Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Temporary setback for Ward's Corner
The WCC went to court yesterday to make the case for our legal challenge to Haringey Council to go to Judicial Review. We are challenging Haringey Council's granting of permission to Grainger PLC's plans to demolish Wards Corner.
Our legal team expertly argued our case but sadly the judge refused to grant permission for the case to go to Judicial Review.
It's sad to see that the Council are more interested in pushing this disastrous development through than they are in following their own policies and procedures or listening to local residents and traders. It sends a worrying signal about their approach to regeneration and their lack of concern for the communities that will be affected.
This fight is far from over. There is still the potential to appeal the judge's decision, but we need to consider our options before deciding on the best course of action. We'll send news soon of what's next, so keep your eyes peeled or come along to one of our Monday meetings and get stuck in.
Solidarity
The Wards Corner Community Coalition
Tags for Forum Posts: high court, ward's corner
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Johnny on
-
That's disappointing news for the campaign. What grounds did the judge give for refusing JR?
-
Permalink Reply by pamish on
-
We're getting the transcript of his summing up and reasons for refusal, will post as soon as it's available. Our lawyers reckon he was unsympathetic from the start - the luck of the draw (or maybe not). Also there is a tendency now to want to refuse JR's as more + more people are having to use them to get their basic rights and it's getting expensive and clogging up the High Court, so they are predisposed to refuse.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
If this has to go ahead it will mean the loss of an elegant and interesting Edwardian department store.
To be replaced with something that might look okay in the abstract and elsewhere. However, on this site it is inappropriate, where it represents over-building and unimagination.
I don't know what the merits of the "affordable homes" requirement are. However, this policy – whatever its merits – looks to be dead in the water.
No or few property developments are "viable" if this criterion is incorporated to any significant extent.
The same thing has happened to the flats to be thrown up on the open space behind the Hornsey Town Hall. This area would make a fine park in an area – according to the councils own data – of maximum open space deficiency. A park would make a perfect fit.
Instead, the council – who owns the land already – will sell it to a developer and there will be masses of flats right behind a Grade 2-STAR listed building ... with tiny provision for affordable housing. On behalf of the property developer, the council says the same thing as at Wards Corner: not viable otherwise.
It puts a question alongside each proposal: is it the right project for the site?
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
