Saturday19 August 2017

Make under pressure to alter Tottenham masterplan

The Spurs' redevelopment masterplan
  • Email
  • Comments (9)
  • Save

Make could be forced to alter plans for the redevelopment of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club amid claims that the planned demolition of listed buildings on the site would be “very difficult to justify” under planning rules.

English Heritage and Save Britain’s Heritage are pressing for amendments to the architect’s masterplan so that a set of up to 15 historic buildings - including two grade-II listed properties - in a conservation area on the southern tip of the site are retained.

English Heritage met with the club’s officials last week to tell them that there was “presumption in favour of the retention” of the buildings, while Save has commissioned Huw Thomas Architects to draw up alternative designs for the site.

Save secretary William Palin hit out at the “wastefulness, both in conservation and economic terms” of the plans, which he described as “very difficult to justify” in a letter to Savills, the club’s planning consultant.

“The bottom line is that planning legislation is against them on this. They can come up with every reason they like [for the removal of the buildings], but if they can’t satisfy PPG [planning policy guidance] 15 they will have to think again,” he told BD.

Tottenham Hotspur announced last November that Make, alongside landscape architect Martha Schwartz, would masterplan the 8ha site, while KSS designs the stadium.

A spokesman for Tottenham Hotspur said: “We don’t think that in order to deliver the scheme it is possible to keep those buildings. We have been really clear and up front about it.”

Illustration of proposed alternative scheme with buildings intact by Huw Thomas Architects, facing north toward stadium
Illustration of proposed alternative scheme with buildings intact by Huw Thomas Architects, facing east toward stadium


Readers' comments (9)

  • Then look again... as once historic buildings are lost they are lost forever.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The proposed scheme blasts a huge hole in the historic townscape of Tottenham High Road The Huw Thomas admirably demonstrates how these characterful buildings could be retained AND a new stadium constructed. It is sheer arrogance to destroy Tottenham's heritage just to allow a windswept space all around the stadium. The existing buildings, properly restored, would be an essential foil for this huge bulky development. Hotspur must think again.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Whilst evaluting buildings with historical character is all well and good, so is allowing for future history to be made. Given the shortage of land and restraints imposed on the civic development by individual buildings why not integrate housing on a vertical scale with the stadium? That is imagine watch Spurs from your terrace. Public concourse surrounding a stadium is crucial for the flow of crowds and a crowd's integration back into the urban surrounds. Higher density, integrated with the stadium could be a viable way to generate income and provide lifestyle, future culturally significant development, whilst co-existing harmoniuosly with existing hertitage buildings. Just a thought.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The whole Tottenham area currently looks like a complete mess. I know as I live there. The local team is known not only in the UK but worldwide. Hotspur was around before most of the buildings themselves and the scheme will vibrant, new and will help the whole area regenerate. As residents we need this input. So a few old houses and shops get disposed off. It's a small price.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I'd prefer the historic buildings to stay - not everyone loves sport, and there is no wider public gain from this - a commercial venture. - so really, demolition is against public policy. The 'complete mess' can be dealytwith, the buildings retained.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • How many people commenting on here are actually from Tottenham? The place is in a state of degeneration, the buildings will fall down on their own in the next hundred years or so because for all the well meaning comments above no one is prepared to put real cash into preserving them. The desire to protect our heritage is admirable but must be careful not to stray into a dew eyed sentimentalism. We must start to descriminate between what must be saved and what we merely desire to be saved born of unreasoned attachment to what is otherwise a sound principal.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Please can we get something straight, these buildings are not historic they are old, they offerno archtectual merit whatsoever hence they are not listed. I know these building very well and they realy are not worthy of keeping, architectual heritage wold be enhanced by removing them. As for the two listed buildings they can be moved, God knows there are plenty of nothing buldings in Tottenham that could be removed and replaced with these. This scheme is the best architectual hope for Tottenham. An eminent architect once said to me that we have built rubbish buildings in every century, old does not equal good.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • aint being funny but the buildings that they want to get rid of are boarded up, the area needs this regeneration

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • this is a serious opportunity to sort this area of tottenham out and move it into the 21st century and benefit local community in a big way.....as always a few dodgy old buildings which do not represent any real value except that they are old ,creat new heritage !its these old building are hardly the tower of london etc ........for petes sake!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

sign in register
  • Email
  • Comments (9)
  • Save
Sign in

Email Newsletters

Sign out to login as another user

Desktop Site | Mobile Site