Proposed demolition of the Old Hornsey Journal Building - please object

[Adrian Essex]

A developer is proposing to demolish what was the Hornsey Journal building on Tottenham Lane, and to pack in an entire terrace of houses and a block of flats on the site. Only the facade will remain. An extra storey is planned, thereby dwarfing the Arthouse (London's Best Cinema). You can read more about the proposal here, or, please, simply take what you think are the most telling arguments the 161 Tottenham Lane proposal from Matt's list  and submit them to Haringey using this form (not verbatim, but in your own words).

Objections to Planning Application for 161 Tottenham Lane

There is a planning application for 161 Tottenham Lane (former Hornsey journal office, next door to the The Arthouse) open for comments until Wednesday 3rd December.

I support residential use of this plot but not the current proposals:

The proposals are out of keeping with the immediate area and many in the local community have a number of objections. Please feel free to copy-and-paste from below and complete the official Comments form here: http://bit.ly/161comment(On Haringey website)

A) Severely detrimental to local built environment compared to now 
• completely out of scale, ugly and in conflict with the adjacent local architecture in every respect - scale, cuboid form, materials. 
• building design is poor and (save the retention of the front façade) has absolutely no respect for local context and character 
• flat roofed block designs destroy the rhythm of the local architecture.

B) Height and mass of proposed apartment block on Tottenham Lane

• totally out of scale with adjacent buildings towering over Victorian Citadel and Kwit Fit too
• would create a ‘canyon’ with the former Victorian Citadel completely dwarfed, once the building on the car wash is built
• obvious from street and significantly detrimental to the street scene.
• existing pleasant brick building would be demolished in favour of a tall cuboid block with dark grey walls - an oppressive large mass viewed from the proposed houses and Conservation Area

C) Intrusive design & poor configuration of proposed rear houses
• rear house wall built right up to the Conservation Area boundary, 
• very serious visual intrusion, towering black wall over Fairfield Road gardens
• would kill important trees which currently soften the harsh urban landscape
• dark grey zinc cladding would 
o be totally in conflict with the prevailing brick walls of the area, 
o exacerbate the oppressive visual intrusion in adjacent gardens

D) Additional retail space not needed in Crouch End

• the 50m ground floor should be used for housing, not retail.

E) Fire Safety – current Fire Escape route replaced by houses 
• Existing fire escape route between 159 and 161 Tottenham Lane would be lost to 3 terraced houses. Residents at the rear of 159 and 161 would have no alternative escape route,

F) More units, no parking spaces
Whilst residents could not apply for a resident’s permit, they could still own cars.

G) Low quality amenity space – proposed tiny gardens
• hemmed in on three sides by 2-4 storey buildings, and by another garden or a wall on the 4th side. 
• Plants would not flourish 
• soft areas would easily become waterlogged due to lack of sunlight.

Further information (Word document): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1255355/161%20Tottenham%20Lane%...

[HappyinCrouchy]

Completely agree

What an eyesore - given the council's record on approvals in Crouch End, let's hope they see sense here and don't add cuboidic monstrosities to a part of Crouch End that could be sympathetically developed in keeping with the environment.

Have objected the proposal and encourage more people to do so

Why can't more architects have the vision that the Art House cinema had - regenerate an beautiful building and make it contemporary, meaningful AND commercial.