“Proposal: Erection of 158 residential (1-3 bedroom) flats and terraced housing (3 bedroom), together with the regeneration and enhancement of an existing ecological corridor, and landscaping scheme with associated parking and necessary infrastructure. Outline application with some matters reserved”.
It's called 'regeneration' which is odd. 'Enhancement' is worrying. I've often wondered how to get into the green space that you get glimpses of in walking along this end of Seven Sisters Road, behind Wickes, that you can see from the railway line. Now it seems it has been spotted as a prime development site. The details on the planning portal are a bit skimpy and maybe it will be a super-sensitive gentle exercise in adding necessary housing. Maybe it won't. Those of you who see the green corridors along both the east-west and north-south railways, enjoy them while you can.
As they include red squirrels in their illustrations of their knowledge of local wildlife, I am just a little concerned that eg trees with preservation orders on the site may be doomed.
Residents heard loud noises at dusk for several days before the bat survey took place, then funnily enough they only saw one bat.
Red squirrels in Tottenham?
Precisely. They forgot the ospreys though.
Another so-called development being hailed by the Council as 'evidence' or regeneration when most people know of course it isn't.
Nev, Can you please point out where someone from the the Council has "hailed" these plans in the way you mention?
Do you know the area this application is being made for? What do think most people in that neighbourhood would want to see there?
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
@Alan, I was just being cynical. This development is unnecessary and will add to our overcrowded area.
I wish I could believe the issues were that simple, Neville.
Over the years, many of the people I've enjoyed meeting in our Tottenham Hale/Bruce Grove neighbourhood have been living in overcrowded homes. As well as wanting larger homes locally, many of them would also have liked their extended families to have the option of living locally.
If we want to see strong communities and social cohesion, a stable decently housed population should be one of the aims of local and national government policy. One of my fears about the so-called regeneration plans is that some people at least have a hidden aim of pushing poorer people out areas which are eyed-up by developers.
There's nothing too surprising about this. According to Professor David Harvey the same thing is going on from New York to Mumbai. One problem we have is that the Muswell Hill colonial administration which runs Haringey isn't at first base in understanding this and other issues in Tottenham.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor. Labour whip withdrawn 6 December 2012.)
Oh can't we just have a bit of space with grass and trees and leave it as grass and trees? Do we really need to pack another development into a densely populated area as it is?
Ok ...moan over.
Why is it a moan, Sarah? That seems a deadly serious question to me.
But in a crowded city with opposing interests and contested land uses, having a bit of space with grass and trees means more people getting a bit more involved in planning and development issues. And not only issues of conservation and protection of open spaces - important as they are - but about how those green areas "work" as safe, attractive well cared for spaces.
Wider still, giving serious consideration to how a large city builds homes - not hutches - for all its people while trying to ensure an attractive, healthy, convivial environment.
In Haringey, councillors like Stuart McNamara have advocated the need for a clear separation between staff who deal with planning and those working on "regeneration". Especially so it's clear that we are not operating a developers' fan club.
Are they going to provide additional schools for future residents of the new development?
If overcrowded Haringey families are rehoused in new homes that won't necessarily add to the total numbers of children. But in any case, at present, a new school would have have to be one of Michael Gove's academies. (Unless and until the next Government is willing to begin undoing Gove's damage.)
That's a good enough argument to knock this whole thing (and the still-not-properly-advertised St Ann's Hospital developments) on the head. If you can't get adequate schools, social housing and extra public transport into the equation the discussion shouldn't even start I'm afraid.