Biggest Housing Development in Harringay for Decades - Your Comments Needed!

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by JJ B on April 26, 2013 at 12:50

Wow! This thing looks like a 1960's bunker.

To be more effective some people may wish to use elements from key policy documents to object to this and other planning applications, as Hugh points out in an earlier post. NPPF, the London and Local Plans are key.

The Council is obliged to examine planning applications with these policies in mind. So while getting maximum support against proposals is important, making sure those objections use policy arguments is also very imporatnt.

Haringey Borough Coucil is NOTORIOUSLY BAD for ramming things through roughshod over the community's wishes with loads of pseudo-consultations that are ignored if the findings don't fit into the "official" picture. We, here in Tottenham, are fighting several battles. A lot of damage is being done on a daily basis while the Council continues to spin its "regeneration" propaganda.

Despite much PR the Council executive has no coherent VISION of how Tottenham should progress. They have only published a Developers charter and called for sites for intensive developments while smaller but important things that really improve quality of life for residents are being seriously neglected.

This Council has no direction and is using recession and deprivation as an excuse!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JJ B on April 26, 2013 at 19:45

All the more reason for residents of Haringey to wade into the bureaucracy and COMMENT on theproposed Development Management Policies....

http://www.haringey.gov.uk/index/housing_and_planning/planning-main...

This consultation closes on 10th May next - soon! It will be planning ploicy for the foreseeable fututre!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James R Grinter on April 27, 2013 at 17:40

hmm! That's a consultation that's been kept on the QT...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nick Wright on April 28, 2013 at 20:59

I seem to remember that Haringey demolished a high flat block (quite a lot more than 9 stories) from the housing site just over the New River from this one - the area is now all low-rise houses and flats.  There were good arguments for this major removal at the time - but I can't remember the details.  It was a few years ago - perhaps more than 10.  Anyone remember?   I'm sure the arguments that led to this demolition would apply now!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lu on April 30, 2013 at 17:22

Hi Nick

You are right. The building which was aptly named Dylan Thomas, was 10 floor-high and contained approximately (if I remember correctly) about 40 flats. It was demolished because it failed to meet gas security standards and with it, the basketball pitch which was located behind the building went too. Unfortunately, the residents were moved on elsewhere in the borough and a similar number of households were built instead. Since then, there have been three further developments nearby.

I agree that this development is a serious concern. In my experience, it will add significant pressure to the heavy traffic both on Wightman road (that corner can be a real bottle-neck at peak times and the new traffic light does not help!) and Green Lanes (Harringay). Let alone, stretched public services nearby.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by AxP on May 17, 2013 at 17:10

Hi all,

Noting the May 10 deadline - just to say the portal still appears to be open and also that the council rep that I spoke to said that they would still consider objections up until the final decision meeting sometime in early June.

So for anyone still considering making a comment it's not too late! Hugh you're a star and thanks to everyone else for picking this up and responding (55 comments...)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by AxP on May 17, 2013 at 18:13

Check out 'comment 55' on the portal - the landowner is now objecting!?! Crazy days...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by HoL Site Admin on January 11, 2014 at 15:40

I thought this had been rejected, but it's on the cards again - developer consultation meeting on Monday.

Also a comment here on a thread on a related issue.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on January 13, 2014 at 18:29

I've just been at the consultation open house. The planning application has been changed in two principal ways:

1. 32 parking spaces will now be proved under the development

2. The somewhat brutalist design has been softened. Below are the new drawings:

For further questions, contact Gebina Ham at Cooley Architects (gebina@cooleyarchitects.com / 079 1775 9412).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on January 13, 2014 at 19:46

I've just been to the consultation this evening. I am rather concerned that there hadn't been a greater attempt to make local people aware of tonight's event.

The development is still 9 storeys at its highest and has reduced to 76 units (from 80) plus some work units. To address the parking issue there is some underground parking now included but only available to the larger units. The building has been softened slightly and scaled down but not much.

Do try and get down there tonight if you can to have a look at the new plans. I'm not convinced all the previous issues have been addressed satisfactorily at this point.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Charlotte on January 13, 2014 at 20:23

I went just after 8pm, all locked up and lights out unless there was a sneaky side door I missed.  I felt a bit cheated as I thought the consultation was open until 9pm.  It still looks massive and will still tower over everything else.  It should not be any higher than other blocks in the immediate vicinity.  Traffic will also increase. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on January 13, 2014 at 20:56

Well, yes their leaflet said 9. I've given Gebina's email address and phone number above. She's one of the architects.

(Did you try the hall on Frobisher and not the church?)

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page