NEIGHBOURS are split over whether an “eruv” – a religious boundary for observant Jews marked by poles and wire – should be installed in West Hampstead.

Camden planning department has been deluged with pages and pages of responses, both for and against, to the scheme proposed by Brondesbury Park Synagogue.

The huge scale of the letters has made it one of the most contested applications to be considered at the Town Hall.

The boundary defines an area in which orthodox Jews can carry out restricted activities – such as carrying things – during the hours of the Sabbath, from sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday. 

The application affects Fortune Green, Kilburn, Swiss Cottage and West Hampstead wards, with 15 sites earmarked for a pole.

While Jewish supporters of the scheme say it will change their lives by allowing them to use children’s buggies and wheelchairs within the eruv, there is a long list of objections from residents who say the poles are inappropriate.

It has left planners dealing with a highly-sensitive application in which they are considering development rules while at the same time taking into account religious sensibilities. 

The decision may now be transferred to councillors. There are more than 200 eruvs throughout the world with one already installed in neighbouring Barnet.

Rabbi Shlomo Odze, rabbi at South Hampstead Synagogue, said: “The erection of these poles would enable parents of young children who require transportation by buggy to leave their home without infringing the laws of Sabbath… 

“Existing ‘eruvin’ have shown that the poles and wire are virtually invisible once installed, merging as they do with the streetscape.”

But not all residents are keen, with officials also mulling over letters of objection which include views that the poles will look intrusive, that birds may be harmed and that a religion should not be allowed to set up such a boundary. All the comments have been posted on the council website for public view.

Katharine Bligh, a past Labour council candidate, said in her written objection: “It is quite wrong, especially in today’s multicultural, diverse and largely secular society for a small minority group to impose itself on the majority. 

“It shows total lack of respect for us. An eruv would be extremely divisive, both among Jewish communities and between Jews and everybody else. It encourages a ghetto-like mentality.”

WHAT SUPPORTERS SAY 

• “The eruv would enable parents of young children who require transportation by buggy to leave their home to attend synagogue for prayers and social functions on Friday evening and Saturday.”

• “The eruv will offer considerable benefit to the Jewish community without inconveniencing residents.”

• “As a person of Jewish faith with a family and small children, this would allow us to not break the laws of the Sabbath. A lot of care has been put into deciding the form and location of the poles.”

• “While it is not the role of the council to pass judgement on religious practices, the fact that this will assist certain residents should be taken into account as a benefit of the scheme.”

• “The poles to be installed are unobtrusive compared to other street furniture and once in place people are normally unaware of them.”

• “My parents who live in Camden are starting to find it difficult to walk. I do not want them to end up housebound on the day when they should be able to go to synagogue and meet friends.”

WHAT OBJECTORS SAY