Spurs’ legal challenge over development dismissed
Tottenham Hotspur football club has lost a High Court challenge over a regeneration scheme near its stadium in north London.
The Premier League joint leaders took legal action over Haringey Council’s decision to grant planning permission for almost 3,000 homes and commercial development on land near High Road.
The club’s lawyers argued the council failed to consider “heritage impacts” and crowd control issues.
Mr Justice Saini dismissed the case.
As part of the proposals between Haringey Council and developers Lendlease, named High Road West, up to 2,929 homes would be built along with a library and learning centre, office space, a new public park and an energy centre.
The plans, according to local authority officials, would “significantly contribute to the regeneration of the area” by creating thousands of jobs, enhancing transportation, and boosting the local economy by millions of dollars.
Though dozens of houses and existing companies will be destroyed, including those on the Love Lane housing estate and the Peacock Industrial Estate, it has drawn objections from locals and business owners.
The impact of the development on nearby listed structures and the North Tottenham Conservation Area, according to the club’s attorneys, was not acknowledged by Haringey Council during a meeting earlier this month.
The proposed conditions had “failed to secure the measures assessed as being necessary to provide for the safe movement of crowds,” they continued, adding that this had “misled” the council about crowd management.
The judge was informed that the council’s independent review had found that “post-construction, the situation for stadium crowds will improve” and that “crowd control measures to be provided both during and after construction would provide at least equivalent provision for stadium crowds queuing for White Hart Lane Station.”
“Safeguards exist which will enable arrangements for crowd safety to be in place and be capable of being implemented, at each stage of the construction,” he continued, citing planning conditions.”Heritage impacts were lawfully identified and were judged to be outweighed by the substantial public benefits which the scheme would deliver,” stated Mr. Justice Saini in his decision.
“There is a clear development plan support for this development and the regenerative impacts of the scheme are of overwhelming significance in the planning balance.”
He stated: “In my judgment, the council was lawfully satisfied that the planning permission created a framework which would ensure that the access to the stadium, which was a key planning consideration, would be satisfactorily achieved without unreasonable impact on [the club].”
The choice was made when the club submitted its own updated plans to erect 287 “student bedspaces” in buildings that may reach six stories on the site of a former printworks next to the stadium.