Planning News – Vacant plot next to Primark in Leytonstone

A planning application has been lodged with the Council for the vacant plot in High Road Leytonstone, next to Primark.

Application Number: 2011/0148

Address: 654-656 High Road Leytonstone

Proposal: construction of a four storey building with mansard roof, comprising two retail units at ground floor level with basement level and four self contained flats on upper floors ( 3 x 1 bed, 1 x 2 bed)

Any comments should be made either by the Council’s website or by mail to The Planning Officer at Waltham Forest Town Hall.

Do we really need 7 betting offices at Bakers Arms?

The Council has recently received a planning application for a betting office at 857 Leyton High Road (formally part of Woolworths).

If this is granted there would be at least seven betting offices around the Bakers Arms area. Residents were angry that a betting office was recently allowed on the Bakers Arms pub site.

Under new regulations, councillors are now allowed to make objections to planning applications. So Liberal Democrat Councillor Bob Sullivan has made an official objection to this new betting office application.

His objections are:-

  • There are already too many betting offices in the area. Leyton is not an affluent area and betting offices are there to make money.
  • Gambling can be an addiction and more betting offices can only encourage this. This could increase crime in the area, as those who lose out may resort to crime to feed their addiction.
  • Children and vulnerable adults will also be affected if one or both parents use family funds to pay for betting, so depriving them of a proper income from which to live.

Bob will keep you informed of the outcome.

Deja Vu!

Funny old world!

 Our last Labour MP, Harry Cohen, was always one of the top expense spending MPs in the country. Well – here we go again!

Our local paper the Waltham Forest Guardian has highlighted that our current Labour MP, John Cryer, is also one of those MPs claiming the most in expenses.

Leyton must be a very expensive area to live in!

Waltham Forest Direct Shops AXED!

Leytonstone's Waltham Forest Direct shop - due to close

The Council has decided that the two Waltham Forest Direct (WFD) shops in Leyton and Leytonstone are to be axed.

A Liberal Democrat amendment at the budget setting meeting to retain the WFD shops was defeated by Labour councillors who decided to close the Waltham Forest Direct Shops in Leyton, Leytonstone and Chingford.

It was noted that the branch in Walthamstow is staying open!

This will be a big blow to Leyton residents who use it to sort out Council queries and benefit problems. Liberal Democrat Councillor Bob Sullivan has heard that a limited WFD service may become available at the new re-furbished Leyton Library. Possibly something similar is envisaged for Leytonstone?

We shall see!

Drapers Field update

All-weather pitch scheduled to be ripped out and area covered with hard standingA planning application was anticipated to be presented to the Council’s Planning Committee in January, regarding the Labour Cabinet’s desire to lease Drapers Field to the Olympic Delivery Authority for a period of 16 months.

During this time the all-weather pitch and the grass football pitches would be ripped out, hard standing installed to allow Drapers Field to be used as a storage centre and laundry for the Olympic Village.

So far, there is no sign of this application!

Liberal Democrat Group Leader Councillor Bob Sullivan has raised this question at the Town Hall, as the Lib Dems are anxious that residents’ views should not be ignored.

We will let you know about any developments.

Thousands of Waltham Forest residents to get income tax cut

These are difficult times for people across Britain and particularly in Waltham Forest, which is not an affluent borough, but last week’s budget has shown that this can also be an opportunity to reshape Britain into a fairer, more equal and greener country.

Labour’s financial legacy has left Britain needing to borrow an extra £400million, every single day, just to get by.

Labour also left us paying £120million in interest on our debt each and every day – for that we could build a new primary school every hour.

In all this debt there is Good News for Waltham Forest as 88,o00 residents will be getting a £200 income tax cut and 3,700 will be lifted out of paying income tax altogether.

If you are a pensioner then you will receive an extra £4.50 a week – and those retiring now will be on average £15,000 better off over their retirement.

The Liberal Democrats in Government are making sure that eventually personal allowances will rise to £10,000. This will mean more Waltham Forest residents receiving a tax cut and even more low paid workers paying no tax at all.

Leytonstone High Road traffic scheme

The Plaza showing area between the sculpture and the flowerbed where it was planned the road should run

Liberal Democrat campaigner John Howard raised concerns about the plans compiled by the Council to ‘improve’ Leytonstone High Road, and the environs of Leytonstone Underground Station in advance of the Olympic Games.

At the time he was advised that London Buses had also raised similar points. A site meeting was said to be taking place early in the New Year, after which revisions would be made.

He has contacted the Council to ascertain what progress may have been made. Watch the website for further news.

Plans for 590-594 High Road Leyton – REFUSED

Artist impression looking towards Bakers Arms

The plans to convert the corner of Leyton High Road and Hainault Road into flats etc. has been refused by the Council’s Planning Department. The planners say that the developments design, height and bulk would constitute and over- development of the site, out of character with the street scene and townscape, and would thus be detrimental to the visual amenities of the area.

Of course the developers could appeal or produce another plan more in keeping with the area. We will keep you informed of any further developements.

Labour and Tory Love-In!

WOULD YOU BELIEVE IT! 

At the Council meeting last week where the 2011/2012 budget was set, the Tories, who are the official opposition on Waltham Forest’s Labour Council, failed to put forward their own budget.

They also failed to support the Lib Dem budget, which tried to save some of the key services to vulnerable families and residents of the borough (see earlier report for details).  They tried to deride it and even went on to praise the Labour budget that cut services by millions. 

Those at the meeting were taken aback by the ‘cosying up’ of the Tories to Labour.  Some even said it looked like a ‘Love In’.  When it came to the vote the Tories  then ABSTAINED on both the Labour and Liberal Democrat budgets!  So much for the Tory opposition on the Council.

The Liberal Democrat councillors were the ONLY opposition to Labour.

The Liberal Democrat Budget

At the Council’s budget setting meeting, last night, the Liberal Democrats put forward their alternative proposals:

LIB DEMS SET OUT PLANS FOR BETTER BUDGET WHICH PROTECTS THE MOST VULNERABLE

The Liberal Democrat Group will yesterday (Tuesday 8 March) put forward a budget amendment which protects services to the most vulnerable, especially children and carers, and still freezes council tax.

The Liberal Democrat budget:

  • puts more money into children centres, young people’s services, respite care and support for carers and people with mental health problems compared to Labour’s proposals
  • maintains services to residents in Chingford, Leyton and Leytonstone through Waltham Forest Direct, so that residents will not have to travel to Walthamstow to deal with benefit and other council enquiries
  • restores residents’ ability to influence decision-making by retaining slimmed-down community councils
  • reverses above-inflation fee increases for pest control charges and sports pitch hire
  • funds extra pothole repairs this year to put right our crumbling roads.

 The Liberal Democrats will fund these services by:

  • slashing members allowances, which have grown substantially over the last decade, by over a quarter of a million pounds
  • reducing the amount spent on corporate communications and campaigns. Waltham Forest was recently revealed as the biggest spender on propaganda associated with the Comprehensive Spending Review, using almost £27,000 of taxpayers’ money to promote the fact it has to make savings
  • reducing the amount spent on subsidising trades union activity in line with other service reductions
  • using money built up in the insurance reserve to fund pothole repairs thereby reducing the number of successful insurance claims against the council
  • using other reserves to protect key services and support the transition to new ways of working

Liberal Democrat Group Leader, Councillor Bob Sullivan, said:

“This is a very difficult budget for the council but Labour has chosen to protect councillors’ allowances and the council’s propaganda factory while making cuts that the Liberal Democrats would not have done. Our budget proposals protect those services which make a real difference to residents’ lives.”

Liberal Democrat councillor for Forest ward, Farooq Qureshi, said:

“I am delighted that the Liberal Democrat proposals prevent the closure of the Waltham Forest Direct offices in Leyton, Leytonstone and Chingford – funded by cutting councillors’ allowances and reducing the amount of money spent on glossy campaigns. The services provided by the WFD shops are irreplaceable. They should not be forced to travel to join long queues in the sole remaining Walthamstow office.”

Liberal Democrat High Street councillor Mahmood Hussain said:

“It is clear that Labour’s proposals will have a drastic impact on many people who rely on respite care to give them a vital break. By putting extra money back into this service the Lib Dem amendment gives carers a boost.”

Liberal Democrat Cann Hall ward councillor Liz Phillips said:

“Waltham Forest has one of the highest rates of teenage pregnancy in England and Wales. It is a false economy to cut this service so drastically when the social and economic costs of teenage pregnancy are so high.”