OCTOBER 2009

Tottenham Hotspur submitted their planning application for the new stadium - and the removal of the Red House - in October 2009. The planning application number is HGY/2009/2000.

You can view it in detail (see the list of pdf files) and comment on the application online below

http://www.planningservices.haringey.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=206589

The Commission for Architecture and the Built Enviroment (CABE), the Goverment's Architectural advisory body, have not given a glowing review of the Northumberland Development Project. Whilst they have praised the Stadium design itself, the overall scheme of Supermarket, Hotel, Housing and 'Public Realm' ( and by association the demolition of the Red House et al) has been frowned upon.

See here for a summery of their report...http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/cabe-attacks-spurs-stadium-redevelopment-plans/5210003.article

 

JANUARY 2010

The campaign to 'Save the Red House' grows.

Here is a link to the Victorian Societys website... http://www.victoriansociety.org.uk/news/spurs-plans-for-tottenham-too-destructive/

and here too... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23793885-anger-over-plans-for-new-tottenham-football-stadium.do

and a very supportive article from WHEN SATURDAY COMES magazine (see links)... http://www.wsc.co.uk/content/view/4347/38/

as well as this earlier article http://www.wsc.co.uk/content/view/4461/38/

many thanks to both the Victorian Society and WSC for their support 

 MARCH 2009

A meeting held at White Hart lane in March 2009 between the Club and the Author of this website left the campaign to preserve the Red House hanging by a thread. The representatives of Club had three main points to make...

 

1. The Club see little of value in the Red House itself, either as a building or as a link with the Clubs past. It was questioned whether Bill Nicholson actually ever had his office located inside it (which, I am assured by several ex-players and officials who visited him there, that it was) and the former board room was dismissed as being an unremarkable room that has been much altered since its time as a boardroom. However, it was suggested that 'things of value' in the Red House should be considered for preservation.

 

2. The 'open space' that the clearance of the Red House will create (along with Warmington House, The Tottenham & Edmonton Dispensary etc..) was elaborated on in much detail. This 'space', as well as giving the ground its only street-level panoramic view when approaching it, will be available for 'Community events'. North Tottenham doesn't have a public square as such and so the Club would be providing such a facility to the people of the locality. It is noticeable in the latest release from the Club ( http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/futureplans/scheme/public_space.html) how much more effort has gone into explaining the purpose of this 'open space'. It was questioned whether this 'exceptional public square' justified the destruction of the Red House and that perhaps the Red House's inclusion into such an area would actually enhance it?

The Club's final point made that academic anyway...

 

3. Permission has been sought and in principal given, to the removal of all the buildings on the High Road, roughly south of the junction with White Hart Lane. This permission is for all the buildings without exception and, according to the Club, if one were to stay, then cases could be made for others to stay too. So, the bottom line is, even if the Club wanted to 'save the Red House', it would then create a situation where Warmington House, the old Tottenham & Edmonton Dispensary and even the White Hart Pub could be preserved also. Warmington House, which is a grade-two listed building, has a very good case for preservation and the Dispensary is aesthetically the most interesting of any of the buildings mentioned. If the Red House remained, it would be almost certain that somebody would want the other buildings to be kept too and then the entire new Stadium project would be unlikely to go ahead. Whilst the Red House could feasibly remain as a stand-alone building without hampering entry/exit points or even the majority of the proposed open space, if the Dispensary building and Warmington House remained alongside it then the safe movement of people, particularly leaving the ground, would become an issue.

 

(look carefully at the above drawing and you will see the faint outlines of the Red House (top), Dispensary (middle) and Warmington House (bottom) all blocking the view - erm, restricting access -  to the proposed south-western entrance to the new stadium) 

 

The meeting ended looking very bleak indeed for the Red House. If there was any feeling of value, nostalgia or affection for the building from the Club then perhaps there would be some avenue to explore but none was forthcoming.

 

Conversations with Officials at Haringey Council's planning office have been equally discouraging. The new stadium project with its buzz-words of 'regeneration' and 'community' seemed to have pressed all the right buttons in their Wood Green offices and the notion that somebody would want to alter the plans was met with a 'why would anyone ever want to do a thing like that?' response.

 

So, where does the 'Save the Red House' campaign go from here? Fight for the retention of the Red House and therefore the almost-certain retention of the rest of the buildings on the High Road, thus scuppered the entire new stadium project? Or accept it's demolition as a consequence of the new stadium?

If there is a 'third way' then somebody please suggest one otherwise it's the end of the line for both the Red House and this campaign to save it.

Make a Free Website with Yola.