Forum Topic

Assyrian Centre - South Ealing

Here we go again.....New (amended) Planning Application in.

Colin Goodman ● 4321d50 Comments

The Assyrian Centre started building work again today - without planning permission.

Neil F. Weber ● 4321d

Colin and Neil, I can't make any sense of the three recent posts about the Assyrian Centre building again.

Gerry Tan ● 4320d

Gerry,I don't know what Colin knows about a new application, however, I do know that the Assyrian Centre started building a very large covered shelter in its front garden area between its main building entrance and the South Ealing Road. There is no planning permission on file in the Council database for this construction, nor any application on file, ergo they have started building again without planning permission. It is plain for all to see if go past their site.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

Legally no-one needs planning permission to build  as long as you are sure your building will comply with the planning rules.

Graham Weeks ● 4320d

Graham, What happens if you build something that does NOT comply with the planning laws?

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

Nothing if my experience is anything to go by.We had a large 'shed' (with power and water) built locally.I objected but the Ealing response was that 'if they had applied, we would have been minded to grant with conditions'.The fact that they did not apply made not one jot of difference.

Nigel Brooks ● 4320d

Where was the shed? Was it in the back garden or behind the property where it probably would have got planning permission? I mean a situation where there is a clear breach of planning.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

If you build without permission and are in breach of the rules you can at worse be ordered to demolish. The problem with people building in their gardens is that within certain specifications you can build on up to a third of your garden without any permission at all. The problem should come if you turn it into accommodation but in reality council enforcement is negligible.

Graham Weeks ● 4320d

ref:PP/2013/4082 letter dated 19th November 2014Comment within 21days of the letter date

Philip Alford ● 4320d

I think that you may find that there is more enforcement going on than you might think. Typically an illegal development may be subject to a couple of planning notices in succession of two years each while negotiation and applications take place each before the Council takes legal action to remedy the situation. Then comes the order to remedy the situation with a time limit and if it is not demolished then the Council can demolish it and bill you for the demolition itself. It can all take a long time in a civilised place like Ealing. Sometimes you get some gung-ho administration that wants to speed things up, and gets it very wrong. What often speeds things up is that someone who has done something illegal does actually need planning permission for something they want to do and have to sort out the illegal stuff before the Council grants them permission for the stuff they need.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

You are joking. The Assyrian Centre elsewhere on this Forum said that they had withdrawn their application, I think it was someone called Bob. Were they lying? Have you just received this letter? Who has been sent a letter?

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

It's an "Amended" Application -- yet to view it fully but from outline description sounds much the same as before.Your first question I think you can answer for yourself.Your second one the answer is that anyone who had views on orignal Application should've been sent a notice letter of this.I stress should've

Colin Goodman ● 4320d

Quote from Bob back in August on the other thread you've sought out:-"We have no plans to do any major external buiding work."(sic)Surprised offers of meetings turned down... Mmmmmmmm

Colin Goodman ● 4320d

Shouldn't there be something posted on the lampost outside the Assyrian House at the least, a list of people who the ammended application was sent to, shouldn't there be an advert in the local media, and possibly the London Gazette as well on an issue as contentious as this. Not to mention the Council's own "Around Ealing" publication.Shouldn't the Assyrian Centre be required to fix or get permission for what they have already/done/ are doing, before progressing any further? At the very least they could pay to have the pavement repaired where they have destroyed it from their wall-building activities.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

They clearly haven't got permission for the shelter they were building in front of the building today. Why won't Ealing Council stop them from doing that? Are there two rules in Ealing: one for the Assyrian Cenre and Bob Babakhan and another for us mere voters and mere residents. I noticed that the portion of pavement that they trashed at the front of their drive was replaced free-of-charge, anyone else woule have been billed.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

It would appear that Bob lied. I wonder what the head of The Assyrian Church would say about his methods and his morality? I shall be writing to the Bishop and telling him of the behaviour of some of his senior church patriarchs.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

"Surprised offer of meetings turned down...." I wonder if he realises how frightened people are of walking past the Assyrian Centre or interacting/enocuntering with the attendees when there is a group function going on there?

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

here's the link to the planning websitehttp://www.pam.ealing.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=162560There are some amended docs and details, but it takes some working out - all the versions and the gap in time since they started makes it more confusing

Philip Alford ● 4320d

This was the construction of a habitable building which AFAIK requires permission it is not an extension within permitted development guidelines.

Nigel Brooks ● 4320d

my biggest issues relate to the enlarging and extending the use and size of the site, with all that entails - plus the completely new second floor and new access in Temple Road.The original plan had a 'restaurant' in this new second floor extension which overlooks Temple Road, but now refers to a 'library' to be used by a few people - guess what will happen after it's been built!! Please say no to the second floor at least!

Philip Alford ● 4320d

They are trying to sneak the extra access into Temple Road with their pending wall planning permission application which includes plans and diagrams that show the 3m gate space. I hope that you have commented on that *as it is pending I think the system allows you to comment, failing that e-mail the planning officer named and councillors.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

PP/2014/3280  21/07/2014 1A TEMPLE ROAD EALING LONDON W5 4SL EALING  Retention of 1.9 metre high brick/railing perimeter wall including retention of new crossover to Temple Road (Retrospective Planning Permission) PENDING Ah yes thanks - I did not know this PP application existed

Philip Alford ● 4320d

This is a modified document. It is still not accurate as it does not show the site as it is and the planns do not match what is already there, One of th emore prominent lies is that it describes the wall as being built from matching brick to the building and area in the form of reclaimed bricks, however, not only are the bricks used in the wall they are building brand new, they are a completely different size and are a brand new contemporary bright red facing brick. Local bricks are local yellow London stock bricks not BRIGHT RED modern bricks.This is also an ammended application, the original one on the database was much more disengenuous to say the least, though some of the more fanciful documents have disappeared and the database entry has been edited, again without conmsulting anyone locally AFTER the changes.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

London stocks are not at all the most common brick, indeed they are rare. Lots of houses locally were built using Leicester Oranges or Flettons as during the early 1900's they were significantly cheaper being machine made and equally as durable.

Nigel Brooks ● 4320d

Okay, lets be pedantic about this. Most of the bricks used in the development of the South Ealing area in the late eighteen hundreds were made locally and the area where the council estate below Occupation Lane was built was as a result of the brick earth excavations to fire the bricks in clamps on the spot. This later became the world's first aerated sewage processing facility... Then the flats were built there. Bricks continued to be made locally owing to the difficulty of moving heavy stuff around by horse and cart until the railways changed that amd decorative (though not as mechanically strong) red brick started to get shipped into London and Ealing from Oxfordshire where the brick earth had a higher iron-oxide content. Still much more expensive than the locally produced stuff so used for decoration.The bricks that the Assyrian Centre have used do not match any of the old established brickwork in the area. They are the wrong size, the wrong colour, and are definitely NOT reclaimed and do not resemble anything used locallyy.Does that meet with your requirements? We are discussing here HOW to save South Ealing from sliding further into the abyss of drug-dealing bars, illegal tobacco smuggling corner shops, alleyway strreet drinking, bank and ATM robberies, NOT the detailed history of bricks used throughout London. Perhaps if you could look at what the Assyrian Centre has used for its wall and apply your knowledge of local brickwork to categorize appropriately what they SHOULD have used to meet their own (retrospective) planning criteria? That would make an excellent contribution to the discussion and provide us with more accurate information to take the Council.Please help rather than be pedantic.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

I have now submitted comments on this retrospective PP application for the wall.I included comment on the actual vs plan new gate in Temple Road.

Philip Alford ● 4320d

I made an (accurate) observation.I realise that you feel strongly about this but surely your response to my post is a gross over reaction.There are laws in place to deal with the 'abyss-like' situations you detail, the efforts of those affected would surely be more productive in ensuring, with the co-operation of the Neighbourhood Policing Team, that they are rigidly enforced. To link the construction of a boundary wall (where, save for listed buildings, the wall does not have to be made of 'sympathetic materials' irrespective of the aesthetics) to something on the scale of an ATM robbery in the same paragraph is frankly ludicrous.Perhaps if one of the many offers made for meetings had been accepted then this situation would not have arisen.

Nigel Brooks ● 4320d

Unofrtuantely the laws are not being enforced as anyone who lives in the area will tell you. After dark it is pretty much a "no go" area. Local residents who work in central London scurry rabbit-like from the tube station and more local workers from the buses to their house avoiding the decaying and frankly nocturnally-dangerous South Ealing Road.I am, however, quite serious about your contributing to this effort. Please could you have a look at the (once very fine architecturally) Good Shepherd Hall (as the inset stone plaque correctly names it on its East side) and see what you think of the brickwork. Some input would be useful as to the exact nature of what it was built with, as I am no expert on bricks myself. Then have a look at the wall that has been built. More than anything what worries me is that the Assyrian Centre is "passing off" new cheap bricks as reclaimed architecturally-correct "of-the-period" reclaimed bricks. It is not just the matter that the bircks are not old bricks, it is that the Assyrian Society is LYING about what they have done in its retrospective planning application.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

Happy to look at the wall when I pass next (probably Monday).

Nigel Brooks ● 4320d

Excellent! I am sorry I was so harsh on your comment, I am still reeling that a representative of a highly religious Christian group can say in August that there will be no major building works on the Assyrian Centre and then a new planning application goes in by stealth in November, not to mention the attempt at adding a three metre extra gate onto Temple Road next to residential houses by stealth in an application to replace an existing fence "with no changes"; although this has been refined the plans alongside the application still include the extra three metre open space in the wall for vehicular traffic onto Temple Road. What is making me so angry is the lies in the planning applications which the planning department and the Couoncil are either not checking or ignoring before seeking consultation and then making decisions on these lies.Meanwhile, work on a timber-frame shelter structure continues at the front. Dangerous holes surround the walls that anyone could slip it in the dark or when it is wet. It is madness.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

The new access in Templ Road is already in place with the space built into the wall next to the house that is actually 1a Temple Road. On the basis of this, at least part of the planning application should be classed as "reotrospective", the work has already been done to build a wall with a space for the new gate.

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

Thank you. You are a valuable citizen participating in the democratic process. See if you can get some of your friends and neighbours to do the same. If necessary just "cut and paste" your comments and get them to "endorse them"

Neil F. Weber ● 4320d

A cursory look when I had to pop to Wickes and the bricks most certainly do not look like 'reclaims' and they do not match obviously. It is difficult with rough-face bricks as the tool marks from reclamation are not as evident as they are on faced bricks.Any Building Inspector worth his salt would be able to tell the type. My guess though that any requirement which MAY have been imposed to use matching materials will be ignored as the wall is now erected. On that topic though, am not all sure if consent of any type is actually needed to construct a boundary wall less than one metre high, excluding posts and supports.

Nigel Brooks ● 4320d

That is why it is only a metre high. The original project was to build a two metre brick wall out of new bricks, however, instead they are opting for a one metre brick wall with railings on the top bringing it to 1.8 or 1.9 metres in height for which they would need planning permission, hence they have gone as far as they can without presenting, say, a private person from taking them to court to have the excess height removed. My worry is that as the plans and elevations in the application are at such a variance to what is there already they will take the 1.8 or 1.9 metrees if they get planning permission  as carte blamche to just extend the brickwork upwards to the full height. I am sorry, I just do not trust the Assyrian Society as an organisation and my mistrust borne of personal experience is only underlined by Bob reneging on his words of four months ago. I cannot understand how an orgnisation that stresses its Christian roots so strongly in every public interaction can break one of the Ten Commandments so easily and so repeatedly. It is not the behaviour that I would expect of a Christian.

Neil F. Weber ● 4319d

Firstly..... Neil Webber for Prime Minister is my vote!!!I'm not too fussed about the boundary wall, it does look better at the moment than it used to. However what's fact is they would've cracked on rough shod if not pulled up on this. They erred due to the hideous railings they will fit taking the wall above the 1.00m rule plus change in materials.This follows on with previous and current scant disregard for rules, process and neighbours.So what makes you think they will play fair on this resurrected planning application?!?!Reference made above to not taking up the offer of meetings. As far as I'm concerned trust has been destroyed and previous and current conduct would back that up, I'd find it hard not to become annoyed when being lied to my face so no to meetings remains the case.Alas, I fear that eventually this development will go ahead and direct and surrounding neighbours will be blighted. The continued stealth approach and dogmatic instance to keep pressing on continually despite legimate reasons not to can only end one way. Ealing will lose energy and finally wave it through and even if they don't maybe they'll do it anyway!!!I'm at a low ebb at the moment. I will hopefully re-energise and look at this next few days

Colin Goodman ● 4319d

Thank you for that compliment. I couldn't do what policians do. I find it hard enough to do what I perceive to be the right thing on a micro level in my own neighbourhood. I would be useless at representing anyone.While the wall application pales into insignificance compared with the new (amended) application for the Good Shepherd Hall/Assyrian Centre it is noteworthy that there is still an embedded attempt within it to introduce a three metre wide extra entrance onto Temple Road covertly. This is a big problem as it would funnel traffic and people into a quiet residential area at the West end of the centre.The changes to both the planning application for the wall and for The Good Shepherd Hall (Assyrian Centre) are so significant compared to what was originally submitted a year ago that I think consultation should take place by the planning department as far as Airedale Road and the whole length of neighbouring Creighton and Netherbury Roads as these would all be affected by the traffic from the new entrance practically opposite the end of Creighton Road.

Neil F. Weber ● 4319d

Again, Nigel, my apologies for my brutal riposte earlier. The problem with the written word is that without the Non Verbal Communications (NVC) element of seeing the emotions that are uttered with the word it is easy to over-react.

Neil F. Weber ● 4319d

Accepted, I hope with the same grace as it was offered.We had a brick problem at my church as any repairs were conditional on using 'identical' bricks.A bit of a problem when the brickworks used closed in 1962!Cue a two-year search for reclaims (none) buildings in the area of the brickworks being demolished (none) and the services of a 'brick finder' who came up trumps with an 'identical' (looking) brick. Damn, they were expensive but if the condition is imposed that's what you have to do to keep English Heritage and the local community happy!

Nigel Brooks ● 4318d

Scaffolding up to the rear area of the building nowDrip Drip Drip Drip

Colin Goodman ● 4318d

Nigel, is the church you refer to St. Thomas Church in Boston Manor by any chance?

Gerry Tan ● 4318d

It is indeed Gerry. It is faced in wonderul Tondu brick all the way from south Wales and is the 'scale model' for Guildford Cathedral which is by the same architect Sir Edward Maufe.The church is Grade 2* listed hence the problems we have when any repairs are needed.

Nigel Brooks ● 4318d

I've now picked through the "amended" application and it's even more laughableThe parking solution is a park and ride as previous to ECC in Northfields etc. So lets spread the disruption issue of up to 500 people coming and going not only to South Ealing but Northfields as well shall we?A Noise Report has been included from an acoustician which fails to acknowledge human behavoir of leaving doors and windows open OR the fact external entertainment space is now included.No mention of the impact in changing the entrance frontage to Temple Road.It's a farce!!!I was almost beaten but having read through this I'm re-energised and have objected.

Colin Goodman ● 4314d

http://www.pam.ealing.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=162560

Philip Alford ● 4299d

I'm not up to date on the Assyrian Centre activities.  What's the state of affairs now please? And who is winning?

Gerry Tan ● 4299d

Mmmmmmmm "who is winning" probably not apt here really.I can tell you who will come second best and that's the local loyal residents of South Ealing.Make no mistake this development will happen.Ealing PP wont have the gumption to keep delaying it our turning it down. The Assyrian Centre have invested far too much money and effort to simply have a lightbulb moment that maybe they'd be best not to disrupt the local residents forever.Even if this Application gets canned it'll be back slightly revised, sops being paid to issues etc, etc, etcMerry Bleedin Christmas!

Colin Goodman ● 4299d

Thanks for the reply Colin.  And I wish you and yours a happy and peaceful Christmas.

Gerry Tan ● 4299d

The extent to which local residents' wishes and the planning department of the council are being ignored is notable n the continued way that the Assyrian Society is pushing ahead in activity without planning permission. They clealry think nothing of the council planning department as they have started adding extra portions to their wall WITHOUT planning permision. The local politicians have been notable in their ;ack of comment or involvemnt: if nether the Tories, nor Labour, no LibDems want to get their hands dirty in the run up to a general election on an issue that is true to the hearts of so many South Ealing residents why should we vote for any of them in the next election? They don't care.A new (and illegal) shelter at the front of the premises facing the South Ealing Road has gone up without planning permission. comment, or indeed sanction by the planning department  or the local councillors. The Assyrianb Centre is in a Tory ward, so ewhat happened to the party of "law and order" messr Reen, Millican, et al?

Neil F. Weber ● 4298d

Function on there today -- absolutely no parking available down my street or those adjacent or parallel.Some form of temporary permits or notes in windscreen of cars.My guests due at 12.30pm, visitors permits already prepared yet nowhere to park!It's going to be fantastic when Ealing PP crumble and this goes ahead!!Happy New Year!!!

Colin Goodman ● 4280d

Colin,I hope that you have called the Ealing Council parking wardens and e-mailed your local councillors. Bits of paper in the windows of cars don't count for a lot if they are parked on double yellow line corners, or on pavements.

Neil F. Weber ● 4280d