A controversial homeless hostel has opened – but the council has inflamed feelings among hostile residents by asking if they would be prepared to share the cost of gating the surrounding alleyways.

The 36-bed Richmond Court in Boughton is opening on a phased basis but Cheshire West and Chester Council has enraged householders by distributing a brochure-style letter showing photos and prices of alley gates, with the most expensive costing up to £2,340.

However, the council says it is carrying out a consultation over the gating option following requests from residents and is trying to ‘understand local opinion and to establish whether local people are willing to fund them’.

Resident Nik Reynold wrote on the Residents against Richmond Court Facebook page: “Just noticed on the letter from Cheshire West and Chester, re: security gates, that residents will be charged for these!

“If the council are to put these up, then they should foot the bill! They decided on Richmond Court and should take a hit on all the costs for security!”

Boughton ward councillor David Robinson said there were seven or eight alleyways including two alleyways adopted by the highway authority.

But he explained that the issue of alley gating was a ‘legal minefield’ because homeowners had a right to access their properties and any one of them could effectively veto plans for a gate.

In addition, the council had to prove anti-social behaviour to justify gating the adopted alleyways with no recorded incidents at the moment.

Cllr Robinson said in some cases the cost of the gates may be shared between just four households and in other cases it was up to 15.

The ward councillor is sympathetic and said he may be prepared to make a contribution from his members’ budget. He said: “Some residents are saying ‘we have had this problem imposed on us so why should we pay?’.”

Council spokesman Ian Callister said: “The purpose of the consultation on gating was to inform residents about possible actions which might be available.

“However, the two public areas owned by the authority do not meet the anti-social behaviour thresholds required for gating.

“In respect of the private areas involved, the consultation has proved so inconclusive that no action is being considered.”