Hey Joe. Scepticism is good. I guess I just put a lot of emphasis on formal evidence over speculation. My eyes tell me otherwise to yours, hence my seeking fact rather than opinion. While maintaining that healthy scepticism, I'll trust the report until someone points out exactly how it's wrong. If you're concerned then I suggest you try and do that, the residents of Wells Terrace might end up worshipping you as a god! :-) A

I'm a Haringey councillor for Tottenham Hale ward, and a resident told me about comments here on the "Hale Village" development. I also saw that yesterday JoeV added a link to my Flickr photoblog showing the Emily Bowes Court building near Tottenham Hale Station.

Normally as a resident in the far east of Haringey, I wouldn't have added my view. But then I read Arkady's comment:
"Then again, it's a shithole around there anyway, they didn't have to worry about the surroundings."

Part of our problem is this sort of attitude about Tottenham Hale. It's a of view of the area we might expect from slum landlords; from property developers; and apparently the London Development Agency. But I'm disappointed to find it on a community website.

The area around Ferry Lane, including Ferry Lane Estate and Bream Close; the streets around Down Lane Park; the neighbourhood inside the Tottenham Gyratory system; Markfield Park and roads nearby; none are shitholes. Though to be fair to Arkady, my photoblog does focus on lots of corners where fly-tippers and dumpers do their best to foul the area.

It's actually rather nice - and sometimes quite beautiful. Don't believe me? Then come and take a walk round. Or look on Flickr. Here are some quick suggestions: There are loads more.

● Photo by local resident Jordi Martorell.
● River Lee 6 April 2008
● The river on 2 February 2009
● Jeanette Sitton's photos from The Paddock.
● Panorama of Tottenham Marshes.
● Bream Close Estate website.

Thanks for replying quickly and frankly Arkady.
Of course you hit a nerve.

For some people "Tottenham Hale" means just the station and the immediate area round it. For others - the developers and the London Development Agency - it means the area of the so-called Tottenham Hale and Greater Ashley Road "Masterplans" - including land on both banks of the river, and extending to Down Lane Park.

While for us who live here, it's our homes, our neighbourhood and neighbours – including people we call our friends.

True, I'm not expecting architectural tourists to queue up to visit Ferry Lane Estate, or roads near Down Lane Park where we live. You might think them "bland and featureless". Dismissing our streets as "nothing"; "dross"; and "parochialville" homes which "degrade the natural environment around them".

Well, I like handsome Georgian, Victorian, Edwardian and later buildings. But we love out little 1930's house as well. It's also what we could afford at the time. Calling our streets a "shithole" because they're not Victorian seems - well, just a little harsh.

We enjoy and visit attractive modern buildings. Good design of any period is great. Though I'm sceptical about "iconic" buildings which - in my observation - tend to show their problems the minute everyone takes a taxi back from the black-tie prize-giving back-slapping dinner. (Irena Bauman is an architect who is refreshingly honest about this.)

Maybe you and I will agree on some things about the new Tottenham Hale development. Perhaps one is the absurdity of the developers - Lee Valley Estates - calling a high-rise development a "village". I and others have poked gentle fun at this. Chris Shellard, formerly Haringey Assistant Chief Executive and Head of Haringey Regeneration, is now Lee Valley Estate's project manager. He at least, was honest in describing their initial aim as a "mini-Paddington Basin". If that soulless island of concrete next to the Grand Union canal might conceivably be appropriate in central London near a major railway station, it's hardly what's needed next to the River Lee and a Regional Park.

The plans previously put forward for Hale Wharf by Isis - British Waterways development arm - were even more grotesquely out of scale. Though no doubt "signature" and "iconic", viewed miles away where architects and consultants live.

And that's the basic problem. it seems to me that many of the people driving this are uninterested in Tottenham, its regeneration, or the people who live here. They saw a chance to make money - and get a public subsidy as well - with a piece of land next to a tube station which is also on the main line to Stanstead, Stratford and Liverpool Street. It has another bonus: views across the Lee Valley Regional Park, its marshes, reservoirs; bird watching areas, and a river. (The "gorgeous natural features" you mention.) Except that out-of-scale and out-of-context developments will mar these forever for everyone who doesn't have a flat at the very top.

Proud and valiant indeed, credit to your passion Alan. You’re right that I was associating TH with the area around the rail station, and perhaps that is unfair. I certainly get miffed when people dismiss the wider Finsbury Park area. I admire your sense of community, and I suspect we share a hope for regeneration tempered by scepticism towards development agencies. And we also share the belief that ‘good design of any period is great’ – sadly the percentage of good designs after c.1930 - when classical principles and ornaments were largely abandoned - are thin on the ground. You may genuinely love ‘your little 1930s houses’, but when compared to their older neighbours they seem like a failure to me (I’m making a narrow point about architecture here, I’m not slagging off the residents). This failure has largely remedied for individual buildings in the last few decades – modernism has been endowed with a new appreciation for aesthetics. But modernism still struggles to provide good streets, most low-rise estates have desperately poor aesthetics compared to their classic forebears. Even mid-to-high rise developments like this one and Tottenham Hale can be done right with attention to detail and the right materials. But at the moment it looks like a badly wasted opportunity.

Arky

Anyone know when this City North application will appear at a planning hearing? I don't know much about the process, but I believe that's what happens next. Would I need to attend to ensure my points are heard, or is just submitting formal comments via the portal enough?

Thanks, ShaunG and regards from me and Zena to you and JG.

I haven't had much time to browse Stroud Green website. But it strikes me that many issues in common are discussed by community websites and Residents' Associations - including bogus charity collectors and where to get the best coffee!

So carping at other neighbourhoods (and websites) seems pointless. Instead, cooperation and sharing information between local community groups - online and offline - could generate win-win. And this is true whether we're objecting to poor development; or e.g. looking for the best method for an adopt-a-plot community garden scheme.

Currently I'm a member of a loose group - linked to Haringey Online website - who've been exposing the activities of landlords and developers who exploit loopholes in the Certificates of Lawfulness process to convert homes into hutches. (Here's one in Hampden Lane where Haringey are going for revocation.)

I'd be glad to hear of people in Stroud Green, or further afield, tackling the same issue.

Alan - I'm looking into a certificate of lawfullness issue right now in Islington and have found some jaw-dropping incompetence and dodgy goings-on in the process. Whisper me your email address ?

Maybe take a leaf from the DVLA's book of 'you haven't paid your road tax - we'll crush your car', and have a severe 'You've broken planning laws and committed fraud - we'll have this property thanks very much'. That'd be a fair deterrent. Tenants could then serve out the remainder of their tenancy, council takes the rent and puts it towards maintaining the property, then sells it off and pockets the proceeds.

Seems appropriate given the impunity with which rogue builders/landlords appear to ruin areas and properties (and the lives of tenants and residents).

Planning hearing today at the town hall starts at 7:30pm.

http://www.islington.gov.uk/Democracy/meetings/areameetingdetail.asp?meetingid=2528

What is the format of these meetings, are members of the public alowed to comment or ask questions? I'd like to go myself but I'm not sure if I'm going to make it.

I'm going just to see what happens. I made 'formal' comments via the planning portal, but I haven't asked to speak at the meeting (I got a letter asking if I wanted to speak).

It's probably in one of the main chambers at the Town Hall, each chamber has a sign outside usually saying what's on at what time. So it will probably be signed as "East Area Planning Sub-Committee" or thereabouts. You could also just ask at the front desk. If it's like most meetings there, you can just rock up and take a seat wherever you like.

I'll be wearing a bright red tracky top if anyone wants to say hello.

I borrowed a mini laptop with a dongle, for as-it happens news!

How terribly exciting...

The case officer read out design details relating to “Linear Terrace“, “cylindrical building“, “rectilinear building“ and amenity space. The case officer mentioned several objections, mainly arising due to size and scale but didn’t seem to go into any real depth.

Objections from three members of the public were heard regarding application process, the timing of consultation letters, environmental impact and scale, play areas and BREEM rating.

Votes cast 3 in favour / 2 against. Application is approved.

I think it's now referred to the almighty and all-knowing Mayor of London, for his decision on such large applications. I think it's safe to say it would have had a much tougher time under Livingstone than Johnson due to the low number of affordable housing in this scheme.

@Four Eyes: Where exactly is your office, out of curiosity? If it's on the City North site I'm guessing it's not that pretty on the outside anyway! Are your firm expecting to be relocated within the new development?

Does anyone know what the timescales will be on finalising planning permission and commencing work?

Four eyes, any chance of a photo or two of that view?

I'm less concerned about views from the site than I am about views OF the site, to be honest. We can't all work there, and it's an eyesore at the moment.

Any idea when exactly the lease is up?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23822956-twin-towers-will-dominate-the-skyline-of-north-london.do

Whoop. A

Nope, a fifth of the habitable rooms will be affordable, number of addordable homes is around 11-12% from memory. Far too low.

"Just a fifth of the homes will be affordable — a trade-off made by Islington in exchange for a guarantee that building work will start within three years. "

Here's someone who doesn't understand the planning process at all. Commencement of the development within three years is a standard planning condition attached to every application. There's nothing to stop them a)start material works and then stop - just like the Vista development on SGR b)apply to extend this limit by either variating the condition or simply applying to renew the permission, which has very recently been made easier by the government. If this 3year thing is secured in the legal agreement, then I dont think there's anything stoping them doing (a).

Hehheh. Re housing specifically - and I won't pretend this is an original argument - a big part of the problem is that we haven't quite decided whether we want to be a homeowner society or a renter society. In France most people rent and arguments like this don't happen. But if we are going to insist that home-owning is a good thing - and I can see the argument for that - then we have to limit people from buying multiple homes, especially for buy-to-let. Otherwise the demand for housing actually rises at a higher rate than population growth.

Of course if we did the sensible thing and worked to limit and reduce the population then this problem, like so many others, would go away.