Hello all
Having not asked supporters to sign in support of a Pinkham Way Alliance submission for some six years, we were unsure of how much interest there'd be. The final total of nearly 950 signatures in support of our submission to Haringey Council's draft Local Plan was well in advance of what we would have been happy with. Thank you - we really appreciate it.
I thought I'd bring you uptodate with the situation as we see it.
Since our campaign to save the nature conservation site started 15 years ago, Haringey has ignored successive Inspectors’ recommendations to carry out a robust, evidence-based assessment of the site. 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.
PS whilst we don't anticipate raising money to retain a planning consultant etc in connection with Haringey's Local Plan, we do have some unavoidable running expenses, eg accountant's fees for annual reports, plus MailChimp fees for sending our newsletters.
If you can spare a few pounds a month, or a small single donation, it'll be a huge help. Thanks.
To donate, please go to: https://pinkhamway.org/donate/
Replies
Following my update on March 13th, I omitted to tell you that the London Nature Recovery Strategy (LNRS) has finally been published, and that it includes Pinkham Way.
We mentioned this a few months ago to thank those who'd kindly responded to the initial call for sites to be included, and were thrilled how much that had helped. However, the landowners (Barnet and N London Waste Authority) also had the chance to oppose inclusion.
Whether they responded and the GLA discounted it, we don't know, but the fact remains that the site's in there, and, whilst its inclusion doesn't entail a designation or anything formal, is an additional independent recognition of its existing biodiversity value and enormous potential.
And one more serious consideration for any development proposal.
Interestingly, nearly 50 years ago, the GLA's predecessor authority, the GLC, responded to Haringey's Local Plan as follows:
...the site is an important length between open land north of the NCR [A406] and Muswell Hill to the south ... the open space needs and the purpose of the strategic open land in relation to this disused sewage works override its use for industry and warehousing ...'
What's changed in the intervening decades? Nothing's happened on the site, apart from decades of use as public open space. There's been no change at all to the land's general aspect, except that nature has reclaimed the site more completely and in doing so has absorbed any signs of the site's previous use.
All the best,