At South Area Planning Commitee on Thursday 2nd October, we were asked to approve an application for 17 residential units at 110-116 Elmore Street.
Islington Council's stated policy is that they will seek 50% affordable housing for all developments over 10 units. This development should have had at least 8 affordable units, yet the developer claimed he couldn't afford to provide any affordable housing.
The developer had an 'independent assessor's' report, which said the development was 'unviable', principally because he'd paid too much at auction for the site. And who did he buy the site off? - Islington Council. And there were the Lib Dems, supporting the developer's argument all the way, twisting the words of Council Policy, and saying that providing affordable housing was more-or-less an option for the developer if he felt like it.
The whole point of an affordable housing policy is to make sure we get affordable housing.
Along with Councillor Gary Doolan we bitterly opposed this application, and I said in the meeting that the argument put forward by the developer was clearly spurious, since the claimed unviability was entirely down to his own folly in paying too much for the site. Why should the less well-off people in Islington get pushed out yet again, just because this developer can't get his sums right? But the Lib Dems on the committee couldn't do enough to explain how policy had to be applied 'flexibly', and that a requirement for affordable housing had to be 'reasonable'. They all voted for the 100% private scheme in spite of the paper-thin arguments.
It is quite clear to me that the Lib Dems DO NOT WANT affordable housing if they can possibly avoid it, and are prepared to be sold almost any kind of a line by developers trying to wriggle out of it. In Westminster under Shirley Porter, this was called Gerrymandering. I'm not sure I can see the difference, except the Lib Dems haven't yet twigged that they are Gerrymandering themselves out of their own seats.
Showing posts with label islington. Show all posts
Showing posts with label islington. Show all posts
Sunday, 5 October 2008
Tuesday, 26 August 2008
The famous Islington Council 'Dog Consultation'
The Council's recent 'Dog Consultation' is a classic example of how this Lib Dem Council completely failed to engage with local people on an important local issue.
The 'consultation' was entitled "How to deal with irresponsible dog owners" - which sounds fine, and something everyone would want. Yet hidden in the small print and the colour-coded diagrams that went with the consultation was the proposal to allow dogs into a number of previously dog-free areas, which included Arlington Square in St Peters ward. The completely barmy idea being that as long as dog-owners 'pick up' after their dogs, and accept to put their dogs on a lead if asked by an 'authorised person', it is OK to allow dogs anywhere in public parks.
Now I am not against dogs, or people owning dogs, but there is a very practical problem with mixing dogs and toddlers in the same bit of grass. Dog-owners cannot be counted on to 'pick up' 100% of the time, and the chances of one of Islington's 2 dog wardens being in every park in the Borough at the moment when a dog needs to be put on a lead are laughable. And if there is any chance at all of a crawling toddler encountering doggy poop, or being frightened by a boisterous bonzo, parents will not take the risk, and the children will be driven out of the park.
There were other cock-ups, like when the Council tried to email everone who had objected to the misleading wording of the consultation, they managed to 'cc' the list of objectors to everyone. And the final insult was that lead member Lib Dem Ruth Polling, who should have taken responsibility for the decision on the consultation, instead decided to 'delegate' the decision to a senior officer, presumably in an attempt to duck criticism for the shambles.
Quite apart from the unnecessary and unworkable rules that this sham consultation has introduced, it has also succeed in setting dog-owners and non-dog owners against each other, and covered the borough in a new crop of signs advertising fines for any infringements of the new "dog control orders", which must be really intimidating and hostile to dog owners, most of whom have done nothing wrong.
Not only have the Lib Dems cocked up the consultation, they have set residents against each other, and covered the borough in prohibition notices. They have been in power for 8 years now, and should have learned how to deal with issues like this with sensitivity. Obviously they haven't.
The 'consultation' was entitled "How to deal with irresponsible dog owners" - which sounds fine, and something everyone would want. Yet hidden in the small print and the colour-coded diagrams that went with the consultation was the proposal to allow dogs into a number of previously dog-free areas, which included Arlington Square in St Peters ward. The completely barmy idea being that as long as dog-owners 'pick up' after their dogs, and accept to put their dogs on a lead if asked by an 'authorised person', it is OK to allow dogs anywhere in public parks.
Now I am not against dogs, or people owning dogs, but there is a very practical problem with mixing dogs and toddlers in the same bit of grass. Dog-owners cannot be counted on to 'pick up' 100% of the time, and the chances of one of Islington's 2 dog wardens being in every park in the Borough at the moment when a dog needs to be put on a lead are laughable. And if there is any chance at all of a crawling toddler encountering doggy poop, or being frightened by a boisterous bonzo, parents will not take the risk, and the children will be driven out of the park.
There were other cock-ups, like when the Council tried to email everone who had objected to the misleading wording of the consultation, they managed to 'cc' the list of objectors to everyone. And the final insult was that lead member Lib Dem Ruth Polling, who should have taken responsibility for the decision on the consultation, instead decided to 'delegate' the decision to a senior officer, presumably in an attempt to duck criticism for the shambles.
Quite apart from the unnecessary and unworkable rules that this sham consultation has introduced, it has also succeed in setting dog-owners and non-dog owners against each other, and covered the borough in a new crop of signs advertising fines for any infringements of the new "dog control orders", which must be really intimidating and hostile to dog owners, most of whom have done nothing wrong.
Not only have the Lib Dems cocked up the consultation, they have set residents against each other, and covered the borough in prohibition notices. They have been in power for 8 years now, and should have learned how to deal with issues like this with sensitivity. Obviously they haven't.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
