Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Building work on the site of M&S
Hi All
I am trying to find out if anyone knows if the other Building applications for erecting high rise structures are in the process of going through.
I do remember hearing of plans put forward to use the old BHS building in a similar manner to what is happening now.
I had raised some objections to the M&S proposal to build a tower block on the High Road/Bury road and I was told by letter it had been rejected and then heard nothing again from the “Consultation Process” until the work started.
I have since discovered it was approved in a closed meeting and most of the affordable housing that was originally proposed has been seriously reduced.
I had wanted to know what consideration there was of how parking possibly 100 + new cars in the local area will be handled because they must have the rights to a Resident Parking Permit as we all do.
Has anyone heard anything about more plans to put Tower Blocks on the High Road?
Tags for Forum Posts: development of wood green high road
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Charlotte on
-
Many new builds exclude residents parking. This was the case for the Hampden Road development although many residents appear to park illegally at the top end of Hampden Road as there is no enforcement.
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Ruggles on
-
Understood issue was that is Not public Highway
-
-
I had wanted to know what consideration there was of how parking possibly 100 + new cars in the local area will be handled because they must have the rights to a Resident Parking Permit as we all do
Many of these are only approved with the proviso that there isn't any right to parking.
-
-
It's usually in the Section 106 agreement that there isn't a right to apply for residents parking; and the Council's 'Local Land and Property Gazetteer' should flag up which property addresses permit applications won't be accepted from.
The difficulty is actually in places which don't have CPZs yet, because the policy in the London Plan essentially says that you can't refuse a scheme for parking impacts just because the council hasn't bothered to introduce a CPZ.
-
-
It's the council's MO, unfortunately. Pass (or don't pass) plans, then concede every time the developer goes back to them to say there's budget for fewer and fewer affordable homes. It's a fun game they play and I don't think the developers have any intention of delivering the original number of affordable homes, they just come up with an arbitrary figure, knowing they'll negotiate down after approval to little or no affordable units. And the council rolls over every time. Usually, as you say, in a private meeting. It's scandalous. Maybe the new council management will make a difference, but I won't hold my breath.
-
-
Looks magnificent. I can't wait. It's about time such a promising central location was given the much needed facelift to bring it into this century.
https://www.sheppardrobson.com/news/article/first-look-at-sheppard-...
-
-
The Council didn't approve this (so not its MO - Rory) the Mayor of London approved it on appeal, open mtg.
It isn't a tower (a building taller than its width) but could be considered a tall building following post Grenfell rules on buildings over 6 storeys, but as the term 'tower block' tends to come from the era of Councils developing 20 storey housing blocks a developer building a nine storey one in the centre of an urban conurbation is hardly a tower block.
The scheme appears to have the same affordable housing provision in the scheme approved by the GLA as the one rejected by the Council, so no dumbing down by the Council.
If you check the Councils planning portal then the former BHS site has approval but is 'safeguarded' because of Crossrail 2.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
