Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

'Do as we say or it will be worst for you' is the regen threat of the council

'The alternative to not doing this plan is far worst' claimed Stephen Kelly, Haringey Council's Assistant Director of Planning, when he updated residents on the Area Action Plan at the Tuesday 28th October meeting of the Tottenham and Seven Sisters area forum.

He accepted that people responding to the draft plans had raised common concerns about the growth agenda - especially about defending open space and the lack of supporting infrastructure - but said his hands were tied to following the housing targets set by the GLA. For Haringey these have risen from 830 per year to 1500.

'We have to find a way of bringing forward housing' and 'the price to pay is private housing' he said. Adding: 'It is the only show in town,'

He dismissed the concerns expressed about putting vulnerable people into twenty storey tower block because he knew some people like living in tower blocks. When it was suggested these blocks will be where poor people are housed, he snapped back that the council are 'not removing the poor ... we are removing poverty'.

He claimed that the council 'don't want to build on green spaces' - note the didn't want to part of that claim - but said he was ok to build a tower block along Monument Way that would narrow the pavement and concrete over grass areas next to the Chesnut Estate by insisting that it is 'not an area of public open space'.

When challenged about particular sites, he retorted to telling people that if not that site then they had to find another site for building on. Generally when challenged his answer was: 'I am a planner and always say let's have a plan.'

He was clear that if the community rejected the council's plan then 'the outcome would be significantly worst'. There would be uncontrolled private property building and the Secretary of State will step in with his history of granting all sorts of objectionable planing proposals. Like, for example, the Spurs stadium and property development?

When asked about the need for infrastructure improvements he said that he was talking to the NHS, education colleagues, etc. However, he was clear that the buildings will go up and up irrespective of whether there are any decisions by NHS England on new facilities in the area. He might as well have said that we have to Build for Boris regardless of the impact on the quality of life for people living and working in Tottenham.

The fatalistic message was clear, and he admitted the future is 'not all going to be rosy'.

'We are blending outcomes that will be imperfect, but essentially it is our best take on what we think we can deliver.'

Be ready to let him know what you think can be done when the consultation on the Area Action Plans resumes in December.

Tags for Forum Posts: green, infrastructure, planning, space

Views: 554

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The first thing we must do with Stephen Kelly is force him to stop saying, "The alternative to not doing this plan is far worst," and "the outcome would be significantly worst," when he obviously would have said "worse" in both cases if he'd ever been to school.

Meetings like that one leave me wondering whether it will be worth going on living here.  It's going to be horrible.

As it was all miked, it's a shame they don't record such meetings.  We don't need video but an upload of the soundtrack would help to let people know what's said. There were perhaps 20 of us there not from t'council, and nearly all were usual suspects.  (Actually video would be useful to show the body language of some of the councillors who clearly thought their time was being wasted having to hear what the great unwashed think of the plans. Next time I'll bring some kit.)

I wasn't at the meeting. So thanks for the reportback, to Martin, Pam - and Zena who went, too. Somebody has to descend into the dank murk of what passes for public consultation in Haringey.

Although maybe not, given Mr Kelly's candour in telling people the cold unvarnished truth. That there's only one plan. That they've already decided it. And that whatever local people say will make not the slightest jot or tittle of difference. And that it's the least worst of the unwelcome options facing us.

Although, interestingly, this pure Kobertory message (which as a senior officer, I assume Mr Kelly feels obliged to repeat) is now increasingly subject to wider critique.  Including serious doubts being raised about the whole bonkers tower block strategy for the Tottenham area. Which David Lammy for example, is now openly challenging. (And by the way, I mean actual towers; not town houses.)

There are also increasing objections being raised to building on every scrap of ground - especially if it happens to be owned by the Council and on a Council estate. And knocking down part of those estates if necessary to meet Mayoral Targets.

I do wonder what Mr Kelly makes of his brief to say that they are "removing poverty; not removing the poor." This sounds like a fascinating new take on inequality in Haringey. So it would be nice to know what he meant.  And I mean that seriously. So if anyone else gets the chance to ask Mr Kelly I'd appreciate knowing the answer.

Without further enlightenment, I just can't get over the sheer illogic of trying to "solve" the problems of unemployment, low wages, poor health etc by destroying people's homes. And by packing in more people in areas which are already short of GPs and other services.

Pam I completely agree with you about recording stuff. Especially now that Eric Pickles has given us a strengthened and legislation-backed "Right to Report"  from public meetings - including using video.

Someone asked me if I thought Claire Kober was like Margaret Thatcher. Obviously not. For one thing if Thatcher had been Leader of a Council which claimed "among the cleanest streets in London", they'd have been a helluva lot cleaner than ours. And Eric Pickles Right to Report builds on Margaret Thatcher's Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960.  So maybe, as the Koberites have taken up Tory policies so enthusiastically, they'll feel the same about this one?  Even though it goes completely against their commitment to the mushroom theory of local government.

RSS

Advertising

© 2024   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service