Showing posts with label hackney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hackney. Show all posts

Friday, 11 February 2011

Before and after photos of Prince George Road

Dear neighbours,
At the end of the business day today no information or plans of the Horizon School redevelopment could be found on the Council website. We will keep on looking out for any relevant information.

Meanwhile a visual feast for Prince George residents.

Those of you who were at the first public meeting we had last year with BSF and Hackney Council, the architects said that the new Horizon school building would heal a broken street (referring to Prince George Road). The two photographs below (one from Google and one of the architects' view of how Prince George Road will look once they 'reunify' it) are telling of how our neighbourhood will change.

before
after!

 

Sunday, 16 January 2011

Tree Preservation Order news

Hackney Council received a number of requests to consider issuing a Tree Preservation Order for the trees in the current Horizon School from local residents and other people whose work or other daily routines bring them to the area. 

In answer to one of the requests signed by several local residents the case council officer responded  that he
appreciates the signatories' attachment to the trees and their effect on our views and the street', but Hackney are currently not planning to serve an order.
He then stressed 
this is not because the trees do not warrant one but because, even with a TPO, the trees could still be removed if a planning permission allowed it; a planning permission over-rides a TPO,
and finally added 
in this particular case my superiors are satisfied that a TPO is not yet expedient.
Our collective TPO request stressed the value of the trees and the green area around them for the local wildlife as well as the visual and aesthetic value of the trees, but the Council response entirely ignores this dimension of the residents' campaign to save the mature trees in Horizon school choosing to dismiss the request as merely one about views and attachment to the trees!

We are left wondering why then there is a department dealing with tree preservation orders if their decisions are by definition potentially redundant. Perhaps the department has a view on that?