Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

Biggest Housing Development in Harringay for Decades - Your Comments Needed!

I've just posted in the old thread on the Hampden Road development  but wanted to start a new one as it seems that people are saying comment is now closed.

It is not so please get your comments to the council development ref: HGY/2013/0470

or link here:


Tags for Forum Posts: hampden road, hampden road development

Views: 3286

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Is this being built on of pseuds corner by any chance

On the subject of squeezing existing local services, not least schools, doctors and dentists, there's also these other nearby(-ish) schemes:

Lawrence Road, N15 http://hbd-news.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/tottenhams-lawrence-road-dev...

St Ann's Hospital http://www.beh-mht.nhs.uk/Downloads/Get%20involved/St%20Anns/The%20... 

I think? It would be interesting to see a map showing all these new/proposed developments in Harringay & surrounding parishes. Anyway, aside from the pros or cons of these other schemes, yes we need more places for people to live (new or existing stock), but yes I also worry that the necessary thought has gone into whether enough services exist to support the new populations. And then there's your building design......!

Best I can do on that score right now, is this one from five years ago. To add to that we now have Lawerence Road and potentially Hampden Road.

Amazing thanks Hugh!


I'm just taking a rather glancing look at this and some of the following info may well be helpful in framing an objection at this stage and subsequently in informing any debate. 

I'm not a planning expert, but as I understand it, in the first instance, planning decisions are made against general planning practice as informed by the London Plan and the Council's own Local Plan (supplemented by carry over policies from the old Unitary Development Plan - UDP). (See how the London and Local plans fit together). In order that any comments on the application carry the greatest weight, it's worth making them against this background.

The salient points seem to be (italicised words are my own notations):

Haringey UDP


The Council will require development proposals to demonstrate that:

b) the proposal complements the character of the local area and is of a nature and scale that is sensitive to the surrounding area;

2.20 New development in the borough should complement the existing pattern of development in that part of Haringey. The criteria above aim to ensure that future development in the borough will not worsen the quality of life for those living and working in Haringey.



7.19 Residential developments without car parking provision are only likely to be viable where there are alternative and accessible means of transport available, in particular a good level of public transport accessibility and where a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) is in existence or planned within the timescale for the proposed development.


7.20 The construction of new residential developments without car parking would support Council policies to reduce car dependency and the encouragement of other modes of transport. The Council will negotiate viable means to implement car-free developments where it is appropriate.

Further, in Appendix 1, we have:

11.1 The Council will support proposals for new residential developments without provision of car parking in appropriate locations and where there are effective mechanisms in place preventing car ownership. The Council will support such proposals where there are alternative and accessible means of transport available and where a Controlled Parking Zone is in existence or planned within the time scale of the proposed development. The first car free residential developments will be carefully assessed to see how well they perform.

(So this sounds like the Council recognises the issue that in reality parking is normally needed to support viability, but they leave a let out clause. If parking had to be supplied, no doubt it would be in the North Ladder CPZ).

Local Plan

2.1.4 Development in the growth areas should take account of the community, environmental and other distinctive local characteristics of each area, deliver good design, including public realm, open space and promote social and economic inclusion and relate development to the surrounding areas. Tall
buildings may be appropriate at certain locations within these areas (See SP11 for the Council's approach to tall buildings), subject to further detailed analysis. Haringey Heartlands and Tottenham Hale will be the key locations for the largest amount of Haringey's future growth. Their significance lies in their location within the London-Stansted-Cambridge-Peterborough Growth Corridor and they are also identified in the London Plan as an Area for Intensification and an Opportunity Area respectively. These areas are suitable for large scale redevelopment with significant increases in jobs and homes.

2.1.8 One way of making the most efficient use of our land and buildings is to encourage higher densities. The Council will encourage high densities in the most accessible parts of the borough (generally Tottenham Hale, Haringey Heartlands and Wood Green Metropolitan Town Centre) as well as other appropriate locations. New schemes should be of high quality design and sensitively consider the character and built form of their surroundings, particularly in Conservation Areas. Good design can increase density while protecting and enhancing the character of an area (please see SP 11 Design for more detail on our approach to design). The Council will expect the density of housing development to comply with the Density Matrix in the London Plan (Table 3A.2 - Missing). Density will vary across the borough due to its different character settings; however, densities below the relevant range in the density matrix will not be permitted. Please see SP2 Housing for more details on the Council’s approach to housing.

SP0 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

When considering development proposals the Council will take a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The Council will always work proactively with applicants to find solutions, which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible and to secure development that improves the economic social and environmental conditions in Haringey. Planning applications that accord with the policies of Haringey’s local plan (and, where relevant, with policies in neighbourhood plans) will be approved without delay, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Where there are no policies relevant to the application or relevant policies are out of date at the time of making the decision, then the Council will grant permission unless material considerations indicate otherwise taking into account whether:

  • Any adverse impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole; or
  • Specific policies in the NPPF indicate that development should be restricted.

3.1.6 Haringey Growth Areas these are areas with the greatest capacity for growth. It is expected that the most significant amount of houses, jobs and infrastructure will be delivered in these areas over the plan period.

3.1.7 Areas of Change these are areas with considerable potential for growth, though on a lesser scale than growth areas. These areas are appropriately located to support growth and contain identified sites which are available and suitable for development.

3.1.8 Areas of Limited Change these are areas in which expected growth is likely to be small scale and be of an incremental nature.

(Unfortunately Haringey’s Local Plan has been published with all maps and charts missing. I’ve asked for the relevant maps to be provided, but in the meantime I’m assuming that Harringay is in an ‘Area of Limited Change’).

Areas of limited change

3.1.45 Many parts of Haringey, particularly in the west of the borough, are predominantly residential in character. Significant areas of these are designated as Conservation Areas, for example parts of Crouch End, Highgate and Muswell Hill, and will have development over the next 15 years. However, the Council envisages this development to be of an incremental nature and it should not change the character of quality places and conserving our heritage.

3.1.46 The Council will ensure that development in the areas of limited change respects the historic significance and character of its surroundings, conserves heritage and other important features and provides environmental improvements and other local benefits, where appropriate.

3.1.47 Major development taking place adjacent or near to areas of more limited change should bring benefits to these areas of an appropriate nature and scale. In particular, the Council will seek:

1. Contributions towards regeneration and training in deprived areas; and

2. The provision of open space and other community facilities where there are local deficiencies.


High quality new residential development in Haringey will be provided by ensuring that new development:

1. Meets the density levels set out in the Density Matrix of the London Plan; (Needs checking in detail against London Plan)

6. Subject to viability, sites capable of delivering ten or more units, will be required to meet a borough wide affordable housing target of 50%, based on habitable rooms;

(Note this is a target; it's not mandatory. But, if the developer can be pushed to provide this, it'll put them off since affordable housing cuts in to profit. I believe that only a counter-balancing argument can remove the target completely - as in the case of the Ward's Corner development when it was successfully argued that the affordable housing element could be dropped since the whole scheme offered so many regeneration benefits. I don't think there's that case here. About the only benefit to the borough that I see to this plan is that it helps the Council to meet its housing growth)

3.2.4 The London Plan sets a London-wide target of 322,100 additional homes from 2011/12 - 2021/22 and a Haringey target of 8,200 additional dwellings (a target of 820 additional homes per annum).

3.2.6 …….In addition, it is expected that over the plan period there will be sites that come forward for housing other than those already identified. These sites are known as
 windfall sites and will contribute towards meeting the housing need in Haringey. Such sites will be assessed to ensure that they meet the needs of the community and do not harm the surrounding environment.

Hope that helps

Hi Hugh this is brilliant thank you.

I am a total novice on stuff like this so this is very helpful! The line is that they have all their little bits of paper in place, and that it is in line with Haringey's Planning Policies. It's on my list to call the Case Officer and ask a few questions of the Council as they did not provide this opportunity at the meeting. But it was a concern at the meeting that maybe the decision is made and it'll go through becuase they've got their little ticked boxes...

Thanks again

Another thought on this. It just came to mind that elsewhere in the Local PLan, I read that the car ownership in the borough averages out at 53%. Extrapolate that out against the planned number of inhabitants in the new development and you'll get some sense of the pressure for car ownership (not necessarily a projection of it) - though I'm sure the developer has stats handy that show the viability of car free developments. That would need looking in to. 

I've also aded a new note towards the end of my last entry, above 3.2.4.

Now the bad news. I spoke with the Council this morning (apparently the version of the Local Plan on their website at the moment is a draft one.). They've sent me the map which shows that the Heartlands "Area of Change" has been extended south along the railway line as far as Hornsey Station.

So this could close off one challenge to the plan (subject to finding out what "indicative only" indicates), but the other potential challenges I identified remain.

jpeg below, pdf attached.


Ah, but hope lives to fight another day. In her email to me the officer said:

The saved UDP (2013) Proposals Map still applies and identifies the Growth Areas e.g. Haringey Heartlands and Tottenham Hale in more detail than what is illustrated on the Key Diagram. The designations on this Map will continue to be used to make planning decisions. The Proposals Map can be viewed here Haringey UDP Development Plan website (external link).

And here's a snippet from that map, showing that the Area of Change doesn't extend as far as Hornsey Station. The precise location of the 'Haringey Heartlands Area of Change' clearly needs unpacking.

Hugh, just to mention that what you see in part of this map is not a spatial strategy. For my area it's a destruction strategy.

It was very clear at the early meetings I attended of the Local Development Framework that there was ambiguity in the describing "Tottenham Hale" as a "Growth Area". Did that mean the area around Tottenham Hale Station? Including Lea Valley Estates gated community?  I was told it did. I asked  for this to be made completely clear so developers (including slum landlords) wouldn't see the whole area as open season. This and my other comments were ignored. I decided not to attend any further meetings. I simply don't have enough hours in the week to fight on every front.

As I expected my entire neighbourhood is now shown as a fierce purple blob. With the whole of the rest of North east Tottenham shown in orange as an "Area of Change".  Community cohesion?  Stable communities? Doesn't look like it. More like planning blight.

Seeing a map like that, will people want to buy houses as their medium and longer term homes?

(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)


I cannot make any comments on the Hampden Road development because sometimes I am called to serve on the planning committee but I am aware of the residents' concerns.

Cllr. Gina Adamou
Harringay Ward

This is the most staggering ugly development I think I have ever seen.  If I didn't know better I'd think it was the stage set for a new production of 1984. 



© 2024   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service