DICKENS Yard is creating quite a topic, which I suspect is opposed by more people than those who actually want more than new shops to compete with central Ealing's already failing shops.
I fail to see the logic in creating more shops that will exasperate the situation rather than somehow make things right.
Nor do I understand building tiny homes that will have a short shelf life. People's ever increasing expectations of what homes should be like will soon render these shoehorned dwellings as desirable as 1960s tower blocks are today.
Has anyone explored exactly how many affordable dwellings will be allocated to employees of the new shops, or will the employees of the new shops still have to bus, drive, bike or walk into the area from out-side? Doesn't it seem logical to allocate the new dwellings to the shops' employees if the new project is an attempt to create a 'village persona'?
If Ealing Council really wants to look to the future why doesn't it build town hall offices on Dickens Yard, then vacate Perceval House, which is on prime land ripe for developing? Perceval House could be converted into 'affordable' but quality desirable dwellings or into an undercover market or mall.
Buses pass by so there is no extra need for transport provision and even the private and commercial vehicles it would attract wouldn't have to go down neighbouring residential roads.
For too many years both the council and past developers have looked on Ealing Broadway as the cash cow it clearly cannot be, so how about applying some common sense logic to the whole matter?
JOE PAGE
Ealing
