30+October+2008+-+NDC,+HC,+Grainger,+WCC

** HELD ON 30TH OCTOBER 2008 @ THE CIVIC CENTRE WOOD GREEN N22 ** **Present:**
 * REPORT OF THE COLLABORATIVE MEETING **

Candy Amsden CARA/WCC Michael Parkes PAL/WCC Tony Rich Rich Regeneration Ltd Bernard Bourdillon PAL/WCC Lagu Sukuruman Tottenham Traders Assoc. /WCC J. McCartney GLA Member (Labour) Philip C Jones Solicitor, HC Geoffrey Ocen Director, NDC ? Planning Policy Development Officer, HC ? [Nunjuwany] Tottenham Traders Assoc/WCC Moaz Nunjuwany Chair of Tottenham Traders Assoc/WCC Roy Jose CARA/WCC Matthew Bradby TCS/WCC Mital Patel WCC Sue Penny CAAC/TCS/ Dann Jessen East Architects/Glasshouse Elize Truter FARA/WCC Wendy Keenan Wendy/WCC/Sustainable Haringey Ruth Allen CARA/WCC Beth Thomas TARA/WCC Alison Armour CAAC/Bruce Grove RA Paul Carroll CARA/WCC Jacky Davenport NDC/WCC Isidoros Diakides Ward Councillor Nicky Price Tottenham Traders Association/Bar Latino Carlos Burgos Pedro Achata Trust Rita Jones Pedro Achata Trust D Schmitz Lim Dem Parliamentary candidate/lawyer/WCC Vicky Alvarez Pueblito Paisa/WCC Raul Mancera Pueblito Paisa/WCC Sheik Thompson Local Resident LBH Brian Haley Cabinet member Cllr John Oakes Lib Dem – Community cohesion and involvement Niall Bolger Director of Urban Environment David Lammy Tottenham MP Kaushika Amin Cab Mem for regeneration and enterprise George Meehan Leader of the Council Andrew Scrivener Grainger David Walters Grainger Nick M&M B. Vanier Ward Councillor

Ruth opened the meeting thanking everyone for coming and the Council for hosting. She commented on the huge interest shown in the meeting by such a diverse range of people and groups. The WCC had called the meeting to talk to all stakeholders about where we could go to from here to get an outcome. There is really strong opposition to the Council and as the proposal from Grainger is not supported by the Community whose arguments have not been heard, it would be a bad approach for the plans to now be taken forward. In addition, the economy and development timescales add doubt.. The Council had adopted a paternalistic approach which squandered the energy and talent of people and alienated local community. This is an opportunity to do something really exciting, begin something transformative, make Tottenham a place where people want to come to and changing the image of Tottenham which had been in the doldrums. WCC represent different views which is why they call for a collaborative, community-led approach.
 * Where can we all go to from here?**

the plan does not look after small businesses 50,000 small businesses locally small businesses are struggling to survive locally, regionally and nationally WCC is calling for a community project where community-led networks follow a co-operative concept a labour government should support this. instead they are supporting multinationals should be a local-led initiative supporting local people
 * Moaz Nunjuany Chair of the Tottenham Traders Association**

Important for the community diverse groups listed business provision service to those cultures find products only there and nowhere else in England help economy – attracts people to our business and this stays in Haringey 150 families are sustained, most are Haringey families and the money stays in Haringey Clients enjoy going to the market for just to shop but to see friends, socialise, chat, practice language the market it child and family friendly everyone feels safe there. WCC traders and clients provide community and great service unique to the country, offered nowhere else market compliments Haringey economy, brings lots of money into the area please save Wards Corner
 * Raul Mancera, President of Pueblito Paisa, Seven Sisters Market**

Tottenham Civic Society has 100 members. Established 2 years ago. Heritage Buildings are a friend to small business, in their time as now they enable businesses to set up and thrive New builds are not a friend to small businesses but corporate chains like Ladbrokes, the kinds of businesses Grainger want to attract. Look at markets like Farringdon, Leather Lane, Exmouth, Whitecross thrive in Victorian streetscapes where buildings are full of small industries and businesses run by local people. Creates a place that is interesting Seven Sisters has been tatty and run down since the 1970s, but is a very good example of the Edwardian architecture that is in the borough. This is a conservation area and so not appropriate to demolish Grainger build inappropriate with balconies onto 6 lane traffic.
 * Matthew Bradby, Tottenham Civic Society: Heritage**

Prime point of historic corridor, not just the building but where it is in relation to London. Will fundamentally disrupt the course.
 * Elize Truter, Fountain Area Resident Association**

Offers prime space, 26,000 sq feet. Beautifully lit with huge windows and skylights. Capable of sustainable reuse. Won’t cost a lot to do up where the end building is the high end restoration. Princes Regeneration Trust (PRT) has shown a lot of interest in the site. They sent a message this evening saying they would like to be here to help take this forward and that they “stand ready” to work with us and would appreciate contact with the local authority. Fred Taggart has seen the buildings and was gob smacked as was Roland Jeffrey. They have said that finding £50,000 would be no problem at all for a feasibility study. After the PRT had seen the building they wrote to Boris Johnson, Cllr Meehan and TfL. Restoration and funding are possible. Diverse community, people moving into Haringey, Latin American community are a very important community with great interest in what happens on this site and there is an opportunity here for great community engagement and to turn around and profile an area considered down at heel. Haringey has strong groups thinking about sustainability, especially environmental sustainability who are keen to work with us and will do a feasibility study. This has generated a lot of contemporary interest that the WCC have pulled together. Latin American Ambassadors are very keen to see how they can help. If WCC work in partnership with the LA they will float boats, tick boxes, meet policy imperatives, Dpt of Communities and Local Government criteria. Don’t compete with Tottenham Hale and Wood Green. Must stand in its own right. South Tottenham must be a conduit to make the BGC initiative work We have more heritage here than elsewhere in the borough Difficult for the council to work with community as never happened before We are here to ask you to work with us. you are there to support the community, you are the voice of the community. WCC is central to residents’ memories of this area. show faith in the talent in this community. we are united/homogeneous/diverse/one voice/strong/proud/love Tottenham/want it preserved and restored.
 * Roy Jose, Clyde Area Residents Association**

We are where we are. There is a planning application to be heard on the 17th. That will determine how things move forward from here.
 * George Meehan, Leader of the Council**

Planning is a political process with lots of law. Areas of law can be interpreted. Everyone listens to debate and discussion going on around them. If this is “the last chance saloon” talked about forms backdrop, has influence/impacts what gets thought about. So it is for when people imply that everyone has to stand by what they have said, the party line
 * Roy Jose, CARA/WCC**

UDP approved 2000 Exec cab 2004 Grainger selected from competition
 * George Meehan, Leader of the Council**

Needn’t go to planning decision at this stage. can withdraw application. engage in collaboration talks. revised Grainger plan to the rear and restoration to the front. there is scope for Grainger to be involved and get something from the site. we haven’t explored sufficiently options not all about planning committee. they are within the control of the council, responsible to the council. facts which appear before planning committee can be brought forward by Haringey Council eg on heritage and the PRTs offer. Council owns land so has powers as landowner.
 * Roy Jose**

have the interest of all of the people of Tottenham. don’t want a standstill and blight. truth is, regeneration is a matter of this kind – passionate views. I’ve listed buildings and those designated are not so done for all of time. it is important that the council are representative of the community. it is important that local authorities recognise the importance of heritage on that site and future up the high road want to see progress on that site, economic regeneration in relation to the people of the ndc. the site has been blighted all my life here in Tottenham and have lived all my life here the community proposals have their attraction. these are attractive heritage buildings but no funds to take forward. WCC - we are not against new build and only for heritage. we will compromise. how site is developed is not just about WCC There is Apex. What happens to it – how is the land to be used/what community use/what will be the aesthetics and the future use of the area? WCC cannot attract serious investors without the council partnering
 * David Lammy, RH MP**

original consultation was good. acknowledged importance of heritage. welcome wcc saying not against new build. my interest with big development in relation to development proposed whether arch ambition meets quality. new build should equal new heritage. passionate presently about old buildings what we want is progress Difficulties in building on this site so won’t attract many others. therefore, if Grainger fall out, what opportunities remain for this site, if planning passed? DL says that he has lived all his life with deteriorating buildings, but these buildings have been blighted by the exact same plans as are being carried forward now to redevelop since 1972! David Lammy said he did not know this.
 * [Niall Bolger]?**


 * Isidoros Diakides, Tottenham Green Ward Councillor**
 * 1) Want to see the area redeveloped and improved, but the current plan unfortunately is not the way to do it.
 * 2) What is proposed is inferior, unpopular, risky and more likely to stifle rather than enable regeneration.
 * 3) Even if it gets planning permission, it may never get built, in the current climate. The developers will hold back for at least 2-3 years, before they proceed if they ever do, and this will keep blighting the area for years to come.
 * 4) The Grainger development will see a loss of half the jobs that are there, with most of the new jobs being inferior and also leading to the loss of valuable local specialist services and facilities for our diverse local communities.
 * 5) Section 106 agreement offers no contribution to social infrastructure: schools/jobs/healthcare/social housing
 * 6) Look at the drawings – not landmark architecture to lift the area, but condemning the area to mediocrity forever.
 * 7) Never been involved in anything that has had such overwhelming and near-universal opposition to the development of a plan
 * 8) Only supporters are those who devised it: NDC, Developers and Urban Regeneration section of the council
 * 9) Opposed by every single civic, business and residential group in the area.
 * 10) Opposition across the political spectrum, Labour ward councillors, Tory Mayor, Lib dems, Greens, Left list, and GLA members and candidates from all the parties. Who are we, the council representing?
 * 11) There is a viable alternative, with a more organic way forward, building on the existing plans but also involving a mix of heritage, new housing, including social housing, preserving existing businesses and jobs whilst adding new ones and addressing all the concerns of local residents and traders.
 * 12) This will overcome the problems associated with the current plans and ensure that we are all united and also that we can be sure of delivering real regeneration of the site within the next two years, whilst avoiding the threatened years of blight.
 * 13) Defer to allow collaboration to take place. Would like to build on current proposals and see Graingers involved, but need open mind and unfettered talks, to reach consensus.
 * 14) Want to work together to move project forward so we get something pleasing, that respects diversity, cultural and architectural heritage, puts Tottenham on the map, maintains local specialist facilities, protects the livelihoods of existing local traders, minimises the risk of blight and stands a better chance of being delivered in the current climate.
 * 15) It should be possible to come out of this meeting talking about working together rather than opposing each other

the manner is which cllr Diakides represents his constituency is appreciated. other views exist in the area and also a lack of other views i want now to hear from the ndc and Grainger. Grainger say to me there have been discussions
 * David Lammy**

as the ndc is involved with this process, why is it so challenging to take on the aspirations of this group? such a good approach offered, seems so incredibly possible put over to NDC. ..
 * Dan, East Architects**

Do not want to add anything to the NDC’s stated position (Lorne Horseford, Chair of the ndc – unable to be present**)** KA says NDC completely independent of the council and make their decisions independently. Also as a local resident aware that there are other views and that the local residents associations present are not representative of all these views. Coalition has met with ndc, divergent views, I know the area and people here have very different views. don’t hear the opposite view call for regeneration of that site as they don’t have capacity to do what you have done. WCC don’t represent everyone. nobody can do that. No proper consultation even in the NDC area. We wanted proper consultation. NDC does some great things/has done some great work. refuse to back down on this rather than admit they got it wrong. so many things could be done. stand back. rethink.
 * Geoffrey Ocen, Director of NDC**
 * Kaushika Amin,**
 * Dan:** if it is helpful to clarify, i propose that it is important to not look back but forward. to have dialogue. the ndc have to be working closely on regeneration closely with the council otherwise it wouldn’t work
 * Jacky Davenport, NDC Resident**

Half way through not heard out Regarding the consultation I echo Lammy Its a complex site, long time coming forward, resources and money and working with TfL responsible to development brief – essence of the scheme. deliver what is deliverable within this scheme. 2007 enough of a scheme to bring out – comments were then made on that scheme, we listened, learned and understood and have taken elements of comments and tried to incorporate. Fundamentally better than months ago. Listening and understanding that is what has made radical changes/completely different within that have recognised the importance of the WC building. real amenity to the building. we are committed to architecture. about the right solution for the environment. gateway in aggressive environment. impressed with quality cant understand from two dimensional drawing we are passionate about quality have incorporated the market a driver for people and their businesses by sitting down and talking. . . we can really make that the best market in London. we have the passion to build on that market and make it your success is our success. we can achieve regeneration where we want to work with out, engage in the project, background/investment/make happen/people and diversity/planning/continue to improve Everyone is saying that they want to see an improvement and to collaborate but no consideration of what the community want, it is not a community concept. if it were conducive to everyone i would welcome that. you haven’t heard a quarter of the voices of the people.
 * Andrew Scrivener, Grainger**
 * Bernice Vanier, Tottenham Green Ward Councillor**

the community have clearly stated that: Ø they want to work with the developer Ø talking to Grainger, prepared to collaborate and work together Ø Tottenham Hale and Haringey Heartlands are regeneration areas Ø Seven Sisters is an opportunity to do something remarkable. Ø not consultation but collaboration Ø the panel take that the views expressed are universally of need for collaboration Ø set up a tri-partite planning group like crossrail/white chapel – taken forward in collaboration with London Borough of Tower Hamlets – is an example of a development trust Ø with a Latin American quarter would be unique borough Ø key trigger is development trust – trewmans brewery Ø this is doable Ø want to look at temporary uses Ø can do something that will be celebrated Ø wise to be ambitious
 * Michael Parkes, Planning Aid for London**

we have followed process of consultation, presented ideas and modified them, keep process going, cant incorporate all ideas, wont go back to stage 1, invested too much. happy to engage in positive dialogue but need to move from a multitude of issues
 * Andrew Scrivener**

don’t like the offer, not grassroots involving process no intention to have collaboration with us, the few adjustments forced by Mayor of London recognise that you have taken time to come here today but there has been no real paradigm shift no one has said your plan is exciting there is a huge misconception that only Grainger will change the area
 * Ruth Allen, WCC**

1m Latin Americans in the UK we don’t have a centre for ourselves, kicked out of Elephant & Castle we think we can do something extremely extraordinary for Haringey and we can help bring millions of extra investment. we could create in Wards Corner a plan in which we could bring 1 million customers to the area we could transform help make the Tottenham carnival even greater. Olympics for a few millions pounds you could have an extremely beautiful gate
 * Isaac Bigio, MINKA News**

Development will demolish the Latin American market, lose half the jobs currently in the area we should keep the heritage buildings, build strong modern riba quality new buildings the community plan has been delayed wasted opportunity to not consult with the community Grainger are 50m in the red – not a risk free option for the Council to be backing
 * Paul Carroll, CARA**

Cannot disclose confidential information about Graingers current financial situation, but refute implication that the company is in serious trouble.
 * Andrew Scrivener**

there is no delay in bringing forward the community plan but to accommodate changes to the application the coalition’s application will be considered required changes to the application as has happened with the Grainger proposal let due process occur properly within the law
 * Naill Bolger**

we have got an acknowledgement from all parties present tonight that some collaboration is possible
 * Michael Parkes**