| |
Questions over ‘consultation’ on school plans
• JOHN Ward (Letters April 16) claimed that widespread consultation had occurred with the local community in relation to the Emmanuel School expansion.
This claim is at best disingenuous for I am one of many Cholmley Gardens residents who received no leaflet, no notice of a meeting and certainly nothing that could be characterised as consultation.
It may well be the case that 500 leaflets were printed but they did not find their way into my mailbox and neither were any posted on the individual noticeboards in each lobby of the Cholmley Gardens estate.
If I was simply one of a handful of residents who had no communication, I could possibly accept that this was an isolated omission. I am however one of many, and not just in Cholmley Gardens, who was ignorant of the plans before being informed by a neighbour.
In any event, printing 500 leaflets does not, in my view, satisfy the description of wide consultation even if they had been delivered as claimed.
Consultation means “taking into account, considering the feelings, interests etcetera” and none of this has been done in a transparent or inclusive way.
Liz Bingham
Cholmley Gardens, NW6
• WHAT is the purpose of a consultation period: is it actually to consult with stakeholders, regardless of the desired outcome, or is it merely a political formality designed to give a democratic varnish to a pre-concluded project?
Where have the 500 leaflets gone which supposedly were sent out to neighbours? None arrived in Mill Lane.
Why is this project rushed through in what appears to be a very underhand manner? (Existing drawings of the project dating back as far as 2008 have initially been excluded from the process and appeared a week before closure – why?)
At the end of the day, the school expansion should be an improvement for both the children and the local community.
If it was found that the project were over ambitious, the site too small and inadequate, none of the parties would benefit!
Susanne Tide-Frater
Cholmley Gardens, NW6
• JOHN Ward claims Emmanuel School undertook widespread consultation with the local community (Letters, April 16).
This statement is clearly misleading, and like the entire process in relation to this proposed project, is being handled in an underhand and manipulative manner.
The people of West Hampstead deserve to be informed of this.
I am also still wondering why architects’ plans dated October 2008 were only made publicly available in the final seven days of the consultation process?
Again one is left with the impression that the school is being underhand and very sparing in the dissemination of information that we, as the community, have a right to know.
We do supposedly live in a democratic world!
Linda Clark
Cholmley Gardens, NW6
• MY wife Suzi Malin is directly affected by the proposals to demolish the houses at Mill Lane to make way for a new school.
She is an artist working in her studio at a Mill Lane property, immediately adjacent to the proposed development and will be greatly affected by loss of light, overlooking, noise, disruption, increased traffic and general chaos.
More to the point she has never been consulted or received a leaflet outlining the proposals.
The claim by John Ward (Letters, April 16) that the community has been “widely consulted” is factually incorrect.
A large number of residents contacted in Buckingham Mansions, Cholmley Gardens and Mill Lane were totally unaware of the proposals and never received any notification.
If you would like to discuss this matter with Suzi please call her on 07786 934 377 or email suzi@malinonline.co.uk
David Hyams
Head of Auctions
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
| |
