Topic

housing

218 petitions

Update posted 14 hours ago

Petition to Tower Hamlets Development Committee

STOP SAINSBURY'S, SAVE WHITECHAPEL

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 dr.developmentcontrol@towerhamlets.gov.uk (ref:PA/15/00837), and join the Friends of Trinity Green at www.friendsoftrinitygreen.co.uk where you can find a template letter objection. STOP SAINSBURYS, SAVE WHITECHAPEL Thank you for your support. 

Friends of Trinity Green
5,543 supporters
Update posted 3 days ago

Petition to Jerry Brown, California State House, California State Senate, California Governor, Eric Garcetti

DECLARE A "SHELTER CRISIS" IN LOS ANGELES (CA. GOV. CODE § 8698-8698.2)

California Homeless Crisis Grows As State Is Reluctant To Use Powerful Law (CA. GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 8698-8698.2) Homeless spike in rural California linked to Silicon Valley:  "California’s Central Valley is best known for supplying nearly 25% of the country’s food, including 40% of the fruit and nuts consumed each year. Yet today, backcountry places such as Patterson, population 22,000, are experiencing an increase in homelessness that can be traced, in part, to an unlikely sounding source: Silicon Valley. The million-dollar home prices about 85 miles west, in San Francisco and San Jose, have pushed aspiring homeowners to look inland. Patterson’s population has doubled since the 2000 census. Average monthly rents have climbed from about $900 in 2014 to nearly $1,600 in recent months, according to the apartment database Rent Jungle, compounding the hardships of the foreclosure crisis, the shuttering of several local agricultural businesses and surging substance abuse rates." https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/13/california-homelessness-silicon-valley-tech-commuters Shelters across California have only enough beds for a small fraction of homeless people turning away hundreds each night for this reason leaving them to fend for themselves. But one of the state's most powerful tools to assist this vulnerable population is hardly being used. Buried within California's legal codes is a 25-year-old statute that allows counties and municipalities to declare a state of emergency when a "significant number" of homeless people exist in a community, allowing them to convert public facilities into shelters and even to change zoning codes to site shelters in most neighborhoods. Yet since the law was passed in 1987 -- and as the homeless population increased -- few communities have invoked the statute, and when they do, it is almost always just to set up temporary winter shelters. As a result of a lack of political will, neighborhood resistance and budget constraints, this law has rarely been tapped to ease the suffering of the dispossessed." "It is almost unparalleled in its potential," National Coalition for the Homeless executive director Neil Donovan said about the statute. "But it's a challenge [for California] because of the financial crisis that they're in. Other communities use similar statutes far more effectively. I'm thinking of Boston, which opens up its armories when overcrowding happens." The reluctance to take action frustrates advocates for homeless people. "It's a very powerful statute in the sense that once a shelter crisis has been declared -- it could be done on a statewide level by the governor or on a county level -- there are just about no restrictions to housing the homeless anywhere," said civil liberties lawyer Mark Merin. "But there are very few instances where it has been invoked. Any mayor or board of supervisors which has not declared a shelter crisis should be asked - Why not?" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40635756 http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-lopez-renters-struggle-06042017-story.html

Benefit Network
150 supporters
Update posted 3 days ago

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

CALLING FOR A MORATORIUM ON MANSIONIZATION & SMALL LOT SUBDIVISIONS IN VENICE, CA

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.”

VENICE COALITION TO PRESERVE OUR UNIQUE COMMUNITY CHARACTER (VC-PUCC)
836 supporters
Update posted 3 days ago

Petition to Kathleen Wynne, NDP Leader Andrea Horwath, PC Leader Patrick Brown, Deputy Premier Deborah Matthews, MPP Vic Dhillon, Minister Tracy MacCharles

End Tarion’s new home warranty monopoly NOW: Give Ontario's new home buyers a choice!

Ontario's Premier Kathleen Wynne said the time for monopolies is over (National Post, Apr. 17, 2015). We think she’s absolutely right! Monopolies are notoriously inefficient and ineffective - the prices are too high and the production is too low - and they can "capture" the political and regulatory processes (CBS Money Watch, Sept. 18, 2014). And now Justice Cunningham has recommended ending Tarion's monopoly as a result of his Tarion Review! "...I am recommending the introduction of a competitive multi-provider model for warranty protection.  Introducing competition should encourage continuous improvement and innovation. This in turn can lead to better consumer outcomes such as enhancements in warranty protection beyond minimum amounts..." (Justice Douglas Cunningham, Tarion Review Final Report, Dec. 16, 2016). But the Wynne Government has not yet accepted Justice Cunningham's recommendation to end Tarion's monopoly.   Tarion is a private corporation created as a monopoly by the Government of Ontario to provide warranty protection to new home buyers and to regulate builders. The legislation was established in 1976 – 41 years ago – and many agree that it has never worked properly. Numerous media reports show that there are many serious problems resulting from the legislation and how Tarion is administering the legislation - and now Justice Cunningham has agreed!  The following summarizes the situation in three other provinces – and then in Ontario: Prov       2015 Housing starts    # of Warr Providers       Avg #        Alberta             37,282                         7                         5,326 BC                    31,446                        5                          6,289 Manitoba          5,501                           5**                      1,100 Ontario             70,156                         1                         70,156  This means that Alberta, BC and Manitoba offer a CHOICE of warranty providers AND, on average, the warranty providers in those provinces have a much more reasonable number of homes to service than Tarion.     Sign this petition to ask Premier Wynne to end Tarion’s monopoly and offer a number of warranty providers in Ontario -- like Justice Cunningham recommended -- and like other Canadian provinces are doing.  It's time for Ontario to catch up! ------------------------------------- * Statistics Canada  **effective 2017

Canadians for Properly Built Homes
818 supporters