housing and homelessness

126 petitions

Update posted 2 days ago

Petition to Tower Hamlets Development Committee


What’s the story? Sainsbury’s have submitted plans to Tower Hamlets Council for an over-sized development of their megastore in Whitechapel, east London. Whitechapel is a diverse and ever changing area, which makes its character all the richer. However the proposals, based primarily on cashing in on high value apartments, causes irreversible harm to the surrounding community and environment.  1. Disproportionate Scale The development is radically out of context with the surrounding low-rise Whitechapel area. The proposed 28 storey tower (101m) would be the tallest building in the 3 mile stretch between at Aldgate and Canary Wharf. Even the eight ‘smaller’ blocks of up to 15 storeys (59m) would introduce a density beyond Council guidelines. The enormous tower will block daylight to hundreds of homes and businesses, and overlook countless more. 2. Damage to Local Heritage The scheme will overwhelm the historic setting of the Whitechapel Market and Stepney Green Conservation Areas and their 52 listed buildings. The tower also intrudes significantly on the Grade 1 listed Trinity Green Almshouses, sited just 100m to the east of the site. The current proposals demonstrate little evidence of how this remarkable context has influenced the design, which Historic England has described as “substantially harmful”. 3. Lack of Affordable Housing Of the proposed 559 residential apartments only 89 apartments (16%) are to be ‘affordable’, falling far short of the Council’s targets of 35-50% to align with the London Plan. A tiny 6% are family dwellings, making the mix wholly inappropriate for this part of Whitechapel, and doing little to address the wider London housing crisis.  What can I do? Please support this campaign by signing this petition - it takes just a few seconds, and please spread the word! Opposition has been raised by Historic England, the Georgian Group, SPAB, the Victorian Society and the East End Preservation Society but we need much more support to ensure the development is rejected by Tower Hamlets council. You can send your objections to Tower Hamlets Council to (ref:PA/15/00837), and join the Friends of Trinity Green at where you can find a template letter objection. STOP SAINSBURYS, SAVE WHITECHAPEL Thank you for your support. 

Friends of Trinity Green
5,554 supporters
Update posted 4 days ago

Petition to Michael LoGrande (Director, L.A. City Planning), Mike Bonin, Eric Garcetti, VNC Board, LUPC , Tricia Keane, Kevin Jones


We the undersigned call for the following:  - an immediate moratorium on the  'McMansionization' of VENICE - an immediate moratorium on Small Lot Subdivisions (SLS) in VENICE - a denial of all Small Lot Subdivisions currently pending for VENICE - no building permits to be issued for Small Lot Subdivisions prior to recordation of final map In VENICE - FULL public notification and participation, as set forth by Federal, State, and Local Law, in any and all proposed developments in VENICE. Additionally, we the undersigned call for full enforcement of  the California Coastal Act, the Mello Act, and the Venice Coastal Zone Specific Plan, because the cumulative effect of recent development in VENICE is diminishing the quality of life for it’s residents, and negating the purpose of said protections put in place to preserve the Coastal Zone. Here are 3 consistent and repeated ways that the City is ignoring and violating Venice Coastal Zone Specific Plan (VCZSP):1. City Planning is interpreting the Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance (SLSO) to trump the Specific Plan, although the law says that specific plans always trump ordinances. The City is interpreting the Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance to allow more units on lots than the Specific Plan allows, and is not requiring any guest parking at all, and is allowing tandem parking that people often don't use, rather than side-by-side parking.2. Allowing buildings to be constructed to the maximum possible size even when the proposed building is totally out of scale with the neighborhood i.e. three story buildings that block all of the neighbors' sunlight in a one-story or two-story neighborhood. The Specific Plan requires an evaluation of the compatibility of the mass and scale of the proposed building with the other buildings in the neighborhood. The Planning Department does not do this, and they have set up a process where there is no appeal. If the Planning Department continues to get away with this, soon Venice will be all 3-story compounds with very little sun or air between the buildings. 3. The Planning Department is issuing illegal DIRs that blatantly violate the Specific Plan. Then the City says that there's no appeal because the 14-day deadline has passed. The community has no real notice and no opportunity to respond. The City refuses to email citizens a .pdf of the DIRs as they are issued, they only send a mailed copy.Whereas per The CA Coastal Act. Section 30116 Sensitive Coastal Resource Areas – Venice has the following characteristics:b.  areas possessing significant recreational value.c. Special communities or neighborhoods which are significant visitor designation areas.Areas that provide existing coastal housing or recreational opportunities for low- and moderate income-persons.The public has a right to fully participate in decisions affecting coastal planning, conservation and development.From Section 30250 Location; existing developed area:“In addition, land divisions, other than leases for agricultural uses, outside existing developed areas shall be permitted only where 50 percent of the usable parcels in the area have been developed and the created parcels would be no smaller than the average size of surrounding parcels.”Section 30251 Scenic and visual qualities:“Permitted development shall be sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas. Section 30252 (e) and enhancement of public access:Where appropriate, protect special communities and neighborhoods that, because of their unique characteristics, are popular visitor destination points for recreational uses.”

838 supporters
Started 1 month ago

Petition to Kamala Harris, Douglas Guthrie, Eric Garcetti, Matt Szabo, Roberto Gama, Stephanie Romero, Marcella Cortez, Jose Huizar, Paul Habib, Zenay Loera, Lisa Kable-Blanchard, Bridget Byrnes Hirsch

Help Protect Northeast LA Elders & Disabled from Homelessness

The tenants at Reflections on Yosemite, 1560 Yosemite Drive, Eagle Rock, CA 90041, call for an immediate suspension of all rent increases. The majority of the residents are senior and disabled individuals on fixed incomes from Social Security andSSIDisability. They have been subjected to emotional and financial distress by the Housing Authority (HACLA) since it began imposing rent increases in July, 2016. HACLA’s original rent hikes were 32% to 58% increases for 19 tenants with plans to raise the rents for the rest of the non-subsidized residents. After calls and letters to José Huizar’s office, the Eagle Rock Neighborhood Council, local newspapers, and to HACLA, this was eventually amended to a 6% rent increase. This demonstrates that HACLA cynically put profits before the people it has pledged to assist and protect. Moreover, these actions may be in violation of the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, the California UNRUH Civil Rights Act and other fair housing laws related to age discrimination. Due to the residents’ continued outcry and their testimony at the Board of Directors of the Housing Authority’s Annual Planning meeting, coupled with vigorous protest from the Los Angeles Tenants Union, HACLA dropped the rent hikes to 3%. This increase has been implemented. Yet even this 3% hike is an extreme hardship for the fixed low-income seniors. The average monthly income of members of the Reflections at Yosemite Tenants’ Association is $1,258.00. The average monthly rent is $703.00. Therefore, residents are paying an average of 55%, some up to 75%, of their income on rent. Several have reported struggling to buy food and medicine after paying rent. For 2017, the Social Security cost-of-living increase, 0.3%, was negated by the increased Medicare cost. For this most vulnerable population of low income people, a 3% rent increase is untenable; for many, it threatens homelessness. Due to these extreme economic hardships, the residents require an indefinite moratorium on rent hikes of any amount. The Housing Authority’s purpose is to provide safe, affordable housing for low income people. Its strategic mission states that it will “...create viable, healthy communities...while developing and maintaining a strong culture of mutual respect, fiscal responsibility, and ethical behavior...” The Yosemite Tenants’ Association and the Los Angeles Tenants Union expect and insist that HACLA adhere to its declared commitment to ethical behavior and responsibility by not violating its own mission or the rights of its tenants to fair treatment and affordable housing. We, the undersigned, demand that all rent increases cease immediately.

LA Tenant's Union
334 supporters