Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Wards Corner temporary setback
Grainger plan voted through.
Five-four, party lines.
Wish I'd bet my house on it, then I could afford to leave. Don't want to live here any more if those are the people who have power over me.
Tags for Forum Posts: seven sisters, ward's corner
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by pamish on
-
Checked my notes, the tape is missing the twelve community and expert objectors, they spoke before the Cllrs. Also misses most of the Q+A between Smith + councillors. 7.30 pm (late start) to 1am is 5 1/2 hours by my maths.
BTW Cllr Basu asked no questions, and Cllr Christophides asked one question, most Labour Q's were left to Cllr McNamara. As Cllr Christophides voted against the last and almost identical incarnation of The Plan, I'm surprised she didn't have more questions in 5 1/2 hours yet still changed her mind. It must be tough working as a party-affilated councillor. Cllrs Vanier, Watson and Strickland, who spoke their support from the floor, are all cabinet members - Watson for all of two weeks now, what a rising star this young man is.
-
Permalink Reply by byl999 on
-
They have edited out the most important aspects of the very long meeting. DISGUSTING.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Despite Grainger's representative asserting that if they were granted planning permission, they would begin work "tomorrow" (i.e. Tuesday), it unlikely that anything concrete will happen for at least three months. This is the normal period to allow for the possibility of legal challenge.
Some of the assertions or undertakings of the Grainger's representative – made to assuage the concerns of some councillors – are legally unenforceable. The comments on a holiday for the (greatly increased) rent probable fall under that heading, and possibly the quality of materials to be used.
The Grainger's representative knew that he didn't have to try too hard, because he knew permission was in the bag in any event. This, thanks to the stacking of the Planning Committee and the undoubted pressure to approve, under which all majority group councillors fell.
One possibility is that the site and (highly valuable) Planning Permission will eventually be sold on to another developer. The second developer would then assume the true risks of development, when real money is being spent. Grainger may have incurred no costs so far, thanks to the gift aid of nearly £2,000,000 from public taxes to the huge property company.
When inducements are being offered to members of planning committees, it is believed to take the form of brown envelopes from developer to councillor. Haringey have shown it can work the other way too. In a semi-public manner and long before the grant of planning permission, brown cartons are passed from council to developer, to act as inducement.
You couldn't make it up, because no one would believe you.
-
-
Look up Moorpool in the Midlands - Grainger wrangled that planning permission, to part demolish and part rehab a big model housing estate, which found them not dissimilar to this struggle ie they refused to engage, and did a crappy job of the bits they started on. They have now sold on the rights to another developer, thankfully for the people of Moorpool they are having a much better experience with the new ones.
I see that Grainger is now after a big development in Aldershot. Will see if everyone there is happy, strangely everyone is smiling on the Grainger pics. They have changed their name for that development, like the way they are now calling themselves Seven Sisters Regeneration to detoxify the brand here.
Grainger have only ever completed one part new build, at Hornsey Road Baths. They are at base a huge landlord of thousands of single dwellings, they buy up individual houses and run them for rent or selling on.As long as we have landlords, I am happy for them to do that, just wish they would sort out their ego needs on single houses and not whole communities.
-
-
I thought it hilarious they should mention their Hornsey rd Baths project as that is a good example of where historical architecture CAN be retained and featured and improved!!! I must say i'm not a fan of the flats behind the main facade but I was impressed when they built it that they did retain the fabulous architectural buildings nearest Hornsey Rd. WHY ON EARTH can't they do that sort of "regen" up here in Seven Sisters??? It's farcical they get an architectural report from a man working for Grainger who saw no significant architectural qualities in Wards Corner and that's his "opinion as an expert" - as he said in the meeting about 4 or 5 times.
Why don't we deserve the effort and appropriate style that Islington gets?
-
Permalink Reply by William Booth on
-
Because we are a poor area and the council's agenda is to push poor residents out somewhere else and to make the place a more inviting step on the ladder for young professionals. Oh no, of course, that's much too cynical.
In Islington there's too many old liberals who bought their houses in the 60s and have read a few Pevsner books...
-
Permalink Reply by JJ B on
-
People - the wrong kind of residents and the wrong kind of businesses - of Tottenham seem to be the problem. Get rid of them and you solve the problems. Thats what regeneration is all about! NOT!
Regeneration needs to deal with the systems and involve the people. Getting them to take ownership of the problems and helping them to solve their own dilemmas. The buildings, although an imporatnt part of the equation are secondary.
Otherwise what is the point if you only displace the people and problems elsewhere?
Out labour councillors seem to be desperate to tick the right boxes and show that they are achieving results. Very short term vision span. We'll see in a few years when the chickens come home to roost.
Read todays Evening Standard about the size of developments and how the sizre of a development affects the area = big ones attratc investors with no stakehold other than financial gain and so you get transient tenants in renetal properties. Small develoments attract people who make the place their own. They take an interest in improving their community.These are estate agents speaking not academics. Grainger's is a large development. Seven Sisters is in for problems.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Just to respond to comments about a missing chunk of the webcast. I can't find this either and am dismayed that the recording leaves out people who spoke before Cllr Isidoros Diakides.
Cllr Pauline Gibson and I were both at other meetings beforehand and so arrived late at the Civic Centre. We were told it was full and we were refused entry - along with other people in the same position. We were all told we could wait for people to come out. Obviously that wasn't likely to happen for quite a while so I went home and planned to watch the webcast this coming weekend.
Cllr Alan Strickland is the "cabinet" councillor whose brief includes planning. I've asked him to remedy this so the whole webcast is available.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
-
-
I didn't know people had been shut out, for such big meetings could it not be made possible to have a big-screen viewing in another room? As it's webcast (not that I've tried watching anything live, my b/band is too slow) it could be just shown in a browser.
Thanks for the chasing, obviously we will need to be able to transcribe the whole session ASAP.
-
-
Alan Strickland replied, saying he'll be on this first thing tomorrow.
But just in case, can I please ask anyone who streamed and saved the webcast to keep it. Ditto if you saved the audio. Thanks.
-
-
Before being allowed to enter the public gallery on Monday evening, all members of the public were obliged to sign a statement that they would accept the "democratic decision" of the planning committee. The belief that some members of the public might not accept the decision, democratic or otherwise, probably accounted for the presence of 8 (eight) police officers. One might have thought that they had even more serious matters to address, other than attending a Planning Committee meeting.
As I entered the Civic Centre public gallery I noted a sign prohibiting any form of recording apparatus by members of the public. The council undertakes to record everything, they maintain significant recording capability of their own and the public depend on this.
Even though I believe the conduct of the council over this Application has been more or less deplorable, I hope and trust that the council has not failed to record significant chunks of the meeting (i.e. the speeches of the Objectors) to suit themselves.
Planning Permission has force in law and its grant for a huge scheme is made in a public forum. It may yet transpire that there has been an "accidental" omission or deliberate editing of some recording. Everything that transpired that evening is for a period potentially subject to further legal action. In another sphere, tampering with evidence would be equivalent to obstruction of justice.
I was much impressed with the speeches of the Objectors and it was a pity that nothing they said could have made a difference. Although all members of the Committee listened to Objectors politely, most people in the Chamber knew beforehand that the decision had been made many days beforehand when the committee was stacked.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
