Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Queen's Head owner in planning row
The Hornsey Journal reports that the Queen's Head owner, Docklock Ltd has been refused planning permission for an illegal building in Crouch End. Mark Forrester of Docklock Ltd began work on a two storey house in August without planning permission.
Residents of Cresent Rd campaigned against the development. The council put a tempoary stop on the works and Mr Forrester then decided to put a planning application in. This application has now been turned down. Cllr Canver said the council ''aims to persuade the applicant to rectify the situation'' but '' full enforcement and prosecution'' will be used if necessary.
Nearby residents hope the building will be demolished but fear Mr Forrester will simply appeal the decision.
The Hornsey Journal article appears not to be available online but, is on page 9 of the printed version.
Tags for Forum Posts: queen's head
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Stuart on
-
It's online now:
Residents are celebrating after Haringey Council refused planning permission for an illegal building in the back garden of a Crouch End property.
Comments Email Print Got a story?
Work on a two-storey house in Crescent Road began in August without planning permission.
Last month council planners served a temporary stop notice to halt further construction and applicant Mark Forrester, of Docklock Ltd, submitted a planning application.
But Mr Forrester now faces demolishing the building after a council planning officer refused permission for the development earlier this week.
Tec Fawcett, secretary of CASCH Residents’ Association, which represents Crescent Road, said: “We are delighted, it was the right decision.
“We hope that this will be the end of it, but we fear that the developer will appeal this to try and continue with the development.”
Mr Forrester had claimed that the garden development was a restoration of an existing apartment belonging to the mansion site, referring to it as “apartment 10”.
Cllr Nilgun Canver, cabinet member for environment, said the council “aims to persuade the applicant to rectify the situation” but “full enforcement and prosecution” will be used if necessary.
Mr Forrester was unavailable for comment.
(Copied in by site admin because the 'shelf-life' of local newspaper articles is very short and people find they can't retrieve them afyer a short while)
-
Permalink Reply by 0rl8c48t1y284 on
-
If there was a house there originaly, what the big deal? Do we want another http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6279835.stm? well done to the developer, taking action, making safe a dangerours building and providing more houising in a needed area! Sorry Hanringy Council are you so rich that you do not need the extra council tax money? How about the extra money brought to the neighbour hood? errr and when did Bats become something positive in a residential area
-
-
Mike
Did you actually read the story? Why don't you have a look at the online article here?
He didn't make safe a dangerous building. There wasn't a house there orginally. He built a brand new structure in the back of the garden of an apartment block. Without even bothering to ask for planning permission. And who knows what your reference to bats is all about? You don't by any chance work for Docklock do you? And given he didn't bother applying for planning permission, it doesn't say much for his chance of offering to pay the right council tax either, does it?
Given you appear to think that planning laws are irrelevant as long as the council gets more money, I can only assume you are either trolling or someone who cares not a jot for right of law.
-
-
Oh, hang on a sec, Mike - the only other topic you've ever contributed to on HOL is about the Queens Head development - also by Docklock. Which curiously you posted about repeatedly, always to support the change of use to a furniture store. Time to declare your actual interest perhaps?
-
-
Bushey, Did you read the news article? as there is reference to bats! I think if you read it correctly you'd realise that they rebuilt a decaying building. You're right no planning and thats wrong and should be done proberly. No i dont work for docklock, just cos i have an opposite position means im "the enemy?" great discussions we will have if everyone is segregated as with or aginst. I simply got a news alert/ following from the site, which i previously set up in relation to the QH.
What i hate are people who simply object to things for the sake of stopping progression. If this was granted planning would you be so negative? Are you saying your simply objecting as it was done without planning? So now they are going for retrespective thats ok for you?
Bushey do you even know how council tax works?if granted planning the council will receive council tax from the landlord.
what we need here is a Cerebral Enhance-o-tron!!
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
