Finney Is Back
Andy Thompson
My summary of the GLA response to our planning proposal for those that don't want to trawl through the numerous pages.
In effect the existing proposal doesn't quite meet the London Plan.
The GLA have commented specifically on the loss of the heritage buildings. However it looks like they are giving two potential ways out:
1. The overall benefit of the scheme has to be considered against the loss of the heritage buildings and it may be the case that the positives outweigh the negatives - with the GLA also mentioning that the extra 7 metres of pavement space would be an additional benefit in terms of crowd safety.
2. A recommendation that Spurs retain the façade of the Dispensary and incorporate that into the façade of the new stadium alongside the proposed retaining of Warmington House as part of the Tottenham Experience. They say that the facades of the other two buildings (The Red House and the former White Hart Public House) don’t really lend themselves to being moved, but that Spurs should seek to retain Bill Nicholson’s former panelled office from the Red House and move it in its entirety to the proposed Spurs museum.
Personally I think option 2 above is a decent, workable idea and allows us to demolish the buildings nearest to the high road to open up access with just a minor alteration to the overall stadium scheme (that may actually be more aesthetically pleasing) and I'm sure the club were looking at incorporating Bill Nicholson's office into the new museum anyway.
It also looks like TFL are again angling for some money. They suggest that our estimation of flow through Tottenham Hale station means that it would require an extra escalator and this would cost £3.6 million, or £3 million if they do it as part of the work they already have planned. I think this one will rumble on for a while. Personally I wonder how the usage of Tottenham Hale for Spurs games will compare with the usage of Tottenham Hale station at peak rush hour times, especially with the huge amount of residential development going on around that station. The GLA also suggest that some of our estimations for visitor numbers and peak times might have been underestimated.
Page 32 of the report has the overall conclusions but in essence:
Historic Environment
The GLA officers conclude that the proposals will cause ‘substantial harm’ to the significance of the Conservation Area and total loss of locally listed buildings. The substantial public benefits arising from the proposal could outweigh the loss of those buildings; however, taking into account the significance of those buildings, the applicant should consider the relocation of the entire frontage of the Dispensary within the new Tottenham Experience terrace and the relocation of Bill Nicholson’s former panelled office from the Red House within the museum. Harm to some other Heritage assets is considered to be ‘less than substantial’ and outweighed by the considerable public benefits.
Transport
Applicant will need to work closely with TFL to ensure that the impact assessment is sufficiently robust as there are concerns that the peak period for trips has potentially been underestimated.
Urban Design and Tall Buildings
Proposals considered to be of high design and potentially iconic, however applicant should provide further information on how the podium level public spaces will be managed
Inclusive Design
Generally acceptable, however an additional general access lift should be included from the plaza to first floor podium level.
Climate Change
Further evidence required that the cooling demand has been reduced. Fresh approach to drainage regime is required for application to comply with London Plan Policy.
Air Quality
Needs to be remodelled based on 30 matches per year during the football season plus 16 events during the summer months (16 events during summer months?!?!?)
Regeneration and Economic Development
Proposals supported
Mixed Uses and Town Centre Uses
Acceptable in relation to London plan polices
Sport and Recreation
Strongly supported
Visitor Infrastructure
Supported
Housing
Supported in principle (which surprised me considering the height and density of the new towers). However the council should confirm that this would meet local housing needs.
Affordable Housing
No information yet provided, a viability report is to be independently assessed on behalf of the council and the results shared in full with the GLA officers.
On balance while the planning application is generally acceptable in strategic planning terms, the application does not yet comply with the London Plan for the reasons set out above, however the possible remedies set out above could address these deficiencies.
I would say that this is a very positive response overall that only really requires some minor amendments and a few further studies.
In effect the existing proposal doesn't quite meet the London Plan.
The GLA have commented specifically on the loss of the heritage buildings. However it looks like they are giving two potential ways out:
1. The overall benefit of the scheme has to be considered against the loss of the heritage buildings and it may be the case that the positives outweigh the negatives - with the GLA also mentioning that the extra 7 metres of pavement space would be an additional benefit in terms of crowd safety.
2. A recommendation that Spurs retain the façade of the Dispensary and incorporate that into the façade of the new stadium alongside the proposed retaining of Warmington House as part of the Tottenham Experience. They say that the facades of the other two buildings (The Red House and the former White Hart Public House) don’t really lend themselves to being moved, but that Spurs should seek to retain Bill Nicholson’s former panelled office from the Red House and move it in its entirety to the proposed Spurs museum.
Personally I think option 2 above is a decent, workable idea and allows us to demolish the buildings nearest to the high road to open up access with just a minor alteration to the overall stadium scheme (that may actually be more aesthetically pleasing) and I'm sure the club were looking at incorporating Bill Nicholson's office into the new museum anyway.
It also looks like TFL are again angling for some money. They suggest that our estimation of flow through Tottenham Hale station means that it would require an extra escalator and this would cost £3.6 million, or £3 million if they do it as part of the work they already have planned. I think this one will rumble on for a while. Personally I wonder how the usage of Tottenham Hale for Spurs games will compare with the usage of Tottenham Hale station at peak rush hour times, especially with the huge amount of residential development going on around that station. The GLA also suggest that some of our estimations for visitor numbers and peak times might have been underestimated.
Page 32 of the report has the overall conclusions but in essence:
Historic Environment
The GLA officers conclude that the proposals will cause ‘substantial harm’ to the significance of the Conservation Area and total loss of locally listed buildings. The substantial public benefits arising from the proposal could outweigh the loss of those buildings; however, taking into account the significance of those buildings, the applicant should consider the relocation of the entire frontage of the Dispensary within the new Tottenham Experience terrace and the relocation of Bill Nicholson’s former panelled office from the Red House within the museum. Harm to some other Heritage assets is considered to be ‘less than substantial’ and outweighed by the considerable public benefits.
Transport
Applicant will need to work closely with TFL to ensure that the impact assessment is sufficiently robust as there are concerns that the peak period for trips has potentially been underestimated.
Urban Design and Tall Buildings
Proposals considered to be of high design and potentially iconic, however applicant should provide further information on how the podium level public spaces will be managed
Inclusive Design
Generally acceptable, however an additional general access lift should be included from the plaza to first floor podium level.
Climate Change
Further evidence required that the cooling demand has been reduced. Fresh approach to drainage regime is required for application to comply with London Plan Policy.
Air Quality
Needs to be remodelled based on 30 matches per year during the football season plus 16 events during the summer months (16 events during summer months?!?!?)
Regeneration and Economic Development
Proposals supported
Mixed Uses and Town Centre Uses
Acceptable in relation to London plan polices
Sport and Recreation
Strongly supported
Visitor Infrastructure
Supported
Housing
Supported in principle (which surprised me considering the height and density of the new towers). However the council should confirm that this would meet local housing needs.
Affordable Housing
No information yet provided, a viability report is to be independently assessed on behalf of the council and the results shared in full with the GLA officers.
On balance while the planning application is generally acceptable in strategic planning terms, the application does not yet comply with the London Plan for the reasons set out above, however the possible remedies set out above could address these deficiencies.
I would say that this is a very positive response overall that only really requires some minor amendments and a few further studies.
