height, i.e. no more than 10 stories in selected area otherwise Brentford will become a mini west Manhattan. I would like to remind people that Brentford was the old country town of Middlesex and has many unique features which are gradually diminishing or swamped by the density of the planned programme. Cecilia Hodgson Individual In general terms the areas of transformation and consolidation appear reasonable. This is without prejudice to views on specific proposals as they arise.

Issue 2: Strategic Vision and Key Diagram for the Great West Corridor

Name Respondent Type Q3 What do you like and dislike about the area?

Brentford Community Council Community group Likes: The present area of Brentford (which should not be included in the plan for the Great West Corridor) is characterised by 2/3 storey terrace housing and is defined by the Thames and the historic estates. It includes many unique features like the Grand Union Canal. Some of the buildings in the GWC, like the offices for Glaxo are high quality designs with generous landscaped settings. Dislikes: The high rise flats in the Haverfield Estate are incongruous and have like been used as an unacceptable precedent for later high rise schemes which have harmed both Brentford and the Kew World Heritage site. The quality of some new development on the A4 particularly in the Great West Quarter and the Alfa Laval sites is very poor. Most of the commercial building in the GWC have been designed to catch the attention of passing motorists and do not present a coherent response to a well- considered urban design framework. Historic England Public body The area is especially rich in heritage assets. Within the GWC itself there are opportunities for heritage-led regeneration, integrating consideration of the outstanding legacy of grandeur of the 1930s headquarters buildings with new buildings that complement this resource, and ensure their future beneficial use. Adjoining and beyond the corridor there are highly significant heritage assets including Gunnersbury Park, Syon Park, Osterley Park and the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew World Heritage Site. The

sensitivity of the settings of these historic parks and gardens, and the individual designated heritage assets within them, is a key consideration to which this plan should have special regard. The conservation areas within Hounslow must also be carefully evaluated to make sure that their character and appearance is preserved and enhanced. St John's Residents' Association Community group The area around the River Thames provides a quiet backwater with a number of buildings of townscape merit and important strategic views. The area is characterised by the dominance of motor traffic with poor air quality and a poor micro-climate. Traffic congestion is particularly acute at weekends with leisure car trips. Walking and cycling routes are particularly unattractive as are bus journey times due to the lack of bus priority. Kew Bridge station lacks basic amenities, has inaccessible platforms and is basically fit for the Nineteenth Century. The Kew Bridge junction is a nightmare for pedestrians and is windswept. Transport for London Government In terms of the additional priorities, the Council should be focussing on to those listed in Issue 2. While the vision is focussed on “game-changing” (p14) new infrastructure, there should be greater regard to improving the attractiveness and safety of the “last-leg of journey” through infrastructure improvements for pedestrians and cyclists. Relatively small amounts of investment and promotion in linking and signing local areas flanking the A4 can yield benefits in sustainable movement, which could reduce pressure on road and rail services in particular. Linked to the above priority should be a vision to reduce car use (whilst increasing the attractiveness of other modes) through siting of high density residential and employment uses near to areas with good and

attractive pedestrian and cycling provision along and (ideally) good access to public transport (measured by PTAL). It is recognised though that PTAL is quite limited in some parts of the GWC, hence the focus on improvements. West Chiswick and Community group These comments relate to the narrower GWC as we have Gunnersbury Society defined it above. Like: The remaining Art Deco buildings - including the refurbished Wallis House, the GSK building - a modern building of high architectural quality The mix of type and scale of employment, including medium and small-scale enterprises. World-class companies providing local employment and high-skilled jobs such as Brompton Bikes. Seeing the elegant campanile of the “Steam Museum” – a favourite landmark. This signals a change of scale and character to those approaching from the high- rise commercial sector of the Golden Mile to the West.

Dislike: The heavy traffic, noise and air-pollution, inadequate pedestrian crossings, poor provision for cyclists and general low quality of the public realm along the A4. The degradation caused by the proliferation of advertising on buildings and free-standing structures, especially the high-level, large, brightly-lit, LED digital media screens. Those on the Chiswick Roundabout are especially intrusive and inappropriate in this location and detract from the positive attributes of the roundabout. The recent 25-storey Great West Quarter tower, which dominates the low-rise residential areas to the south and which is seen as a large and has a negative impact on a variety of heritage assets and their settings, in particular Syon Park and Gunnersbury Park.

Brentford Chamber of NGO Likes: the mix between residential and small commerce Commerce allowing many SMEs to walk to work; the prestige of many of the international HQs on the A4 and the mix; contribution that waterside makes to wellbeing; roads out of London (traffic permitting); some aspects of public transport . Dislikes: other aspects of public transport (such as poor rush hour service on trains and buses); traffic grid lock; lack of amenities for staff; poor air quality. Closure of Church Street hasn’t helped. Sarah Hill Individual You have expensive Chiswick then high-rise Brentford – no thank you! Dorothy Boland Individual I dislike the hideous Premier Inn and other hotel at the top of Ealing Road near GWQ. I like the Blue Sky area. The Isleworth Society Community group As stated above the area is too large. It is demonstrated to be highly polluted and the A4 is unsuitable for residential or mixed uses. The implication that the residential estate north of London Road and parts of that east of Ealing Road could be re-developed at higher density is unacceptable. Kath Richardson Individual Likes: The waterside, both original and modern; the water, canal and river; historic buildings and modest 2-3 storey terraces; mix of buildings and purposes; sense of history; local community; Griffin Park, GSK and the art deco buildings on A4. Dislikes: lack of mixed community secondary school; poor design of many new buildings, both built and planned; tower blocks, old and new; lack of community infrastructure; traffic; noise and air pollution; reliability of trains and some bus services; the way the A4 cuts through Brentford and divides the community in two; plethora of horrendously huge and bright adverts on the A4 that affect us all.

The Grove Park Group Community group Which area? This consultation is to decide the area to be adopted as the Great West Corridor, so it hasn't been settled yet. As above, our suggestion is for the GWC to be solely the length of the A4 from Gillette Corner to Windmill Road. If you are referring to the Diagram marked 'Great West Corridor' (as above, the purpose of this consultation is to delineate it, so let's not pre-empt it), here's what it say in the Local Plan: (see full representation for quotes with emphasis added from pp 38,60, 91, 228 and 248 of the context and character study) Elizabeth Hagerty Individual I hate the ghost town feel of the new residential flats areas, with empty shops and restaurants. This proves there is little demand for these types of properties with families and neighbours. They are also windy. I love the access to the river. It's great if people can work within 20 minutes of home. I love the greenery and open spaces. I hate the traffic and parking problems and that it's not safe for pedestrians or children near the roads. Sue Lewis Individual Convenient for both Heathrow and central London. But transport links are poor overall, there are some awful 1960s buildings, Brentford High Street has very few decent shops and restaurants, the area by the river is nice but feels really dead, there are not many people around in the evening. Aidan Allanach Individual This is a real opportunity to develop industry and commerce outside the sphere of central London. This in turn means it can have far wider social and economic benefits than is normally associated with business. If successful, Brentford could become a model for other future developments of this kind. On the other hand, if not done comprehensively, it could significantly diminish the area and exacerbate many

issues. If not carried out alongside transport upgrades, the environment in the Golden mile will degrade significantly. Ken Munn Individual The high density of motor traffic, the poor provision of public transport, walkways and cycle routes and the paucity of green space and vegetation. Graham Seaman Individual I like the variety of use of the area. I dislike the vehicle dominated nature of the area, which makes walking and cycling an unpleasant experience in much of it. Ross Garside Individual Like the variety of buildings, but dislike the canyon effect of too many tall buildings too close to each other. Keep Osterley Green Community group What we like is the “greenness” of the area and we would like this to be protected. What is disliked is the piecemeal and opportune gobbling up of this and also the erosion of amenity by increasing population and “commuting” workers. Donald Osborne Individual It is not a “Corridor” it is a motorway, a linear ribbon development along the old A4, where 1930’s traffic trundled along at 40mph. Now six lanes of traffic screech along at 80mph on the nearby M4. The noise and air pollution are intolerable. Giving it a fancy name does not make it suitable for development. Iris Hill Individual I like access to the river and low rise buildings that currently exist. I loathe the anonymous glass high rise buildings, with empty shops and bleak walkways. Chiswick Roundabout is polluted and the noise level is horrible. There are always queues across the roundabout because there is too much traffic.

Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor The area west of where the M4 diverges is rather splendid, with good wide vistas and still retaining much of the grandeur of the GWR in the thirties. Spoiled

somewhat by a few horrible buildings (I’m thinking really of the former Firestone) The old art deco ones must stay undisturbed. The new ones, if they change, should be developed with high quality design (GSK is fine). From Boston Manor Road east it’s a different story. I’m happy with GWQ, Carville park South is quite a gem – why can’t we protect it from noise and pollution by those green fences you see all over France and Surrey? CIW will be great if it happens, Lionel Road architecture is pretty woeful IMO. The Chiswick Curve is just far too big and dense – I agree 100% with what Ruth Cadbury says. The footpaths on both sides of the A4 and the central area are a disgrace -always filthy and full of junk. The proposals to improve pedestrian access at Chiswick roundabout are a joke. On the north side, parks aside, there’s little to be commended. The stretch from Ealing Road to the substation needs to be flattened and start again. Martine Petetin Individual Very high levels of air pollution, at levels dangerous for residents (see your own data). This is mainly caused by intense traffic along the M4/A4. Kew Residents' Association Community group This is an historic area of mixed domestic and light industrial use, in which residents of all socio-economic groups have lived happily for generations. The area is clearly in need of much regeneration and economic development but the key to its future success as a West London district it will be to ensure that remains a desirable place to live for all sorts of people who work both in and out of the area. It will be very important to provide social housing and to ensure that current residents are not squeezed out of the district as a result of regeneration.

Victoria George Individual Focussing on the A4: the Brentford section of this road is appalling in terms of air pollution: it regularly breaks all EU legal limits for Nitrogen Dioxide, which we now have conclusive medical evidence regarding damage to lungs and heart, particularly underdevelopment of lung capacity in young children. It is therefore not an area where people should live, work or go to school. Without a ban on diesel fuelled vehicles I cannot see how a development like this could possibly go ahead. It should be noted that tall buildings are disastrous in this context – they trap pollution. This road is filthy and not fit for any kind of human use in its current state, and the Hounslow Local Plan does not go far enough in addressing air pollution to warrant development on the planned scale. Secondary to this, but still very important, is noise pollution. Local people already suffer unacceptable levels of noise as a result of Heathrow and the A4/M4 – absolutely nothing is being done to alleviate this – in fact we are going in the opposite direction, with the proposed expansion of Heathrow, and with the amount of development happening in Brentford combined with the lack of incentive for people to use any mode of transport other than their cars. Cycling continues to be unsafe throughout Brentford and certainly unhealthy along the A4. Judy Rees Individual Like – open spaces, plenty of sky, light etc. It lends itself to my lifestyle, working from home from a garden office, which I think is the way of the future. Clients include firms based in big offices on the Great West Road. June Hoare Individual Like overall, apart from the wonderful green spaces of Gunnersbury park, Kew Gardens and the river heritage and calm residential areas, the development of public

amenity along the river. Loads to dislike about traffic, noise, pollution, poor infrastructure. A lot of talk about vision: but issue 2 is short on a vision for anyone to sign up to. We have yet to experience how the huge development at Brentford FC will impact on the current pressures on infrastructure, as well as within the historic skyline. Linda Tillman Individual The air pollution is the worst aspect of much of the area, particularly on the section of the A4 near the elevated section of the M4 John Williams Individual Like: The many large parks, the rivers, the green spaces and the historic heritage, e.g. Syon Park and Boston Manor Park. The low-rise uniformity of central Chiswick High Road, barring the Empire House exception. The attractive A4 GSK head office complex.

Dislike: The north/south split occasioned by the M4/A4 with few pedestrian/bike linkages between the two. The eastern half, under the elevated M4 is particularly affected. The limited number of pedestrian/bike gates and entrances to the big parks, e.g. access to Syon Park from Gillette’s, access to Gunnersbury Park from ‘Kew Gate’. Jonathan Knight Individual I like the predominantly low rise, existing buildings in Chiswick and Brentford (and indeed most of Hounslow). I like the sense of community amongst the inhabitants, both residential and commercial, in these areas based on the human scale of the current built environment.

I dislike the destructive affect the A405, A4 and M4 have had on their surroundings by creating pollution, noise and congestion. High density development proposals along these highway fringes that will exacerbate these

conditions. I dislike the overloaded public transport infrastructure. Any development along the GWC without additional rail services will only add to this problem. Only by incorporating parking spaces, thereby exacerbating the pollution problem, can developers hope to attract buyers. OWGRA Community Group What OWGRA likes is the “greenness” of the area and we would like to this protected. What is disliked is the piecemeal and opportune gobbling up of this and also the erosion of amenity by increasing population and “commuting” workers. Shetson Property Business the area needs modernising consistently, new buildings Developments Ltd with similar design

Rolfe Judd Planning Business Dislike: The dominance of the private car and lack of public realm and activity at street level. Like: The opportunity for future development to address the concerns raised above and provide much needed housing for the area. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Likes  The presence and proximity of the area’s green spaces which should not only be protected but also enhanced.  The remnants of the area’s rich industrial heritage which should be recognised, protected and celebrated.  The area’s vibrant commercial activity and the potential of Brentford Town Centre to support a sustained shopping and leisure offer for residents, workers and visitors.

Dislikes  The unaddressed pollution from road traffic.  Noise from traffic and occupancy of buildings in close proximity to residential spaces.  The piecemeal and opportunistic erosion of amenity and green areas.  The lack of social infrastructure and current “jam tomorrow” aspects of piecemeal development. Ken Newlan Individual Like: Some architectural heritage and some access to green spaces e.g. Gunnersbury, Osterley Park; space (to accommodate good safe cycle ways). David Pavett Individual I appreciate the openness the greenness of the area and we would like to this protected as planning guidelines suggest should be the case. The problem is that the Council, and the Council leader do not seem to share this concern and concur with developers that open spaces are development opportunities rather that a vital in fact valuable environmental resource. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Like: Green spaces mean that it doesn’t feel claustrophobic, areas have village neighbourhood feel- people are proud of heritage, the history of the area, prestigious buildings. Dislike: Traffic- volume of cars on roads, the architecture of the green dragon estate - the tower blocks are out of character with the area - M4 charging through the middle of the area- creating noise and pollution and bringing with it ugly billboards that light up and ruin the quaint atmosphere. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor The elevated section of the A4 is a 'blight' from Chiswick roundabout through to where it crosses the A4/Gt West Rd/Boston Manor Park. This blights residencies, parks, schools and access for pedestrians. It is a division for residents and park users (Gunnersbury Park is located in

TW8 Brentford ward, but many residents have never been there! Due to the unpleasant access across the A4 this prevents many from using/or knowing the park is in Brentford. GWR needs to be improved and cleaned to make it possible for a 'Great' West Road! We should protect people from the pollution, dirt and noise by erecting fencing, which is used in outer London borough motorways. Electricity Supply Pension Business The areas poor public transport connections and lack of Scheme services hamper the Great West Road corridor as an employment location particularly for office uses and smaller businesses. The existing road connections (i.e. M4) provide one of the areas key strengths and the reason why it has historically proven to be a successful employment location. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business The areas poor public transport connections and lack of Investment services hamper the Great West Road corridor as an employment location particularly for office uses and smaller businesses. The existing road connections (i.e. M4) provide one of the areas key strengths and the reason why it has historically proven to be a successful employment location. McKay Securities PLC Business Our client would prefer to see the Masterplan approach implemented so that the area has a much more permissive approach to development along the corridor. A general development policy encouraging mixed use development for the M4 Gateway area rather than a zoning strategy would help to better deliver the development potential as set out in the Masterplan. Starbones Ltd Business We agree in principle to the strategic diagram (‘Brentford Spatial Strategy’) as set out in the draft document. It is positive that the Golden Mile is established as an area of employment and we believe the inclusion of residential

development is equally important to ensure a balance of uses and community. Similarly we support the principles of mitigating the severance posed by the M4 motorway. Richard Mundy Individual I like the area’s variety of transport links (Piccadilly line, Hounslow loop trains, bus links, A4, M4) and its mixed nature in terms of industry, commerce, housing of a variety of types and recreational space. I do not like that the public transport links into London (Because only slow trains stop at Hounslow and Brentford), the air/noise pollution from A4/M4/Heathrow, the poor use of the river and quality of the shopping in Brentford Town Centre and all of the empty/derelict commercial space along the A4. Adam Jackson Individual Too much high rise and too high density development. Current open spaces will be lost. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor What I like about the town is its many parks, its close proximity to water and the mix of heritage housing mingled with the new but my dislikes are that the new are too dense, too high and characterless. They do not encourage soft and hard landscaping. Kew Society Community group We dislike the focus on traffic to the detriment of pedestrians and cyclists created by the raised M4 and wide A4 roads. We also dislike some poorly planned 1960s high rise buildings such as the Brentford residential tower blocks which have not proved to be successful social housing models. The Local Plan states these should not be used as a justification for the provision of new tall buildings in inappropriate locations (Policy CC3). Cecilia Hodgson Individual What I like is the “greenness” of the area and we I like this to be protected. What is disliked is the piecemeal and opportune gobbling up of this and also the erosion of amenity by increasing population and “commuting” workers.

Name Respondent Type Q4 Are there any additional priorities, the Council should be focussing on in the scope and content of the vision for the Great West Corridor?

Brentford Community Council Community group The corridor should not include residential until the poor air quality (shown Red on Issues paper p19) is improved to the borough median (yellow) and when sufficient land is reserved for schools (see paras 8.4/11) and open space (see para 6.4) to meet present and predicted deficiencies. Please note all para references refer to our letter reference BCC757. M C Bull Individual Important historic and natural areas and buildings: I agree, with statutory designations that they must be respected (page 8) Follow the Golden Mile and Concept Mission / Masterplan area down to where you get the effect of the flight path, Heston mainly, and you find residents affected by damaged air quality, NO2. The AQMA is not being investigated near the M4/A4 with a view to improving conditions for residents near the golden mile (page 13). Your study leaves out the increase in heart and lung disease caused by NO2 and responsible for an increase in deaths locally recorded in Hillingdon Hospital and Ealing Hospital (Kirk House, West Drayton). St John's Residents' Association Community group There should be more emphasis on creating a mixed community with affordable homes and access to open space. Developments should be designed to improve air quality with less densities than proposed. Environment Agency Government In response to question 4, reducing flood risk should be a priority in the vision for the Great West Corridor; we also feel that there should be a priority to work towards becoming prepared for climate change. The need to protect and enhance biodiversity and to create linkages

between green areas and habitats should be prioritised in the Borough. West Chiswick and Community group Balancing the Council’s aspirations for growth with the Gunnersbury Society reality of the current infrastructure deficit and the extremely poor environment of the GWC. No longer yielding to the temptation to put the cart before the horse. Complying with Local Plan Policy IMP 3 (h) Ensuring that development does not proceed unless the delivery of critical and necessary infrastructure to support that development is assured.” Brentford Chamber of NGO Need retail strategy to encourage and support new and Commerce existing retail in Brentford, with long term free/low rental periods to make investment in location worthwhile. Transition policy for retail needs to be in place to stop existing retail (and other businesses) moving out during development phases. Provision of suitable loading and business parking, short term and longer. A BID should be supported for Brentford as a whole. Legal and General Property Business It is considered that the potential of sites within the corridor to accommodate a mix of uses including housing should not be under-estimated. Sarah Hill Individual You need to include facilities for a community, i.e. a secular community centre, not just empty boarded up units to let under blocks of flats Dorothy Boland Individual More consideration of the surrounding environment and buildings when approving planning permission e.g. for the above hotels. Either better road crossing facility or developing better `village’ type hinterland behind the main road buildings to encourage a sense of identity for residents and workers. The Isleworth Society Community group A priority should be to give regard to long range vistas – specifically those of Grade l Listed Syon Estate, Boston Manor, Gunnersbury Park and World Heritage Site, Kew

Gardens and Isleworth Riverside Conservation Area. The landmark Gillette building/tower should not be compromised through addition of further high rise buildings. The rationale of the “Vision” needs re-visiting to ensure that proposed high density development will include sufficient infrastructure and achieve acceptable air quality. Kath Richardson Individual Separating employment areas into different types and size of commerce; Improving air quality everywhere but particularly on A4; marking out school sites both primary and secondary; saving and maintaining MOL and open green spaces, both large and small. Only the large ones are marked in this spatial strategy which lacks sufficient details to be evaluated. Carville Hall Park, north and south, St Paul’s Rec, Brent Lea rec, Robin Grove and others should all be there. Green spaces should be listed. The Employment purple spreads into residential areas. This is not a strategy; this is a child’s colouring in. The Grove Park Group Community group If there is a vision for development within the borough that includes providing more employment for borough residents, as opposed to attracting more commuters from outside the borough, then it should centre first and foremost on the quality of life for residents. This means: - Actually protecting and enhancing the borough's heritage (east of the borough) - A proactive policy to reduce noise. - Having a policy to reduce pollution (there are no current plans to mitigate) - Compelling developers to build homes that are of a reasonable size (3 beds+) and affordable to the average wage.

- Ensuring that there are actual green spaces for children to play outdoors that do not suffer traffic noise and foul air. - Planting more trees, particularly along the almost treeless A4 / Great West Road. - Installing necessary infrastructure, including improved transport links, before any further development.

The current 'vision' has it backwards, concentrating on high rise office buildings bordering the M4, on the highly questionable basis that unspecified companies will want to display their logos prominently over traffic on the crowded M4. There are also major transport barriers to delivering workers to this part of the Great West Road. An overlooked part of the current plans is Transport Avenue, an unloved and unlovely canal-side road, leading to a heavy industrial estate. However, in the future the road could be a conduit to a dynamic rail link via Southall, as well as being close enough to the canal and far enough from A4 traffic to stimulate creativity in small businesses.

A recurring, and misguided, theme of all the Great West Plan literature is to refer to the Great West Road and the M4 as 'corridors; or 'gateways'. They are not. The M4 facilitates filthy traffic bypassing most of Hounslow to pollute Chiswick en-route to Central London. The A4 westbound is a route from Chiswick (already within the borough) to the western reaches of the borough. Eastbound, it is a passage to gridlock, which can only get worse with more development, including the BFC stadium and its surrounding tall buildings.

Note that there is no traffic management to cope with increased traffic volumes. Please also note that almost every building site in the 'Golden Mile Site Capacity Study' has a listing of 'substantial parking required'. How will this reduce the levels of noise and air pollution along the A4?

David George Individual Avoiding over development and keeping some degree of human scale. Just because you can build high does not mean you should. Create a long term sustainable area that people want to live in. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual It shouldn't be a Corridor, it should be a destination. The thinking is wrong and does not attract business that wants to stay. You need to create a perfectly formed self- sufficient community. A big priority must be affordable homes and not selling to absentee/investment owners. Aidan Allanach Individual No Ken Munn Individual ‘Greening’ the area. Stephanie Lang Individual Any additional buildings should not be above the current heights. Buildings along Chiswick High Road should not be above the height of the current hotel Ross Garside Individual Apart from vehicular access there is not sufficient public transport to serve the area. Keep Osterley Green Community group Currently we feel that the improvements proposed for transport elsewhere in the document must come before the increase in workers and also sufficient GP’s surgeries, libraries, Green spaces and schools must be secured prior to population increase. Donald Osborne Individual Architectural quality and overall design of the whole area. Is this a plan or a free-for-all?

Iris Hill Individual A corridor, as you call it, cannot be anything but a place that you pass through. Develops are seeing this as an opportunity to create “desirable” accommodation which as we know will be bought by foreign owners who do not live in them. The laughably named affordable housing is not affordable to those who really need it. So there can never be a community under such circumstances. It is notable that the newish local Sainsbury at Kew Bridge is more expensive that the main stores. This reflects the clientele that the store expects to use it Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Beyond the development suggestions I made in 3, no. The somewhat mixed use is probably needed – we need to have a Screwfix and a KwikFit somewhere and they are a heck of a lot better under the M4 than residential. Perhaps in fact the north side area I referred to above – w of Ealing Road – should be developed as light industrial. We know we’re short of it and this is not a good place for residential. B&Q site would be much better for residential (and yes, I know some people live there, and this needs to be respected) Martine Petetin Individual The Council should seek to reduce air pollution. Also, there is a lack of public transport with current stations struggling to cope with current levels of usage. As per para 4.15 of your Background Paper (Dec 2015). Developments must be subject to the actual delivery of strategic public transport improvements. Cooperation with TFL is essential and substantial improvement to public transport access must be in place before further developments. Kew Residents' Association Community group No comment

Victoria George Individual See above

Judy Rees Individual Growth of the “gig economy”, people need to be able to work from home, co-working spaces etc. Big office blocks are likely to be less useful in future. Really excellent communication (internet) and transport links will be vital to success. Knowledge workers need pleasant places to walk, enjoy nature and think. June Hoare Individual I’d like to see a plan with a much more sensitive approach to the environment and character of the area, [which has been well eroded over the years]: some very specific requirements for developments [and developers] to be green, carbon neutral, clean air pathways and with stated targets for native British planting. [see Lea river and Olympic park what green transformation was achieved] In the best of worlds working or living in a corridor is uncomfortable, added to which there is a flight corridor overhead – so the green challenge is perhaps greater than for any other part of London. Linda Tillman Individual As local residents we need to keep retail outlets to support our lifestyle e.g. supplies for home improvement, household goods and food. Affordable rents are critical. John Williams Individual The scope needs greater clarity and justification. There is an inbuilt assumption that ‘growth is good’, particularly business growth. Spell out the benefits. Council Leader Steve Curran’s opening sentence talks of a “renaissance of the Great West Corridor” alongside a picture of Gillette. 80 years have passed since those days. There are many identified and unresolved infrastructure problems in the area that need resolution before aspirational new plans. Jonathan Knight Individual The council should be promoting and adding to the sense of community that already exists. Building the BFC Stadium achieves this. Building high rise apartment blocks does not.

OWGRA Community group Currently OWGRA feel that the improvements proposed for transport elsewhere in the document must come before the increase in workers and also sufficient GP’s surgeries, libraries Green spaces and schools must be secured prior to population increase. Shetson Property Business Residential and transport links to support the demand. Developments Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business The creation of gateway/focal point/landmark building at Gillette Corner marking the start of the Great West Corridor/Golden Mile. The areas outlined as ‘employment’ within the Brentford Spatial Strategy on page 11, have the potential to be mixed use schemes incorporating residential accommodation. This would provide accommodation for workers within the area and prove a more sustainable form of development. Improvements to the public realm and pedestrian linkages across the Great West Road at Gillette Corner are required. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor - All infrastructure should come before developments and consequent increases in new residents and workers. - Schools, medical and social facilities should be built in tandem with any new developments. - Transport links and access should be planned and provided before new developments. - Through traffic should be tunnelled to allow surface links between commercial and residential zones; the Courts of Justice area in Barcelona is an example. Ken Newlan Individual No - they got it about right. David Pavett Individual Currently OWGRA feel that the improvements proposed for transport elsewhere in the document must come before the increase in workers and also sufficient GP’s

surgeries, libraries Green spaces and schools must be secured prior to population increase. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor I don’t agree with London housing being marketed in the middle east before locals, or key workers or first time buyers are given an opportunity, or buy to let landlords buying up property to rent out and not care about the area, but want a quick profit- can we put covenants in place to ensure people need to live in houses for a given time frame before they can rent them out or consider car limits per property (assuming public transportation can fulfil need). When building homes need to ensure there are enough schools, hospitals, parking etc. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Business parks, such as the Chiswick one, could be successfully built, as there is good access to GWR. This could be linked with retail and other light business premises. Electricity Supply Pension Business The spatial strategy diagram should identify opportunities Scheme for mixed-use development and local centres to serve the existing and future businesses on the Great West Road. The strategy should identify what services are required and how these can be delivered. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business The spatial strategy diagram should identify opportunities Investment for mixed-use development and local centres to serve the existing and future businesses on the Great West Road. The strategy should identify what services are required and how these can be delivered. McKay Securities PLC Business The M4 Gateway is of strategic importance to London and could serve as the visual entry point to London signalling “arrival and departure” to all those using Heathrow Airport. This strategic location should be acknowledged and identified by a series of tall landmark buildings of exemplary design. It should not be shackled to the fundamentally different requirements of Brentford Town

Centre for instance which would be better dealt with in a planning document specific to that area. The land use indicated in the Brentford Spatial Strategy diagram is too rigid, mechanistic and restrictive. There may be significant planning and sustainability advantages to have set uses, but as conceived at present, the area is being defined into zones. A much more open approach in the Vision would unlock additional growth along a major highway. There is a discrepancy between the prospective plan area shown in the Plan for Issue 1 and the Brentford Spatial Strategy in Issue 2 which is confusing and undermines the exercise. LaSalle Investment Business The Great West Road in Brentford between Chiswick Management roundabout and Gillette Corner is an established and successful office location, providing Grade A offices, which meet the office demand from global and national firms, such as Sega, Worley Parsons, GSK, Sky, JC Decaux, EMC amongst others. LaSalle considers that the strength of the office market in this area, and the future opportunity it brings in terms of regeneration and growth, should be reflected in the long term vision. However, the lack of amenities/services and accessibility/public transport links are perceived by occupiers and marketing agents as the weakness of the Great West Corridor. We therefore consider that a wide range of facilities accessible by foot and cycle and improved public transport linkage and public realm/environment are the key to the delivery of viable and attractive office accommodation in this area. We consider that the Great West Corridor Plan should have clear and positive visions for the sites along the Great West Road, which support growth and mixed use

developments that integrate and relate well to the consented development in the Kew Gate. Hugh Mortimer Individual Proposals to enable the Great West Corridor Review Plan to be achieved in the plan period will totally depend on improvements to public transport being in operation before any additional development is occupied. Richard Mundy Individual See my answer to question 3. Adam Jackson Individual Lower impact. Low rise. Reduce congestion and air pollution. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor The Vision should have a clear green strategy, a commitment not to build on garden land, and a clear strategy for the heritage of the area which gives the town of Brentford its uniqueness. Gillette Corner Holdings Ltd Business We consider that there is a disparity between the policy aspirations for the GWC as outlined in Policy SV1 and the wider approach taken in the emerging issue and supporting text. Place making and creating a vibrant environment is paramount to the successful redevelopment of the GWC as a creative, digital and media hub. There needs to be compelling positive reasons why they should choose the site and a key consideration in this decision making process is staff recruitment and retention.

While we support the principle of promoting employment development, there should be specific recognition of the importance of delivering Use Class 81 (a) office floorspace in emerging policy, along with supporting lifestyle and amenity uses and a potential hotel and an element of residential floorspace. The existing policy support for the provision of Use Class B1(b) B1 (c) light industrial floorspace will not meet the demand and needs of the creative, digital and media sector and will not unlock the

employment potential of the site. At present, we consider that the proposed distribution of land uses within the character areas are too restrictive and given the life span of the Local Plan and rapidly changing creative, media and digital sector it should be more flexible. I Kew Society Community group The requirements for health care provision as a result of population growth (residential or employment) get little or no mention. More emphasis should also be given to creating communities, including affordable homes with access to green spaces. Emphasis should also be given to improving the quality and number of pedestrian routes across the Corridor, particularly the A4 which should not divide communities. A full assessment of the cumulative impact of growth on traffic and consequent air pollution needs to be undertaken to ensure compliance with legal requirements currently being breached. Cecilia Hodgson Individual Currently I feel that the improvements proposed for transport elsewhere in the document must come before the increase in workers and also sufficient GP’s surgeries, libraries, Green spaces and schools must be secured prior to population increase. Brentford Community Council Community group The A4 lined with employment sites. We endorse the exclusion of residential or mixed uses as the sites are so polluted (issue 6). We understand that the background employment paper will not be ready for consultation before February 22 so it is not possible to comment on the demand for employment development nor the amount of land that may be required during the plan period. Brentford Community Council Community group We are concerned that parts of the existing residential areas are shown in pink, while others are not. If the intention is to indicate that the Syon estate, north of

London Road and parts of the residential area east of Ealing Road should be demolished and redeveloped at higher densities we would ask that this intention should be dropped and that all existing residential areas in this diagram should be shown un-coloured. Brentford Community Council Community group Heritage: The plan shows Gunnersbury House and Boston Manor House, but fails to show the Steam Museum (Grade 1) or the buffer zone of the Kew Gardens World Heritage site. Further heritage assets like CAs, listed and locally listed buildings should be indicated on an appropriate map and policies should ensure that their character and setting are fully protected. This diagram should include the Gillette listed building as its tower is an important landmark which should not be compromised by any high buildings which would affect it's setting. Brentford Community Council Community group 2.9. Para 1 refers to the Vision behind this plan. While it is widely recognised that visionary plans like Brasilia or Chandighar capture the imagination around the world, a vision which is not based on a real understanding of what is required and what will be appropriate in a particular location can be more of a liability than an asset. There seems to be a real possibility that the vision behind the Great West Corridor is faulty, given that it proposes high density development when public transport is so poor, where air quality may pose a threat to the lives of children and where the demand for new commercial development requires such extensive promotion.

Issue 3: Achieving Economic and Employment Growth

Name Respondent Type Q5 Do you think the digital and media sector should be prioritised in the Great West Corridor? If so, what can the Council do to support and encourage growth and spin off benefits? Legal and General Property Business Prioritising the digital and media sectors would be consistent with the ongoing development of the BskyB campus. The Council should also consider the introduction of uses which will support a media cluster including the provision of housing on adjoining sites such as the West Cross Industrial Estate. Sarah Hill Individual Make the area somewhere where people wish to spend their leisure time and do their shopping. Dorothy Boland Individual Yes – create some related housing/village facilities such as cafes, restaurants, health/fitness facilities. E.g. there could be good development of the canal-side around Transport Avenue which would create very pleasant environment. Rolfe Judd Planning Business Provision of housing to accommodate workers within the digital and media sector would encourage further growth of this sector. As stated within Issue 3 the expansion of the Sky Media Campus will bring the total number of jobs to over 12,000. Future residential accommodation is required for these workers. Residential development along the Great West Road would be within close proximity of these employment hubs. Such sustainable forms of development would reduce the dominance of the private car as workers

would have the opportunity to live in close proximity to their workplaces. McKay Securities PLC Business The digital and media sector should not be prioritised in the Great West Corridor. Although very welcome it is fortuitous, and has been brought about without the benefit of planning polices to encourage it. A variety of sectors would allow the area to flourish, thus diversifying economic activity and resilience. The LPA should not involve itself directly in trying to ‘fine tune’ this as this will only create inflexibility and make the area less attractive to investment. There is a greater prospect of encouraging the digital and media sector by improving the appearance of the area for instance through high quality street furniture, and public landscaping and granting permission for A1, A2 and A3 uses. Iris Hill Individual What do you mean by ‘already established companies’? Why would they want to in work in such a bleak area with loads of glass and concrete? Leave historic buildings as they are to give the area some character and attractiveness. If you mean start-ups then it is all going to be too expensive. Aidan Allanach Individual Whilst Sky is a significant employer, it is not the only significant employer currently in the Golden Mile. One of the good things about the area today is the diversity of the nature of companies based there – from Pharmaceutical, to media to Insurance. Ken Munn Individual The council should not prescribe types of employment. Any employment opportunities should be encouraged, especially those which would support unskilled and semi- skilled roles, to help reduce unemployment amongst those who are not naturally ‘knowledge workers’.

Ross Garside Individual A variety of mixed commercial industries provides diversity and will have lower impact if one sector diminishes. John Williams Individual No. Why not also, pharmaceutical growth around the GSK complex or bicycle development around the Brompton plant? The Council should welcome all sectors. The Council has limited ability to influence the location of businesses. Infrastructure, the availability of talent, and costs will be the drivers. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Concern is too much concentration in one area- issue is Netflix and online offerings can distort the market – Sky has been around only since the 1980s, it may not be around in another 30 years- need to ensure not concentrated in one industry- consider dot coms and hubs / shared office space. I would like something similar to Heathrow and the apprentice centre- too often people commute in from elsewhere in London- it would be great to encourage a feeder system from schools into such businesses e.g. apprenticeships Cllr Myra Savin Councillor We have to be careful with the priority siting of any one business area, due to volatile business investment, and the media and digital sector are no different. However a centre for digital and media investment is a consideration, but a mixed capacity should be sought, particularly bearing in mind the use of third sector education. LaSalle Investment Business Our local and national agents attended the workshop on Management the Environment Land Review in January 2016. As stated in our contribution to that work, whilst we recognise that there could be demand for a media/digital hub in Brentford from media companies and potentially SMEs, demand for office space along the GWR is also likely to

continue to come from the larger national and international corporate sector. It is therefore essential that the GWC Plan does not focus entirely on a specialised commercial sector alone to secure economic growth. We do not object to the Council’s aspiration to create accommodation and an environment that is attractive to this particular sector. However, it is important to ensure that office stock supply fulfils the demand from other sectors and their needs. In addition, market conditions change over time and any redevelopment opportunity should reflect the commercial demand and long term viability. This would inevitably stifle inward investment opportunities towards the regeneration of the area and spin off benefits from the landowners and developers. We therefore consider that a flexible approach is necessary. With regard to additional jobs/employment capacity of the Corridor as identified in the Golden Mile Site Capacity Study in 2015. It should be noted that we do not necessarily agree with the capacity identified for 27GWR as the indicative massing, height and layout used to identify the capacity does not maximise the site’s potential. LaSalle has instructed an architect to undertake a massing study, and once completed, we wish to discuss it with the Council in order to support and inform the preparation of Great West Corridor Plan. Richard Mundy Individual I disagree with prioritising only media - this is putting the area’s jobs ‘all in one basket’. The area’s other strengths should also be encouraged (e.g. pharma (GSK), engineering/energy (Worley Parsons, Tullow, Aker).

These other sectors can provide better-paid and more secure jobs than the media sector. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor I think any business along the GWC should be encouraged. There is no need to identify this employment hub simply for one type of business. However it should be kept as is for employment uses only and definitely redeveloped for any residential purposes. I believe that no building should exceed the height that already exists and that the soft and hard landscaping should be retained and enhanced. Brentford Community Council Community group The background paper on employment will not be available for consultation until after February 22 so any comments made at this stage may be premature. The GWC includes valued employers like Glaxo Smith Kline and Sky, which local residents would wish to see expanded as sustainable Brentford enterprises. It also includes many small scale workshops and warehouses north of the A4 which are apparently threatened by this plan. The BCC would hope that the plan could be modified so that both elements could be retained. David Pavett Individual I have no idea whether digital and media should be prioritised. Since no arguments based on consideration of alternatives. June Hoare Individual Without significant improvements in the infrastructure and in the quality of the environment it will be hard to make this corridor attractive. Encouraging more people in will only make this worse High Sense Securities Ltd Business As set out in the Local Plan, there is an identified demand for an additional 200,000 sqm of office floorspace during the plan period to 2030. The London Plan more specifically identifies that the GWC Strategic Outer London Development Centre is a strategically important

area for digital and media related industries. Whilst a growing industry, in response to Question 5, we support the emergence of the media and digital businesses but consider that the Council should be careful in developing their detailed policies to ensure that this is not at the expense of general B1 floorspace for which there is also an identified demand. Within the Local Plan, Power Road is designated as a Locally Significant Industrial Estate (LSIS). This reflects the history of the estate which has traditionally supported industrial uses. However, such uses have certainly declined over the past couple of decades and the character of the area continues to evolve. The estate supports a range of uses, including car showrooms, a gym, car mechanics and a large take up of office space. In taking forwards the development of the GWC Plan, sufficient flexibility should be allowed to support those uses which are in demand and which are likely to grow in the future. Gillette Corner Holdings Ltd Business We support the intention to focus on creative, digital and media uses with the GWC Plan as set out in Policy SV1 Part (e), to secure the employment function and long term vitality of the area. This is in accordance with the aspirations of the Strategic Outer London Development Centre designation set out in the London Plan. A report by The British Council for Offices report entitled "Technology, Media and Telecommunications (May 2014) states that 8% of the nation’s GDP comes from TMTs and attracts direct and additional value of more than £100 billion. The report states that the TMT sector was responsible for more than one third of all office take-up in 2013 and continues to be a considerable driver for economic growth, job creation and office take-up.

The TMT market is growing steadily and so we support the provision of employment floorspace to meet the needs of this sector within the GWC. However, in order to harness the full potential for the growth of this sector, it is important that the policy position remains flexible. Restrictive policies will prohibit the ability of the private sector to deliver the sites required to meet the ever changing requirements of this sector. Policy should reflect the need for creative office space, complimentary ancillary lifestyle uses and amenity uses together with a potential hotel and an element of residential use in order to create a vibrant environment that is attractive to creative, media and digital employers. Starbones Ltd Business It is positive that the digital and media sectors have been identified as a priority in the Great West Corridor. As a result, future policies should allow for a flexibility in B1 floorspace types, such as co-working floorspace, and other types which suit the digital and media sectors such as those proposed as part of the Chiswick Curve. Martine Petetin Individual Not particularly, employment of local residents should take priority over fashionable areas of development such as digital and media. Lionel Road Developments Ltd Business The Club supports the continued protection of the employment land to the south of the M4 (Kew Bridge Distribution Centre) as a Locally Significant Industrial Sites allocation. This employment land helps to reinforce the importance of this strategic corridor for employment growth and the potential for further leisure uses. The Club is keen to work with surrounding land owners to ensure match day operations run safety and efficiently and to ensure that the new stadium has the ability to grow and fulfil its role as a major community asset for the Borough.

Kew Residents' Association Community group Clean modern industries based in offices, studios, laboratories, etc. are likely to provide both more jobs and a more pleasant living environment than heavy manufacturing or other heavy industrial use. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor No more than it is now. Digital and media industry is a highly volatile employment sector and potentially subject to ‘instant’ change when compared with other employment types, the BBC at White City is a good example. There is a need to establish mix of activity to grow to replace media sector should it relocate to other parts of the world such as the Far East. Current and any future operators should be required to recruit locally as well as share their space and facilities with the borough’s residential community. Electricity Supply Pension Business Digital and media sector should not be prioritised. It is Scheme essential that the employment opportunities are not focused on a single sector and provide broad opportunities to improve the employment prospects of residents in Hounslow and West London. This will also ensure that the economy of the GWR is not vulnerable to downturns or changes to one sector. Employment floorspace should therefore, be flexible and adaptable. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business Digital and media sector should not be prioritised. It is Investment essential that the employment opportunities are not focused on a single sector and provide broad opportunities to improve the employment prospects of residents in Hounslow and West London generally. This will also ensure that the economy of the Great West Road is not vulnerable to downturns or changes to one sector. Employment floorspace should therefore, be flexible and adaptable.

West Chiswick and Community group More attention needs to be paid to creating the Gunnersbury Society conditions necessary to retain current employers and to maintain a healthy mix of employers, including a wide range of SMEs. It is to be deeply regretted that Brompton Bikes has found it necessary to leave Brentford in order to expand. This sector should be encouraged and supported but not prioritised. Over dependence on one sector or on a small number of large global employers is a high-risk strategy. Need to retain, attract and support SMEs offering a wide range of employment types and skill levels. Need to encourage all employers to recruit locally (to reduce commuting into and out of borough) and bridge the skills gap. The Isleworth Society Community group Failure to provide the background paper on employment precludes informed comment. There should be more concentration on small scale workshops and warehouses north of the A4. Brentford Chamber of NGO We need a clear policy and provision of light industrial Commerce and commercial space for SMEs at long term affordable rents to enable businesses to develop and grow. Kath Richardson Individual Brentford needs small light industrial and commercial at affordable prices for both sole traders up to the likes of Brompton. It’s not just the multinationals that we need to provide employment but also for local businesses and local business people. We need space for SMEs who are being run out of town like Brompton and Octink but also numerous smaller ones who are leaving. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual I suggest that you develop small start-up space for high tech entrepreneurs and their equivalent in dining and crafts. Unlike Shoreditch and Hoxton this is rather an "uncool" area so you need to compete with sports facilities, better use of the river and boost historic Brentford.

Donald Osborne Individual Rentable and small office premises for start-ups and small firms. They would probably prefer to be in a cluster somewhere central, but there is always local demand. Linda Tillman Individual Yes. Digital and media seems a suitable sector. It is really important that there is flexible and affordable workspace to allow smaller companies and start-ups to be there as well as the giants such as Sky. Ken Newlan Individual Yes. Especially hardware manufacturing and R&D- provide incentives for rent, create low-cost start-up premises with fast internet speeds (e.g. Custard Factory Birmingham) - why not use the Bannister Fetcher Gillette building for such an enterprise?? The Grove Park Group Community group Certainly, if possible. As above, the bleak landscape of the GWR is not an ideal place to locate a fast-moving flexible modern company, especially if they want to attract a motivated workforce, which means establishing a safe and encouraging work environment, plus simple travel options to be able to get to the workplace, preferably from somewhere inside the borough, not outside it. As stated above, the single most important thing on the Great West Road is to establish a proper transport infrastructure, without which any campaign to attract new business will be very difficult. Brentford Community Council Community group We support the priority for digital/media where it is not at the expense of existing small factory and warehouse enterprises. (see para 3.2) St John's Residents' Association Community group No objections to this use per se but there should be a presumption against large scale multinational employment hubs with an emphasis on the creative and cultural sectors. Better use should be made of the existing large 1930s buildings such as the Gillette and

Pyrene buildings whose settings should be enhanced. The inter-war feel of the area should be promoted. Keep Osterley Green Community group Digital and Media should be prioritised and consideration should be given to the extent to which their facilities can be used for the benefit of the local residential community. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Yes. Not an expert in this area but council should be talking to existing businesses, trade bodies, trades unions, universities and colleges to determine what would be helpful and attractive. Existing local businesses should be encouraged to engage with the community especially schools and colleges, community groups and local councillors Victoria George Individual Yes. Jonathan Knight Individual Absolutely. The zone of the GWC between the 1000 building on the Great West Road and Gillette Corner is ideal for mixed commercial and residential low to medium rise development. To the north, south, east and west of this zone is 2-3 storey housing. A Canary Wharf style development would be completely out of place and discourage the influx of high tech, entrepreneurial SMEs that are the future. The River Brent has great potential for being an attractively landscaped zone overlooked by Brentford Dock style apartments, cafés and offices. The ideal is to create a zone where people live and work rather than commute OWGRA Community group Digital and Media should be prioritised and consideration should be given to the extent to which of their facilities can be used for the benefit of the local residential community. Shetson Property Business Digital media should be a top 5 priority. Council should Developments Ltd discourage static old billboards

Big Yellow Self Storage td Business It is noted that the primary objective for the GWC Plan is to promote employment growth in the corridor, particularly in the digital and media sectors. Whilst Big Yellow supports the focus of the Plan on growth in the digital and media sectors, it is considered vital to the prosperity of the area that other employment uses such as B8 (self-storage) are retained as part of the employment mix within the corridor. It is considered that the Kew Bridge Distribution Centre LSIS should remain unaltered by the GWC Plan. Big Yellow regard this LSIS as an important industrial location within the Borough and industrial uses such as B8 (self- storage) use would be compatible with nearby mixed use allocations.

Cecilia Hodgson Individual Digital and Media should be prioritised and consideration should be given to the extent to which their facilities can be used for the benefit of the local residential community.

Judy Rees Individual Digital and media (my own sector) is especially “giggy”. There aren’t very many Sky’s. There need to be an atmosphere of interconnectedness.

Name Respondent Type Q6 Do you think other industrial uses, such as those along Transport Avenue, should remain a part of the employment mix in the corridor?

Iris Hill Individual Those employed in Transport Avenue are going to be priced out of the area if you carry on as you wish to. McKay Securities PLC Business The LPA should focus on retaining broad employment uses and areas are and should not focus on the mix or nature of that employment. Future employment demands will be determined by international macroeconomic factors beyond the scope of the LPA to influence or control. The LPA should not involve itself at a level that will create inflexibility and act as a drag on the market. As long as an area identified as an employment area is providing an employment function, this will achieve spatial and land use planning objectives. LaSalle Investment Business Industrial/distribution space in West London works best Management with lower density site cover to function efficiently for occupiers. We have given an example of how the sites such as 27GWR would become totally unviable if it were to be redeveloped for industrial/distribution purposes. Moreover, the established use of 27GWR is office, and the changing character of the area does not lend itself suitable or appropriate for low density industrial uses, both in terms of amenity, and meeting the industrial/logistic sectors’ demand. It is therefore imperative that new industrial and logistic development should be directed on sites that are right in terms of size and location. Not all designated employment sites, including those along Great West Road in Brentford, are the right size and location. As such, they should not be “safeguarded” for industrial/logistics type uses, and in particular, we

request that the existing Locally Significant Industrial Site designation for 27GWR should be removed for an appropriate allocation.

Jonathan Knight Individual I would support any encouragement of light industrial manufacturing. Brompton Cycles is a great example of a high value low noisemaking business that can coexist in a mixed development. Why is it moving out of the area? Sarah Hill Individual I have no opinion on this. The Isleworth Society Community group It is not possible to access employment benefit that could be derived from this by 2030 given that employment to be generated from consents already given including outline consents has not been included. David Pavett Individual Similar to the answer for (5). Asking for answers to such questions without laying out alternatives and the various pros and cons seems to me to be the mark of a “consultation” in which the answers have already been determined in advance. The Grove Park Group Community group It depends. Light industry - yes, depending on what they make. Heavy industry, attracting frequent truck deliveries - no. It is a shame that the popular and ground-breaking Brompton cycle factory could not have been persuaded to stay within the borough. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual I think it is too close to central London for this heavier industrial use. John Williams Individual No. Pre-war the ‘Golden Mile’ was industrial, i.e., big factories behind art- deco facades. Those days have passed. The supporting local foundries and gas-works have long since disappeared. Any new industrial use development would impinge heavily on adjacent residential areas. Ken Newlan Individual Look to re-site it e.g. recycling and waste disposal.

Electricity Supply Pension Business It is considered that industrial uses should be directed Scheme away from higher density employment areas along the Great West Road and M4, as it is not considered that such uses are compatible with higher density mixed-use areas. However, industrial uses still have a place in the employment mix subject to their type and location. Employment designations in high-density areas should become more flexible to allow a mix of uses, which are capable of supporting employment uses. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business It is considered that industrial uses should be directed Investment away from higher density employment areas along the Great West Road and M4, as it is not considered that such uses are compatible with higher density mixed-use areas. However, industrial uses still have a place in the employment mix subject to their type and location. Dorothy Boland individual Not sure – concrete mixers do not go very well with (presumably small) digital/media enterprises. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Rubbish and waste etc. industry have to go somewhere, whether Transport Ave is the place I don't know! It does appear to be an appealing place for redevelopment and moving present occupants to a less central area could be a consideration. Starbones Ltd Business We support the key objective of the Great West Corridor Plan in promoting employment growth. Our Client is committed to contributing towards the provision of 2,200 employment opportunities identified for this area of the Plan, through the provision of 4,608sqm of floorspace at Chiswick Roundabout (equating to around 450 employees). Therefore we welcome the opportunity to promote an uplift in employment floorspace in the Corridor. Brentford Community Council Community group Yes. (See para 3.3), not just in Transport Avenue.

St John's Residents' Association Community group Yes providing that there is an emphasis on freight by rail making use of the existing infrastructure there. West Chiswick and Community group Yes, the borough needs to retain a wide range of Gunnersbury Society employment types. Over dependence on one sector or on a small number of large global employers is a high-risk strategy. Brentford Chamber of NGO Yes, not just in Transport Avenue. Commerce Kath Richardson Individual Yes, Transport Avenue is good for industrial use and there are few alternatives. We need more industry and less offices. David George Individual Yes keep a mixed area Aidan Allanach Individual Whilst several of these businesses are not especially glamorous, they do provide a necessary service – for example waste management. Furthermore, they do not especially impact upon the area or those covered by this proposal. Their impact on the traffic is fairly limited given their utilisation of rail freight when compared to the traffic impact of other current or prospective employers in the area. Lastly, it could prove extremely difficult to relocate these businesses due to their nature. Considering waste management in particular, it could impact adversely upon Hounslow Council’s own services significantly – adding extra cost and complexity. Ken Munn Individual Yes Graham Seaman Individual Yes, variety is a good thing. Ross Garside Individual Yes – we still need areas of heavier industrial uses which can benefit the area. Keep Osterley Green Community group Other industrial units should remain part of the employment mix mainly because they provide/facilitate valuable local services and also local jobs for people who may not be able to, or may not want to, work in digital or media.

Donald Osborne Individual Yes. Modern industries should be a centrepiece of the plan. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Yes. They represent both an important part of the employment mix and are necessary to underpin local services Martine Petetin Individual Yes Victoria George Individual Yes, but concentrate on sustainable industry. Judy Rees Individual Yes Linda Tillman Individual Yes OWGRA Community group Other industrial units should remain part of the employment mix mainly because they provide/facilitate valuable local services and also local jobs for people who may not be able to, or may not want to, work in digital or media. Shetson Property Business Yes, a variety in employment is good however pollution Developments Ltd traffic should be controlled. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Definitely and existing policies strengthened to deter closure of businesses in favour of residential uses. Other uses should remain part of the employment mix mainly because they provide, facilitate and support valuable local services and local jobs for people not able or wanting to work in digital or media. Space for heavy and light engineering, logistic and warehouse jobs and activities should be maintained and supported. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor I have concerns with the industrial areas being turned into residential. Where will future jobs be located? It is important to have a diverse mix to keep some employment at all times, for example utilities are stable in a recession, industries can be easily disrupted these days (e.g. uber and taxi industry), need to ensure diversity

Note that not everyone in this area has one skill set there are multiple skill sets present in the borough. The Day Group Business Transport Ave. activities protected by NPPF para 143. The industrial jobs associated with their yard are particularly important to retain as they cannot be relocated given the need for the railway infrastructure and the importance of transporting minerals by rail as set out in the NPPF Richard Mundy Individual Yes Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor Definitely yes. Cecilia Hodgson Individual Other industrial units should remain part of the employment mix mainly because they provide/facilitate valuable local services and also local jobs for people who may not be able to, or may not want to, work in digital or media.

Name Respondent Type Q7 If you work in the Great West Corridor, in what location do you work? What do you like or dislike about working in the area?

Alastair Nixon Individual I occasionally work on the GWR, although I’m primarily based near Heathrow. I’m a resident just south of the A4 at Osterley. I think the area is a great place to live and work, but is noisy and polluted. Residential roads that were busy 5 years ago are now better described as congested (e.g. College Road, St Johns Road, Twickenham Road). In my time as a resident here, since 2000, there has been a continuing trend towards more congestion which needs to be addressed. Aidan Allanach Individual I work in GlaxoSmithKline. As I live in Ealing, I like the fact that I do not have to commute into central London. Furthermore, several of the surrounding areas are pleasant and central London is fairly accessible. One of the things I do find troubling however is people’s journey times to their work which they have no practical choice but to complete by road. As stated in the consultation, traffic on the M4 and Great West Road is a significant issue. Many of my colleagues face journey times of 1 and a half hours each way despite living 30 miles or less away. This doesn’t seem positive for wellbeing or the overall environment Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor I do not now work in the corridor but used to work in Great West House (near Brentford Station) Railways aside, local transport is patchy. The GWR area is very cut off from the town centre – physically by the railway and psychologically by the residential areas which separate the two pieces. The river/canal would be much better appreciated if it was more visible/accessible

Brentford Chamber of NGO The ability to walk to work for some, the increasing Commerce difficulties of commuting from a relatively short distance, be it via public or private transport. Lack of support from Hounslow for SMEs. Judy Rees Individual Home office in Brook Road South. Post Office etc. a short walk away, nice walks through Boston manor Park, canal etc. Like short-term office spaces like in GWQ, which allow start-ups to thrive. Like new coffee shops such as Verdict. Dislike that so many new developments have empty ground floors. Surely these could be used for something sensible? Shetson Property Business Work at the Osterley Hotel, like the greenery of the Developments Ltd parks, dislike the trucks and waste vehicles. LaSalle Investment Business As per our response to Q3 and Q4, the lack of Management amenities/services (with no pedestrian linkage to facilities in the town centre) and the reliance on cars are perceived by occupiers and agents, as the weakness of the corridor. We therefore agree with the Council’s view that the corridor’s success will largely depend on making the corridor more attractive to the workforce in the area by improving the offer for existing and future businesses in terms of leisure, night-time economy and public realm. In particular, our client and agents’ commercial view is that unless the amenity and transport access issues are fully addressed and significantly improved, the GWC will undoubtedly perform poorly and become less attractive to businesses in comparison to the proposed regeneration of Old Oak Common. We therefore consider it fundamental that the current deficiencies are properly addressed in the GWC Plan in order for the Corridor to

100

offer a commercial hub which is attractive to businesses and competitive with other employment hubs. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor I have not worked in the area, but if I did, think I would find the lack of a 'named' Brentford tube station frustrating. Boston Manor tube is in Brentford, but seems to have been claimed by Elthorne, west Ealing. However, it does encourage workers to walk through Boston Manor park to work on GWR, as does the regeneration of the canal, to use Brentford high St.

Hounslow Cycling Community group We are keen to see key employment sites retained and encouraged in the area, and only see new residential development where it has been proved that there is little prospect of employment use. This will help to maintain a healthy mix of uses in the area and enable people to live near their place of work, thus reducing the need to travel and its environmental impacts. Brentford Community Council Community group No. We are a residents' association. Kath Richardson Individual No. I work and live in Brentford. The Grove Park Group Community group (As above, the GWC has yet to be defined) Graham Seaman Individual I travel through the GWC to work, but work just outside it (Kew). Martine Petetin Individual I do not work in the Great West Corridor Kew Residents' Association Community group No comment David Pavett Individual I don’t work in the GWC. Richard Mundy Individual I live in this area, but do not currently work here. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor I am now retired. Linda Tillman Individual I do not currently work there. When I did it was the train link to Brentford station which was really helpful.

101

Issue 4: Creating New Strategic Transport Connections and Improving Ease of Movement around the Area

Name Respondent Type Q8 What should be the priorities for improving access to and from the area? Brentford Community Council Community Group The "game changing" rail links proposed are not in the control of the Council, would take many years to complete and are not likely to improve PTALs enough to encourage sustainable development. (See para 4.3). More and more frequent bus services radiating from Brentford Town Centre would be a more practical way of improving PTALs during the plan period and would help to give Brentford Town Centre the priority sought in the Local Plan. (See Local Plan policies TC1, TC2, TC3 and TC4). The regeneration of Brentford should start from Brentford Town Centre as the focus of the community which should not be under-mined by hiving off facilities to the GWC. St John's Residents' Association Community group Improved rail links to Southall and on the Hounslow loop line with an additional entrance at Syon Lane, substantial improvements to Kew Bridge station and enhanced rail frequencies. Bus priority is needed along the GWR together with an enhancement of the segregated cycling facilities. Better walk route to Brentford and Hanwell via the canal towpath. Improvements should also be sought to Chiswick Roundabout to ease traffic flows (particularly at weekends) and to improve bus reliability. Transport for London Government TfL suggests an action or principle is included to tackle severance caused by the M4/A4 and ensure both that there are good quality crossing-points for pedestrians and cyclists, and that the quality of the environment

102

under the flyover is improved. Better connections are implied in the reference to linking into Brentford town centre, but could be a more general objective. The Brentford spatial strategy diagram shows a number of connections for pedestrians but does not identify cycle connections, the key could simply be altered to reflect this. The connection to the towpath seems to be missing. There is a TfL scheme to provide an improved connection for cycling from Kew Bridge Road to Wellesley Road via Chiswick High Road. This may not merit inclusion in the Local Plan but it could be worth noting under the Kew Gate heading that high quality cycle parking should be provided or expanded at public transport nodes. An added strategic transport improvement could be provision of cycle hub(s) &/or a Brompton cycle-type scheme. The Plan should take more advantage of the Piccadilly line and the existing connections that this brings to the. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group To remedy the existing transport deficiencies before any Society further growth is considered - by improving public transport and making walking and cycling more attractive. The real problem with respect to transport improvements on which the entire strategy for the GWC depends is that the Council is unable to give any assurance of delivery as it is dependent on other bodies. The projects in the ICD, like the statements in the Local Plan policies EC1 and 2 are long-term aspirations/wish lists rather than firm policies. Only two improvements in Table EC1.1 are “planned”. Piccadilly Line upgrade for which the start date is to be confirmed (anticipated early 2020s). The other is the current District Line upgrade; although in principle an improvement, the increased train

103

capacity may well exacerbate the station capacity problems at Gunnersbury (see below).

The continuing absence of the footbridge between the Chiswick Business Park and Bollo Lane and the time taken to extend bus services to the business park provide stark evidence of the Council’s inability to deliver essential infrastructure in a timely manner. The need for the footbridge was recognised as early as 2001 and planning permissions have been granted in 2007, 2012 and 2015. GlaxoSmithKline Business Over the last two decades a number of transport proposals have been made for the area, but virtually nothing that is "game changing" has actually happened on the ground. It will therefore be important for the Plan to include proposal that have a good possibility of being implemented in the reasonably near future. We support the GWC proposals for an enhanced station at Brentford. This should include better bus interchange, cycle parking facilities and pedestrian accessibility. The GWC Plan needs to include a requirement for increased frequency of passenger services on the Brentford Loop from Clapham Junction and to other destinations including Hounslow, Twickenham and Weybridge at peak times. The GWC Plan should include reference to the need for the opportunity to influence the SW Trains rail franchise to ensure that rail services and investment on the existing line are maximised. The GWC Plan should specifically identify the need for an improved layout at the Great West Road/ Boston Manor Road intersection, to provide better connectivity between Brentford Station and GSK's global headquarters, with a particular focus on improving

104

pedestrian crossing and cycle facilities. Although GSK is located in a Key Existing Office Location (KEOL), the inbound public transport accessibility for employees is currently poor, this is reflected in the low PTAL score of 2/3. There is a strong argument to increase parking provision for existing employers. The GWC Plan should include an inbound accessibility assessment for each employment zone within the area, similar to that included within the Brentford Regeneration Framework a decade ago. Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO The regeneration of Brentford should start from Brentford Town Centre as the focus of the community. More and improved bus services along the A4 and through the town centre. Better public transport including rush hour train provision, and better weekend service Legal and General Property Business L&G agrees that the delivery of the new Brentford Golden Mile station will increase public transport capacity and considers that if it is to be pursued, the Council should consider how contributions from development sites in the corridor could be optimised. Sarah Hill Individual A run-around bus that goes up Ealing Road to South Ealing tube, across to Northfields Tube then back down to Brentford, linking the Piccadilly line to the area. The No 65 bus route is hopelessly infrequent and inadequate. Dorothy Boland Individual Better transport and some consideration for pedestrians to have safe Windmill Road Action Group Community group There must be “cast iron” guarantees that these proposals will be fully paid for and with firm dates for their completion before any associated growth developments are even considered.

105

The Isleworth Society Community group As transport improvements described are not under the control of LBH they can only be regarded as speculative at best. To avoid total gridlock, all proposed transport improvements need to be in place in advance of implementation of new employment and residential developments. Kath Richardson Individual The rail links are proposed only and long term. We have years to go. Cycling along the A4 is dangerous, unpleasant and unhealthy. Bus services along the A4 need to be improved (H91 better than it was but needs more) but also buses along the A4 and to tube stations. Brentford has a number of east west as well as north south buses but services need to be improved/maintained. Traffic junctions like Chiswick roundabout and Kew Bridge which cause major tail backs throughout the day need to be redesigned to maximise flow. South West Trains need to deliver the service they have promised for Brentford and increase the frequency and length of trains. The Grove Park Group Community group 1. Secure funding for the Southall rail link. 2. Improve bus services along the A4, including smaller commuters buses to Osterley Station (unfortunately Gunnersbury Station is now overloaded) 3. Produce a study on the possibility of a light railway/ tramline to run down the centre of the A4 to Chiswick from at least Osterley Underground Station but possibly as far as Heathrow Airport. 4. Produce a study of the current use of motor vehicles in Brentford / A4 (Gillette Corner to Hogarth Roundabout / M4 (Junction 2 to Hogarth Roundabout) / A406 Kew Bridge to Ealing.

106

This will probably demonstrate the acute pinch points that impede traffic flow now, and may induce you to address what needs to be done to plan for the upsurge in vehicle use created by ongoing construction / new BFC Stadium, and any proposed refurbished buildings along the A4. David George Individual Improvements at Gunnersbury station and reducing road congestion. New developments should have limited parking. A link to Crossrail. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Solve the Chiswick Roundabout/M4/A4 slip to avoid stop start. Improve the north/south circular. Have local Hoppa buses in residential areas linking with express buses to tube and mainline station. Increase rail frequency from Waterloo 7 days a week and later at night. Sue Lewis Individual Improving rail links. The line into Waterloo is fine (if a bit slow) but the Piccadilly line is awful, very crowded and often subject to delays. Aidan Allanach Individual The priority must be to remove as much commuter traffic as possible from the road. The most practical and impactful solution is within rail and the projects outlined. The Golden Mile does currently enjoy good access to South and South West London via South West Trains and to Central London via the Piccadilly Line. Both of these in turn link to the London Terminal for intercity services. However, rail access West of Heathrow is very poor. Ken Munn Individual Rapid transit along the E-W axis which does not involve motor transport. Light rail? More permeability for N-S movement. Graham Seaman Individual Providing alternatives to motor transport. In terms of cycle access I would like to see the restoration of the cycle track beside the A4 and the reversal of the policy of removing cycle track and replacing with shared use pavement. (The section on the north side of the A4

107

between Windmill Rd and South Ealing Rd is an example of how this policy eventually removes cycle access, forcing cyclists onto the A road).

Additional cycle cross links between routes should be created; e.g. widening the canal route from A4 to Brentford to allow a cycle path which does not conflict with pedestrian use.

Transport policy, and road, path and cycle path creation or modification should in future be considered before large housing areas are constructed. The problems created where this has not been done i.e. Key Bridge area, where the London Road is now normally nearly static in rush hours. Maximum lorry size should be restricted off the wider roads. Access to building works by large vehicles should be restricted to off-peak hours (as is already successfully done for road works). Stephanie Lang Individual Gunnersbury Station urgently needs improvement to handle congestion including a lift, better platform access, more in and out gates and alleviation of the wind-tunnel effect. It is imperative that the ticket office remains open at Gunnersbury Station. Kew Bridge station will also need improvements to sign-posting, stairways, and lift and platform facilities. The cumulative impact on road traffic should be minimised. Ross Garside Individual Public transport especially rail links to central London, Heathrow and Old Oak Common HS2 connection. Alastair Nixon Individual Improved road infrastructure - improving pedestrian crossing facilities. Must be a priority. Right now, pedestrians are made to feel very much second class,

108

having to cross the 6 lane A4 with staggered lights and up to a 4 minute wait (2 minutes each direction) in places. Improving train links e.g. Syon Lane will be less effective if pedestrians have queue to cross the A4. Keep Osterley Green Community group Priorities should be to improve public transport to the commercial and industrial areas and walking routes to and from existing PT termini. Pedestrian access throughout the area needs to be improved. Donald Osborne Individual Major improvements to Gunnersbury and Kew Bridge stations. Iris Hill Individual Chiswick roundabout is a nightmare for navigating whether on foot or in a car. The pollution level is already well above the legal maximum. So you need to think how you can reduce car and lorry traffic around it. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor The transport situation in the town centre could reasonably be described as a crisis. Kew Bridge Road heading East and the High Street and Twickenham Road heading West are regularly gridlocked causing severe delays to bus traffic and effecting local business. So higher bus frequency is urgently needed on some routes. The planned new train services are needed as a matter of great urgency and should be implemented before planned major developments at Lionel Road, CIW, Wheatstone and Chiswick Curve generate traffic rather than several years after. I believe the centre of Brentford would be improved by a ‘Dutch’ approach with less traffic lights and pedestrian crossings, a 20mph limit and road space. I believe cycle superhighway 9 is still held up by other boroughs but what’s stopping partial implementation in Brentford? The cycle tracks on the A4 are basically OK but need better lighting and maintenance and redesign/reprioritisation at junctions.

109

Martine Petetin Individual Add stations and lines linking into TFL network. Get cars off the roads which are gridlocked for many hours a day and highly polluting. Kew Residents' Association Community group New improved public transport, e.g. the Skyline and the Golden Link. Major upgrade of Gunnersbury Station at the eastern end of the corridor and increased frequency of the Underground and Overground services serving it. Improved road infrastructure.

Victoria George Individual Less car access, more buses, consider a tram. Consider low energy forms of transport. Judy Rees Individual Super-high-speed internet. Clear routes for buses through Brentford and Kew Bridge. June Hoare Individual A key issue is that the M4 makes it a corridor and one would not necessarily wish to increase access into the area from the passing traffic overhead. A key priority is reducing congestion which at present is chronic. Linda Tillman Individual Road - the junctions at Chiswick roundabout and at Kew Bridge/London road need changing because there are widespread tailbacks in all directions. Major building works are not going to help. Rail – the Sunday service of one train an hour is a disgrace. John Williams Individual More local bus routes serving Chiswick, Brentford, Hounslow plus express buses to Heathrow, Hammersmith and Feltham stations, plus Central London. Increasing bus transport is more quickly achieved than building new railways. H91 bus along the A4 is woefully inadequate. Frequent shuttle buses linking the A4 with Syon, Brentford, Osterley and Boston Manor stations. Of the proposed ‘game-changing’ rail access developments, the Southall Skyline should have priority. The revived line should terminate in Brentford Town,

110

with an A4 stop, and should have an interchange at Southall Station, not a bus connection. Jonathan Knight Individual Before any development of the GWC starts better rail services need to be opened. The planned station in Transport Avenue needs to be brought forward and linked under the A4 to the Waterloo to Hounslow line. A driverless shuttle service between the new station and Boston Manor (Piccadilly Line) would link the GWC to central London. In fact this shuttle could run between Kew Bridge Station and Boston Manor providing existing residents a much needed north/south public service. OWGRA Community group Priorities should be to improve public transport to the commercial and industrial areas and walking routes to and from existing PT termini. Pedestrian access throughout the area needs to be improved. Shetson Property Developments Business Links to Crossrail are important. Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business New rail links and increased frequency on existing rail links. Improving pedestrian access and the public realm from Syon Lane to Blue Sky via Gillette Corner. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor All these proposals would be welcomed but the details and designs should be on a human scale and surrounding environment protected and enhanced. - Improvements to public transport to commercial, industrial and residential areas should be a priority. - Walking routes to and from existing public transport stops and termini improved to make safe and handle commuters. - All pedestrian and cycle access throughout the area needs improvement.

111

- Skyline and Golden Link should also be designed to improve north-south connectivity with other parts of London. - Skyline should be designed to connect to the Hounslow Loop thereby linking surrounding centres as an alternative to private car use. - Improvements should be made to north-south and east-west bus routes and services.

Ken Newlan Individual Cycling infrastructure - separated lanes and traffic controls. David Pavett Individual Priorities should be to improve public transport to the commercial and industrial areas and walking routes to and from existing PT termini. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Ensure public transit is accessible and practical and safe e.g. adequate lighting along footpaths, maintained footpaths, fly tipping regularly removed (perception of lack of safety if area is a mess. Boston Boardwalk is a ridiculous name- if anything call it the Boston Manor Boardwalk. Ensure all stops are zoned and are costing no more than the underground- zoned appropriately. Tim Henderson Individual I am supportive of the 5 measures listed. In immediate priority I would place the Boston Board walk to improve public transport links from the Sky Campus to the Piccadilly line and reduce the fleet of shuttle buses running to Osterley Station. Attention should also be paid to improving the GWR cycle route as a continuous route on both the north and south sides of the A4. Crossings of Boston Manor Road and Ealing Road are particularly poor. Further east the section north of the A4 approaching Chiswick roundabout is dire and needs tackling. It is a pity that a link from the A4 to

112

run along the side of the rail chord to join with Gunnersbury Avenue has not been planned in conjunction with the Brentford FC proposals. In longer term, both the rail routes to connect with Crossrail. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Please see above Issue 3. Traffic is encouraged to Brentford's residential roads to access the A4/GWR. Which causes both residential and major arterial traffic hold ups. These effect public transport and businesses. New residential developments have put pressure on parking availability. We must work out the solutions for transport and pedestrians, who suffer from poor access in crossing the A4/GWR; TfL plans are not always suitable for pedestrians, as they seem very much 'car' focused. Salley Ltd & A J Optimum Business The owners welcome the proposed strategic transport Performance Ltd improvements being worked on by the Council with Transport for London and other stakeholders. The Skyline with its new station, Golden Mile, on the A4 new junction with Transport Avenue is particularly welcome given its close proximity to the owners’ sites. Electricity Supply Pension Business The public transport accessibility of the area needs to be Scheme enhanced in order to reduce its reliance on the car and to increase the opportunity for high density employment uses. Using existing rail lines to connect to Cross-rail and HS2 hubs is welcomed. On the back of this other public transport services such as buses can be approved as well as enhanced pedestrian and cycle routes Heinz Pension Plans Property Business The public transport accessibility of the area needs to be Investment enhanced in order to reduce its reliance on the car and to increase the opportunity for high density employment uses. Using existing rail lines to connect to Cross-rail and

113

HS2 hubs is welcomed. On the back of this other public transport services such as buses can be approved as well as enhanced pedestrian and cycle routes High Sense Securities Ltd Business The ability of the GWR to accommodate additional employment capacity will partially rely on improving access to the area, in terms of its pedestrian, cycle and public transport connectivity. In response to Question 8, we consider that the Council should prioritise the improvement and expansion of public transport and we support the introduction of a new or enhanced station within the Kew Bridge area, and the improved capacity of Gunnersbury station. McKay Securities PLC Business Improving methods of sustainable transport are vital to ensuring connectivity and movement. In turn, this will help to support economic growth and reduce the number of cars using the A4 and M4. We strongly support a new rail link at Brentford train station, as proposed on P15 of the Issues Paper, as this will significantly improve the ability to access 1000 Great West Road. Big Yellow Self Storage td Business Big Yellow is generally very supportive of the new transport infrastructure proposed within the GWC plan area. The new train station proposed approximately 150 metres to the west of Big Yellow’s site, between Brentford and South Acton is particularly welcomed. This new infrastructure will increase the accessibility of the site using public transport, minimising the number of trips to the site by car. However, due to the nature of B8 (self-storage) land use which often involves the movement of bulky items not suitable for public transport, there will remain a need for some cars and vans movement to and from the site.

114

Tesco Stores Ltd Business The GLA has identified it as having the potential to be designated as an Opportunity Area. In order to crystallise this designation, any major additional sites with housing potential should be identified within the plan. The benefit to the Council in the area being designated as an Opportunity Area, apart from the additional private interest and investment, is the greater availability of funding for infrastructure projects. It is to be expected that, for the GLA to designate the Corridor as an Opportunity Area, it will want sufficient certainty that a significant amount of new homes could be delivered. The inclusion of a further site, with significant housing potential, can only assist the case for the GLA to designate the Corridor as an Opportunity Area. The development itself may also be able to contribute towards funding for the ‘game changing’ transport improvements envisaged. The Day Group Business It will be essential to ensure that the two uses [skyline and existing uses] are compatible as it is vital to the business that sufficient delivery slots are available. Hounslow Cycling Community group Increasing development and housing density in the area are further reasons to enhance the environment for walking and cycling in the area, and we particularly welcome the proposal for a 'Great West Cycleway' with significantly upgraded cycleways along the A4. North- south cycle links are also important as these journeys are generally difficult or slow by public transport, and safe and attractive routes to rail stations should be provided, and employment sites should be encouraged to provide large, sheltered and secure cycle parking for staff and visitors.

115

Richard Mundy Individual The priorities should be; fast trains to Clapham Junction and Waterloo running on the existing line, getting Crossrail trains running to a station local to the Golden Mile, improving the walking/cycling experience along the A4, improving pedestrian access to the river from Brentford town centre. Adam Jackson Individual Rail not road.

Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor The Great West Road has a cycle path on the pavement. Cyclists are not using it as they need to double check when approaching any road or dropped kerb entrance for traffic which has in some instances caused deaths. It would be preferable that the cycle track is part of the road structure in that the pavement that the cycle track is on is cut away and given to the road space BUT as a cycle track. I support the new initiatives for local rail services but we need think about a park and ride system as well as improve services on the H91 and H28. Gillette Corner Holdings Ltd Business The poor PTAL rating is currently prohibitive to the development of the area and so we agree that improving the existing transport links is key to unlocking the development potential of the corridor. While we support all the transport improvement works highlighted under Issue 4, we consider that it is also fundamental to undertake on-going public realm works to improve the existing pedestrian routes. Improving the poor existing pedestrian routes will be key to unlocking the development potential of the corridor and in particular the Gillette site. At present it is necessary to walk through an underpass which is in much need of improvement, to get to Syon Lane Station.

116

Kew Society Community group Replacing car, lorry and van movements with rail, bus, cycle and pedestrian improved access. Cecilia Hodgson Individual Priorities should be to improve public transport to the commercial and industrial areas and walking routes to and from existing PT termini. Pedestrian access throughout the area needs to be improved. Brentford Community Council Community group Nor how vehicles could move or be parked if any new development was permitted before the transport improvements proposed in the issues paper and in the quoted (p 16 para 4) Strategic Case for Transport Investment Study" are in place. It is already clear that traffic movement is difficult and sometimes grid-locked.

GC.3.9. No proposals are included in the plan for improving the capacity of the critical junctions such as those close to Chiswick roundabout or at the approach to Kew Bridge which can be achieved during the plan period.

Brentford Community Council Community group The marking of pedestrian routes is welcomed. It should be noted that the numerous crossings of the A4 at grade will further delay traffic and reduce the capacity of the corridor. Additional delays will occur on match days when 20,000 fans arrive at and leave the stadium.

117

Name Respondent Type Q9 Which of the listed projects (or other ideas you have) should be the priority?

Brentford Community Council Community group Brentford Town Centre. See above.

Port of London Authority (PLA) Public body The aim of the Local Plan, in terms of travel and transport, is to further improve transport by promoting a safe, environmentally sustainable, attractive, accessible, healthy and efficient transport network. The consultation documents, including the Hounslow Local Implementation Plan, set out a number of key challenges and opportunities to improve transport and infrastructure. However, there is no specific mention of the use of the river to assist in this regard, which is disappointing. In terms of the consultation documents, little consideration appears to have been given to the promotion of river based transport, which would accord with the River Action Plan (February 2013). The plan outlines a number of specific measures to be taken by Transport for London (TfL) and other stakeholders to help boost the number of river trips.

The PLA would like to see consideration given to the use of the River Bus within the Borough’s Transport Policies. As discussed within the submission, the need to reduce our carbon footprint and establish sustainable communities is paramount within National Policy. The use of the river as an alternative transport method would therefore aid in promoting the objective of sustainable communities within the Borough. Whatever conclusions are made in terms of Transport, it must be in general conformity with the London Plan,

118

which is particularly strong on the use of water for transportation of goods and people. M C Bull Individual The skyline, sounds reasonable, provided it is confined to existing rail tracks. The Crossrail should only be allowed it does not mean demolition of any property, or alteration of residential roads (p14). Transport for London Government As it stands, the GWC plan looks at new pieces of infrastructure without necessarily taking advantage of what already exists. For example, Syon Lane and Brentford NR stations in close proximity to the A4 and key employment zone but do not feature in Issue 4’s visions nor are they in the study area plan. There is (understandably) considerable focus in the document on 2 rail links (a Crossrail spur and London Overground extension from Old Oak Common to Hounslow), but it would be pragmatic to also consider alternatives. TfL forecasts there will be minor iterative changes/improvements to Crossrail services, South West Trains and the Piccadilly line, however nothing on the scale of the Old Oak Common or Golden Mile extensions. Devolution of South West services to TfL is at an early stage of consideration/ consultation by the London Mayor. The ‘Boardwalk’ is an example of linking employment into the Piccadilly line / existing infrastructure but this seems to mainly benefit the Sky campus and considering this as a strategic improvement is questionable. The deliverability, i.e. the feasibility, costs and user- experience of the provision of a long bridge stretching high over the motorway and canal between Boston Manor station and the Sky campus should be explored further if it is further promoted in the vision. The Council should look for / consider opportunities on

119

the rail link to Southall, this could include additional stops. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group Of the listed projects, (c) The Boston Boardwalk, (d) the Society Great West Cycleway and (e) improved road infrastructure, especially improved pedestrian crossing facilities would, perhaps, have the best chance of delivery within the plan period. While these improvements would help to reduce the current dependence on private motor vehicles, they would only be a minor element of what is required. The current PTAL for many parts of the GWC is very low and the likely increase resulting from the proposed projects would still not bring it to a good level. Both Gunnersbury Station and Kew Bridge Station have significant access problems and Gunnersbury Station also has severe capacity problems. It is questioned why neither of these stations feature in the transport improvements.

User numbers at this transport hub will be augmented by employees and residents from other consented developments including the 910 residential units in the Brentford Football Stadium scheme in Lionel Road South; the station is also expected to handle large numbers of football supporters from the new stadium. The overcrowding at the station is such that TfL currently operates crowd control measures during peak hours.

GlaxoSmithKline Business The primary strategic deficiency in public transport for this area is in the orbital direction. Both the "Skyline" and "Golden Link" rail proposals are aimed at addressing this. The Plan states that the Skyline could be in operation before 2020 and the Golden Link by the mid-2020s. If

120

these dates are realistic, both these schemes have GSK's support. The Golden Link would be of greater value as this will increase inbound accessibility more than the Skyline, which has no onward orbital rail connection beyond Southall. Previous attempts to introduce a rail service similar to the Golden Link have been thwarted by details such as the lack of train paths, the two level crossings within Ealing, and the difficulty of providing a high quality interchange with Crossrail/HS2 at Old Oak. The Anglia service on this line was abandoned partly because of lack of train paths. The Golden Link proposal needs to be developed as soon as possible to a sufficient level of detail to check that these constraints can now genuinely be overcome, and that the necessary funds to achieve this will be forthcoming. We note that TfL are currently spending £35 million on repairing the bridge which takes the A406 North Circular Road over this line, which is encouraging. Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO Brentford Town Centre. Essential to encourage a future for Brentford Sarah Hill Individual Pull down tower blocks on Green Dragon Lane and build low-rise accommodation. Dorothy Boland Individual Absolutely first – and probably easiest to attain – make Kew Bridge station safe for people to access and exit trains. The tunnel under Lionel Road South will relate to one platform only, and will not eliminate or address in any way the gap between train and platforms. Oonagh M Boland Individual There should be guarantees that these will be paid for and firm dates given for completion before any associated growth developments are even considered. The Isleworth Society Community group Improved road infrastructure, although it is concerning there is no mention of existing congestion problems at

121

the intersection approach to Kew Bridge which will be exacerbated by further high density housing here for which consent has already been given. Kath Richardson Individual Brentford Town Centre needs to be a priority. Whether Ballymore or other, Brentford residents and businesses need a functioning town centre. There is no point in improving links between A4 and high street if there is little to do when you get to the high street. Focus. The Grove Park Group Community group As above, the plan has it backwards: there can't be any commitment to putting office workers or new residents in areas where they are subject to high levels of air and noise pollution. There are no plans for Hounslow to tackle air and noise pollution, so producing those should be an absolute priority, as should be installing the necessary transport infrastructure to make the A4 a viable place to work.

As stated in the Local Pan, the desired transport infrastructure is unlikely to be delivered with the Local Plan's 15-year period, and it is not under Hounslow Council's control anyway, so a complete re-think is need. Transport infrastructure along the A4 should come first.

Similarly there isn’t yet a 'Tall Buildings' Policy - why not? One is proposed, but with no delivery date. This is vital to be able to set maximum heights for new buildings, without which there will be a wholesale trampling on the borough's heritage sites, with particular threat to the Kew Gardens World Heritage Site. It is clear from the visuals produced by Urban Initiatives Studio, 3rd party advisors to Hounslow Council that their answer to growth aspirations is to site more high-rise office buildings straddling the elevated M4 - the very

122

place that the Local Plan wouldn’t permit for all the above reasons. This is seriously out of kilter with the objectives of the Local Plan, and indeed with any serious and responsible plan to induce meaningful growth in employment and housing opportunities.

Since the Council has already approved the overly dense and resident-unfriendly 'Kew Gate' area triangle (not near Kew, and not a 'gate' to anywhere), it would be sensible to reconsider how it might be possible to at least try to make the area between the A4 and the railway line, north of Kew Bridge Station and west of Chiswick High Rd more conducive to human interaction and enjoyment.

David George Individual The Golden Link with a new station at Kew Gate Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Golden Link your priority Sue Lewis Individual The proposed link with Willesden Junction and Crossrail. The sooner the better. What about a tram line along the A4? Aidan Allanach Individual The “Skyline” is rightly placed as the first option in the consultation. It appears easy to complete and would have the biggest impact and soonest. It would completely unlock access to the Great Western Mainline for access to Berkshire and beyond. This will eliminate the need for much if not the majority of journeys made on the M4 to Brentford – in turn unlocking capacity for expansion of the Golden Mile. For these reasons it is the top priority Whilst the Golden Link is an excellent initiative, it seems much more complex to implement which is presumably reflected in the longer lead time. It is still worth implementing in the longer term but not at the expense of the Skyline.

123

Graham Seaman Individual I think all are important. My own interest is in “D, which as presented here is very badly worded: “The Great West Cycleway – improved cycle lanes along the A4 to provide a safe, segregated and continuous east-west route, attracting more cyclists from a greater catchment.”

I hope this is not intended to say what it actually says: firstly given the existence of good-quality, safe cycle tracks beside much of the A4 these should not be replaced with 'cycle lanes along the A4'. Instead, the cycle tracks beside the A4 need restoring and work putting in to creating safe and convenient junctions where this track crosses other roads. Second, the priority should not be to 'attract more cyclists from a greater catchment' but to make cycling a practical means of transport for people living within the existing catchment.

A further priority (not listed) should be local control of the planned Cycle Superhighway. It is important that the Council prevents this from becoming a token route which further discourages people from cycling and puts people’s lives at risk. A proper superhighway cannot be routed through the Chiswick roundabout, Kew Bridge junction, and along London Road without major changes. Otherwise an alternative route should be created (this could be along the A4. Ross Garside Individual Improving frequency of services and better access to rail stations. A tramlink on the A4 connecting stations would massively improve connectivity.

124

Alastair Nixon Individual What does continuous cycle lane mean? If it means giving way to fast moving traffic coming from behind and turning at each side road (like it is now), then it’s neither continuous nor safe. At minor roads (e.g. no traffic lights on A4), cyclists should be given priority over turning traffic. Otherwise, you get (and now have) enthusiast cyclists on the A4 itself (where they have priority at side roads), and far fewer regular cyclists using the cycle path. I use the cycle path on the A4 from Wood Lane to beyond Hounslow every day, but only occasionally see other cyclists. This route has the potential to be a major east west cycling highway but as is it’s a limited used path. Keep Osterley Green Community group Boardwalk, Golden link, Skyline. Lionel Road Developments Ltd Business The Club supports the Council’s transport aspirations, in particular the new Skyline, The Great West Cycleway, improved road infrastructure and The Golden Link with the new station off Lionel Road South using the existing rail freight line. The Club considers that the new and improved transport connections are critical in order to achieve a sustainable level of growth over the GWC Plan Period. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor The Golden Link, plus cycling and bus related work as above. Project e (improved road infrastructure) appears to be completely undefined. The improved pedestrian and cycle facilities proposed for Chiswick Curve are risible. Martine Petetin Individual I do not have sufficient information to enable me to answer that. Kew Residents' Association Community group The Skyline and the Golden link

Linda Tillman Individual Before any of the plans listed Kew Bridge station and Gunnersbury station both urgently need upgrading to cater for the numbers of people using them. At Kew

125

Bridge the platform is so low that the elderly and people with luggage or buggies struggle to get on and off the trains because of the very big up/down step needed. The proposals in the consultation seem sensible. A link between Hounslow and Old Oak would be helpful. Another possible station in the Kew Gate block is mentioned – with the intense development already on the table where would that go? John Williams Individual 1. Resolution of identified but unaddressed existing issues, e.g., redevelopment of Gunnersbury station. 2. Residential accommodation plus associated infrastructure, schools and doctors surgeries. 3. Business development OWGRA Community group Boardwalk, Golden link, Skyline Shetson Property Development s A [skyline], B [golden link], E [improved road Ltd infrastructure],C [Boston boardwalk], D [Great West Cycleway] Rolfe Judd Planning Business The Skyline and the Golden Link; The redevelopment of the site outlined in blue would allow for the continuation of the Great West Cycleway which is to be encouraged. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor All. Public transport access improvements to this area are long overdue and these ambitions apart from the more direct pedestrian connection from Boston Manor Station have been on the table since the 1990s. The main problem is Network Rail and the fractured responsibilities and management of the whole country’s public transport infrastructure. The design of the Boston Boardwalk (an alternative name should be used) should protect and enhance the environment between destinations, be safe and open at all times.

126

Public access through large development sites should be the norm to avoid non-employee/pedestrian diversions. Ken Newlan Individual Brentford redevelopment. More explicit involvement of the visual and plastic arts in the permanent environment. David Pavett Individual Boardwalk. What appears to be the current rush towards ever taller buildings should be reconsidered. It seems as though the intention is to change the character of the area with scant regard for genuine sustainability. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor I like the Golden Link - but if the overground train is more than the underground this is no longer a priority as it excludes use for many people (many people use only the bus instead of underground even though the underground could be more direct, but it is more expensive) need to ensure inclusive pricing. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor The Golden Link, plus cycling and bus related work as above. Project e (improved road infrastructure) appears to be completely undefined. The improved pedestrian and cycle facilities proposed for Chiswick Curve are risible. Electricity Supply Pension Business The proposed skyline and golden link should be Scheme prioritised with a view to increasing the areas PTAL in the quickest and most cost effective manner. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business The proposed skyline and golden link should be Investment prioritised with a view to increasing the areas PTAL in the quickest and most cost effective manner. McKay Securities PLC Business The Golden Link should be prioritised over the other proposed strategic transport improvements. This will improve access at Brentford between Hounslow and Willesden Junction, and connect 1000 Great West Road to other services including Crossrail and High Speed Two at Old Oak Common. This will help to improve links and capacity between Central London and other parts of the south east.

127

LaSalle Investment Management Business We note that ‘game changing’ new transport infrastructure improvements are recognised as a requirement for the corridor to grow, and that the Council is already working closely with TfL and other stakeholders. We are particularly supportive of the Golden Link potential with a new station in Brentford, adjacent to 27GWR. We consider that the location of the proposed station is optimum as it is adjacent to the existing offices at 27GWR and within walking distance from a number of established major offices in the area which are car access reliant. This line and station, if delivered, could potentially reduce the traffic generation in the area, including parking demand, thereby increasing the area’s development capacity. This would also resolve some of the weaknesses in the area, by improving the accessibility by public transport. Richard Mundy Individual The priorities should be; fast trains to Clapham Junction and Waterloo running on the existing line, getting Crossrail trains running to a station local to the Golden Mile, improving the walking/cycling experience along the A4, improving pedestrian access to the river from Brentford town centre. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor Amendment to the cycle tracks on the GWR which will lead to greater safety overall and enhancement to the lighting along the GWR which will make it a lot safer including under the M4. Cecilia Hodgson Individual Boardwalk, Golden link, Skyline. Brentford Community Council Community group We know from past experience that office development on sites like Alfa Laval and the Great West Quarter were found not to be viable as access was so poor. Turning to the background document: "The Golden Mile, Strategic Case for Transport Investment" page 27 para 5.22 It appears that the extensive work proposed under issue 4

128

may not improve PTAL ratings enough to encourage sustainable development on all the proposed employment sites. Brentford Community Council Community group Para 1 of the issues paper emphasises that public transport (PTAL) is poor or very poor. It is noted in para 2.1 that after all the proposed transport improvements have been completed the PTAL would only slightly improve to give "poor to medium". It would therefore seem inappropriate to call the proposed transport investment "game changing". 4.3. None of the transport improvements described are under the control of Hounslow Council and none can be totally relied on.

Building new employment or residential development before the transport infrastructure is in place would cause serious congestion which would be unacceptable to existing residents and to the emergency services. Brentford Community Council Community group It is noted that the proposed terminal for the Skyline link service would be located north of the A4. While this may be convenient for both Sky and Glaxo staff it is not easily accessible for most existing residents nor for workers in the proposed "Kew Gate" developments. It is suggested that the line should be continued south of the A4 with a terminal west of Commerce Road near to London Road. Brentford Community Council Community group The advantages of linking the Great West Corridor to Old Oak Common are set out in the issues paper and in "The Strategic Case for Transport Investment". However the WSP paper, which considers the possibility of running four trains per hour on this line, is not available for consultation at this time.

129

Brentford Community Council Community group We would support, in principle, any proposal to make it easier for staff at Sky to walk to the Piccadilly line. It is also understood that there are plans to improve the capacity of the over-crowded Piccadilly line trains which serve all the Heathrow terminals. Brentford Community Council Community group We welcome, in principle, improvements to the cycle ways along the A4 especially if this improvement would be an alternative to earlier plans to introduce cycle routes through Brentford Town Centre. We would ask that special care is taken in the design of these routes as there can be fatal when motorists on the A4 turn off and potentially hit cyclists coming in the opposite direction

130

Name Respondent Type Q10 What do you think are the main barriers to movement within the area?

Brentford Community Council Community group The Thames and the Brent. We need a footbridge from Ferry Lane to Kew Gardens. M C Bull Individual Heathrow is the main barrier to traffic on roads, being unable to move, or rather making it impossible to move freely, especially near schools. We were promised books of maps when the inquiry finished. It was accepted that most of the plans accompanying texts sent out for public consultations had detail/s generated by computer in place of plans (page 15 for example) that are completely incomprehensible and especially unrecognisable. Transport for London Government The consultation document should also identify and acknowledge there is a link for employment uses in particular between both private and public parking provision and car use, car trips make up around half of employment trips being along the A4/M4, and its “pressure and limited capacity” (page 14). The strategic vision in Issues 2, 4 and 6 need therefore to promote local control of levels of parking, where appropriate lower than the London-wide (London Plan) standards. ‘Appropriateness’ could be judged by such factors as identified traffic congestion, air and noise pollution, ease of improving connectivity, proximity to a public transport interchange and proximity to high density mixed-use development. The towers and other developments proposed at either side of the Chiswick roundabout will put additional pressures on Kew and Gunnersbury Stations, therefore

131

TfL will need to work with developers and the Council to ensure capacity improvements are built in. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group The grid-locked road network is one of the main barrier Society to movement. This impacts both east-west north-south movement. A secondary, “vicious cycle”, effect is that the congested road network precludes improving public transport by means of additional bus services or increased frequency of existing services. A recent TfL consultation TfL consultation responded to a WCGS proposal to extend Route 70 beyond the northern end of the Chiswick Business Park by stating “Extending it would expose it to heavy traffic around Chiswick Roundabout which would affect reliability.” The hostile environment of the A4 for pedestrians and cyclists (see Q3 Dislikes) is a major barrier to a modal shift to active travel modes. GlaxoSmithKline Business Road The elevated section of the M4 is undergoing repair, but its lifespan must still be finite. Elsewhere in London consideration is being given to new road tunnels, for example the A4 Hammersmith scheme to release housing land, and Boris Johnson's proposal to link Chiswick with Beckton. If these feasibility studies proceed following the mayoral election, Hounslow Council should be asking TfL to include the GWC within the area of study. Cycling The Plan includes the Great West Cycleway as a proposal. Whilst GSK continue to support any improvements to cycle routes, the main priority should be to establish a network of local routes that will assist orbital as well as radial movement. The latter is already provided for by public transport. We

132

understand that TfL will be reviewing the London cycling network during 2016, and this orbital requirement should be taken on board when they liaise with Hounslow council on this. We suggest that the eventual aim should be a network based on the "Knooppunten" system, to be established throughout outer London. This should help define investment priority as well as guiding cyclists to the best routes. Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO River, canal and M4/A4. Dorothy Boland individual Poor transport links and very unfriendly environment for pedestrians – not just more pedestrian crossings but also cyclists suddenly bouncing onto and off pavements etc. The Isleworth Society Community group It is evident that the PTAL will still remain low-medium even if all proposed transport investment comes to fruition which is highly unlikely. Kath Richardson Individual Crossing the A4, Chiswick Roundabout, Kew Bridge and now Church Street for road traffic. Better designed bus stops for the high street that don’t block traffic. Lack of single Thames path and river/canal for pedestrian. Pollution. The Grove Park Group Community group It is self-evident and clearly stated that a 6-lane road, as in the A4, is a major barrier and creates challenges to any further development. David George Individual Over development and lack of tube links Sue Lewis Individual Traffic congestion is increasing with all the new homes being built along the river, there are often tailbacks to get onto Kew Bridge. Aidan Allanach Individual Road traffic at peak times Ken Munn Individual High volumes of A4/M4 traffic making an unpleasant environment for walking and cycling, and slowing bus movements.

133

Graham Seaman Individual In general, lack of co-ordinated planning of roads and building over many years combined with unsustainable growth in car use. In particular, lack of co-ordination between Hounslow Council and TfL along the TfL managed routes, lack of co- ordination between Hounslow Council and other boroughs at borough borders (e.g. Kew Bridge junction), and lack of integrated planning by rail, underground, bus providers and housing and industrial developers (e.g. lack of provision of any new rail routes in the area in at least the last 30 years in spite of the massive development of other aspects of the area. Ross Garside Individual Lack of sufficient public transport Chiswick Labour Party Political Party Gunnersbury Station urgently needs improvements to handle congestion, including a lift, better platform access, more in and out gates and alleviation of the wind tunnel effect. It is imperative that the ticket office remains open at Gunnersbury Station. Kew Bridge station will also need improvements to sign posting, stairways, lifts and platform facilities. Alastair Nixon Individual Far too much traffic, side roads already at capacity, more traffic on A4 would just exacerbate the issue. Church St closure in Old Isleworth a great illustration, without the rat run through the old village, Twickenham Rd becomes almost gridlocked. Desperately need more viable alternatives to cars. Keep Osterley Green Community group 1) Great West Rd – lack of links from North of GWR to Brentford especially. 2) Large sites with employee only access meaning a long walk round for others. Iris Hill Individual See above. The bus lane along Chiswick High Road to the roundabout always has long queues at rush hour. This

134

increases pollution and is not healthy for those living alongside it. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Already stated: congestion, lack of cycle facilities, gridlocked and overcrowded buses. Martine Petetin Individual Already huge levels of traffic on M4/A4 and congestions on North Circular and Chiswick High Road, as well as insufficient public transport. Kew Residents' Association Community group Road traffic. There are already very large numbers of people coming to work in the area by car. If this continues and the number of new jobs created gets anywhere near the predicted capacity of 17,700, the whole corridor will become completely jammed. There are already serious problems with traffic in the area, e.g. the Chiswick roundabout at the eastern end. All plans for development of the corridor must incorporate plans to minimise any increase in traffic whether it be commuter, residential, delivery, HGV, or traffic in transit through the area. Victoria George Individual Traffic jams. Judy Rees Individual Traffic jams on Brentford High Street. Lack of pleasant walk/cycling routes over railway line, across A4, across the Thames (could we have a new footbridge between Brentford and Kew Gardens?) June Hoare Individual Insufficient North South connection, too much east west through traffic, insufficient focus on attractive ‘village areas’ Ruth Mayorcas Individual Traffic management needs to take priority - reducing the need for HGVs and vans and private unnecessary vehicles and massive expenditure in public transport. Also proper Dutch style cycle infrastructure. The plans show absolutely no imagination at all and little attempt in making the area more pleasant. Above all walking, cycling

135

and better transport links should be put in before any further building. Linda Tillman Individual Traffic congestion. Poor junction design. John Williams Individual - Crossing the A4/M4 divide. - Crossing the Thames - Congested road junctions, Kew Bridge, Hogarth roundabout, Chiswick roundabout, M4 access J2, Gillette. Jonathan Knight Individual Lack of rail services – see Q8 above OWGRA Community group 10 (i) Great West Rd – lack of links from North of GWR to Brentford especially. (ii) Large sites with employee only access meaning a long walk round for others. Shetson Property Developments Business none Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business The dominance of the Great West Road by private motor vehicles. Pedestrian linkages across this road from Syon Lane station to Blue Sky via the Gillette Corner should be enhanced. The existing public realm and footpaths along the Great West Road are not enticing to pedestrians and should also be improved. Creation of an active frontage within developments along the Great West Road should also be encouraged. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor The Great West Road and north south links locally to Brentford and Isleworth and further to Southall, Ealing, Greenford, Harrow, Richmond and Kingston. - Access through large private developments. - Aspects cited in 4, above. Ken Newlan Individual Traffic pinch points in surrounding areas- Brentford town centre and Chiswick roundabout especially. David Pavett Individual i) Great West Rd – lack of links from North of GWR to Brentford especially.

136

ii) Large sites with employee only access meaning a long walk round for others. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Traffic- people using private cars over public transportation Tim Henderson The canal is a barrier to east west movement north of the A4 and the Boston Boardwalk is an imaginative solution to tackle this. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Crossing the Gt West Rd, Kew Bridge interchange, not enough bus routes, lack of underground trains. Electricity Supply Pension Business The existing road network due to its design and the speed Scheme of traffic is a barrier to movement and discourages workers from moving around the area and using what limited services exist. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business The existing road network due to its design and the speed Investment of traffic is a barrier to movement and discourages workers from moving around the area and using what limited services exist. McKay Securities PLC Business The main barriers to movement in this area are the limited public transport links and reliance on car use. This often causes significant congestion to the M4 and A4, particularly in the morning and evening rush hours. Improvements between Brentford railway station and the M4 Gateway would also be welcomed. Starbones Ltd Business We support the principle of improving movement and connectivity within the Great West Corridor Plan area. The M4 motorway and highway dominance of the Great West Corridor pose the biggest threat to the movement of pedestrians and cyclists. The Chiswick Curve application commits to delivering a package of benefits to begin mitigating the severance of the urban landscape, through contributions to provide improved crossing facilities beneath and across the highway dominated context. We welcome any future

137

policies which promote increased connectivity and reducing the impact of the highways on this area. LaSalle Investment Management Business In terms of the main barriers to movement in the area, it should be recognised that pedestrian access to amenities and services in the town centre for the workforce along the Great West Corridor is physically constrained by the M4/A4 and the railway line. We therefore emphasise the need to enhance the facilities available and accessible to the workforce and future residents in the area along the Great West Corridor. Hugh Mortimer Individual I believe that building new employment or residential development before the transport infrastructure is in place would cause serious congestion which would be unacceptable to existing residents and to the emergency services. Richard Mundy Individual The A4 is a barrier to walking in the area. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor There is a major problem from the installation of the jug- handle in between Boston Manor Road and Windmill Road at peak traffic times. I would suggest that the right hand turn into Boston Manor Road south in reinstated as well as the right hand turn from Boston Manor north onto the Great West Road (westward) with traffic lights that would give them a traffic light sequence to execute these turns. Cecilia Hodgson Individual Traffic congestion. Cecilia Hodgson Individual I) Great West Rd – lack of links from North of GWR to Brentford especially. II) Large sites with employee only access meaning a long walk round for others. Brentford Community Council Community group Item “e” (issue 4) talks of "improvements to the transport infrastructure", but these are not clear. The backup paper “Strategic Case for Transport Infrastructure" page

138

33 "Constraints Identified in Transport Assessments" shows pinch points on the A4 and at Chiswick roundabout. However, it does not show the numerous at grade pedestrian crossings shown on the Brentford Spatial Strategy diagram (issue 2) nor is special note taken of the effect on traffic of the patrolled crossings at Chiswick roundabout on match days. But the papers also make no mention of the congestion problems which already exist at the intersection at the approach to Kew Bridge. This junction will be increasingly effected by the high density housing for St George, St James, BFC and others who already have planning consents and will be exacerbated by any further development in east Brentford.

139

Issue 5: Achieving Additional Housing Growth

Name Respondent Type Q11 Should we look at the Great West Corridor as a location that could further help meet the borough’s housing supply?

Brentford Community Council Community group No. Not until air quality is improved, which may not be achieved within the plan period (See response to question 4). See also paras 5.1/6. St John's Residents' Association Community group Only if this can be provided by achieving a good dwelling mix with good amenity space and good air quality. This is also dependent on achieving high PTAL levels. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group No The GWC is, in principle, totally unsuitable for Society residential use because of the levels of air and noise pollution. For the foreseeable future, any further development in the corridor should be non-residential. The local road network is already at saturation at peak times. We strongly urge the Council to use its power, as the Local Planning Authority, to designate the GWC as an area where no new residential development will be permitted. [See also Q 14 and 15] GlaxoSmithKline Business Outbound accessibility (as measured by the number of jobs accessible from home) is already reasonably good within the GWC. It is already a good location from which to commute to central London by public transport, subject to the overcrowding on trains being addressed. However we would welcome a balanced mix of housing types to provide choice for GSK and other GWC employees who choose to live locally and avoid the need- to drive to work. Hence 1 and 2 beds flats should not

140

predominate at the expense of larger family accommodation. Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO No, the space is needed for businesses of all sizes and types. Legal and General Property Yes. There are sites beyond Kew Gate, Brentford Lock North and adjoining existing housing near Gillette Corner referred to in the Council’s consultation that are available and suitable for new residential floorspace and where there would be linked benefits. It is considered that the West Cross Industrial Estate is one such site (see the below response to question 25). Sarah Hill Individual Yes, but not high-rise. Dorothy Boland Individual Certainly – but not in hazardous traffic situations with poor air quality e.g. Chiswick Roundabout, and where there are no facilities such as good transport links, GP centres, schools, elderly recreation facilities, green space etc. Windmill Road Action Group Community group The proposal to implement a London Plan “Opportunity Area” with its incremental growth requirements of a minimum of 2,500 additional homes (London Plan paragraph 2.58) over and above the challenging housing growth targets for Brentford which are contained in the recently adopted Local Plan is both excessive and totally unacceptable given the exceptional development which has already taken place in Brentford and the as yet unoccupied and/or unbuilt local development which has already received planning approval. The Isleworth Society Community group While it is usually desirable to create mixed urban spaces so areas are not desolate/deserted by evening where industry/workplace is prevalent, acknowledged poor air quality is a considerable constraint to housing in the GWC. A “development edge” concept as a protective barrier makes housing not sustainable – for instance, if

141

balconies are provided people will use them, likewise parks etc. Kath Richardson Individual Not at all. Pollution (and noise) is too bad to live on the A4 and residents would be isolated. There is no sense of place for a community on the A4. Brentford can’t be an Opportunity Area and survive. The Grove Park Group Community group * As I have defined it above. Not if the London Borough of Hounslow is concerned with the health of its citizens or potential workers within the borough. David George Individual It already does Elizabeth Hagerty Individual All housing must be occupied whether you achieve this by tax penalties or prosecution. Rent increases should be fixed to inflation for the first 10 years of a new property. Aidan Allanach Individual Yes, whilst it is primarily a business district, there is opportunity for housing construction in some of the areas Ken Munn Individual Yes, but a) public transport infrastructure need to be improved to facilitate movement and b) residential property should be shielded from noise and air pollution. Graham Seaman Individual Yes Stephanie Lang Individual Additional housing should only be built in areas where air quality does not exceed EU limits; currently this makes the Great West Corridor unsuitable for housing. Ross Garside Individual Partly .although it is better to have low rise 2-4 storey residential buildings instead of high rise tower blocks for housing. Chiswick Labour Party Political Party Additional housing should only be built in areas that do not exceed EU air pollution limits. Keep Osterley Green Community group It would appear that the Great West Corridor should only be looked at for residential development as a last resort.

142

Donald Osborne Individual No. It is not a good place to live because of noise, air pollution and traffic congestion. Iris Hill Individual If you make develops provide genuinely affordable housing for those living and working in the Borough. If you do not then there is no point in these developments except to finance Hounslow at the cost of the residents in Chiswick Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor No. Brentford is creaking from existing and planned developments which have put a strain on infrastructure that is already close to unbearable and will only get more extreme as currently planned development proceeds. There should be a moratorium on further large scale development in Brentford for 10 years. Martine Petetin Individual Possibly, but please do not market them as investments to foreign investors. Housing should be made available to Londoners. Kew Residents' Association Community group Yes, but these should mainly be relatively low level developments, not exclusively tower blocks. Victoria George Individual See previous response, No because of the existing air and noise pollution. Judy Rees Individual Not without additional infrastructure. If the council can’t get schools, health services etc. What needs to happen? June Hoare Individual It could well be possible to imagine the early part of the Golden Mile as more residential, with development of the Homebase and Tesco sites for example more compactly so as to provide space efficient underground multi storey car parking, supermarket access, and human sized accommodation [not tower blocks] with planned green spaces including tree cover. There must be areas of Council land that could be sensitively redeveloped? Don’t go for commercial ‘foreign investment’ developments

143

that are unaffordable, since these don’t meet the needs of locals and clog up infrastructure. Linda Tillman Individual No. There are many miles of low rise housing in the western part of the borough, which would seem to have greater potential for more housing and the schools which will be needed for the additional children. John Williams Individual Yes, subject to all the requirements in the 2015 Local Plan. Jonathan Knight Individual Only if it can be integrated as low to medium rise residential mixed with SME business accommodation. Quality not quantity. OWGRA Community group It would appear that the Great West Corridor should only be looked at for residential development as a last resort.

Education Funding Agency Government The proposal to provide additional housing in the GWC (c.1, 580 new homes) could generate a requirement for new school places in the area. The plan will need to give careful consideration to how land can be safeguarded to provide for new schools or the expansion of existing schools. LB Hounslow should ensure that robust forecasts are used to identify the medium-long term capacity requirements of the school system. Detailed advice on forecasting school place planning is available from the EFA at: .gov.co.uk We welcome Hounslow’s approach to use Planning Obligations and CIL monies to help deliver new school infrastructure. There is a need to ensure that the education contributions made by developer’s are sufficient to cover the increase in demand for school places that are likely to be generate by a development in the GWC. Robust forecasting will also help to agree investment from other services and housing developers

144

for infrastructure projects and new housing developments through Section106/ CIL negotiations. Shetson Property Developments Business Definitely, yes. Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business Yes, the GWC has potential for taller high density buildings which could provide significant amounts of new homes. The provision of residential development on the GWR would be beneficial to existing businesses by providing accommodation for workers. This would be a more sustainable arrangement than existing situation where a number of workers commute to workplaces along the GWR and live elsewhere. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Only as a last resort and not an excuse for banked and undeveloped brownfield sites which would otherwise be perfect employment locations enhanced by improved public transport access. Aspects cited in Q4. Ken Newlan Individual Absolutely e.g. Barratts. David Pavett Individual It would appear that the GWC should only be looked at for residential development as a last resort. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor I am hesitant to see a Dubai tower appear in this area, we need to ensure the history and heritage is balanced. We don’t want another ill thought out Dragon estate this century, may seem a good idea at the time but will it be timeless? Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Enough is enough. Small residential/business developments, but Brentford's cannot tolerate mega towers or buildings within adding serious overdevelopment which will not be attractive to any resident or business.

145

Salley Ltd & A J Optimum Business The planned creation of the new Golden Mile station will Performance Ltd further enhance the site’s credentials for high-density development being in such close proximity to a significant transport hub which will make the location highly sustainable and greatly improve the prospects for regeneration and growth in this part of the Borough. Rentplus Business It would be beneficial for the Council to consider the delivery of Rentplus rent to buy housing on sites across this area of the Borough. This would widen the housing mix across Hounslow, contributing to the creation of mixed and balanced communities, as well as improving individual site viability and overall housing supply. Any opportunities to deliver housing in this area should be aimed at delivering high quality housing such as Rentplus rent to buy which can blend well with existing residential streets and employment space, promoting diversity in the redevelopment of this area. Future drafts of this Plan should carefully consider the viability of delivering all housing tenures here, and how well these can be integrated with other uses. Electricity Supply Pension Business It is considered that additional housing can be supplied in Scheme the area without damaging its primary function as an employment area. Given the significant need for housing in Hounslow and London this opportunity should not be missed. The Brentford FC regeneration scheme will increase the supply of housing in the area. The opportunity that this creates for further residential development in the surrounding area as part of mixed- use development should be considered.

Heinz Pension Plans Property Business It is considered that additional housing can be supplied in Investment the area without damaging its primary function as an employment area. Given the significant need for housing

146

in Hounslow and London this opportunity should not be missed. The Brentford FC regeneration scheme will increase the supply of housing in the area. The opportunity that this creates for further residential development in the surrounding area as part of mixed- use development should be considered. High Sense Securities Ltd Business The GWCP is also looking to address the demands for housing within the Borough. The issues paper recognises that the corridor has only a limited capacity to sustainably accommodate further housing supply and that the strategic sites along the corridor are most suitable for employment use. In response to Question 11, we do not object to the introduction of further housing within the GWC subject to the Council ensuring that a conflict is not created between existing commercial uses and those sites with the potential for expansion. The introduction of new housing should not be at the expense, or jeopardise, the delivery of new or expanded commercial development. McKay Securities PLC Business The narrower corridor plan area we recommend is an excellent area to help meet the borough’s housing supply, so long as significant improvements are made to public transport links. The Local Plan sets out that it will provide for at least 12,330 homes between 2015 and 2030, However, this figure is based on the London Plan target, and is different to Hounslow’s actual need. The Council considers that they require 1,350 new homes per year. It is therefore vital that the Council do not unnecessarily protect and designate land adjoining the M4 and A4 solely for employment use. The policy for the general area should be left open to encourage residential and/or mixed use development.

147

Tesco Stores Ltd Business The corridor presents a fantastic opportunity to significantly boost LB Hounslow’s housing supply, commensurate with the amount of additional new homes sought by the London Plan. Indeed, this is recognised within the Issues Consultation document. Tesco has identified an opportunity to substantially intensify the contribution its premises can make to housing supply and sustainable development. We would like to work proactively with the Council in identifying how it can move towards effective delivery over the course of 2016 by participating in the development of the Opportunity Area. Starbones Ltd Business We strongly support the delivery of additional residential development within the GWC area. It is also positive that the draft document has acknowledged that LBH and London, as a whole, have both fallen short of their housing delivery targets. As a result, we consider the GWC to be a reasonable and suitable location for further residential development. Our client is committed to this through the submission of an application for the Chiswick Curve including over 300 residential units, which will provide nearly a quarter of Council’s 1,350 annual target. Residential development can be delivered in the Great West Plan Area through the provision of high-density quality mix-use development which can complement employment uses. Our client’s proposed development exemplifies this approach, such that it proposes retail uses on the ground floor, office uses from the first to sixth floor and residential uses on the upper floors. This allows for housing and employment space to co-exist and maximises the efficient use of this space. The designation of the area as an Opportunity Area

148

would be positive in securing funding to support new and improved transport infrastructure. LaSalle Investment Management Business With the changing character of the Kew Gate area, which already has planning permissions for major residential development and leisure use, we consider that the Kew Gate area has the potential to contribute to the borough’s housing supply. Such potential can be realised through allocating the sites, such as 27GWR, for mixed use development to include residential use, while ensuring that the economic vision for the area is met. Hugh Mortimer Individual Proposals to enable residential uses to be included in the plan will totally depend on significant improvements to air quality being achieved before any residential development takes place. Richard Mundy Individual Yes Adam Jackson Individual Only for low rise housing. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor Excluding Brentford Lock, I definitely oppose any housing development along the Golden Mile from Gillette’s to Chiswick roundabout which includes any thoughts of building on Carville Hall Park north or the periphery of Gunnersbury Park. Maybe B and Q site on Chiswick roundabout could be a sensible site for houses (but not tower blocks). Gillette Corner Holdings Ltd Business The provision of new residential floorspace as part of mixed use development is key to creating balanced communities and should be promoted in accordance with the London Plan. As such we support the principle of additional residential development along the GWR. However, we consider that new housing within the Blue Sky area should not be restricted to the Southern Western section of the character area. Instead, that new residential units could be accommodated on the Gillette

149

site allocation. While we support the principle of this allocation for employment use, in order to achieve the policy aspiration to attract and enhance the creative, digital and media type uses, there must be a policy presumption in favour of office floorspace with supporting ancillary lifestyle and amenity uses.

The policy presumption in favour of the delivery of creative media and digital uses, aligns well with the need for additional residential units. Unlike the more traditional industrial premises, creative, digital and media uses would not cause any detrimental impact on the amenity of adjacent new residential units through noise or odour disturbance. Therefore, we consider that an element of residential floorspace should be considered on the Gillette site and elsewhere in the Blue Sky area. As the demand for the different residential unit sizes will fluctuate over the 15 year plan period, we would not propose that a prescriptive policy on unit mix is implemented. The implementation of the proposed transport link improvements is central to the success of the Great West Corridor, not just in terms of the delivery of new housing as set out in Issue 5, but of the wider employment uses. Without an increase in connectivity it will be more difficult to promote and attract the new creative, digital and media sector employers to the area. Kew Society Community group Employment should be the main focus of the GWC. If some housing is included, the traffic and its impacts on increased congestion and air and noise pollution would need full assessment, also taking into account the impacts of Heathrow airport generated traffic.

150

Implications for other infrastructure requirements: education, health etc., would also need assessment. Cecilia Hodgson Individual It would appear that the Great West Corridor should only be looked at for residential development as a last resort. Brentford Community Council Community group This issue is supported by "The Golden Mile Site Capacity Study, Final Report" which clearly states that it is "envisaged to become a new Opportunity Area for London". 5.2. The Mayor defines Opportunity Areas as "a major source of brown field land which has significant capacity for development, such as housing or commercial use, they can accommodate at least 5,000 jobs, 2,500 homes or a combination of the two, along with other facilities and infrastructure" 5.3. The much quoted Old Oak and Park Royal OA with access from HS2 and Crossrail has an approved framework for 65,000 new jobs and 25,500 new homes. 5.4. Comparing the Mayor's typical expectation for OAs it is clear that The Great West Corridor is in another league. There are no brown field sites without planning consents, the PTAL would remain low/medium even if all the transport investment is completed. The job and new home increases which would not come forward without the plan are minimal in comparison to his targets.

151

Name Respondent Type Q12. What sort of housing would you like to see here?

Brentford Community Council Community group When pollution + infrastructure are fully solved the need is for family housing, housing with gardens, affordable housing (including units for larger families, special housing, particularly on sites easily accessible to the town centre. M C Bull Individual Like water, housing will never reach a satisfactory level. A further recession not wholly unlikely will be more damaging with these proposals, 12,330 extra houses 2015-2030 than if they had not been made. Studio flats would be more reasonable. People tend to be away for months at a time, even when living in council properties. Entertainment, cinema screens, limited housing growth under 12,330 to 2030. The greatest worry is the competing nature of the infrastructure. Considerably more school places, hospitals, medical centres, amenity, social centres, local services, shopping, and sewage, social provision, for entertainment and leisure or employment. However some housing can be added to central Hounslow, Brentford and Chiswick. Metropolitan Open land meant to support the whole London area, and also to keep communities apart is already being used in Osterley for a school. If you sanction building more housing A4/M4 you get the opposite to what you want that is combined with Heathrow (a considerable draw) and entice more people into the M4 corridor. Create greater need for employment. More housing, schools, medical facilities than ever (page 16) An unending vicious circle. St John's Residents' Association Community group Family homes with minimum three bedrooms and substantial open spaces to play. For people who will stay and become affluent in this area

152

West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group None until external air quality and noise levels are shown Society to be consistently within objective levels required by European Union limit values /WHO recommendations. [See Q11] Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO None.

Sarah Hill Individual A mixture, plus private sheltered accommodation. Work/space units – encourage creativity. The Isleworth Society Community group Low rise family homes which will attract long term residents with a vested interest in preserving and enhancing local heritage and environment. Factor in more provision of lower rise sheltered/retirement accommodation for the elderly/infirm. Kath Richardson Individual Not on or around the A4 as stated. Need to keep green spaces before more housing. Priority housing should be rented social housing, housing to meet special needs; family housing rather than flats with adequate green space (not just open space). No development should happen without a high proportion of affordable housing in it and it should be mixed; no so called “poor doors”. Schools need to be built alongside not afterwards. The Grove Park Group Community group It is not suitable for any housing. David George Individual Not just high rise flats Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Family homes with minimum three bedrooms and substantial open spaces to play. For people who will stay and become affluent in this area Sue Lewis Individual Affordable housing, with priority for people who live or work in the area. There are far too many ‘luxury’ flats being built in Brentford, which are snapped up by ‘buy to let’ investors pushing prices up.

153

Aidan Allanach Individual It should be modern apartment blocks (perhaps mixed social and private housing). However, the blocks should be 8 storeys or less. Ken Munn Individual Affordable family housing. 2, 3 and 4 bedroom properties with outside space Graham Seaman Individual Council housing Ross Garside Individual Lower scale mixed housing would add diversity of design and function. Keep Osterley Green Community group If there is to be housing in the corridor it should be compatible with existing forms – low rise- development especially at the Western end. Donald Osborne Individual None. Most people this far out of London want houses and gardens. Those who are content with apartments want to live nearer the centre of London. The GWC is a bit of a dump from the point of view of housing. Iris Hill Individual Properly planned family friendly properties with gardens and facilities to go with. This includes green spaces, schools, surgeries etc. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor None, as stated. In particular, any new development should be family accommodation not small flats. Martine Petetin Individual Mixed, in order to create/ preserve the neighbourhood. Tiny flats sold as investment for rental do not create a neighbourhood. Kew Residents' Association Community group A mixture of owner-occupier and social housing, ranging from studios to apartments to houses. It is very important that “affordable” housing is available if the district is to be home to a wide spectrum of people of different socio-economic groups and ages. Such a spectrum will make the various areas of the corridor a desirable place to live and give it vitality. Judy Rees Individual Obvious need for more family housing, live/work units

154

Ruth Mayorcas Individual There needs to be property which the young and the low- incomer can afford to buy and to rent and more green space. John Williams Individual Low rise, 2 bedroom. Jonathan Knight Individual See 5 above OWGRA Community group If there is to be housing in the corridor it should be compatible with existing forms – low rise- development especially at the Western end. Shetson Property Developments Business Apartments and forms of community living. Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business The Great West Corridor is likely to be most suitable for 1-2 bedroom units contained within high density residential led mixed use developments. Due to environmental constraints the Great West Road is unlikely to appeal to families and as such priority should be given to smaller units to accommodate those working within the vicinity. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Should this location be the last resort, housing should be compatible with existing forms in the western end, low rise and humane associated with small business development. Key worker and housing for rent with encouragement to major employers to provide housing specifically for their own workforce on a tenanted basis. Ken Newlan Individual Social housing. David Pavett Individual If there is to be housing in the corridor it should be compatible with existing forms – low rise development especially at the Western end. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor In characteristic with the history and local area- no high rise developments more than 5 stories – and where there are high rises then this must be balanced with outdoor space and parks. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Small developments; family, young people’s starter homes.

155

Electricity Supply Pension Business It is considered that the area would be best suited to Scheme non-family accommodation with a mix of tenures to maximise housing opportunity. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business It is considered that the area would be best suited to Investment non-family accommodation with a mix of tenures to maximise housing opportunity. McKay Securities PLC Business Only high density residential development would be suitable in the narrower Great West Corridor we advocate. It would comprise of flats and non-family accommodation given the environmental constraints which currently exist in the area. We note that Local Plan Policy CC3 (part d) – Tall Buildings states that specific sites will be identified in the Great West Corridor Plan. The most suitable location for these sites should be adjacent to the M4 and A4 corridor where there is less chance of any impact on existing residential areas. 1000 Great West Road should be included within any emerging site allocation (see Question 25). In addition the Design and Conservation Background Paper identifies that 1000 Great West Road is in a location suitable for tall buildings. Richard Mundy Individual Mostly high density flats (bedsits, 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom, 3 bedroom). The area is already strong in terms of terraced housing. Adam Jackson Individual Housing for people who work in London and locally. Houses not flats. Low rise not high rise. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor It has be social housing in low rise developments to encourage stimulation to the local economy. Cecilia Hodgson Individual If there is to be housing in the corridor it should be compatible with existing forms – low rise- development especially at the Western end.

156

Name Respondent Type Q13. How can we better plan for housing and employment space to coexist?

Brentford Community Council Community group As there is no heavy industry mixed development is welcome. Mixed development and good walking/routes cycle paths/bus routes should help integrate the Brentford community and reduce commuting. St John's Residents' Association Community group Have modern business parks (like Chiswick Business Park) adjacent to quite separate but connected low-rise homes with local shops and play areas. Traffic access to business parks for lorries and vans to be opposite side to homes and schools and play areas. Homes to be away from the M4/A4 corridor due to high levels of air pollution. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group Not relevant in view of response to Q 11 and 12. Society Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO Mixed development that doesn’t include heavy industrial is welcome as long as protection is in place for existing businesses (such as boatyards that do have to make noise). Legal and General Property Business It is not uncommon for business uses, and more specifically a media cluster, and housing to co-exist. The Media City in Salford is one such example where the quality of design and public realm has enabled both to be delivered together creating a highly sustainable destination. Sarah Hill Individual Work/space units. Dorothy Boland Individual See above. Council should be much more forceful with developers about CIL (or 106) and affordable housing should be part of new development – i.e. mixed development. The Isleworth Society Community group When considering planning applications give more credence to existing transport congestion, infrastructure

157

requirements, air and noise pollution and existing residents’ local knowledge. Kath Richardson Individual Where there is no heavy industry mixed development is welcome. Mixed development with local jobs along with pedestrian/cycle routes as well as bus routes should help consolidate the Brentford community. The Grove Park Group Community group Think about the Borough's assets, particularly those in the eastern part of the borough, and ask why it is that residents enjoy living and working there. They enjoy the proximity to the river, the greater proportion of trees, the human scale of the houses, streets and avenues, the friendly nature of the communities, and (in the case of the Waterman Arts Centre previously, and Chiswick now) the modest level of arts available. They do not enjoy living beside polluted, noisy, blocked roads which endanger their health, or the increase in workers from outside the borough endangering their safety at the overcrowded Gunnersbury Station. This latter is possibly because Chiswick Business Park has now opened Building 7, having 'renegotiated' their delivery timetable to build a pedestrian bridge from the Business Park to Chiswick Park Station, and because workers increasingly cannot afford to live in the borough, due to the lack of genuinely affordable homes. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Have modern business parks (Chiswick Business Park) adjacent to quite separate but connected low-rise homes with local shops and play areas. Traffic access to business parks for lorries and vans to be opposite side to homes and schools and play areas. Homes to be away from the M$/A4 because of air pollution. Green walls on buildings not enough. Businesses to be closer to them. Don't be so greedy about increase in employment and

158

housing. Encourage growth in The Midlands or elsewhere away from London. Aidan Allanach Individual Improved leisure facilities can be a significant boost to this as both groups will utilise these. This could range from sports facilities to pubs and restaurants Ken Munn Individual Place commercial space alongside the trunk roads, with residential behind it – effectively a wall of commercial property sheltering residential components. Ross Garside Individual Provide more affordable homes in the less stressful areas of the borough – Hounslow, Feltham with good public transport to the GWC. Keep Osterley Green Community group We doubt if housing and employment space can co-exist. They can exist in close proximity but residents require doctors, schools, libraries, leisure facilities, green space, shops etc. Donald Osborne Individual Restrict the GWC to industry, offices and other commercial and build lots more social housing elsewhere. That is what we need, not massive apartment blocks for rich foreign “investors”. Iris Hill Individual Smaller affordable developments so that those who work locally are able to live locally. Keep business developments separate from homes. Your winter gardens plan is too little and will not be truly available to all. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Any further development in the GWR area should be employment. Central Brentford development should be housing, retail, and public amenity with priority to the latter which has been squeezed out in recent developments. Better links between employment on GWR and retail in Town Centre should be prioritised. Martine Petetin Individual Leave tall buildings away from residential. Judy Rees Individual Stop assuming they will be in separate buildings, or that companies can afford to pay through the nose

159

June Hoare Individual By making good human friendly plans, with adequate attention to green cover – trees especially help mitigate air and noise pollution: more underground off street parking instead. Linda Tillman Individual If the air quality is said to be unsuitable for housing, how can it be Ok for working people to spend 8 hours plus a day in that environment? So any coexisting development would need environmental measures. John Williams Individual Simple integration, not mutually exclusive. Housing near open spaces. Business near main roads and stations. Jonathan Knight Individual By providing mixed value property, some 3/4 bedroom houses and also lower cost, truly affordable housing/low rise apartments for service industry/key workers. These are not space efficient but do lead to sustainable communities of long term residents. What is needed is quality not quantity. Hounslow need to resist the pressure from government to solve their housing crisis (which is a nationwide responsibility not just London) and it will gain the respect of the existing Hounslow population and provide an example to other boroughs. OWGRA Community group I doubt if housing and employment space can co-exist. They can exist in close proximity but residents require doctors, schools, libraries, leisure facilities, green space, shops etc. Shetson Property Developments Business Ground floor retail and upper floors residential. Mixed Ltd use developments. Rolfe Judd Planning Business Make optimal use of land through the provision of mixed use developments which provide active frontages at ground floor levels with residential accommodation on upper floors. Office and residential development can coexist successfully. The plan should encourage the redevelopment of existing industrial sites which

160

incorporate noisy or anti-social uses which are incompatible with residential uses. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Housing and employment space can only coexist in close proximity if residents have access to doctors, schools, libraries, leisure facilities, green space, shops developed at the same time. 1) Any housing development should encourage and be designed to enable straightforward and easy access to Brentford Town Centre as well as enhanced public transport connections. 2) Any new housing should accompany better managed traffic to create more open space and pedestrian routes, cited in 4 above. Ken Newlan Individual Attract more housing associations- discourage high cost dwellings. Sanction against HMOs e.g. license for small number of residents - appoint more enforcement staff David Pavett Individual I doubt if housing and employment space can co-exist. They can exist in close proximity but residents require doctors, schools, libraries, leisure facilities, green space, shops etc. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor If possible concentrate the employment space in designated areas and do not mix residential with offices- if we sell off all office space there will be no place for jobs Cllr Myra Savin Councillor We need to look at example used in places like Malmo, Sweden, other British and European town. Encourage local architects and designers. Integral employment with residential is a natural blend. Electricity Supply Pension Business Opportunity areas for mixed-use development should be Scheme identified. These should be primarily located adjacent to public transport nodes that either exist or are planned. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business Opportunity areas for mixed-use development should be Investment identified. These should be primarily located adjacent to public transport nodes that either exist or are planned.

161

McKay Securities PLC Business Hounslow can better plan for housing and employment space to coexist by not encouraging sectorial land zoning as illustrated in the Brentwood Spatial Strategy map. The GWC area would benefit by encouraging an open mix of uses to coexist rather than specifying exactly what uses must be developed on one particular site. This would help to plan for a variety of uses and support the provisions of such development set out under NPPF paragraph 17. Schemes should also be encouraged to come forward which are phased to enable them to respond to market signals by allowing sites to address local needs either in single or mixed use configurations. A flexible approach to applying CIL and S106 obligations would also greatly assist the flexibility and make it easier for various uses to come forward to meet local plan objectives. The Day Group Business Any new development in the surrounding area [housing around transport Ave] should take their existing operations into account. Paragraph 123 of the NPPF sets out that planning policy should: “recognise that development will often create some noise and existing businesses wanting to develop in continuance of their business should not have unreasonable restrictions put on them because of changes in nearby land uses since they were established” As such proposals must be designed to ensure that there is not a conflict between existing and new uses. LaSalle Investment Management Business Commercial uses such as offices and leisure and residential use can be delivered as mixed use development through an appropriate layout and design. Such as the development of the former Wallis House, Great West Quarter. Indeed, the NPPF promotes mixed use developments and encourages multiple benefits from

162

the use of land in urban areas. A flexible mixed use development allocation would deliver the potential long term redevelopment opportunity for 27GWR, which could help meet both the economic vision for the area, and the borough’s housing need. Richard Mundy Individual Too much of the existing commercial space is derelict or of poor architectural quality, This ugliness and the busy A4 degrade the living quality of the area. Insisting on high quality redevelopment of commercial spaces is key to making it a pleasant place to also live. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor Simply by not having them co-existing. Cecilia Hodgson Individual I doubt if housing and employment space can co-exist. They can exist in close proximity but residents require doctors, schools, libraries, leisure facilities, green space, shops etc.

163

Issue 6: Environmental quality and enhancing open space

Name Respondent Type Q14 What do you consider to be the main environmental issues in the corridor?

Brentford Community Council Community group Presence of Heathrow. Air Pollution, Noise, Lack of street trees, poor maintenance, dangerous access to Gunnersbury Park, limited access to the Thames. M C Bull Individual 1 Investigate small particulate and irksome matter, which was considered at T5 as not known about 3 years before start of inquiry into T5. Nothing done about AQMA, air quality. Chiswick very bad air quality, M4 and A4. 10. (p19) Computer reference to noise, level does not include air noise dba on the edge of plan under flight path. Noise creeps along surfaces. Also damaging to health, psychological effects not realised. Road noise and aircraft noise is devastating under flight path (p22). The computer sketch (p23) is unrecognisable (p24). Enabling development is reserved for planning applicants unable to pay for their applications and a charge on council and council services. St John's Residents' Association Community group Poor air quality, lack of trees, traffic congestion and poor public transport infrastructure.

CPRE London NGO CPRE London are pleased to note the inclusion of policies to protect and enhance green spaces in the Borough. We would like to see more emphasis on the importance of protecting Metropolitan Open Land, in and around the

164

Corridor, which should be given the same strong protections as Green Belt. Environment Agency Government As stated in your adopted Local Plan “Flood risk presents a major challenge for London, especially to boroughs like Hounslow, located on the River Thames”. A combination of risk from the river Thames, Brent and surface water in the area should be referred to. It would be a good make reference to the existing flood risk policies such as policy EQ3 from the adopted Local Plan. This is especially important as the policy states that “planning can significantly reduce the risk of flooding by ensuring development is located appropriately and by promoting design that is flood resistant and resilient”. For example, in the document, it states that 560 homes are planned at Brentford Lock North – an area where flood risk is a key consideration The Thames Estuary 2100 (TE2100) Plan is referred to in the policies in the Local Plan on flood risk and the Blue Ribbon Network (GB5 and EQ3). We feel that it would be good to make reference to the Thames Estuary 2100 Plan. See representation for further comments on this question. Transport for London Government TfL is pleased to see that air quality and noise pollution are a key focus of Issue 6, which covers the main issues adequately. However in response to question 15, further policies and guidance are recommended to be applied in addition to Local Plan and London Plan polices, this could usefully include TfL’s published information and mapping (detailed below), for measures and area-based holistic schemes that aim to tackle these problems whilst also creating an attractive area to business, residents and visitors. Taking action on air quality is particularly

165

important in the context of the proceedings against the UK’s non-compliance with legal limits on air quality. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group Very poor air quality, noise and light pollution. All three Society issues militate against residential use in the corridor and air quality and noise also detract from the corridor’s appeal as an employment location. In addition, air and noise pollution impact negatively on the nearby open spaces as spaces for active recreation and/or quiet enjoyment and light pollution can reduce biodiversity as it can be detrimental to wildlife, especially invertebrates, bats and birds. Any further development in the corridor before major improvements in transport infrastructure will lead to a further deterioration in air quality and noise. Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO Expansion of Heathrow, current air pollution; lack of small green landscaping (such as street trees and planting). Sarah Hill Individual Too many people with nowhere to park, bad transport links, and the little transport there available is overcrowded. Protect green spaces, open spaces, trees, planting. Provide more small allotments to encourage community cohesion. Dorothy Boland Individual Poor air quality and too much through traffic. The Isleworth Society Community group The fact that existing air quality is identified to be “particular constraint” while proposing further development is demonstrably not sustainable. Increased traffic movements generated by additional development will negate any improvement in public transport. The contention that “winter gardens” on building facades adjacent to the elevated M4 provide a buffer as an amenity space shows a lack of understanding of residents’ needs for enhancement of and access to “real” open spaces.

166

Kath Richardson Individual Heathrow’s existence for both noise and air pollution (direct and indirect); air pollution; noise (from A4, trains, emergency vehicles, helicopters, fireworks etc.) I’m apparently not even in the pink area (p19) but I still get sleep disturbed from A4 traffic as well as Heathrow. The Grove Park Group Community group As above, (stated in the GWC Plan) it is a fact that pollution and noise along the A4 / M4 run at unacceptably high levels. Why is it not part of the Plan to mitigate these dangers, which threaten every resident of Brentford and Chiswick? David George Individual Overdevelopment, high rise monstrosities. Create a human scale environment. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Poor air quality, lack of trees, pollution of the river and canals. Flooding of the Thames Sue Lewis Individual Noise and pollution from the A4, Heathrow expansion (if it goes ahead) could also increase aircraft noise. Aidan Allanach Individual Air Pollution Ken Munn Individual Noise, atmospheric pollution and a lack of green areas Maggie Webber Individual Pollution levels and traffic congestion are already high around the Chiswick Roundabout area without additional nearby major developments. Graham Seaman Individual 1) Air pollution primarily, due to excessive motor transport and to the Heathrow flight path; 2) Noise pollution due to the Heathrow flight path and to excessive motor transport; 3) Gradual degradation of the stock of trees in public areas in order to accommodate cars; 4) Disappearance of the front garden as a space to; absorb excess rainfall, improve air quality, and provide an environment for insects, birds and small mammals, due to concreting over for cars;

167

5) Huge reduction in many of the insects, birds and small mammals which previously survived in this area, even as an urban area. Stephanie Lang Individual A major environmental concern in the Corridor is air quality, which is well above legal limits. Light pollution should also be taken into consideration. Ross Garside Individual Noise and pollution. Commercial spaces can maintain an interior artificial climate to occupants to overcome these issues. Most residential units cannot do this. Alastair Nixon Individual Traffic pollution, aircraft noise.

Keep Osterley Green Community group The main problems, besides a lack of transport to the area, are noise and air pollution from air and road traffic. Donald Osborne Individual Air pollution from traffic and aircraft, especially Nitrous oxide and small particulates. Continuous deafening racket from both these sources. Iris Hill Individual Pollution, noise, and clearly being a thoroughfare to other nicer places outside London. Not only is there noise from traffic which never ceases, but also from planes which can mean that it is impossible to sit in an open area and have a conversation. It also disrupts sleep and increases stress. Even in the middle of the night there is considerable noise from the A4/M4. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Air quality is by far the biggest issue but it’s difficult to see how that can be improved other than via national/EU initiatives. The impact of the elevated M4 is very pernicious from air quality, noise pollution and spatial oppression perspectives. Street cleansing and maintenance, poor lighting and constant works to the M4 with plant and discarded materials constantly littering the area are a local disgrace and have been for years if not decades. Urban motorways in other areas have noise

168

and pollution screening, but there is nothing on the M4, even where there are parks adjacent at Gunnersbury and Carville Hall. Martine Petetin Individual Traffic levels, airplanes overhead, huge levels of air pollution. Also, lack of public transport. Kew Residents' Association Community group Traffic exhaust emission pollution and traffic noise. The latter may be aggravated by both road traffic and planes if further developments (e.g. runway 3) are allowed at Heathrow. Victoria George Individual See above (Q11). Judy Rees Individual Traffic noise and air quality. June Hoare Individual Noise, too much traffic, air pollution, aircraft noise from 4am to 11pm, insufficient linkage between green spaces, insufficient attention to the beneficial aspects of planned greenery. Make it a place to enjoy that people want to work in. Too much concrete flyover, concrete sanitised same look walkways, piazzas, tower blocks etc. all contribute to poor living and working conditions. [The picture at issue 5 is very unappealing] Ruth Mayorcas Individual Although the area needs regenerating this is absolutely not the way to do it. It is a polluted area where there is far too much traffic and pollution levels are astronomical. Linda Tillman Individual Air pollution from traffic, probably planes too. Light pollution – the new car showrooms on the south side of the A4 near Chiswick roundabout are surprisingly obtrusive when seen from Chiswick High Rd at night. These buildings seem reasonably unobtrusive by day. The picture on page 25 of the consultation document shows the problem (even though it is an exaggeration for dramatic effect there is much truth in it). Water supply. Skyline – see below.

169

John Williams Individual Air quality. Congestion and traffic noise. Pedestrian/cycle safety. Jonathan Knight Individual Noise, pollution and over dense development. Think low rise. Add trees and green spaces not reduce them. OWGRA Community group The main problems besides a lack of transport to the area are noise and air pollution from air and road traffic. Shetson Property Developments Business pollution from emissions of larger HGV, trucks etc. Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business The poor air quality and noise generated by cars using the Great West Road. Encouraging residential development which would provide accommodation for workers within existing and future businesses in the vicinity would reduce the dominance of the private car and help alleviate these environmental issues. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Besides inadequate and lack of transport infrastructure, noise and air pollution from air and road traffic. The creep and ambition to develop Metropolitan Open Land. Ken Newlan Individual Pollution, traffic noise, poor accommodation for cycling David Pavett Individual The main problems besides a lack of transport to the area are noise and air pollution from air and road traffic. The road problems are exacerbated by congestion leading to lots of braking which increases particulate emissions. As far as I know this is not being closely monitored at multiple locations in the area. This should be done – possibly in cooperation with amenity groups using some of the low-priced monitors now available. Same goes for other forms of pollution (e.g. NO2, NO CO2)

170

Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Traffic is a problem and the pollution and stress that goes with it. Attempt to develop brownfield sites first- this may be more expensive, but it is the right thing to do. I am unsure of a “district heating scheme” never known this as a priority in any major city. Why not let other cities work on this first and we learn from them. I would be more supportive of advertising days of high energy usage and encouraging people not to do laundry on those days etc. Let’s do the easy things vs create something too ambitious that could fail. Tim Henderson Individual Air quality in the area is poor and the Council should support initiatives to introduce road charging / congestion charging in the area and for traffic travelling to the airport. Public transport and sustainable transport should be encouraged. The area would also be noise-blighted from any third runway at Heathrow and this should be opposed. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Obviously, pollution is the major impact. I refer to this in a previous comment, along with the lack of care and due attention to the infrastructure, in terms of maintaining a clean, well kept, well lit, good crossing facilities, coupled with screening.

Electricity Supply Pension Business The main environmental issues relate to the M4 corridor Scheme in terms of noise and air quality Heinz Pension Plans Property Business The main environmental issues relate to the M4 corridor Investment in terms of noise and air quality

McKay Securities PLC Business As the Issues Paper mentions, air quality is a significant problem along the M4 and A4. The GWC Plan should primarily address this issue by significantly improving public transport links to the area, and encouraging public

171

landscaping schemes. This issue could begin to be resolved by creating car free development. This is not considered to be contrary to the parking standards set out in the London Plan specifies maximum thresholds. Hugh Mortimer Individual the present high pollution levels makes all the A4 sites unsuitable for residential development, particularly those in or close to "Kew Gate" Richard Mundy Individual Air pollution from A4/M4/Heathrow, noise pollution from A4/M4/Heathrow, ugly derelict buildings. Adam Jackson Individual Air pollution from A4/M4. Noise and air pollution from Heathrow flight path. Increased traffic and air pollution from high density development. Quality of built environment and quality of flight and space if current heights of buildings are exceeded and development includes high rise. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor The retention of all green spaces and that wherever possible local people should be encouraged to make these areas of character by assisting in making these green spaces their own by contributing through time and effort to their wellbeing and popularity. Gillette Corner Holdings Ltd Business We agree that enhancing the quality of the environment and public realm is a key component in the delivery of the aspirations for this area. As a part of this, measures to improve the air quality and traffic noise should be considered. However, with the use of high quality design, these issues can be easily mitigated in the new developments coming forward.

Consideration should be given to ensure that any new industrial uses coming forward in the wider area do not cause any detrimental impact on amenity and by doing so prohibit the delivery of new creative, digital and media

172

uses in accordance with the aspirations of Local Plan Policy SV1. Kew Society Community group Air and noise pollution from excessive traffic and light pollution from high rise buildings and inappropriate advertising. Cecilia Hodgson Individual The main problems, besides a lack of transport to the area, are noise and air pollution from air and road traffic. Brentford Community Council Community group GC.3.1. It has been made clear that sustainable development depends on the inclusion of significant residential development to "enable" viability to be achieved. This has been demonstrated by the recently approved Brentford Football Club scheme and from the draft proposals for the adjacent mixed development, which includes the proposed bus garage. However, the plan area includes some of the highest pollution levels in the borough (issue 6). The papers do not show how these high levels of pollution can be reduced to acceptable levels before further residential is built. We consider that the present high pollution levels makes all the A4 sites unsuitable for residential development, particularly those in or close to "Kew Gate" GC.3.3. Brentford Community Council Community group 5.18. "Mix of Uses". We would agree that it is normally desirable to create urban spaces which are not "deserted in the evening" but in this location "air quality is a particular constraint" (see issue 6 page 18 para 2 and page19 diagram). It is not a suitable location for housing, schools or amenities.

5.19. The concept of a "Development edge" which acts as a protective barrier" is not sustainable. In real life people use their homes, their balconies, their parks, their schools

173

and their amenities. If these are in a highly polluted area ingenious designs will not allow them to live a full life and bring up their children in safety.

5.20. "Taking advantage of fantastic views across Gunnersbury Park" also means that the many users of Gunnersbury Park, which is undergoing a costly restoration scheme promoted jointly by Ealing and Hounslow, will be unable to avoid the new buildings which do not enhance the park. A better policy would be to keep all buildings facing the park to the height of mature trees. Brentford Community Council Community group 6.1. The paper identifies air quality as a "particular constraint", but then proposes development where both workers and residents would be exposed to unacceptable conditions unless they always remained inside air conditioned buildings. But the plans show amenity areas, open spaces and facilities which must be reached outdoors on foot. There must be a particular concern for children growing up on these conditions.

6.2. Additional development will lead to additional movement. While it could be true that "improved public transport"(para 2) may reduce (the additional) pressure on the highways network" it is unlikely that the proposals will result in a net decrease. The consequence of additional traffic is a further reduction in air quality. This consequence would be likely to continue until large numbers of vehicles (understood to be less than 1% in 2016) are converted to electricity. There appears to be no evidence to show this could occur in the plan period.

6.3. The suggestion that "the use of winter gardens on

174

the facades of buildings adjacent to the elevated M4 to provide a buffer as well as amenity spaces for residents" (para 2) would be a sufficient measure to allow development close to the corridor is clearly ludicrous. These flats will be used every day by families with young children who will need to be protected from the effects of poor air quality inside and outside their homes. Brentford Community Council Community group 6.4 We understand that the Brentford Town Centre scheme includes a district heating system which could be expanded. 6.5 Landscape. We note that the importance of landscape has not been brought out as an issue at this stage in the process. Tree planting could be a part of the measures to improve air quality and give a coherence to new development. 6.6. The BCC considers that a single landscape concept plan should be part of the initial proposals. It should include tree planting and landscaping along the whole length of the Great West Corridor, as well as surrounding areas such as Syon Lane and Boston Manor Road/Half Acre (leading to Brentford town Centre).

175

Name Respondent Type Q15. Do you think development in the Great West Corridor would benefit from further policies and guidance to address environmental issues, beyond those already in the Local Plan?

Brentford Community Council Community group A high quality integrated landscape plan is required

St John's Residents' Association Community group YES to strengthen policies aimed at promoting air quality and sustainable development.

Environment Agency Government Policies EQ3 and GB5 in the adopted Local Plan on flood risk and the Blue Ribbon Network should be referred to. The local flood risk management strategy (when published) should be referenced. Transport for London Government Taking action on air quality is particularly important in the context of the recently published draft Defra NO2 Action Plan in response to the European Commission’s infraction proceedings against the UK and recent UK Supreme Court ruling in relation to the UK’s non- compliance with legal limits on air quality. The Council is recommended to refer to and use TfL’s Transport Emissions Roadmap (TERM) for more information on measures that can be used to help reduce transport related emissions. A guidance note can be found at the link below. The focus of the note is on transforming existing areas and guide new development areas: https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/low- emission-neighbourhoods.pdf

West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group We recognise that the Council, acting alone, cannot Society reduce the unacceptably high levels of air and noise pollution associated with the major road network in this area. It is questioned, however, whether its air pollution

176

approach is sufficient. We note with concern that the recently published Air Quality Update and Screening Assessment for 2015 indicates that even this monitoring function has not been progressed satisfactorily. The assessment states (page 7 and see also Table 1.2). “The recommendation to undertake a Detailed Assessment of hourly mean NO2 within Hounslow was made in the 2011 Progress Report (London Borough of Hounslow, 2011), the 2013 Progress Report (London Borough of Hounslow, 2013) and the 2014 Progress Report (London Borough of Hounslow, 2014). Following these recommendations, the LB of Hounslow is in the process of amending its AQMA order to include the 1-hour objective for NO2 across the borough.” In view of this situation, we strongly urge the Council to use its power, to designate the GWC as an area where no new residential development will be permitted.

What evidence does the Council have for (1) the effectiveness of Green Walls? In capturing particulates (2) the viability of green walls in locations such as those presented by sites adjacent to the A4, especially when near/underneath the overhead section of the M4.

The Isleworth Society Community group In a lot of instances “we will expect” should be strengthened and interpreted as “we will require”. Ensure advertising is proportionate in size and does not intrude into residential/heritage areas. Kath Richardson Individual Not if they’re not going to be applied, it would be a waste. A guarantee from LBH that they’re not going to U- turn and support Heathrow’s expansion.

177

The Grove Park Group Community group As I have defined it above. There aren't any in the Local Plan, but there should have been. As stated, development is impossible without it. David George Individual Little respect for heritage or the existing street scene, this should be addressed. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Yes, it needs all the help it can get Aidan Allanach Individual Perhaps requiring improved ventilation systems in new housing and commercial developments to remove pollutants from the air. Ken Munn Individual Some form of E-W rapid transit system, reducing the need for motor vehicles for personal movement. Graham Seaman Individual Yes. For example, there is no mention of requiring new developments to include any additional ecological features, and there is no mention of assessing impact on wildlife. There is no suggestion that it might be possible to restrict vehicle access according to level of emissions. All this sounds very much as if the plan will simply 'hand over' to developers without ongoing local control, which is vital for existing and future residents. Ross Garside Individual Probably – although policies are one thing – solutions are another. Alastair Nixon Individual ‘Green walls’ and ‘winter gardens’ are completely pointless if the development encourages more traffic into the area. Plans for the development should incorporate a radical shift in intended modal share of public transport or cycling, 5-10% is not enough, need more like 30-50%. Keep Osterley Green Community group Development in the GWR corridor will benefit from further policies and guidance especially in respect of the preservation of green space which absorbs pollution, both noise and air pollution. Existing policies do not appear to be achieving this. Donald Osborne Individual Yes, but how? Controlling emissions is a very long term project. We can’t close Heathrow either!

178

Iris Hill Individual Yes. The whole Borough is an AQMA and as such you need to be identifying ways of reducing pollution – especially in the area of Chiswick roundabout and the A4 and A316 Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor As previously noted. Martine Petetin Individual Definitely Kew Residents' Association Community group No Comment

Victoria George Yes – before anything else is even considered. Judy Rees Individual Yes June Hoare Individual Yes: I don’t think the Local Plan is nearly visionary enough in addressing the environment positively and as an asset to the area. Roof gardens at motorway height? Electric mini buses and trams? District heating? Becoming the greenest borough in Britain? Linda Tillman Individual Certainly John Williams Individual No. The Local Plan was approved just months ago, Sep 2015. It is adequate if followed strictly by LBH decision makers. Jonathan Knight Individual Yes. Health problems due to pollution are now starting to become national concerns. Hounslow need to be ahead of the curve by mitigating problems in the future. Lead by example. OWGRA Community group Development in the GWC will benefit from further policies and guidance especially in respect of the preservation of green space which absorbs pollution both noise air pollution. Existing policies do not appear to be achieving this. Shetson Property Developments Business Not sure Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business No existing policies are sufficient.

179

Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Development in the corridor would benefit from stringent policies and guidance particularly to preserve and increase green space to allow absorption of both noise and air pollution. Existing policies do not appear to be achieving this. Policy to improve traffic management. Ken Newlan Individual Probably David Pavett Individual Development in the GWR corridor will benefit from further policies and guidance especially in respect of the preservation of green space which absorbs pollution both noise air pollution. Current policies are not only failing to do this but are actually leading to the reverse. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Maybe limit cars per household given the traffic issues and pollution Cllr Myra Savin Councillor We need to put these as a priority and give them high profile. Electricity Supply Pension Business No Scheme Heinz Pension Plans Property Business No Investment McKay Securities PLC Business No, we consider that Local Plan Policy EQ4 (Air Quality ) as sufficient in addressing the issue from a planning perspective, and further regulation is restrictive and will create unnecessary complexity Richard Mundy Individual Yes Adam Jackson Individual Yes - as above Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor I will just reiterate the need for soft and hard landscaping throughout the whole area including where possible a tree planting programme. Cecilia Hodgson Individual Development in the GWR corridor will benefit from further policies and guidance especially in respect of the preservation of green space which absorbs pollution, both noise and air pollution. Existing policies do not appear to be achieving this.

180

Name Respondent Type Q16 What would the priorities for enhancing open space be if resources were available?

Brentford Community Council Community group The first priority is to preserve open space and increase it in areas of open space deficiency. A much higher standard of maintenance. Provision of playing fields and all weather pitches. Port of London Authority Public body It is noted from the consultation documentation that Hounslow has a number of valued green and blue corridors and open spaces, which form the underlying landscape of the borough. These assets include Kew Bridge and the Grand Union Canal. It is recognised that the waterways which make up the Borough’s ‘blue corridors’ have always played an important part in the economy of Brentford (in particular) and other key locations within the Borough. The Grand Union Canal, which is made up of 10 waterways, provides important access to the network from the Thames. Consideration has been given to the existing pattern of bridges, towpaths, locks and the embankment, which add to the character of the Canal network and Thames. Aside from this, it is noted that there are a number of key challenges and objectives within the consultation documentation, including the need to enhance the Borough’s waterways for leisure use, in appropriate locations, which the PLA would seek to support. The London Plan 2015 identifies waterways, such as those rivers, canals, lakes and reservoirs, as linear open spaces, and as such considers the opportunities provided by water spaces as being important for sport, recreation and visual amenity, all of which contribute to health and wellbeing (Blue grid

181

network). It is recognised that in Hounslow, the Blue Corridor Strategy addresses issues relating to the Borough’s water spaces.

Given the importance of waterways to the Borough, it is considered important to continue to protect and enhance these spaces through the policies in the new Local Plan. It is suggested that evidence is sought to assess the quality of the Borough’s waterways and opportunities to enhance waterway use and access. It would be beneficial for the PLA to contribute to any future discussion in this regard, on development or policies which specifically affect land within our control. Historic England Public body The historic environment is very much a part of the environmental quality of the corridor. We recommend that the plan provides clear acknowledgement of this, and identifies the opportunities for enhancement as well as the vulnerabilities of these important assets, their settings. Surrounding the corridor there are major open spaces nearly all of which are on Historic England’s national Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest – Gunnersbury Park (Grade II*), Osterley Park (Grade II*), Syon Park (Grade I) and Royal Botanic Gardens Kew (Grade I, and inscribed as a World Heritage Site). Further policy guidance in the plan is required based on analysis of building heights that can be accommodated within the Great West Road Corridor without harm to the setting and significance of these assets. The potential to address heritage assets at risk in line with policy CC4(c) should be considered in terms of potential to use s106/CIL development funding and could be a matter for policy in the Great West Corridor Plan

182

with respect to site allocations, and as a general policy approach. (Please also see Qs17/18/19 comments) M C Bull Individual There appears to be competition between land for schools, employment and housing sites. Take open space, a Miss Lavender left a field off Heston Road as “open land in perpetuity to Heston people”. This has been given to developers to build houses on. LBH is understood to be leaving it to housing associations to build mainly flats, some up to 5 stores in height. ‘Help to buy schemes, multiple occupancy helpful.

St John's Residents' Association Community group Promotion of the use of the River Thames and S106/CIL funding made available to enhance local parks and public open spaces in both Ealing and Hounslow. Environment Agency Government The TE2100 plan clearly sets out that it is important that requirements for safeguarding land are incorporated into strategic plans, in particular site allocation documents for Thames riverside development. As stated in the attached, there is considerable scope in Hounslow for local flood defence realignments to achieve landscape, public amenity and environmental enhancements. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group The overall priority for open space is keeping it open. Not Society allowing building within open space (other than, exceptionally, very modest structures associated directly with recreational/biodiversity use of the space). Not allowing building in the surrounding area that would detract from the openness of the space. Open spaces can be significantly impacted by developments on or close to their boundaries; the larger the scale of a development, the wider the surrounding area that will be impacted. The open spaces in the vicinity of the GWC and in the surrounding area are particularly vulnerable for example, Gunnersbury Park and Gunnersbury Cemetery. Their

183

protection will require rigorous application of the policies in Chapter Seven of the Local Plan: Green and Blue Infrastructure.

Enhancing open spaces should be site specific and carried out in full consultation with users of the open space, including “friends” groups, amenity and local residents’ groups and individual residents. Open spaces have a variety of uses and an appropriate balance needs to be achieved. Insensitive “improvements” for one use (e.g. sports facilities) may, inadvertently, harm a different use (e.g. nature area). Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO Keeping it, maintaining it and making it available to public. Preferably adding cafes nearby. Sarah Hill Individual Trees, seating, planting schemes Dorothy Boland Individual More should be made of river access: in the Kew Bridge development St George were willing to pay for step-free access under the Bridge to allow a walker to continue under the bridge along the Thames Path but this was vetoed by PLA on grounds of possible flooding. This should have been followed much more aggressively by Hounslow as the alternative is to walk up to cross the north/south circular to walk from Strand on the Green towards Brentford or vice versa and that is a junction extremely hazardous to pedestrians, whether children or elderly, which could have been avoided with more pressure. The Isleworth Society Community group Ensuring Metropolitan Land and all open spaces are respected and no permissions are given for development whether for schools or otherwise. Ensuring parks and open spaces are maintained to a high standard.

184

Kath Richardson Individual First priority is to protect existing green space; second to make it open and available to public; proper maintenance (however minimal); sensible community use; free pitches, MUGAs and useful playgrounds for multiple age groups. The Grove Park Group Community group First, create some open space; Brentford and Chiswick are already extremely dense in residential areas, although of course there are many parks. Parks should in theory be protected by the Local Plan, but the visuals produced by Urban Initiatives Studio, suggest, worryingly, that the answer to growth aspirations is to install more high-rise office buildings, many of a height that would 'harm' existing open spaces, including local parks.

 Write the 'Tall Buildings' policy that is promised in the Local Plan.  Don’t approve developments that would raise the heights of buildings like Empire House; don't consider developments like the proposed 32-story 'Chiswick Curve'.  Don't believe that merely allowing a small space for a plaza surrounded by skyscrapers, as in the Kew Gate/ Stadium Skittles development, will either attract high quality businesses or discerning consumers; nor will it will be any substitute for a green area, including trees, surrounded by low-rise buildings of mixed use.  Plant more trees along the A4.  Install noise-supressing fences of organic material along the A4, specifically from Chiswick Roundabout to Hogarth Roundabout. David George Individual Keeping them clean and well maintained Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Copses and mown paths (see Windsor Great Park), Occasional seating.

185

Sue Lewis Individual Some open community space by the river. Aidan Allanach Individual Not sure Ken Munn Individual Tree planting on all available sites Graham Seaman Individual Given the large amount of additional building already taking place, most of which is without gardens, new allotments should be provided. Ross Garside Individual More trees to counter both noise and pollution in the residential areas. This is difficult to achieve with high rise apartments, but possible on lower scale developments. Keep Osterley Green Community group The priorities for “enhancing” open space are firstly to protect it and secondly to involve local residents, companies and clubs in managing it to preserve both its amenity and environmental value. This should not require much in the way of council resources other than guidance and organisation. Donald Osborne Individual Play areas for children where they can swallow the nitrous oxide and particulates in safety. Iris Hill Individual Landscaping with trees and paths and seating so that all can use it. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Opening up continuous, accessible, attractive paths along all the rivers and canals in the area, including more bridges at certain points. Martine Petetin Individual Just look at Turnham Green, it is enjoyed by many, thanks to intelligent landscaping, rockery, and wild flowers, all managed with the help of local residents. Kew Residents' Association Community group Ensure that resources are available to upgrade, care for, and make the most of what already exists, e.g. the Riverside, the Canal, Boston Manor, Osterley, Syon and Gunnersbury Parks, etc. Victoria George Individual Green space – in an area of such high density, this is vital. Judy Rees Individual Use section 106 funding to provide high-quality parks equipment, outdoor seating etc. that won’t be so vulnerable to damage. Things are broken within days and

186

then stay broken permanently e.g. bench near St Paul’s School was broken before the contractors left the site, about 18 months ago. St Paul’s Park railings need complete renovation, replace missing sections June Hoare Individual First of all examining and making existing areas better: Brentford Town centre has had its heart ripped out and has lost any sense of an attractive ‘London village’: it is not connected to the river nor the Grand Union Canal both hugely important assets which have not been enhanced and integrated. Needs more trees to reduce noise, capture air pollution, and improve surroundings. Regain some area character and ‘buzz’: reason being that this is unique and should not be converted into shopping malls and faceless windswept plazas, needs to regain its independence and local shops – and character! Linda Tillman Individual The priority should be to avoid degrading open space by surrounding it with tall buildings. Any enhancements to help the physical and mental wellbeing of local residents and workers would be welcome. Small open spaces round any residential developments would provide the play space which is sadly in the approved first phase enabling development at Lionel Rd South. John Williams Individual Protecting it absolutely. Local Plan objectives should not be over-ridden by ‘exceptional circumstances’ Holding the maintenance contractor, currently Carillion, to account. Targets set, failure penalised. Jonathan Knight Individual Access. Do not close off access to the Thames, Brent River and open spaces by permitted developments. OWGRA Community group The priorities for “enhancing” open space are firstly to protect it and secondly to involve local residents, companies and clubs in managing it to preserve both its amenity and environmental value. This should not

187

require much in the way of council resources other than guidance and organisation. Shetson Property Developments Business Open spaces near employment for staff and visitors, Ltd smaller play areas for children. Rolfe Judd Planning Business Improvements to public realm and pedestrian linkages across the GWR. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor  Not a question of if, resources should be made available through condition for any development.  The priorities should be first, to protect it and second to actively involve residents, businesses, land owners and operators in the management, preservation and sustainable enhancement of open space amenity and environmental value.

 Resources for advice, guidance, monitoring and enforcement should be sought, enhanced and sustained for these purposes.

 There should be provision of green linkages to connect new and existing developments with Brentford Town Centre, heritage assets north and south including Osterley Park, Brentford and Isleworth riversides, Brentford Dock, the Three Bridges, Hanwell Locks, Golden Mile Art Deco buildings.  Pedestrian, cycle and electric vehicles only routes should be developed to access these valued resources. Ken Newlan Individual Permanent sports facilities e.g. live-in wardens / coaches for Gunnersbury Park. Get National Trust Osterley to be more sports orientated.

188

David Pavett Individual The priorities for “enhancing” open space are firstly to protect it and secondly to involve local residents, companies and clubs in managing it to preserve both its amenity and environmental value. The council should monitor and enforce the obligations of owners of open spaces to maintain in the way required in the Local Plan. If this is being done then there is much sign of it. It would also be useful to have an inventory of open spaces listing areas, size, quality and current usage so that it is easy to see the extent to which spaces are being lost, enhanced or gained by development. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Ensuring open space is visible, sign posted, joined up through cycle paths, walk ways and ensuring it feel safe to all. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor We have open spaces, we need them with the amount of pollution and traffic. No building on open spaces, but yes, to building open space. Explore options to further connect the north and south of Brentford, oh yes, and the north and west! Electricity Supply Pension Business The provision of sporting and play facilities to maximise Scheme the use of the areas of open space to the benefit of residents and workers in the area should be considered. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business The provision of sporting and play facilities to maximise Investment the use of the areas of open space to the benefit of residents and workers in the area should be considered. McKay Securities PLC Business Given the limitation on space within the GWC, especially the narrower corridor we recommend, the focus should be on intensifying development to improve economic growth rather than creating new spaces. Similarly, the burden should not be placed on landowners and applicants to create open space over developable floorspace.

189

Richard Mundy Individual Improving the pedestrian/cycling areas on either side of the A4. Creating new public space between Brentford town centre and the river. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor Enhance by publicity the local heritage and amenities which already exist. Cecilia Hodgson Individual The priorities for “enhancing” open space are firstly to protect it and secondly to involve local residents, companies and clubs in managing it to preserve both its amenity and environmental value. This should not require much in the way of council resources other than guidance and organisation. Brentford Community Council Community group We note that no open space is shown south of the A4 where most Brentford people live. The plan should show St Pauls, Waterman's Park and Brent Lea Rec as POS and should examine areas of open space deficiency and make proposals for additional open space to meet London Plan guidelines.

190

Issue 7: Promoting High Quality Design and Conserving Heritage

Name Respondent Type Q17 How can we respect the historic context of the Great West Road whilst providing the potential for growth?

Brentford Community Council Community group This is the wrong question. It should be "How much growth can be accommodated if we really respect our heritage". And the answer would be a limited amount of sensitive development which respects the scale and character of heritage assets London Borough of Richmond Government The GWC Plan is generally promoting ‘tall buildings’ along upon Thames the Great West Corridor, which raises a number of key issues for LBRuT, including:  Tall buildings are likely to lead to further harmful impacts on the views and settings of key heritage assets within Richmond borough, particularly the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew World Heritage Site (RBGK WHS), but also the WHS Buffer Zone, conservation areas (particularly Kew Green) and river views (designated Thames Policy Area); including adverse impacts on key views towards LB Hounslow; e.g. Strand on the Green, view to Brentford Steam / Water tower / Museum.

 Tall buildings in Brentford are contrary to Thames Landscape Strategy (2012) policies and guidance, which LBH is signed up and committed to, which clearly states that any further flat-roofed, high-rise

191

buildings should be prevented from intruding on the Brentford waterfront massing.

 The general support for tall buildings in Brentford is contrary to criterion (c) of adopted LBH policy CC3, which clearly states LBH will only support ‘a limited number of tall buildings in Brentford town centre.’ 1.4 LBRuT raised soundness issues on LBH’s Local Plan in 2014 and 2015 in relation to policies CC3 and CC4 as they allow for an unknown number of additional tall buildings of unknown height in Brentford. We reiterated our concerns at the hearing sessions of the examination in public, particularly the fact that the Local Plan was not underpinned by robust evidence to show the impacts of such additional tall buildings on the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew World Heritage Site (RBGK WHS). Historic England Public body The council can respect the historic context of the Great West Road by: 1. a) providing clear and detailed guidance in the GWC plan, based on a robust evidence base that includes adequate testing of building heights and inter- visibility with heritage assets, and then by b) approving development which complies with the Plan. 2. The guidance should include height planes, and could be tested using 3D digital models. It should be subject to discussion and engagement with the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew WHS, Historic England, London Boroughs of Richmond and Ealing, and local amenity groups – as well as developers to ensure that it has widespread support.

192

M C Bull Individual Conservation areas are a mockery, people do not see any need to comply with them. See Heston Village conservation area, where a person has found that she can make another application after every refusal, even to from the Planning Inspectorate (page 7). 10.1 LB Hounslow does not recognise heritage assets even where they have been in situ for over 600 years and could bring some money into LBH as part of a tourist initiative which includes parts of Isleworth and Kew. NPPF stresses they should be conserved (20) and Osterley and a church 1350 in use. (p21) Q17. Most historic centres in surrounding areas to Heston are not recognised and seldom used. St John's Residents' Association Community group By ensuring that development is a of scale that fits in with surrounding buildings, respects the Thames Landscape Strategy, does not over dominate the skyline and maintains important local and strategic views.

West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group Development should be heritage-led; the potential for Society growth should be determined by what can be achieved while conserving and enhancing the heritage of the GWC. If as a borough we are to exploit GWC’s strengths, we need to ensure that any new buildings and their branding: 1. pay full respect to and subservient to the elegant and restrained Art Deco buildings; 2. Are of the highest quality; 3. Contribute to a coherent sense of place along the GWR; 4. Contribute positively to the experience of travelling along either the M4 or A4; 5. Maintain a varied skyline with a significant proportion of low to medium-height buildings

193

and open spaces providing relief from high-rise structures; 6. Avoid creating a canyon; 7. Showcase innovation without descending into “theme-park anarchy” with each new building competing to be the most prominent through their design concepts. Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO Growth needs to be in context with surroundings

Sarah Hill Individual Don’t overcrowd it, swamp it, knock it down Dorothy Boland Individual Explore the hinterland so it is not just a commercial `strip’. Better consultation with local architects at Plan stage – there are plenty. Don’t start with the Will Allsops’ of this world who simply want a signature building for themselves and then move on. The Isleworth Society Community group By having regard to the character, scale and setting of the art deco buildings that remain. New structures must conform to an urban design concept that retains and complements these buildings. Kath Richardson Individual It’s a daft question. Keeping those historic buildings on the A4, encouraging equally superb architecture in new buildings along the A4 pays sufficient respect. Rebuilding Firestone. Who decides what high quality design is? I haven’t seen much in the borough. Modern does not need to be tall. The Grove Park Group Community group See above. First establish the necessary infrastructure, and attack the pollution, without which no development close to the M4 can be undertaken. On the stretch between the M4 and Gillette Corner, an Urban Design Policy would guide developers towards echoing the height and proportion of the Art Deco listed buildings.

194

There would also be some unity of approach, rather than the assumption that developers' goals are merely to build higher and denser buildings, closer to the M4, to show off their company logos. David George Individual Not over develop the area, which LBH seems determined to do! Elizabeth Hagerty Individual By not allowing a single building to go up before you have a cohesive area plan, with maximum height allocations and taking into account life for residents as a priority. Then accepting only award- winning architectural design. The Government should appoint a judging committee of architects determined to enhance what is British to adjudicate on all major new buildings in the country. Aidan Allanach Individual Maintaining buildings of specific interest but also removing those which are not Ken Munn Individual Restrict building heights so as not to dominate existing desirable buildings and spaces. Stephanie Lang Individual The visual impact on other local areas should be an important issue when tall buildings are considered. Ross Garside Individual By promoting the retention and maintenance of key heritage buildings – those that are left after the demolition of art-deco buildings like Firestone and Trico. Keep Osterley Green Community group The historic context can best be respected by reuse of Buildings where possible and by sympathetic redevelopment where this is unavoidable. Donald Osborne Individual The historic aspect can be over-played. One or two art deco factories do not make a cultural centre. We should preserve those but basically have the confidence to build modern buildings, providing we do not end up with a canyon of very tall vanity projects. Iris Hill Individual By not approving inappropriate high buildings. For instance the proposed “Curve” is ludicrously high and totally out of proportion to existing buildings. As of this

195 time you do not have a tall building policy and you should have.

From your own Character and Context Study “The Chiswick Flyover and Roundabout and the surrounding anonymous commercial buildings function poorly as the eastern gateway to the Golden Mile, unless the recent advertising towers either side of the flyover can be considered to fulfil this role.” There is a need for those developing in the borough to understand the borough’s distinctive character and take their cue from this context to avoid ugly, bland or out-of- character developments which blight areas for generations.

Protection of areas of special character There are many well-loved areas which have a well- established and coherent character that are not designated as a heritage asset but which need protection from insensitive development. These areas should be prioritised for further appraisal and conservation and enhancement through a range of measures including possible conservation area designation.

Urban form and building heights Heights should relate to the urban structure, accessibility and the character of the borough, with taller buildings focused in our town centres and key movement corridors. Urban form and layout should take its cue from street-based, perimeter block structures (urban types 1, 2 and 5) which are the most successful forms in the borough.

196

Major barriers to movement A number of strategic roads create barriers to movement for local people and have a negative impact on the character and liability of an area. Unlike the historic main routes like the London Road around which communities have focused, many modern strategic roads such as the Great West Road and M4 motorway separate and segregate communities. Development should where possible seek to contribute positively to the borough’s movement network.

Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor The defining feature which makes the ‘historic’ GWR appealing is its spaciousness, with developments set back a significant distance from the road. This makes the absurdly over-dense proposed development at Chiswick Curve particularly egregious. To respect the historic context, this site should be turned into a garden in front of a high quality development on the B&Q site. We should insist on the highest quality of design, and appropriate buffering areas. Martine Petetin Individual No towers please

Kew Residents' Association Community group By making it clear to developers that this is not to be a skyscraper area and that planning application for new buildings should limit their height and ambition accordingly. The recently submitted application for the “Chiswick Curve” is an example of a building which, as planned, is far too high and has far too great a mass for the location in which it is proposed, where it will dominate sightlines and the landscape for miles around. If the Great West Corridor becomes a skyscraper area it will become a very unpleasant place to live or work. Brentford has its own character, to be

197

preserved/conserved where possible, and is not Manhattan, or even Croydon. Victoria George Individual Retrofit wherever possible. June Hoare Individual The old golden mile [Gillette corner etc.] is attractive because it’s light, buildings not tall: perhaps not the best use of space now, but good places to be. Issue 7 seems to be rushing to the conclusion of needing tall structures, or at least seeking opportunities for tall structures with illuminated advertising, without any impact assessment or sensitivity of which parts of the skyline and raised road preclude very tall developments due to their extremely negative impact on the historic context and views. Ruth Mayorcas Individual I am horrified at the idea that this should extend as far as the Business Park in Chiswick High Road and that little attention has been paid to the local plan which says that all development should be in keeping with the architecture and feel of the area. Chiswick is a pleasant leafy suburb of London with the benefit of the river and its proximity to Kew Gardens and Richmond Park - but it is being made into a mini high-rise city of London with inappropriate high rise buildings which do not fit in with the surroundings. Linda Tillman Individual Do not allow any more tall buildings. In particular no WALLS of tall buildings. Despite the statement in the Design and Conservation background paper (4.38) that this should not happen, the approved first phase of the ‘enabling’ development for the new Brentford stadium is already a wall and much too high for the context. Future phases and other proposed developments threaten a massive wall visible for miles around.

198

John Williams Individual Give it absolute priority. The Local Plan requirements should be sacrosanct, not capable of override for exceptional circumstances. New buildings on the A4 between Gillette and Boston Rd should be of the highest architectural merit reflecting the still strong historic context in height and mass. The GSK building fits this role well. Jonathan Knight Individual By only allowing high quality, low rise developments. The respect will come from the population 100 years hence who will appreciate the care with which the area has been developed. Do not allow short term commercial opportunities to blight the historic context. For example by allowing massive and bright advertising displays. We live in Hounslow, a residential borough, not Times Square or Piccadilly Circus! OWGRA Community group The historic context can best be respected by reuse of Buildings where possible and by sympathetic redevelopment where this is unavoidable. Shetson Property Developments Business Keep employment, we need to encourage growth, new Ltd efficient buildings. Rolfe Judd Planning Business Understanding that well designed new development can enhance and complement the historic context. The Great West Road should not remain static, there are opportunities for taller landmark buildings to be constructed, provided these are well considered and of high quality architecturally. Such buildings can successfully coexist with the historic Art Deco character of the Golden Mile. A gateway building at Gillette Corner is also recommended to signify the entrance to the Great West Corridor/Golden Mile.

199

Cllr Tony Louki Councillor The reuse of buildings should be considered as the first option then sympathetic redevelopment only where this is unavoidable.  Tall buildings should be clustered in zones that do not harm the historic context and ensure architectural quality that enhances the new zones in the manner that the Art Deco factories did in their day.  All new developments should arise out of architectural competitions overseen by suitably qualified and respected design champions.  The height of buildings within zoned clusters should not exceed that of the GSK world headquarters.  The height of buildings in Brentford Town Centre should not exceed five stories. Ken Newlan Individual Maintain existing and promote high quality new design via architectural competitions to build. David Pavett Individual The historic context can best be respected by reuse of Buildings where possible and by sympathetic redevelopment where this is unavoidable. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor I have concerns around planning and the move for developers to go straight to the planning inspectorate to appeal- we need more alignment with policy here before we continue to loose appeals e.g. Lucozade sign Ensure buildings are sympathetic to the area, we don’t need another Gherkin Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Abide by Planning laws, listed building, respect as to the impact of high rise has on the environment, avoiding over development, and aiming for high quality small buildings, which enhance historical and listed buildings. History is a major tourist attraction, we have lot in Brentford, let's exercise its great potential.

200

Electricity Supply Pension Business The historic context of the area can be protected by Scheme ensuring that new developments are built to a high standard using high quality materials. Tall buildings and high density development should be carefully sited and designed in relation to heritage assets but the presence of heritage assets does not prevent such development. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business The historic context of the area can be protected by Investment ensuring that new developments are built to a high standard using high quality materials. Tall buildings and high density development should be carefully sited and designed in relation to heritage assets but the presence of heritage assets does not prevent such development. McKay Securities PLC Business Heritage Assets already receive full protection in the Adopted Local Plan and no further regulation or protection is necessary. Hugh Mortimer Individual I can envisage that areas outside the limited corridor may be affected by the development plans and due regard should be had to any adverse effect corridor development may have on character areas, conservations areas, the setting of listed and locally listed buildings, more distant historic estates like Gunnersbury, Boston Manor, Syon or Chiswick House, the World Heritage Site at Kew nor the area around Brentford Town Centre. I feel proposal to rebuild Great West House would be totally unacceptable as it would cause further material harm to the setting of the Butts CA/listed buildings and by virtue of its height would also be affect the setting of many other CAs and listed buildings (probably) including Kew Palace and Gardens, Syon Park, Boston Manor and Gunnersbury. Richard Mundy Individual Sympathetic redevelopment of the art deco buildings should be encouraged. New development should be encouraged, but only if the buildings are to a high

201

aesthetic standard (e.g. the new tower in the Barrett’s GWQ development is a significant eyesore due to its ugly viewing gallery on top). Adam Jackson Individual Maintain original 20th century architecture. And avoid any new build that is higher than current buildings. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor We have to be sympathetic to the area – it’s as simple as that! Gillette Corner Holdings Ltd Business We support the protection of buildings of historical significance along the Great West Road and the need to ensure that building heights are controlled to mitigate any potential impact on important site lines and vistas. It is important to acknowledge that in order to maximise the potential of a site a balance should be struck between preserving the character of the listed building and enabling additional floorspace to be delivered on site to ensure the viability of a scheme, to enable the site to come back into active use. We suggest that the design is considered on a site by site basis and that prescriptive policy restricting the potential heights of new development on particular sites is avoided. The architectural landscape of the area will change over the next 15 years and so the potential for additional massing should be considered on a site by site basis. The Gillette building is Grade II listed and has been vacant for some time. In order to unlock the site and make a scheme deliverable, a hotel and an element of residential floorspace may be required as part of a creative employment led scheme, along with additional massing. In accordance with the NPPF, emerging policy should facilitate sympathetic alterations to listed buildings to enable them to be brought back into active use. Schemes should be supported where it can be demonstrated that

202

any perceived harm to the significance of a heritage asset is outweighed by the wider public benefits that would be delivered. Cecilia Hodgson Individual The historic context can best be respected by reuse of Buildings where possible and by sympathetic redevelopment where this is unavoidable. Brentford Community Council Community group 7.1 Para 1 refers to the history and character of the Great West Road. The vision of re-building large parts of the GWR sites with higher buildings could conflict with the character, scale and setting of the former "art-deco factories" which remain. It is very important that any new structures conform to an urban design concept which retains these buildings and complements them with new structures which remain secondary to them. 7.2 "the road sits within a historically sensitive part of the borough" and should include a map marking all the listed, locally listed buildings and estates and conservation Areas as well as the buffer zone for the Kew World Heritage Site. No development should harm CAs or the setting of listed buildings. In the case of very high schemes (see para 3) the "harm" may occur at a considerable distance from the site.

203

Name Respondent Type Q18 What are the most significant assets of the surrounding heritage assets and how best can these be conserved?

Brentford Community Council Community group New development should be subservient to existing structures. Just because somewhere attracts demand for advertising hoardings doesn't mean they should be allowed. London Borough of Richmond Government The Inspector’s Report (dated July 2015) on the LBH Local upon Thames Plan states in para 157 in relation to the tall buildings policy CC3 that the precise extent of the GWC is not yet defined, and that the original proposed policy criteria do not provide sufficient assurance that tall buildings will not be permitted in locations within those areas where they could still have a significant adverse impact on heritage assets. He acknowledged that representatives (which included LBRuT) are particularly concerned about the potential for harm to the setting of the RBGK WHS from inappropriately sited tall buildings in Brentford Town Centre or along the GWC. The inspector recommended modifications to be made included; a partial review of the Local Plan would need to define the extent of the GWC and also identify the sites within that area with suitability for tall buildings. Only as a result of these modifications, the policy for tall buildings was considered to be sound. Historic England Public body 1. To address the significance of the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew World Heritage Site reference should be made to its Outstanding Universal Values; for the Grade I and II* registered landscapes in the area the entries on Historic England’s register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest provide detailed information. Historic landscape design (layout,

204

skyline, views, and the experience of an artificial natural environment) and collections of highly significant buildings (many listed) are key characteristics of all of the registered landscapes. The inter-relationship between them and the river Thames is also important. For all heritage assets, the Council should consider how setting contributes to their significance, considering the guidance that we have produced.

2. This will then illustrate where harm could be caused or not, and be included in a modelling exercise. These assets can best be conserved by robust guidance – see Q17, which, having identified where new buildings could be located – to cause no harm, and to enhance the appreciation of heritage significance – should then be respected by planning decisions. By modelling and testing impacts, it should be possible to plan realistically for development at higher densities in a sustainable manner. M C Bull Individual (p20) urban design and heritage assets – Heston, all conservation areas in LBH should have the same value places upon them by planning department and members. Heston Village Conservation Area does not equal Boston manor field and house in the members’ view, no money spent on Heston. (q18). The opportunity to keep those in Heston in repair for subsequent generations to marvel at should be taken up. Not demolish them as present thought. Local heritage is not recognised and cannot be linked to the findings, which are frowned on locally. St John's Residents' Association Community group Any tall towers should generally be avoided and new developments should reflect local buildings and built

205

form. There should be a presumption against poor quality advertisements such as free-standing towers over the M4 elevated section. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group The Design and Conservation background paper has Society described many of the surrounding heritage assets. It is not considered realistic to attempt to identify the most significant aspects within this response. It would be over- simplistic, in any case, to reduce consideration of the impact of development to particular assets or views. Part of the value of the built and natural heritage is in the assemblage. See note under Q3.

The assets can best be conserved by the Council scrupulously applying the full suite of policies in Chapter Six of the Local Plan: Context and Character. The Council needs to ensure that developers engage positively with the purpose and core principles of this chapter as articulated in Our Approach to Policy CC1 and to Policy CC4 and in paragraphs 6.1, 6.12 and 6.13. Developers must not be allowed to consider sites in the GWC in isolation and narrowly define the context, taking cues from, and respecting and responding only to the immediate environment. They must fully assess the impact on the surrounding heritage and on local residents, the larger the scale of development the wider the surrounding area that needs to be considered. In commenting on the Context and Character study in January 2013 we emphasised that no Character or Study Area should be viewed in isolation. Each area will have impacts on, and in turn be affected by, its neighbouring areas. This is especially relevant where the character changes abruptly from one area to another.

206

In assessing the Great West Road Area, great care needs to be taken not only in relation to the coherence of its appearance and impact in relation to those travelling along either the M4 or A4 it but also with respect to those living alongside The negative influence of, for example, tall buildings and advertising structures can extend far beyond the immediate vicinity. The proximity of the River Thames and of heritage assets in Hounslow and Richmond, including the World Heritage site of Kew Gardens needs to be taken into full account, when drawing up design guidelines for this area. Residents in the surrounding areas of Brentford and Chiswick do not want the A4/M4 and its flyover to be the defining feature of their neighbourhood (see comments on area J below). Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO New developments should be in keeping with surroundings Dorothy Boland Individual Hounslow is fortunate to have clusters of conservation areas, and the Kew World Heritage site buffer zone are within its boundaries and we should nurture them. They are precious: once damaged by inappropriate surrounding development they cannot ever be retrieved. My understanding was that the living environment should contribute to people’s sense of place, safety and security. Therefore the objective should be to create reasonable size `clusters’ which give residents and workers a sense of place identity to live and work, rather than a string of commercial – or residential - high rises with no centre. Think beauty before thinking money. The Isleworth Society Community group Great harm can, and has been, caused by lack of respect for vistas from Isleworth Riverside Conservation Area, the River Thames, Syon Park estate, Gunnersbury Park, Kew Heritage site and Boston Manor; these need to be respected henceforth.

207

Kath Richardson Individual New developments should be in keeping with existing buildings and surroundings, not dwarf them in height, mass or density. The Grove Park Group Community group These are clearly laid out in the detailed Conservation & Character Study, which forms part of the adopted Local Plan. David George Individual Numerous attractive buildings. Don’t dwarf them by more tower blocks. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual The most significant aspect is their beauty and their contribution to the well-being of residents and visitors. They need to be seen and provide the gateways to the area. Their proportions in the landscape must be maintained. So no high rise behind them. Just because somewhere attracts demand for advertising hoardings doesn't mean they should be allowed. Aidan Allanach Individual Not sure Ken Munn Individual Heritage buildings and grounds and conservation areas. Prevent them from being dominated by tall buildings and isolated by traffic. Ross Garside Individual Sensitive views of buildings from Kew Gardens, Strand on the Green need to be preserved by not approving overbearing and ‘iconic’ buildings. Keep Osterley Green Community group The Gillette Building and some of the other period buildings are the most significant aspects. Gillette is of course listed and the others can best be preserved by reuse. Donald Osborne Individual Osterley and Gunnersbury Parks have to be preserved, also the Victorian suburbs at the eastern end. Iris Hill Individual Low rise buildings and with many trees and an environment that encourages residents to stay and build a community. That also allows them to enjoy their surroundings and be productive

208

Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor The sense of space. Tall buildings near to the likes of Gunnersbury and BM parks can obviously impact on this. Martine Petetin Individual Those listed in your Background Paper. It is important that the views from those sites is not disturbed. Kew Residents' Association Community group The sites referred to in question 16 and, south of the river, the World Heritage Site of the Royal Botanic Gardens. It is very important that the sight lines from any of these sites is not dominated by excessively tall and massive building. If it is this wonderful heritage will be ruined for ever. Victoria George Individual Boston Manor Park and House, Carville Park South. Under funded at present, in need of serious investment. Plus must be protected. June Hoare Individual The issue lists most of the key estates etc., but makes no mention of the historic and unique riverfront. There is no clear promotion of protecting these assets, nor more importantly of connecting or enhancing them. These are what bring visitors to London, or this part of London. Simply ‘conserving’ those within a bundle of unrelated tall commercial buildings is not an option. Linda Tillman Individual These have been identified in the Design and Conservation background paper – not only Kew Gardens, Syon Park, Boston Manor Park and Gunnersbury Park but the built environments of industrial heritage (Museum of Water and Steam) and domestic use particularly the waterfront at Strand on the Green and parts of Brentford. These all feature in LBH tourist literature but are at serious risk from massive intensification of development. John Williams Individual Their open spaces, their parkland and their trees. They are an important lung in the increasingly polluted air quality in the area. The downward swoop of the A4 from Gillette to Boston Road retains the visual appeal of the

209

original development of 80 years ago. This should be protected when GWC planning is being considered. Jonathan Knight Individual We tend to concentrate on the high profile assets such as Kew Gardens, the Thames, Chiswick House and other listed buildings but this area of west London is a heritage asset in itself. New development needs to be in context of its history, a continuation of the character that has evolved. Naturally developers want to piggy back on the attraction of the Chiswick and the east of the borough with the real possibility of damaging that very attractiveness. LBoH needs to do more to raise the profile of the west of the borough. It is surrounded by Kew Gardens, Syon Park, Gunnersbury Park, Osterley Park, Lampton Park, Hanworth Park and Hounslow Heath. These make it one of the greenest London boroughs. Do more to emphasise the unique assets of Hounslow and its history. OWGRA Community group From OWGRA point of view the Gillette Building and some of the other period buildings are the most significant aspects. Gillette is of course listed and the others can best be preserved by reuse. Shetson Property Developments Business not sure Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business The Art Deco design of the heritage assets is important to conserve. This can be achieved by retaining existing buildings of outstanding architectural quality and encouraging new development to make some reference to the historic context of the area Cllr Tony Louki Councillor The Gillette Building and associated former National Provincial Bank, other Art Deco sites on the Golden Mile are the most significant aspects as is even, the more

210

recent and special Homebase. All can best be preserved by ensuring reuse.

Other assets that provide contrast with the Great West Corridor such as Osterley Park (not just the National Trust estate), Boston Manor Park and House, River Brent and canals, should be protected by green and pedestrian buffer zones. Ken Newlan Individual Brentford town; Canals; Gunnersbury Park; Gillette building - Banister Fletcher David Pavett Individual From OWGRA point of view the Gillette Building and some of the other period buildings are the most significant aspects. Gillette is of course listed and the others can best be preserved by reuse. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Gillette building must be preserved as should any building with listed status Electricity Supply Pension Business Existing heritage assets should be protected and brought Scheme back in to meaningful use where they are vacant. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business Existing heritage assets should be protected and brought Investment back in to meaningful use where they are vacant. McKay Securities PLC Business Heritage Assets already receive full protection in the Adopted Local Plan and no further regulation or protection is necessary. Hugh Mortimer Individual Development outside the immediate A4 corridor should preserve the predominantly Victorian street pattern and grain. The plan should ensure safe and easy movement across the A4. Richard Mundy Individual Sympathetic redevelopment of the art deco buildings is important to conserve these. Good maintenance of the parks, town centres, pedestrian routes and canal surroundings are important to keep this pleasant and secure.

211

Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor I reiterate by having a heritage strategy and promoting tourism to the local area to boost the local economy. Kew Society Community group Vistas, sympathetic design and bio-diversity. Vistas must be protected, including the setting and views from the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew World Heritage Site and its Buffer Zone, conservation areas including Kew Green, river views (designated Thames Policy Area) and key views within Hounslow by appropriate location of tall buildings with specified restrictions on the maximum number, specific sites and height of tall buildings based on evidence and impact assessments as well as restrictions on advertising, light and noise pollution. These were all issues we and others raised in the independent review of Hounslow’s Local Plan. The Inspector referred to tall buildings in his report of July 2015 and we are not satisfied that his requirements have been taken on board in this draft Plan. The broad definition of tall buildings as being those that are “substantially taller than their neighbours” is wholly inadequate. The Great West Corridor Plan needs to demonstrate clearly its compliance with Hounslow Local Plan policies CC3 and 4 and with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework. The current draft does not do so. Cecilia Hodgson Individual The Gillette Building and some of the other period buildings are the most significant aspects. Gillette is of course listed and the others can best be preserved by reuse. Brentford Community Council Community group The aerial view of Brentford Lock north shows the recently renovated high rise "Great West House" at the SW corner of Boston Manor Road and the A4 being demolished to make way for a much higher tower (possibly in the order of 35/40 storeys. It has already

212

been demonstrated that the 22 storey oval tower in the nearby Great West Quarter is visible from great distances and is causing "harm" to the setting of the Grade 1 Syon Park. The proposal to rebuild Great West House would be totally unacceptable as it would cause further material harm to the setting of the Butts CA/listed buildings and by virtue of its height would also be affect the setting of many other CAs and listed buildings (probably) including Kew Palace and Gardens, Syon Park, Boston Manor and Gunnersbury. Brentford Community Council Community group 6.4. Para 3 describes the open spaces close to the A4. It is certainly true that the Thames edge and Gunnersbury Park are valuable assets. It is to be hoped that the Thames Riverside Path (see Brentford Spatial Strategy Issue 2) will be completed during the plan period and connected through Syon Park to Old Isleworth. Connections to Gunnersbury Park involve at grade crossings of the A4, which is a 40mph 6 lane dual carriageway. Because of these access difficulties much of the plan area is in an area of public open space deficiency. The plan should plot the deficiency areas and show proposals which would eliminate them. Ian Speed Individual Secondly, I would like to add that I personally feel the Council should be seeking to protect buildings that contribute to the area's Art Deco heritage and encourage their re-use along the lines of the Tesco Hoover Building at Perivale as well as the existing use of the current buildings on the A4.

213

Name Respondent Type Q19 Have we identified the right constraints on sites for tall buildings? (please see Design and conservation background paper with further questions)

Brentford Community Council Community group No. Tall buildings criteria should conform to Historic England Advice note 4 London Borough of Richmond Government LBRuT remains extremely concerned of the potential of a upon Thames significant number of tall buildings appearing in the GWC. Therefore, the GWC Plan should define the parameters for tall buildings by clearly identifying and setting out specific sites and maximum heights, based on robust and credible evidence and impact assessments, including partnership working with key partners, including for example RBGK, Historic England and LBRuT as well as local community groups. LBRuT specifically recommends that LBH, as part of the GWC Plan, addresses the following:

 In line with criterion (d) of policy CC3, the GWC Plan should clearly identify specific sites for taller buildings, whereby it needs to be made clear that these will be subject to the delivery of strategic public transport improvements identified in the Great West Corridor.  The GWC Plan has to comply with criterion (f) of policy CC3, which states that LBH will not seek to replace existing tall buildings which are in inappropriate locations and not allowing them to be a justification for the provision of new ones.  LBRuT recommends that LBH undertakes a detailed analysis and study to address inter-visibility between potential sites for tall buildings in GWC and RBGK WHS.

214

 Adhere to Policy CC3, which states that LBH will work with partners, particularly Historic England and RBGK WHS. The current application for a tall structure at Chiswick Roundabout illustrates the critical issue of assessing visual impacts objectively, because LBRuT and its partners, including Historic England and the Kew Society, fundamentally disagree with the applicant’s assessment of this structure being ‘beneficial’ or that the scheme would ‘add to the richness of the background setting of the WHS without harming it in anyway. Historic England Public body The Design and Conservation background paper does not capture everything. In our opinion the assessment of setting as a concept is weak and the significance of Grade II* listed buildings is under-represented. In terms of the overview of heritage assets there could be reference to the Bedford Park Conservation Area, which is a similar distance from parts of the GWC as Chiswick House, and closer than Isleworth, which are both referenced, and includes 3 Grade II* listed buildings and c.220 list entries (some are for multiple buildings) at Grade II.

The views identified in the Site Capacity Study are a start, but do not represent a methodical or rigorous approach. However, clarification is needed in relation to references in paragraph 4.17 of the background paper suggesting that further urban design work has been undertaken. (Please refer to our separate comments on the background paper below). M C Bull Individual Urban design principles should have a separate public consultation. Use libraries to meet LB Hounslow does not recognise public interest in its heritage. There are no

215

instances where any publication by LBH can be obtained, or seen dealing with the topics as there should be. Heritage Assets not recognised as of right. The Interim Planning Framework is not obtainable for public to access, and use to judge planning applications as it should be. St John's Residents' Association Community group Any tall buildings need to be sensitively located and large clusters should be avoided. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group No. Limiting consideration to significant views from major Society heritage sites is too restrictive an approach. We consider that the starting point should be that so much damage has already been done by tall buildings or is “consented”, that the GWC is an unsuitable location for any more.

One of the problems with stating that “the area around the GWC does contain a number of locations with ‘some suitability’ for tall buildings” is that this encourages developers to make inappropriate proposals. The GWC already contains a number of tall buildings, including several over 60 m. Policy CC3 clearly states (para 6.10) why tall buildings are inappropriate and recognises the sensitivity of the heritage assets in Brentford, Chiswick and Kew. The Council is fully aware of the negative impact on these assets and on residential communities of existing (“inappropriate” cf 6.11) tall buildings (including the recent 25-storey tower (75m) in the GWQ) and the further significant harm that will be inflicted by consented schemes, especially residential elements of the Brentford Stadium Scheme. In these circumstances, application of the criteria in CC3 might identify a limited number of sites in the GWC where a tall building of say between 20 to 40m would be acceptable but no more tall buildings above 40m should be allowed.

216

Note: Historic England’s Advice Note 4 (December 2015) replaces earlier CABE/English Heritage guidance. Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO No Oonagh M Boland Individual Additional tall buildings are unacceptable in what is a low-rise residential neighbourhood. Any redevelopment of commercial or other employment sites should not exceed the height of existing buildings. Windmill Road Action Group Individual Additional Tall Buildings are unacceptable in what is a low rise residential neighbourhood. Any redevelopment of employment sites should be “capped” at the height of the existing buildings on the sites in question. The Isleworth Society Community group No. Taller buildings should be to the west of the area; lower buildings to the east where they will better co-exist with historic areas and the World Heritage site. Kath Richardson Individual No. Constraints are only minimally defined – height, number, location, build quality, purpose, lighting need to all be set out. Views should be considered for residents and not just from parks and Kew Gardens. We’re all entitled to a decent view. The Grove Park Group Community group As above, you know that you have not, since you have not delivered a Tall Buildings Policy. When may we expect this? David George Individual I see little evidence of constraints, huge advertising hoardings are an eye sore Simon R Hill Individual In addition, any development at the eastern end of the Golden Mile (including the new Brentford Stadium complex and any development of the B&Q site, but especially any proposed development on the old Bank site on Chiswick roundabout) should have regard to its impact on the adjacent residential area. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual You have it backwards. All The taller buildings should be to the west of the area and lower buildings to the East

217

where they need to dovetail with historic areas and the World Heritage Site. And concentrate on developing Hounslow Town Centre area instead of just the Golden two and a half miles. Aidan Allanach Individual Not sure Ken Munn Individual There should be guidance that new buildings will not exceed the median height of neighbouring buildings and will not impinge on the skyline for more distant views. Maggie Webber Individual 3) Any new replacement developments proposed for this area should be of a height that does not dominate and overwhelm Chiswick’s suburban character. Ross Garside Individual The GW corridor has sufficient tall buildings without approving or promoting more. The sight lines from historic open spaces are compromised already, especially when the 13 tower blocks ‘enabling’ the Brentford Football club development are built. Keep Osterley Green Community group Please refer to the recently issued Historic England Guidance. Donald Osborne Individual Yes, but will these constraints be observed? Precedents.in this borough are not very encouraging, Iris Hill Individual No. Buildings at this end of the Borough should be low rise to blend with existing architecture. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor No. Whilst I have no objection to tall buildings on the GWR (subject to the provisos in the local plan) I do not agree with tall buildings in Brentford town centre. The existing police house is entirely out of keeping with the local environment and plans to extend and replicate it are unacceptable. The town centre area should be limited to 5/6 storey development at maximum. Martine Petetin Individual Tall buildings should be kept along the elevated section of the M4, not near residential streets where they are out of character. Kew Residents' Association Community group No comments since we have not seen this document

218

June Hoare Individual No. Your documents makes for very muddled thinking about heights of buildings: there appears to be no reference to context and character guidance: the bulk of the buildings should echo the ‘classic’ old golden mile 4-5 storeys and certainly not exceed 12 storeys. Tall buildings by the raised motorway could lead to issues of safety and security – closure of this vital highway could bring London to a halt. Linda Tillman Individual The constraints sound appropriate but have already been compromised (see above). The tall building at the junction of the A4 and South Ealing Rd is dominant in views from Syon Park and Kew Gardens and that is a single building, not a cluster. John Williams Individual The current Local Plan is explicit on tall building development. The problem arises in the breach by planning decision makers. The Local Plan should be absolute, no exceptions. The current and anticipated high-rise developments at ‘Kew Gate’ could become a dis-spiriting cramped and isolated site within a few years compounded with the unattractiveness of living above the new Brentford football stadium.

The limit of ‘Kew Gate’ high-rise development, both approved and anticipated, has been over-reached. It should not be repeated elsewhere in the Corridor. Further installations within the Corridor of large advertising media screens should be stopped. They do nothing to improve the quality of life for residents. They are unnecessarily intrusive in every way.

Jonathan Knight Individual Definitely not. The Local Plan does not adequately address high rise building constraints. Foremost is the need to consult and listen to local residents and their

219

representative bodies. What possible justification is there for allowing high rise buildings, such as the Chiswick Curve proposal, next to 2 and 3 storey suburban housing? Hounslow is not central London and should never be. OWGRA Community group Please refer to the recently issued Historic England Guidance. Shetson Property Developments Business Not sure but we need to allow tall buildings to cope with Ltd demand. Columbia ThreadNeedle Business We are encouraged by Figure 15 (Potential Building Heights) which appears to identify Great West Plaza for taller buildings and potentially a landmark building. The key is very difficult to read and should be clarified. We understand from telephoning your office that the proposed storey heights are 8-12 storeys. We agree that Great West Plaza has the potential to accommodate taller buildings and should not be limited by height guidance within the Plan, which will inevitably be taken as a restriction (Figure 15). We suggest that the Plan takes a site by site approach to building heights, whereby height guidelines are derived in consultation with the Council dependent upon the various criteria that are set out in the Plan. This would better align with the Council’s preferred positive and proactive approach. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Probably not, the recently issued Historic England Guidance should clarify and a humane approach for vistas, not only from the river but from residential neighbourhoods in Isleworth, Brentford, Chiswick, Gunnersbury and Acton should be respected and maintained. The quality of tall buildings and their relationship to spaces at ground level is equally important with the avoidance of a monoculture of offices and residential types.

220

Ken Newlan Individual Yes David Pavett Individual Please refer to the recently issued Historic England Guidance. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor M4 is main route into London from airport and its one of first things visitors see when travelling into London- need to ensure that buildings don’t impact key views- so I am in agreement – but my concern is that one building does not ruin a view but at what point is it noticed the view has changed? This is unclear Cllr Myra Savin Councillor I don't feel this is the case. Tall buildings creates wind tunnels, obscure vistas and can intimidate small town areas, like Brentford high street. We need to have a 'special' case review of 'tall' buildings in small towns. The horror that is Vauxhall is key to that. Met residents in Kew Bridge new developments, who said Brentford was their alternate, as it didn't have the mass buildings/towers that Vauxhall has recently developed! Electricity Supply Pension Business It is considered that the Sky and Kew Gate areas provide Scheme opportunities for tall buildings, which should be encouraged to the benefit of the area. The opportunities for tall buildings should be discussed with land owners and a coherent strategy developed. The emerging Masterplan does not provide enough detail for landowners to comment. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business It is considered that the Sky and Kew Gate areas provide Investment opportunities for tall buildings, which should be encouraged to the benefit of the area. The opportunities for tall buildings should be discussed with land owners and a coherent strategy developed. The emerging Masterplan does not provide enough detail for landowners to comment. McKay Securities PLC Business Figure 14 of the Design and Conservation Background Paper identifies 1000 Great West Road as an ‘area with

221

some suitability for tall buildings’. Given these findings, we strongly encourage the Council to support this area for tall buildings to accord with Policy CC3 (d) – Tall Buildings. Starbones Ltd Business We support the principle of promoting the highest quality of design within the Great West Corridor. We welcome the acknowledgement of tall buildings within the Corridor. We feel that this approach will help to deliver the Council’s aspiration for the area, which was founded on bold architectural principles for many prestigious HQ buildings along the Golden Mile. The potential for the regeneration of this area has been initiated by a number of high-profile planning consents including Brentford Football Club, Wheatstone House, 250 Gunnersbury Avenue and advanced pre-application discussions at Capital Interchange Way for a mixed-use scheme led by Will Alsop’s all Design. It is considered that tall buildings can act as a visual marker for this area of regeneration. We feel that ensuring proposals are of the highest quality of design can assimilate respect to the historic context while allowing for potential growth and transformation of the Great West Corridor. The proposals for the Chiswick Curve set a high design standard which can be a catalyst to kick-start an improvement in design quality in the area. LaSalle Investment Management Business We would agree that tall buildings in the corridor in certain sections have the potential to impact on important site lines and vistas from Kew Gardens and other historic open space vistas. This needs to be considered carefully as part of the de design process for larger developments in the corridor, taking into account the existing and consented buildings in the area, and the relative impact on the views.

222

With regard to the Kew Bridge Conservation Area, paragraph 3.21 states that the Great West Corridor Plan will specify how future development should complement and avoid compromising the distinctive feature of and views over Kew Bridge. We would comment that such policy should not provide prescriptive guidance on how future development should be developed. Paragraph 3.27 refers to the preservation of Gunnersbury Park’s setting and views, and indicates that the Great West Corridor Plan may include policies on building heights, colour and materials of roofs. Whilst we acknowledge that these aspects could potentially have an impact on the setting of Gunnersbury Park, we do not consider it appropriate for planning policy to include prescriptive guidance or restrictions on the height, colour and materials.

Figure 14: significant views across the GWC, identifies part of the Kew Gate area, including 27GWR, as an area with some suitability for tall buildings. We agree with this view, as the area is already surrounded by the existing and consented tall buildings, and tall buildings in the area are unlikely to impact on the key views from Gunnersbury Park, Kew Gardens, Kew Green and Kew Bridge. We consider that the Kew Gate area is suitable for tall buildings, with the significant opportunity to provide additional economic and residential development and catalyst for regeneration in the area, without having a significant impact on the heritage assets.

We agree with the potential solutions identified in the area, including the provision of a wider range of uses and

223

activities to provide shopping, restaurant and leisure amenities to employees during and after work hours and improvements to the environment in and around stations to provide a more professional image for visitors to businesses. In terms of potential solutions to poor environmental conditions, we agree that the development of tall mixed- use towers with lower floors devoted to employment with residential units on upper floor could be one of the solutions to accommodate commercial and residential uses on 27GWR.

Our client requests a collaborative approach with the Council to identify a suitable solution for 27 GWR. We request that their views and knowledge on the long term viability of the site, which is also a key output of the Plan, should be reflected in the Plan making process. Hugh Mortimer Individual I believe that the Background papers to the Issues paper propose developments for the Great West Corridor which are inconsistent with the London Plan (FALP) the Local Plan for Hounslow 2015 which should therefore be rejected. Proposals to include tall buildings within the Great West Corridor Area must be so designed that no harm is caused to listed and locally listed buildings and their setting, to conservation areas and historic estates as well as the World Heritage Ste at Kew and more distant heritage assets. Richard Mundy Individual Height is not in my opinion a big issue, so long as the quality of the architecture is high, pleasant public spaces are provided and sufficient supporting public transport infrastructure is provided.

224

Adam Jackson Individual No. The design and conservation paper does not set any clear constraints. In addition it focuses on the impact of tall buildings on ‘heritage’ views from places like Kew Gardens and Syon Park. What is completely fails to do is look at the impact on residential areas in Brentford and the view for people living here, who have invested in the area and will be impacted day in and day out by high rise views. Brentford people will be particularly affected by any high rise in the ‘North Lock’ and ‘M4 Gateway’ areas. There should be a very clear policy of no new buildings more than 4 storeys high in these areas. The council and plan must take better account of the impact of development of these two areas on the quality of life (including views) of current residents. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor You may have seen them but are ignoring them. What is planned in the foreseeable future for Brentford Town Centre is nothing more than a nightmare and would destroy once and for all the quaintness and unique character of the Half Acre area. It would also put a blight on the skyline for decades to come. Kew Society Community group Our comments above apply to this question too. In addition, the relationship of tall buildings to surrounding low rise housing needs to be added so that new designs do not loom over existing properties. An overall height limit should be imposed so that developers are clear on the boundaries. High rise “enabling” developments should not be accepted which breach planning rules on height and density in the Local Plan. (Note we are commenting separately on the Design and conservation paper). Cecilia Hodgson Individual Please refer to the recently issued Historic England Guidance.

225

Issue 8: Community infrastructure and local services

Name Respondent Type Q20 What will the corridor need to support the growth in employment and housing? Brentford Community Council Community group No construction should be consented before improved public transport is operational. Development should accord with London Plan matrix based on PTALs re- calculated after new transport facilities are complete. M C Bull Individual 11. (p22) No reference to infrastructure deficiencies in Brentford. Need for more medical centres. Too many schools, and estate to fund Bees football stadium, means many more school places needed. Instead of a medical centre LBH decided on a school opposite Osterley Underground Station. Medical centre would serve Brentford, Chiswick roundabout. Too many people are being brought into the area, mainly to work at Heathrow Airport, not anywhere on Golden Mile. Crossrail will not serve to reduce traffic congestion or poor air quality now below WHO permitted levels. St John's Residents' Association Community group NHS and private Doctors, health centres, dentists, schools (private and state), churches, playgroups, nursery facilities, pedestrian areas, weather protection, long lasting good looks to buildings, parks, security, police, ambulance and paramedic services, pubs, bars and restaurants, access to all London airports not just Heathrow, easy access to central London, youth clubs, Scouts and Brownies and Guides, West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group There should be no housing growth in the GWC (see Q Society 11, 14). Community infrastructure is required, however, to provide for the increased population resulting from developments already built, under construction or in the pipeline in the Brentford and Chiswick area.

226

With respect to growth in employment, the immediate, working-day needs of businesses in the GWC for cafes and restaurants etc. should be provided within the commercial quarters/campuses (as, for example, in the Chiswick Business Park). A more extended leisure offer is best provided by better access (especially on foot) to the existing/future leisure offer in Chiswick and Brentford town centres. The GWC should remain essentially an employment corridor; it should support not compete with or draw custom away from the local town centres. Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO Need higher PTAL and air quality.

Sarah Hill Individual Encourage small businesses. In Brentford there is no obvious Neighbourhood Community Centre where ‘wellbeing’ activities can take place. Several of these employment areas are of a self-employed nature and part-time and give value to an area. Dorothy Boland Individual Small local social activity centres fulfilling the role once held by local pubs and church halls: health centre with swimming pool (including activities for the elderly), medical centres, schools, maybe a golf course or driving range. To build happy, integrated communities you need activities which tempt residents and workers to remain in their area contributing to the social as well as commercial life. Oonagh M Boland Individual All of the current infrastructure problems should be resolved before any further growth or development is permitted. Windmill Road Action Group Community group All the existing Infrastructure Problems must be completely resolved before any further growth is permitted.

227

The Isleworth Society Community group Before considering “growth” existing needs for health services (including convalescence), education, police, open spaces, fitness, transport nursery, sports, entertainment, retirement living etc., need to be addressed in order to make the area a successful place to work, live or visit. Kath Richardson Individual Improved PTAL for the A4 and reduced pollution as a priority. Community infrastructure and local services. We need a retail strategy that supports small businesses while they establish themselves. GWQ retail spaces are almost all still empty. The Grove Park Group Community group As above, the plan has it backwards: there can't be any 'growth in employment and housing' along the A4, without a commitment to putting office workers or new residents in areas where they are not subject to high levels of air and noise pollution. There are no plans for Hounslow to tackle air and noise pollution, so producing those should be an absolute priority, as should be installing the necessary transport infrastructure to make the A4 a viable place to work, even if only the portion east of the M4 was made the 'Corridor', as we have proposed. As stated in the Local Plan, the desired transport infrastructure is unlikely to be delivered with the Local Plan's 15-year period, and it is not under Hounslow Council's control anyway, so a complete re-think is need. Certainly no development can commence along the A4 without infrastructure first. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual NHS and private Doctors, health centres, dentists, schools (private and state), churches, playgroups, nursery facilities, pedestrian areas, weather protection, long lasting good looks to buildings, parks, security, police, ambulance and paramedic services, pubs, bars and

228

restaurants, access to all London airports not just Heathrow, easy access to central London, youth clubs, Scouts and Brownies and Guides, Sue Lewis Individual Schools, medical facilities Aidan Allanach Individual New pubs, bars and leisure facilities. Don’t let it be as sterile as Canary Wharf was when it was first built. Make it a place where people will want to hang out rather than escape as soon as the day is over. Ken Munn Individual Reliable, frequent public transport. Local ‘mini centres’ for convenience shopping. Schools and primary healthcare premises Ross Garside Individual Better transport, shopping, medical facilities and schools. Keep Osterley Green Community group To support growth in employment better access and more imaginative use of Brownfield Land will be required. To support Housing, as previously indicated, doctors, libraries, green spaces, shops and other services accessible to the residents will be required. Lionel Road Developments Ltd Business The Club welcomes the allocation of its Lionel Road South site as an “Opportunity Site” but notes that the site boundary is incorrect. The boundary needs to be extended to include the Capital Court site (off Capital Interchange Way) which also comprises part of the BCS Masterplan development. To assist a site boundary plan to show the exact boundary for the allocation is attached in Appendix One. The Club would welcome confirmation that this change has been made in the publication of the Preferred Options Stage. Donald Osborne Individual It is not suitable for housing, which in any case does not need to be in a “corridor.” Employment growth is not so problematic.

229

Iris Hill Individual Genuinely affordable housing. Schools, health centres with GPs, Dentists, mother and toddler groups, nurseries, affordable shops and ancillary facilities. Leisure facilities for adults and children and above all sensitive landscaping to provide a decent environment for living. And also the overcrowding at Gunnersbury tube station. Even at present it is a potential death trap, and given the increases in capacity at the business park is overcrowded. Add that match days at the new stadium and it is only a matter of time until someone goes under a train. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Schools as below and transport as above are priorities, as is NHS provision, though it is understood that the council cannot force the NHS to provide capacity. Nevertheless, such provision should be a required precursor to any major development proposal, rather than an afterthought. Martine Petetin Individual Public transport Kew Residents' Association Community group Community infrastructure; First rate access by public transport. Victoria George Individual Brentford has had unprecedented growth in population over the last 5 years, with no more GP’s, very little in the way of new school places and no provision of these within new developments, which is where clearly they should be. No more genuine community facilities. Pitiful social housing capacity. June Hoare Individual A huge sea change in the infrastructure which cannot cope now. Infrastructure needs to come before the development: schools, doctors, transport and housing. The Council has not published in simple format anything that shows their appreciation of what will be needed resulting from the piecemeal developments along the motorway.

230

Linda Tillman Individual As detailed in the Plan, community facilities such as schools will be badly needed. General practice medical facilities too. It is crucial that ‘short-termism’ does not win out. A long- term plan is needed. The relevant example is the closure of Smallberry Green secondary school and sale of its land on the London Road in Isleworth for housing many years ago. The school is so badly needed now but can’t be re- created. John Williams Individual Transport and Infrastructure is the overwhelming priority. The ‘Golden Mile’ came about following the opening of the Gt West Road, not before. Businesses and house building were attracted by mould-breaking new infrastructure. Vague promises and slow implementation today will not be sufficient to generate a ‘renaissance’. This should be the central theme of the GWC project, not an ill-defined afterthought. It needs emphasis, it needs push. Jonathan Knight Individual See 5 above. OWGRA Community group To support growth in employment better access and more imaginative use of Brown Land will be required. To support Housing, as previously indicated, doctors, libraries, green spaces, shops and other services accessible to the residents will be required. Education Funding Agency Government The EFA welcomes LB Hounslow’s approach to planning for new school places through the Council’s Sequential Site Assessment for Additional School Sites and the allocation of sites for school use within the Local Plan. As the Council has recognised, these sites may not be available or deliverable within the timescales required to provide the necessary school places. We therefore encourage LB Hounslow to allocate further land in the

231

Great West Corridor Plan specifically for educational purposes and in that regard make the following comments: Floreat Brentford Primary School opened in September 2015 in temporary accommodation at Trico House, Great West Quarter, Brentford. A permanent site is required for the school which should be recognised within the Great West Corridor plan. Nishkam School West London is a Sikh ethos, multi-faith all-through school for students aged 4-19 years. The school opened in temporary accommodation at 390 London Road in September 2013. Planning permission recently secured for the school’s new permanent building on Syon Lane. The school will provide 1,400 school places once at full capacity.

Bolder Academy is an approved secondary school which is due to open in September 2017 in the Isleworth/ Brentford area. It will provide 1,150 school places once at full capacity. A permanent site will be required for the school which should be recognised within the GWC Plan and potential sites identified and protected for school use. Shetson Property Developments Business more local shops, independent companies Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business Improvements to transport services would help support future development. Provision of new housing would in turn support further employment within the area.

232

Cllr Tony Louki Councillor To support growth in employment better access and more imaginative use of brownfield sites will be required.  To support growth in housing new and human scaled schools, nurseries and children’s play areas to provide contrast with the scale of this and other potential new development.  For both, access to doctors, schools, libraries, leisure facilities, green space, and shops developed at the same time as in 13 above. Ken Newlan Individual Social and affordable housing; cycle ways David Pavett Individual We need an evaluation of the extent to which the Planning Department has sufficient resources to deal with the heavy pressure from developers. If it is under- resourced then this should be openly stated even if the situation cannot be remedied with present government policies. It should also be considered the Planning officers could work in a more cooperative way with amenity groups. The current approach appears to be to hold them at arm’s length while making arrangements with the developers. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Need to help identify empty unused/ underutilised office space. Ensure housing is not built without bigger considerations of schools/hospitals/parks Cllr Myra Savin Councillor If the cohesion is that employees are residents. Electricity Supply Pension Business The area needs shops, restaurants and services that are Scheme capable of supporting higher density employment and residential development. Due to the length of the Great West Road it is considered that a number of small centres will be needed rather than a single larger centre. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business The area needs shops, restaurants and services that are Investment capable of supporting higher density employment and residential development. Due to the length of the Great

233

West Road it is considered that a number of small centres will be needed rather than a single larger centre. McKay Securities PLC Business In order to support the provision of employment and residential development, more retail, leisure and commercial uses (e.g. A1, A3, A4, B1 C1 (hotels), C3, D2, Sui Generis (car showrooms) uses) are required to make the Great West Corridor a successful place to work, live or visit. We strongly encourage the Council to promote these uses by encouraging mixed use development to come forward across the entire designated area. Starbones Ltd Business We support the provision of new community infrastructure within the area and see the forthcoming development as a significant catalyst in enabling this. Future development within the GWC can provide critical infrastructure to support the growth in housing and employment. We consider that contributions to improve the public transport network, pedestrian and cycle networks and connectivity are crucial in the regeneration of the GWC.

Additionally, future development can offer the opportunity to provide new infrastructure to support the growth in housing and employment, but also make important improvements to existing social infrastructure in the area. This could include important contributions towards crucial local services, including schools, where the consultation paper has identified a specific need. LaSalle Investment Management Business As the Council has acknowledged in the consultation document, businesses along the Corridor would like a greater leisure offer and accessible amenities and facilities, such as restaurants, cafes, gym and crèches.

234

Whilst the Council considers that existing town centres at Chiswick and Brentford can contribute to this in part, as noted elsewhere in these representations, certain sections of the corridor, including 27GWR, are constrained by the physical barriers to access facilities in the town centres. We therefore consider that the corridor will need to have a mix of uses to support the growth in employment and housing, taking into account the accessibility by foot and cycle from properties along the Great West Corridor, which are physically disconnected from the nearby town centres. Richard Mundy Individual Improved public transport links are needed (e.g. fast trains into London and/or a Crossrail station), school places are needed and a GP surgery capacity is needed. In addition, Brentford town centre needs continued significant redevelopment. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor I don’t see any need for any support in the growth of mixed developments for employment and housing purposes. Conflicts are arising between resident and businesses on the basis of this mix due to noise and over- densification. Surely the object of the exercise is to grow the local economy not stifle it! Gillette Corner Holdings Ltd Business As set out above, if creative, digital and media type uses are to be promoted within the Great West Corridor Plan, then the delivery of community infrastructure and services will be fundamental.

Kew Society Community group Better public transport, more schools, more health care etc.

235

Cecilia Hodgson Individual To support growth in employment better access and more imaginative use of Brownfield Land will be required. To support Housing, as previously indicated, doctors, libraries, green spaces, shops and other services accessible to the residents will be required. Brentford Community Council Community group Nor is it clear where the local shops and facilities could be located. Brentford is already seriously short of services and amenities. The Site Capacity Study proposes to demolish most of the existing provision so that they can be re-built in high density mixed development schemes. This would deprive residents of more facilities while these developments are re-built. Brentford Community Council Community group The plans for the GWC have not been properly balanced with those required to ensure that Brentford Town Centre becomes a vital hub. The plan proposals are unsustainable and would not form the basis for co-ordinated development which could be secured in the plan period 2016/2030. Commercial development must follow major transport improvements which will require most of the plan period to complete. Any residential development must follow improvements to air quality, infrastructure and facilities, transport capacity and additional schools which will all take a substantial period to complete.

Brentford Community Council Community group 8.1. Before any consideration is given to the need for additional infrastructure a review should be undertaken of the unmet needs of the existing population and workforce. The BCC has long been arguing that recent planning consents may have provided financial support, but not land to enable adequate shops and services,

236 health, education, police, open space, leisure, fitness, cultural and transport needs to be met. Sites needed to remedy these existing defects need to identified in the plan review and be protected from other development.

8.2 Additionally we support (para 2) the statement "that to be a successful place to work, live or visit it must have the right mix of community infrastructure to serve its residents, worker (and visitor) population. 8.3. It should be noted in the plan that Brentford could become "a destination of choice" as it already has a number of hotels, museums, river and canal side amenities and that it is surrounded by high quality open space. The plan should promote the river path, including a footbridge to Kew Gardens at Ferry Lane, support the extension of the World Heritage Site to include Syon Park and add to amenities in the town centre. These should include a re-designed phase 1 of the development on the south side of the High Street, if possible a skating rink next to the main supermarket so that it was fully integrated into the new town centre from the outset.

237

Name Respondent Type Q21 How and where can new school places be provided?

Brentford Community Council Community group We are concerned that there is still no evidence to show where primary and secondary schools could be provided on land which was protected from other development and which was likely to be financed by the Department of Education. No schools should be sited on POS or MOL. Potential sites should include Commerce Road bus garage + phase 3 for a secondary school and Griffin Park. St John's Residents' Association Community group Secondary schools and 6th form colleges In the business areas so we join up education and work at last. Primary schools near homes. CPRE London NGO CPRE London has been discouraged to see that a number of protected green spaces across the Borough are at risk due to the expansion and building of new schools. Generalised pressures, such as the need for school places do not constitute the very special circumstances for development on designated green spaces: adjacent playing fields and other open spaces should be protected. We would encourage a flexible approach to provision of school places that makes better use of footprints of existing schools and brownfield sites across the Borough. Transport for London Government Issue 8 queries “How and where can new school places be provided?”; TfL recommends this to be effected through production of a Supplementary Planning Document, in which site selection gives significant weight to ensuring convenient and safe access by walking, cycling as well as by public transport services. TfL expects schools to contribute towards the local walking and cycling environment together with bus route or capacity improvements in order to encourage demand for these sustainable modes of transport.

238

West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group New school places are needed for residential Society developments already built, under construction or in the pipeline in the Brentford and Chiswick Area. They should not be built in the GWC (our definition) for the same reason that residential development should not be built there (see Q11 and 14). Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO Not on green space

The Isleworth Society Community group Assessment of additional school place needs generated by new housing schemes already granted permission should be made. School sites should not be built on open spaces/Metropolitan Open land. In Brentford the Griffin Park site should be considered for much needed school provision. Modification of the Commerce Road site when it becomes available could provide for a new secondary school. Kath Richardson Individual No new schools should be built on green space whether POS or MOL. That includes Grasshoppers and all other sites currently earmarked for schools. Commerce Road was supposed to have a secondary school on and still should. Any new secondary school should be south of A4. Residential planning permission on sites suitable for schools should not be given. David George Individual Create new schools Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Secondary schools and 6th form colleges In the business areas so we join up education and work at last. Primary schools near homes. Aidan Allanach Individual Not sure Ken Munn Individual In redundant commercial premises? Such would need to be removed from high pollution areas, Ross Garside Individual Examine the possibilities of expanding and improving existing facilities.

239

Keep Osterley Green Community group We believe schools should not be provided on any piece of MOL which can be made available by questionable means and then obtain questionable planning permission. This unfortunately is not a belief shared by a majority the Members who are supposed to represent us or the Officers whose salaries we also may. The hypocrisy displayed by Members and Officers is breath-taking considering the Local Plan undertakings and indeed the assertions made in this document. We consider the area is about to suffer a surfeit of school places with the possibility of Nishkam going ahead on what was until recently the Conquest/ White Lodge Sports Ground (MOL), the Bolder Academy having a preferred site of Grasshoppers (MOL) and the Green School for Boys scheduled for the top of Park Rd. We believe the way forward is to develop schools on brownfield sites within the areas they are required to serve, even if this means sacrificing industrial growth or housing. Donald Osborne Individual There do not seem to be any suitable sites in the corridor itself. Iris Hill Individual By allowing space to build schools. Also reducing pollution and noise so that children are able to learn. What is the point of outside igloos when the children do not know what it is like to be outdoors and see nature Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor The obvious place is Commerce Road, combined with the existing and currently consulted sites. A realistic assessment of the needs for schools and other community infrastructure over the medium as well as short term is needed prior to any development being undertaken. It could well be, for example, that we actually need to reserve all undeveloped (or not recently

240

developed) sites for infrastructure needs and this needs to be done now, not later. Kew Residents' Association Community group No comment Victoria George Individual Within new developments -proportional to new residential capacity. Which is obvious but never provided. June Hoare Individual This should already have been worked out, prior to the Council giving approval of new developments such as Brentford FC and Wheatstone House: the Council is in the best position to calculate how many places will be needed, having approved the detail of significant new developments. Linda Tillman Individual exactly John Williams Individual They should take preference over business and housing development. It will be easier to build small schools than large. Jonathan Knight Individual The GWC is ideal for a secondary school or technical college to support a growing digital and media industry hub but the public transport infrastructure needs to be in place first. More importantly the total population of Hounslow needs to be maintained and not increased. Any development needs to be focused on housing and servicing the indigenous inhabitants and not encouraging new residents from outside the borough. OWGRA Community group OWGRA believes schools should not be provided on any piece of MOL which can be made available by questionable means and then obtain questionable planning permission. This unfortunately is not a belief shared by a majority the Members who are supposed to represent us or the Officers whose salaries we also may. The hypocrisy displayed by Members and Officers is

241

breath-taking considering the Local Plan undertakings and indeed the assertions made in this document.

OWGRA consider the area is about to suffer a surfeit of school places with the possibility of Nishkam going ahead on what was until recently the Conquest/ White Lodge Sports Ground (MOL), the Bolder Academy having a preferred site of Grasshoppers (MOL) and the Green School for Boys scheduled for the top of Park Rd. OWGRA believes the way forward is to develop schools on brown field sites within the areas they are required to serve even if this means sacrificing industrial growth or housing. Shetson Property Developments Business The only real possibility is on green belt land Ltd unfortunately. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Not on Metropolitan Open Land which appears to be a too simple and convenient alternative. Brownfield sites should be the first resort even if this means foregoing commercial or housing development. By the council using funds allocated by developers specifically for that purpose and located between major development areas on land identified for housing. This will ensure that each development zone is bounded by other uses of a sustainable mix. Ken Newlan Individual Osterley and Brentford areas; David Pavett Individual I think that schools should not be provided located on MOL on the basis of transparently fallacious research which amounts to no more than developers cherry picking the piece of land which suits them the most (as in the case of the Nishkam school in Osterley). This unfortunately is not a belief shared by a majority the

242

Members who are supposed to represent us or the Officers whose salaries we also pay. It seems that the area is about to gain surfeit of school places (especially primary) with the possibility of Nishkam going ahead on what was until recently the Conquest/ White Lodge Sports Ground (MOL), the Bolder Academy having a preferred site of Grasshoppers (MOL) and the Green School for Boys scheduled for the top of Park Rd. The way forward is to develop schools on pre-selecting brownfield sites. This should be allocated and developers should be guided towards choosing them as they are allowed (even advised to do in planning guidelines). Housing and industrial development should only be sanctioned to that the educational infrastructure that will serve them is planned well in advance. The current crisis in school places shows that this has not been the approach hitherto. Cllr Sam Christie Councillor Consider Brownfield sites first Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Do we know how many school places we need in the future projections? A review of how may pupils go to schools outside the areas, due to our many faith and single gender schools, and how many come in from other borough because of same in Brentford area needs to be addressed. Electricity Supply Pension Business New school places should be provided firstly on existing Scheme school sites. Where this is not possible then new sites should be identified. These should be located within existing residential areas in order to best meet need. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business New school places should be provided firstly on existing Investment school sites. Where this is not possible then new sites should be identified. These should be located within existing residential areas in order to best meet need.

243

McKay Securities PLC Business We do not consider that new school places should be accommodated within proximity to the A4 and M4 given the poor air quality. The narrow corridor Plan area we recommend is too close to this zone in particular. Instead, new school places should be provided by expanding existing schools or de-designating limited areas of Metropolitan Open Land to develop new schools to meet the requirements of this strategic need. Richard Mundy Individual The area has a number of derelict or under-utilised commercial areas. School(s) should be built at these sites Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor Apart from Commerce Road and the expansion of existing schools we may be planning for empty buildings beyond 2030. It is estimated that from 2020 onwards that the birth-rate will flat line and then fall! Cecilia Hodgson Individual I believe schools should not be provided on any piece of MOL which can be made available by questionable means and then obtain questionable planning permission. This unfortunately is not a belief shared by a majority the Members who are supposed to represent us or the Officers whose salaries we also may. The hypocrisy displayed by Members and Officers is breath-taking considering the Local Plan undertakings and indeed the assertions made in this document. I consider the area is about to suffer a surfeit of school places with the possibility of Nishkam going ahead on what was until recently the Conquest/ White Lodge Sports Ground (MOL), the Bolder Academy having a preferred site of Grasshoppers (MOL) and the Green School for Boys scheduled for the top of Park Rd. I believe the way forward is to develop schools on brownfield sites within the areas they are required to serve, even if this means sacrificing industrial growth or housing.

244

Furthermore the Council should identify a specific site (not Green Belt or MOL) and start a tendering process to find a school provider. The school would have to meet the Council’s specifications as detailed in the tender brief and therefore address the real needs of the area in which the site is located. This would be an active way for the Council to address the shortage of school places and would see the Council control the process, rather than being at the receiving end. Brentford Community Council Community group The Site Capacity Study indicates that up to 1560 new flats could be provided, adding a further.4,000 to the population of Brentford of which about 400 might be school age children. GC3.5. It now appears that pre-application discussions are proceeding for further residential developments which would further increase the residential population. This would further increase the need for infrastructure. GC.3.6. But the only potential school site indicated is a possible 6FE school on isolated land north of the A4, presently occupied by industrial premises and a waste disposal plant. This would need to be relocated in another, unspecified, part of the borough. Brentford Community Council Community group We note that no school sites are shown. School sites in Brentford were shown on the draft versions of the borough Local Plan. Unfortunately Griffin Park was omitted in the adopted plan. It should be reinstated. Opposition to a school site on the Brent Lea Rec was aired at Cabinet and the Scrutiny committee, but no alternative site is shown. The established school site at Commerce Road is also omitted. Although the background paper on schools in the Great West Corridor area will not be available before February 22.

245

It is clear that there would be a demand for additional schools in the plan period which should not be sited on POS or MOL at a time when most new homes may be in high rise flats. (See para 8.4/10 below). Brentford Community Council Community group 8.4. Reference is made to the need for school sites and we await the paper (in February) which may supply more details. Brentford has recently benefitted from emergency measures to enlarge existing schools so further places will need to be provided on new sites. The unresolved debacle over Brent Lea Rec (and the recent agreement to allow a 6FE school in Osterley) show how difficult it is to plan for the additional school sites which will be needed during the plan period.

8.5. The BCC believes that it should now be possible to assess the need for additional school places generated by new housing schemes which have already received planning consents plus any additional housing development which may be included in the Review Plan.

This would be the basis for an estimate of the growth of the school age population during the plan period.

8.6. It is clear from the debates in the Cabinet and Scrutiny Committees that the additional school sites should not be on public open space (POS) or on Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) and therefore sites which have housing consents or which might be suitable for future housing proposals should be designated for future schools and be identified and reserved in this plan.

8.7. In order to meet this need some compromises may

246

be necessary such as providing schools on twin sites (like St Paul's Primary) or providing school sites which cannot provide onsite recreation, if off site facilities are close by, as might be the case with Aston Lodge (school buildings) and Brent Lea (recreation).

8.8. Griffin Park (assuming the CPO for the new stadium is confirmed) should be available for development in the Plan period. We propose that this site should be reserved for a new school. Brentford Community Council Community group 8.9. The Commerce Road bus depot site is expected to be released during the plan period. If phase 3 of the approved (outline) scheme was modified it should be possible to enlarge the school site so that it could accommodate a new secondary school.

8.10. When the need for school places is known, a third site may be required. One possibility might be to review the preliminary development plans for the former Police Station site and for the Morrison's supermarket site together with the bus standing area and the adjacent 4 floor maisonettes to produce a single development strategy including a site for a new school.

8.11. The plan must review all infrastructure deficiencies (see 8.1 and 8.2 above) and identify and protect land required to meet them during the plan period.

247

Issue 9: The Need for an Interim Planning Framework for the Kew Gate area

Name Respondent Type Q22 Do you have any comments on the Interim Planning Framework, the design principles it contains or the evidence documents it is based upon?

Brentford Community Council Community group IPF unacceptable. There should be no "departures" from approved plans. Historic England Public body We have been unable to access the Interim Planning Framework. We would be grateful if this could be forwarded to us so that we may respond. In terms of the principle, it is clear that such a document will not have the statutory weight of a local plan for the GWC, and that there is a very strong incentive for the council to progress the work necessary to support the local plan partial review for the GWC area, as recommended by the inspector on last year’s local plan examination. St John's Residents' Association Community group This issue should have been addressed as part of the Local Plan Process. This answer requires a further consultation. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group See our response to Q 1 and 2. Any changes to policies of Society the Local Plan should be subject to the full consultation process, inspection and adoption. Meanwhile, any application for a site within the so-called “Kew Gate” area should be assessed against the policies in the current Local Plan as adopted in September 2015 and should conform to the London Plan and the NPPF. This document is not yet available. We reserve the right to

248

comment within a reasonable time of it being made available. Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO No need for it. Dorothy Boland Individual Change the name – Kew Gate is ridiculous. Anyone would think there is nothing to see or do in West London apart from Kew which is actually on the other side of the river. The Isleworth Society Community group It is inexplicable why this is called “Kew Gate” – NB: Kew is on the Surrey bank of the Thames this site borders Brentford/Gunnersbury remote from the river. It is also unclear why an Interim Planning Framework is currently being considered when LBH’s Local Plan was only adopted September 2015. Kath Richardson Individual We have a Local Plan and don’t need this. It’s not Kew or a Gate. It’s East Brentford. The Grove Park Group Community group No comment is possible, since no Interim Planning Framework has been delivered. However, all the aspects of good Planning are covered in the adopted Local Plan, and any further Plan would only serve to negate what has already been signed off and committed to. There should be no departures from approved Plans. David George Individual Massive over development of this area already in train, despite widespread objections. LBH continue to ignore local residents. No more rise. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual You urgently need a plan for the whole area. Brent's had one for years. It is impossible to separate Kew Gate in a way that does not involve endless high rise buildings. These should be redirected to the west and Hounslow Town Centre. It is simply greed driving the interest in this tiny area because W4 property prices have become so high. But this speculative bubble has done nothing to improve genuine housing stock or community in W4.

249

Fewer people are able to live there. Rushing through an interim document will be just as much a disaster. Wait a year and get the whole thing done Aidan Allanach Individual No Ken Munn Individual I have been unable to find the framework document! Stephanie Lang Individual The document on which comments are invited is not yet available, so consultation on this should take place at a later date. Keep Osterley Green Community group We do not wish to comment at present.

Lionel Road Developments Ltd Business The Club is supportive of the continued regeneration of the local area and welcomes the preparation of an Interim Planning Framework. The Club is keen to be involved in the preparation of the document to ensure that its match-day operations run efficiently and to ensure that the new stadium can fulfil its role as a sustainable community asset. Donald Osborne Individual No Iris Hill Individual It needs to be informed by sensitive planning. High rise buildings will give Hounslow income and make the lives of residents unbearable. Also Kew Gardens is a World Heritage Site and as such even the current developments are intrusive Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Leaving aside the unacceptable name for this area, as far as I can see there is no Interim Planning Framework as such. There is little evidence from existing proposed developments (Lionel Road site with poor quality boxes, CIW with very creative/quirky approach, Chiswick Curve with extreme height and absurd density) of any vaguely coherent approach. Martine Petetin Individual Has it been published?

250

Kew Residents' Association Community group We have not seen this document. Our comment is that projected development in “Kew Gate” is already getting out of hand, because it is occurring in a piece meal fashion without regard, as far as we can see, to an overall strategy for infrastructure to support massive development in this area. It already has very inadequate roads (Chiswick roundabout, Chiswick High Rd to Kew Bridge, frequently at a standstill), public transport links (Gunnersbury and Kew Bridge Stations inadequate and need upgrading before development), schools, GP surgeries, etc. Victoria George Individual Why is it called Kew Gate – this is Brentford, not Kew. Judy Rees Individual Name is ridiculous, it is Brentford Fountain. June Hoare Individual The Great West Policy Plan is highlighting its need for a plan for the “”Kew Gate”” area: indeed, nothing should be approved in terms of any developments, until there is a plan drawn up and agreed for Kew Gate. This is where the GWCP is extremely weak, it appears to be following rather than leading by a clear plan and vision. It is no good coming up with ‘a framework of design coherence’ which develops as buildings are proposed and approved. The framework needs to be drawn up and in place for the developers to use as guidance. Linda Tillman Individual If this is a separate document I could not find this on the LBH website. See my earlier comments under questions 18 and 19. John Williams Individual The introduction of Interim Planning Frameworks to this ‘partial review’ is not explained. There is a danger of a confusing overlap between the Local Plan and various Interim Planning Frameworks. Which plan/document will trump which? The Local Plan already includes all the necessary planning principles. Developers will smile at

251

the unnecessary confusion.

Why single out Kew Gate? There are 12 areas identified in the map: are they all to have an Interim Planning Framework? The NPPF discourages additional development plan documents, presumably to avoid such over-lapping confusion. Jonathan Knight Individual Kew Gate should be guided by the existing Local Plan and Context & Character Study. Any new development needs to be part of a well thought through long term strategy for the borough. OWGRA Community group OWGRA does not wish to comment at present. Shetson Property Developments Business No Ltd Ken Newlan Individual No Cllr Myra Savin Councillor I do not know the Kew Gate area! Do you mean the Kew Bridge Rd? If so, traffic always a problem exacerbated by current and future developments, so yes above would be good. How feasible is the planning framework, and how integrated will it be with the rest of Brentford, as the gateway to people who enter from the west?

Leaving aside the unacceptable name for this area, as far as I can see there is no Interim Planning Framework as such. There is little evidence from existing proposed developments (Lionel Road site with poor quality boxes, CIW with very creative/quirky approach, Chiswick Curve with extreme height and absurd density) of any vaguely coherent approach. Urban Evolution (GWR) Ltd We would also welcome an Interim Planning Framework for the Kew Gate Area, although we note that there is no clear plan in the Issues Consultation to indicate the precise boundaries of that area.

252

Electricity Supply Pension Business This requires further dialogue Scheme Heinz Pension Plans Property Business This requires further dialogue Investment

Big Yellow Self Storage td Business The Kew Gate area, within which the Big Yellow store located, is identified as being an area for transformation as described below: “Kew Gate – located at the eastern end of the corridor from Chiswick roundabout to Gunnersbury Park, this area is criss-crossed by major roads and rail lines and features diverse uses including large office blocks, industrial areas and a leisure centre. Demand and land values are now feeding intense pressure for intensification and change, and create the opportunity for transformation and placemaking to overcome the areas many challenges. The development of a new community stadium for Brentford Football Club is key to changing the perceptions and opportunities in the area”. It is understood that the Council considers that interim planning guidance is urgently needed to offer a framework of design coherence across the area. Whilst Big Yellow does not object to the principle of such a framework, it is considered that it should be produced through close consultation with existing landowners and businesses in the Kew Gate area. It is considered that this framework should in no way alter the existing Kew Bridge Distribution Centre LSIS designation and should allow the continued presence of a range of employment uses immediately south of the Great West Road (A4), including B8 (self-storage).

253

LaSalle Investment Management Business It is noted that the Council expects to receive planning applications for a number of large sites in the Kew Gate area and plans to prepare an Interim Planning Framework to offer a framework of design coherence to be approved by the Planning Committee. Given that the Interim Planning Framework will not go through the examination process, we have potential concerns with the Council’s intention to include some of the principles in the Framework in the Local Plan Review for the GWC. In addition, we consider that such an interim policy document should only be treated as an informal guide to “enabling” development.

Whilst we consider that there needs to be a mechanism to secure funding for the “game changing transport infrastructure” from new development proposals in the Kew Gate area, we are not clear whether the Interim Planning Framework is necessary for design as a number of major developments, including Brentford Community Stadium, have already been granted without such design guidance. We request that we are consulted on a draft Interim Planning Framework which we understand will be published in the coming month for consultation. Hugh Mortimer Individual The Interim Planning Framework provides an unacceptable basis for applications which would be "departures" from the approved FALP and Local Plan (2015).

Richard Mundy Individual No Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor Have an issue with the name Kew Gate. It should be Brentford Gate. Brentford is in Middlesex and Kew is in Surrey – the other side of the river! Little cognisance is being taken of the views of people

254

who have lived in Brentford all their lives. The view of local people are extremely important for building for the future. If we are going to build social and real affordable housing for local people then that has to be treated very sensitively along with a retail, industrial and commercial strategy which is designed to enhance the local area and not depress it. Cecilia Hodgson Individual I do not wish to comment at present.

Brentford Community Council Community group The "Visualisation" for Brentford Lock North appears to show the view looking east along the A4 just west of the existing bridge over the Brent. As the proposed train terminal (see para 4.4 above) is just off the left side of this view the area would have to accommodate the main access from Brentford to the new station passing under the A4 unless the suggestion (also in para 4.4) to extend the line south to Commerce Road) was accepted.

5.10. The para "Towards Delivery" refers to the "initial consultation with stakeholders...." It should be made clear that these consultations were only held with companies (listed in Appendix 01 Site Capacity Study) who might be interested in investing in the area and very deliberately excluded residents.

5.11. There has been much local annoyance that this part of the plan has been called Kew Gate. It clearly stands between Brentford and Chiswick and should have a name appropriate to a site north of the Thames. One possibility might be "Brentford East"

5.12. The "Kew Gate" proposals are not centred on Kew Bridge Station, which is at the southern edge of the area.

255

Perhaps the centre is the proposed "Eye Space" east of the new stadium site. We understand that the site immediately west of the "Eye" may be a new bus garage rather than the residential "petals" shown.

5.13. It is understood that the plan proposes to demolish the existing Fountain centre/pool and to replace it in a larger mixed use building. It is not clear whether the expanding population will enjoy more facilities than now exist nor what facilities will be available during the period this complex building is built.

Brentford Community Council Community group The para "Indicative Urban Structure" describes "improved public transport including...." The Golden Link. The proposed rail terminal is north of the A4 about a mile to the west (see para 4.4 above), A new Lionel Road Station appears to be on the site of the BFC hotel and is not included in the list of "new transport connections" set out in "issue 4" and "improvements to Lionel Road South which already have planning consent.

5.15. The first visualisation (from a point shown on the plan) appears to miss- represent buildings which now have detail planning consent. It would help if they could be shown correctly. The location of the second is not clear.

5.16. The para on "Heights" is not clear. It suggests that "taller buildings are proposed to mark prominent gateways" The term "gateway" has been used by every applicant for planning consent. Clearly it would have value if its use was very limited and if a real transition in urban grain took place at the gateway.

256

5.17. "The new Icons" Some of the buildings in the A4/M4 corridor are distinguished by good design like the GlaxoSmithKline HQ. Nearly all these buildings suffer from having no urban design context. It would appear that if this plan was implemented the new buildings would each seek to grab attention from its neighbours and the plethora of advertisements. What is needed is not "new icons" but an urban design of quality.

Brentford Community Council Community group 9.1. Residents are concerned that the Council is considering "Interim Planning Frameworks" for any part of the Great West Corridor area. The basis of good planning is to propose area plans, which are set in the context of national, London and Local Plans. The London Plan (FALP) was only recently approved and the Council adopted the Hounslow Local Plan in September 2015. Now 3 months later an Interim Plan is proposed.

9.2. Our understanding is that the GW corridor review is being carried out as a planned sequence to the Local Plan. In contrast the Interim Framework is effectively only a "planning brief" exercise which will have little or no weight when decisions on individual sites, which will be departures, are being considered by committee or on appeal. Furthermore when the public inquiry is held into the GW corridor review plan the Inspector will be asked to require the Council to ignore the Interim Plan.

9.3. As the GWC review Issues paper make clear successful development within the review area will

257 depend on reduction of pollution, improvement of PTALs and provision of infra-structure before new development is approved. If an Interim Planning Framework is approved it may increase the probability that developments, which do not accord with the London Plan or the Local Plan are put to the council, the Mayor and the Secretary of State despite the clear fact that they are significant departures from plans adopted last year.

9.4. However, the consequences of approving the Interim Framework and/or individual projects which do not accord with recently adopted plans not only prejudices the whole planning process, but it also establishes precedents. We appreciate that all applications are judged on their merits, but if adjacent developments are rejected they will be hard to defend on appeal if a similar scheme has been approved next door, unless there is a fully established contextual plan which defines that high development will only be approved on specific landmark sites is in place.

258

Name Respondent Type Q23 What aspects of the Interim Planning Framework should we take forward into the Local Plan review?

Brentford Community Council Community group See above St John's Residents' Association Community group All of it West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group This document is not yet available. We reserve the right Society to comment within a reasonable time of it being made available. David Rush Individual I have read the Great West Corridor Issues Consultation Paper. Please stop referring to the area around Kew Bridge Station as "Kew Gate". The place is called Brentford! Kew is in a different county and a different London Borough. Hounslow Council should be proud of Brentford and not have to resort to estate agent marketing ploys to sell the area! Brentford folk have already had to suffer new developments being marketed as Kew Bridge, Kew Bridge West, and Kew Reach & Kew Side. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual All of it. Aidan Allanach Individual To ensure that all plans are completed in a coherent manner with the Golden Mile strategy Keep Osterley Green Community group We do not wish to comment at present. Iris Hill Individual All. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor I can’t find the IPF so cannot comment Kew Residents' Association Community group Make good the deficiencies outlined in question 22

June Hoare Individual Objective townscape heritage and visual impact assessments and modelling. [Not as in the Chiswick roundabout proposal, bland statements of ‘beneficial’ impacts when clearly the visual impact is extremely negative].

259

Linda Tillman Individual The principles put forward in the Design and Conservation background paper must urgently be implemented. I note that the illustration on page 25 of the Consultation document shows a very large, slab-like development on the current B&Q site. This contravenes many of the principles put forward. John Williams Individual Only those aspects that have a material impact. Beware confusion. OWGRA Community group OWGRA does not wish to comment at present. Shetson Property Developments Business not sure Ltd Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Kew Gate (again, an avoidance to Middle Saxon heritage) will provide a test for how robust Hounslow Council’s policies are and our ability to implement them. The contents of the Interim Planning Framework are perhaps less important than the establishment of a suitably qualified, authorised and competent officer group able to oversee development from pre application to post implementation without caving in to developer ambitions at the expense of residents and neighbourhoods. David Pavett Individual I hope that the Council will stop using the term “Kew Gate area”. The overriding problem is that of building height and I am strongly of the view that this needs to be the subject of informed debate before we get locked into developer pressures (and perhaps the vision of a small number of members who have never made the case for these trends). The “curve” building at Chiswick Roundabout is an example of the problem. There have been some mad proposals for this site over recent years but the “curve” is surely the maddest.

260

Also why is Brentford town centre included in Golden Mile considerations? The concept of the Golden mile seems to be running out of control. Electricity Supply Pension Business This requires further dialogue Scheme Heinz Pension Plans Property Business This requires further dialogue Investment

Starbones Ltd Business In considering the need for an Interim Planning Framework for the “Kew Gate Area”, development at the Chiswick Roundabout should also be acknowledged in addition to the Community Stadium and Wheatstone House schemes, given that there is a major consent for a tall building known as the Citadel (00505/EY/P5 – granted in 2002) which has been implemented and remains extant. Development at the Chiswick Roundabout will form a crucial factor in the regeneration of the area and should therefore be considered in the formulation of the Interim Planning Framework. Richard Mundy Individual I have no comment on this Cecilia Hodgson Individual I do not wish to comment at present.

261

Issue 10: Making it happen

Name Respondent Type Q24 Do you think any of the Local Plan site allocations should be changed?

Brentford Community Council Community group The plan should include school sites not on POS/MOL and remedy POS deficiencies. M C Bull Individual 27. Site allocations: Too many sites, site allocations described as “mixed use” when they ought to be employment and stress manufacturing. As Alfa Laval should be (12) as it is on the M4 Site 3, Kew and World Heritage site should be protected. Site 8 should not contain further school and or house building. Site 9, Gunnersbury Park has ample open space. Situated on the M4 there should not be houses built there. Chiswick Business Park still advertises some vacant space Brompton Bicycles should be helped to expand in an industrial park somewhere in Hounslow. St John's Residents' Association Community group Yes as stated above and throughout Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO Can’t comment as diagram not accurate and information missing. So yes, but can’t say which. The Isleworth Society Community group NB: relevant documents not made available. Boundaries should be clearly drawn close to the A4 to ensure no intensification of development is proposed in the residential areas to the north and south. Kath Richardson Individual The diagram on p27 is incorrectly labelled which doesn’t inspire confidence for site allocations and it doesn’t enable an answer to the question. Map is too small to be useful. Sites should be designated for education as a priority.

262

Mixed use as a designation is meaningless without further details. David George Individual Yes do not include. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Yes as stated above and throughout. Aidan Allanach Individual No. Ross Garside Individual All sites East of Chiswick roundabout should be limited in height to a maximum of 5-6 stories, preferable 3-4. This area is ostensibly residential and commercial development properties should respect this. Keep Osterley Green Community group Allocating Site 26 as mixed follows its previous uses. However given its position outside the corridor it would seem more sensible to utilise it for Housing with the proviso that any construction on the site should comply with the character and context study for the area. Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Nothing identified, other than tall buildings in Brentford town centre Martine Petetin Individual Please make it clear that the Golden Mile stops at and does not include the Chiswick Roundabout Linda Tillman Individual The diagram does not specify use for sites 11 and 13, 13 being the Lionel Rd south site. Elsewhere in the plan it is designated as a Community site but the current plan is largely housing to fund the stadium, which is not exactly a community asset as most fans come from outside LBH. John Williams Individual The extension of the Corridor to include Chiswick High Rd up to the Chiswick Business Park should be removed. Gunnersbury, Boston Manor, Syon and Osterley Parks are ‘allocated sites’ which have ‘the potential to undergo transformation’. This is worrying. Exactly what does the Council have in mind? More trees, more grass: fine. Business and housing development; highly questionable. OWGRA Community group Allocating site26 as mixed follows its previous uses. However given its position outside the corridor it would seem more sensible to utilise it for Housing with the

263

proviso that any construction on the site should comply with the character and context study for the area. Shetson Property Developments Business Not sure Ltd Rolfe Judd Planning Business Yes, the site outlined in blue above should be included within the Prospective Plan Area within page 27 for a residential led development. The proposal site (which is an allocated site within the Local Plan) has the potential to act as a gateway denoting the start of the GWC. This should be included within the Brentford Spatial Strategy as outlined on page 2 of the GWC Plan Issues Consultation and the Brentford map from the Local Plan Chapter 12 Site Allocations. This site has the potential to accommodate a tall building (circa 14-17 storeys in height) and residential led mixed use development to support employment activities to the north and east of the site. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Given the position of Site 26 outside the corridor it would be more appropriate to use it for housing that should comply with the character and context study for the area. Ken Newlan Individual No David Pavett Individual Allocating site 26 as mixed follows its previous uses. However given its position outside the corridor it would seem more sensible to utilise it for Housing with the proviso that any construction on the site should comply with the character and context study for the area. Cllr Myra Savin Councillor Open for discussion. New development need to be decided in the light of this consultation. Electricity Supply Pension Business Additional site allocations should be added to reflect sites Scheme that are now available or will become available during the plan period. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business Additional site allocations should be added to reflect sites Investment that are now available or will become available during the plan period.

264

Lendlease Residential (CG) PLC Business The majority of Lendlease’s site is allocated in the Hounslow Local Plan (2015) for mixed use development incorporating either a hotel or offices, with some element of retail and residential uses. The allocation specifies a 50:50 ratio between residential and non-residential uses. This allocation includes Empire House; a vacant 11 storey office block which is designated as a Key Existing Office Location in Local Plan. This building benefits from Prior Approval under Class J of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 for the change of use to convert the tower from office (B1a) to residential (C3) in order to create 62 residential dwellings.

It is considered that the existing allocation should be removed entirely or at the very least amended to designate residential led development of the site with some proportion of retail (A1-A3) use fronting Chiswick High Road. It is also considered that the Council should use the opportunity provided by the partial Local Plan review to remove the designation of Empire House as a Key Existing Office Location as this office space has not been in use since 2013 and is in the process of being converted to residential (C3) use. Richard Mundy Individual I have no comment on this. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor Anything west of Gillette Corner can be used solely for housing. Along the GWC all sites should be for employment only to encourage local employment, the Police station should be for use of employment. Site 10 Raynard Mills (housing) is right next to St Johns School is right next door to this site it would be preferable that some of this site is identified for school expansion.

265

Gillette Corner Holdings Ltd Business We are supportive of the allocation of the vacant Gillette site (site allocation 7) for redevelopment. However, as set out in our previous representations to the Local Plan Proposed Submission 2015- 2030, we consider that the wording of the Gillette site allocation should allow for greater flexibility in terms of uses. We consider that emerging policy in the GWC Plan should recognise this. The restrictive wording of the Gillette allocation currently encourages B1(b), B1(c) and high value B2 activities where ancillary B1a offices will be considered acceptable "if this is ancillary to the primary use of the premises for industrial related uses or does not exceed the level of existing offices on site". However we urge the Council to recognise the need for Use Class B1(a) office floorspace with provision for facilities such as galleries, studios, event spaces as well as lifestyle and amenity uses such as retail and food and drink and leisure to meet the demand and needs of creative, media and digital companies. It is also important to recognise the potential need and demand for a hotel and an element of residential, to serve the international nature of the creative, digital and media uses, especially given the proximity of the site to Heathrow and central London. A key priority should be the delivery of the new infrastructure projects. Without the increase in PTAL rating, the media hub will be unachievable. Cecilia Hodgson Business Allocating Site 26 as mixed follows its previous uses. However given its position outside the corridor it would seem more sensible to utilise it for Housing with the proviso that any construction on the site should comply with the character and context study for the area.

266

Name Respondent Type Q25 Do you think any further sites in the corridor should be allocated too? For each site please provide reasons and if appropriate a map.

Brentford Community Council Community group The proposed High rise replacement for Great West House should be omitted. High rise development at Syon Lane should be rejected. Legal and General Property Business Mix use: The West Cross Industrial Estate should be allocated as a development site, suitable for a mix of uses including a significant proportion of residential floorspace for reasons including:  The estate was constructed approximately 30 years ago and the units range in quality. Approximately 7% of the Park is currently vacant and within the next 5 years a number of leases will have expired. There will therefore be the opportunity for redevelopment over the course of the Plan.  Redevelopment of the estate is encouraged by the recent Network Rail GRIP Stage 2 Feasibility Report which was prepared for the Council to support this consultation. The preferred option for the new Golden Mile station includes safeguarding land at the Industrial Estate and access for a linked car park when it is redeveloped.  A mixed use allocation would be consistent with the existing character of the estate, which already includes a variety of uses. In policy terms, a mixed use allocation would strengthen the area as a Strategic Outer London Development Centre (SOLDCs) for economic growth as identified by the Mayor.

267

Kath Richardson Individual Clarity as to which sites are allocated here and why. Also, whether planning permission has already been granted and/or building commenced. There are plenty of sites not included like Morrisons, Max Factor building and Watermans. The Grove Park Group Community group The Corridor has not yet been decided - that is the purpose of this consultation. However, the proposed High rise replacement for Great West House should be omitted. High rise development at Syon Lane should be rejected. Ken Munn Individual The B&Q site at Chiswick roundabout should be allocated to residential, with some of the land closest to the road system being used to ‘buffer’ the site. This site is close to public transport links, is serviced by Chiswick or Brentford town centres for shopping, and is in proximity to recreational space at Gunnersbury. Facilitas Engineering Services Ltd Business Mix use: This response is submitted on behalf of Facilitas Technical Engineering Services who own and plan to develop a 0.84ha site on the northern side of Capital Interchange Way, Brentford for mixed use development. Facilitas intends to submit a planning application for a mixed residential and commercial development. It will comprise several different uses including a relocated bus depot, commercial space, publicly accessible open space, student accommodation associated with the University of West London and three architecturally distinct buildings.

Relocation of the bus depot will free its existing site at Commerce Road for construction of a new school. The site is currently occupied by a large vacant commercial shed and is ripe for development to maximise its potential and to contribute to the economic regeneration of the area. The planned development will complement the other wide

268

ranging redevelopment proposals intended to bring about major change in the wider area. We request that the site at Capital Interchange Way should be designated in the Great West Corridor Plan for major mixed use development. Comments have been condensed to summary. Shetson Property Developments Business Osterley Park Hotel should be designate for mixed use or Ltd full residential. Columbia Threadneedle Business Mix use: We consider that a viable redevelopment scheme would need to constitute a mix of uses. The property is currently part vacant and one of the major tenants has announced its intention to vacate parts of the property shortly. This will leave much of the site vacant by the middle of 2016.

The site occupies a prominent position within the GWC and is located opposite GSK Brentford and adjacent to Great West House. However, the low scale and relatively low grade office stock provided by the existing buildings does not make the best use of the site and offers very little prominence to the A4. The site could benefit from permitted development change of use to residential. Whilst this remains the ‘fallback’ position, we are currently considering options for redevelopment of the site. In our view there is an opportunity for high quality mixed use development including new, modern office floorspace which could be cross subsidised by other uses including residential. Comments have been condensed to summary. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor There appears to be no reason why the area in Harlequin Avenue between Gillette and Sky should be incorporated in either. There should be room for alternative and independent good quality, mixed use developments rather

269

than the potential of its becoming subsumed into either of the major schemes. Salley Ltd & A J Optimum Business Mix use: Performance Ltd 4 and 8 Harlequin Ave: the site is best suited for redevelopment for a mixed use scheme that could include offices, aparthotel, residential and retail which this submission seeks to promote. It is suitable for significant redevelopment, Local plan policies should be flexible to recognise patterns of land use change i.e. retaining sites as 'b class' may no longer be appropriate. Plan policy should not limit redevelopment to business use alone.

Concept Business Group Business The site is vacant (although other elements of the ‘Alfa Laval site’ are now complete). Our clients have recently purchased the property and are currently considering options for development. The site is an opportunity to deliver office or mixed use development in a key corner gateway location. It would appear to us that there is an opportunity to advance the permitted scheme to propose a taller building of higher quality design. This would make better use of the brownfield site on a key gateway and frontage. We will shortly commence pre-application discussions with the Council. We are, however, concerned by the limited heights suggested by Figure 15 of the Design and Conservation Background Paper. This seems to suggest potential building heights of between 6-8 storeys on the block that contains the subject site. While the adjacent Premier Inn building appears to be at least ten storeys in height. We consider that the site should not be limited by arbitrary height guidance, which will inevitably be taken as a restriction (Figure 15).

270

Urban Evolution (GWR) Ltd Business The site occupies a prominent position on the M4 corridor and is located between the Esso Petrol Station, the new VW building and the Whetstone House development site. Once the Whetstone House development is complete, 3 Great West Road will be surrounded by taller buildings. There is therefore an opportunity to redevelop 3 Great West Road to make better use of the site and for a new high quality building that befits an important gateway and frontage site. We will shortly commence pre-application discussions with the Council. Electricity Supply Pension Business Mix use: Scheme The Kew Bridge Distribution Centre should be allocated for mixed-use development. The site has a strategic location on the M4 and on Lionel Road South. It is under developed and has the opportunity to be developed at a greater density including the provision of taller buildings, which could meet identified employment and housing need. The sites strategic location would also make it suitable for other forms of development including hotels and car showrooms. Due to the expiry of leases the site would become available in the short to medium term. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business Mix use: Investment The Kew Bridge Distribution Centre should be allocated for mixed-use development. The site has a strategic location on the M4 and on Lionel Road South. It is under developed and has the opportunity to be developed at a greater density including the provision of taller buildings, which could meet identified employment and housing need. High Sense Securities Ltd Business We formally submit the site at 110 Power Road under the Call for Sites procedure. As set out earlier in this letter the site has the potential to deliver a greater amount of employment through either its wholesale redevelopment or extension. The site extends to 4,130sqm in area and is

271

currently underutilised. The existing occupiers are due to vacate the premises in the short term future and therefore an opportunity exists to bring this site forwards for Class B1 development. McKay Securities PLC Business 1000 Great West Road, Brentford, proposed for mix use development. The site is situated in an excellent location between both the M4 and A4 and is within close proximity to Brentford train station (250m south west). It provides an opportunity to create a mixed use development inclusive of B1 floorspace and residential development (C3) in conjunction with other uses to provide a scheme that would contribute positively to a successful working and living environment This should be marked by a tall building of landmark scale and of high quality design. Betterphase Ltd Business The owners of Westlink House, no. 981 Great West Road, who would like to contribute to the Council's vision for the Great West Corridor, by bringing this vacant building back into active use. It is a prominent site of importance in heritage, public realm and gateway terms, and would benefit from an appropriate site allocation with the Council's agreement. Big Yellow Self Storage td Business Big Yellow has no objection to allocations proposed as part of the GWC Plan, including the mixed use site allocation ‘13 Brentford - Lionel Road’ for a Community Football Stadium within enabling residential and hotel (C1) with ancillary retail and services (A1-A4). Tesco Stores Ltd Business Allocating the Tesco site for housing would assist in providing certainty that housing would be delivered on this site. This would in turn provide added justification for the GLA to designate the Corridor as an Opportunity Area, with all of the associated public funding and private investment benefits.

272

The Day Group Business Mix use: 946 – 948 Great West Road is located on the corner of GWR (A4) and Transport Avenue. Day Group would like to put forward this site for redevelopment in the medium/long term (five years +). The site is well located in close proximity to the new station and as such will be in a sustainable location once this is built. Day Group would be happy to keep their options open including developing the site as part of a larger site should this be possible. It is envisaged that possible options for this site could include offices, a hotel or a car showroom. The redevelopment would enhance the frontage onto GWR and would be in keeping with the regeneration aims of the GWC.

LaSalle Investment Management Business Mix use: We request that 27GWR, together with an island site between the parking areas for 27GWR, is removed from the LSIS designation, and allocated for a mixed use development with the potential to provide a mix of uses (including residential) without precluding redevelopment options for offices. The site’s redevelopment potential for commercial uses with residential uses is identified in the Golden Mile Capacity Study (2015) and we request that the Council engages our client in the consideration of an appropriate allocation for the site. Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor It seems to me that existing businesses on the Golden Mile are very happy with their location. It is only when housing is built that problems arise. Therefore no other site on the Great West Road Golden Mile should be identified for mixed use ever in the future. Local people want jobs in their local area. This is where they will get them.

273

Name Respondent Type Q26 What planning ‘tools’ would help implement the Plan, in particular the ‘game changing’ transport proposals?

Brentford Community Council Community group A sensitive Urban Design for the whole of the (reduced) corridor area should be produced/consulted on/be adopted which would the basis for all site development briefs. St John's Residents' Association Community group See above. The phrase ‘game changing’ is clumsy. Transport for London Government  TfL and other authorities will need to continue to review the impact of schemes individually and cumulatively, as well as secure travel planning measures. To ensure that existing and future crowding and congestion on parts of the public transport and highway network are not negatively affected by further growth. Travel Planning measures that should be consistently applied include a Travel Plan, Construction Logistic Plan, Delivery Service Plan; the Council may wish to include reference to these and their relevance to an area-wide strategy.  The relationship with other emerging Local Plans, Masterplans and other strategic growth-planning documents in west London should be recognised for their cumulative impact and identification of strategic transport measures.  TfL will expect to see contributions secured to implement the range of strategic and local transport interventions which are identified in the Issues Papers and which will be needed to ensure the successful delivery of the vision for the development of this important part of London. To this end, TfL will be pleased to continue to work with Hounslow Council,

274

GLA and other stakeholders such as Network Rail on a joint Strategic Transport Study and potentially a Development Infrastructure Funding (DIF) Study if deemed necessary in the near future. Kath Richardson Individual Sufficient Planning Officers and expertise to apply the Plan. The Grove Park Group Community group Given that, as above, it is very unlikely that the possible transport ideas can be delivered within 15 years, and that they are not under the control of Hounslow Council, they cannot be described as 'game changing'. In any case the area's PTAL will not be substantially improved, so other proposals should be made, to cover a shorter time frame. A sensitive Urban Design for the whole of the (reduced) corridor area should be produced, consulted on and adopted, after which it would form the basis for all site development briefs. Aidan Allanach Individual A charge on new developments (especially housing) to contribute to the transport proposals. Ken Munn Individual 25 above, encouraging a bus operator to introduce a service following the line of the N Circular road – perhaps Richmond-Kew-Gunnersbury-Ealing would help facilitate N-S movement and perhaps remove some local traffic from the road. Keep Osterley Green Community group We do not feel able to reply to this. Iris Hill Individual From your CC Statement. Tall buildings strategy: Drawing upon baseline work provided by the study, the council will produce supplementary guidance on the type and location of tall buildings within the borough. The work will consider tall building types and how they might be accommodated in the borough. The study will also include urban design analysis that identifies appropriate locations for the various types of tall buildings.

275

Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor I have no idea what this means. Transport improvement must be a precursor for all further development Linda Tillman Individual It sounds a good idea to protect existing offices from change of use. We need employment as well as housing. John Williams Individual What ‘tools’ are available? The project needs an identified Project Manager to coordinate the various LBH departments involved and to be Council’s face with external bodies, e.g., TfL, in addition to responsibility for liaison with residents and businesses. The appointee should have clear and measurable delivery targets. Delivery should be the driver for the project, not bureaucracy. OWGRA Community group OWGRA do not feel able to reply to this Shetson Property Developments Business not sure Ltd Cllr Tony Louki Councillor All supporting infrastructure, particularly transport should come first in order to avoid crowding of currently inadequate public transport. The council should maintain its own planning responsibility and absolutely resist any attempts to hand this opportunity area to a separate and unrepresentative alternative planning authority or development corporation. Ken Newlan Individual Bus services to and from train and tube; cycleways. David Pavett Individual What does the question mean? Cllr Myra Savin Councillor I do not understand question enough to respond. Electricity Supply Pension Business It is considered that the transport improvements will Scheme require funding from either Central Government or TfL as they will not be able to be funded by development alone. Heinz Pension Plans Property Business It is considered that the transport improvements will Investment require funding from either Central Government or TfL as they will not be able to be funded by development alone.

276

McKay Securities PLC Business Local Development Orders should be introduced to enable defined classes of commercial and mixed use development to come forward as quickly and easily as possible. Richard Mundy Individual Provision of fast trains on the existing line requires work with DfT, Network Rail and South West Trains. It’s not up to the planning system to deliver this, but it is necessary. Improvement of the A4’s pedestrian/cycling areas could be achieved via s106 agreements, as could development of Crossrail station(s). A Crossrail extension is, however, likely to need TfL funding.

Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor I am concerned that this is another back door method to allow overdevelopment – particularly upward! Cecilia Hodgson Individual I do not feel able to reply to this.

277

Name Respondent Type Q27 Is there anything else that you would like to mention? Brentford Community Council Community group We would like to emphasise the importance of a comprehensive landscape plan which extended over the whole corridor and the roads linking it to other areas. See paras 6.6 and 6.7. London Borough of Richmond Government LBRuT would welcome clarification on whether there will upon Thames be a further Regulation 18 consultation following this issues consultation, prior to publication and submission to Secretary of State for Examination in Public. In particular, it is noted that this consultation is not supported by a Sustainability Appraisal (SA), incorporating the requirements of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). This is of particular importance in relation to assessing potential impacts and the likely significant effects on traffic and highways, air quality as well as on the built environment and heritage assets. LBRuT would welcome consultation and engagement on the SA / SEA carried out alongside the Great West Corridor (GWC) Plan. Historic England Public body This is not an Opportunity Area yet – this statement is inconsistent with others in the document. Is the Opportunity Area status part of this consultation or will it be determined through the London Plan review? M C Bull Individual 1. Firstly residents need complete transparency in all as aspects of town planning – it is now difficult to learn of decisions. 2. Your study leaves out the increase in heart and lung disease caused by NO2 and responsible for an increase in deaths locally recorded in Hillingdon Hospital and Ealing Hospital (Kirk House, West Drayton). 3. Many people would prefer no departure from the current or earlier form of a more transparent method

278

of granting planning applications, not granting ‘planning permission in principle’, which does not state if it is any more than outline permission or not.

4. Heathrow has many overseas investors such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, China, states not known for their civil rights. How stable are they? With what is known about their human rights history – are they dependable trading partners? 5. The West London Waste Plan includes land set aside for MOL and to the landscaped, not waste disposal. Near Wentworth Road residential district and unsuitable for waste. 6. The Piccadilly line is not shown on your diagram. We were promised a leaflet in September 2015 to enable us to identify MOL and proposed sites. At present it is still not available and consultees only have blurred images, or partial pieces of an area, not the entire picture to judge.

Sport England Public body Sport England wishes to see local planning policies that seek to protect, enhance and provide for sports facilities based on robust and up-to-date assessments of need in accordance with paragraphs 73 and 74 pf the NPPF. Sound policy can only be developed in the context of objectively assessed needs, in turn used to inform the development of a strategy for sport and recreation. Policies which protect, enhance and provide for sports facilities should reflect this work, and be the basis for consistent application through development management. Sport England is not prescriptive on the precise form and wording of policies, but advises that a stronger plan will result from attention to taking a clearly justified and

279

positive approach to planning for sport. In this way, planning authorities will be able to demonstrate that their plan has been positively prepared (based on objectively assessed needs in accordance with NPPF para 73), is consistent with national policy (reflecting the NPPF), is justified (having considered alternatives) and effective (being deliverable).

Additionally, please note that Sport England along with Public Health England have recently launched our revised guidance ‘Active Design’ has considerable synergy with Policy D20: Green Infrastructure and D21: Community and Cultural Facilities. It may therefore be useful to provide a cross-reference.

Lastly, as you may be aware, Sport England will oppose development resulting in the loss of playing field land or formal built sports facilities unless its loss is justified by a robust and up-to-date assessments of need. Any loss of sports provision should be incorporated into formal policy such that it may be considered through the policy making process and scrutinised at Examination in Public. St John's Residents' Association Community group Please ensure that any further consultation carried out involves local residents and stakeholders at an early stage. Natural England Government The requirements of the Habitats Regulations are also applicable to the Great West Corridor Plan. In line with NPPF Planning Practice Guidance and London Plan Policy both plans should identify opportunities for the creation, enhancement and management of Green Infrastructure (GI). GI is a core component of high quality development, alongside other forms of infrastructure such as transport, energy, waste and water. GI is not simply an alternative description of open space

280

and is relevant to many wider objectives of plan making. Well planned GI provides multiple economic, social and environmental benefits relevant to the West of Borough and Great West Corridor Plans and NPPF policies, including supporting economic growth, creating desirable places to live, climate change adaptation and resilience, flood risk management, community health and wellbeing, sustainable transport opportunities and the protection and enhancement of ecological networks and biodiversity. Environment Agency Government Please note that you will need to take a sequential approach to the location of development to avoid areas at high risk of flooding. When revising this section of the Local Plan you will need to consider if you are complying with paragraphs 100-102 of the National Planning Policy Framework which sets out the requirements for applying the Sequential Test, and the Exceptions Test based on a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. Any additional sites (to those already allocated) proposed in areas of flood risk will need to have passed the Sequential Test (and where applicable the Exceptions Test) before being allocated. A level 2 SFRA may be required to assess the flood risks in detail to determine their feasibility and whether they can pass the Exceptions Test. The revised climate change allowances will need to be factored into your updated SFRA and when assessing individual strategic sites. This has been published under ‘‘Flood risk assessments: climate change allowances’ on gov.uk. It has replaced previous guidance Climate Change Allowances for Planners. These allowances will replace the current allowance for peak river flow which is 20%.The revised allowances are based on improved climate science

281

and reflect the catchment characteristics within each river basin district. We expect applicants to factor the revised climate change allowances into their Flood Risk Assessments rather than the current 20% for peak river flow. Flood modelling to demonstrate the impact these changes will have has not yet been undertaken but it does have the potential to affect sites within the Great West Corridor. We recommend you reference this so new development takes account of the revised allowances.

Transport for London Government There is little or no mention of changes to the bus network although some plans are likely to impact on bus usage. If the proposed new rail link aspirations come to fruition the bus network will need to complement the new transport links. Below are the plans for improvements to the bus network in Hounslow however public consultation has only recently finished hence implementation decisions are not final. Route E8: it is proposed to extend this route from Brentford High Street to Hounslow Town Centre, via West Middlesex Hospital and London Road. Route 110: it is proposed to withdraw the section of route between Hounslow Town Centre and West Middlesex Hospital. At the other end of the route, it is proposed to extend it from Twickenham to West Middlesex Hospital via Twickenham Road. Route H28: it is proposed to withdraw the route along Wood Lane and Amhurst Gardens, and to re-route it from Jersey Rd, along Syon Lane, to London Road and terminate at Brentford County Court.

282

The vision should be to focus on strategic improvements to the public bus service as well as– where no other non- vehicular mode will do- shuttles for distances greater than the ‘last mile’ to run between public transport interchanges and employment zones. Lastly, for completeness, the vision should perhaps make a reference to taxis and coaches and the opportunities or negative contributions they could have to the vision issue 4 embodies. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group In conclusion we consider that the constraints identified Society under issues 4, 6, 7 and 8 preclude the possibility of the growth proposed under Issues 3 and 5. Expanding the “GWC” to absorb large parts of the surrounding areas as proposed under Issue 1 is totally unacceptable. Planning policy relevant to these areas is provided by means of the adopted Local Plan as supported by the detailed Context and Character Study. Policy SV1 Our approach: We will work with residents and stakeholders to explore and identify the potential capacity for additional employment-led mixed use development along the GWC and coordinate its regeneration. There is no potential capacity for any additional development until current major transport infrastructure deficiencies are met. This important employment area of the borough is only one of its assets; it must not be allowed to dominate and devalue the surrounding areas with their rich heritage and thriving residential communities. West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Community group SV1 [continuation of policy run through] Society a) Confine to a narrow corridor comprising the curtilage of the commercial buildings along the A4. b) The inadequacy of transport infrastructure is such that there is no sustainable quantum of any additional development above existing Local Plan

283

levels; there is no sustainable quantum of residential development on environmental and social grounds. c) This needs to be progressed before any further development is contemplate policy IMP3. Otherwise there is a real risk of losing existing businesses. d) The location, size and the environmental conditions of the GWC are such that such a designation is entirely unacceptable; e) Provided this is not at the expense of maintaining a healthy mix of types of employment and size of employer. f) Yes, this should be a priority. g) The work done so far supports our view that there are none. h) Suitable industrial employment, especially by SMEs, should be retained and supported and new employers encouraged at appropriate sites. i) Mitigation by design only addresses the internal environment and will not deliver sustainable development; the borough has been an AQMA for over 10 years so why is it still at the exploratory stage in seeking solutions? j) This needs to be progressed before any further development is contemplated. k) Issuing the consultation on 21 December 2015 met this deadline but at the expense of community engagement* and a target for adoption by the end of 2018. *E-mail correspondence on behalf of G15+ during November requested that any consultation period should exclude the Christmas/New Year.

284

Mayor of London The Mayor supports the preparation of this Plan and the objectives set out on page six. As a designated Strategic Outer London Development Centre (SOLDC), the plan will assist in the implementation of London Plan Policy 2.16. The Mayor is also working with Hounslow to identify, assess and realise the potential of the area as an Opportunity Area. Such areas are identified for their housing and employment potential, and therefore objective (d.) of the proposed Plan should be amended to include housing and employment growth. It is also important that the plan is supported by a robust evidence base. GLA officers are interested in the employment land review and would be grateful if early stages of this review can be shared with the GLA. In this regard, London Plan policy 4.2 sets out office based employment projections and GLA officers will be completing the London Office Review in spring 2017. Brentford Chamber of Commerce NGO Need to consult fully and widely with business and residential community about these proposals before preferred visions are drafted. Dorothy Boland Individual Far greater consideration needs to be given to the very special assets we have within Hounslow, not just for commercial gain. I can only speak for the eastern end of the borough, but we do need to take the greatest care with developments which have impact, intentional or otherwise, on the Arcadian Thames, the riverside paths and frontages, and the small village type clusters like the Butts, Strand on the Green, the Kew Gardens buffer zone, Gunnersbury etc. Any damage will be irreversible The Isleworth Society Community group The plan proposals do not demonstrate that they form the basis for co-ordinated development that could reasonably be secured within the plan period of 2016-30; commercial

285

development must follow not precede major transport improvements and residential development must follow not precede air quality improvements/ provision of adequate and sustainable infrastructure. Kath Richardson Individual This primary issues consultation assumes a knowledge and understanding of planning issues that is beyond many residents’ abilities. There are no definitions of terms or explanation of their potential effects. There was little consultation as this was not supposedly for residents although no justification for that. Future plans need to be better detailed, explained, and publicised with public meetings for questions and explanations before deadlines. People feel that decisions are made at senior level at LBH before any consultations happen. The Grove Park Group Community group The remit for the GWC Plan includes the following: (iv) Progress the designation of the GWC as an Opportunity Area through the review of the London Plan; Why is this not included in the Questionnaire, if you are seeking feedback on all aspects of the aspirations of the GWC Plan? The Mayor of London defines Opportunity Areas as "a major source of brown field land which has significant capacity for development, such as housing or commercial use and existing or potentially improved public transport.” While the Old Oak and Park Royal Opportunity Area, with access from HS2 and Crossrail, has an approved framework for 65,000 new jobs and 25,500 new homes, there cannot and will not be anything approaching this along the A4 in Hounslow. It is clear that, whatever The GWC ends up being defined as, it will not meet the Mayor's typical expectation for Opportunity Areas. There are no brown field sites without planning consents, the PTAL would remain low/medium

286

even if all the transport investment is completed, and the job and new home increases would be minimal in comparison to his targets. It is time for Hounslow Council to have some concrete plans to tackle the challenges facing the borough, and not all including concrete. Let us not always suppose that third Party developers have anything in mind other than enriching their owners, with the danger that possible affordable homes will be replaced by 'buy to leave' investments from non-residents. The Local Plan has too many aspirational statements, some of which contradict each other, and none of which are supported by the untrammelled development of high-rise, dense, ugly, over-tall buildings requiring increased car usage, in the eastern part of the borough, which appears to be the stated goal of the Council, judging from published visuals. The Grove Park Group Community group What the Local Plan says: SV1 Great West Corridor Plan Our Approach: We will work with residents and stakeholders to explore the capacity for additional employment-led mixed use development along the GWC. Note: residents have been excluded from 2 years' worth of discussions with developers, who have unilaterally proposed the dense, high-rise building-based illustrations that form the Councils' current 'vision'. It is however, a deeply flawed vision, as stated at length above. A 'Corridor' which seemingly engulfs the whole of Brentford and parts of Chiswick. This was surely not the Inspector's intention, and the latter areas are anyway comprehensively covered by the Local Plan and the Context & Character Study.

287

David George Individual Please stop the obsession with cramming more and taller buildings into this area. You are destroying the skyline and will simply create an appalling congested urban mess. Elizabeth Hagerty Individual Japanese architectural studies show that open balconies above the 14th floor are useless as too windy and uncomfortable, but I see them on recent proposals Aidan Allanach Individual This is an excellent opportunity for the area and if done well will prove transformational. Ken Munn Individual The Golden Mile should definitively end at the Chiswick roundabout and not impinge on Chiswick High Road. Iris Hill Individual I can understand the need for revenue for Hounslow, but I would be happy to pay extra Council Tax to make future developments small and sustainable Cllr Guy Lambert Councillor Links across the Great West Road. The GWR and particularly the elevated M4, present a daunting barrier between the Brentford town centre and the Northern outposts, both residential areas and major recreational zones. Whilst there are apparently inevitable physical constraints (short of demolishing the M4) if the area beneath the M4 could be restored to a state fit for human habitation and the pedestrian crossings improved that would alleviate the problem. In fact, the crossings are not too bad, and plans are being developed to improve them but nobody seems to have any interest in improving the environment, which is just horrible. In addition to being depressing for local residents it is appalling PR for the area. Kew Residents' Association Community group No Further comment Ruth Mayorcas Individual So please put me down for a total rejection of the plans as they stand currently. I have been unable to fill in the questionnaire - it is far too complicated and I suspect that many people will be defeated by its complexity - so it will not be a fair and true reflection of local people’s views.

288

Linda Tillman Individual A plan should have been made at least five years ago. It is already too late to stop the London Rd in Brentford being turned into over-dense development. The tower blocks on the Green Dragon estate are large and not attractive but they have space between the blocks so that they are not oppressive and do provide some green space for residents. John Williams Individual The Local Plan requires a ‘Partial Revue’ to be completed to ‘settle locally controversial issues such as transport infrastructure, tall buildings and large scale residential development’. Why will it take the planned 2 years to complete? This seems an unnecessary luxury. The project currently lacks bite or urgency. The January 2016 presentation to the Chiswick Area Forum was lacklustre. Delivery of a ‘Renaissance of the Great West Corridor’ is in danger of being elusive. Jonathan Knight Individual Remember that Hounslow has long standing residents and families that have lived in the area for generations. Their quality of life, wellbeing and interests should be the council's number one priority. LBH has a duty of care of the borough's history and quality of the future built environment. Listen to local business and residential voices and respond to their needs even if this means resisting government pressure to build housing for people who want to come to London. Encourage local firms rather than multinational or overseas developers to build on GWC and other sites. That way the profit is retained within the borough and involves those with an affinity for and long term interest in the area.

Cllr Sam Christie Councillor I feel too many people commute into the golden mile from far afield it would greatly help the local infrastructure If we are able to encourage businesses to hire more locally, encouraging hiring through the local schools and

289

apprenticeships would help and having job fairs locally with local businesses would be helpful also.

Cllr Myra Savin Councillor I am pasting in my fellow Brentford ward councillor's comments as below, as I am absolutely 100% behind his proposal, and think this is an essential and pivotal proposal for Brentford corridor. It would be a make or break decision, and I believe that if it is ignored, we may as well forget the cohesion and continuity of the plan for Brentford. Links across the Great West Road. The GWR and particularly the elevated M4, present a daunting barrier between the Brentford town centre and the Northern outposts, both residential areas and major recreational zones. Whilst there are apparently inevitable physical constraints (short of demolishing the M4) if the area beneath the M4 could be restored to a state fit for human habitation and the pedestrian crossings improved that would alleviate the problem. In fact, the crossings are not too bad, and plans are being developed to improve them but nobody seems to have any interest in improving the environment, which is just horrible. In addition to being depressing for local residents it is appalling PR for the area.

Rentplus Business Rentplus has set out how their model of rent to buy housing should be delivered within the borough. The model is essentially one of rent to buy, with a five year renewable tenancy at an affordable rent, managed by a housing association. All dwellings are to be leased to Registered Providers at an affordable rent for up to 20 years; the housing association will be responsible for managing and maintaining the properties. Homes will be sold on a phased basis every 5 years; those homes not sold

290

at year 5 will be re-let to tenants for a further 5 years (further explanation in rep) Representation includes information on government support for new housing, including evidence showing people can’t buy and stuck in private rental sector. Hounslow Cycling Community group And the fact that Brentford is home of the Brompton bicycle should be proudly promoted! Cllr Melvin Collins Councillor I would like to strongly reiterate my opposition to any thought of housing or business being built on Carville Hal Parks North and South, the periphery of Gunnersbury Park and Waterman’s Park and respecting the rights of local people’s access on all other parks and open spaces Brentford Community Council Community group It is noted above that the PTAL would remain low/medium even after all the improvements proposed at issue 4 (below) have been completed and that office sites for other enterprises would probably not be sufficiently accessible to encourage investment, given the poor history these sites have had. 3.5" Page titled: "Delivering For London “states "The Golden Mile Site Capacity Study: "Approximately 17,782 new jobs in addition to 12,058 existing jobs (HCA Employment Densities Guide Second Edition 2010..." The source quoted is not among the consultation papers and it is not clear how "new" and "existing" jobs are defined.

3.6. The employment benefit attributable to this plan might be clearer if a comparison was made between the employment which will be generated from the consents already given (including the outline consents for the Sky campus) and the additional jobs which would be created by 2030 if the plan was approved and built out. In making this calculation it would also be necessary to deduct the jobs relating to the existing employment sites including the

291

small industrial units and the many car outlets which are to be demolished and re-built.

Brentford Community Council Community group The Background papers to the Issues paper propose developments for the Great West Corridor which are inconsistent with the London Plan (FALP) the Local Plan for Hounslow 2015 which should therefore be rejected. The proposed Interim Planning Framework provides an unacceptable basis for applications which would be "departures" from the approved FALP and Local Plan (2015). Proposals to enable the Great West Corridor Review Plan to be achieved in the plan period will totally depend on improvements to public transport being in operation before any additional development is occupied.

Proposals to enable residential uses to be included in the plan will totally depend on significant improvements to air quality being achieved before any residential development takes place. Proposals to include tall buildings within the Great West Corridor Area must be so designed that no harm is caused to listed and locally listed buildings and their setting, to conservation areas and historic estates as well as the

World Heritage Ste at Kew and more distant heritage assets.

Ian Speed Individual I would like to endorse the detailed comments by Brentford Community Council.

292

APPENDIX 2a List of WoB Issues Consultation Respondents: Name Surname Organisation Respondent Type

Chris Hern Individual Andrew McLuskey Individual Tim Individual Sikander Hassan Anjuman Islam Business Himayatul Raakhee Patel Sport England Public body Ellen Kendrick Abava Developments Ltd Business Bedfont Councillors Bedfont Councillors Councillor Charles Asante Individual Clare Obeng Individual James Dyson Transport for London Government Richard Clarke Green Feltham Community group David Gregory London Diocesan Fund Business Rebecca Booth Global Grange Ltd Business Samantha Davenport Natural England Government Kath Harrison Surrey County Council Government Seema Malhotra MP Ross Anthony The Theatres Trust NGO Amy Douglas Universities Superannuation Scheme Ltd Business John Devonshire Runnymede Borough Council Government Euan Bull Individual David Blackett Heston Residents' Association Community group Clifford Watson London Wildlife Trust NGO P J Harmes Individual Stephen Hinsley Rentplus Business Matthew Spry Berkeley Strategic Business

293

Adam Pyrke Speedbird Securities Ltd Business Tarun Singh Shetson Property Developments Ltd Business Suzie Willis Education Funding Agency Government Dennis Pope British Airways Business Rebecca Booth Windowflowers Ltd Business Andrew Barnes Individual Sonia Harmon Individual Ian Stewart Individual June Stewart Individual Matthew Dugdale Orbit Developments (Southern) Limited Business Mike Foston Individual Anna Jackson Thornton Mayfield Residents' Association Community group Sarah Dawson Aviva Investors UK Ltd Business Geoff Bullock Airport Industrial Property Unit Trust Business Rob Gray Friends of the River Crane Environment Community group Nick Davey The SB Hotel Group Business Louise Spalding DIO (Defence Infrastructure Organisation) Government Matthew Savage Individual Geoff Dawes Spelthorne Borough Council Government Ben Taylor SEGRO Business Stephen Allen Heathrow Airport Ltd Business David Traylen Individual Brian Traylen Individual Maggie Netto Individual Leigh Hyatt Individual George Whyatt Individual J Edwards Individual Sarah James Individual S Jarvis Individual

294

David and Marnie Ott Individual Sharon Savill Individual Linda Ott Individual J and P Ott Individual D Rowe Individual G Hayes Individual Claudine Ott Individual Thomas Smith Individual Carol Wood Individual Chris Netto Individual Raja Individual Alan Rise Individual K Harmon Individual James Gleave London Borough of Hillingdon Government Celeste Giusti Mayor of London Government Mark Savage Individual Tom Hawkins WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Business Sam Foston Individual Sarah Dilley Environment Agency Government R Evans Individual Mark Harmon Individual Rebecca Pullinger CPRE London NGO Paul Kirby Individual Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Andrew Robinson Individual Sathat Virdi Individual Gurpal Virdi Individual Ian McDonald The Rutland Group Business

295

APPENDIX 2b Summary of consultation representations on the WoB Local Plan Review.

Issue 1: The Plan Area Boundary and the West of Borough Plan

Name Respondent Type Q1 Are there any other areas which you feel should be added or removed from the proposed Plan area shown?

Sikander Hassan Anjuman Business I wish to support the overarching objective of the emerging Himayatul Islam Plan.

Charles Asante Individual  Hanworth boundary with Whitton/Twickenham  Incorporating Butts Farm Clare Obeng Individual Bedfont Lakes should be protected - local residents need green space with growing population of families. Area behind Duke of Northumberland River parallel to Kingston Avenue should be protected, Bedfont Primary already under pressure. Green Feltham Community group The areas shown appear to include all the areas to the West of the Borough. I would question whether the areas of West Hounslow, Cranford and Heston are really the same geographic area as the South-Western parts of the borough. London Diocesan Fund Business No Euan Bull Individual The September document states for Bedfont. “Development will focus on respecting and enhancing the established character. There are no development site allocations in Bedfont”. Suddenly in the space of 3 months there is proposed considerable development that will clearly not

296

enhance the established character of Bedfont but will in fact destroy it. The current document talks about growth but the September one clearly understands that this would not be appropriate for Bedfont. The residents will not see any benefits but only the negative aspects:

 Increase in traffic around Bedfont  Resulting increase in traffic will lead to more noise and pollution and destroy the character of Bedfont.  The high rise of some of the buildings inappropriate for the area.  Proposed retail premises around the new railway station would have a negative impact on those already on the Staines Road in Bedfont. Andrew Barnes Individual No I believe to be fair all areas should be equally considered Sonia Harmon Individual Please remove this area from the plan. It is a vital and well- loved green space containing many homes, for rare species, and for humans. It should not be built upon. The triangle of Green space used to be allotments, and was famous in its day, for producing the Feltham First Pea, and a Feltham Cucumber.

A survey of over 2000 residents, found that people wanted an Ornamental Memorial Allotment to Freddie Mercury, and Queen, there, where it would be designed and maintained to be a landmark feature on the Station approach. It would not just be a standard allotment – it would be maintained year round, and be an Ornamental Allotment, incorporating elements of Feltham’s vast History. Please remove the below area from any building plan! (map in rep showing Feltham Arenas, Feltham Park, Blenheim Park) Ian Stewart Individual No

297

June Stewart Individual Not concerned about the boundaries, just what you're proposing. Mike Foston Individual There were no clear reasons stated why an area should or should not be added/removed from the plan, or the implications of such a change. Matthew Savage Individual There may be changes to the Borough Boundaries proposed in the postponed Boundary Commission Review, which may increase the area to be served by LBH, or may indeed involve transfer ‘out of borough’ This is a risk that should be addressed. David Traylen Individual Feltham Bedfont Lane. Brian Traylen Individual Bedfont Lane Feltham. Maggie Netto Individual No. J Edwards Individual Station Estate Road should not be removed. Sharon Savill Individual Feltham is built up considerably more than Bedfont and Hanworth. Feltham should be removed from any proposals made. Linda Ott Individual Feltham is built up and overcrowded. Look elsewhere. From the plans you can easily see that Bedfont and Hanworth are less populated. K Harmon Individual No Sathat Virdi Individual No Gurpal Virdi Individual No Spelthorne Borough Council Government The WoB Plan Area has an extensive common boundary with Spelthorne Borough from Bedfont Road adjoining Heathrow in the north to Kempton Park in the south. It is of vital importance therefore that there is full engagement and meaningful regular consultation on the full range of issues which affect both authorities. Under the duty to cooperate we have already had some initial meetings with you, in December 2014 on Green Belt methodology, in April 2015 on the Green Belt Review and in November 2015 on the

298

Southern Rail Access. We look forward to further meetings in the near future following this current consultation. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business We consider that the extent of the Plan is appropriate.

London Borough of Hillingdon Government The consultation document proposes that all of the growth area should form Hounslow's proportion of the Heathrow Opportunity Area and question 2 of the consultation document asks for comments on the definition of this area. This indicates that the majority of the Opportunity Area should be accommodated in Hillingdon, with specific reference to Stockley Park, Uxbridge and the Hayes/West Drayton Corridor. Hounslow's proportion of the Opportunity Area as defined in the consultation document appears to go beyond the scope of the London Plan, which notes that in Hounslow, there is capacity to continue the rejuvenation of Feltham as a town centre. The document should provide further justification for the expansion of Hounslow's proportion of the Opportunity Area, over and above the expectations of the London Plan. In addition, the requirement to work with the London Borough of Hillingdon to prepare a joint Opportunity Area Planning Framework should be acknowledged. Mayor of London Government The Mayor supports the general ambition set out in the document, most notably to secure improvements to Feltham Town Centre, improve the quality of life of residents in Hounslow and to link new growth with public transport improvements. Bedfont Councillors Councillor No Berkeley Strategic Business Berkeley Strategic agrees with the Plan area. Shetson Property Developments Business No, the plan is good Ltd

299

Speedbird Securities Ltd Business Open space and Conservation Areas Windowflowers Ltd Business Without the Green Belt Review documentation it is somewhat difficult to comment on the proposed boundary of the West of the Borough Plan. However, we have no principle objection to the boundary as currently proposed. PJ Harmes Individual What other areas available? Sam Foston Individual Plan area accepted as a consequence of lack of clarity about what we are being asked to consider. R Evans Individual Plan area not accepted as a consequence of lack of clarity about what we are being asked to consider. No bio diversity research plan for the "green" arears. The status of the land proposed has not been made clear Mark Harmon Individual I can’t find any plans on Hounslow’s website. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor No, but would be helpful at early stage to have sight of development plans (policy or draft) as a reference. Paul Kirby Individual Do not know of other areas. Thornton Mayfield Residents' Community group Hounslow is of a sufficient size to allow the great Association commercial development which would benefit some areas, but would damage and undermine the subtle characters of other older and/or more traditional areas. Some parts of Hounslow are much more suitable for new commercial development than Chiswick. The GWC at its Eastern end should terminate at Chiswick Roundabout and not be extended eastwards to Chiswick Business Park. The TMRA insists firstly on the need to keep the commercial high-rise and brash, ugly advertising out of the Chiswick area. Any commercial encroachment would only be acceptable ‘in character’, i.e. the design, architecture and infrastructure of any new development must be sympathetic to the style (and height) of Chiswick. Chiswick Park is a good example: an excellent integrated collection of high quality

300

buildings set apart in a parkland environment by an iconic architect, Richard Rogers, near to a couple of tube stations and good bus services. Secondly, TMRA does not want Chiswick to be split up by a Corridor any further than it is already by the Great West Road itself. Global Grange Ltd Business We fully support the growth and development aspirations for the West of the Borough as detailed within the above extracts. It is clear that the Council are seeking to secure investment into the borough and to utilise and benefit from its relationship with Heathrow Airport; this would appear to be a sound and sensible approach to development in this location. It is important however that the draft West of the Borough Plan appropriately facilitates and promotes this growth aspiration in the emerging policies and allocations, otherwise one could argue that the Plan is not positively prepared and lacks coherence and consistency. Raja Individual Feltham prison. SEGRO Business Plan area is acceptable and will enable the Council to fulfil the aims of Hounslow Local Plan Policy SV2. Importantly, the plan area includes areas both physically and functionally connected to Heathrow Airport. My Client believes this area will enable a focused and co-ordinated approach to be taken to defining and tailoring the Heathrow Opportunity Area with neighbouring authorities. The plan should seek to augment the strengths of the area and compared with the national average, Barton Willmore’s Economic Review has identified specialisms in the WoB relating to logistics, air travel-related industries and security services – reflecting the area’s proximity to Heathrow Airport. My Client welcomes the review of [employment] designations, as set out in Point (e) of Policy SV2, to address

301

the quantitative and qualitative shortfall in employment land in the Borough.

Name Respondent Type Q2 It is proposed that the London Borough of Hounslow part of the Opportunity Area will be drafted once the scope for change and growth has been more clearly established at the next plan making state. In the meantime, do you have any comments on the definition of the Heathrow Opportunity Area?

Clare Obeng Individual Bedfont is an old village full of character and maintains a village look and feel with small shops church and village green. Overdevelopment has already put pressure on local schools and housing - no more please. Green Feltham Community group It seems strange that the Opportunity Area only includes Hillingdon and Hounslow. There should be perhaps thought to include areas of Surrey in this as well. Given the special planning powers that the Opportunity Area will give, care will be given to preserve the heritage. It shouldn’t cover Feltham town centre, as this has and needs to retain a separate identity from Heathrow airport. London Diocesan Fund Business Hounslow needs a vision that excites the community and addresses known issues; this is a great start. Andrew Barnes Individual Not sure I understand the question or what it is defining, please provide more details Sonia Harmon Individual Please explain what the Heathrow Opportunity Area is, and what you mean! Ian Stewart Individual How can you comment on something that is not yet established June Stewart Individual I don't want to see any expansion at Heathrow as we suffer with too much pollution and traffic.

302

Mike Foston Individual The definition of the Heathrow Opportunity Area appears appropriate Matthew Savage Individual Extensive housing development in the HOA will need to ensure adequate provision of infrastructure such as schools, transport, and community facilities (meeting halls *and open land* for groups such as Scouts, Guides, Stage Schools, faith groups, etc.) There does not appear to be sufficient detail in the HOA plan yet to decide if the provision will be good enough. David Traylen Individual No Brian Traylen Individual None Maggie Netto Individual I’m unable to comment on this as you have not provided a definition of the Heathrow Opportunity Area. J Edwards Individual No Sharon Savill Individual No Linda Ott Individual No Chris Netto Individual Yes but exclude green field sites. K Harmon Individual Yes Sathat Virdi Individual What sort of opportunities will exist for people of different age ranges, jobs, leisure and health? Gurpal Virdi Individual More information Heathrow Airport Ltd Business Heathrow is specifically identified in the London Plan as an ‘Opportunity Area’, however the specific boundary has not formally been established. We welcome the lead that Hounslow are taking in establishing an Opportunity Area in so far as it relates to the west of the Borough, however we look to the GLA to take the lead in establishing and coordinating the planning of the wider Opportunity Area given its potential strategic, cross-boundary influence. Mayor of London Government The borough’s attempts to progress the Heathrow Opportunity Area in ways that would help deliver London plan objectives are supported.

303

WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Business The Heathrow Opportunity area could be extended to include the current areas of Airport Business Park South, Heathrow Gateway, Bedfont, and Lower Feltham West, parts of Bedfont Lakes and of the area surrounding the Feltham Young Offenders Institution. These additional areas could be made accessible from the proposed new station(s) on the proposed Southern Rail Access Link to Heathrow, thus improving the integration of future transport and land use planning. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Heathrow opportunity area should be contained within one borough- not straddle two. Shetson Property Developments Business No Ltd Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The London Plan makes clear that the Mayor recognises the importance of Heathrow Airport as a driver for economic growth within the Opportunity Area and beyond. In Hounslow, the capacity to continue the rejuvenation of Feltham as a town centre and to develop the Borough’s industrial offer is noted.

The London Plan also states (paragraph 2.17) that being informed by the continuing work of the Outer London Commission, a focused approach will be taken to integrate new and existing transport infrastructure with land use and development capacity. This will provide the basis for greater economic synergies between business locations in London, supported by more effective cross border working arrangements. In order to meet these objectives, it is appropriate to include the land immediately adjacent to Heathrow which is also well-served by public transport within the Opportunity Area together with such surrounding land which meets local needs.

304

Windowflowers Ltd Business In relation to the Heathrow Opportunity Area: Whilst it is accepted that the Council felt bound to undertake a consultation on the draft WoB Plan at this time given the duties placed upon it by way of Local Plan Policy SV2, it is clearly not feasible for interested parties to comment and respond to the matters raised in question 2 at this stage. In addition, it is somewhat unhelpful that no further detail is provided on the background and content of the Heathrow Opportunity Area within the draft Plan, as in all likelihood many interested parties will not be aware of the details, leaving them feeling disengaged from the process. This will need to be addressed going forward. It should be noted that the Heathrow Opportunity Area within which our clients land is located, is very much seeking to promote investment and growth within the local area.

This overall strategic approach to development needs to be robustly replicated and supported within the West of the Borough Plan to ensure consistency and a plan which has been positively prepared. PJ Harmes Individual It is busy enough Sam Foston Individual Public transport should be enhanced R Evans Individual Local Bus Transport to the airport should be considerably enhanced Mark Harmon Individual Do you mean what is termed as “The Heathrow Garden City” as again there is no reference to this unless you go through multiple webpages and websites Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Heathrow opportunity area should be contained within one borough - not straddle two but notice taken of neighbouring boroughs’ development plans where they impact or detract. Paul Kirby Individual Not enough info given

305

The SB Hotel Group Business The West of Borough Plan Issues Consultation describes the whole of the plan area as being, to a greater or lesser extent, affected, and impacted, by the presence of Heathrow Airport. Accordingly, and consistent with the narrative relating to the Heathrow Opportunity Area, as set out at Annex 1 to The London Plan, the whole of the Plan Area, and in particular the central and northern parts and the main transport corridors (including the A4 and the A30), should be included within the Opportunity Area designation.

Global Grange Ltd Business Our comments apply equally in relation to the economic needs assessment and the qualification of the need for commercial land, which presumably cannot be confirmed until the Heathrow Opportunity Area has been defined and the economic needs of an expanded Heathrow have been identified. It is clearly not feasible for interested parties to comment and respond to the matters raised in question 2 at this stage. It is also clear from the draft WoB Plan that the Council are anticipating some expansion of the airport. It is therefore hoped that the Council will be taking a positive approach to employment and commercial growth and development within the West of the Borough.

In addition, it is somewhat unhelpful that no further detail is provided on the background and content of the Heathrow Opportunity Area within the draft Plan, as in all likelihood many interested parties will not be aware of the details, leaving them feeling disengaged from the process. This will need to be addressed going forward. It should be noted that the Heathrow Opportunity Area within which our clients land is located, is very much seeking to promote investment and growth within the local area.

306

This overall strategic approach to development needs to be robustly replicated and supported within the West of the Borough Plan to ensure consistency and a plan which has been positively prepared.

Raja Individual No SEGRO Business The Economic Review shows that the area currently experiences large in- and out-flows of commuters, with only a quarter of those living in West of Borough also working there. Many local residents commute out of Heathrow, with the Airport relying on the West of Borough to supply 11.5% of its workforce. The importance of the Airport as an economic driver is acknowledged through the London Plan and measures need to be put in place to maintain its attractiveness to business and inward investment. Page 7 of garden city document quoted. NPPF para 21, and EC3 quoted. Support the identification of an Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF) to provide an integrated approach to the distinct environmental and growth issues facing the area around Heathrow and beyond.

London Plan para 2.9 importance of Heathrow quoted. Based on SEGRO’S knowledge of the market, we enclose Drawing SL-P-02 showing the proposed extent of the Heathrow Opportunity Area, which comprises key locations in Hounslow, Hillingdon and Slough. It is considered that the proposed area illustrated on Drawing SL-P-02 is capable of catering for a variety of needs and business uses and will be efficacious in terms of forming an appropriate basis for the OAPF to be developed. The Rutland Group Business Only that it is a useful instrument for bringing in GLA support for investment in the area.

307

Issue 2: Developing a strategic vision for the West of the Borough

Name Respondent Type Q3 How can we tailor the borough wide vision to be specific for the West of the Borough?

Chris Hern Individual The starting point was the examination of statistics, at ward level and below, which revealed significantly lower levels of educational attainment, employment category and skills in the western half of the borough, which linked with lower income and job security. Other data suggested a generally lesser feeling of well-being and greater health problems in the west of the borough I suggested that Hounslow was becoming two boroughs, with the western half becoming the new 'East End' of London, for although parts of northeast and the far east of London shared the low skills, education/income levels they did not share the dominance of a single employment sector, that had characterised the old East End and now was true of areas adjacent to Heathrow, with its extensive associated employment providing predominantly low paid, and low skilled work. Charles Asante Individual Specify town names? Incorporate a different methodology often used for major town planning Green Feltham Community group The chief characteristic of the WoB is the extensive green space and inter-connected communities. The idea of a ‘Heathrow Garden City’ is clearly inappropriate, as Heathrow is not even in the Borough – Hanworth has its own unique airport heritage, and this should be celebrated above Heathrow. The proposals will also be neither a garden nor a city. An alternative concept, such as ‘Feltham eco-town’ would be more appropriate – given high levels of air pollution in the

308

area and the need to tackle climate change, it is important any development is sustainable. I would be happy to share further concept work on this, but ‘Feltham eco airpark’ would give a more imaginative and forward looking vision.

The other idea is that the West of the Borough is equidistant to the Thames to the East, West and South. The Longford and Crane Rivers are important connections. The ‘River Link’ or ‘Thames Gateway’ could be an alternative concept to be developed. London Diocesan Fund Business There are areas with development potential that can only be utilised with a more flexible approach to planning as well as reducing the time table from initial concept to planning consent. Andrew Barnes Individual Isn’t this what the West Borough Plan is? Sonia Harmon Individual Listen to residents – communicate with Residents – and pay attention to Towns like Feltham that were a Village, and still has a Village mind-set. Protect Green Spaces in highly residential areas, just because it’s green, it doesn’t mean “go build on it!” – It means it is a valuable area, that resident’s value and need. Green spaces are the lungs of any Town. They should be respected as such. Ian Stewart Individual You need to have a better understanding of the West. At the moment you are lumping 7 completely different towns together which have completely different needs. Although you address each one individually nobody seems to actually know the Towns. Liaise directly with local Residents associations and community groups to establish the needs of each town.

309

June Stewart Individual The improvements made so far have been detrimental to the area; large tower blocks are not in keeping with the area and too many people live in this area; any more high-rise development will destroy the community feel and turn this into an inner city style slum area within 15 years. We need to build House (Homes) not tower blocks and eye sores. Mike Foston Individual Firstly you need to communicate the "vision" to everyone in an easy to access and easy to understand way, that all residents can be aware of and be able for form an opinion on. Feltham has much green space but it appears badly maintained, little utilised and undervalued by both council and residents. Investment must be people led, and not driven by council wants. Matthew Savage Individual The West of the Borough is perceived as the “poor relation” when compared with the affluent and low-density housing areas in the East of the Borough, such as Chiswick. It does, however, benefit from leisure facilities that are absent from those areas, such as the ‘Leisure West’ complex, and many chain restaurants. There are not, however, many independent cafes and restaurants, such as those that might be found on Chiswick High Road David Traylen Individual Low profile Brian Traylen Individual update our parks Chris Netto Individual Improve pollution control, traffic, youth provision, transport links. K Harmon Individual Don’t know. Sathat Virdi Individual Investment to be made as promised for all the projects identified. Gurpal Virdi Individual To include Cranford. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business It is important that the vision is flexible enough to accommodate the various growth scenarios presented by the airport.

310

Bedfont Councillors Councillor We need in the West of the Borough a strategic overview for housing/employment to dovetail onto the needs of Greenbelt to mitigate the urban sprawl from Central London I feel many open areas are hidden away, from Feltham Arenas to Bedfont Lakes- making these open areas more visible and appealing to the community is important. For example a large entrance from the Feltham train station to entice people in to Feltham arenas- having some picnic tables and safe lighting and footpaths and appropriate parking. Berkeley Strategic Business The Borough-wide vision should be tailored to deal with the specific issues related to the WoB and the original drivers for preparation of the immediate review for this part of the Borough. This includes matters identified by the Local Plan Inspector in paras 42-46 and 57-63 of his report on the Local Plan where he addresses the shortcomings of the existing Local Plan vision in respect of the WoB Area, focusing in particular on dealing with the Heathrow Opportunity Area. Other relevant matters include the need to actively address the shortfall in housing supply against London’s objectively assessed need by actively exploring opportunities to provide additional housing capacity, including through a comprehensive review of the Green Belt. Heston Residents' Association Community group The basic tailoring should be the same throughout the Borough; the more detailed tailoring should then recognise the needs of the West acknowledging such features as the social/economic traits and the specific needs established by massaging the overall plan. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business This consultation is an important element in developing an understanding of what is required to meet the needs of the West of the Borough but the Vision should also be viewed in the context of meeting the wider needs of West London. We believe the views of local landowners and businesses should

311

be sought to take into account what lessons they have learnt from being active in the local area through face to face meetings. The Vision covers an extensive area and developing local proposals for each of the sub-areas would help develop more definitive plans more quickly. Windowflowers Ltd Business Whilst the adopted Local Plan Vision is well conceived, it is considered that the WoB Plan Vision should be drafted from scratch, as the aspirations for growth will be focused more on commercial and employment generating development. Furthermore, the area itself will face different challenges to that of the Borough as a whole. The Vision for the WoB needs to better reflect the aspirational approach being intimated in the Issues Paper, to demonstrate the Councils clear commitment to growth, development and investment in this part of the Borough. PJ Harmes Individual Do not destroy Feltham by making it more densely populated and heavier traffic. Mark Savage Individual The plan should recognise the very different culture and demography of the West Area; whilst improvement is generally welcome, ‘Gentrification’ of the West Area must be avoided at all costs as this will only make the area less affordable. Sam Foston Individual Easier explanation of strategy R Evans Individual More Transparency, easier explanations, better communication about the strategy. Mark Harmon Individual Please tell me what is the vision for the West of Borough plan Cllr Tony Louki Councillor There should be a strategic overview for housing and employment to meet the needs of local Green Belt and Metropolitan Land (here and across the borough) to mitigate the urban creep from Central London. The plan should address how the neighbourhoods and outlying areas in the

312

west effectively link with each other as well as with Feltham and Hounslow Town Centres. Paul Kirby Individual what is the vision Aviva Investors UK Ltd Business We note that the strategic vision that town centres such as Feltham will become hubs of cultural, leisure, community and retail activity and that they will be promoted as locations for economic growth and places to do business, supported by improved connectivity and transportation improvements is supported by Aviva. The SB Hotel Group Business The Hounslow Vision as set out in the recently adopted Local Plan, provides a good starting point for, and should apply fully to, the WoB area. Given the WoB’s proximity to Heathrow Airport, however, the Vision should include a greater acknowledgment of the environmental, community and economic impacts that the airport has. In the latter respect, specific reference should be made to the promotion of employment generating development (in the locations set out in the Vision – i.e. in town centres and along the GWC) related to the airport. Global Grange Ltd Business Whilst the adopted Local Plan Vision is well conceived, it is considered that the West of the Borough Plan Vision should be drafted from scratch, as the aspirations for growth will be focused more on commercial and employment generating development. Furthermore, the area itself will face different challenges to that of the Borough as a whole.]

The Vision for the West of the Borough needs to better reflect the aspirational approach being intimated in the Issues Paper, to demonstrate the Councils clear commitment to growth, development and investment in this part of the Borough. Raja Individual Improve transport.

313

SEGRO Business SEGRO agree that the Local Plan provides a starting point for the vision for the WoB, which sets out the three priorities: people, place and economy. They support a ‘vibrant and growing Borough with development focussed in areas with capacity for change. ’SEGRO are supportive of the aims of Local Plan Policies SV2, EC3 (it recognises the important role Heathrow Airport plays in stimulating economic growth), ED1 and ED2 .

It is important that the key policy aims are manifested in the West of Borough Plan and, in line with the NPPF’s core planning principles. A holistic and positive spatial planning approach must be adopted whereby the Council support the designation of sites and importantly the delivery of key development and infrastructure in the most sustainable locations.

SEGRO endorse the effective use of previously developed land through the protection and regeneration of existing employment site as well as well-coordinated land use and infrastructure planning to generate multiplier effects, possibly through agglomeration. The Rutland Group Business The vision tends to be expressed in topic-by-topic terms, whereas the overriding need in the west of the Borough is for a comprehensive approach which will give cohesion and community to a fragmented area. The vision should be expressed in structural terms, aiming to create stronger linkages between the different land uses. Apart from Feltham town centre, there is nowhere that is a place, for assembly, for recreation, for commerce, for culture. The Garden City idea is some recognition of the need for integration, but it is unclear how it relates to the rest of the plan area.

314

Name Respondent Type Q4 Are there additional priorities Council should be focussing on for the vision in the West of the Borough?

Chris Hern Individual The foreword ignores other visions. The need for a special planning analysis and proposals for the WoB was first raised by me at an area ctte. My starting point was an analysis of ward statistics- educational level, employment category and skills level, demonstrating a sharp difference between the east and WoB. To an extent the Asian community in Heston and Hounslow west altered some of these parameters. The massive dominance of Heathrow- with most of its workers from Hounslow in low paid low skilled work-ish a trap as well as a benefit, and I described the west of the borough as the new 'East End' also based on transport and vulnerable to change. Charles Asante Individual Parking, Retail options, different forms of housing not just flats Clare Obeng Individual School keeping local schools for local kids. Consider a second secondary for Bedfont for current residents rather than more housing. Green Feltham Community group Feltham’s heritage assets should be maintained and improved e.g. the former Town Hall (now Magistrates Court), Bridge House Pond, and Feltham railway station. Also there is a real need to integrate communities which have become divided by poorly planned transport links. Hanworth is divided into 3 centres which feel disconnected. Feltham and Bedfont are disconnected by the railway line and poorly planned Centre redevelopment. London Diocesan Fund Business See questions 6/7/10 Andrew Barnes Individual Yes, more importance on Heritage. There has been a total lack of focus on this area in the West of the Borough.

315

Sonia Harmon Individual Not building on small green spaces, but consider empty offices and warehouse for conversions, and on Brownfield sites first. Ian Stewart Individual The main focus for the Council should be Traffic Management and how to keep and enhance our Green Spaces. The other priority should be understanding the desires of the residents with regards to Heathrow by conducting an unbiased and constructive survey. June Stewart Individual To maintain the community atmosphere and retain the towns identities; not try to change what we have but enhance it. Mike Foston Individual This end of the borough has a large incidence of ASB issues, largely caused by the lack on youth investment and engagement. This is a very high priority to be included in any vision, because without this you risk excluding a massively important section of Feltham, Hanworth and Bedfont's future. Matthew Savage Individual “Community Infrastructure” is important, and these should be available at little or no cost to users. I would not wish to see a repeat of the somewhat misleading development proposals that were implemented for Feltham Town Centre, where Community Facilities were promised – but when realised, only two meeting rooms were in the development, on the second floor (albeit with lift access), and they have limited hours of access. Indeed, at least part of one of these rooms seems to be exclusively for Feltham Arts use. David Traylen Individual Not more housing but better housing. Brian Traylen Individual Keep our heritage. Maggie Netto Individual Traffic and pollution must be a high priority. Leigh Hyatt Individual Traffic, keeping youth engaged in work ethic good citizens. Sarah James Individual Traffic is outrageous at the minute. I think this is a major issue.

316

S Jarvis Individual Traffic in Feltham is outrageous and if you plan to build extra houses. Flats how are the roads going to cope. Sharon Savill Individual Traffic. Keeping our green spaces Linda Ott Individual Traffic J and P Ott Individual The traditions and culture of the showmen community. Chris Netto Individual Decrease emissions from airplanes and traffic K Harmon Individual Road repairs. Return traffic light phasing to previous settings stopping hold ups over Feltham Station bridge Sathat Virdi Individual Pollution and methods to cleanse the environment in Cranford. Gurpal Virdi Individual To include Cranford and more investment Heathrow Airport Ltd Business The establishment of the Heathrow Strategic Planning Group (HSPG) provides the opportunity to develop a coherent and inspiring vision for the Heathrow sub-region. The vision for the West of Borough Plan should, as far as possible, take account of this wider emerging vision for the area. London Borough of Hillingdon Government Question 4 asks whether there are additional priorities that the Council should be focussing on for the vision in the west of the borough. Hillingdon is concerned that the extent of growth, particularly for Cranford and Heston, could have cross boundary impacts on transport, community infrastructure and environmental quality. These issues and the impact on adjoining boroughs should be considered as part of the development of the vision for the growth area. WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Business We believe that, given the GLA’s increasing population forecasts, the Council should be more ambitious with housing targets, across all tenures, within the West of the Borough and specifically within the Heathrow Opportunity Area.

Bedfont Councillors Councillor  Development/Housing marries into open spaces for leisure;

317

 Need to ensure we keep Feltham Arenas and Bedfont lakes;  Keep the agricultural land opposite West View going towards Stanwell;  Mayfield Farm is important for the history- as we understand there is a Roman Site in the middle of it. Shetson Property Developments Business Yes, more retail and mixed use developments Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group To acknowledge the presence of Heathrow Airport and its importance to the West of the Borough in job and business creation and general prosperity. The future of course depending on any expansion at Heathrow. Insufficient attention has been paid in the past to the benefit of having Heathrow on the borough's doorstep. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business As part of this proposal there is the opportunity to deliver a significant element of public open space in the Public Safety Zones in the guise of the Hatton Country Park. We have long felt your residents will welcome this strategic improvement in recreational space and public access opportunities. It will also complement the proposed commercial and housing uses providing a balanced pattern of urban development in the area. PJ Harmes Individual local resident rather than others coming in Mark Savage Individual Improved Provision for Youth services and Community Education. Too much of the latter is currently focussed on Chiswick and the east of the borough these need to be back within reach of the population of Feltham, Hanworth and Bedfont. The idea of a Feltham ‘university’, even as a college should be encouraged, supported and developed- but not at the expense of existing facilities nor the area’s heritage. Sam Foston Individual Traffic management.

318

R Evans Individual  Need to ensure we keep Bedfont lakes.  Mayfield Farm is important for the history- as we understand there is a Roman Site in the middle of it.  Quality Green Spaces. Keep the agricultural land opposite West View going towards Stanwell. Youth Provision Mark Harmon Individual Publicising what is meant by “vision in the West of the Borough? Cllr Tony Louki Councillor  Adoption of extensive street tree planting to mitigate increased aircraft noise and pollution;  Any development and particularly housing should marry into open spaces for leisure;  There should be no development which risks the loss of Feltham Arenas and Bedfont Lakes;  Agricultural land opposite West View going towards Stanwell should be kept;  Mayfield Farm is important to maintain local heritage and protect its Roman remains. George Whyatt Individual Yes. Keeping green spaces for children and the elderly. Raja Individual more cafes / restaurants

SEGRO Business SEGRO consider the Council should seek to strengthen its established logistics and warehousing market whereby existing employment designations should be protected and where possible expanded to meet the needs of the Borough and any future demand as a result of the expansion of Heathrow Airport. [ELR initial findings and a Savills report from 2015 discussed.] Given the strategic location, SEGRO consider the Council should provide sufficient flexibility for larger warehouse and storage facilities to include large ancillary office floorspace, as operators are seeking to rationalise their operations and consolidate the majority of their facilities onto a single site.

319

As highlighted above, securing logistics and warehouse facilities in the West of the Borough will provide an increase in employment opportunities. Subsequently the increase of jobs will create an increase in demand for ancillary amenity uses that are intended to serve the needs of surrounding businesses. It is considered that provision of ancillary uses, such as retail uses and hotels, should be supported through the West of Borough Plan.

In light of the above, it is considered the economic priority should be expanded in order to respond to the increasing demand for modern industrial floorspace. In particular, the provision of medium and some larger sized Grade A units with adequate yard space in the most appropriate, sustainable and accessible locations should be focussed upon to meet the identified demand The subsequent demand for ancillary uses should also be taken into account, in order to retain existing employers and attract new businesses to the Borough.

320

Issue 3: Reviewing the Metropolitan Green Belt

Name Respondent Type Q5 Do you think all the Green Belt in Hounslow is fit for purpose and meets the purposes and objectives set out on the NPPF? If not please identify the areas that do not.

Andrew McLuskey Individual Building on open land around Bedfont Lakes country park as you propose will rob local people (and not just in Hounslow) of the enjoyment and recreational opportunities of one of the few remaining green lungs in this area. (Heathrow have already indicated they wish to build a huge car park on parkland in my own community here in Stanwell.) New housing is needed in this part of the world but it should not be at the cost of the environment. Tim Individual The role of the greenbelt is to prevent urban sprawl and preventing settlements merging into one. I think maintaining Bedfont Lakes, Hanworth Park, Hounslow Heath, Feltham Marshalling Yards, De Brome Fields and the River Crane corridor as Greenbelt does achieve this. The NPPF also places an obligation on local authorities to plan positively to enhance the Greenbelt. I think there is good evidence that the Greenbelt in Hounslow contains fantastic biodiversity that should be enhanced. Charles Asante Individual Yes to some extent, although not sure of the Feltham Marshalling Yards. Clare Obeng Individual Please leave Bedfont Lakes protected. Green Feltham Community group The Greenbelt provides a vital ring around London, and contributes to the unique semi-rural character of the area. Hounslow urban farm, Bedfont Lakes allow residents of London boroughs feel that they are in the countryside, even with aeroplanes overhead.

321

Unfortunately recent development in the Greenbelt – e.g. the Royal Mail warehouses on Feltham Marshalling Yards have been totally inappropriate and detracted from the openness and quality of the environment. Industrial uses of greenbelt must be particularly carefully managed. It is important to learn lessons from the success of force in the Crane valley, which has shown that interconnected spaces which provide good greenway links can create ownership for areas of green space. London Diocesan Fund Business No. There is no need to destroy Green Belt or MOL a lot have areas on the fringes that could be utilised and have only been included because lines have been drawn without any consideration as to peripheral use. As such it could in effect, enhance the GB/MOL. London Wildlife Trust NGO The existing Green Belt to the West of the town of Hounslow achieves this with the River Crane Corridor and adjoining nature reserves, MOL and open spaces. However there have been several incursions over the years which have eroded this barrier, notably the loss of a large section of Feltham Marshalling Yards, Post Office Depot and the housing development on the side of Hounslow Heath which is accessed from Frampton Road. The corridor is very narrow in places almost restricted to the footprint of the River Crane itself and a narrow area of flood plain e.g. the section to the north of the North Feltham Trading Estate.

‘The essential characteristics of Green Belt are their openness and permanence’ can be challenged as it has been severely eroded in several places in our Borough. If anything, the policy in Hounslow should be to look to reinforce the Green Belt in Hounslow rather than look for ways to further erode it.

322

Euan Bull Individual In an earlier document on the area, released in September 2015, the council stated it would protect the extensive open landscape of the Green Belt around Bedfont, whilst encouraging leisure and agricultural uses which complement this. In the space of 3 months it appears to have done a complete U turn and is intent on building on it. Surely the council would have known about the housing pressures while the September document was being written, they cannot have suddenly appeared in the last 3 months. Andrew Barnes Individual If Green Belt land within Hounslow is not fit for purpose would this not demonstrate a neglect and non-adherence to the NPPF on LBH’s part? If there are areas not fit for purpose what confidence does this instil in future promises and plans on behalf of LBH Sonia Harmon Individual No. Please explain the NPPF. Please listen to Locals. Hounslow Borough Council has promoted some green spaces as antisocial hotspots, and unloved and un-used, and has not recognised the heritage and need for all of it. Make Brownfield sites, a priority for building on first. Once and only once that has been built on, should other avenues be considered? For example - Feltham Arenas – including the Green space opposite the station, has been surveyed intensively, and the residents have requested what they want with the land – in the Feltham Phoenix Project. Such a venture would improve lives, and the area and combat increased air and traffic pollution. Ian Stewart Individual All the Green Belt land is fit for purpose if maintained correctly by the Council. The Council have a duty of care to maintain and positively promote Green and open spaces. At the moment they seem to only be promoting them for building purposes.

323

June Stewart Individual Yes; we have diverse areas of Green Belt that suit all types of people. Not everyone likes coffee shops and ornamental flower beds. Mike Foston Individual As previously mentioned most of the green space, is just grass, worth little thought or development to make the most use of it. Residents complain of motorbikes and want it flattened to make it less attractive, but really in needs considerable investment so it benefits the whole community. Matthew Savage Individual There is a perception that areas previously used for mineral extraction are designated as ‘Green Belt’ – when they are not; they have not been developed because of possible land contamination. There needs to be an awareness campaign to show what land is actually designated Green Belt, and what is currently Public Open Space, or Permissive Access land (such as the former railway marshalling yards at Feltham). I have been made aware that this is the National Planning Policy Framework. I have heard that this places a demand for up to 200,000 new homes across London. But some neighbouring authorities will not have enough space available to meet their ‘quota’ – thus, demand falls disproportionately on outer London Boroughs such as Hounslow (perhaps Richmond). Is there cross-boundary consultation with the neighbouring Boroughs? David Traylen Individual Yes Brian Traylen Individual Yes Maggie Netto Individual I don’t think Hounslow makes the best of its green spaces and does not make it easy for community groups to use them Chris Netto Individual Keep Bedfont Green - Bedfont High St Alan Rise Individual Retain status quo K Harmon Individual Yes

324

Sathat Virdi Individual Green belts to be maintained as such, no compromises Gurpal Virdi Individual Yes, it needs to be more strict Seema Malhotra MP I welcome the document’s emphasis on having a clear definition of which land in Hounslow is green belt and which not. The assessment needs to be made in terms of an evidence based judgement of need, not simply past history. Spelthorne Borough Council Government The Green Belt in Spelthorne was designated at the same time as that in Hounslow under the provisions of the Middlesex Development Plan 1956. Significant areas of Green Belt straddle the common boundary in an area where the Green Belt at its inner edge is fragmented. Spelthorne has already contributed to the initial Green Belt review process in Hounslow and, as part of its own Local Plan Review process, Spelthorne will soon be undertaking a Green Belt Assessment. We would therefore expect to work closely with Hounslow on any future consideration of the Green Belt, particularly to ensure that there is a consistent approach to safeguarding areas of Green Belt which straddle the boundary. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business We welcome the Council’s review of the Green Belt’s use and benefit to the west of the Borough. But we believe that the Council is best placed to determine the status of the Green Belt. Mayor of London Government The intention to comprehensively review existing Green Belt (and Metropolitan Open Land) boundaries is noted. The Mayor strongly supports the extent of the existing boundaries and this review should be mindful of relevant London Plan and NPPF policy. The London Plan’s current housing target of 822 homes per year, for Hounslow is based on existing open space boundaries and does not assume any housing supply from such protected areas. The Mayor has strong concerns that undue emphasis is being given to identifying the Green Belt and Metropolitan

325

Open Land (MOL) as potential sources of new housing supply and the Mayor would require other possible sources of housing supply to be rigorously pursued before any release of Green Belt or MOL is considered as set out in policy 3.3E Bedfont Councillors Councillor Fit for purpose - will the Green Belt review redefine that purpose? When alluded to at a recent West Area Forum the question was referred to as a “chicken and egg conundrum”. We need to clarify the Green Belt purpose and then plan accordingly when it fits into agreed priorities Green Belt enhances the feeling of ‘well-being’ in the community it can only realistically be justified when already in a derelict state and not fulfilling its original purpose. I remain devastated by the dumping of landfill on Feltham arenas - this is something that we need to prevent ever happening again- hence it was not fit for purpose- there are still some areas in Feltham Arenas that have broken glass.

Berkeley Strategic Business The Green Belt boundary is not fit for purpose and should be reviewed in the context of paragraphs 83-85 of the NPPF. In part this is because some land does not fulfil Green Belt purposes, but also because the need for housing can represent exceptional circumstances, and in reviewing Green Belt boundaries it is necessary to take into account. There are multiple areas where land within the WoB Local Plan area, that was designated as Green Belt for historical reasons, no longer meets all the criteria – the five purposes– and could be released without causing unacceptable harm, in the context of the need for development in the Borough, and the specific benefits of a proposed allocation on that land. Berkeley’s interests relate to land shown in Appendix 2. This land is currently within the Green Belt. However, this parcel

326

of land is not considered to perform a strong Green Belt function, and it could be safely released without causing unacceptable harm. (see response for test against five criteria) Shetson Property Developments Business Yes Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group What exactly is fit for purpose? Both the Green Belt & MOL & Local Open Space are of vital importance to the West of the Borough. It must continue to provide that vital buffer to urban sprawl and whilst it may not be sacrosanct its presence must be safeguarded. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business With respect to my client’s land as defined on Plan 1 attached to this questionnaire, it no longer serves any of these purposes at the current time. London, including the area around Heathrow, is growing and the strategic plan is for it to do so to meet identified needs. Whilst there is a brownfield first approach the amount of brownfield land is not sufficient to meet the objectively assessed needs.

Windowflowers Ltd Business Given the aspirational views intimated in the Issues Paper to the development of this part of the Borough, it is inevitable that parts of the Green Belt will need to be released to achieve the housing and economic development required to meet not only the needs of the area, but also the objectives of the West of the Borough Plan.

Unfit for purpose: The land included at Appendix 2 to the south of Staines Road, has planning consent for employment development and is understood to currently be part Green Belt. Given the extent of built development in the local area, the planning history of the site, and the Councils aspirations for a

327

transport hub at Clockhouse Roundabout, there does not appear to be any merit in retaining this parcel of land within the Green Belt.

The more natural Green Belt boundary would in fact appear to be the A30 itself. It is our view that this land in particular should be released from the Green Belt and given a site specific policy for an employment or mixed use.

Airport Industrial Property Unit Business The representations set out in this document demonstrate Trust that:  The Green Belt land at the Site does not meet the aims of Green Belt policy to prevent urban sprawl neither does it make any material contribution to the ‘openness’ of the Green Belt in this part of the Borough;  The land does not serve any of the five purposes of including land within the Green Belt and, consequently, its removal from the Green Belt would not undermine the function of the Green Belt;  The land offers little scope to contribute to the enhancement of the Green Belt through ‘beneficial use.

Friends of the River Crane Community group Despite this clear guidance from National and Regional Environment policy the document seeks to promote the removal of Green Belt designation from large parts of the west area and associated maps include proposals to develop these areas. These proposals are justified by the proposal on the presumptions that: (a) There is an over-riding need for growth, increased employment and housing in the west area and (b) These needs cannot be met within the existing designated areas.

328

There is however no strong rationale presented to support these presumptions, which are then the starting point for the arguments set out in the document. The removal of green belt from large parts of the west area, along with their subsequent development would be a major concern FORCE.

It is of particular concern that this attempt it being made without any justification in terms of the value of these open spaces in particular, and the over-riding value of green belt as a concept for London. We would note in this respect that Green Belt needs only meet one or more of the five purposes for which it can be designated. This fact is not made clear in this Issues document. FORCE considers that any review of green belt across the western part of the Borough should also consider the actual value of this green belt land and (probably more importantly) its potential for enhancement to meet the environmental and community needs of the borough. This approach would be consistent with much of the existing policy and associated documentation. The actual and potential value of this open space as open space is not considered by this Issues document. In our view this presents an opportunity to review these spaces and consider how they can be better utilised within their Green Belt designation so as to provide an enhanced asset for the borough. There is considerable potential for improved utilisation and management of open spaces to provide enhanced community, green transport, social, educational, training and employment uses, whilst both maintaining and enhancing the environmental value of these spaces. PJ Harmes Individual Must be accessible to public

329

Mark Savage Individual Please ensure that in future you avoid jargon and use initials and acronyms the average resident can understand! I presume this refers to the “National Policy Planning Framework”, but many would not know this. The most important green belt in this area is that to the west of Feltham, where there have been development pressures in the past. This provides an important buffer which prevents Feltham and Ashford running into one mega-village. The Crane Valley Linear Park is also under-represented in this plan at present. Its place as part of the LOOP too (London Outer Orbital Park) needs to be encouraged and supported.

Feltham Marshalling Yards site. While this has become a de facto local nature reserve, it was never officially intended for this purpose. If land must be re-designated, I would favour this for re-designation and development of further housing etc. over the area west of Feltham. Sam Foston Individual Lack of clarity what is green belt R Evans Individual There is a lack of clarity over which land in Hounslow is Green Belt, and what green field is and exactly what is being considered for redevelopment. Fit for purpose - will the Green Belt review redefine that purpose? When alluded to at a recent West Area Forum the question was referred to as a "chicken and egg conundrum". We need to clarify the Green Belt purpose and then plan accordingly when it fits into agreed priorities Green Belt enhances the feeling of 'well-being' in the community it can only realistically be justified when already in a derelict state and not fulfilling its original purpose. Mark Harmon Individual What is the NPPF?

330

Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Hounslow’s Green Belt and Metropolitan Open Land is a compensating factor when measured against major impact of transport infrastructure. Any net loss should be actively resisted and policy devised to assert this. Neglect by landowners should not be a reason for declassifying any Green Belt and Metropolitan Open Land. The plan should unequivocally assert remedy of historic neglect with stated powers to transfer to communities if not addressed. Runnymede Borough Council Government Although Runnymede and Hounslow do not share a common boundary, the Green Belt in both authority areas was first designated in 1956 and flows out from south west London into Surrey and other surrounding county/unitary areas. The Green Belt background paper accompanying the West of Borough Issues Document, sets out that Hounslow is undertaking a Green Belt review and this is welcomed. The review should be used to ensure that Hounslow can demonstrate that the West of Borough Local Plan has made ‘every effort’ to meet development needs and to ensure that the Green Belt boundary remains robust. Should Hounslow consider that the exceptional circumstances exist to alter Green Belt boundaries any options for release it will need to be tested through the SA process.

CPRE London NGO Whilst CPRE London has not been able to assess in detail whether all of Hounslow’s designated Green Belt continues to meet the purpose and objectives, we would underline that only one of the criterion laid out in the NPPF needs to be met to warrant continued designation as Green Belt. Paul Kirby Individual If it's available to public its fit for purpose

331

Global Grange Ltd Business Is understood that the Hounslow Council have for some time been completing a revised Green Belt Assessment. In reality until this assessment has been published, it is somewhat difficult for interested parties to make meaningful representations, particularly given the extent of Green Belt land in this area. Whilst we had previously been advised that the revised Green Belt Study would be published with the WoB Plan, it remains outstanding. We would therefore ask that the Green Belt Review be published at the earliest opportunity and that interested parties for interested parties to comment. Raja Individual No, poor lighting, not safe SEGRO Business 40% of the WoB area identified is within the metropolitan Green Belt. My Client considers that areas of the Green Belt are not fulfilling their purpose in the context of Paragraph 80 of the NPPF. Our view is that the Green Belt boundary definition in the areas surrounding SEGRO’s landholdings is weak, as it does not make use of readily recognisable and permanent boundaries, being defined by an overly complex boundary making use of buildings, fence lines and hard standing which are (and indeed have been) liable to change.

To remedy this we propose the rationalisation of the Green Belt boundary, which we recommend should be a strategic level rationalising of readily recognisable features including land use boundaries, adopted highways, woodland and river watercourses. Our (BW) Green Belt Assessment identified areas of Green Belt around existing employment designations that do not serve a Green Belt function and have poorly defined boundaries.

332

The Rutland Group Business We have set down in our initial statement how we believe the Green Belt in much of the West area fails to perform the intended purposes of Green Belts. We have commented on the fitness for purpose of two specific sites in our response to the call for sites.

More generally we recognise that Green Belt boundaries can only be altered (reduced or extended) with exceptional justification. Whether a site performs the functions of a Green Belt is only part of such a justification; the other part is the use to which a site or sites will be put. It has rarely been a sufficient case to say the site is needed for housing. However the present plan is an opportunity to consider the overall structure and functioning of the area and to look at ways in which it can operate more effectively and sustainably; a well-considered plan of this sort could provide the justification for both the release of land from the Green Belt and for additional designations. The Green Belt review will need to be repeated for the sites that will be crossed or bordered by the proposed rail access to Heathrow; it will make a major difference to their performance of Green Belt functions.

333

Name Respondent Type Q6 Under what circumstances Green Belt land should be re-designated for other uses?

Tim Individual I think the value of this Greenbelt land is so high in providing thousands of people a chance to encounter the natural world that I do not think that it should be re-designated. I think that public access to these sites should be improved without them being re-designated. Charles Asante Individual Transport as in road that help relieve congestion or train paths not housing Clare Obeng Individual On exceptional cases where there is plenty of access to green spaces anyway and only if the local roads / schools can grow. Green Feltham Community group Green belt land should only be re-designated if it leads to a material improvement in the natural environment and its accessibility for local people (amenity, air quality, enjoyment) in that location. Any development must meet the highest environmental standards – e.g. Green roofs, carbon neutral, use non-polluting vehicles. There must be no material loss to the London Green Grid in these areas – therefore important areas such as Feltham Marshalling Yards, and the area south of Hanworth Park must be retained. Improving connectivity across these spaces and providing limited amounts of high quality housing to provide some guardianship of these spaces could be a legitimate use. London Diocesan Fund Business Affordable housing and social projects, Dementia Care and Care of the elderly that create job opportunities as well as reducing 'bed blockers,' in hospitals. London Wildlife Trust NGO The Green Belt in Hounslow is under threat. There is a creeping erosion of the Green Belt which flies in the face of the statement from the NPPF which talks about the

334

permanence of the Green Belt. We need to take the long view and not simply respond to immediate needs. Andrew Barnes Individual I believe that Green Belt itself should not be designated for other uses. If there is a need to use green belt land then a process should be followed to un-designate it as such. Criteria, consultation and assessment should form part of this designation. Once it’s gone it’s gone. Sonia Harmon Individual None. Unless locals have had a direct and open, involvement in every stage of planning and redevelopment. Ian Stewart Individual Under no circumstances at all. June Stewart Individual None. Mike Foston Individual If all brown field sites have been reutilised, then it may be acceptable to use other green space, but only if the proceeds are used to make changes to existing green space and better use it for the community. Matthew Savage Individual Green Belt land *could* be re-designated such that low-rise development for community use that retains the ‘concept and use’ of the areas, but does not stifle improvement – such as the provision of sports pitches *and club houses*, or even schools and playing fields. David Traylen Individual People being moved to build more houses. Brian Traylen Individual No more housing. Maggie Netto Individual Only if other green belt land is improved. Leigh Hyatt Individual Tidy up, give up to improve other green belt retained. J Edwards Individual Green belt, should not be used for any development. Sharon Savill Individual It shouldn't. If it had to be used only if it is going to make it better for the community. Linda Ott Individual It shouldn’t. J and P Ott Individual Showmen’s land for there way of life and business. Football/sports. Chris Netto Individual Only if adjacent green belt improved or new GBL designated. Alan Rise Individual No circumstances.

335

K Harmon Individual Only small areas if other green areas are improved Sathat Virdi Individual Why do you need to re designate this? Not when it is so close to Heathrow! Gurpal Virdi Individual Never. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business The re-designation of Green Belt land should only occur where an alternate use can be justified and where the land cannot reasonably be considered to fulfil a Green Belt function, as set out in the NPPF. We consider that the quality of Green Belt land should take precedence over the quantity. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Once the green belt is given up it can never be brought back- in appropriate situations we can use for mixed housing (affordable and private). I am keen on mixed housing to ensure the appropriate social-economic balance in this area We need to ensure re-designating Green Belt is a genuine attempt at balance and not a political trade off. Berkeley Strategic Business It is important that the Council’s Green Belt review takes an approach that responds appropriately to the NPPF. The question to be asked is whether land can be released from the Green Belt without unacceptable harm to the principal purposes of its designation, and to then relate the conclusion of this to the tests in paragraphs 84 and 85 of the Framework in respect of amending Green Belt boundaries and judge whether there are alternatives to Green Belt designation. In this respect, it is not necessary for any releases of land from the Green Belt to be restricted to parcels that are deemed to have no Green Belt purpose – it is a matter of planning judgement based on the value of the land to the Green Belt alongside the need for housing (and other uses), the need to promote sustainable patterns of development, and the ability to set amended Green Belt boundaries that,

336

inter alia, are consistent with the plan’s strategy, will not need to be altered at the end of the plan period. Shetson Property Developments Business For schools or hospitals only. Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group Whilst not sacrosanct it should only be re-designated when all other alternative sites for development (housing/schools) have been thoroughly investigated. Green Belt is a vital asset in the West of the Borough environment as covered in 5 above. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business There remains a need to accommodate new development pressures in order to maintain economic prosperity and meet housing needs but this must be achieved in a sustainable manner. The area covered by the Heathrow New Garden City Vision document, In particular my client’s land, already benefits from investment in communications/transport and local services. The area is served by London Underground (Piccadilly line); overland services (at Feltham via services from Waterloo and connections); the Heathrow Express and by road via the M4/A4/A30 and A316/M3. Development in this location would take advantage of investment in existing and proposed new infrastructure. These factors need to be taken into account to adopting a holistic assessment of where new development can be accommodated in the most sustainable means. PJ Harmes Individual Only when all other areas have been looked at. Sam Foston Individual Building on green belt should be last resort. R Evans Individual We need to ensure re-designating Green Belt is a genuine attempt at balance and not a political trade-off. Biodiversity is important across the borough, we all benefit from the flora and fauna present in our green belt, and this should not be damaged in favour of buildings. Building on green belt should always be the last resort, not the first resort. The

337

green belt should be celebrated and protected and not be abandoned and Local wildlife should be encouraged. Mark Harmon Individual Only if it acceptable to local residents after consultation that is well publicised. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Only when a significant increase in related leisure activity within the green belt is proposed. CPRE London NGO Green Belt land should only be re-designated when it no longer fulfils one or more of the criteria for Green Belt designation. This is in conformity with the NPPF and London Plan. It should not be used to meet generalised unmet needs, as Planning Policy guidance laid out by the Housing Minister in 2014 states: “Unmet housing need (including for traveller sites) is unlikely to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and other harm to constitute the “very special circumstances” justifying inappropriate development on a site within the Green Belt.” Paul Kirby Individual if no other options George Whyatt Individual no circumstances Global Grange Ltd Business Given the aspirational views intimated in the Issues Paper to the development of this part of the Borough, it is inevitable that parts of the Green Belt will need to be released to achieve the housing and economic development required to meet not only the needs of the area, but also the objectives of the West of the Borough Plan.

338

appear to be any merit in retaining this parcel of land within the Green Belt. The more natural Green Belt boundary would in fact appear to be the A30 itself. It is our view that this land in particular should be released from the Green Belt and given a site specific policy for an employment or mixed use. Raja Individual Not at all. The Rutland Group Business Exceptional ones. SEGRO Business At the time of review, Local Planning Authorities are advised to consider the Green Belt boundaries having regard to their intended permanence in the long term and they should be capable of enduring beyond the plan period. Furthermore, Paragraph 84 highlights that when drawing up or reviewing Green Belt boundaries local authorities should take account of the need to promote sustainable patterns of development. In line with the NPPF, it is considered that sites should be released from the Green Belt that would support sustainable development, particularly where there is existing infrastructure in place that can be efficiently utilised. The release of Green Belt land surrounding the Airport will assist in meeting the demand from airport-related businesses regardless of the Government’s response to the recommendations of the Airports Commission.

New sites will therefore be required to accommodate this growth in line with Paragraph 21 of the NPPF that requires local authorities to set out a clear economic vision and strategy for their area which positively and proactively encourages sustainable growth as well as identifying strategic sites for local and inward investment. This will inevitably require land to be released from the Green Belt to achieve this objective.

339

Name Respondent Type Q7 Do you think that, if some Green Belt land is released for other uses now, it should be compensated for by designating other areas as Green Belt?

Charles Asante Individual Is this possible? Clare Obeng Individual Yes. Green Feltham Community group As a principle, yes – but only very small areas of Greenbelt should be used. Given most areas are already designated Greenbelt, it is hard to imagine what this would look like. These should be high quality areas of land – e.g. the area of green space in the centre of the Feltham MOD base. London Diocesan Fund Business Where possible yes, but not in such a way that it reduces a more imaginative use of current GB/MOL opportunities. EG. Tying reduction in GB/MOL to unrealistic 100% replacement or even 50%. It should not be based on what one would ideally like but, upon realistic yet challenging possibilities. London Wildlife Trust NGO Green Belt by its very name should surround and protect areas from sprawl. As such it has a very important function from a biodiversity point of view. Open lands that are contiguous act as highways for wildlife and as such are vital in providing corridors for wildlife. ‘Island’ reserves are restricted by their position, often surrounded by development and as a result restrict the movement of wildlife between them. Therefore, the Green Belt should not be re-designated for other purposes. If it were to be then the concept of corridors and contiguous lands should be adopted. Euan Bull Individual Little trust in the proposal to find land to replace the green belt lost development. If there is land that can replace the green belt, why build on it in the first place? Likely to lead to “green belt” on a merry go round as the area is developed.

340

Andrew Barnes Individual Again in relation to question 6, a designation process should include potential alternative sights if green belt status is to be removed. Sonia Harmon Individual This depends on what land and where the land is, and previous history of land vs previous disruption and upset to locals. It should also involve extensive transparency and communication should be held with local residents on all medias, not just online. Councils should make provisions for local residents to be trained to present the plan positively, and be volunteered to hold consultations. Ian Stewart Individual Why look at redefining Green Belt land - if other green open spaces are available and would be easier to build on then why the rush to destroy the heritage of the Borough? June Stewart Individual What would be the point of changing the areas? Mike Foston Individual Perhaps Feltham Arenas could be re-designated green belt and have some proper resolution to the area to prevent the drug dealing and other ABS that goes on there. However it should also be considered in light of other improvements and this may well not be the most suitable green space to improve. Matthew Savage Individual Much of what is perceived to be Green Belt is actually out with the Borough. There should be consultation with neighbouring Authorities (Spelthorne, Surrey CC) to have some land re-designated if Hounslow’s own resource is released. David Traylen Individual Yes Brian Traylen Individual Yes Maggie Netto Individual Yes E.g. Feltham Arenas Leigh Hyatt Individual Yes. If land given up remaining maintained to high standard J Edwards Individual No Sharon Savill Individual Yes Linda Ott Individual Yes

341

D Rowe Individual Yes every area needs green belt land. G Hayes Individual Yes, we should always have green belt land in our area. Claudine Ott Individual I would be lost without open space. I walk in the open air most days. Thomas Smith Individual I think green belt land is good for release in certain areas. Carol Wood Individual I think green belt land is very important to the area as Feltham is quite a built up area. Chris Netto Individual Yes Alan Rise Individual Retain status quo. K Harmon Individual Should not be necessary if green belt left. Sathat Virdi Individual There is too much over building and congestion as it is now. Gurpal Virdi Individual It should not be released. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business Hounslow is a densely urbanised London borough with limited spare land capacity, therefore the ability to achieve new Green Belt designations will be restricted. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Depending on where the other areas are- simply designating land under the flight path defeats the purpose. Berkeley Strategic Business In the context of a constrained urban borough like Hounslow, the compensation for Green Belt ‘loss’ should not be a precondition, and there is no national planning policy obligation that requires this measure. The relevant tests for determining the release of Green Belt land are paragraphs 83, 84 and 85. Any new Green Belt land would have also to be justified by the tests in paragraph 82. Shetson Property Developments Business Yes Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group Ideally yes. But that would depend on the location of other potential Green Belt land and whether it could serve the same purpose. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business There is no need to designate other land as green belt simply to replace that which is taken out of the green belt to

342

accommodate current identified housing and employment needs. Such designation should only be established in exceptional circumstances and so a simply quid pro quo approach would not accord with the NPPF (paragraph 82) which sets out the considerations to be taken into account when looking at establishing new green belt. In any event, most open land in Hounslow is already green belt or metropolitan open land, as is land in adjoining shire districts.

Whilst the level of development proposed in the Heathrow New Garden City Vision document could be classified as an urban extension, whether this should lead to other land being designated as green belt must be considered in the clear context set down in national policy. PJ Harmes Individual Only by carefully choosing other areas. Sam Foston Individual Residents should be involved to bring land back into use. R Evans Individual Leave all green belt alone and focus on brown field first. Where would you find land you could now designate as Green Belt? Would this land be of equal value to the wildlife? Mark Harmon Individual It depends on local residents as a whole, and not just a case of “robbing Peter to pay Paul”. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Strategic adaptation of the Green Belt with no overall loss needs to be measured against the potential to significantly increase density within new development areas such as the GWC and by increasing density of Hounslow West to become part of Hounslow Town Centre rather than a neighbouring area. It also depends on where the other areas are and these should not be anywhere else except within the London Borough of Hounslow.

343

CPRE London NGO CPRE London does not support the release of Green Belt for other uses. The current extent of London’s Green Belt is ‘supported’ by Government; therefore, it is unclear where any significant areas of open space that meets one or more of the criterion for designation will be found to mitigate loss. CPRE London supports plans that re-designate Green Belt to Metropolitan Open Land, where it can be proven the site no longer fulfils the criteria Green Belt designation to ensure the open space remains protected. Paul Kirby Individual must be compensated George Whyatt Individual Yes if you do just that Raja Individual Yes SEGRO Business SEGRO do not consider there is a requirement to re-balance any loss of Green Belt through some offsetting mechanism. If there are development pressures to meet objectively assessed needs for employment and residential land, the NPPF confirms at Paragraph 83 that a Green Belt review can be undertaken as part of a Local Plan Review in exceptional circumstances. The national guidance does not set out any requirement to designate new Green Belt land, but rather requires local authorities to have regard to their intended permanence in the long term. Additionally, Policy GB1 of the adopted Plan makes no provisions for the compensatory designation of new Green Belt Land and this approach is not supported through any policy basis. Consequently SEGRO do not support this approach which is counterintuitive and could lead to capacity problems beyond the current plan period.

The Rutland Group Business Compensation or offsetting is not very interesting; there may however be exceptional grounds for designating new areas of Green Belt, independently of any losses.

344

Issue 4 Impact of Heathrow on the West of the Borough 4(a): Employment Related to Heathrow Airport

Name Respondent Type Q8 What sort of employment and space opportunities should be created, and for which types of jobs, building and businesses?

Sharon Savill Individual Jobs in the airport. Linda Ott Individual Jobs in the airlines. PJ Harmes Individual It has enough already. One would imagine the type of jobs sustainable would be related to the airport Mark Savage Individual Heathrow’s prominence has led inevitably to a dominance of ground support services in the west, e.g. in-flight catering, freight forwarding and logistics. However, this has been at the expense of light industries the area was once strong in. New Square at Bedfont is an example of the sort of businesses I would like to see more of, i.e. hi-tech software and telecommunications. Financial services are under- represented in this part of the borough too, with a Credit Factoring subsidiary of NatWest bank but few similar businesses that I am aware of. There are also few ‘shed’ type shopping facilities in the area, with the exception of the Apex Retail Park and Manor Park in Feltham. While I would not want these to dominate, there is room and a need for at least one ‘lifestyle’ type retailer in the area- Ikea is frequently mentioned and this could obviously bring extra trade into the area, though there may be traffic issues.

345

WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Business Higher density sustainable business park developments could be clustered in the areas accessible from the proposed new station(s) on the proposed Southern Rail Access Link to Heathrow. This would achieve better integration of land use and transport planning compared with the existing situation and would improve access to employment by sustainable transport for local communities and other commuters. Green Feltham Community group There is the need for small business space as well as creative arts spaces to promote artisanal trades to make the West of the Borough attractive places for senior Heathrow staff to live, as well as commuters into central London. The West of the Borough should seek to attract high quality head office-type accommodation – such as at Bedfont Lakes. Runnymede Borough Council Government Runnymede published its Functional Economic Market Area (FEA) assessment in 2015 and is currently preparing an Employment Land Review (ELR). The assessment sets out that Runnymede sits on the edge of two different FEA’s, with the southern portion of the Borough facing the M3/A3 corridors and the northern portion focusing on Heathrow with the strongest relationships with Spelthorne, Hillingdon and Hounslow. The Hounslow Employment Background Paper accompanying the Issues Document states that the London Plan estimates that an additional 21,000 jobs will need to be provided within the London Borough of Hounslow between 2011 and 2036. It also states that Peter Brett Associates (PBA) are undertaking an update of the Council’s 2011 ELR, which will determine demand and supply over the Local Plan period (2015-2030). Runnymede would request that it is engaged in the preparation of the Hounslow ELR given the likelihood of a shared FEA. Runnymede will also be engaging with other authorities under the Duty to Cooperate on a draft version of the Runnymede ELR once prepared, which

346

will include engaging with Hounslow. It is however acknowledged that Runnymede will need to work with Hounslow as well as a number of other authorities to understand how/where FEAs overlap as well as understand the demand/supply of employment floorspace across the wider FEA and how this should be planned whilst balanced against housing need/supply.

As with housing, Runnymede would expect the West of Borough Local Plan to develop and test options through the SA for how employment floorspace could be delivered, including whether this could include meeting some strategic need. Leigh Hyatt Individual Education, this would deal with unruly youth in Feltham. George Whyatt Individual Education also opportunities for youth Heathrow Airport Ltd Business Work is currently being undertaken by HAL in conjunction with the HSPG to inform the current and future employment space requirements generated by the airport and its potential expansion. The West of Borough Plan should take into account this emerging work. Paul Kirby Individual engineering - jobs suitable for residents and youth The Rutland Group Business The key to the types of businesses is the phrase used in the London Plan in relation to the designation of SOLDC: “a strategic economic function of greater than sub-regional importance”, otherwise known as export businesses. The firms located at Bedfont Lakes are not only international firms with major export markets, but they have located there the functions or activities of their business that make best use of the Heathrow location e.g. marketing & sales, training of European staff, development of projects for specific international clients. Part of that competitive offer is the support services that are used by the firms: hotels, conference facilities, restaurants,

347

shops, which are important for both the firm’s corporate activities and for staff. The challenge is to identify housing or other accommodation that could meet some of the needs of the firms and their staff, clearly there is also a need to provide for the many services that support the airport. London Borough of Hillingdon Government It is important that the consultation document recognises that Hillingdon and several other boroughs remain firmly opposed to the third runway proposals. The Council objects to the inclusion of the statement that 'the Airport will inevitably continue to grow and the nature of · the airport will change'. Hillingdon and other boroughs continue to challenge the conclusions of the Airports Commission and it is therefore premature and unhelpful to plan for scenarios where the third runway goes ahead. If proposed growth scenarios are to be considered, the document should also plan for circumstances where Heathrow contracts in response to runway capacity being granted at other UK airports. The consultation document should make clear that Hillingdon, as the local planning authority, is the key stakeholder for development proposals relating to operational development within the airport and any proposed expansion of the existing boundary. The Council is therefore concerned that the Heathrow New Garden City document, which has informed the consultation document, includes maps showing the proposed third runway throughout. Further justification is therefore sought on the basis of proposed growth targets. Berkeley Strategic Business The need for employment at Heathrow should respond to the economic and agglomeration advantages that attract businesses to airport-related locations. Any strategy for employment uses at Heathrow should complement the business needs and existing employment locations

348

elsewhere within the Borough, so that the Opportunity Area delivers genuine additionally. Mark Harmon Individual If Heathrow closes, this will have a major impact on the area, not just the airport job but jobs relating to it like transportation and hotels. Sonia Harmon Individual Small independent businesses should be promoted heavily, offered help with rates. Andrew Barnes Individual A commitment to provide jobs for local people and space for communities to thrive and get together Ian Stewart Individual The Council should be looking at creating employment for those who are already resident in the Borough; they should also look at better paid employment through training schemes for the apparently poorly educated. June Stewart Individual Employment opportunities should be targeted to the residents that already exist and not to encourage more people into the area as we don't have the infrastructure to support them. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Sustainable employment that local people can undertake- not specialised IT work that is fulfilled by people from outside the borough that commute in (think about Bedfont lakes- SAP/Cisco- few live in the borough). I am keen to see the apprenticeship programme is continued. I feel saddened that on occasions such as building terminal 5 the advertising of jobs did not target the local people and numerous people from out the borough were given the opportunity.  If a third runway is built I would like to see much more local advertising for these opportunities.  With the rise of uber I am keen the airport works with them to have designated waiting areas (not in residential streets near the airport).

349

 I would like more work experience for people in schools with the airport and summer internships also to help the younger generation get employment.

Cllr Tony Louki Councillor  Sustainable employment that local people can undertake – not specialised jobs that are filled by commuters.  There should be legal agreements conditioned in any new development to train for and maximise employment for residents of the west of the borough, then the rest of Hounslow borough before elsewhere.  Prioritise new enterprise and start-ups that can take advantage of short-term or flexible opportunities.  Provision of buildings and workspace that reflect these more creative types of employment. Raja Individual More jobs for people who live in Feltham Seema Malhotra MP Sufficient land for employment is crucial. The London Plan estimates that Hounslow will have an extra 21,000 jobs by 2036. Possible decisions about Heathrow Airport may increase this figure substantially. The need for an adequate need for employment land is obvious. The shortage of suitable office space is one of the issues I most often come across when I talk to local businesses, so I welcome the Council’s Article 4 direction to protect office space. It is also important that we have the various other kinds of infrastructure that are needed to help local businesses thrive. Examples of these can be found in the Feltham Masterplan, such as the proposal to improve the quality of the offer in Feltham High Street.

350

Speedbird Securities Ltd Business In my client’s experience, there is considerable pressure for additional industrial and distribution uses in the Hatton Cross area to meet the needs arising from the airport and from this strategic west London location. Along the primary road frontages – especially the A30 – there is also demand for other commercial uses (such as hotels for example) which are looking to take advantage of the greater prominence along these routes on which their businesses are more dependent. An added benefit of these uses is that they generally benefit from a higher standard of building design and so make a greater contribution to townscape quality.

Consequently it is considered that the primary focus should be for hi-tech and traditional industrial and airport related distribution type uses in the main employment areas (including Airport Business Park North and South) but with provision for more mixed range of uses along the main transport corridors and in areas of higher public transport accessibility. Windowflowers Ltd Business As detailed above, the industries which will be required to support the expansion and operation of the Airport are hotel developments and logistics/warehousing. To maximise the benefits from the growth of the airport, Hounslow Council need to look more favourably at such developments at or within close proximity of the Airport, such as the approved employment development at Staines Road, and ideally to allocate additional land for such uses,

The West of the Borough Plan and the Heathrow Opportunity Area, alongside the expansion of the operations at Heathrow Airport are huge opportunities for the London Borough of Hounslow. Additional air traffic and passengers

351

will have a knock on demand for additional services and facilities within close proximity of the Heathrow.

We are therefore of the opinion that additional sites need to be allocated within the West of the Borough for logistics and distribution centres; as per those the subject of the grants of consent included at Appendix 2. These allocations should be supported with an enabling policy framework which seeks to support future growth and promotes expansion of existing businesses. SEGRO Business [Summary of ELR initial findings] SEGRO support the view that more industrial land is required as a result of population growth and, in particular, growth in ‘urban logistics’ characterised by e-commerce and the internet market. This land is required for both airport-related businesses and to provide new ‘Grade A’ stock.

[Evidence to support need for logistics] There is a quantitative and qualitative shortage of logistics development in the Borough that needs to be addressed through the West of Borough plan. SEGRO believe more commercial development would have occurred near Heathrow if appropriate premises of the right size and quality were made available. SEGRO consider that it is important that the Council accommodate urban logistics through the identification of new sites to provide a sufficient quantity in the right locations. In summary, the WoB Plan should respond to the growth of warehousing and logistics and address the qualitative and quantitative shortfall identified in the WoB. This can be achieved through the provision of medium and some larger sized Grade A units with adequate yard space in the most appropriate and accessible locations. These are sites that

352

will benefit from existing and proposed infrastructure that are close to the customer base and labour pool. Gurpal Virdi Individual Space for mini cabs to park as presently they park in residential roads this causing a problem London Diocesan Fund Business Not qualified to give an answer Heston Residents' Association Community group Dependent on the decision to expand Heathrow. Any such opportunities would in time be commensurate with the demands emanating from Heathrow and existing and new business. The job types should ideally be semi-skilled/skilled in construction and businesses providing not only employment but also be beneficial to the overall prosperity of the economy of the Area. Maggie Netto Individual Service jobs, offices Chris Netto Individual Service jobs , offices Shetson Property Developments Business Small business space and more warehousing Ltd The SB Hotel Group Business The narrative to Issue 4(a) describes, and acknowledges, the main types of employment related jobs, buildings and businesses for which provision should be made in the Plan. Clare Obeng Individual Consider additional school near Bedfont / Ashford instead of more housing. Sam Foston Individual Training for real life skills R Evans Individual Training for real life skills Mike Foston Individual In order to encourage a diverse community, a diverse range of jobs need to be possible to travel too locally, meaning a whole range from manual through to manufacturing and high tech jobs should be available to residents. Matthew Savage Individual Warehousing, HGV Operations Centres, Import / Export, and High-Tech businesses. The west of Borough lies just outside the UK’s own “Silicon Corridor’ between the M3 and M4 motorways – areas such as Slough seem to greatly benefit from these industries.

353

Name Respondent Type Q9. Does the presence of the Airport in itself, give sufficient justification to allowing certain types of hotels to be located at or very near the Airport instead preferred town centres location?

R Evans Individual What is meant by 'a certain type'? Hotels in the town centre bring visitors to the town, but also increases traffic, so this requires forethought and planning Heathrow Airport Ltd Business The question assumes that if hotel uses were to locate at the airport, this would somehow be at the expense of town centre locations. We consider that hotels can be located at both locations serving a number of different market needs without one being at the expense of the other. Hotels that are terminal linked, or in easy walking distance to terminals, are poorly represented at Heathrow when compared with other major European airports. These predominantly cater for specific airport passenger and airport business needs. We have reviewed the current hotel supply around the airport which has shown that most of the hotels to the north of the airport along Bath Road have more than 100% occupancy rates during peak seasons (i.e. rooms being occupied more than once in a 24hr period). There may be potential opportunities to the south of the airport and in the West of Borough Plan area to tap into this demand.

Shetson Property Developments Business No, hotels should be at town centres as well as near the Ltd airport Heston Residents' Association Community group There is a necessary balance to be struck both in town centre location, bearing in mind the concept of creating residential properties in the town centre to enable a "24 hour" economy and hotels near to Heathrow. Hotel accommodation near to an airport will always be in demand,

354

they are dependent on land availability and do provide a more appropriate location for many passengers and staff. Sathat Virdi Individual There has been a rapid development of hotels in Cranford. Need to have thorough consultations. Sonia Harmon Individual Maybe – but what types of Hotel? Charles Asante Individual No Ian Stewart Individual No is my answer. June Stewart Individual No. Maggie Netto Individual No it does not. There are good hotels in local town centres J Edwards Individual No Mark Savage Individual No, it does not provide this justification. Feltham’s St Giles Hotel- which falls just within Feltham Town Centre in local designation- provides just such a town centre hotel and restaurant facility. Andrew Barnes Individual Again each proposed site should be reviewed but essentially Hotels should be located in town centres. Matthew Savage Individual I believe there are already enough hotels in the immediate vicinity of Heathrow Airport; development of hotels in town centres should be encouraged, provided they are not hostel- type accommodation that depresses the area due to the type of social demographic that has no choice in where they live. Chris Netto Individual Prefer some hotels in Feltham Clare Obeng Individual No more hotels please - there is enough Euan Bull Individual No need for hotels in the area – again their presence will lead to increase in congestion and pollution. Gurpal Virdi Individual Hotels should be encouraged to build west and south of Heathrow. There are too many hotels in Hounslow. Leigh Hyatt Individual Don’t understand certain types of hotel? PJ Harmes Individual Certain type of hotel? Explain!

355

Mike Foston Individual Can you seriously hope to coax passengers on short stays away from airport hotels? Whilst it would be nice to see more stay in Feltham, unless you make serious changes to the cost of parking and the traffic that stops you getting to the hotels we have, you are fighting a losing battle. London Diocesan Fund Business Yes, hotels at airports are needed for fleeting passenger within 36 hour periods. David Traylen Individual Yes Brian Traylen Individual Yes Sharon Savill Individual Yes Linda Ott Individual Yes K Harmon Individual Yes Bedfont Councillors Councillor The airport is a fact of life here in Bedfont- Hotels, Warehouses, Cargo are the life blood of the area. This must however be off set and mitigated by Green Belt areas that facilitate leisure and outdoor activities. I feel much of the hotels are crew hotels or people waiting connections, getting an early flight- the transportation from Feltham to the airport is not intuitive for people who don’t live here- so in this case I am supportive of hotels next to the airport- PROVIDED they are in the Borough of Hounslow so we get the taxes from them!

Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The town centre first approach currently embodied in the NPPF was developed as one limb of securing a sustainable approach to development by focussing uses which generate high levels of movements in locations which are accessible by public transport. In addition, this approach also helps underpin the future vitality and viability of town centres.

With respect to hotels, the NPPF defines main town centre uses (in the Glossary) as including “arts, culture and tourism

356

development (including theatres, museums, galleries and concert halls, hotels and conference facilities) “. This approach is understandable as a general rule but as is acknowledged in the Planning Practice Guidance, “certain main town centre uses have particular market and locational requirements which mean that they may only be accommodated in specific locations” (Ensuring the vitality of town centres; paragraph 011).

It is consequently appropriate for the local development plan to incorporate a policy approach which addresses these distinctive market and locational requirements as part of a proactive drive to support sustainable economic development, recognising the different role and character of this area, in compliance with the Core Planning Principles set down in the NPPF (paragraph 17). The proximity of our client’s land to Hatton Cross station and the airport provides a clear opportunity to reduce airport related vehicle movements. British Airways Business BA supports proposals for new or expanded hotels outside of town centres where they enhance and contribute to the economic offer of surrounding businesses through the provision of facilities such as conference / meeting space and restaurants. It is important to BA to have a wide choice of hotels in close proximity to Heathrow Airport for its customers, crew and other staff. This particular need should be addressed in the West of Borough Plan and there should be recognition that hotels that can clearly demonstrate that they are serving the needs of the Airport will be permitted. Sam Foston Individual Keep hotels at airport. Mark Harmon Individual It does. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Yes, if managed correctly and located within Hounslow borough. Such short-stay nature of use and the relatively

357

poor quality of amenity may not be much of a loss to the town centre but links to encourage access to local town centres should be made available. Paul Kirby Individual No, keep hotels by airport. George Whyatt Individual Yes airport provides well. The SB Hotel Group Business With the possible exception of Hounslow, the majority of centres in the Borough are not of a scale that is commensurate with the type of hotel that is required to service the airport. Nor do they generally, with the possible exception of Hounslow, provide a sufficient range and size of site. The majority of the town centres are located some distance from the airport and do not have direct public transport links. Accordingly, siting hotels in these locations could increase the number / length of journeys undertaken by car. The West of Borough Plan should make provision for the development of new, or the expansion of existing, hotels on sustainable sites, along major transport corridors, which have good accessibility to the airport. Global Grange Ltd Business We fully support this aspiration and look forward to working with the Council to achieve this clear aim. Development of hotels, such as that approved at Bedfont Lakes, and other associated industries including the logistics industry (and the approved warehouse at Ascot Road) which will support the expansion of the Airport, need to be encouraged and promoted within the West of the Borough, in order to ensure that benefits of the airport expansion are achieved for Hounslow. To maximise the benefits from the growth of the airport, Hounslow Council need to look more favourably at such developments at or within close proximity of the Airport, such as the approved hotel development at Bedfont Lakes, and ideally to allocate land for such uses, otherwise they risk

358

losing the economic gains to Hillingdon and other authorities who may be more supportive of such associated industries. Raja Individual Yes The Rutland Group Business A number of factors militate against locating “Airport” hotels in town centres, specifically in this case Feltham town centre: the size of the hotels, which is partly a function of the economic number of rooms and partly a function of the additional facilities, especially conference facilities. We urge that provision be made outside town centres where the market to be served is clearly Heathrow to a significant degree. Green Feltham Community group Yes, this seems sensible – as long as these are near public transport routes. Feltham has high numbers of hotel spaces, but not enough is done to make these people feel welcome in the town and spend money locally. Maps, tourist information would help. Alan Rise Individual The opening of any new hotel is dependent upon investors own money.

359

Issue 4 Impact of Heathrow on the West of the Borough

4 (b): Surface Access to the Airport and Local Movements around the Area.

Name Respondent Type Q10. Do you support the Council’s idea of the Southern Rail Access to Heathrow, with a new Station at Clockhouse roundabout? What do you think there would be the main benefits and difficulties to resolve?

Andrew McLuskey Individual I can only speak from a Stanwell perspective and can only very cautiously support the Council’s idea of the SRA to Heathrow with a station at Clockhouse roundabout. I have no desire to be a ‘NIMBY’ but it has to be said there has been a great deal of confusion for people living in my neighbourhood – confusion and concern which I share- about the whole SRA business. We had assumed, on the basis of press and other publicity, that the line under discussion was being promoted by Network Rail (i.e. NOT Hounslow) and was going directly from Heathrow to Staines. Only after your previous consultation ended (last November) did we become aware of your plans and how they might affect this neighbourhood.

While the route you indicate around here is somewhat different from the Airtrack plan of several years ago some of the objections to that could well apply to your project (e.g. questions over drainage/flooding, problems with tunnelling, visual issues with ventilation shafts and quite a bit more). The comments about a new station in Bedfont connected with Southern Rail Access are difficult to assimilate to Heathrow’s long standing

360

commitment to build a SRA line between the Airport and Staines. Surely we are not looking at two different projected SRA lines? Charles Asante Individual Yes, favourable for any enhanced links to major connections Clare Obeng Individual No - Leave Bedfont as a village. We have good links already to Heathrow. Transport for London Government TfL has already responded to Hounslow Council’s proposal for a Southern Rail Access to Heathrow (a copy of this response is attached). To summarise, TfL would in principle be supportive of improved rail access to Heathrow from the south due to the improved connectivity this could bring. However TfL is not able to support the option proposed by Hounslow in its current format.

Concerns: TfL has concerns regarding the limited spare capacity on the Windsor Line to accommodate the demand due to background growth. As detailed in the earlier response, TfL will need to be convinced that this capacity challenge can be addressed. TfL is also concerned that the inclusion of a new station at Bedfont as proposed would be sub-optimal for Heathrow passengers due to the additional journey time incurred. There only appear to be limited opportunities for housing and employment growth around the proposed station due to green belt designations and so alternative route options without a station at Bedfont should also be considered.

TfL has concerns that the issues consultation makes no connection between the delivery of the proposed new

361

homes and employment in the west of the borough and the Southern Rail Access proposal. The only reference is that people living in Feltham may be able to access jobs/opportunities in Heathrow more easily.

Recommendations: TfL would recommend that Hounslow Council consider the role that any improved rail access could play in providing improved connectivity between planned new homes and key destinations including employment sites.

TfL would also welcome further consideration of the combined impact of the proposed Southern Rail Access and potential Western Rail Access with the services and capacity provided on Crossrail 1 and 2, particularly in light of the potential Crossrail 2 station at Twickenham Green Feltham Community group I support the principle of Southern Rail access – note the idea is not the Council’s – DfT have also completed a study which for some reason has not yet been published. This alignment seems sensible – particularly the potential for housing on the Feltham Young Offenders site. The clear issue is for residents whose houses are on the Council’s current preferred route. The Council must take steps (whether the option of selling at market rates to Hounslow Homes) to remove the uncertainty facing these residents – this is a moral imperative, and needs to be considered. London Diocesan Fund Business Yes, speed of access reduces congestion. There is a need to guillotine the planning timetable. London Wildlife Trust NGO I do not support the idea of the Southern Rail Access to Heathrow Airport as outlined in the document for the following reasons:

362

1. The route that the line would follow is Green Belt and the open nature of the area would be destroyed. 2. The route includes not only a relatively new housing development and a site under construction (see response to Q5. 3. The damage to the environs during construction, supposing that a strip at least 100m either side of the viaduct would be needed for access during construction would have a disastrous effect on the ecosystems of the area, both in the Bedfont Lakes Country Park and the land on the other side.

4. During construction of such a link the Bedfont Road would need to be closed. The ensuing traffic chaos would be untenable. 5. It would be much more preferable for an alternative system of transport from the South to the airport and perhaps a tram system could be considered? Failing that, tunnelling (not cut and cover) would appear to be the only alternative to destroying the unique nature of Bedfont and its environs. Euan Bull Individual The railway station could cause problems if people park in the surrounding streets when using the station, already some streets have become single lanes due to cars parked both sides of the road. Andrew Barnes Individual I do support the present proposal. Only because it is the 1st viable option with little destruction I have seen. The main issue is the loss of homes to Wooldridge. Congestion of the area whilst works are carried out. Sonia Harmon Individual NO. The issue is traffic flow, in around other areas, parking, and displaced parking and the destruction of some fairly new builds and homes.

363

Ian Stewart Individual No; this is a ludicrous idea that will destroy housing stock whilst you are planning to build more. Where is the sense in this proposal? June Stewart Individual No. I don't support this idea, this would destroy current residential properties for no gain. Mike Foston Individual Whilst I can see the potential for a rail route into T5 being a benefit, does it really benefit this area? It might, if there was an interchange perhaps at Feltham, where passengers alight to get into a shuttle service, they might be tempted to wander. Otherwise the train services, especially in rush hour are massively oversubscribed now. Matthew Savage Individual I do not support the Southern Rail Access to Heathrow. There are already sufficient transport links by public transport (London Underground, 24-hour bus, Heathrow Express) that can already be accessed from the WoB area. A wider ‘ Southern Rail Access’ is already provided by Rail-Air Coach Links from Reading and Woking, and the extensive National Express Coach Network is very convenient for areas further afield such as North Devon. David Traylen Individual No Brian Traylen Individual Don’t know Maggie Netto Individual In principle, yes. It would provide better access to T5 but I am not sure that Clockhouse Lane roundabout is the right location J Edwards Individual No. Sharon Savill Individual Rehousing and traffic. Linda Ott Individual Rehousing and traffic. Alan Rise Individual No benefits - difficulties road system K Harmon Individual No, traffic problems. Gurpal Virdi Individual Residents would benefit if the station was in Bedfont.

364

Surrey County Council Government We support improved southern access to Heathrow but we are not persuaded that the solution presented in the Plan is the optimal scheme in terms of the benefits for either Surrey’s residents or for the residents of South East England as a whole. Our view is reinforced by the findings of Network Rail's recent study of southern access options (Southern Rail Access to Heathrow Feasibility Study, December 2015) which suggests that an alternative alignment would be more beneficial to the wider south east region.

In summary enhancement of public transport access to the airport from the south is therefore vital to improve Surrey’s connectivity to Heathrow for airport users and staff and to help mitigate congestion, achieve modal shift and to minimise detrimental local economic impacts. Seema Malhotra MP All three rail schemes mentioned in the Issues paper, Southern Rail Access, Hounslow/Old Oak Common link & Brentford/Southall link, have their merits. The southern rail access in particular has the potential not just to help the airport, but also to improve access to the Bedfont Industrial Park and create more employment opportunities for local residents either in the immediate area or through better access to London. It is also likely that smaller road schemes will have to be pushed forward.

Spelthorne Borough Council Government On the specific matter of the proposed Southern Rail Access which is being promoted by Hounslow I confirm that Spelthorne supports the principle of a southern rail access into Heathrow but has reservations as set out in our previous consultation response sent by email dated

365

6 November 2015. At that time the feasibility study was still subject to the views of the Dept. of Transport and, until their report is published, Spelthorne will be unable to determine whether the route proposed is the most appropriate or sustainable. There are a number of issues and potentially significant impacts on Spelthorne arising from the consideration of a southern rail access and this Council would therefore expect to be fully consulted and involved in any discussions on taking forward this proposal. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business We welcome Hounslow’s continued support for Southern Rail Access to Heathrow and consider that a solution needs to be developed by the rail industry in collaboration with key stakeholders. This should be initiated as a project through the Network Rail GRIP process. For Heathrow, the benefits of Southern Rail Access would be to improve public transport access to the airport from key catchment areas to the south of the airport. This would represent an opportunity to further improve Heathrow’s public transport mode share for both passengers and airport workers. London Borough of Hillingdon Government The impact of such substantial growth close to the boundary with Hillingdon needs to be carefully assessed. The Airports Commission's final report made it clear that key road and rail schemes in the region would be close to capacity by 2030, even without expansion of the airport. A comprehensive assessment, which includes a strategy to address the transport impacts of the proposed growth on surrounding boroughs, will need to be an integral part of the WoB Plan. The reference to a new Southern Rail Access (SRA) has

366

featured in the Airports Commission work. Hillingdon, as part of a wider group of authorities, has responded to various airport related consultations, noting that such a link would be desirable even without expansion. It is unclear if the proposal for the SRA, as put forward by Hounslow with a station at Bedfont, is the most appropriate route to ensure the best and quickest connections to Heathrow. References to the SRA should be caveated with the need to wait for further consultation to ensure that, should the SRA be taken forward, the final selected route is the most appropriate means of achieving modal shift increases for airport commuters. WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Business Yes, we support the idea. The challenges will lie in determining the best station location and tunnel alignment, and harmonising the road and public transport strategies, in order to enable the best pedestrian accessibility and integration with future communities and employment areas. We believe that the station offers an opportunity to catalyse regeneration of the entire area and to build a new community in the WoB. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Fully supportive to the Rail access- only if there is a station at Bedfont. We expect the people of Woodbridge estate to make the loudest objections. Berkeley Strategic Business Berkeley supports the idea of the Southern Rail Access; improving access by sustainable modes to Heathrow - as a major transport and employment location - from the Borough is a major benefit. The key challenges will be on delivering a technically feasible alignment that is consistent with a quality urban development, securing the necessary land, and a business case that secures the necessary finance for the infrastructure investment.

367

It will also be necessary for the infrastructure to not prejudice or stymie delivery of wider development during the period in which it is being assembled. Shetson Property Developments Business Traffic would be an issue Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group In principle the Southern Rail Access is supported and long overdue. However the selected site should complement the existing environment and the existing infrastructure. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business In principle this proposal seems sensible and should be supported but not at the expense of a significant delay to bring other elements of The Vision forward. The biggest issues will relate to whether there is line capacity to accommodate the additional services; the costs of the new infrastructure and who should pay for it and the length of time it will take to acquire the route, secure the necessary approvals and secure funding. British Airways Business One of the key challenges faced by BA is the provision of good surface access to Heathrow Airport and surrounding facilities both in terms of road and public transport. It is important for BA that journeys to Heathrow Airport are made as efficiently as possible and the Airport is readily accessible to users and employees. On-going investment in the strategic transport network is required to ensure that this accessibility is maintained and improved, and to deliver economic benefits to surrounding areas. BA is aware of several schemes to provide rail access to the airport from the south, of which the Hounslow proposal is one, but must reserve judgement until feasibility and sources of funding are identified. Windowflowers Ltd Business We support the provision of the new southern rail access link given the wider improvements in sustainable

368

access that it will create for this part of the borough. Furthermore, it will improve the attractiveness of this part of Hounslow to outside investors and businesses to assist in job creation and economic growth.

1. The improvement of accessibility from the south will not only benefit the Borough commercially, but will also assist in opening the area up for new employment opportunities for residents and allowing improved commuting and access to the south, 2. The site at Staines Road would now appear to be more justified than ever for allocation given the Councils suggestion of a new railway station at Clockhouse Roundabout to better provide access to the Airport from the south. PJ Harmes Individual No - would mean destruction of homes, land, roads. Mark Savage Individual I support a link, which might enhance the area, but with reservations. I do not see the need or usefulness of a new station at Clockhouse Roundabout at present, and instead would favour better guided bus routes to and from Heathrow. This location is of limited value to existing residents and an enhanced bus service could provide much the same service. The necessary railway flyover would complicate an already busy junction subject to frequent flooding. Sam Foston Individual Good idea. R Evans Individual No, another station in the area is not required we have enough buses and tubes servicing Heathrow currently. This would lead to lower air quality and yet more traffic, more people.

369

Mark Harmon Individual No I don’t, as it would mean destroying lots of housing, including new builds and re-routing roads. This would mean over a decade of disruptions. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor  Yes with as many stops within Hounslow borough, not least Bedfont and full connections to elsewhere via existing tracks and as part of a publicly managed network.  Employment areas access by car should be addressed to encourage viability and maximise service frequency. Runnymede Borough Council Government Runnymede Borough Council made representations to Hounslow on 9 November 2015 on the feasibility study undertaken by Parsons Brinkerhoff for a Southern Rail Access into Heathrow. Runnymede’s representations set out general support for the principle of a southern rail link into Heathrow, but set out that any options would need to be considered against the Department for Transport’s report into options and markets for a southern rail access. At the time of Runnymede commenting on the Parsons Brinkerhoff feasibility study in November 2015 the DoT had not published its report and as such it was not possible to determine that the route proposed was the most appropriate. Concerns were also raised about possible barrier downtime at level crossings and the implications of this on congestion on the surrounding road network. As at February 2016, the DoT report remains unpublished and Runnymede’s comments are therefore remain as submitted in November 2015. Paul Kirby Individual No rail, use bus hub DIO Government DIO supports the idea of the Southern Rail access to Heathrow The SB Hotel Group Business SB Hotel Group would support this proposal.

370

Global Grange Ltd Business We support the provision of the new southern rail access link given the wider improvements in sustainable access that it will create for this part of the borough. Furthermore, it will improve the attractiveness of this part of Hounslow to outside investors and businesses to assist in job creation and economic growth.

1. The improvement of accessibility from the south will not only benefit the Borough commercially, but will also assist in opening the area up for new employment opportunities for residents and allowing improved commuting and access to the south. 2. The site at Staines Road would now appear to be more justified than ever for allocation given the Councils suggestion of a new railway station at Clockhouse Roundabout to better provide access to the Airport from the south. Raja Individual More traffic SEGRO Business It is recognised that the Council are promoting a new Southern Rail Access from the Waterloo-Surrey Line and this is supported by SEGRO. Local Plan Policy EC1 (Strategic Transport Connections) identifies that enhancements to transport connections will maximise the Borough’s regeneration potential and support growth. Similarly, Policy EC3 (e) and (f) support increased surface access and sustainable multi-modal travel choices, respectively.

This is aligned with Paragraph 31 of the NPPF states that Local Authorities should work with neighbouring authorities and transport providers to develop strategies

371

for the provision of viable infrastructure necessary to support sustainable development. The Rutland Group Business Yes, the idea is good. By providing for trains to the Airport direct from Waterloo and Clapham Junction, it will reduce travelling time to the Airport for much of SW London (and from areas SW of London); Paddington and the Piccadilly Line are not convenient from SW London.

The main difficulties relate to implementation: agreement on the line; environmental impact assessment; funding and statutory approval. Whilst the link will make a useful difference to accessibility in the area, for the reasons set out above it must be expected that many journeys will still be undertaken by car. We therefore advocate that other measures be taken through the plan review to reduce the need to travel, e.g. by relating housing and services to the needs of the workforce in the area. The Rutland Group Business The story of the WoB is one of fragmentation and unintended outcomes. It points to a need for a plan that offers cohesion, the creation of communities, residential and business, of which it may be appropriate to consider a number for different parts of the West. The proposed Southern Rail Access (SRA) to Heathrow from the Waterloo-Windsor line is a good proposal; however it is not yet a commitment and funding may be difficult in the current state of public finances. It is suggested that a reduction in the need to travel should not be solely dependent on SRA which carries a significant degree of risk and which will, in any event, only deal with a limited number of local journeys.

372

Name Respondent Type Q11. Do you think there would be benefits for a major new access to the Airport from the south? If so what would they be?

Andrew McLuskey Individual Again in theory yes but as John Major would say: ‘The devil is in the detail’. Given that the Airport is surrounded on all sides by close packed, densely populated communities any attempt to expand the airport itself or transport links to it is beset with problems. Charles Asante Individual congestion reduction, job oops, etc. Clare Obeng Individual No. There are enough good links. Transport for London Government Same as response given for question 10 above. Green Feltham Community group There would be significant benefits by removing road trips. The risk would be that non-residents would seek to park in the roads around Feltham station. Affordable residents parking options to compensate this would be needed. Currently these are too expensive and there are fears that the Council would use this as a cash cow in future. London Diocesan Fund Business Only if such access reduces M25 congestion; both directions into the airport terminals. Andrew Barnes Individual Yes I believe it will bring benefits in that it will reduce road traffic and provide transport links to local people. Sonia Harmon Individual A possible re-zoning of Feltham. Ian Stewart Individual No; Improved links to central London would be much more beneficial; the Piccadilly Line needs upgrading to better trains before we add more routes. A faster link to the south would only cause major disruption and noise pollution for the residents. June Stewart Individual No

373

Mike Foston Individual Possible new pedestrian traffic, but there would need to be a reason for them to stop on our area. Matthew Savage Individual No David Traylen Individual Yes J Edwards Individual No Sharon Savill Individual No Linda Ott Individual No Chris Netto Individual Yes, ease of travel for other parts of country. Alan Rise Individual To drive a new road from A312 skirting northern end and Faggs Rd (Green Man) - this would link the A30 and Hatton Cross. K Harmon Individual No Gurpal Virdi Individual Direct tram link to Gatwick from Heathrow. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business As part our long term airport master-plan, both the airport and the surrounding area could benefit from a new southern road tunnel into the airport’s Central Terminal Area. This would require changes to the existing road infrastructure in the Borough, the details of which would need to be considered as part of any third runway planning process. WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Business The new rail access would have a key role in improving surface access to Heathrow Airport by sustainable transport. It would also help with the sustainable delivery of residential and business development of the entire Bedfont / Lower Feltham / Heathrow Business Park area, and further renewal across the West of the Borough in the mid- to long-term. Environment Agency Government The proposed new Southern Rail Access that follows the route of the Duke of Northumberland River (main river) and the Longford River (ordinary watercourse) appear to fall outside of the London Borough of Hounslow’s

374

boundary into the London Borough of Hillingdon. The proposal at this early stage, with the limited drawings and details looks as though the proposed railway line will be in a tunnel. Having reviewed the consents section of the Southern Rail Access Report there is no reference to the requirement of Flood Defence Consent. Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991 and the Land Drainage Byelaws 1981, the prior written consent of the Environment Agency is required for any proposed works or structures in, under, over or within 8 metres of the brink of any main river. Our records show that we have not been consulted regarding the proposed Southern Rail Access. Given that the proposed scope of works involved and proximity to the Duke of Northumberland River we would like to be consulted on this proposal separately and be given the opportunity to provide comments as the proposals are developed. Bedfont Councillors Councillor  Anything that reduces traffic movements daily would benefit the environment and living experience of those in the immediate area is welcome.  Transportation is not great from Bedfont, have to get to Feltham first, to improve transportation would enable more people to live in Bedfont to commute into London.  The buses from Bedfont are not as frequent as we would like, hence improving the transport would improve employment prospects. Berkeley Strategic Business The benefits arise from improving accessibility to Heathrow and its employment opportunities, as well as delivering a new station halt that improves the PTAL rating of the wider area.

375

Shetson Property Developments Business Yes, efficiency and hopefully reducing traffic. Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group Yes, to provide an improved travel service for those travelling from the Southern Counties, possibly avoiding Central London and to relieve the pressure on the roads and the Underground. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The existing road network needs investment and upgrading and the provision of a new access would help relieve traffic levels at the existing access point and help remove vehicles from the public network at the earliest opportunity. PJ Harmes Individual Overhead rail e.g. New York - Chicago Mark Savage Individual I think the harm of such as (demolition of existing housing and increased pollution and traffic) would outweigh the benefits, unless there is major investment and improvement in Feltham’s road infrastructure at the same time. Sam Foston Individual Major redevelopment would improve traffic flow. R Evans Individual Why not invest in a rail shuttle type service from Feltham in and out of Heathrow rather than a full train line, along the lines of the car parking shuttle trains. Mark Harmon Individual No due to existing infrastructure. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor  Yes, if connected to other routes.  Yes, in order to reduce the environmental impact of other surface modes. Paul Kirby Individual What constitutes major new access? George Whyatt Individual Not sure. The SB Hotel Group Business SB Hotel Group would support this proposal.

Raja Individual Accessibility

376

Name Respondent Type Q12 How could local transport services best be designed so that local residents and businesses could benefit for their own local journeys from these improvements too?

Chris Hern Individual The other community vision, sponsored by FORCE but not mentioned in the Garden city proposals and not featured in the W of B background and issue papers is the need for a sustainable cycle and pedestrian routes along the Crane Valley linking the various component land uses. The completed route from Twickenham to Feltham and Hanworth demonstrates its benefits and utility; routes can link into Hounslow West and Heston, and Bedfont via the Duke's river. A grid of sustainable route ways should be built into the planning on any new neighbourhoods. It would also be a disaster for the proper planning of the west of borough if the key site of the Golf Course was developed as currently proposed. Andrew McLuskey Individual Cheaper and more frequent bus service must be a priority along with encouragement for people to use these. Park and ride to the airport should also be developed. These would assist air passenger and people following local journeys. Charles Asante Individual Better planning of roads for such journeys. Clare Obeng Individual Put them under ground and carbon free. Green Feltham Community group The possibility of direct rail journeys to Kingston would improve mobility for local residents to the South and remove the need for road journeys. Currently bus journeys between Feltham and Kingston take too long to be attractive. Although Feltham is zoned as zone 6, on the oyster card the fares are above the standard zone 6 rate. The

377

Council should work to ensure that Feltham is zone 5/6 and the new stations are zones 6. London Diocesan Fund Business Evidence suggests that combining quality of rolling stock with increased frequency of peak service journey time reduces the use of private cars and therefore congestion. Euan Bull Individual Improvements to the Clockhouse roundabout for cyclists/pedestrians is essential but also for some of the roads off the roundabout. Clockhouse Lane is already dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians and would be more so with the proposals. The railway bridge on the road needs a safe crossing for pedestrians and cyclists to improve access to Bedfont and also the country park, Bedfont Lakes. This has been done on the Bedfont Road and needs to be done on Clockhouse Lane. Andrew Barnes Individual Reduced cost or free limited travel Sonia Harmon Individual Look at bus infrastructure. Ian Stewart Individual I don't see any benefit to these proposals so cannot answer this question politely. June Stewart Individual The roads are too small to cope with any more expansion of traffic. Mike Foston Individual Resolving the traffic situation would have to happen before any additional services would have a chance of working and providing any benefits at all. If a shuttle service was provided instead of the rail line, there would be far more local benefits, but shuttle service I mean like the self-driving pods that are increasingly being used, which could have multiple destinations. David Traylen Individual Plenty of transport at the present time Brian Traylen Individual plenty of transport at the moment

378

Chris Netto Individual Put new infrastructure underground include in zone 5. Sathat Virdi Individual More direct routes, more buses. Cranford suffers with having to make many short journeys - mostly costly. Gurpal Virdi Individual Transport within the A312 should be free for residents this will reduce use of employee vehicles. Surrey County Council Government On a separate transport related issue, I would refer you to the Expression of Interest, soon to be jointly submitted by our authorities to the Enterprise M3 LEP, for the funding of pedestrian and cyclist facilities over Clockhouse bridge. In this context we would suggest that some additional wording along the following lines should be added to page 16 – under Issue 4 'Surface access to the airport and local movements around the area': “Providing a facility to enable pedestrians and cyclists to cross Clockhouse Lane bridge safely and extending an off-road facility along Clockhouse Lane to the bridge would complete a crucial missing link in the sustainable transport network. This link would unlock a sustainable transport route enabling people to commute between Spelthorne, Hounslow and Heathrow via bicycle which would help to reduce traffic congestion along this route. Seema Malhotra MP Adequate transport connections are essential. If a decision to expand the airport goes ahead, greatly improved transport links will be needed not just to get people to and from the airport, but also to ensure that local people can go about their normal lives without unacceptable traffic congestion. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business At this stage we are not seeking to comment on specific transport services, however we would support appropriate public transport links between the airport and the Plan Area.

379

WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Business The proposed new station(s) on the proposed Southern Rail Access Link to Heathrow could become the focal points for a new high-quality emission-free bus network (or light rail) serving existing and new communities, and providing a great impetus for lasting modal shift to sustainable transport and active communities. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Synchronised transport around the hub areas (getting off trains to board buses seamlessly). Happy with the hub idea regarding the buses at the train station. Berkeley Strategic Business A comprehensive transport strategy will be needed that responds to the new infrastructure provision but also looks at how this relates to the wider development opportunities in the surrounding area, so that transport services are effectively integrated. Substantive new residential development can play an important role in kick starting the provision of new and enhanced public transport services. Shetson Property Developments Business Not sure Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group By providing more inter-change points. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business Any improvements in public transport should be available to the local community as the ability to travel by means other than the private motor car is a key consideration in promoting a sustainable pattern of development. PJ Harmes Individual Dedicated coach service. Mark Savage Individual There is scope for a major re-routing and enhancement of local bus services, several of which have been in place on the same route since the 1960s. The 285 bus, for instance, might better serve Bedfont Lakes and Lower Feltham before continuing on its present route through

380

Central Feltham and Hanworth. The 90 and 490 services between them provide an adequate service from the south of the airport and Hatton Cross, together with the H25 and H26. The 116 bus service should be enhanced to serve Staines again. Green Line coach services could also make a return to the area, and there is urgent need for the X26 express bus service to serve the west of the borough- at present it does not stop in Hounslow borough at all, but runs non-stop from Teddington to Hatton Cross! Sam Foston Individual A shuttle service serving more than just Feltham, Bedfont and T5 would broaden the appeal. R Evans Individual Synchronised transport around the hub areas (getting off trains to board buses seamlessly). Why not extend the district line from Richmond instead of rail. Better connecting bus services would be essential Mark Harmon Individual More traffic sensitive traffic lights like the ones near Tesco Dukes Green that during off peak hours. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Pricing would key as would full integration with other modes. Community fares and other compatibility with Oyster cards that encourage local and short stop journeys would be a relatively simple means of engaging new users. George Whyatt Individual Not sure as improvements have made it worst Raja Individual Cheaper travel The Rutland Group Business A station at Bedfont will be a significant contribution by linking two important nodes: Feltham and Bedfont. This was an important connection that the Heathrow South Business Partnership tried to address: facilitating many more residents of Feltham to access the jobs at Bedfont Lakes and in other large employers in the area; working

381

with the Jobcentre in Feltham, the Partnership had some success. The Rutland Group Business In this context it is suggested that a second line of attack be the planning of development which complements the land uses already established, such that the potential for a range of trips to be contained locally is maximised (in a metropolitan context, which offers a massive range of destinations for work, leisure, shopping and other services, local self-containment will always be limited, but the contribution to trip reduction may nevertheless be valuable). A further benefit of complementary development is the opportunity to engage more local people in the jobs offered in the major businesses – the Heathrow South Business Partnership had some success in this regard in relation to jobs at BA, BAA (as Heathrow Ltd was), IBM, SAP and BP.

382

Issue 4 Impact of Heathrow on the West of the Borough

4(c): Noise and Pollution

Name Respondent Type Q13. What planning controls and measures would you like to see put in place to address and resolve the impacts of noise from aircraft and Airport related development in the future?

Charles Asante Individual Reduced or no flights at night. Clare Obeng Individual Reduced flights, maintain Cranford agreement, do not build third runway. Green Feltham Community group Firstly there needs to be a real recognition that Feltham is badly affected by aircraft noise, particularly from Easterly departures. The current noise contours do not reflect the noise experienced – as a map of departure routes would show. These also seriously impact local areas of green space. It is vital to monitor this accurately and incentivise noise reductions (e.g. fining the Virgin 747s that fly directly over Feltham and sound like missiles).

Secondly, there is almost no noise insulation/ barriers to the South of the airport. On a Sunday evening, despite being over a mile away, windows shake because of the A380s taking off. There needs to be serious amounts of investment in noise mitigation for affected areas. The building of ‘Adobe’ type shelters in schools is a sign that aircraft noise is too great. This is not the answer to noise issues. Moving flights to alternative airports would be a better solution.

383

Currently air pollution is too high. It is literally killing people. I have friends with children who had to move away from the A312 because their children had asthma. It is not acceptable, and the Council cannot allow any further development without significant action to reduce air pollution. London Diocesan Fund Business Evidence suggests that combining quality of rolling stock with increased frequency of peak service journey time reduces the use of private cars and therefore congestion. Andrew Barnes Individual An annual review on noise and its affects to local communities/buildings and measures put in place to resolve. Sonia Harmon Individual Green spaces and Green Belt, should be protected, and locals encourage to nurture them, as they are the lungs of any town, and do provide sound protection in some instances. Ian Stewart Individual With regards to Airport related developments - simple - prevent any further unnecessary expansion. June Stewart Individual No further expansion of Heathrow Airport. Mike Foston Individual Assuming manufacturers will develop quieter and more pollution sensitive planes then the priority should be to remove the major impact of the traffic, which is mainly the noise of overnight flights. Matthew Savage Individual Community Infrastructure Levy payments should be designated to provide zero-cost noise insulation schemes for affected residential, business, and educational premises David Traylen Individual No problem at the moment. Brian Traylen Individual Don’t know. Maggie Netto Individual No night flights. J Edwards Individual I feel that all measures are in place. Sharon Savill Individual Same as before when the airport opened. Linda Ott Individual Same as previous.

384

Chris Netto Individual Adhere to pollution level rules. K Harmon Individual House sound proofing grants for older houses currently without sound proofing Sathat Virdi Individual Windows and roofs to be replaced for all Cranford residents. More trees and greenery. Gurpal Virdi Individual No development for Heathrow until the pollution levels are in line with EU limits. Seema Malhotra MP An issue that gets scant attention in this report, but which is of great and growing interest to residents is air quality. Heathrow Airport is important in this regard, both in terms of possible aircraft emissions and in terms of surface transport. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business The Plan should be consistent with Hounslow’s Local Plan policy EQ5 where it acknowledges the air noise contours that overlay this part of the Borough. Land-use planning can play an important role in reducing the impact of aircraft noise by controlling certain types of developments near airports like houses and schools.

The West of Borough Plan might usefully reiterate or cross- refer to the Council’s policy on aircraft noise to highlight the following criteria:

69dBA Leq 16hr contour  Planning permission will be refused for all noise sensitive development.

69dB to 63dBA Leq 16hr contours  Avoid family accommodation, while other accommodation should only be accepted with high levels of sound insulation and ventilation. - Presumption against non-residential noise sensitive development.

385

63dB to 57dB LAeq 16hr contours  All new build development, including residential extensions, should have high levels of sound attenuation and ventilation. London Borough of Hillingdon Government Much of Hillingdon is affected by poor air quality and noise issues associated with the airport. The Council's policy with regard to air quality is to sustain compliance with and contribute towards meeting EU limit values. However, it is important to recognise that planning conditions are unlikely to be sufficient in mitigating the air quality and noise impacts of the proposed third runway. In this sense, the expansion of the airport beyond its current boundaries is entirely unsustainable. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Sound proofing e.g. triple/quadruple glazing on buildings closest to airport etc. slots awarded to planes based on noise, so as new technology is introduced this must be included in the planes in order to be able to land. Shetson Property Developments Business Not sure Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group Improved and more extensive insulation opportunities for home owners, businesses and public buildings including schools. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business With respect to land falling within the area shown as Airport Business Park, the proposed land use would not generally be noise sensitive although appropriate measures would include sound proofing of the buildings. This approach could also be applied to more sensitive uses. British Airways Business The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) explains that the planning system should “prevent both new and existing development from being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of noise pollution” (para. 109). The NPPF goes on to explain that planning decisions should aim to “avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and

386

quality of life as a result of new development” (para. 123). In line with national planning policy, all future development in close proximity to the Airport should fully consider airport operations. Specific attention should be given to the height of buildings in close proximity to the Airport and restricting any development within the Public Safety Zones and airport noise contours. Windowflowers Ltd Business In terms of other noise streams, other than the airport, it noted that traffic noise is also a contributing factor. Should the proposed new railway line be implemented from the south, this could assist in reducing traffic demands on the local highway network and thus reducing some of the noise issues associated with the wider operations of the airport. In addition, environmental improvements such as landscaping and planting can also assist in reducing background noise levels, whilst enhancing the visual appearance of an area and improving ecology and biodiversity. PJ Harmes Individual Quieter aircraft engines, heavy lorry movement restricted. Plant move trees. Mark Savage Individual Retention of runway alternation. Noise limitation measures on local roads (e.g. quieter surfaces or rumble strips, as used on the A316. Natural ‘Green’ devices such as increased tree planting. Encouragement of green roofs and similar innovative schemes which would also provide visual enhancement of the area. Sam Foston Individual Sound proofing , houses closest to airport R Evans Individual Sound proofing e.g. triple/quadruple glazing on buildings closest to airport etc. Slots awarded to planes based on noise- so as new technology is introduced this must be included in the planes in order to be able to land. No night flights between 11pm and 7am.No night flights between 11pm and 7am

387

Cllr Tony Louki Councillor The only realistic improvement would be reduction in the flying hours to which residents are subjected. In turn could only be implemented by a national policy to deflect increased aircraft activity to other London or regional airports. Sound proofing including triple/quadruple glazing and other noise proof construction on buildings closest to airport. Slots awarded to planes based on noise so that when new technology is introduced this must be included in the planes in order to be able to land. Paul Kirby Individual Plant trees as noise barrier and help diminish pollution Global Grange Ltd Business Should the proposed new railway line be implemented from the south, this could assist in reducing traffic demands on the local highway network and thus reducing some of the noise issues associated with the wider operations of the airport. In addition, environmental improvements such as landscaping and planting can also assist in reducing background noise levels, whilst enhancing the visual appearance of an area and improving ecology and biodiversity. Raja Individual More noise reduction.

The Rutland Group Business We are aware of the measures that the Airport and airlines are promoting and implementing for the next round of life at the Airport and we support them. They are capable of making a significant difference.

388

Name Respondent Type Q14. What environmental benefits could the Airport help create for the area? Do you have any ideas or proposals?

Andrew McLuskey Individual Mention of industrial buildings inevitably raises the question of whether these will emit pollutants to add to the already overwhelming amount we have already. Charles Asante Individual There is none. Clare Obeng Individual By not building a third runway. Increasing tax, so people fly less. Green Feltham Community group All buses to the airport should be zero tailpipe emissions by 2030. Heathrow could ban all non-electric cars from parking or dropping off passengers to ensure low emissions. Heathrow could support a bid for the Feltham eco-town to become a EU ‘green capital’ – it could link up with Bristol, which currently has this honour for 2016, and aim to get this award by 2020. Heathrow could help fund the Greenways network – currently this is inaccessible past the A30 and fund patrols of the green spaces such Donkey Wood and Hounslow Heath which unfortunately attract antisocial behaviour because of their remoteness. London Diocesan Fund Business Not qualified to answer. Andrew Barnes Individual A commitment and investment in keeping our waterways clean and tidy. Sonia Harmon Individual The airport should be contributing to Green Space funds, and should be helping to protect Green Spaces. They should have a funding pot that would be accessible to locals via the Council, to spend on Community activities, in little local parks.

389

Ian Stewart Individual Stronger and harsher penalties for Airlines that constantly land flights outside the allowed operational hours. Some flights constantly land before 05:00 and the fine is not a deterrent as it is less than the cost of the fuel to not land. June Stewart Individual Apart from closing, no. Mike Foston Individual Part of the windfall of getting another runway should be money spent to offset any noise/pollution additions, or to at least maintain the present bad levels, whilst research should show what else can be done. David Traylen Individual No Brian Traylen Individual None. Maggie Netto Individual Subsidised triple / quadruple glazing for local residences / schools. Leigh Hyatt Individual A levy on airport and related income to generate funds to improve Feltham i.e. security more police, generate safe community. J Edwards Individual No Sharon Savill Individual Jobs. K Harmon Individual Don’t know. Sathat Virdi Individual You need to seriously think of how to counteract the extra levels of pollution that a bigger airport will bring. Gurpal Virdi Individual Double glazing for all in Cranford. Insulated roofs for all in Cranford. Seema Malhotra MP Many of my constituents suffer from extreme noise pollution as a result of the proximity of Heathrow Airport. Current levels of noise pollution are unacceptable and future planning policy should to mitigate and reduce unreasonable noise pollution wherever possible.

I would like to finish with a plea for the Council’s consultation on these issues to be as widespread as possible. I realise that planning documents do not always quicken the

390

blood, but the consequences of them can be important. Ensuring that as many local people as possible have their say not only respects peoples’ rights, it also leads to better quality policy.

Heathrow Airport Ltd Business An expanded Heathrow will deliver a world-class noise insulation offer, new and enhanced green spaces, and solutions to longstanding traffic issues around the airport and provide cutting edge, sustainable growth.

We have already announced that we will be investing £700m into our noise insulation scheme, which goes beyond the UK Government policy requirements. This investment, combined with quieter aircraft, steeper approach paths and runway alternation will reduce the number of people affected by aircraft noise even with an expanded airport. Public transport links around Heathrow are only going to improve with expansion. By 2030, an average of two trains per minute will go through Heathrow connecting North, South, East and West with Crossrail, Western Rail Access, Southern Rail Access and an HS2 link at nearby Old Oak Common.

Heathrow has a surface access strategy that is focussed on getting passengers and our airport colleagues onto sustainable transport modes such as rail, bus, coach and cycles. This will ensure the airport does not increase the number of airport related cars on the road does not increase, which will help to reduce emission from traffic.

Mayor of London Government The Mayor also supports Hounslow’s ambition to address the environmental harm that Heathrow Airport causes to Hounslow in particular and London in general, but would ask

391

that the Plan makes clear that this harm should be actively reduced irrespective of any future Government ambition to expand capacity or to build a third runway at the airport Bedfont Councillors Councillor Like electric vehicle idea. Like more sustainability, e.g. solar panels on the airport roof, more recycling. Noted this is in the immediate airport- would like this encouraged further afield/ subsidies for the people closest to the airport to encourage behaviours. Shetson Property Developments Business more parks and open spaces Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group By continuing to force airlines to use quieter, cleaner and more efficient aircraft. By adopting improving aircraft approach to Heathrow, improved and varying flight paths. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business Part of our client’s land has previously been approved for use as a Country Park (LB Hounslow reference 00576/K/P29). This use could be brought forward on land within the public safety zone. PJ Harmes Individual Plant trees barriers - cut noise, help air pollution.

Mark Savage Individual Wildlife havens along the rivers serving Heathrow- Duke of Northumberland, Crane and Longford. Encouragement for species such as water voles, or even otters. More planted bedding and flowering shrubs at the entry to Heathrow to offset the “concrete jungle” effect an airport inevitably brings. Sam Foston Individual Like electric vehicle idea R Evans Individual Like electric vehicle idea. Like more sustainability, e.g. solar panels on the airport roof, more recycling. Section 106 money should be used for Green Belt improvements not building on it. Some of the Airports environmental initiatives should be adopted by Hounslow to improve the situation in

392

Feltham. Runway alternation must continue to give some respite from noise Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Significantly increase tree planting to absorb noise and pollution. Environmental benefits employed at the airport should be encouraged via subsidies for the people closest to the airport to encourage similar in neighbourhoods and not just in the WoB area. Paul Kirby Individual None. George Whyatt Individual Not any. Raja Individual More trees. The Rutland Group Business The menu of ideas and proposals needs to emerge from a coherent plan for the area, a plan which the Airport will also recognise as being supportive of its competitive position in the world.

393

Issue 5: Accommodating Housing Needs

Name Respondent Type Q15. In light of the housing need in the borough, do you think more housing land should be sought in the West of the Borough over and above that identified in the current Local Plan? Do the Heathrow New Garden City vision and Feltham Masterplan offer useful potential to achieve this? Clare Obeng Individual No, we do not wish for more houses to be built in Bedfont. We do not have enough school places now. Green Feltham Community group Unfortunately the road infrastructure in the WoB is not appropriate to build new housing. The Heathrow New Garden City Vision and Feltham Masterplan concepts represent corporate visions which unfortunately have failed to engage local residents or recognise the culture of the area, or the noise and air pollution challenges from Heathrow. In order to attract additional housing, there is a need to do so in a way that brings real benefits to current residents and celebrates the cultural strengths. Aspects of both ‘concepts’ could be retained, but unfortunately both are tarnished by the way that the Council has gone about promoting them, and therefore this consultation must signal the need for a new approach. London Diocesan Fund Business Yes, the problem is so pressing that one needs to capture resident's imagination by a visionary and challenging plan. Encourage the community to promote the exciting new opportunities. Andrew Barnes Individual I believe all areas should be considered equally and more out of the box thinking. With increased housing in any area brings about additional pressures on infrastructure, transport, schooling and jobs. Heathrow Garden City and

394

Feltham Masterplan puts too much emphasis on this part of the borough to resolve this. The burden should be shared more fairly across the borough. All that is asked in all these processes is that everything is transparent, is available to everyone and that response is easier to respond and follow. At present it isn’t. Sonia Harmon Individual The Feltham Masterplan is a bad idea in where it suggests builds. It destroys people’s homes, lives, historic landmarks, rare species, and green spaces. There should be more communication and transparency on the Heathrow New Garden City Vision, and the Feltham Masterplan. Ian Stewart Individual No to the Housing, the area is already overcrowded and cannot tolerate any further crowding. The Heathrow Garden City is a vision and is not even a genuine concept; the Feltham Masterplan will destroy the Town Centre and the community feel of the Town. June Stewart Individual I think the Feltham Masterplan will destroy Feltham as it is not in keeping with the character of the town. The New Garden City will only happen if there is a 3rd runway and I am against this as the 3rd runway will open the floodgates for continued expansion until it swallows up Hounslow. Mike Foston Individual Potential yes, but targeting green belt land will never get residents onside unless there are far more other incentives bundled together. Matthew Savage Individual I believe there should be more consultation with neighbouring authorities to try and relieve the demand from Hounslow. The Heathrow New Garden City vision does not seem to address the need for community infrastructure, only housing. Although such a large development would provide a very large one-off ‘bonus’ to the Community Infrastructure Levy. David Traylen Individual No more houses if not for people from the area. Brian Traylen Individual None, too overcrowded.

395

Maggie Netto Individual Feltham already has a high density of housing to green space, It would make sense replace the car park at Leisure West with a multi storey facility and create a mixture of residential and leisure on this site. Leigh Hyatt Individual No Feltham is already over populated. If roads could deal with more cars then ok but this is not the case. J Edwards Individual No. Sarah James Individual You need to sort Feltham out before you bring more people into Feltham, can't cope now. S Jarvis Individual Good question. Has living at Station Estate Road which is in jeopardy I can't see why we have to give up our homes for others. Sharon Savill Individual I don’t think we need any more housing in our concrete city. Alan Rise Individual The aforementioned will only further impact the current problem. K Harmon Individual Don’t know Gurpal Virdi Individual Development needs to happen west and south of Heathrow. Spelthorne Borough Council Government The issues paper sets out the current housing figures for the plan period from 2015 to 2030 of 12,330 new dwellings at a rate of 822 per annum. It is not clear how the statement which suggests that 822 “will be challenging to exceed year on year” equates with the assertion that “rolled forward” total provision will “comfortably exceed” the required 12,300 additional homes target. However, what is more important is how the objectively assessed need for 1,350 dwellings per annum is to be met and the particular implications for WoB Plan Area. Spelthorne would expect Hounslow to be making every effort to meet its objectively assessed housing need and put forward a range of options to be tested. Spelthorne and Runnymede have recently prepared a joint SHMA, this

396

identified the boroughs as a single Housing Market Area. Spelthorne has already been approached by Cobweb Consulting, the consultants preparing the Hounslow SHMA and, as this work progresses, we consider that there would be considerable benefits in joint meetings between the three boroughs on strategic housing issues. .

We note that it is intended also to carry out a review of Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showmen needs for the plan period and we would particularly welcome early engagement on the work given the number of travelling showmen sites located in Spelthorne close to the Borough boundary. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business We have no comments to make at this stage. WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Business We think that rising housing need in the borough and surrounding areas creates an increased housing need which will require additional housing supply in the form of additional land and/or increased densities. The Heathrow New Garden City vision and Feltham Masterplan have the potential to play a key role in satisfying future housing demand, although higher levels of development may need to be promoted as these are considered further. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Affordable housing is essential in any housing development proposal. Need to ensure that the green areas are fully considered, once the green belt is gone we can never get it back. Berkeley Strategic Business There is a clear requirement for additional housing land to be identified in the Borough. This is necessary to: (paraphrased) - respond to SHMA identified need, address gap between FALP and London OAN, provide flexibility in land supply and that councils can’t rely on local authorities outside London to meet unmet needs. The Heathrow New Garden City vision and Feltham

397

Masterplan do offer useful potential in this regard, but they are inputs to a wider plan-making process. They are not in themselves a substitute for the WoB Plan to itself arrive at an appropriate development strategy and select appropriate sites for development based on the outputs of a SHLAA (identifying deliverable and developable sites) and the Green Belt Review in terms of land that can be released from the Green Belt. We note that the New Garden City vision identifies the land controlled by Berkeley (shown in Appendix 2) as “Potential Development Residential Areas” but it is not included as one of the areas where a more detailed concept plan has been developed. Berkeley confirms that the site is suitable, available and achievable, subject to it being allocated in the Local Plan. However, the site is not reliant on the other parts of the Garden City Vision coming forward, and does not face some of the infrastructure challenges. In this regard, the Berkeley site is ‘oven ready’ and could make an early contribution to meeting needs. Shetson Property Business Not sure. Developments Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group Only on Brownfield Sites. Possibly - the concepts need to be developed. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The Heathrow New Garden City Vision and Feltham Masterplan are appropriate vehicles to assist meeting housing needs but will need to be encapsulated in the development plan. The plan should seek to meet the objectively assessed housing need rather than simply the housing target set down in the Further Alterations to the London Plan.

398

British Airways Business BA wishes to ensure that in the allocation of any residential development sites these should be in: (1) locations least affected by the operation of Heathrow Airport and; (2) Should avoid both areas which are focussed on meeting the needs of airport related activities and any areas of potential future airport expansion. PJ Harmes Individual What land is available? No to new garden city offers no solutions. Mark Savage Individual Housing is only useful if the support services and infrastructure, particularly schools and GP’s etc., are also enhanced. Otherwise, the new housing will make the area even more like a dormitory town. Housing density around the station is probably already too much and the load should be spread across the area a bit more, making use of brownfield sites as much as possible. Sam Foston Individual Housing should only be built alongside other services R Evans Individual Affordable housing is essential in any housing development proposal. Need to ensure that the green areas are fully considered – once the green belt is gone we can never get it back. Housing should only be build alongside the other services needed to support it, schools, sewage, and healthcare. Does not consider brownfield sites enough Mark Harmon Individual I think more use of land of what used to be the Feltham Marshalling Yards could be used it has little impact on existing neighbourhood. I also think parking should be considered with the average house owner having two or more cars as some “landlords” have multiple occupants per house which each room has their own vehicle. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor More brownfield sites should be identified and proposed densities increased. Real affordability is key as is maximising social and leisure amenity

399

Runnymede Borough Council Government Runnymede and Spelthorne have recently prepared a joint SHMA, this identified the boroughs as a single Housing Market Area. Runnymede has already been approached by Cobweb Consulting, the consultants preparing the Hounslow SHMA and, as this work progresses, we consider that there would be considerable benefits in joint meetings between the three boroughs on strategic housing issues.

Further, given that the Runnymede/Spelthorne HMA overlaps with other areas, Runnymede would also expect to hold discussions under the duty to cooperate with respect to wider housing needs with those boroughs/districts with overlaps. This may be something that could be discussed within the Heathrow Strategic Planning Group, Housing sub-group, or may require more bespoke discussions given the stage of plan making that both Runnymede and Hounslow are at. Runnymede is aiming to consult on Local Plan options in summer 2016 and early discussions will need to have been undertaken prior to this point. Runnymede will send separate correspondence in this respect. Runnymede is aware of ongoing discussions between the Mayor of London and authorities across the wider south east ahead of the full review of the London Plan. One of the points of discussion focusses on how housing needs across the wider south east can best be planned for, which will ultimately steer future housing targets for London Boroughs in an updated London Plan. CPRE London NGO CPRE London strongly objects to the release of Green Belt land, and Metropolitan Open Land to meet housing need. There is enough Brownfield land for 300,000 new homes across London.

400

The London Land Commission register identifies over 225 non-operational sites or sites with unknown status owned by the public sector including the Council. These and other Brownfield sites outside of designated green spaces should be used as the first priority, a priority that is increasingly being recognised such as through the recent consultation on changes to the NPPF. (In fact, we were surprised to note that the word ‘brownfield’ does not feature at all in the Consultation document.) Paul Kirby Individual Maybe. Garden city - what is it and when? George Whyatt Individual No more housing DIO Government Yes, more housing land should be sought over and above that identified in the current local plan. The Heathrow New Garden City vision and Feltham Masterplan offer potential to achieve this along with other sites such as MOD Feltham. Raja Individual No. The Rutland Group Business The scale of housing need is established in the Local Plan. The WoB will need to make its contribution to meeting that need. Housing geared to the accommodation needs (short term and long term, and in a range of tenures) of those employed in the wide range of jobs in the area) could help to reduce the need to travel and increase the sustainability of the area. Both the Heathrow New Garden City and the Feltham Master Plan can usefully contribute to meeting housing needs and both valuably move towards greater cohesion in the area, where jobs, homes and services are developed in concert. As the plans are developed in detail, they should work towards closer alignment between the different land uses in order to maximise the potential for sustainable economic and community development.

401

Name Respondent Type Q16. How should the need for new housing provision be balanced against considerations such as the role of the Metropolitan Green Belt and the supply of local services and utilities?

Clare Obeng Individual There is too much housing already in this area against schooling and roads to carry the traffic, parking, number of trains and buses serving the community. Green Feltham Community group Very simply, it is necessary to ensure that only high quality environmental improvements are built on greenbelt, with sufficient local services and utilities. Solar panels, Electric vehicle charging stations with electric vehicle-sharing schemes. There are no zip-car points in Feltham, yet there are too few parking places, we need to do more to make it easier to live without a car. Feltham is a great place, which has been badly treated by Hounslow Council over the past decades. Now is the time to make it right, by strengthening the protection of green spaces and ensuring high quality spaces, with places for young people to have adventures. London Diocesan Fund Business The emotional aspect of GB/MOL needs to be tackled. The focus has to be focus upon retaining a large portion of existing BG/MOL. However, almost without exception every such area has pockets around it suitable for development that would not destroy a site but enhance it. Andrew Barnes Individual Fairly, open and transparent.

Sonia Harmon Individual Brownfield sites should be considered first then empty warehouses and offices. Existing social Housing should be redeveloped and people rehoused in mutually acceptable areas and homes, this should be done before any Green belt of Green land is encroached upon.

402

Ian Stewart Individual New Housing should not be considered on any Green Belt land, this is needed to maintain the air quality at the already poor standard that we have. Any new Housing should take into consideration the impact on the transport network and the roads - both of which are at breaking point during rush hour; they should also take into consideration the availability of GP surgeries and other medical services. June Stewart Individual We should only look at building Houses for those already in the Borough as there is no more room; open spaces such as Green belt are necessary because of the proximity of Heathrow and the poor air quality this generates. Mike Foston Individual We need to ensure local services are improved sufficiently to cope with additional demand. We also need local buying and clarity and transparency. Residents will cope with things them don’t like better if the reasons for those decisions are supported by evidence, not shrouded in mystery. Matthew Savage Individual A problem in Hounslow and neighbouring authorities appears to be the so-called ‘beds-in-sheds’ developments. Any future development should include covenants to prevent this issue, and be rigidly enforced. The UK, as a whole, is already at 95% capacity for electricity supply – there is very little overhead and spare capacity for times of heavy demand on utilities. As such, major developments are likely to need to construction of additional electricity sub-stations, and new power stations or sources of ‘green’ energy (wind turbines, solar collectors, photovoltaic panels) David Traylen Individual Don’t know. Brian Traylen Individual Yes. Maggie Netto Individual More housing for young professionals housing cannot be considered without an increase in primary / secondary

403

school places in Feltham, and properly funded youth and children’s work. Leigh Hyatt Individual Take new housing to more open spaces, Feltham is overpopulated as it is. J Edwards Individual How can you take people’s homes to accommodate more housing? Sharon Savill Individual Build in surrounding boroughs or use housing that lays empty. Linda Ott Individual Housing should only be built where there's space not if other households lose there's. D Rowe Individual If there is no space for new housing that is fine but not to take other people’s homes. G Hayes Individual I think before housing is given planning permission the traffic problem must be address. Claudine Ott Individual If there is space for building house's great but not by other people losing there's. Thomas Smith Individual I am not against extra housing but I have lived in Feltham all my life and I think local people should be looked after as well. Carol Wood Individual I understand the need for more housing in the borough but not if people that have lived in Feltham all their lives, lose their homes. Chris Netto Individual Services and utilities need to be improved. Alan Rise Individual See response to question 5. Sathat Virdi Individual Thinking outside the box is needed. Overbuilding will lead to ghettos and concrete jungles. Gurpal Virdi Individual Cranford is already more than exceeding its limits. School doctors, housing and drainage system are currently overloaded. Seema Malhotra MP Another pressure on land is the need for more housing, of which London as a whole stands in terrible need. The only way to tackle the unaffordability of housing in our area and

404

more widely is an increase in the number of homes available. Again, this implies pressure on land.

Education Funding Agency Government If more housing growth is planned for the WoB then the Plan should ensure that sufficient land is allocated for school use to meet the needs of this growth. LB Hounslow should ensure that robust forecasts are used to identify the medium to long term capacity requirements of the school system. Detailed advice on forecasting school place planning is available from the EFA. The release of some green belt land for delivery of new schools to meet the needs of borough’s growing population may be necessary, taking into account that schools can be acceptable forms of development in the green belt (Issue 3).

We welcome LB Hounslow’s approach to use Planning Obligations and CIL monies to help deliver new school infrastructure. There is a need to ensure that the education contributions made by developer’s are sufficient to cover the increase in demand for school places that are likely to be generate by a development in the borough. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business We have no comments to make at this stage. London Borough of Hillingdon Government As noted in the response to question 48 above, the Council has concerns regarding the over provision of housing in the west of the borough area. Further evidence of housing need is required to underpin growth targets. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Most residents feel before building on Green Belt the following should be built on first: i. Brownfield sites e.g. Mercury House, Feltham Former Petrol station; ii. MOD site;

405

iii. Old RBS IF site; iv. Marshalling Yards; Green Belt de Brome park- used to be a school. There are concerns that there will not be enough essential community facilities in the plan to if additional housing is built.

Also people have concerns that when building on Green Belt there are often covenants about “no cars” for example the Feltham Peoples centre doesn’t have the traditional number of parking spots, nor do the flats around ASDA in Feltham- in a 2 bedroom flat there may be 2 people with cars to get to work- this results in cars simply parking further away- sometimes in CPZ zones as the fines are less than the cost of paying to park in a car park.

Berkeley Strategic Business The approach to arriving at a balance is set out in paragraph 14 of the NPPF, which establishes the presumption in favour of sustainable development, and the relationship of these to the tests in the NPPF as a whole. In terms of Green Belt, Berkeley’s view is set out in response to questions 5, 6 and 7 above. In respect of local services and utilities, there are clear provisions in the NPPF for Local Plans to assess infrastructure capacity and its ability to meet future needs, and to then plan positively to meet needs and deliver planned infrastructure. This includes considering the ability of new development to facilitate the provision of infrastructure, including through CIL and s.106. It should also be noted that having clarity on the scale and location of new development provides a strong platform for infrastructure providers to plan their own investment and respond to need.

406

Shetson Property Business Not sure. Developments Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group Explore all Brownfield opportunities, the use of MGB should and must be the last resort, the local infrastructure must be constructed in a way which can meet the demands of any development, preferably in advance or to be part of any projected housing development. In the past the necessary and appropriate local infrastructure has not been in place, as a consequence the local authority is required to play "catch-up". Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The need for new housing has to be balanced against a wide range of factors including the special economic responsibility placed on the Borough due to the presence of Heathrow and its importance to the UK economy. The NPPF identifies three dimensions to sustainable development which give rise to the need for planning to perform three mutually interdependent roles; Economic, Social and Environmental. We do not consider there is any justification either in terms of a local policy approach to ignore the economic and social benefits in favour of the environmental as the pressures for addressing the housing shortage and the promotion of the country’s economic security are considerable in this location. Windowflowers Ltd Business We consider that more housing allocations should be sought within the WoB to not only assist in meeting need, but also to promote sustainable development, with housing and employment opportunities being located within close proximity of one another and with excellent transport links. The land south of Staines Road could assist in meeting this need as part of a mixed use allocation. Failure to secure sufficient housing in this part of the, could result in

407

additional and lengthy commuting patterns, which is not deemed to be either sound or sensible. Given that the WoB falls within the Heathrow Opportunity Area (HOA) which is seeking to secure additional homes and jobs, failure to identify sufficient sites to meet the objectives of the HOA would undermine its delivery. In short, there will be a need to release Metropolitan Green Belt land within the WoB to meet the needs of both the local community and the need for jobs and investment. PJ Harmes Individual cannot envisage any improvements in utilities only worse - repairs, roads up etc. Mark Savage Individual The role of the green belt in this area cannot be under- estimated, and indeed it is what attracts many people to Feltham, Hanworth and Bedfont in the 21st century. To impinge on this too much with additional housing would actually have negative effects, in my view. Bedfont Lakes is a precious resource and should not be built on any more than necessary, if at all. The Marshalling Yards is the only area I would currently favour for further housing development, reluctantly. Sam Foston Individual Look at industrial and other brownfield sites first. R Evans Individual We do not wish to eradicate the remaining Green Belt area to fulfil the needs of a housing crisis which has been years in the making. Look at industrial conversions and other brown field sites first. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor  Difficult to see how green belt might be lost given how it buffers impact of other uses.  The remaining Green Belt should not be dismantled to fulfil the needs of a housing crisis which has been years in the making;  There should be a fair mix of affordable housing along with privately owned housing to ensure a range of classes living together;

408

 All housing to have covenants to ensure that people buy a house should live there and time restraints for future letting;  New developments must be supported by social infrastructure conditioned by planning the borough of Hounslow;  All new developments should arise out of architectural competitions overseen by suitably qualified and respected design champions.

Runnymede Borough Council Government Nevertheless, the Further Alterations to the London Plan (FALP) adopted in 2015 sets out in Policy 3.3D – E, that London Boroughs should seek to achieve and exceed minimum annual averages, draw on housing benchmarks to augment extra housing capacity, close the gap between identified need and supply as well as identify and enable additional capacity to be brought forward to supplement targets. Further, paragraph 17 bullet 3 of The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), sets out that ‘every effort’ should be made objectively to identify and then meet the housing, business and other development needs of an area and paragraph 47 to ensure that Local Plans meet the full objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing in their housing market area (as is consistent with other policies in the NPPF). As such, one of the issues that the London Borough of Hounslow will face is how it can exceed and augment its current London Plan target and meet its current objectively assessed housing need (OAN) as far as is consistent with other policies in the NPPF. The full review of the London Plan is likely to amend the housing target for Hounslow and a third runway at

409

Heathrow will have implications for housing need in the wider Heathrow area. However, ahead of any government decision on airport expansion and any discussions between the Mayor of London and wider south east authorities, it is considered that the Hounslow West of Borough Local Plan represents a short-term opportunity for the London Borough to exceed and augment its Borough wide Local Plan housing target of 822 dwellings per annum in line with FALP policies 3.3D-E and make ‘every effort’ to meet its needs as far as is consistent with other policies in the NPPF.

In this respect Runnymede would expect to see a number of alternative Local Plan options developed and tested through the Sustainability Appraisal process on how the West of Borough Local Plan could meet housing needs. This should include exceeding FALP targets, meeting OAN and including meeting unmet needs from other areas should Hounslow’s evidence suggest it is reasonable to do so (the positively prepared test in NPPF paragraph 182). Paul Kirby Individual Use brownfield first. George Whyatt Individual It would not balance the area. The SB Hotel Group Business In addition to reviewing green belt boundaries, the Council also needs to look at the potential for providing higher density, high rise and housing in accessible locations.

The Rutland Group Business Housing need is not normally seen as sufficient grounds (exceptional circumstances) for permitting development in the Green Belt. There needs to be another dimension to the proposed development in order to provide sufficient justification: specifically addressing the fragmentation of the area currently and development proposals which will create sustainable communities.

410

Name Respondent Type Q17. What sort of housing would you like to see here?

Clare Obeng Individual None - leave Bedfont protected and improve services to current residents. Green Feltham Community group There is a desperate need for high quality town-houses and houses for families – built with character. There is a need for houses to be owned – currently there are large amounts of social housing and rented sector which takes away from local ownership of the area. Feltham should seek to attract people who might otherwise live in Ashford, Staines, Twickenham or Whitton – and provide spacious modern family living with access to high quality green space, culture and good transport links. London Diocesan Fund Business A mixture, it is unrealistic to focus on one sector to the total exclusion of others. Hounslow's rich diversity should be expressed in its housing profile. Andrew Barnes Individual Assistance for families to have their own homes. Local people to be given priority. Sonia Harmon Individual Good quality, high sound insulation, max 4 storey builds, sympathetic designs in areas of historical value. Not yellow brick glass and steel tackiness. Ian Stewart Individual New Family Homes; we have enough flats but not enough Houses for people to move into when they start a Family. Feltham in particular does not need any more High Rise buildings. June Stewart Individual Family homes, not tower blocks. There is a need for more housing not more flats. Mike Foston Individual In order to provide a diverse community, a broad range of housing options will be needed, along with a reasonable level of social accessible housing to assist local residents already searching for improvement.

411

Matthew Savage Individual Low-rise /low-density. David Traylen Individual Low rise. Brian Traylen Individual I think there’s enough. Maggie Netto Individual Housing for young professionals (starter homes). More mixed community living e.g. elderly, families, young professionals living 'in community'. Leigh Hyatt Individual Up market not social. Take social out of the town. J Edwards Individual None, Feltham is turning into a concrete jungle Sharon Savill Individual Buyers not renters. Chris Netto Individual Family housing yes service type jobs K Harmon Individual It depends on space available and numbers Gurpal Virdi Individual No future developments. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business See comments relating to noise and pollution. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Need to ensure fair mix of affordable housing along with privately owned housing to ensure appropriate mix of people living together. I would like all housing to have covenants which ensure buys live in properties for perhaps 2 years (before they can let). Cannot simply build another city at Heathrow without adequate transportation links and schools and medical care- need to ensure all come under one borough

Ensure houses are built that will be fit for purpose in the long term- the mistakes that have been made in Feltham, egg tower blocks, or too many back alley ways with fly tipping or inadequate parking, or rat runs need to be incorporated (i.e. don’t employ architects from Chelsea, ensure we have people that know the area) also if realistically there will be a 4th runway at current trends in 50 years. The last thing we want is a city build which will only be demolished in a short time frame!

412

Mixture of affordable and private (ideally not buy to let) would like people here who want to live in the area, not simply profit off it. Need to have an allocation for essential services personal written into the plan – i.e. key workers such as nurses, teachers etc. Berkeley Strategic Business The precise mix of new housing will need to be informed by the new SHMA. However, as a general principle, it is important that a range of types and tenures are provided, including homes for families, and that this responds to the wider demand for housing in this area, which will be for medium density accommodation. Shetson Property Business mixed density, more family accommodation required Developments Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group Housing which complements the existing area. A balanced mix of family and affordable housing. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The most suitable form of housing in close proximity to Heathrow is mixed tenure and size development providing a range of houses and flats but with a focus on smaller 1 and 2 bed units. PJ Harmes Individual 4 storey flats Mark Savage Individual Townhouses rather than flats, a return of maisonettes and properties with front gardens et, reflecting the suburban character of the area. Sam Foston Individual Mixture of affordable and private R Evans Individual Mixture of affordable and private (ideally not buy to let) would like people here who want to live in the area, not simply profit off it. Need to have an allocation for essential services personal written into the plan i.e. key workers such as nurses, teachers etc. Low level flats are acceptable, but not high-rises

413

Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Should reconsider the estate model where housing and new local amenities are provided simultaneously by a single provider whether local authority, employer or housing association, mindful, of course, of historical failures with this type. (As 16 above) international design competition to find a new type of housing that responds, sustainably, to challenges of increased aircraft activity and noise. Paul Kirby Individual 4 storey flats George Whyatt Individual Not social houses not flats Global Grange Ltd Business We consider that more housing allocations should be sought within the WoB to not only assist in meeting need, but also to promote sustainable development, with housing and employment opportunities built together and located within close proximity of excellent transport links. Failure to secure sufficient housing in this part of the borough to meet the expected growth in economic development, could result in additional and lengthy commuting patterns, which is not deemed to be either sound or sensible Given that the West of the Borough falls within the Heathrow Opportunity Area (HOA) which is seeking to secure additional homes and jobs.

It is therefore deemed to be essential that the Council look again at the matter of housing delivery, secure an appropriate target which meets demands, but which is balanced against infrastructure delivery and recognition of the environmental constraints. In short however, there will be a need to release Metropolitan Green Belt land within the West of the Borough to meet the needs of both the local community and the need for jobs and investment. Raja Individual flats

414

Rentplus Business It would be beneficial for the Council to consider the delivery of Rentplus rent to buy housing on sites across this area of the Borough. This would widen the housing mix across Hounslow, contributing to the creation of mixed and balanced communities, as well as improving individual site viability and overall housing supply. Similarly, the delivery of housing across the GWC would be greatly assisted by the inclusion of Rentplus rent to buy housing, particularly as this is aimed at aspirational households who would benefit from close proximity to employment. Any opportunities to deliver housing in this area should be aimed at delivering high quality housing such as Rentplus rent to buy which can blend well with existing residential streets and employment space, promoting diversity in the redevelopment of this area. Future drafts of this Plan should carefully consider the viability of delivering all housing tenures here, and how well these can be integrated with other uses. The Rutland Group Business Clearly, given the scale of need for housing in the Borough, housing development needs to be a significant component of the West of the Borough in the future. However enquiries need to be made among the employers, for example in Feltham and at Bedfont Lakes and Heathrow, of what types of housing, including housing to let, would best assist their staff and assist the firms in the recruitment and retention of staff.

415

Issue 6: Creating Employment Opportunities Locally

Name Respondent Type Q18. Are new jobs needed in the West of the Borough, if so what type of jobs?

Cllr Tony Louki Councillor New employment opportunity for Hounslow residents would always be welcomed but an emphasis upon logistics and distribution with its historically low wage structure and extensive use of polluting technologies is scarcely sustainable. Strenuous efforts to create a more varied employment market should be sought to supplement the airport industrial park model. The Rutland Group Business We see this more as a question of the need for additional land for employment. In a strategic location such as this (adjacent to Heathrow, near several national motorways and in the West London/Thames Valley economic powerhouses) there is a continuous need to renew the competitive offer of premises – many of the firms interested in such a location have choices; and may decide to go elsewhere in the UK or outside the UK. From this perspective we support the provision of additional high- quality land for employment. Secondly, in the interests of maximising local employment, it will be important to meet at least some of the employment needs of the large new population that will be introduced by the Plan; again land will need to be allocated for employment. Transport for London Government TfL supports the principle of high density development in areas of good public transport connectivity, within town centres (i.e. Feltham), on brownfield land (i.e. Feltham Young Offenders’ Institution) and around stations.

416

Green Feltham Community group There are enough jobs in the Borough, but it would be good to have more high-skill jobs, and make Feltham a place where businesses choose to locate because it is a good place to live and work. London Borough of Hillingdon Government The Council notes that Feltham is the centre for new job creation and that the town centre Masterplan proposes significant amounts of retail, commercial and residential floorspace. There is a need to consider the classification of the town centre in the context of the London Plan and ensure that the impact of this growth on surrounding boroughs is fully tested. Sonia Harmon Individual Yes. Help people start their own businesses, and promote and encourage small independent businesses. Mark Savage Individual Jobs in IT and communications would be an asset to the area and have a natural synergy with Heathrow Berkeley Strategic Business There is a need for new employment generation in the Borough – reflecting the wider London Plan economic strategy. The type of jobs need to support the skills and aspirations of existing local residents as well as the profile of those moving into the Borough to secure housing. This should be a key focus on the new employment land review that has been commissioned by the Council. Berkeley will wish to review this evidence when it is produced and provide a more complete response to this question at that stage. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business There is a need to provide a balanced pattern of development in West London which meets not only the housing needs of the Borough and the wider West London area but also the associated employment requirement. The shape of the local economy is strongly shaped by Heathrow and the Vision should seek to respond to the local market. The current employment land assessment should help define the need for different types of space

417

but additional response should be sought from local landowners and businesses who are well versed in the local employment market. Global Grange Ltd Business The WoB Plan and the Heathrow Opportunity Area, alongside the expansion of the operations at Heathrow Airport are huge opportunities for the LB Hounslow. Additional air traffic and passengers will have a knock on demand for additional services and facilities within close proximity of the Heathrow. Furthermore, given the identification of this part of the borough for logistics and distribution within the London Plan, there is a legitimate expectation that additional employment land and jobs will be created through the WoB Plan. Failure to capitalise on the potential economic benefits of an expanded Heathrow would not only be contrary to the provision of policy, but would also be failing to do the best by those that live and work within Hounslow. We are therefore of the opinion that additional sites need to be allocated within the WoB for logistics and distribution centres; as per those the subject of the grants of consent included at Appendix 2. These allocations should be supported with an enabling policy framework which seeks to support future growth and promotes expansion of existing businesses.

SEGRO Business SEGRO support new jobs in the West of the Borough. Barton Willmore’s Economic Review confirmed that Experian Economics forecast growth of 21,050 jobs over the plan period within the London Borough of Hounslow, of which 7,280 jobs are expected to be located in the West of the Borough. Demand from airport related businesses will increase further should Heathrow be expanded. The Economic Review confirms the expansion of Heathrow will

418

generate significant demand for employment premises close to the Airport. Page 11 concludes that Heathrow Airport Limited has estimated that 7,665 indirect and induced jobs could be created by 2030 within the five local authorities adjoining the Airport. This is in addition to direct jobs created on-site in London Borough of Hillingdon. Notwithstanding this, demand will still increase (albeit to a lesser extent) in a 2 runway scenario, as planes gets bigger leading to increased passenger numbers and cargo volumes. With regard to the Heathrow Opportunity Area, the London Plan suggests that 12,000 jobs could be accommodated in the stated 700 hectares of land.

The Economic Review undertaken by Barton Willmore found that strong growth in the West of the Borough is expected in Transport and Storage and Administration and Support, which are currently two of the largest sectors in the area. In particular, the growth in Transport and Storage is likely to increase the demand for warehousing. It is important to note that SEGRO will provide local employment and training opportunities through their existing initiatives which they will proactively seek to replicate in Hounslow. Chris Hern Individual My vision would be the development already underway (media/ tech hub) to provide some counterbalance to Sky and a greater local employment range. The further education facility proposal that is included in the Local Plan would provide support for this hub; The western part of the Marshalling yards, being used for a few years as a base by Network Rail, could be a site, linked to the skills centre Heston Residents' Association Community group Yes. According to demand of local business including Heathrow to be a mixture of low/middle/high skills.

419

Spelthorne Borough Council Government Spelthorne has recently published for consultation its Functional Economic Market Area Assessment which identifies strong links with Hounslow to the north. We look forward therefore, under the Duty to Cooperate, to working closely in the preparation of the Employment Land Review given the strong economic links between Hounslow and Spelthorne. Again given the importance of these issues to the work of the Heathrow Strategic Planning Group it is hoped that this will provide an appropriate forum for discussion and agreement on employment matters and demand and supply across the wider FEAs. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business As a general point, the West of Borough Plan anticipates an increase in housing to meet strategic targets set by Government. If these targets are to be met, then employment related uses will also be required if the current situation of out-commuting is to be improved. In this respect, the Council needs to be mindful of employment land supply alongside new housing. Heathrow is currently engaged in the Government’ local area review of further education which will inform future skills needs for Hounslow and wider west London region. It might be helpful for the outcomes of the review to be embedded as far as possible into the development of the West of Borough Plan. Clare Obeng Individual No J Edwards Individual No Gurpal Virdi Individual Heathrow is bad employer as many are on zero hour contracts. No more new jobs. George Whyatt Individual No Alan Rise Individual Not service sector. David Traylen Individual Office Sathat Virdi Individual Proper jobs - not for everything to be outsourced or zero hour contracts.

420

Maggie Netto Individual More service industry and technology. Chris Netto Individual Yes service type jobs. Raja Individual Yes, service industry / cafes London Diocesan Fund Business There is a shortage of supply of dementia and nursing homes these offer a 24/7 economy. PJ Harmes Individual Unemployment - Jobs always required in the borough; gardeners, window cleaning. Ian Stewart Individual Without knowing the facts about the unemployment rate in this part of the Borough this is not a question that is easy to answer. You have failed to provide this fact in your documentation. June Stewart Individual Without the unemployment figures this is a difficult question to answer. Shetson Property Developments Business More white collar jobs are needed Ltd Mike Foston Individual Jobs are always required, the mixture of job types will drive the mixture of residents. K Harmon Individual If more people come into area then yes. Sam Foston Individual New jobs, new opportunities. Paul Kirby Individual If more people move here they need jobs. The SB Hotel Group Business The recently adopted Borough Plan seeks to make provision for 21,000 additional jobs between 2011 and 2036. With 7.2% of Hounslow’s workforce already being employed at Heathrow Airport, and with many more being employed by businesses which are either directly, or indirectly, related to the airport, a significant proportion of any new jobs created will need to be in the WoB. Andrew Barnes Individual Opportunities for youngsters. Help in building careers and life skills. Opportunities to work with animals. Brian Traylen Individual Job for local youth.

421

Sharon Savill Individual Apprenticeships are needed to stop young adults / adults from claiming benefits. Give them a worth / purpose in life by training them in a trade. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Need to ensure local jobs are created. We need to ensure appropriate apprenticeships for school leavers and partner with businesses to help our youth Could we do more with the Bedfont lakes site where SAP is based? Appears few locals work there and most people are bussed/commute in. R Evans Individual Need to ensure local jobs are created. We need to ensure appropriate apprenticeships for school leavers and partner with businesses to help our youth

422

Name Respondent Type Q19. Does the Heathrow New Garden City vision offer a sound approach to provide for the needs of growth in the area to meet new and existing business’s needs?

Andrew Barnes Individual Again too much emphasis on this and believe some of the proposal is on land of archaeological importance. Mark Savage Individual I am uncertain of this proposal and think that a business community based around similar schemes at Bedfont Lakes (and Chiswick Park) is the best way forward- mini communities which themselves have restaurants and e.g. hairdressing and fitness, leisure facilities. R Evans Individual It’s not shown me how it is taken the green Belt and wildlife in to consideration -I would like to see previews on the buildings that are built i.e.- nest boxes to be put in the roofs of new houses- solar power panels on the roofs, also Gardens not to be "tarmacked over". Berkeley Strategic Business In general terms, we recognise the New Garden City vision does offer employment growth potential and this obviously needs to respond to the economic agglomeration associated with Heathrow. However, it is not currently clear what evidence base justification there is for the vision’s approach to employment and any approach will need to be considered in light of:  The Employment Land Review;  The alignment with the amount of housing that is provided in the Borough and the implications of this for labour supply;  Decision on a third runway at Heathrow. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The requirement is for local plans to be sound and justified. There will need to be significant work undertaken to provide the evidence to justify the Vision and we note

423

that a new Employment Land Review is currently underway. Sonia Harmon Individual Explain the Heathrow New Garden City! Ian Stewart Individual What is the vision? This is a repetition of question 15 to catch people out. Please be more upfront in future. June Stewart Individual I am hoping that the 3rd runway does not go ahead so this will not be needed. Sharon Savill Individual Haven’t seen it. Clare Obeng Individual No Green Feltham Community group The Heathrow Garden City offers too much industrial usage on inappropriate sites. The focus should be on higher quality employment opportunities which will not put additional vehicles on the roads. David Traylen Individual No Brian Traylen Individual No Leigh Hyatt Individual Not if it means social housing J Edwards Individual No Alan Rise Individual No PJ Harmes Individual Cannot see how. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor The Heathrow New Garden City vision is not convincing on the level that any new conurbation close to a monoculture giant enterprise, the airport, would inevitably be bound to the continued success of that enterprise. The fate of steel and coal mining towns provides a recent precedent for this. A revised vision that demonstrates the Garden City as a sustainable entity in its own right would be a significant improvement.  Only if it offsets the community’s need to maintain the Green Belt.  Only if a fully integrated, frequent and sustainable transport infrastructure is in place first. Paul Kirby Individual No

424

Raja Individual No Chris Hern Individual My vision would be for the encouragement of a greater range of employment opportunities in the west of the borough, including the development of a tech/media hub- already underway with Aquila-. The Local Plan includes the possibility of a further education facility in the Feltham area and this could provide support for this hub and other employment initiatives. None of these issues or initiatives are featured in the proposals being so far presented, which concentrate on the needs of Heathrow rather than those of the local community Sam Foston Individual As long as appropriate transportation is available. London Diocesan Fund Business It is a bold start that deserves encouragement and support. Maggie Netto Individual Yes Gurpal Virdi Individual Yes Heathrow Airport Ltd Business We support the principle of the Heathrow New Garden City approach and look forward to engaging with the Borough to help realise this vision. Bedfont Councillors Councillors Yes- the need to house must be offset by the need of the community to maintain the Green Belt. As long as we can have appropriate transportation- we need to ensure people can get to work- many people live in London and get the train to Feltham station and from there have a bus the other end take them to BP or Bedfont Lakes or get the 285 to the airport- we need to ensure the transport is easy or it will fail. Shetson Property Developments Business Yes, but will probably not meet demand. Ltd SEGRO Business The Heathrow New Garden City Document (July 2015) embodies the above and explores three potential new settlements informed by the Council’s Green Belt review and predicated on Garden City principles. These are

425

Heathrow Gateway, Bedfont Lakes Neighbourhoods and Airport Business Park. The Airport Business Park, in particular, identifies 45 hectares of land for distribution, logistics and industrial development which demonstrates that there is a strategic opportunity to direct future growth to support Heathrow and the surrounding areas. The vision for the Airport Business Park would require the release of Green Belt land. SEGRO support and encourage the Vision set out in the Heathrow New Garden City Document and the principles of amalgamating residential and employment land in a sustainable location where there is existing infrastructure. It is agreed that the Heathrow New Garden City vision offers a sound approach to provide for the needs of the growth in the area. The Issues Consultation Document explains that the West of the Borough has been identified as a growth area for logistics in the London Plan and that there is scope to seek new employment land and types of buildings to meet these needs. SEGRO are of the view, however, that more land should be identified for industrial and logistics uses in order to facilitate this growth. The Rutland Group Business Yes, as long as the employment premises are fit or appropriate for the target markets envisaged. The SB Hotel Group Business The Heathrow New Garden City vision can potentially provide for some of the needs of new and existing businesses. The Council should take a balanced approach and identify a range of sites, in town centres and other accessible locations. Importantly, policies should also allow, commensurate with normal environmental controls, the expansion of existing businesses. Particular consideration should be given to allowing the development of new, and existing, employment sites along the GWC.

426

Issue 7: Enhancing the Natural Environment and Open space

Name Respondent Type Q20. Do you feel that the level of open space available for recreation and retreat from the urban elements of the West of the Borough are sufficient for your needs? How can these spaces be improved?

Green Feltham Community group The access to green space is one of the strengths of the west of the area. However, it is important that this is not undermined by poor quality industrial developments bordering the sites. Feltham Marshalling yards is a key environment and a haven for conservation. The bulk of this area should be permanently protected, with some improvements to make it more accessible and welcoming. Places such as Hanworth Park are great spaces, but simple things like ensuring adequate sight-lines would contribute to places feeling safe, and discouraging anti-social behaviour. The provision of adequate bins would also be beneficial. The Council needs to make sure it adequately maintains these spaces and involves local people. Mark Savage Individual I am generally happy with the facilities provided at present, hut there are places where access could be improved, e.g. to the Crane Valley Walkway. Paul Kirby Individual At moment are ok. Make accessible Heathrow Airport Ltd Business Expansion at Heathrow will provide an opportunity to provide new and enhanced green spaces across a wide area. Shetson Property Developments Business more space needed with free parking Ltd

427

Speedbird Securities Ltd Business Our client’s land is open however there is no public access and most parts are screened by vegetation. It does not therefore contribute to open space provision. Part of it has previously had permission for a Country Park and there could be scope for those parts not used for economic development to be developed as recreational public open space. Andrew Barnes Individual The areas would be served better if they generated employment of park wardens and cafes. Clare Obeng Individual If they stay as they are, they are sufficient. Possible improvement: toilets at Bedfont Lakes, Bedfont Road, small scale café there and convert skate ramps at Hatton Road to paddling pools. London Diocesan Fund Business In Hanworth current maps still show bowling green, tennis courts and similar facilities that are derelict. Such land could be put to better community use. Mike Foston Individual We have quantity not quality, but this question has been asked multiple times. David Traylen Individual Keep the same space but update them. Brian Traylen Individual Update them. Maggie Netto Individual More enhancement with local residents to encourage 'ownership' of spaces for community use. Improved litter removal and more visible 'park keepers'. D Rowe Individual There is always room for improvement. G Hayes Individual Any improvement is welcome. Heston Residents' Association Community group It is sufficient, providing it is not eroded by future residential and business developments. All open space can be improved, this depends very much on the priority attached to such improvements by the local authority. Local Parks can and should be upgraded to provide residents with a retreat for relaxation and recreation.

428

Mark Harmon Individual As per plans Glebelands needs attention including where the dumping of waste was sanctioned on the old Feltham Stadium site. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor There are significant areas of green space offering a wide variety of types; from managed space to semi derelict spaces providing important habitats for plants and wildlife. These should be improved, their offer enhanced and protected. Andrew Robinson Individual There are numerous open spaces but many are not maintained or cultivated to enhance their attractiveness or usefulness. For instance, the green space which includes Blenheim, Glebelands and Feltham Parks is not regularly cultivated (other than by the good work of the local football Club) and thus the opportunity to attract recreational visitors is lost. Lessons could be learned from the neighbouring borough where Crane Park, for instance, has been brilliantly managed to provide a mix of use from education to conservation to leisure, without compromising the integrity of the space. Hounslow council has neglected many of its sites to the detriment of both the local people and the flora and forna and any plans to use these sites for building or industry would be further evidence of the council’s lack of appreciation for these green spaces. Raja Individual No, most areas need improvements. Berkeley Strategic Business Decisions on open space provision in the Borough need to be evidence based, responding to population needs and circumstances within individual communities. It is of note that much of the Green Belt land. Including the Berkeley site at Appendix 2, provides green space but not usable open space for recreation and retreat. New development can incorporate higher quality open space that better meets the needs for recreation space.

429

The Rutland Group Business Like much of the WoB, the pattern and quality of the open space has evolved from the long history of mineral extraction, landfill (often uncontrolled) and restoration (the latter varying from good to inadequate). In similar vein the quantity of open space is a product of this rather arbitrary historical process. It is therefore worth looking at the many patches of open space, their usage, their management and maintenance, their quality and their purposes for the local communities in order to assess what changes might be needed. It is likely that this rather arbitrary pattern of open space will have become an asset in the eyes of local communities, maybe one of their few assets, given the history of development in the area. Sharon Savill Individual More playgrounds for the very young. More outdoor free sport areas. Football pitches, netball courts etc. Sathat Virdi Individual Leave the designated Green Belt in Cranford as it is. Ian Stewart Individual Yes but needs to be maintained correctly by the Council. Hounslow Council are failing in their duty of care to maintain open spaces and to promote their use. June Stewart Individual Yes, they need to be taken more seriously and looked after better. Leigh Hyatt Individual Keeping them tidy would help which is not happening at present. George Whyatt Individual Keep tidy clean Sonia Harmon Individual No. The Council have plans to build on local green spaces after billing them as unloved and unused spaces – which is not true. Please speak to Parks and Leisure about the Feltham Phoenix Project on the Feltham Arenas Site. An extensive survey of over 2000 residents, of what they wanted for the Feltham Arena Parklands, and showing that EVERY single part of it is loved and cared for. Feltham

430

Phoenix Project is how that site can be improved, as well as creating jobs and opportunities for many. J Edwards Individual They can't. Alan Rise Individual Nothing that additional funding could achieve PJ Harmes Individual Adequate at moment. Make discreet observation centres for enthusiasts Bedfont Councillors Councillor Joined up thinking on the design- promote what is already there with more advertising of them- sign posting etc. For example you can have toddler parties at Bedfont Lakes- I’m a trustee- but I only found out about it from a Facebook group! There are many footpaths and great open spaces, but these are unknown to many.

R Evans Individual Joined up thinking on the design- promote what is already there. More advertising of them- sign posting etc. There are many footpaths and great open spaces, but these are unknown to many – we need to publicise them more. Wildlife provision must be carefully considered in any planned changes to our green spaces Gurpal Virdi Individual No its not. Stop building on the open spaces. K Harmon Individual Yes. Charles Asante Individual adapt to current needs, overpriced gyms van result in more park exercise use, free park gym equipment, promote walking, allow youth use as in football pitches etc. Sam Foston Individual Green spaces should be approved to attract the youth to make use , respect and value

431

Name Respondent Type Q21. Does the availability of local play spaces and amenity spaces for you and your family meet your needs in the community in which you live? What type of open space is needed? How can existing spaces be improved?

Brian Traylen Individual they need to be kept open we cannot afford to lose them Berkeley Strategic Business There is a clear role for new development in supporting the provision and enhancement of open space through direct on-site provision and, where appropriate, off-site contributions. Speedbird Securities Ltd Councillor There is an opportunity to provide more formal and informal play spaces as part of a package of open space provision in the area. Raja Individual More safe areas for children to play Environment Agency Government We note that the plan states that ‘The area also includes extensive green belt and areas in need of regeneration and investment’ it should also make reference to the need to protect and improve their green infrastructure in terms of biodiversity as well as recreation. Although the River Crane Corridor has been identified within Issue 7 paragraph 2, you should emphasize the need to protect and improve the quality and condition of the River Crane Corridor and reference should be made to the Blue Ribbon Network from the London Plan (2011) and the updated and recently revised version (2015), the Water Framework Directive & the newly launched Thames River Basin Management Plan. More recognition should be given to Local Wildlife Sites in this plan. You should include a reference to the work and projects of the Crane Valley Partnership in order to further promote improvements to maximise the use of the river corridor.

432

The Partnership aims to restore one of London’s most natural rivers, conserve its surrounding habitats and improve public access so that its nearby communities can enjoy contact with the natural world. We may seek financial contributions towards local river improvements where appropriate for developments in this area. The introduction of recreation should be appropriate to the open space and should consider and mitigate against the impacts of disturbance on wildlife areas. The West of the Borough Plan should make reference to Hounslow’s Biodiversity Action Plan. Sonia Harmon Individual The Feltham Arena Parklands is a vital and an integral part of the Community. It is the largest and most adaptable piece of green and open space that used to be a hub for the local community with many activities until one by one, the Council started denying people use of functions and events on the land. Locals want this back. Please see the Feltham Phoenix Project to see how it can be improved. Carol Wood Individual I would hope that our parks and playing fields will always stay and be improved for the local people to use has I do with my grandchildren. Friends of the River Crane Community group This issue is titled “Enhancing the natural environment and Environment open space”. However, the biodiversity and environmental values of the spaces are not mentioned in the text and the three questions do not address enhancement so much as reduction in open space. Maps that have been produced associated with this report earmark large areas of existing open space for development. However, this is not mentioned in this section and this omission appears disingenuous at best. Nowhere is the amount of open space that would be lost if these plans were to be fully implemented listed or quantified. Without this information it is not possible for the public (or other interested parties)

433

to appreciate the implications of what is being proposed.

The values of open space are not addressed in this report. There is no doubt that some of the open spaces in the WoB are not well used nor well managed or maintained. This surely presents a major opportunity to enhance their value and use. At a regional level the potential of open spaces, enhancing their use and value, is starting to be appreciated through documents like the GLA’s Green Infrastructure Taskforce Review. This review states that, as London’s population grows, the need for high value and high functioning open spaces with improved environmental as well as community and social value, will also grow. It is imperative in our view for LB Hounslow to start to address how it can better manage and link together its open spaces to meet future needs. Mark Harmon Individual I am fortunate to have good facilities near me, but further down the road such as near KFC the grounds need to look more appealing Andrew Robinson Individual Feltham Arena is a good example of a potentially fantastic local amenity which has been neglected and which, if renovated and maintained, would meet many needs in the local area. Improvement of existing spaces in general could be derived from more frequent maintenance of existing facilities; provision of more bins in parkland and open spaces; provision of facilities for scrambling bicycles to discourage illegal use elsewhere; More pavilions being erected within green spaces to provide shelter/changing facilities/refreshments etc. Mark Savage Individual The area is under-served by pleasant gardens and similar parks. I would like to see a facility such as that at The Walled Garden in Sunbury. Bridge House Pond gardens in Feltham

434

could be such a spot. There needs to be a resurrection of the village greens of Feltham and Bedfont, and events other than fairs provided on them. Heston Residents' Association Community group In my area it is sufficient. Heston Park (being upgraded), Osterley Park and MOL. If the construction of new residential properties and the expansion of existing properties continues then the availability of sufficient amenity space is critical. Charles Asante Individual More investment in parks, some are neglected or not promoted enough. Alan Rise Individual Funding. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Investment through s106 contributions would enhance what already exists. Assorted investment in clubs that facilitate sport activity. Green Feltham Community group Currently, I have access to good local play spaces. This was significantly improved by the provision of a new play area next to Bridge House Pond/ Alf King’s. It is important that when play areas are put in that they are done in a way that is low-maintenance, and adequately maintained. The play area at Bedfont Lakes was landscaped, but much of this did not last the first summer.

Similarly, ensuring that high quality spaces are maintained. Bridge House Pond in Feltham is a brilliant pocket park in the centre of the town, which has been neglected by the Council. Even now, the Council cannot agree who is going to take responsibility for maintaining certain areas. A play area was put in without a fence around it, even though it is surrounded by a road, and the area is used by dog walkers. This is fairly basic stuff, but the Council’s general competence for such tasks has been very poor in the past.

Currently there are issues with moto-cross bikes using areas

435

such as Hanworth Park and Feltham Marshallling Yards. More must be done to promote alternative forms of adventurous mobility, such as mountain biking as an alternative which is better for health and the environment. Creating a mountain bike trail and running courses for young people to shift people from motorbikes to cycling would be a positive step. Maggie Netto Individual Yes provision of dog bins. Removal of drinkers / drug users Thomas Smith Individual I just hope the local parks and spaces are well looked after Sathat Virdi Individual keep them tidy and clean Sam Foston Individual Clean up litter R Evans Individual Bedfont lakes should be protected and cleaned. The council (or its contractors) should show their pride in the local green spaces by the work undertaken by them, not just the bear minimum to meet contractual demands, or the contractual demands should be increased.

London Diocesan Fund Business N/A PJ Harmes Individual I am old enough not to need play spaces. Sharon Savill Individual No. Make more nature trails and coloured walks for the young and the old to spend time together. J Edwards Individual They can't. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor There should be a separate development paper auditing and proposing potential improvements to all the West Area green spaces as part of a coherent approach.  Investment through s106 contributions would enhance what already exists.  There should be associated investment in clubs that facilitate sport and leisure activities.

436

Andrew Barnes Individual We use all local open spaces for us and our kids. Each area is used extensively by others in local community. These could be improved with more employed park wardens and cafes.

Clare Obeng Individual See Q20. Ian Stewart Individual This is yet again another repetition of question. Restructuring the question to get a different answer is a poor tactic to use. Same answer in different terms to 20.

June Stewart Individual Same question as 20 but worded differently Leigh Hyatt Individual A need for park staff to keep spaces safe. The amount of times men urinate in these spaces makes me feel unsafe. Urgently needed park attendant.

Shetson Property Developments Business No, need more space with good transport links or car Ltd parking. D Rowe Individual We use our local park and the Glebelands with our grandchildren the same has we used it with our children.

G Hayes Individual we has a family use our local park quite a lot we are very happy with it, the pond needs attending to. Claudine Ott Individual Our parks and football pitches are a vital part of my life I take my nephews all the time to our local park and my nephew plays football over Blenheim.

David Traylen Individual meets our needs Gurpal Virdi Individual No improvements required. George Whyatt Individual Yes Paul Kirby Individual Ok at moment. Seek public opinion.

437

Name Respondent Type Q22. How should the need to protect our natural and open spaces be balanced with the need for jobs and homes in the future, and the demands of future residents and employees?

Speedbird Securities Ltd Business Please refer to response to Question 16. The Masterplan can also offer an opportunity to increase access to local public open space. Shetson Property Developments Business A healthy mix needs to be met, new employment areas Ltd should have open spaces integrated. Heston Residents' Association Community group With careful planning and with an approach which respects the need for open space. Prevention of the massing effect/overdevelopment is important. PJ Harmes Individual There are plenty of spaces for job re-generation - define future residents. Andrew Barnes Individual Always a difficult balance and do empathise with your challenge. The easiest way to resolve is to present various options and potential outcomes and let communities decide. Sonia Harmon Individual View Feltham as the Village it was – be more transparent, communicate and include the locals. Leave the largest and most important green spaces for the locals to use and– as it’s vital to help combat pollutions and noise. Gurpal Virdi Individual Build elsewhere other than Cranford and Heston Mark Savage Individual Strict planning controls on new developments, e.g. provision of front gardens over hard standing for car parking. Raja Individual Control planning / conservation. Green Feltham Community group The local spaces should be enhanced by ensuring that they are accessible, are surrounded by privately-owned accommodation and businesses with an interest in supporting their on-going maintenance and improvement. Sharon Savill Individual Keep it as it is. Improve on space and parkland for all.

438

Sam Foston Individual Regenerate already built on sites before using green belts Ian Stewart Individual The need to protect our natural and open spaces should be a first priority due to the proximity of Heathrow as without Trees and Grass the Air Quality would be even worse. June Stewart Individual Because of the air pollution here we need these open spaces for the health of the residents; mainly the more wild areas as we need the trees. R Evans Individual  A reasoned strategy should be arrived at through discussion and consensus;  Plant more trees generally around the borough;  Regenerate already build upon sites before using Green Field/Belt sites. The Rutland Group Business Look at options for realistically different balances and test them with local communities. The Rutland Group Business Finally the large areas of open land need to be addressed. It is clear that the proposals for restoration of the Green Belt in the 1989 West Area Local Plan have been implemented to only a limited degree. Specific projects were set out as priority improvements within the area with some having been implemented including the change of ownership at Bedfont Lakes Country Park, whilst others have planning permission, but development has not commenced such as the large permission at Bedfont Trading Estate.” As the Rutland Group know from their experience at Bedfont Lakes, restoration of these lands is complicated and costly: they had to assemble sites in nine different ownerships in order to control a viable scheme and the technical complexity of dealing with, often unlicensed, waste (sorting, disposal off- or on-site, venting of methane) and unstable ground. A comprehensive plan for the area provides the

439

opportunity to tackle the unrestored areas on a sufficient scale and to bring the land into productive use. Charles Asante Individual There should always be open spaces adding ok housing everywhere doesn’t resolve any issues. Clare Obeng Individual Natural and open spaces in this already congested area should come first. J Edwards Individual why change anything at the cost of people's homes Sathat Virdi Individual Keep our spaces protected. The sewers in Cranford cannot cope with all the extra hotels and housing here. Andrew Robinson Individual Open space will always be required, regardless of the need for jobs and homes. People will choose a place to live base not only on employment, transport and school facilities but also on access to open space. If the borough is to attract young, working families then this need will be particularly acute and, therefore, any building should take place within the current footprint and not sprawl onto open land. The way to ensure this is by good design which enables multiple units to be built on a single site and, since the borough has numerous brown field sites, this should be a realistic proposition. CPRE London NGO As Hounslow’s and London’s population grows, it is essential that the number, accessibility and quality of a range of open spaces grow to meet the growing needs and wishes of local communities. Green Belt and Metropolitan Open Land across Hounslow must be given the strongest protection from development as they are of significance to London as a whole, but Local Open Spaces are also often just as important to local communities and therefore must also receive strong protection. Open and green spaces provide significant benefits to local communities, as increasingly being illustrated by research

440

across towns and cities globally. The council should plan positively for the Green Belt and required by the NPPF, as well as its other green spaces to enhance the benefits they can bring. London Diocesan Fund Business There is no simple solution. What is needed is the removal of all those little rules and regulation that inhibit initiatives. Officers should be encouraged to find solutions not reasons to reject ideas. Politicians should recognise that this wonderful vision in not going to be completed between elections, they all need to buy into the vision and focus upon delivery. Bedfont Councillors Councillor A reasoned strategy should be arrived at through discussion and consensus. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor A reasoned strategy should be arrived at through discussion and consensus with all stakeholders. As in 16 above. David Traylen Individual Yes Leigh Hyatt Individual By all means take some space but leave some, but council must look after spaces. Go to National Trust for guidance. Berkeley Strategic Business The approach needs to be evidence based, taking account of the needs of the existing and future population, and the quality and type of existing and future open space. In simple terms, there has to be a clear recognition that the quality of life of existing and future residents of the Borough is significantly determined by the quality of residential accommodation and the ability of new homes to meet housing needs is a significant factor, carrying the weight of policy set out in the NPPF. In this regard, the protection of open spaces should be assessed in the context of the NPPF, taking into account their value and the level of protection afforded to them. Paul Kirby Individual we had good industrial estates George Whyatt Individual Leave Feltham alone

441

Issue 8: Enhancing Feltham and Protecting Neighbourhood Centres

Name Respondent Type Q23. Do the Feltham Masterplan and Heathrow New Garden City vision offer sound proposals for growth?

Green Feltham Community group The Feltham Masterplan identifies many of the right issues, but some of the ‘solutions’ such as a new university seem to have come from no-where, and may reflect wider interests rather than people locally. Although there is the potential for this to be positive, more needs to be done to ‘sell’ this, rather than it appearing from no-where. Also, the two proposals are contradictory, already Feltham suffers terrible congestion if there is any traffic incident on any surrounding road. Neither of the plans seriously addresses this issue by proposing any kind of relief for these bottlenecks, indeed they would exacerbate them. Much of the congestion in Feltham is self-inflicted by poor road layouts and the lack of road crossings across the railway. Sonia Harmon Individual In some cases, but where Green Spaces are concerned no. June Stewart Individual I think that these plans will destroy the Town. WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff Business The Feltham Masterplan has a sensible approach to exploring higher density development while retaining local context and character, and enhancing public transport and accessibility. However, the Feltham Masterplan can only offer incremental improvements to employment and housing growth needs, and may therefore have limitations in the context of longer terms housing needs. The Heathrow New Garden City offers a credible opportunity for accommodating growth.

442

Environment Agency Government The Feltham Masterplan We have only very limited comments in relation to the Feltham Masterplan, this is due to the fact that the plan area includes only the Longford River which is designated as an ordinary watercourse. Although no longer in our remit we would suggest that the plan should refer to the surface water management plan (SWMP) and the local flood risk management strategy (LFRMS) which have both been produced by the London Borough of Hounslow. This is important in order to ensure that local flood risks are considered in the vision for the area.

Heathrow New Garden City Vision We support the reference that the Heathrow New Garden City Vision document makes to the fact that Longford River, the Duke of Northumberland’s River and the River Crane pass through the area and provide important green corridors. You should include a reference to the work and projects of the Crane Valley Partnership in order to further promote improvements to maximise the use of the river corridor. The flood risk policies contained within the Local Plan are strong and we would suggest making reference to the existing flood risk policies and emphasising the importance of reducing flood risk in the Heathrow New Garden City Vision.

Bedfont Councillors Councillor Growth: yes it does. What is paramount however is that schools and transport are delivered in unison

Berkeley Strategic Business As stated in response to question 15, we note that the New Garden City vision identifies the land controlled by Berkeley (shown in Appendix 2) as “Potential Development

443

Residential Areas” but it is not included as one of the areas where a more detailed concept plan has been developed. Berkeley is willing to work with the Council to shape how its land could be developed so that it can be better reflected within any update to the Garden City vision.

In broad terms, the vision and Masterplan are useful starting points, but they need to be considered in terms of:  Ongoing uncertainty surrounding Heathrow, the third runway, and timing and feasibility of a southern rail link which may impact on the form and timing of development;  The deliverability of development opportunities, and the importance for the Borough of securing a trajectory of housing supply that ensures there is deliverable and developable land available which is unconstrained and can be brought forward.  The findings of the Green Belt review and SHLAA. Shetson Property Developments Business It meets current growth, but not overall demand. Ltd Universities Superannuation Business See representation for comments related to soundness of Scheme Feltham Masterplan. Heston Residents' Association Community group Subject to development of the concepts Speedbird Securities Ltd Business These documents help deliver a high level strategy but need refinement to ensure that their respective visions can be delivered. That refinement requires financial input from many parties which is more readily secured when backed by a firm and clear policy support which decreases risk and increases the prospects of implementation. These documents must seek to provide this assurance as a precursor to more detailed work commencing on detailed design.

444

Orbit Developments (Southern) Business The general ethos of the Feltham Masterplan to improve the Limited viability and vitality of Feltham town centre is welcomed. Friends of the River Crane Community group It is ironic in a way that the Heathrow Vision talks in terms of Environment a “Garden City” and yet the thrust and implications of this document appear to be working against the spirit of a garden city, whereby green spaces would be an intrinsic part of the whole. A further irony is that the Third Runway proposals, which would pave over a large area to the north of the existing airport, and which would need to pass major environmental hurdles to be permitted, are used here to support an argument for paving over large areas to the south of the airport. In our view there is an urgent need to review the value and nature of the green and open spaces across the western part of the Borough. The purpose of this review would be to assess how they may be enhanced and managed to create better green corridors, links and green assets for the local communities they serve. This review would look at existing corridors and how barriers to permeability can be removed and reduced; it would acknowledge and seek to enhance the potential of green spaces as social, educational, economic and health (as well as environmental) assets. PJ Harmes Individual Not sound vision. Mark Savage Individual No. Too much depends on variables such as the growth of air traffic and indeed, Britain’s membership of the European Union. Sam Foston Individual Does it consider residents? R Evans Individual Growth: yes it does. What is paramount however is that schools and transport are delivered in unison?

Mark Harmon Individual There is not much planning detail in the Feltham Vision Masterplan (May 2015) there are a few interesting elements, and worrying about level crossing closure.

445

Considering how much impact it made when closing the road Feltham High street to Bedfont was closed Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Reservations remain regarding sustainable employment but the potential for additional new homes to be welcomed. All social and transport should be planned and delivered prior or in tandem. CPRE London NGO We also object to Heathrow New Garden City vision, as it stands. The current concept plan illustrates a significant loss of Green Belt land that severely impacts on the integrity of the Green Belt and runs counter to London and National policy to not build on the Green Belt. The SB Hotel Group Business As described in the narrative relating to Issue 8, the Feltham Masterplan and Heathrow New Garden City vision offer potentially sound proposals for the provision of local services (retail, culture, leisure etc.), which primarily serve the West of Borough. However, they have a more limited role in providing ‘traditional’ Class B employment space and services related to Heathrow Airport, such as hotels. The Rutland Group Business It is good that the two proposals are founded on the notion of communities, the one a new community and the other an existing community. The rationale for the New Garden City, its role within the wider area and how the different parts of the settlement relate to one another, are not however clear. This rationale is important for two reasons: one because the location and the opportunity are significant in regional and local terms and two because exceptional circumstances will need to be demonstrated to justify development in the Green Belt.

446

Name Respondent Type Q24. What is the role of Feltham and the other local centres in the West of the Borough and how should they be promoted and secured? Charles Asante Individual Better engagements with locals Clare Obeng Individual Shopping centre in Feltham needs more police on the beat. Green Feltham Community group There is a lack of acknowledgement of the connections of the West of the Borough to other local areas. Power League Hanworth has called itself Power league Sunbury – the location of the A316 means that Hanworth and areas along this route are accessible to a wider audience, and will also be attractive for passing trade. The location of the Reading/Windsor to Waterloo railway line means that Feltham serves as the base for BP’s shuttle service.

More work needs to be done to understand the role of Hanworth in relation to these other local centres – particularly the Richmond borough areas of the Nursery lands and Hampton borders. London Diocesan Fund Business Communications Borough wide is very difficult. Developments and visions are too often seen as simply vested interests at work. Social media needs to be used to involve those under 30. It ought to be seen as essential to involve the younger generation after all, it is they who will become the future leaders and users of this imaginative plan. Euan Bull Individual Concern that it is only being done because there is money from Heathrow and other areas, brownfield sites. Could be used instead. Andrew Barnes Individual Feltham has the only Cinema/Bowling in the borough. Green Space, links to Heathrow and Central London. The Southern rail link will ensure the Heathrow/London Link is promoted and secured. The cinema could do with an overhaul as very run down.

447

Sonia Harmon Individual Feltham is a wonderful community village, with a lot of assets. There is high historic value here, and a community feel should be nurtured and continued. Feltham should be encouraging small local businesses, but to a set standard, not just as it is now. Ian Stewart Individual The Towns, including Feltham, in the West of Borough are local community hubs and they should be protected and allowed to be run by the Residents and the Councillors we elect without any interference from Central Committee in Hounslow. June Stewart Individual I think we have just got over the destruction of the 70's build in Feltham Town Centre and it should just be enhanced as it is. David Traylen Individual As a small community. Maggie Netto Individual To provide family friendly all age community living. More needs to be done to make Feltham a place you want to go out to of an evening. Sharon Savill Individual Unsure. London Borough of Hillingdon Government As noted above, Hillingdon is keen to ensure that the potential cross boundary impacts of the proposed expansion of Feltham are properly assessed. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Feltham is the main “town” surrounded by a series of villages. Feltham should be designed as the welcoming venue- its conservation areas enhanced, its walkways and river walks advertised and promoted. Feltham Arenas opened up as the main entrance to the centre. I feel Feltham is one town, but it is dis-jointed, as noted in the report the Arenas/ the movie theatre / the town centre are not all seen as one- it appears to be 3 separate places- we need to bring it all together Feltham high street is a nightmare to drive through. Shetson Property Developments Business More community living should be promoted, new residential Ltd units should not be allowed to be let out.

448

Universities Superannuation Business Feltham remains the main town centre within the catchment Scheme of the West of the Borough and should be promoted as such. The way to consolidate and maintain this designation is to ensure that a co-ordinated approach to “regeneration and intensification” is progressed, looking at Feltham as a whole and ensuring that its current strengths are not overlooked. While the Masterplan is the first step in addressing this, it does not identify which recommendations will be brought forward and or how will be captured in Policy. We have set out above how connectivity is key to ensuring that the different areas of Feltham are promoted by increasing linkages and therefore footfall between the different uses. This will help promote Feltham as a connected centre. Feltham will be promoted further by the right development in the right place. The redevelopment of key existing assets that are critical to Feltham’s current success should be discussed with the landowner in the first instance and the feasibility needs to be discussed before schemes are put into the public domain. Heston Residents' Association Community group Their presence/development of local centres is critical to the prosperity of an area. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business Feltham town centre provides a district centre role meeting the day to day needs of local residents. It does not have a high order comparison goods role and is the type of centre at risk from the polarisation of shopping function. Additional housing development within its catchment would help underpin its function and the provision of a wider range of goods and services. Orbit Developments (Southern) Business Feltham town centre boundary should be amended to Limited include Manor Retail Park.

449

PJ Harmes Individual The role is to satisfy residents first who then earn respect and publish heritage Mark Savage Individual Feltham town centre as it has been since the beginning of this century has become an excellent shopping facility, and it is much less necessary to travel to other towns now to make purchases. Undoubtedly, ASDA and Argos have enhanced the town. But there are too few small local businesses or services, some have been priced out of the town. There should be more incentives so that businesses such as Richardson’s and Ann and Paul’s can thrive. Both Bedfont and Feltham have far too many take-away food shops and the prevalence of these within a small area is visually disturbing and also a bit of a magnet for rubbish. A wider range of businesses and restriction of new fast food establishments should be encouraged. Sam Foston Individual Feltham is very disjointed. R Evans Individual Feltham is the main "town" surrounded by a series of villages. Feltham should be designed as the welcoming venue- its conservation areas enhanced, its walkways and river walks advertised and promoted, I feel Feltham is one town, but it is dis-jointed, as noted in the report the Arenas/ the movie theatre / the town centre are not all seen as one- it appears to be 3 separate places- we need to bring it all together. It needs to be enhanced with better quality shops, family restaurants and no more fast food. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Hounslow, as a Borough on the fringes of London, benefits from the presence of local centres which are entirely in keeping with the suburban character of the area and provide contrast to proposals for increased urbanisation elsewhere such as the GWC. Feltham is the main “town” surrounded by a series of villages. Feltham should be designed as the welcoming venue. Its conservation areas enhanced, its walkways and river walks advertised and promoted and

450

sustainable links made to unite the town’s fringes with its traditional centre. Paul Kirby Individual Promote healthy Feltham. Not just a dormitory Aviva Investors UK Ltd Business Aviva supports the acknowledgement that Feltham is the main town centre, which has also been recognised in earlier Local Plan documents as an accessible location for regeneration and intensification. As part of this improvement we note that the Council identifies that in Feltham the “the ‘evening economy’ is lacking in terms of food and drink. There is potential to broaden the retail mix with informal ‘mid-market’ dining and cafes. Thus particular emphasis need to be placed upon the leisure and cultural ‘offer’ of the town. Promoting a wider range of uses to maintain or improve the Feltham’s vitality will be crucial to its future success”. Aviva considers it appropriate to place emphasis on the mix of uses as an opportunity to improve the offer of Feltham to its residents and reflect its accessibility to public transport. As such, we would suggest that sites such as The Centre are recognised as being able to provide the opportunity to deliver a wider range of uses (when the opportunities arise) to assist the Council with delivering their aspirations to the vitality of Feltham especially in the evening. However, we would suggest that such aspirations are only deliverable if more detailed supporting policies are developed in tandem with this policy document to ensure that this aspiration is supported and delivered at a local development control management level. Raja Individual Not sure The Rutland Group Business There are two clear and important markets to be served by centres in the West of the Borough: the local resident population and the staff of the key international businesses,

451

the latter including the corporate service needs of the firms themselves.

Name Respondent Type Q25. Do you think it is important to protect our small local centres and isolated shops that meet peoples day to day needs? Where lack of demand leads to some contraction, how should this be managed?

Charles Asante Individual Free parking option may help here, liaise with locals Clare Obeng Individual Bedfont shops need better management of leases - too many hairdressers, food shops of poor quality and "corner shops" or off-licenses. Green Feltham Community group We need to ensure that there is adequate local parking, safe cycling routes and parking to make these places accessible.

London Diocesan Fund Business Ys, the Business Rate should be used more flexibly to attract a mixed range of shops and services. One size or rate does not suit all! Andrew Barnes Individual Yes vitally important. More to promote local retail and bring back markets. Sonia Harmon Individual Small and independent businesses should be nurtured and cultivated here, with a set standard to keep to. Ian Stewart Individual This is vitally important; without the small local shops more people would have to take to their cars or the buses and congestion would get even worse. Flexible business rates for failing shops should be considered and cheaper parking in local shopping areas in the west along the lines of Isleworth’s shops. June Stewart Individual Yes; I think the shops in Feltham High Street get used a lot and should be protected. David Traylen Individual Yes

452

Maggie Netto Individual Yes, especially for the elderly or those without transport who rely on local shops. J Edwards Individual Yes Sharon Savill Individual Yes of course. Stop major supermarkets taking priority over small holders. D Rowe Individual Yes local business is important G Hayes Individual we have always supported our local shops Claudine Ott Individual I support our local shops every day they are very important to myself and my husband. Thomas Smith Individual I think local shops are very good for our area and is good for Feltham. Carol Wood Individual I think local shops are good for our area people should be able to run their own business. K Harmon Individual Yes, minimise larger bland shops. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Very important to assist local businesses and small centres – especially with a sympathetic parking policy Shetson Property Developments Business Local shops should be protected and promoted. Better Ltd concessions on business rates and council’s street lighting and decorations. Heston Residents' Association Community group Protection is essential. The increase in housing, demographic changes, population growth, growth in family size will stimulate demand in local areas. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business There is an increasing current trend towards ‘local’ food shopping which sees shoppers undertake more regular shopping trips with a smaller basket size. It is consequently importance to ensure a range of local provision which meets this trend as it is generally a sustainable approach with a higher proportion of shoppers travelling by means of transport other than the private motor car. The Vision should support this pattern of shopping. PJ Harmes Individual Yes as much as possible - if lack of demand rethink use.

453

Mark Savage Individual Yes. Many local shopping centres have become rundown and ill-supported by the council. Central Parade in Feltham is a case in point. The unused shop sites here could be converted into the alternative community centre needed for Sparrow Farm Residents or converted into additional housing. Sam Foston Individual Very important to assist local business R Evans Individual Shops should be of good quality, and have enforced standards to adhere to. Very important to assist local businesses and small centres, especially with a sympathetic parking policy But we also need more big names. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor It is vitally important and within the local centres, to act to prevent loss of shops and their replacement with takeaways, pound shops and similar low effort outlets. Obtaining the right mix of housing types should be of benefit to this approach such as providing housing types for residents who tend to shop and consume locally rather than driving to out of town facilities. There needs to be some kind of business rates relief that will encourage small and specialist businesses to locate and remain in the community and stay viable during times of economic downturn where their loss would disadvantage local people. Paul Kirby Individual Local shops important but if not viable re-think Raja Individual Yes The Rutland Group Business Local shops and services are important; they have however already evolved and will continue to do so. The present and the next generations of traders are best placed to identify the shops and services that are in demand and which will underpin the viability of the centres.

454

Issue 9: Providing Community Infrastructure and Local Services

Name Respondent Type Q26. What does community infrastructure mean to you?

Charles Asante Individual A local asset/setup? Clare Obeng Individual Holistic balance of people vs roads, schooling, shops, local connectivity, volunteering, having a safe community hall for local events Green Feltham Community group Community infrastructure means safe places for meeting and bumping into local people, engaging ideas and finding out what is going on. London Diocesan Fund Business The ability for all ages to move safely around one's community. The Theatres Trust NGO We recommend this succinct all-inclusive description which would obviate the need to provide examples: community facilities provide for the health and wellbeing, social, educational, spiritual, recreational, leisure and cultural needs of the community. Andrew Barnes Individual Places and means for communities to come together. Assisting each other to ensure local businesses continue to thrive. Sonia Harmon Individual Everything from amenities, and Doctors, mental health assistance, policing, and transport Ian Stewart Individual Community Infrastructure is the local amenities that help build a happy community. A decent Town Centre; local corner shops; decent public transport; usable road network; decent and accessible medical services.

455

The more you develop without consideration to these items the less the Community stays strong and the more antisocial behaviour starts. June Stewart Individual It means having a good community and should be balanced in accordance to the population. Matthew Savage Individual Schools, places of worship for different faiths, meeting halls, playgrounds, leisure amenities (parks, swimming pools, sports clubs), Youth groups, Playgroups, utility supplies, retail spaces. David Traylen Individual Too much change. Brian Traylen Individual Too much change to our way of life. Maggie Netto Individual I think this encapsulates everything a community needs to thrive: housing, social, leisure, travel, parking, etc. Leigh Hyatt Individual My home. J Edwards Individual Everything. Chris Netto Individual Water, schools, libraries, shopping, green space and parks. K Harmon Individual Schools, doctors, dentists. Sathat Virdi Individual Adequate facilities for all ages - Accountability help and resources to be provided. Gurpal Virdi Individual Ensure that everybody is cared and looked after. Seema Malhotra MP Hounslow is already struggling to find enough places for all its school children. A growing population is likely to make this need more acute. The key plan issue here will be land, although there will be others, such as localised traffic congestion. Nonetheless adequate supply must be found. Education Funding Agency Government The EFA welcomes LB Hounslow’s approach to planning for new school places through the Council’s Sequential Site Assessment for Additional School Sites and the allocation of sites for school use within the Local Plan. School place provision should be carefully managed recognising that housing growth will impact on infrastructure requirements, including schools. We encourage LB Hounslow to allocate

456

land in the plan area for education purposes to ensure that new schools can be opened to deliver school places at the right time.

The EFA is involved in a number of projects in the plan area, these include: The Rise School opened in September 2014 and supports children and young people with autism. Construction of the school’s permanent building is nearing completion and we expect the school to occupy their new school building from spring 2016. Logic Studio School is due to open in September 2016 and will specialise in International Logistics and Computing Technologies. Subject to securing planning permission the school will occupy existing temporary accommodation on the Feltham Community College site whilst their permanent new building is being constructed. The studio school will have 300 places once at full capacity.

Space Studio West London opened in Bridge House, Hanworth Road in September 2015 on a temporary basis. The studio school will offer 300 places for 14-19 year olds once at full capacity Planning permission has been secured for the school’s new permeant building on part of the Rivers Academy site. Edison Primary School is a 3FE school due to open in September 2016, it will be the first science specialist school to be developed in west London. A permanent site has been secured (Heston House, Vicarage Farm Road) and planning permission will be required for the new school building. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Schools, social services hubs (Southville Community Centre) Ensuring there is a mixture of facilities, from medical to schools, to entertainment, to shops

457

Berkeley Strategic Business Berkeley considers a useful measure of community infrastructure can be drawn from the definition in the Planning Act 2008 in terms of what can be funded through CIL. This includes including transport, flood defences, schools, hospitals, and other health and social care facilities. Shetson Property Developments Business Having people care about where they live and keeping Ltd everything local. Heston Residents' Association Community group To make readily available to all residents and businesses a good balance of all the essential services, for example, school places, libraries, recreation, health and welfare services, road and transport (good PTAL), public utilities and all the other 101 services required to provide a good quality of life. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The Planning Act 2008 provides a wide definition of the infrastructure which can be funded by the levy, including transport, flood defences, schools, hospitals, and other health and social care facilities. This definition allows the levy to be used to fund a very broad range of facilities such as play areas, parks and green spaces, cultural and sports facilities, district heating schemes and police stations and other community safety facilities. This gives local communities flexibility to choose what infrastructure they need to deliver their development plan. Friends of the River Crane Community group Community Infrastructure includes the open spaces that the Environment community use (or could use) but this aspect of community infrastructure (the green infrastructure) is not addressed in the report. This omission seems particularly stark given the proposed objective of a garden city type development. In our view green assets need to be integrated into any assessment of community infrastructure. These open space assets are not just for rest and relaxation. They are also (or can be) used as outdoor classroom and training areas;

458

provide major health benefits; and act as green transport corridors. The management and engagement of local people with their open spaces can also generate good quality sustainable employment through the delivery of education, training, land management and health benefits for example. PJ Harmes Individual Community centres, libraries, shopping, school, doctors, leisure. Mark Savage Individual Roads, schools, surgeries, pocket parks, broadband provision, community centres, places of worship and entertainment. Sam Foston Individual Ensuring there is a mixture of facilities. R Evans Individual Ensuring there is a mixture of facilities, from medical to schools, to entertainment, to shops. Mark Harmon Individual Public transportation, healthcare and education. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor The full range of opportunities: jobs, affordable housing, open spaces, community venues, shops, anything necessary to sustain a diverse community and to welcome and absorb new arrivals. CPRE London NGO As has already been noted, the need expand and build existing schools should not be used as a reason to re- designate or build on protected green spaces: generalised pressures do not constitute “exceptional circumstances”. School playing fields and other open spaces must be protected. The WoB plan should ensure the protection and enhancement of Hounslow’s Green belt, Metropolitan Open Land and other green spaces. Paul Kirby Individual Not utilities but social infrastructure. Group centres, schools, play area George Whyatt Individual My home Raja Individual Parks for us to use The Rutland Group Business The range of shops and services that meet the requirements of local residents and local employers

459

Name Respondent Type Q27. What facilities do you think the area lacks?

Charles Asante Individual Hanworth lacks proper retail character, needs independent shop and a train station. Also reviewing butts farm purpose today vs 50 years ago. Clare Obeng Individual Local community hall. Green Feltham Community group Feltham lacks signposts, and maps to show people around the area. Simple things like signs to Feltham High Street from the Railway station (It doesn’t help that the ‘main entrance’ is now at the back of the station – the historic front entrance should be signed as the main route to the town centre and fared accordingly. There is a lack of noticeboards announcing what is on and even to clearly indicate where the Library is, and when the next Area Forum is – electronic signs could do this.

There is a need for more public arts space, and attractive and well-maintained areas to meet others and catch up over a coffee. There is a need for accessible ‘front doors’ to the green spaces. Currently these are tucked away behind buildings, with no easy parking next to areas where people can meet and relax in safe areas with good circulation of people. London Diocesan Fund Business Survey all the age groups and yes, I do mean the school children upwards. Andrew Barnes Individual Local History Museum. Open spaces having a lack of cafes. Sonia Harmon Individual See the Feltham Phoenix Project. A Survey of over 2000 Feltham local Residents. Ian Stewart Individual The Town Centre could do with some more decent restaurants but otherwise it has most things you would wish to see in a small Town Centre.

460

June Stewart Individual There is a lack of good GP's Matthew Savage Individual *Protected* provisions for children and youths. I am aware, for example, of more than one Community Group that has a leasehold interest in land and buildings, but the leases are ‘held over’ as they have long expired – with no “Section 25” or “Section 26” Notices being issued. Some of these Groups have expressed an interest in Community Asset Transfer, but this does not appear to have been taken forward by the Borough. David Traylen Individual none Brian Traylen Individual NHS and a better road service that will work. Maggie Netto Individual Well-funded sustainable youth and children’s work provision. Modern medical centres. J Edwards Individual None Sharon Savill Individual Safe parkland and green spaces. G Hayes Individual Things for young people to do to keep them of the streets Chris Netto Individual Youth facilities. Alan Rise Individual None improve or upgrade existing. K Harmon Individual Provision of youth activities, reasonably priced halls for hire. Sathat Virdi Individual Elderly and young people - need more centres for them. Gurpal Virdi Individual Doctors/youth clubs Bedfont Councillors Councillor Joined up thinking to enhance what is already here: to what emerges out of the plan. Please be careful with zoning- I am saddened by the number of fast food takeaways can we limit the number of fast food outlets? It would be nice to signpost community halls and centres and ensure there is adequate community events highlighted Berkeley Strategic Business This needs to be considered through an evidence-based infrastructure capacity assessment.

461

Shetson Property Developments Business indoor parks, better car parking Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group Housing, school places. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business On the basis of site enquiries made to our client, the area lacks employment land and hotel sites. PJ Harmes Individual older people activities - e.g. bowls, community centres, football for younger, running track etc. Sam Foston Individual In park activities for the whole community. R Evans Individual Better quality schools, More Doctor surgeries with broader range of hours of availability. More entertainment like Museums, Theatres, Wildlife centres, swimming pools/ gym. Mark Harmon Individual Emergency healthcare - A&E. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor Decent parks and amenities for young people that are free, secure and well maintained. Paul Kirby Individual Older people activity centres - e.g. bowls George Whyatt Individual None less traffic. Raja Individual Lack of restaurants / bars / cafes The Rutland Group Business Mainly catering and accommodation for local firms, many of whom receive many customers and staff on a visiting basis. Good hotels and restaurants should be located near local commercial premises and near other commercial routes e.g. M25 and A30. The Rutland Group Business The south side of the Airport is poorly served by infrastructure and services for both local residents and firms in the area. Shops, hotels, restaurants and other services are limited in range and quality. Proposals in the plan need to be based on an understanding of what services are most needed by residents and firms.

462

Name Respondent Type Q28. What do you think the Plan should provide?

Charles Asante Individual Long term visions not short term gain Clare Obeng Individual 2nd secondary school near Bedfont. Green Feltham Community group There should be improvements for parks and green spaces to provide community spaces and social enterprises. For example, Bridge House Pond could really use funding to support improvements – both to improve safety (e.g. a fence around the play area) and make it more enjoyable to use (a ping pong table), and pleasant (new planting, improvements to the pond). In the medium term we could look to introduce a café into the space. London Diocesan Fund Business Answers already given. The Theatres Trust NGO The Theatres Trust suggest the Local Plan should recognise, protect and support community and cultural facilities. The importance of planning for culture and cultural facilities is emphasised in the National Planning Policy Framework by being included as a core planning principle (item 17). This is supported by guidance in item 70 of the NPPF which states that to deliver the social, recreational and cultural facilities and services that the community needs, planning policies and decisions should guard against unnecessary loss of valued facilities. Also to ensure that established facilities and services are retained and able to develop for the benefit of the community.

Cultural and community opportunities also play a big role in developing, attracting and retaining skilled work force, and this should be promoted in this document. It is therefore important the local plan safeguard cultural & community facilities which benefit and support sustainable communities which might otherwise be traded in for more commercially

463

lucrative developments. Also to promote new facilities to support the growing population.

To support the objectives, we recommend a Community Facilities policy along the lines of: The council will resist the loss or change of use of existing community and cultural facilities unless replacement facilities are provided on site or within the vicinity which meet the need of the local population, or necessary services can be delivered from other facilities without leading to, or increasing, any shortfall in provision. The Policy should also contain criteria for encouraging the provision of new facilities. Andrew Barnes Individual More importance on local Heritage. Sonia Harmon Individual More mental health help, better medical facilities and better transport solutions. More practical use of Green Spaces - See the Feltham Phoenix Project! - A Survey of over 2000 Feltham local Residents. Ian Stewart Individual The plan should be looking at the needs of each Community not a broad stroke idea. Each part of each Town has its own needs and without addressing these you will only be creating anger and disharmony. June Stewart Individual We have all that we need now; we just need to enhance what we have rather than destroy and start again. David Traylen Individual better road junction a high st and Bedfont Lane Brian Traylen Individual Ring road around Feltham. Leigh Hyatt Individual Safer streets parks, CCTV camera, park attendance. J Edwards Individual A nicer area for those that have been here for years. Sharon Savill Individual Schools, doctor surgeries, health centres, libraries, community centres. Sathat Virdi Individual Preserve our heritage. Gurpal Virdi Individual Food courts.

464

London Borough of Hillingdon Government It is important that sufficient physical and community infrastructure comes forward to support the extent of the development proposals and that Hounslow is not reliant on provision from outside of the borough. The need for additional community infrastructure arising from the proposals should be fully assessed as part of the production of the WoB Plan. In order to minimise cross boundary impacts these needs, particularly those for additional school places and healthcare facilities, should be fully met within the growth area or other parts of the LB Hounslow. Further comments will be provided on the Hounslow's infrastructure plans when they are available. Bedfont Councillors Councillor Well defined walkways, cycle paths, a ‘feel-good’ confidence in one’s area, one’s home going forward Berkeley Strategic Business Whatever is provided should be related to needs identified through the infrastructure capacity assessment. In general terms, Berkeley notes the important role of planned release of housing land of sufficient scale to support infrastructure delivery. Shetson Property Developments Business Not sure. Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group A good life quality for residents and good job opportunities with a local infrastructure in support. Local prosperity. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The Plan should provide the housing and employment development required to support London and the UK’s economy. An associated Strategic Infrastructure Plan will identify in formal terms and through consultation the range of infrastructure required. PJ Harmes Individual Better detail, clearer explanations. Sam Foston Individual Identification for traffic improvements. R Evans Individual An environment that allows residents to achieve a higher standard of living. Well defined walkways, cycle

465

paths, a 'feel-good' confidence in one's area, one's home going forward. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor A means by which the windfalls generated by the high value new development zones are channelled equitably throughout the Borough. Barcelona has been achieving this for nearly forty years with parks, housing for rent, new boulevards and local centres being visibly developed and enhanced in the most economically challenged neighbourhoods alongside major infrastructural change; Olympics, conference facilities, traffic improvements, new airport and more.  A feel-good confidence for this, one of Hounslow borough’s long neglected areas.  An honest approach from the council and developers. Paul Kirby Individual Better activity centres Raja Individual More professional services

466

Issue 10: Promoting High Quality Urban Design and Conserving Heritage

Name Respondent Type Q29. How can we best respect the history and best of local character and context of the West of the Borough whilst providing the potential for growth?

The Rutland Group Business Encourage new viable uses for historic buildings and places. Sathat Virdi All regulations for buildings should be enforced. Berkeley Strategic Business Around the Berkeley land (as shown at Appendix 2) there is an opportunity to use new development to provide a significant enhancement to the urban character and design quality of the local area. Berkeley has a strong corporate commitment to high quality design in its place-making, and in the event of any allocation would work with the Council to deliver a strong urban design framework that sets the standard for future development in the area. Green Feltham Community group We can do this by talking about our own local communities. It also means conserving what is left of the area’s heritage – the treatment of the old ‘People’s Centre’ in Feltham by the Council is close to scandalous. One key area is Bridge House Pond, which has been largely neglected but could provide the centre of a ‘heritage quarter’. It means taking time to understand the cultural significance of different areas, and how to improve them for the future.

Unfortunately, the additional protection offered to land in Conservation Areas imposes additional costs on local residents and businesses – which can mean that people by- pass the system rather than engaging with it. For instance, there are a large number of dead trees on private property

467

around the Hanworth Road, Feltham end of the Feltham town centre Conservation Area. As it costs people to pay for these to be removed, they are left as an eyesore. Waiving such fees, where the tree is to be replaced would promote the local environment.

There is also the need for long-term planning to ensure that new trees are planted in Conservation Areas so that there is a mix of ages, in case older trees need to be removed in future. Unfortunately, Feltham has been damaged by speculative investments (e.g. Hanworth Park House, and People’s Centre) which apply for planning permission and then sell to realise investment gains. More work should be put in to ensure any assets sold are passed to bodies who will develop it in a sensitive way. The Council must work closely with the MOJ around the sale and future development of Feltham Magistrate’s Court. Andrew Barnes Individual Stop allowing it to be knocked down or falling apart. Make use of it rather than lose it. LBH needs to demonstrate a more care in the West of the Borough on these matters.

Sonia Harmon Individual Not building on Green Spaces of historical significance such as Feltham Arenas Parklands with its over 100 years old Boundary line a historic Allotment Area and 18th Century. Please listen to others people’s opinions. Ian Stewart Individual By promoting the Green Spaces that we have and looking to build on disused or derelict sites. Shetson Property Developments Business Allow new build with good design. Ltd

468

Heston Residents' Association Community group High quality urban design is vitally important, developments should complement the existing area; architecture should be attractive and enhance the life experience of residents. Too little attention has been directed at conserving heritage, as a result the original character of some areas (Heston Conservation Area) has been seriously eroded. The original architectural concept of many residential roads has been swept away, semi-detached properties have become terraced and the quality of life has been eroded. As a result a massing/overdevelopment effect has been created leading to overcrowding adversely affecting the quality of life. The "Rogue Landlord" presence is prevalent to the west of the borough. Every attempt should be made to respect history when moving forward. Matthew Savage Individual Listing of some assets. Allowing redevelopment whilst preserving facades, such as the Cardinal Road School development, is a good example. Raja Individual Local town centres. The SB Hotel Group Business Existing policies, as set out in the recently adopted Local Plan, together with the provisions of the NPPF and NPPG, provide an appropriate, and comprehensive, framework for ensuring that new development respects the history, local character and context of the WoB. Sharon Savill Individual Maintain what we have. Gurpal Virdi Individual Preservation orders and ensuring heritage buildings and sites are maintained. Sam Foston Individual Keep as much as possible and make the most of it. David Traylen Individual No too much change. Chris Netto Individual Museum. Bedfont Councillors Councillor A local exhibition centre: visitors between flights can understand the area in one location (our history/story) Please keep the Freddie Mercury memorial (this is discussed too many times at the area forum already).

469

Ensure the Roman artefacts are not lost in the area behind Mayfield Farm PJ Harmes Individual Promote heritage, heritage centre. R Evans Individual  Ensure the Roman artefacts are not lost in the area behind Mayfield Farm;  Clearly identification of the listed buildings within  Feltham, and promote awareness; Where’s our Feltham Museum to shoe this all of? Clare Obeng Individual Avoid Bedfont for more housing. Leigh Hyatt Individual Leave alone just support. J Edwards Individual You can't. George Whyatt Individual Just clean the area and stop the growth. Paul Kirby Individual Promote history, guide books. Maggie Netto Individual By not developing areas to the detriment of existing residents e.g. the travelling show people in Station Road, Feltham. This community have been part of Feltham for 100 years. Charles Asante Individual researching back periods to see what can be built and whether it reflects the area that is being worked on June Stewart Individual Ensure those responsible for these plans have an understanding of the Towns and the Boroughs rich history. From everything I see them propose I don't think they have. Friends of the River Crane Community group The heritage section acknowledges the importance of the Environment Crane corridor and the All London Green Grid – for which we are grateful. It does not however acknowledge the importance and value of the Duke’s River and Longford River corridors. These are of considerable heritage importance, as man-made channels constructed in the 16th and 17th centuries to convey water from the River Colne to the River Crane and Hampton Court respectively. They also have great potential as present day walking and cycling corridors for local people, linking the Crane corridor with the great

470

expanses of the Colne corridor to the west and the Thames to the south. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor By employing sufficient numbers of conservation and other professionals to assist the development process in a sensitive consideration, protection and enhancement of designated and other heritage assets. Mayor of London Government The linking of growth to the provision of new social infrastructure is supported as is the draft Plan's recognition of the importance of high quality urban design and the need to conserve heritage assets. The need to protect and enhance such assets should also be recognised as set out in LP policies 7.8 and 7.9. London Diocesan Fund Business Approach planning applications in the same imaginative way as your original vision.

471

Name Respondent Type Q30. What important ‘designated’ and ‘non-designated’ heritage assets do you think we should do more to celebrate?

Clare Obeng Individual Bedfont Green. St Mary's Church, Longford River, Duke of Northumberland River, Racing Track BTW Bedfont and Feltham needs investment Green Feltham Community group Feltham Marshalling Yards, Feltham Magistrates Court, Bridge House Pond, Hanworth Park House, Hanworth Air Parks, Feltham’s Market Garden Heritage, Feltham Borstal, the cluster of old buildings around St Dunstan’s church. The Longford River and Crane Park. More could be done to celebrate Feltham’s heritage, such as reviving the Feltham heritage trail, and supporting improvements in the town centre conservation area. We should do more to celebrate Feltham’s recent heritage. It is associated with some of the icons of the 20th Century – the bi-plane, the Zepellin, the Aston Martin, Freddy Mercury and Brian May and more recently Mo Farah. We should have a ‘wall of fame’ of murals or a series of community-led mosaics to boldly celebrate this history and put the heritage of the area on the map.

London Diocesan Fund Business You cannot answer such a question by a single solution. You should encourage 'all age' local community champions to address these points, not councillors. The community should be your Army of supporters, harness their enthusiasm and knowledge. Andrew Barnes Individual Feltham Peoples centre (before it’s too late), Bethany Church, Hanworth Park House, Cranford Lock Up, St Catherine’s Spire, St Dunstan’s Road original Rose & crown. Feltham House and other parts of MOD area.

472

Better preservation and protection of conservation areas and current listed buildings. A W Smith should be celebrated. Sonia Harmon Individual See the Feltham Phoenix Project! - A Survey of over 2000 Feltham local Residents – which is designed to celebrate a vast amount of Feltham’s History, and well as provide many opportunities to all forms of life. Ian Stewart Individual There is a wealth of History associated with Hounslow Heath that you seem to overlook and appear to want to remove. Promote the general History of the whole Borough and its importance to History. June Stewart Individual Hounslow Heath from the River Crane - east. Matthew Savage Individual Industrial heritage is a major part of Feltham’s history – it’s not all about ancient buildings such as Chiswick House. There should be more recognition of our proud heritage, such as the largest marshalling yard, and the aircraft production, and the high-profile employers such as Aston Martin. There is only one Heritage Trail, and that does not have any recent publications to support it – Hounslow Library Services could be better utilised to promote this. We also have Scheduled Ancient Monuments that need to be properly cared for and promoted. David Traylen Individual Feltham Green and Glebelands Brian Traylen Individual Feltham Green and the Glebelands Maggie Netto Individual There is much history in this area and Feltham history group do a great job in promoting it. A permanent professional exhibition / museum would be good. Leigh Hyatt Individual Longford River, Glebelands. J Edwards Individual Showmen's yards (been here for 100 years). Sharon Savill Individual May Day / St Georges Day. K Harmon Individual Local celebrities; recognise whether they are alive or dead.

473

Gurpal Virdi Individual River Crane, the roundhouse, older buildings. Bedfont Councillors Councillor A local exhibition centre: visitors between flights can understand the area in one location (our history/story) I would like to ensure St Marys church and Bedfont Green are kept in place- the daffodils are a key part of Bedfont! Shetson Property Developments Business Not sure. Ltd Heston Residents' Association Community group Open space and Conservation Areas Speedbird Securities Ltd Business There is a substantial redundant farm building on land to the north of Plot B, on an alignment which runs parallel to the south runway landing lights. This building reflects the history of the area and could be refurbished for commercial or open space related use. It is a building which we consider merits retention. PJ Harmes Individual Airparks, sports arena, historic buildings, gunpowder mills and Hounslow Heath. Sam Foston Individual Bedfont lakes should be protected. R Evans Individual 3 rivers, 3 pons, Bedfont lakes should all be protected. Hounslow Heath. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor The Feltham Tram - Feltham First Pea. Paul Kirby Individual We had a decent sports arena. George Whyatt Individual Glebelands and the Longford Rover. Raja Individual Feltham Pond

474

Issue 11: Making it Happen

Name Respondent Type Q31. Do you think any of the Local Plan site allocations should be changed?

Clare Obeng Individual Leave Bedfont alone please from more housing. London Diocesan Fund Business When decisions are taken do not cast them in stone. Review and make changes if it is not working in improvements can be made. Yes, change to a plan has a cost element, so does failure. Andrew Barnes Individual No Sonia Harmon Individual Lots. A review of the traffic flow in and around Feltham as residents to come up with solutions. Also be transparent as to why it may or may not work. Involve local people!

Ian Stewart Individual I don't agree with the Local Plan so no comment. June Stewart Individual They should not be building in the Station Estate Road Area in Feltham as these residents have been there for generations and are part of the Town's history. To move them could cause them to be discriminated against. Also the Hounslow Road by the Assembly Hall should be maintained as open land. Matthew Savage Individual The MoD Site at Feltham has recently been announced as being released for housing. Brian Traylen Individual Leave well alone. J Edwards Individual Yes Sharon Savill Individual Yes Alan Rise Individual Non-implementation Gurpal Virdi Individual To include more to clean up Cranford

475

Environment Agency Government None of the site allocations in this plan area are located along the river corridor; we therefore have no specific comments in relation to question 31 which asks if any of the existing site allocations should be changed. The main considerations in these areas will be anything highlighted in the SWMP/LFRMS relating to local flood risk. We would advise that you check if any of these site allocations fall within critical drainage areas defined by Hounslow’s SWMP.

Speedbird Securities Ltd Business These comments are made insofar as the Vision relates to our client’s land holding. Orbit Developments (Southern) Business Yes. Feltham town centre boundary should be amended to Limited include Manor Retail Park.

PJ Harmes Individual Not given enough information. Sam Foston Individual Don't know where they could be changed. R Evans Individual Yes, use brown field sites ONLY the field East of Feltham Yung offenders should not be used, there is too much wildlife there for such a small area and it is used by the local community for walking/ running/ dog walking etc. Mark Harmon Individual I think that more detailed plans should be available and advertised. Paul Kirby Individual not sure DIO Government DIO supports the inclusion of Cavalry Barracks, Hounslow, for residential use, as allocated site 52 in the Local Plan Site Allocations.

476

The SB Hotel Group Business The SB Hotel Group owns and operates the Master Robert Hotel on the Great West Road. The Borough Council is fully aware of the Company’s proposals to redevelop the site and it has been designated for hotel and residential purposes in the recently adopted Local Plan (Site 60). The Company would support a greater emphasis on the retained hotel use and, consistent with relevant Local Plan provisions, an indication that a tall building (up to 6 storeys) would be appropriate on this ‘gateway’ location along the Great West Road (see Local Plan Policy CC3). This will provide greater certainty to both the owner of the site, future developers, and the Council (as to what may be acceptable).

Raja Individual Yes SEGRO Business The Local Plan currently directs new employment uses to allocated Sites. Local Plan Policy ED1 seeks to direct new industrial/warehousing and related development to the Borough’s Strategic Industrial Sites, Locally Significant Industrial Sites and other existing industrial sites. SEGRO support Policy ED2 (Maintaining the Borough’s Employment Land Supply) of the adopted Hounslow Local Plan (September 2015), which seeks to protect designated Strategic Industrial Locations (SILs), Preferred Industrial Locations (PILs) and Locally Significant Industrial Sites (LSISs) as identified on the Policies Map. It is considered that these existing designations could be expanded to include new employment land on adjacent sites, where appropriate.

The Rutland Group Business Yes

477

Name Respondent Type Q32. Do you think any other sites should be allocated? For each site please provide reasons and, if appropriate, a map. Sikander Hassan Anjuman Business Whilst supporting regeneration, high quality design and Himayatul Islam community facilities and noting that my client’s site does provide a valuable community facility, there is an opportunity on this site (see attached site plan) to improve considerably upon the existing building not only in terms of the aesthetics but also the facilities provided. However, a major obstacle to the possibility of redevelopment for an improved community facility is the green belt designation.

In my view, the green belt designation is an anomaly in this location. In this respect, I draw your attention to the Sustainable Development Committee meeting report at which planning permission was granted to change the use of the site to a place of worship (application reference P/2008/20102). Paragraph 7.26 specifically states:

‘It is noted that the existing character of the site is not one typically associated with the Green Belt; this is largely owing to the location of the site between two roads and with office buildings adjoining the western boundary of the site. The location of Park Lane to the north visually separates the site from the large open Green Belt area on the opposite side of the road.’ In my view the site should be removed from the green belt as it does not meet any of the purposes of including land as set out in NPPF. Furthermore, its removal would offer the opportunity to redevelop the site which would invariably improve the character and appearance of the conservation area. Clare Obeng Individual No

478

Green Feltham Community group The Council should seek to develop the area around Hanworth Leisure centre car park. There should be a new wider entrance from the road to the Leisure Centre, and provision of a new mixed office space and flats overlooking the park on the under-used section of the car park. London Diocesan Fund Business We believe St Leonard’s Vicarage, Heston, would be suitable for a sensitively designed general residential or elderly person scheme. St Leonard’s Vicarage; Heston Rd, TW5 0RD Sites A & B and Crane Park, also The Village Hall if LDF have registered title. Andrew Barnes Individual No Sonia Harmon Individual I don’t understand the questions – but I think Brownfield sites should be looked at and considered first! Also - have you considered the re-development of the run down area in Groveley Road Feltham? There was a large green field that is now derelict and over grown. Ian Stewart Individual There is too much development in this Borough and we should be looking more at reducing development. June Stewart Individual There is already too much building going on. Matthew Savage Individual The Dice Field”, a large square of open land between Durham Road, Brainton Avenue and The Drive in Feltham does not appear to be greatly used for recreation. This could be redeveloped for housing. The site of the former Eldridge House has been derelict for several years, and could be redeveloped as housing or a community facility. But with regard to local objections car parking and noise they have already been raised due to the use of 100 Hounslow Road as the premises for the Hounslow Islamic Relief Association (HIRA), in breach of covenants already extant on those premises. David Traylen Individual No

479

Sharon Savill Individual Yes sites in another borough. Gurpal Virdi Individual No. Abava Developments Ltd Yes – Land at and to the rear of 117 & 119 West Way, Heston, Hounslow. Please refer to accompanying covering letter for further details and enclosed Site Location Plan. Berkeley Strategic Business The land shown on the Plan at Appendix 2 should be allocated for a residential-led development. It is controlled by Berkeley, and is a suitable, available and achievable site for development. Based on a preliminary capacity analysis, we envisage the site could accommodate circa 800 homes of a range of types and tenures, making a significant contribution to meeting local needs. Unlike a number of alternative sites within the West of Borough Plan area, there are no obstacles to the site being able to deliver new housing within five years, subject to its allocation. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business We support the inclusion of our client’s land, as defined on the attached plan, within the Vision‘s development area for primarily employment related purposes. These sites are available for early development and are free from constraints and so could contribute to the early implementation of the Vision. Windowflowers Ltd Business We fully support this aspiration and look forward to working with the Council to achieve this clear aim. Developments such as that approved at the site delineated at Appendix 2, which could potentially support the expansion of the Airport, need to be encouraged and promoted within the West of the Borough, in order to ensure that benefits of the airport expansion are achieved for Hounslow.

Land South of Staines Road, Feltham – employment or mixed employment/residential use. It is our view that allocation of this site, which already benefits from planning permission for industrial/commercial

480

development, would support the wider strategic objectives of the West of the Borough Plan, and would help achieve the overall aspiration for growth and business investment in this part of the borough, which maximises on the relationship with an ever-expanding Heathrow Airport. Orbit Developments (Southern) Business Manor Retail Park, as illustrated by the enclosed Site Limited Location Plan (467-PL-2000), is located on Feltham High Street on the southern approach to the central retail core, but unfortunately lies just outside the town centre boundary (Manor Lane forms the boundary). The site comprises five A- Class retail uses, in a mix of large and small units, with on- site car parking, providing a range of services that complement the traditional town centre. The site is a mere 250 metre walk from the defined Primary Shopping Area and is highly accessible.

Orbit recognise that one of the aims of the Feltham Vision and Concept Masterplan (May 2015) is to enhance the “Southern Fringe” of Feltham town centre, i.e. through reconfiguring, intensifying and redeveloping sites along Feltham High Street. However, as national planning policy quite rightly gives protection and priority to town centre sites over edge-of-centre and out-of-centre sites.

Orbit consider that Manor Retail Park’s importance and presence on Feltham High Street should be recognised by including the site within the town centre boundary, so that it can contribute to the viability and vitality of Feltham town centre and enhance the High Street’s southern fringe. Therefore, Orbit request that the town boundary be amended, as illustrated by the enclosed Suggested Town Centre Boundary Plan (467-PL-2005).

481

Airport Industrial Property Unit Business AIPUT's representations relate primarily to Question 5 and Trust make the case that the western part of the Site (the Green Belt land) does not meet the aims of Green Belt policy and the purposes of including land in the Green Belt set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’) and should therefore be considered for removal from the Green Belt in this location. Furthermore, AIPUT consider that the land in question would be more beneficially used to support additional warehousing and logistics development within this part of the Borough, given that there is significant demand for such development near Heathrow Airport and as the West of the Borough has been identified in policy terms (within the London Plan) as a growth area for logistics.

PJ Harmes Individual Not enough information. Sam Foston Individual Brownfield sites R Evans Individual All brownfield sites; Government owned land; But a Biodiversity report needs to be done before developing. Paul Kirby Not sure DIO Government MOD Feltham should be allocated as a primarily residential site with associated public open space. The site was one of twelve identified in the MOD Footprint Strategy and announced for disposal by Defence Minister Mark Lancaster on 18 January 2016. The sports ground identified as local open space, in the local plan, is only for primarily military use currently. The whole site has been identified as a potential GLA Housing Zone by Hounslow Council and is being considered by the GLA currently.

482

Global Grange Ltd Business For the reasons laid out within this submission, we would wish to see the land delineated at Appendix 2 allocated for the following development:  Land at Ascot Road – Employment/Industrial Development; and  Land at Bedfont Lakes – Hotel

It is our view that allocation of these two sites, which already benefit from planning permission for the uses proposed, would support the wider strategic objectives of the WoB, would help achieve the overall aspiration for growth and business investment in this part of the borough, which maximises on the relationship with an ever-expanding Heathrow Airport. SEGRO Business Heathrow Causeway Estate Address: Heathrow Causeway Estate, Ariel Way, Hounslow, TW4 6JW Site Plan: Drawing SL-P-03-1A (attached) Proposed Uses: Employment – Use Classes B1, B2 or B8 and similar uses not included in the Use Classes Order (as “sui generis”) such as data centres and builders merchants. Proposed Scale of Development: Over 5,000m2

Heathrow International Trading Estate Address: Heathrow International Trading Estate, Green Lane, Hounslow, TW4 6HB Site Plan: Drawing SL-P-03-2A (attached) Proposed Uses: Employment – Use Classes B1, B2 or B8 and similar uses not included in the Use Classes Order (as “sui generis”) such as data centres and builders merchants. Proposed Scale of Development: Over 5,000m2

Faggs Road

483

Address: Land at Faggs Road, Feltham, TW14 0LH Site Plan: Drawing SL-P-03-3A (attached) Proposed Uses: Employment – Use Classes B1, B2 or B8 and similar uses not included in the Use Classes Order (as “sui generis”) such as data centres and builders merchants. Proposed Scale of Development: Over 5,000m2 [see representation for additional contextual information]

The Rutland Group Business  Vineyard Nurseries, Bedfont Road;  Chertsey Road site.

484

Name Respondent Type Q33. What planning ‘tools’ would help implement the Plan?

Green Feltham Community group Greater support for households to improve their own areas. London Diocesan Fund Business A fast track planning approach. You need some quick wins to both maintain and build enthusiasm for the Vision. Fast action is exciting as it lets residents see things happening and fosters belief in the integrity of plan. Andrew Barnes Individual Local opinion and a way to capture more than 60% of residents Sonia Harmon Individual Please explain the meaning of this question. June Stewart Individual The only tool required is Common Sense. Matthew Savage Individual Interactive on-line maps available for public comment. David Traylen Individual Don’t know. Sharon Savill Individual None. Chris Netto Individual Better communication pre implementation. Natural England Government Kempton Park Reservoirs within the West of Borough Plan area is a European designated site, forming part of the South West London Waterbodies Special Protection Area (SPA). European sites are afforded protection under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, as amended (the ‘Habitats Regulations’). The site is also listed as the South West London Water Bodies Ramsar site1 and also notified at a national level as Kempton Park Reservoir Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The site has been designated because of the nationally and internationally important numbers of overwintering birds (Shovler and Gadwall) that it supports.

We note that the WoB identifies the area north of the SPA, Ramsar Site and SSSI as a housing area. There are no housing allocations for this area in the current Local Plan and it is not

485

clear from the WoB Plan consultation documents if this area has been identified for new housing /intensification of the current housing stock or if the current residential area will remain unchanged.

In considering the European site interest, Natural England advises that you, as a competent authority under the provisions of the Habitats Regulations, should have regard for any potential impacts that a plan may have2. The Conservation objectives for each European site explain how the site should be restored and/or maintained and may be helpful in assessing what, if any, potential impacts the plan may have. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The Vision need to be supported through the preparation of background evidence to demonstrate that it meets the objectively assessed needs of the area, taking into account the national economic importance of Heathrow irrespective of the decision on the third runway; that the policy direction is fully justified and that it can be effectively delivered in accordance with National Policy. There will be a need for associated infrastructure which will also need to be assessed through the development of an infrastructure plan. Friends of the River Crane Community group The document focuses on the release of sites for Environment development and the associated transport infrastructure needs. However, the last sentence of this document states that; “we must also be aware of the environmental impact it could have and seek to ensure that development brings with it improvements that will benefit our residents and their quality of life”.

There are though no proposals in the document to investigate how this can be achieved. We believe there is an urgent requirement for LB Hounslow to review how it can

486

best enhance the value of the network of open spaces across the west of the Borough to meet the needs of a growing population and to mitigate the impact of associated development. This review would assess the current value of these spaces and how this value can be enhanced environmentally and also to better support the transport, social, health, education and economic needs of the borough now and in the future. PJ Harmes Individual Better public involvement. Sam Foston Individual Plans for local area to be approved by local people. R Evans Individual Think tanks of local people who live and work in the area and care about it. Consultation to be transparent with resident’s opinions listened to and acted upon, or clear explanation why not. Cllr Tony Louki Councillor All supporting infrastructure, particularly transport should come first in order to avoid crowding of currently inadequate public transport. The council should maintain its own planning responsibility and absolutely resist any attempts to hand this opportunity area to a separate and unrepresentative alternative planning authority or development corporation.

Paul Kirby More public involvement. The Rutland Group Business Partnerships between significant owners to deliver change and development.

487

Name Respondent Type Q34. Is there anything else you think it is important to mention?

Charles Asante Individual The connections to Feltham should be widened, it’s still very restrictive also explore an option for a Hanworth station.

Green Feltham Community group It’s really important that the Council makes this a local plan for local people. Connections outside the borough are almost more important than connections to Hounslow town centre. Indeed, many of the Council’s policies explicitly favour other areas at the expense of Feltham. The Council needs to take a wider vision of the WoB in the context of the Thames and wider connections. It is possible, and we need to get a global vision for the area – but one that is defined by people and not by corporate interests. Andrew Barnes Individual Thank you for this opportunity. I would also like to mention that it is becoming very apparent that these consultation have been made far too complicated. This paper in itself was hard to understand and at times appeared very loaded. The process needs to be more accessible to all and a lot easier to use. Sonia Harmon Individual Please improve communications, accessibility to consultations (not everyone is online!), transparency, clarity of questions, design of survey, length of consultation against amount of public presentations. Ian Stewart Individual It would be nice to see the Council engage better with the residents; it should not be up to community leaders to provide this information in a way that the population can digest. Something as important as this should have been consulted on fully with public displays in all areas at times the residents could attend.

488

June Stewart Individual I think we should look at creating jobs in other areas instead of just looking at Heathrow Airport. We need to be promoting other industries in the Towns. Not everyone is employed at Heathrow and not all jobs rely on the income from Heathrow; it seems that all this is about is Heathrow Airport expansion and not about the Towns and what is in the best interest of those that live in them. We need to stop expanding Heathrow and look at promoting other areas of commerce. It breaks my heart to see what is a beautiful place get destroyed; Hounslow Town Centre used to be a lovely place to visit and shop in but I now avoid it as it has been overdeveloped with too much Housing and too many large builds. The layout of Hounslow High Street doesn't feel friendly or inviting anymore.

Mike Foston Individual Please pay more consideration to your audience when you consult. This document was not practice to ask residents to complete. Maggie Netto Individual I’ve found this questionnaire difficult to complete and there is an awful lot of documentation to access, read and assimilate which is fine if you have the time. If Feltham is to improve, grow and be a place people want to visit and live in it will be necessary to get residents 'on board' so more plain English, more variety of ways of engaging with people - don’t just put it on your website. I'd like to see the council proactively talking to local groups about their plans.

Leigh Hyatt Individual I and my family have lived in Feltham for 100 years. My mother is 80 years old and certainly does not want to leave her home at her time of life. My sons are in university, my other son works in the area, so we do not want to leave our home.

489

J Edwards You want to take people's homes to make more homes, I don’t understand the logic of this. Sarah James I look after my two parents and these questions are no help for them. Station Estate Road is not looking to good on the good on the plans and my main concern is our home at this point. S Jarvis Most of these questions I don’t understand. I and my wife are 85-87. Lived at this address for 39 years. I am not going to uproot and move at this time of life. Sharon Savill We don’t need more housing! Linda Ott The traffic and road system should be the made priority. D Rowe Feltham's traffic problem is a major concern. Claudine Ott Sorting out our traffic problem in Feltham is vital we are nearly gridlocked sometimes. Thomas Smith I think the traffic is a major problem and must be thought out well before any plan is made. Carol Wood I think that before any plan is approved the council should look at Feltham's traffic problem first. Chris Netto Some of the questions need to be constructed more professionally i.e. include definitions and less jargon e.g. Q9 what is a 'certain type of hotel'? K Harmon questionnaire could be made easier to understand Sathat Virdi What will be done to reduce emissions and pollution in Cranford? Gurpal Virdi The plan does not include Cranford for development. Spelthorne Borough Council Government The impact and influence of Heathrow is as significant for Spelthorne as it is for Hounslow. Spelthorne welcomes the identification of the issues in the consultation and in particular the initiative which has been taken to set up the Heathrow Strategic Planning Group as a forum for addressing the future needs and opportunities for the area by engaging with the all relevant local authorities and other key bodies.

490

A number of the matters raised in the Issues Document are being addressed in the Heathrow Strategic Planning Group and the various sub groups which are being set up. Spelthorne intends to take an active part in these groups as a means of engaging with Hounslow and dealing with matters of mutual interest. Heathrow Airport Ltd Business We have no further comments other than to reiterate our support for the WoB Plan. London Borough of Hillingdon Government Hillingdon does not support the plans put forward in the consultation document on the basis that they prematurely plan for scenarios where the third runway will go ahead.

Environment Agency Government We expect applicants to factor the revised climate change allowances into their Flood Risk Assessments rather than the current 20% for peak river flow. Flood modelling to demonstrate the impact these changes will have has not yet been undertaken but it does have the potential to affect sites within the Great West Corridor. We recommend you reference this so new development takes account of the revised allowances. Any additional sites (to those already allocated) proposed in areas of flood risk will need to have passed the Sequential Test (and where applicable the Exceptions Test) before being allocated. A level 2 SFRA may be required to assess the flood risks in detail to determine their feasibility and whether they can pass the Exceptions Test. These revised climate change allowances will need to be factored into your updated SFRA and when assessing individual strategic sites. Bedfont Councillors Councillor We need to keep the allotments and ensure we have some at Heathrow City if this goes ahead. The Bedfont Councillors Believe it is important to ensure Mayfield Farm site is protected. We wish it to remain an Archaeological Priority Area The London Borough of Hounslow's Unitary

491

Development Plan - Deposit Stage, Nov 1991 (UDP) designates the whole of Mayfield Farm, including the scheme area, as an Archaeological Priority Area.

Within Mayfield Farm there are two Scheduled Ancient Monuments, as defined within the Ancient Monument and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. Both Monuments are located on the Northern side of the farm. At present it is anticipated that scheme proposals would require only very limited works within L061. Any such works would be subject to obtaining Scheduled Monument Consent from the Secretary of State. Before any groundwork’s commence a detailed project design for the archaeological mitigation will be required. This design will need to include detailed construction methodologies where preservation of the archaeological deposits is proposed. Natural England Government In line with NPPF Planning Practice Guidance and London Plan Policy both plans should identify opportunities for the creation, enhancement and management of Green Infrastructure (GI). GI is a core component of high quality development, alongside other forms of infrastructure such as transport, energy, waste and water. GI is not simply an alternative description of open space and is relevant to many wider objectives of plan making. Well planned GI provides multiple economic, social and environmental benefits relevant to the West of Borough and Great West Corridor Plans and NPPF policies, including supporting economic growth, creating desirable places to live, climate change adaptation and resilience, flood risk management, community health and wellbeing, sustainable transport opportunities and the protection and enhancement of ecological networks and biodiversity.

492

Shetson Property Developments Business We need to see a greater improvement to Hounslow West. Ltd Too much focus on Hounslow Central. Hounslow West needs updating, more residential and mixed use development. Speedbird Securities Ltd Business The Economic Plan for London set out ambitious plans for London’s economy to grow at a faster rate than New York’s. In order to do this there will need to be significant investment in the economy and housing. The innovative proposals for the New Heathrow Garden City would make a major contribution toward the realisation of this objective and are wholly justified in order to help ensure London remains at the heart of a powerful global economy. Friends of the River Crane Community group The Heathrow site lies partly within the River Crane Environment catchment and the site affects the value of the river corridors in the following ways: 1. Around a third of the airport runoff drains into the River Crane. For most of the year this run-off is benign to beneficial to the overall water quality of the river, during cold periods the use of de-iceant at the airport can result in major outbreaks of sewage fungus in the river downstream of the outfall with consequent negative impacts on the ecology of the river. 2. Aircraft overfly the central part of the river corridor at low level – and this greatly impacts the peacefulness of the corridor for visitors this impacts both noise and air quality.

3. This central area is also subject to restrictions in the nature of environmental asset that can be created such that it does not increase the risk of bird strike. 4. The upper Duke’s River and Longford Rivers were both diverted around the south western side of the airport as part of the Terminal Five development. Note that the Third Runway proposals would likely necessitate

493

large lengths of both rivers being put into culvert, thereby greatly impacting their intrinsic value and their value as movement corridors for fish and other wildlife.

5. Heathrow owns a significant amount of land around the airport, including within the River Crane corridor and along the Longford and upper Duke’s River corridors. PJ Harmes Individual Have a questionnaire that can be answered. This one shows disrespect for public with vagueness. Sam Foston Individual Local business should be encouraged to support local community. R Evans Individual Ensure the biodiversity of the existing green space in the are his understood and protected by the proposed plans Mark Harmon Individual More information, I happened upon this questionnaire by accident. Not even anything in the local Hounslow Magazine or the usual signage on lampposts or public park noticeboards. George Whyatt Individual We have lived here for more than 40 years it was a very clean and friendly place. I know what there has to be change but it does not mean heavy traffic not a save place any more. Sport England Public body Sport England wishes to see local planning policies that seek to protect, enhance and provide for sports facilities based on robust and up-to-date assessments of need in accordance with paragraphs 73 and 74 pf the NPPF.

Sound policy can only be developed in the context of objectively assessed needs, in turn used to inform the development of a strategy for sport and recreation. Policies which protect, enhance and provide for sports facilities should reflect this work, and be the basis for consistent application through development management.

494

Sport England is not prescriptive on the precise form and wording of policies, but advises that a stronger plan will result from attention to taking a clearly justified and positive approach to planning for sport. Sport England Public body Lastly, as you may be aware, Sport England will oppose development resulting in the loss of playing field land or formal built sports facilities unless its loss is justified by a robust and up-to-date assessments of need. Any loss of sports provision should be incorporated into formal policy such that it may be considered through the policy making process and scrutinised at Examination in Public. As such, should any policy seek to allocate any existing playing field land or formal built sports facilities for redevelopment, we would strongly urge the Council to discuss this directly with Sport England.

Global Grange Ltd Business Given the importance placed within the draft West of the Borough Plan upon the benefits to be achieved from Heathrow Airport, and the definition of the Heathrow Opportunity Area, we would seek assurances from the Council that the proposals included within the West of the Borough Plan, have been discussed under the Duty to Cooperate with the relevant statutory bodies including the London Borough of Hillingdon, The Airport Authority and the London Mayor’s office. In addition, given the commercial ramifications of the West of the Borough Plan, we would also seek assurances that discussions are being held with the local business community regarding employment generation, accessibility and investment into the defined area of the Plan.

Raja Individual Need tube extension to Hatton Cross

495

The Rutland Group Business The Rutland Group have significant local knowledge and experience of development in the West of the Borough. The complex history of the way much of the land has been worked over several decades’ means that successful re-use and development of the land will require expertise and experience. Rutland would welcome the opportunity to work with other landowners and other parties in order to promote the successful implementation of the Plan.

The Rutland Group Business Shaping Factors for the WoB and Heathrow Airport, whether the third runway is built or not. Unfinished restoration of land in the Green Belt, much of which has been worked for minerals and then tipped with waste.

It is good that the Council has reviewed the Green Belt in the WoB: at a strategic level to the WoB, for example around Staines and Egham, the Green Belt appears to perform its intended role of separating settlements, whereas in Hounslow the Green Belt is fragmented and it is unclear how it performs any of the roles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. The existence of the very solid Green Belt to the west provides some comfort that the outward spread

496

of London will be limited, whatever happens to the Green Belt in Hounslow.

Bedfont Lakes has shown that the area can be attractive for strategically important business investment, investment for which there are choices over where it is located. The downside of the location for the business community is the lack of shops and services for staff and corporate use. Bedfont Lakes Country Park was welcomed by local people as an asset created for them. Superficially there is an abundance of open space, but much of it is inaccessible and either unrestored or poorly restored, a seriously wasted asset in a very important location in London.

The Rutland Group Business In short the opportunities are great [better integration of services with Bedfont Lakes] and of enormous potential benefit for Hounslow residents, but the task is technically complicated and costly; in the absence of major public funding, the way forward will rely on the creation of value.

497