Forum

Hello all

Having not asked supporters to sign in support of a submission for some six years, we were unsure of how much interest there'd be. The final total of nearly 950 was well in advance of what we would have been happy with. We really appreciate it.

I thought I'd bring you uptodate with the situation as we see it.

Since the issue started 15 years ago, Haringey has ignored successive Inspectors’ recommendations to carry out a robust, evidence-based site assessment. In 2021 the Waste Plan Inspector expressly handed over to the Council the responsibility for two fundamental decisions: a) whether the dual designation and its employment element should continue to apply and b) whether the land is ‘Previously Developed’ or Greenfield. Since 2011 every Inspector has found the approach to the site unsound and has had to introduce 'Main Modifications' in order to make the particular plan sound; neither has any Inspector validated either the irrational dual designation or the employment element.

Since 2011 Haringey has successfully avoided the task of objective assessment by making assertions on the lines of ‘... it’s always been an employment site, therefore ...’. However, it’s now crunch time. By stating that it's not the function of the Waste plan to make these decisions, the Waste Plan Inspector has cleverly isolated Council decision-making from any outside influence.

For the Council lawfully to progress the allocation in the draft Local Plan, it must first produce sound evidence showing a) that Pinkham Way is suitable for employment (it never has, and its own independent evidence (ignored) says no) and b) that it regards the site’s status as Previously Developed (both field evidence and case law underline its Greenfield characteristics). Until it can do that, Pinkham Way’s position in the Waste Plan is effectively frozen, and no one can infer suitability simply from its inclusion.

Were the Council to offer sound assessments, any proposal would then need to satisfy a fearsome set of planning and environmental hurdles set out in the Waste Plan Inspector’s Main Modification.

So, paradoxically, by including the site in the waste plan, the Inspector has enabled a very much higher degree of protection for the site than if he’d thrown it out.

We’ll keep you in touch – there’s stuff going on and it could be an interesting year. If you need clarification on any of the above, please don't hesitate to contact me on here or via PM.

Thanks again, and all the best,

Stephen Brice

Chair - PWA.