Letter: Leasehold aesthetics
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: In choosing Hampstead Garden Suburb to demonstrate the virtues of the leasehold system in preserving the visual integrity of urban areas, Martin Richardson (Letters, 2 March) seriously undermines his argument.
The majority of properties in Hampstead Garden Suburb are already enfranchised under the 1967 Leasehold Reform Act. The visual integrity of the area has been maintained by the Hampstead Garden Suburb Trust.
The Housing and Urban Development Bill includes proposals for such schemes of management to be set up. If Hampstead Garden Suburb is anything to go by, the schemes will do as much to protect the visual character of the areas as any leasehold schemes.
Yours faithfully,
RUTH EVANS
Director
National Consumer Council
London, SW1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments