Agenda item

[The Chair announced the suspension of Committee Standing Orders to allow the continuation of the meeting beyond the 10pm cut off].

The Committee received a short presentation from officers followed by representatives of Tottenham Hotspurs Football Club (THFC) on early proposals to seek planning permission for a revised scheme for the redevelopment of the White Hart Lane stadium and the land around it. The Committee’s attention was drawn to a tabled addendum setting out initial comments from the Quality Review Panel and Development Management Forum held subsequent to the publication of the agenda.

The Committee raised the following points and questions regarding the briefing:

·         The Committee stressed their commitment to adherence to the Council’s targets in relation to affordable housing provision on new developments, particularly in recognition of the significant increase in residential units proposed for the revised scheme. The applicant affirmed an intention to provide affordable housing both off and onsite but outlined that as the scheme currently remained at design stage, final costs had yet to be established and which would impact on the level of affordable housing permissible. Officers provided assurance that the Council were in the process of commissioning an independent specialist to review the viability assessment to be submitted by THFC in relation to the ability to deliver against policy aspirations. 

·         Clarification was sought on plans around the engagement of young people with the scheme including apprenticeships. The applicant advised that around 100 apprenticeships were already offered through the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation and THFC. The number of apprenticeships to be provided directly by the scheme would be set out within the final s106 agreement.

·         Further details were sought on the primary health service provision proposed onsite and whether a clear commitment has been received from the NHS to utilise the facilities. The applicant advised that the extended provision proposed was in recognition of the significant need evidenced for additional GP access in the area and would now include specialist services as well as a GP surgery. Discussions with NHS England and an NHS trust to commission the GP service were at advanced stage in confirming occupation of the facilities.

·         The Committee requested that prior to finalising the scheme, consideration be given to:

o   Utilisation of a ticket pricing structure to encourage early arrival of spectators.

o   The provision of winter balconies within the residential tower design and adherence to the Building for Life guide for new homes.

o   The residential towers to the corners of the site being of triangular shape to bridge the curved shape of the stadium and rectilinear shape of surrounding streets.

·         The Committee emphasised the standing of the Design Review Panel and the imperative of their views and comments on initial plans for a revised scheme being given proper recognition and consideration by the applicant.

·         Areas of concern identified by the Committee included:

o   The proposed height and bulk of the residential towers, with the highest being 35 storeys.

o   The management of litter following events at the stadium.

o   The lack of WC provision along the High Road.

o   Disabled parking provision

o   Parking pressure on Homes for Haringey estates in the vicinity during events.

o   The misleading perception portrayed that the College and Sainsbury’s store had been provided by the scheme as opposed to being necessary in order to support the development

o   That the proposed onsite museum would overlap with the Bruce Castle museum.

·         Clarification was sought as to whether consideration had been given to moving the three locally listed buildings to an alternative location to avoid their demolition. It was advised that relocation had previously been considered under the consented scheme but that English Heritage (as was) was unable to support this rarely used approach due to the destruction of the context to the buildings. The Chair emphasised the importance of all options with regards to the locally listed buildings being fully assessed including the closure of roads and/or bus lanes. 

·         The Committee questioned why crowd control design plans for the High Road frontage under the consented scheme were now considered unacceptable. The applicant advised that new design solutions for this area had been generated following the application of further dynamic modelling of crowd movement, particularly in light of concerns regarding the blockage of bus lanes by supporters.

·         A position was sought from the applicant regarding the application of the London Living Wage. Confirmation was provided that THFC was a Living Wage employer. The Club were in negotiations with two of the main contractors around this issue but identified that it would have less control over pay levels offered by the significant number of subcontractors engaged during the construction works. 

·         Measures to mitigate the increased pressures on sustainable transport provision in the area from the revised scheme were questioned. The applicant confirmed that discussions were underway with Transport for London and other stakeholders regarding the bus routes serving the area and making better use of the W3 bus. Consideration was also being given to operating a shuttle bus service from Tottenham Hale and Wood Green tube stations to the stadium.

·         Clarification was sought on planned parking provision in light of proposed increases to the number of residential units and capacity of the stadium. The applicant advised that stadium parking including disabled bays would be provided at basement level (as approved by the Committee on 22 June 2015 under a s73 application for the consented scheme) and to an area behind the south stand. Basement level parking in the region of 250-275 spaces would be provided to the residential towers.

·         Further details were sought on the community benefits associated with the new National Football League (NFL) contract. The applicant advised that a percentage of tickets would be allocated for the local community, promotion extended of the NFL’s Play 60 active lifestyle campaign for children and the funding of 3 annual university places.

·         Clarification was sought on whether a Spurs season ticket offer would be made to local people. The applicant advised that this would likely be the same as the current arrangement under the s106 of the consented scheme in offering preferential access for local people. Opportunities around pricing would also be explored inline with the increased stadium capacity sought.

The applicant advised that the final application would likely come before the Committee in December for determination, subject to the consultation process.