The Regeneration of Tottenham Thread

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
19,066
#41
My understanding is that the council has effectively binned off this entire plan and are going with something rather less ambitious.
The reasoning being that's too yuppified and too much gentrification for the new council as I understand it. I'd love to be proved wrong I really would.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
11,909
#42
The reasoning being that's too yuppified and too much gentrification for the new council as I understand it. I'd love to be proved wrong I really would.
It's a little more complicated than that. I don't have the energy to go into such limited details as I know right now, but it isn't really to do with clichés like that. It has to do with issues such as where investment comes from, the split in the council over the Lend Lease regeneration deal, how they secure and guarantee the proportion of affordable housing and the degree to which re-accommodating existing residents takes priority over the long-term improvement of the locale.

Using words like "yuppified" just dumbs down the discussion. This is a multi-billion-pound regeneration project. The decisions are orders of magnitude more complicated than tabloid considerations like "yuppification". That's a dismissive term for the problem that local working class people get driven out of neighbourhoods by the property industry when regeneration projects get built.

The council sees the problem. I don't think the council knows how to deal with it. No one does. You can't any longer do regeneration projects without a lopsided majority of private investment, because the government virtually terminated the grant-making scheme for affordable housing. That puts the power largely in the hands of the developer and the council into a supplicant position. The previous faction of Haringey Labour that controlled the council was willing to go along with that. The current group is not.

It's not about style wars. It's about capitalism.
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
19,066
#43
It's a little more complicated than that. I don't have the energy to go into such limited details as I know right now, but it isn't really to do with clichés like that. It has to do with issues such as where investment comes from, the split in the council over the Lend Lease regeneration deal, how they secure and guarantee the proportion of affordable housing and the degree to which re-accommodating existing residents takes priority over the long-term improvement of the locale.

Using words like "yuppified" just dumbs down the discussion. This is a multi-billion-pound regeneration project. The decisions are orders of magnitude more complicated than tabloid considerations like "yuppification". That's a dismissive term for the problem that local working class people get driven out of neighbourhoods by the property industry when regeneration projects get built.

The council sees the problem. I don't think the council knows how to deal with it. No one does. You can't any longer do regeneration projects without a lopsided majority of private investment, because the government virtually terminated the grant-making scheme for affordable housing. That puts the power largely in the hands of the developer and the council into a supplicant position. The previous faction of Haringey Labour that controlled the council was willing to go along with that. The current group is not.

It's not about style wars. It's about capitalism.
Well put David' I was being a bit tongue in cheek as those terms had been used previously however, I do think there is a level of ideological difficulty involved.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
18,065
#44
My understanding is that the council has effectively binned off this entire plan and are going with something rather less ambitious.
I don't think they were ever on board/had the stomach with doing this part of the regeneration. At the time I thought it was a purely council led part of the development around the stadium so am confused as to why the club are buying up land other than they think/know the council won't go ahead with the plans. With the council saying they won't partner up with development/property companies to fund and build developments I really cant see them finding the money for it unless theres something in it from themselves and I cant think of anything that would benefit them.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
11,909
#47
Mate, why dignify or indulge him by trying to explain yourself. Flogging a dead horse comes to mind
'Mate' ...do you know what a 'poor door' is?
It's a provocative name for a separate entrance for affordable housing in a mixed tenure development.

Every housing association prefers to have a separate entrance for its part of the development. It's not something that is unilaterally imposed by the developers, although they prefer it too. But the housing association wants to be able to manage its own part of the development, as far as possible, rather than depending on the private developer's (usually useless) property managers. They want their own refuse store, cycle store, stairwells and lifts. Otherwise, their tenants have to wait for the developer to fix things when they go wrong, rather than just asking their landlord, the HA.

Also, the law governing service charge means that, if the affordable flats share access and any facilities with the private flats, they have to contribute to the same service charge. That would include expensive items like concierges, special lifts, even swimming pools and gyms, which can make the affordable units even more unaffordable than they already are.

As always with these things, the lurid version you read in the press (the wet-lefty press in this case) isn't the whole story.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
6,772
#49
It will be interesting how we compete with the 16 non football events. And how much consideration on surrounding area say a concert promoter takes when deciding a London venue. I would think the regeneration is crucial to the stadium working as a multipurpose venue. When I was 15/16 my parents were quite happy to let me find my own way to pop concerts. If I had kids the same age would I feel comfortable them making their way through Tottenham of an evening not really in fact definitely no.
 

Bulletspur

The Reasonable Advocate
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
7,605
#50
It will be interesting how we compete with the 16 non football events. And how much consideration on surrounding area say a concert promoter takes when deciding a London venue. I would think the regeneration is crucial to the stadium working as a multipurpose venue. When I was 15/16 my parents were quite happy to let me find my own way to pop concerts. If I had kids the same age would I feel comfortable them making their way through Tottenham of an evening not really in fact definitely no.
Very good point
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
149
#51
It's a provocative name for a separate entrance for affordable housing in a mixed tenure development.

Every housing association prefers to have a separate entrance for its part of the development. It's not something that is unilaterally imposed by the developers, although they prefer it too. But the housing association wants to be able to manage its own part of the development, as far as possible, rather than depending on the private developer's (usually useless) property managers. They want their own refuse store, cycle store, stairwells and lifts. Otherwise, their tenants have to wait for the developer to fix things when they go wrong, rather than just asking their landlord, the HA.

Also, the law governing service charge means that, if the affordable flats share access and any facilities with the private flats, they have to contribute to the same service charge. That would include expensive items like concierges, special lifts, even swimming pools and gyms, which can make the affordable units even more unaffordable than they already are.

As always with these things, the lurid version you read in the press (the wet-lefty press in this case) isn't the whole story.
After reading so many posts from you about the stadium and issues about the development and build. I feel I have to thank you on behalf of the less informed, for the well written and educational posts you have put up and for not getting side tracked by certain members. Keep up the good work, COYS.
 

Graysonti

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 8, 2011
Messages
3,449
#52
After reading so many posts from you about the stadium and issues about the development and build. I feel I have to thank you on behalf of the less informed, for the well written and educational posts you have put up and for not getting side tracked by certain members. Keep up the good work, COYS.
I concur - DM is obviously a well educated, articulate and experienced guy in this field and always splits fact from opinion - love hearing what he has to say.
 

sherbornespurs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
2,313
#54
A recent update regarding the proposed 'High Road West' project from Haringey council (Housing and Regeneration).

On the High Road West project more generally, this project is separate from the HDV, a legal contract had already been signed with Lendlease and a significant sum of money had already been spent. The Council therefore cannot withdraw from this but is having conversations about restructuring the development, including by increasing the number of social housing units. There were other complexities relating to the project. A ballot of Love Lane estate residents was now needed to demonstrate support for the proposals, as required by the Mayor of London, and this will take place next year. In addition, Tottenham Hotspur Football Club are also a stakeholder in the process as they own a section of land known as the Goods Yard where they intend to develop a public square as part of the High Road West site. Conversations were ongoing with the owners of the properties on the Peacock industrial estate. Asked what would happen if the ballot of residents opposes the redevelopment, Cllr Adje said that this was something that was being looked at with legal advice being taken and conversations ongoing with the Mayor of London’s office. Asked if the panel can see the legal agreement, Cllr Adje said that this would be a matter for the Borough solicitor

https://www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk/documents/g8859/Printed minutes 15th-Nov-2018 18.30 Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel.pdf?T=1
 
Last edited:

sherbornespurs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
2,313
#56
The interesting thing here is that the development is in partnership with Haringey council, "building homes – including a significant amount the council will own and manage as much-needed social rented housing".

Scant on detail, to be expected at this early stage, but add this to the recent news regarding the 'Tottenham West' development on the stadium's doorstep, things do seem to be progressing at last.

Just the little job of sorting out the remainder of Haringey now, post binning the Lendlease partnership,
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
11,909
#57
The interesting thing here is that the development is in partnership with Haringey council, "building homes – including a significant amount the council will own and manage as much-needed social rented housing".

Scant on detail, to be expected at this early stage, but add this to the recent news regarding the 'Tottenham West' development on the stadium's doorstep, things do seem to be progressing at last.
The government recently relaxed the longstanding (Thatcher-era) restrictions on the use of local authority capital receipts from selling off property to build new property, i.e., council housing. As a result, a number of Labour local authorities have started building council blocks on a modest scale again.

Because London development land has been insanely expensive over the past few years, these councils are generally doing this on underused land that they already own. Islington and Camden are converting undercroft (ground floor) garage spaces under existing council flats into more flats. Near me, Islington has demolished a two-storey 1970s library and replaced it with a new library and five storeys of mixed private and shared ownership flats on top. Camden has built very substantial commercial-and-residential blocks in front of setback council blocks in Hampstead Rd, near Euston.

These projects are generally done as partnerships with developers - the latter get access to scarce development land in good locations and can develop profitable private flats, in return for returning a freebie library (or community centre, etc.) and some affordable flats to the council.

Haringey is doing similar things. I was working with a developer on a planning application down the High Rd from WHL earlier this year. When I spoke to the council's housing department about the affordable housing element and asked them which housing associations might be interested, she said, quite pointedly, that my client should also considering selling the affordable units to Haringey.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
11,909
#59
Not really. I wasn't especially pessimistic, just trying to describe the political reality, and I'm not any more optimistic now. Partly because the fate of the regeneration scheme is drenched in inside-Labour factionalism. Partly because there are no responsible regeneration schemes anymore, because there isn't the capital funding available to deliver a balanced product. Regeneration schemes all depend on private investment and the developers routinely bully and rip off the local authorities. Where the local authorities refuse to be bullied and ripped off, the developers walk away and the regeneration doesn't happen.
 

Bulletspur

The Reasonable Advocate
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
7,605
#60
Not really. I wasn't especially pessimistic, just trying to describe the political reality, and I'm not any more optimistic now. Partly because the fate of the regeneration scheme is drenched in inside-Labour factionalism. Partly because there are no responsible regeneration schemes anymore, because there isn't the capital funding available to deliver a balanced product. Regeneration schemes all depend on private investment and the developers routinely bully and rip off the local authorities. Where the local authorities refuse to be bullied and ripped off, the developers walk away and the regeneration doesn't happen.
It is very reasonable for one to feel pessimistic after reading this :(
 
Top