Letter to Charlotte Graves, Chief Executive, Hackney Homes

Charlotte Graves

Chief Executive

Hackney Homes

Christopher Addison House

72 Wilton Way

London

E8 1BJ

15 September 2010

Planning Application 2010/1577

Dear Ms Graves,

I wrote to you on 19 August regarding Hackney Homes' planning application to install security gates and fences on the Lockner Estate (application number 2010/1577) enclosing a petition of objection from residents on the estate. I regret that I have not yet received a reply.

I am writing again because I was alarmed to hear last week from Michael Garvey, Hackney Council planning officer, that he feels, given Hackney Homes' strong support for the proposal, that he has no choice but to recommend it for approval by the planning sub-committee on 3 November 2010. This is despite a commitment made by a spokesperson for Hackney Homes just last week that "if residents are not in favour of this option, it will not be further considered" (Hackney Gazette, 9 September p.17, enclosed).

I would be grateful if you could let me know what, in addition to our recent petition and the many letters and forms the planning office has received in opposition to the proposal, we need to do as a Tenants and Residents Association (TRA) to make the opinions of residents clear to Hackney Homes?

The main grounds for opposition are (1) aesthetic: our estate is in a conservation area and the gates will do nothing to enhance or preserve its open plan design, nor will they enhance the look of De Beauvoir Square which is a statutorily protected London Square; (2) practical: disabled access will be reduced, it will be more difficult for visitors/deliveries, and the gate are liable to break; and (3) social: most residents prefer the estate as an open friendly space rather than being fenced off, they are concerned about the nuisance caused by door intercom buzzers going off at night; gates will make the area feel less welcoming and could lead to the estate seeming more dangerous rather than safer, and, by not integrating with the area, the gates may further stigmatise residents on the estate and reduce, rather than improve, social cohesion.

We are aware that a survey was carried out by Hackney Homes in 2008 that received 74 responses, with two thirds being in favour. We believe, however, that this consultation was badly worded and, as a result, poorly understood. Indeed, I am aware of residents who supported the proposal in 2008 but who are now very strongly opposed. In addition, the numbers in opposition to the scheme today outweigh the number of original positive responses in 2008. Furthermore, the spokesperson for Hackney Homes quoted in the Hackney Gazette said that "there is no intention of putting up security gates on the estate" and urged residents to get in contact to discuss how they would like to see the estate improved. In light of this, I would like to request a meeting with you to discuss this issue further.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind Regards, 

cc.        M. Garvey, Planning Officer, Hackney Council

Cllrs. R. Chapmen, T. Ebutt, G. Icoz

M. Hillier, MP

F. Derbyshire, Chairperson, De Beauvoir Association

J. Pipe, Mayor of Hackney