New Action Group Mounts Petition to Influence Hornsey Depot Development

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Kay on November 30, 2013 at 16:44

Here are the four pages of the document 'Hornsey Depot Public Consultation Update 2' which was given out at the recent public, Council-run meetings about this planning application. 

Apparently objections/comments from the public on this application will be accepted into January but people were urged to get their concerns/opinions sent in to Haringey as soon as possible.

Attachments:

• Page 1.pdf, 1.6 MB
• Page 2.pdf, 1.1 MB
• Page 3.pdf, 1.8 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kay on November 30, 2013 at 16:45

.

Attachments:

• Page 4.pdf, 2.1 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by HoL Site Admin on January 25, 2014 at 17:07

Moved from another thread:

Reply by Clive Carter 23 hours ago

Delete

I have always enjoyed the view towards the city

Michelle, I'm sorry to inform you that residents no longer have any entitlement to views.

This is my tentative conclusion after listening to "Officers" from the council's planning department when they considered Hornsey Depot – now to be waved through on 3 February by (effectively) whipped Labour politicians.

In the case of our view of Alexandra Palace from Hornsey High Street, the official, considered position of Local Government Officers, is the view is "Accidental".

The gist of their argument was that by rights, there should be a two or three story frontage there. Thus, our view is a mistake. This overlooks that some accidents are chance happenings for the good, or for public benefit. The use of the term in this bizarre way shows the lengths that 'officers' will go to defend private interests and to deflect objections.

Even some Labour Councillors (briefly off-leash piste) made a display of querying this ridiculous formulation.

Accidental? or fortuitous?

Planning perverts parlance

 Reply by Chris Setz 22 hours ago

I notice the the Cttee has prominent Lib Dems on it - the Lib Dem leader of the opposition was the one who proposed deferring the decision. Here they all are http://www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=728

Half are Labour and half Lib Dem. The Lib Dems should have a major hand in this one, because it affects wards in which there are Lib Dem Cllrs sitting, and they do.  This idea that somehow the Lib Dems have no responsibility and can only blame is tosh - the Lib Dems are very much part of the council, doing their job reflecting the issues and concerns.  They go further in using the considerable experience some of them have to spot opportunities to improve the plan where possible.

The public? They dont give a stuff. If you were to hold a referendum on the Hornsey Depot in Hornsey, I reckon that less than 25% would even bother  to fill in the form. They can't even be bothered to turn up to the meetings the Labour and the Lib Dems organised.

The plain truth is that the ConDems changed the planning laws to remove almost all barriers to property development however much local people don't like it.  They gave property developers a right to develop.

It is because the ConDems fervently support property developers, funded by banksters, in their privatisation of public space. It is a ConDem tenet that the market will solve property problems. That is why Thatcher sold off all those council houses, only to see a third of them rented back to councils by private landlords. She got a few quid once, but the landlords profit forever. What a disaster that idea was!

So St james (massive property company) will build a Sainsburys (their rep described the view as "incidental") and make a lot of cash doing it, creating rental income for centuries on which they will pay little or no tax. They might be persuaded to throw a few scraps at any locals who might otherwise make noise, but we are talking of millions and millions of pounds worth of revenue here that Council Tax payers throughout the borough will have to pay to service. And councils can do hardly anything about it because the law is clear - you are not allowed to put people first.

Will there be any "affordable" housing?  The absolute bare minimum.  How about family housing?  One bed flats make more money so mind your own business. What about car parking?  We will all get 90 minutes - car-free? On your bike!  Nine storeys high?  Nope, better get ready to make that eight so as you can be seen to be reacting. What if it harms surrounding local business (which many think is certain) - the law is the law.

You seem to be of the view that if the Hornsey Depot scheme is unpopular, it is Labour's fault.  Your unprovable slurs against people exposes the weakness in your argument, doesn't it?

I can see the propaganda now:

If it gets slightly modified:

"Lib Dems force Labour to act sensibly"

If it gets through:

"Lib Dems force Labour to act sensibly"

Is the planning process fairly treating the Hornsey Depot issue Clive? If yes, please stop right there!

If no, what changes are needed? Fewer Lib Dems on the Cttee? More time for the developer to speak?  What would the Lib Dems do if they were in power Clive? 

Reply by Clive Carter 17 hours ago

Chris,

Thanks for your detailed response. I'm not convinced you attended the planning meeting, as you imply, or enough of it. As a result, I'm afraid that you appear to have made at least two mistakes:

First, the motion to Defer came from Cllr. McNamara (Labour). It was then seconded by Cllr. Wilson (Liberal Democrat) and then agreed unanimously.

Second, while the committee members are evenly divided between the two parties (four and four) you overlook the role of the chairman. Do you believe he does not have a casting vote?

The chairman is a Labour Party appointee and anything but impartial: a defector to Labour who must repeatedly re-prove the new-found loyalty to the party line. (I noticed and was disappointed with his treatment of David Browne, a former Mayor and one of two councillors deselected in shady circumstances – a loss for Labour and for the public).

I'm sure you didn't deliberately assert untruths; I see them as merely part of what appears to be an over-zealous attempt to defend anything with the name "council" or "Labour" on the tin, regardless.

The public? They dont give a stuff. ... They can't even be bothered to turn up ...

I note your view of the general public, scores of whom attended public meetings, as did I, but not all of which you appear to have attended; Not even Labour Councillors would show this level of contempt for public opinion.

I agree with your implied general point, that these meetings are normally party political affairs. We shall likely see that on February 3, when the Labour-run council will enforce a charade of discussion, followed by the rubber-stamp decision to approve the flawed application (whipped-agreed beforehand).

You may find this council page helpful.

Watch out for the votes amongst those listed on link for Attendence details!

Reply by Chris Setz 1 hour agoDelete

Hi Clive - any post that contains personal attacks should really be ignored but, from your writings in the past, you seem to me to be a fair-minded person who bases judgements on facts as objectively as you can.  Granted, politics are matters of opinion and I guess I can only blame myself if I get you to see red, but that is not my intention.

I am sad that I come across as a Labour zealot - that is not my intent.  I want to look at the situation fairly and remove as much of the party politics as possible, because the parties do not represent everyone, only those who vote. Ideally, every decision would be made for everyone.

As I am sure we both agree, this development matters for the same reasons that Ally Pally or Hornsey Town Hall matter - it directly affects local people and should therefore be of concern to them.  It is also a test of our system - if we get it right, everybody wins, if not, it can severely damage us.  So the extent to which it works has a direct bearing on our lives and the lives of our family and friends. 

Apologies for the error of fact as to who proposed the motion to defer - the two men sat next to one another and have broadly similar voices - they spoke almost together and the Lib Dem guy agreed with the Labour guy and, as you wrote, the vote was unanimous.

I do not have contempt for people and I ask you to accept that you slur my good name. What I am saying is that people should accept their responsibility to vote.  If they don't vote, it is hard for them to complain when their elected reps do something on their behalf. Their silence is taken as implicit assent. The least they can do is vote once every four years.

Your diatribe about the casting vote goes to the heart of what I see as your blind prejudice.  You are saying that, whatever the issue, Labour will engineer to get their own way and that is wrong. It is not wrong for the majority party to get their own way, Clive. Are you saying that they are corruptly getting their own way? Are you saying that our system of local government is wrong, or that the version applied in Haringey is wrong? You mention whipping, are you saying that it is wrong of Labour to whip?  Do you want whipping banned just for Labour or for your Lib Dems too?

The vote of the chair was irrelevant in this meeting but I think you are hurting because you probably feel that Labour always wins. I don't really mind if Labour win, but I do care that Haringey wins.  They are in the majority so I suppose you could say that it comes as no surprise that they win, but how else could it be done?

You see a flawed application whereas I see one that is the best they can do.  

You see where I am going with this Clive, surely the thing that is wrong is that you are not getting your way and you don't like that.  I am totally with you in the burning sensation that they are all doing it wrong and you cannot stand idly by whilst they mess you life up, but unless we can actually influence the decision, what is the point?

I am afraid to say that, were you to stand for election, you would not be able to get your own way either - surely, rather than criticise Labour errors and misjudgements, you could give some attention to how to fix this broken system of ours, something you can actually do? You are not going to get the power to change things, but it might make you feel better if you know what should be done and how to bring change about.

• ▶ Reply