Posts
Leytonstone cartoonist Woox on LBWF’s housing policies
(Reproduced by kind permission of Woox) »
LBWF’s flagship Blackhorse Yard ‘affordable’ housing scheme teeters, as developer Swan Housing steps away
The future of LBWF’s flagship ‘affordable’ housing scheme at Blackhorse Yard has been thrown into disarray, following the withdrawal of one of its two developers, Swan Housing. Swan Housing and its partner, Catalyst Homes, originally had gained planning permission for Blackhorse Yard in February 2019, and intended to deliver ‘359 affordable homes for shared ownership’, together with ‘a creative hub for artisans, artists’ studios, new retail space and an exciting and vibrant public realm’, using a site that had been purchased expressly for their purpose by the Mayor of London. LBWF’s then Leader, Cllr. Clare Coghill, was jubilant, claiming, ‘“We are really pleased that the firs... »
Asbestos in Waltham Forest Town Hall: LBWF CEO Martin Esom answers the criticisms…sort of
On 1 July just passed, LBWF CEO Martin Esom e-mailed his response to the various points that I recently raised with him about asbestos in the Town Hall and the Assembly Hall (see his e-mail pasted below, and links to my correspondence at the bottom of the page). Mr. Esom is extravagantly paid and also on the government’s Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Board, and so it is a reasonable expectation that he will answer residents’ inquiries about asbestos in full and definitively. However, here, he disappoints, favouring bland generalisations while disregarding specific issues. LBWF has been following ‘a management plan for asbestos’, he advises. And when removal of asbestos has occurred, it’s... »
Asbestos in Waltham Forest Town Hall: a new LBWF disgrace? Part Two
I have sent the letter pasted below to LBWF Chief Executive, Martin Esom, and will post his response when received. 24 June 2022 Dear Mr. Esom, I note that in a submission about an ex-employee’s asbestosis that was part of legal proceedings in 2019, LBWF’s defence team ‘specifically denied that members of the public who visited Walthamstow Town Hall for ordinary civic functions were inevitably (or at all) exposed to the risk of fatal asbestos injury’, and later in the same document asserted ‘The Defendant believes that the facts in this defence are true’. However, having looked at the available evidence, I am unclear as to how LBWF can be so certain of these propositions. Please note the fol... »