Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Grainger plan voted out!!!!!!
Four very long hours later at the town hall, surprise vote to chuck out the monstrous Grainger plan to destroy our local market+shops. One Labour member changed loyalties, have yet to work out who was who, but amazing that it didnt get nodded through like last time. They will appeal but we are now on the up.
Tags for Forum Posts: regeneration, seven sisters, ward's corner
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by pamish on
-
There are nine on the committee. I have still to look up who is in which party. I guess they just voted on the facts before them and the strength of the various presentations.
-
-
They were all different from the previous nine, deliberately to avoid prejudice.
Reg Rice (chair)
Ann Waters
Dhirin Basu
Sophie Erskine
Pat Egan
Nigel Scott
Juliet Solomon
joanne Christophides
Paul Strang
(check spellings, I had wrong glasses on)
The webcast will show who voted which way.
-
-
No he voted for Grainger. I think I know but won't put it here, will wait for the podcast or s/o else to post. I was so getting ready for the big disappointment that I didnt take notes of who did what.
The three TG ward councillors - Isidoris, Berniece and Richard - all spoke from the floor against Grainger.
-
Permalink Reply by jane on
-
Hmmm... I'm not sure that Berniece spoke against Grainger. Admittedly she didn't speak FOR them either.
-
-
we have plans.... there is massive scope for regeneration here. Not least because there is a space the size of a football pitch (the first floor of the old department store), plus the three floors of the old store, that are still in good nick despite 30 years' neglect by TFL.
-
Permalink Reply by clyde on
-
Yes but after the vote the planning department intervened to say on what ground could the plan be voted out and planning and the cabinet supported the plan. How can a supporter choose the objection grounds?
All looked very suspect to me, in that Haringey may have deliberately refused the plan in order that the current councillors would get off the hook knowing all the time Grainger will appeal against any decision. So weak reasons may have been chosen by Haringey knowing Grainger can over throw it easily in court. The council appeared to be expecting a riot with all those Police and barriers, they were not there last time and where were all the cabinet members hiding? There were no gloating faces in the chamber this time. Odd don’t you think, if they expected to win.
Cllrs Vanier and Watson speeches were a bit vague but then they are both known Grainger supporters but I expect want to keep there ward happy for the next party selection meetings but it is what they do next that will count. Will they get those building bought back into use against the will of their colleagues? The Wards Corner speakers were good as were those heartfelt speeches from Cllr Smitz and Cllr Diakides.
A great speech from the Spanish Lady from the market. Only in Seven Sisters, a human rights lawyer running a hair salon, long may it remain.
-
Permalink Reply by David Schmitz on
-
It is possible that the absence of old faces on the committee had something to do with something that I said in public last February, which was that I myself could not take part in deciding the application (even though I am a planning committee member) because I had been supporting the objectors for years, and that similarly no-one who had ever expressed a view in public about it ought to sit.
Instead of sitting, therefore, I made one of the speeches.
The Wards Corner Community Coalition did an absolutely brilliant job. For me the highlight was a speech, given in Spanish and translated into English, by a woman who had to flee here as a refugee after doing dangerous work as a human rights lawyer fighting for native rights in Latin America. She had since settled here, had children and begun to work happily at a hairdressers in the Wards Corner market, but was now terrified that her life would again be disrupted.
Although the developers' scheme promised to provide a market in a new building and to make concessions to the existing market traders, these promises were no more than agreements to make agreements and were thus completely unenforceable at law.
Although the scheme was said to offer regeneration, a report commissioned by the Council's own consultants described the regenerative benefits as speculative.
Although the impact of the scheme on black and ethinic minorities in the community had been the subject of an Equalities Impact Assessment, as required by law, an examination of that assessment revealed that it contained no data about the Latin American community (the one which was the most affected), that the Assessment was a "desk top exercise" and that the makers of the report had not even consulted the Haringey Race and Equality Council despite the fact that the Council helps to fund it and that three Councillors (Cllr Stennett, Cllr Basu and I) actually sit on it.
As for the Wards Corner building itself, locally listed and in a conservation area, the scheme would have destroyed it without anyone ever having attempted to see if it was economically viable to restore it and rent it out - an omission which breached planning policies.
We have now won an important victory, and I am delighted to have played a part in it.
However, there is a lot of work to be done. We must now press the Council to follow up the interest which has been shown by the Prince's Regeneration Trust to support the restoration of the Wards Store and the market so that together, we can make these assets the centrepiece for a true regeneration in which we can all participate and of which we can all be proud.
David Schmitz
Liberal Democrat Councillor for Harringay Ward
-
-
I share your hope that we have now seen the end of litigation so that we can all concentrate on realising the wonderful potential of this site.
Just for the sake of completeness, an agency called The Bridge NDC (standing for New Deal for Communities) made very substantial grants to Grainger, largely to pay for professional services. The Council had a very strong say in what the NDC did, and in my view the spending of this money was unwise.
In addition, the Council gave options to Grainger to purchase, at a substanial discount, the part of the site which actually belonged to the Council. The discount was on the order of £500,000.
I believe, though I am not sure, that with the failure of the application, the Council will be let off the option hook. I do not know how much of the £1.5 million NDC money allocated to the scheme is recoverable. I would hope to find out mrore about these matters.
In fairness to officers and members of the council's cabinet, it is right to mention that the agreements with Grainger did not bind the planning department or committee in any way. It is a frequent occurrence that a council has an interest in a property transaction in which it is the local planning authority. Local authorities are well praciised in keeping the decision makers on a planning application insulated from those in the authority who have brokered the deal.
David Schmitz
Liberal Democrat Councillor for Harringay Ward
-
-
Sorry, I've just noticed that no-one has said who voted which way.
The no votes were from the Lib Dem Councillors (Erskine, Scott, Solomon and Strang) and from the Labour Councillor Joanna Christophides.
The yes votes were from Labour Councillors Egan, Basu, Rice and Waters.
I ought also to mention that there is nothing at all suspicious in the way in which the reasons for the refusal were formulated, nor in the fact that the wording was suggested by officers. This is normal. Although the officers supported the application, they worked entirely professionally after the decision was made in order to phrase it in such a way as to make it defensible on any appeal. The actual phrasing of the reasons appeared to me to be correct.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
I do hope we can get our £1,500,000 back from Grainger, the huge listed property company. If the scheme was not viable without this big contribution from Haringey taxpayers, the scheme was not viable.
The council is too ready to thrust huge amounts of our cash into the hands of rich property developers.
During 2007-08, our charitable trust Alexandra Palace (totally controlled by the council) paid an ongoing subsidy to the private developer Firoka (Alexandra Palace) Ltd. This amounted to almost £50,000 a week on average for eight months.
The second of three investigations by Martin Walklate calculated the total loss down to an ill-conceived Licence, was between £1,487,000 and £2,013,000.
Despite a half-hearted attempt to finger (solely) a now-disgraced and retired general manager, the liability for this huge loss has yet to be established. Ideally, an independent solicitor, with experience of Trust and Charity law, should be appointed.
.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
