This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

c/o Hornbeam Environmental Centre, 458 Hoe Street, Leyton Green, London E17 9AH

Essex and Eastwood Wharf

Wednesday 3rd February 2010

Join Us at Hackney Town Hall!

This Planning Application proposes four 7-10 storey high-rise high density residential tower blocks on the River Lee Navigation opposite North Millfields, in the Borough of Waltham Forest.

Local Councillors representing Leabridge Ward in Hackney have asked for this Application (to WF) to be discussed at the Planning
Sub-Committee Meeting at 6.30pm on Wednesday 3rd February.
Hackney’s Planning Officers are recommending the Borough should put in an objection to Waltham Forest.  We agree!

Please come to the meeting to show the
high degree of public interest in this matter!

If you wish to address the Committee please contact the number below to discuss first.

We also encourage people to bring posters to the Town Hall steps before the meeting, from 6.00pm, bearing ‘neutral’ green slogans (such as
“Keep our Open Spaces Open,” “Save our Marshes,” No to High-Rise Tower Blocks in the Lea Valley,” “Keep our Green Space Green” etc.)
in support of the Planning Officers’ recommendation to object.

More information:  0790 415 9398

Read more:

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Read it here

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

SHG House calls

Residents have expressed concern to No Hackney High-rise, that Southern Housing Group’s surveyors are seeking access to all properties on London Lane and Ellingfort Road.

One resident wrote: ‘Personally, I’m not chuffed about the idea of anyone from this scheme walking around my house and frankly, it seems a bit tenuous – aren’t they able to consult the OS and figure it out from there?’

Our planner at LMPC says:

I appreciate that allowing access to residents’ properties does seem invasive, and that the inclination is to resist this so that it makes it harder for the developer to get a proper scheme together, but my view is that it is better to allow access. Otherwise the developer will make assumptions, which may not be correct, the residents will challenge this and the developer will say, ‘well, you never gave us access to your property’. It looks unco-operative and it will upset the planning committee, and planning inspector (if it goes to appeal).

The main reason the layout of the properties is important is to allow the developer to undertake a proper assessment of sunlight and daylight. It is best that this is based on actual room layouts. If it is accurate, we have a much better chance of criticising the results. We area less able to challenge a study which is based on incorrect data.

It really is better to work with them, than against them on this.

Hope this helps.

SHG claimed tower site was 40% larger than it actually is.

We queried Southern Housing Group on the size of the site of their proposed tower block and they now concede that the site on London Lane is .241 (2410 square meters) hectares and not  .335 hectares (3350 square meters) as previously stated in public consultation.

Their development officer wrote ‘I have now confirmed with the architect and the site size is 0.241 hectares. I am not sure where the previous size had come from, I need to check with Roger Arnold when he returns from annual leave’.