31st+March+Deputation+to+the+Full+Council

Wards Corner Community Coalition wants to see the successful regeneration of Wards Corner. To be a success, this regeneration must build on the energy and innovation of local people and be part the long term economic and social improvement of Tottenham. It must build on what is distinctive and special and promote social cohesion, environmental sustainability and safer communities. We reject the plans put forward by Grainger plc. They must be turned down because they will not deliver this regeneration. We ask you tonight to do your part in preventing a flawed, mediocre development that risks damaging Tottenham and this Local Authority for generations. Local opinions against Grainger’s plans – your constituents’ opinions – have been expressed through more than 850 signatures against demolition of architectural heritage; over 100 objections lodged on the planning website and 300 letters of objection delivered to the planning department. 350 people attended our public meeting in February and overwhelmingly objected to Grainger. At the planning forum on 22nd March it was clear that support for Grainger was very low. In return, Grainger have demonstrated no substantial community support for their plan. Many local people are angry at the lack of meaningful consultation by the Council and NDC about the future of this site. This is despite the fact that Grainger are being supported and heavily subsidised by the NDC which is tasked with pursuing ‘community-led regeneration’. Traders and local residents on the site had no meaningful contact with Council officials or with the NDC before joining together in the Coalition. Grainger’s will evict these local residents, kill off long standing, successful businesses – including many shops and the indoor market of 50 traders which is an important community and retail facility. Contrary to some of the myths that have been peddled, this market is a force for community stability, a proven antidote to crime and an opportunity for new business to flourish. Look at the huge popularity of other successful markets in London and you can see its potential to be a dynamic retail and cultural niche in North London in the future. By contrast, Grainger can offer no guarantee that their proposed retail units will be let nor that they will be affordable to local businesses. So what else is wrong with Grainger’s plans? Well they fail to meet rafts of local and national policy and best practice guidance. For instance, they propose to build only private flats and houses, mostly in a gated design. This flies in the face of national and GLA and Communities and Local Government policy on provision of mixed affordable and private housing and of creating cohesive, sustainable communities. How can plans to create private gated communities on one side of the road and social housing on the other at the Apex site create anything but social division and marginalisation? This unnecessary split use of land, pursued explicitly by the majority group of the Council, goes to the heart of why Grainger’s land use plans have ended up the way they have. In relation to conservation area policy, the ‘substantial community benefit’ requirement for demolition in a conservation area is patently not shown and indeed local residents and traders have overwhelmingly highlighted community harm. Also, the demolish and rebuild proposals will be hugely environmentally costly to construct and show no meaningful commitment to a sustainable and greener future. These environmental costs will be exacerbated by the complex and very risky structural problems of erecting tall buildings on this fragile site which overlies the booking office, escalators and tunnels of Seven Sisters tube Station. TFL have not yet even approved Grainger’s proposals. Developments on this site must particularly meet the requirements of the Council’s 2004 Planning Brief. And yet:. - They do not provide a ‘__landmark development that acts as a quality gateway’__ and the buildings are not ‘__of a distinctive and imaginative modern design’__. The single structure proposed looks at least 25 years out of date. - The planning brief notes the architectural merit of the Wards Store building in particular and says ‘__any development scheme should reflect and retain the architectural features of the store if at all possible’__. The building is sound and it is patently possible to retain and restore. - The development does not ‘__enhance the Page Green Conservation Area’__. Tottenham Civic Society, Conservation Area Consultative Committee and the Victorian Society and English Heritage oppose Grainger’s proposals. - The proposals do not provide for ‘__more uses that are open in the evening looking out into the street’. T__he proposals at ground level are all for shops which will be closed by early evening. There is no street life proposed. - The plans are also not for truly __‘mixed’__ use. They are for private housing and retail and one large restaurant which is likely to be a chain outlet providing a lowest common denominator option on the site. There are no community, leisure or cultural uses proposed. Crucially, the brief requires that the development __‘takes it cue from the richness and diversity of the communities and small shops in the West Green Road area’.__ This fits with the Mayor of London’s London Plan and with the Government’s 2005 guidance on Equalities and Diversity in Planning. This makes it clear that __‘Consideration of diversity should be at the heart of planning activities’__ and __‘planning staff should understand the mix of people within their area and how it might be changing’__. Wards Corner is a dynamic place. An equalities impact assessment should be done on the impact on diverse communities living and trading on this site: the impact of dislocating the community and business resource for the Latin American community particularly in the market and the impact of closing the variety of shops and businesses serving the local Caribbean, Far and Middle eastern communities on the site. The Grainger proposal is fundamentally flawed as an attempt at ‘regeneration’. It is predicated on profits for a private developer, subsidised by public (NDC) money. It was pursued by the Council and the NDC without discussion with those most affected and those in the wider community who use the site everyday. It demonstrably does not have the support of the wider community of South Tottenham. So, Members need to do what is right and insist on a regeneration that builds on the best of this rich and diverse place.
 * Deputation 31st March – From Wards Corner Community Coalition (WCC) that represents local shopkeepers, traders and residents with an interest in a sustainable, successful, community-driven regeneration of the Wards Corner Site **
 * For further information on WCC contact Wendy at ** wendy.keenan@yahoo.co.uk