Legal Challenge By Spurs Over Development Is Dismissed
The Club 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, arguing the council failed to consider “heritage impacts” and crowd control issues.
As part of the proposals between Haringey Council and developers Lendlease, named High Road West, up to 2,929 new homes would be built, along with a new public park, office space, a library and learning centre, plus an energy centre.
Local authority officers said the plans would provide a “significant contribution to the regeneration of the area” including thousands of jobs, improved travel links, and millions of pounds for the economy.
The plans have proved controversial, and have attracted opposition from both residents and business owners because dozens of homes and existing businesses would be demolished.
At a hearing earlier in the month, lawyers for the Club claimed Haringey Council had not acknowledged the impact of the development on local listed buildings and the North Tottenham Conservation Area.
They also claimed the council had been “misled” on crowd control, because proposed conditions had “failed to secure the measures assessed as being necessary to provide for the safe movement of crowds”.
The judge, Mr Justice Saini, was told the council's independent review had concluded “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; and that post‑construction, the situation for stadium crowds will be improved”.
Mr Justice Saini dismissed the case, stating in his ruling: “Heritage impacts were lawfully identified and were judged to be outweighed by the substantial public benefits which the scheme would deliver.
“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 added that through planning conditions, “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: “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].”
