Viability Report – Walthamstow Greyhound Stadium‏

The email below asks the council to release public documents that it is withholding to protect L&Q massive losses:

Dear Steven,

You were included in an email that clarified that all documents from the 17th august 2011 were to be treated as public. We have requested for the last two months that you release the viability report concerning the L&Q stow report. The GLA have also requested that this be released.

We note that your authority by its planning officers report is totally protecting L&Q and is doing all it can to cover up the losses of L&Q. We made previous allegations against councillors who encouraged L&Q to buy this site according to Mike Johnson Director of L&Q . Your authority failed to investigate any allegation including your head of planning caught fixing planning dates and L&Q obtaining “inside information”.

Your authority has created history by recommending to committee a planning application from  an RSL that has” no social rent” in its plans. Part of the viability included in the report shows the massive loss to the public purse of the L&Q plans and shows you as an authority basically  covering up another public bodies massive mistake.

We now call upon you to release the public document of viability in line with the Mayor of London wishes by return.

Kind Regards

Rick Holloway


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Viability Report – Walthamstow Greyhound Stadium‏

  1. DaftAida says:

    It’s like trying to prize open the facts from the official secrets act.

  2. Miles says:

    Outraged as a taxpayer that this is happening, there has to be openness & accountability!!

  3. andy bishop says:

    The proposed scheme fails on many levels..yet the planning authority recommends granting conditional permission. I suspect the majority of authorities would refuse due to density,built environment, traffic and environment issues. It has been obvious all along that the development will be extremely light on proper affordable housing and social rent. The s106 arrangements are ridiculous and go nowhere near reflecting the loss of leisure and negative impact it will have on local communities and infrastructure. The “dire need for housing”.. L and Q and the council have stated this…is for social rent and proper affordable housing. This development fails miserably to ease the need….SO WHY ARE THE COUNCIL SUPPORTING IT.

Leave a Reply to andy bishop Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s