The Liberal Democrats have welcomed an agreement at the inquiry into Haringey’s UDP (Unitary Development Plan) that a revised map will be considered over the proximity of residents to green space in the borough. Lib Dem Environment Spokesperson, Bob Hare, who raised the issue a the inquiry last Thursday, says that the Council’s present definition of proximity to green space is selling residents short and could contribute significantly to future overdevelopment in the area.
The complex but vital issue centres round Haringey’s open space deficiency map, and how Haringey Council defines the benefit of nearby open space for residents. At present Haringey says that residents living within 400 metres of a green space enjoy such amenity. This means that those proposing development nearby might not have to provide much greenery with any new buildings. However, Haringey uses this definition for even the smallest of green pockets, even where the green spaces in question could not be regarded as green open land being enjoyed by residents.
The planning inspector agreed to accept as evidence a new map from Cllr Hare, which will give a much more realistic definition of residents’ proximity to green space – treating large spaces such as the Alexandra Palace Park differently from a small pocket park on a street corner.
Cllr Bob Hare comments:
“This is far more than a technical issue. How the Council defines existing green spaces will have an enormous impact over the years on what green spaces are preserved or created elsewhere in the borough.
“At present, Haringey is being far too generous towards development in its current definition of what is enough open space. This will only fuel suspicions that Haringey Council is too soft on the potential for overdevelopment in the area.
“A wide definition of proximity to green space will let the Council off the hook when it considers the issue in other proposed developments. If this issue is not resolved, it could have far reaching consequences for local residents for many years. I welcome the inspector’s call for more evidence on the issue and we will continue to pursue this at UDP inquiry.”