Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
URGENT CALL !! WARDS CORNER SEVEN SISTERS / GRAINGER APPLICATION ~ PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS DIRECT TO THE COUNCIL!
SHARE YOUR VIEW WITH THE HARINGEY CASE OFFICER
select "comment on application"
http://www.planningservices.haringey.gov.uk/portal/servlets/Applica...
Dear friends and neighbours,
The ongoing heartbreaking saga of WARDS CORNER continues ... Grainger recently submitted a THIRD application to demolish the whole area between seven sisters road, suffield road and west green road, crushing long-standing local businesses in our seven sisters community. The proposed monstrous structure will take away any sense of historical significance to the street, not to mention how generic the design is!!! We pride ourselves on local run business, we don't want McDonalds and Pizza Express!!! The shop rents will be far too high for any wiped-out business to return. A kind of social cleansing appears to be proposed.
TFL have now also opposed the plans citing structural risks to the underground system.
HARINGEY COUNCIL have arranged a meeting TOMORROW:
Wednesday 30 May 2012, 7pm, The Moselle
Room, Tottenham Town Hall, Town Hall Approach, Tottenham Green N15 4RY
This is our first and possibly last chance to address the many issues directly to GRAINGER and to our Council.
If you don't live in Seven Sisters, please consider coming along to show your support. I sense there will be a lot of disruption, even riots if this proposal goes ahead so it's in everybody's best interests to support the campaign against the development company.
WE ALL AGREE IMPROVEMENTS NEED TO BE MADE IN THE WARDS CORNER SITE, BUT NOT LIKE THIS !!!
Tags for Forum Posts: corner, council, meetings, seven, sisters, wards
- Attachments:
-
-
1.jpg, 104 KB
-
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Tilly on
-
For anyone interested this is the reply I received to my complaint.
Dear xxxxx,
Thank you for giving us an opportunity to investigate your complaint and make sure that we have done all we can to put things right for you.
On the evening in question Mr Smith was in charge of a major public meeting. With my agreement and that of the Director and Head of Security - all of whom were also at the meeting - Mr Smith gave the meeting 2 warnings to act politely and in an orderly fashion. The meeting (over 140 people) refused to allow him to conduct an orderly meeting. He was then personally confronted and threatened by 2 members of the public who left their seats and went up to him and began shouting into his face. Other members of the public stood up and moved forward and continued to shout. At this point I, the Director and Head of Security became fearful for the safety of officers and agreed that the meeting should be closed and that officers should move immediately into a side room which would be guarded.
As this happened a member of the public from the meeting tried to "push" his way into the safe room - he was also shouting at the same time - having been instructed to leave the council owned property. Mr Smith said to the "intruder" that he should be leaving the building at the same time as holding the door closed - he feared for his and his colleagues safety. The intruder pushed and Paul held the door firm and was then supported by the Head of Security to close the door.
I don't recognise nor witnessed any aggression on Mr Smith's part - simply a calm and very firm request that the intruder should not enter the safe room and a refusal - a physical refusal to allow the intruder in to the safe room. I don't recognise or agree that there was any deliberate aggression or any type of assault - only appropriate defence.
I therefore do not uphold this complaint. I hope that I have resolved your concerns to your satisfaction.If you are unhappy with my response, you can ask our Feedback and Information Governance Team to review your complaint. You should tell them what you remain dissatisfied about and what you want us to do to put things right. This normally has to be done within 12 months of this response. Their contact details are:
Marc Dorfman
Asst. Director Planning and Regeneration
-
-
I should add, I in no way agree with his interpretation of events, just thought some people on here might be interested to read them.
-
Permalink Reply by pamish on
-
As they recorded the meeting, it should be possible to see it all. It's not on the website where they post such recordings - eg where the whole of the 5 hours of the planning meeting last monday are now apparently online. Did you ask in your complaint to have access to that recording? Would be interesting to see their answer. And if it's not available, what was the point of making the recording?
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
I wasn't aware that the Development Control Forum on 30 May was officially recorded on behalf of the Council. From the minutes on Haringey website it was. So, Pam, as it was a public meeting I can see no legal reason how you can be prevented from having a copy. Please bear in mind that comments other than through a microphones may not have been recorded.
I am puzzled as to why Mr Marc Dorfman conducted the investigation into the complaint. He was not only present at the meeting but, as the letter above appears to show, he was a witness to the incidents complained about.
But in any case the Council's Complaints procedure gives a right to an independent review by a someone who is not in the same service team. And a further possible stage is a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman.
I was not there and don't know what did happen. But if any part of the aggressive behaviour described did take place it is entirely unacceptable.
-
Permalink Reply by Neville Collins on
-
I'm sorry that I couldn't have attended the meeting, but in the light of both Haringey Council and Grainger's refusal to listen to our views, I believe it is time to start a non-cooperation campaign. They will not stop until local people are crushed. If they have their way Tottenham will become even further degenerated. An earlier thread on the state of Tottenham High Road.
-
-
.
VERBATIM from DMF held 30th MayQuestion session opened by P. SmithPaul Smith I will get around around to everybody so do be patient. It’s a big meeting and that will take a little bit of time. It won't necessarilly be fair because I wiil pick people at random so be patinet if you can. Two colleagues will go around with mics one oon each end>>I notice Councilor Schmitz has put his hand up so give him the mic.>>Cllr Schmitz question Thank you. I just have a question for the officers of the Council in this matter. Do you accept that your role in the case of the appeal is loyally to uphold the decision of the planning committee that refused the scheme and that, that being the case, can you explain why it is where in the past year no major application but one has been dealt with within 13 weeks of it being submitted, we are now dealing with an application within 6 weeks of it being submitted. Inaudible>>Applause! ...if this application goes through, it suceeds, that thereafter the appeal will become moot and therefore a fully argued procedure which would result in a full argument, a reasonable judgement that would be non-political, will be entirely political and as is born out by the fact that if the last session is to act as guide, the Planning Committee will be graced by the presence of the Labour chief whip.>>ApplausePaul Smith's answer THAnk you for that question Councillor. applause. This is a meeting where the applicants present their scheme and you ask them (stressed) questions and expect answers from them. So you will not expect answers from me about that at this meeting. Thank you very much.>>
-
-
Here we go.
Is Haringey Council ready for another scandal as big as the Baby P scandal but dealing with its equal level of ineptness in handling and enforcing planning issues.
Councillors who know need to put a stop to this NOW!
-
-
look it up on Haringey's site. Publicly acccessible and we citizens, have a right to access this info....
English heritage's 24th June 2010 response letter to Haringey's consultation on its Core Strategy.
Read what they say. Poor transparency...>> inappropriately drafted heritage policies...>>
...the core strategy does not currently provide a sufficiently robust rationale for its growth locations or its Area Assemblies, which appear to be defined in part by historic character.>>
There is more...but are Haringey's councillors going to put thinhgs right and stand up for their constituent-residents?
-
-
Gotta link, please, JJB?
-
-
Thanks for your prompt response. It's an interesting letter.
And odd that on the website at least it's apparently on its own without any context or links to other correspondence. Have you any more useful links on the conservation issue to share publicly? I assume there were some subsequent emails and substantive changes made in response to English Heritage comments. I can't imagine senior planning officers treating English Heritage with the same disdain as sometimes happens with local ward councillors.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
