Plans for a 24-storey block of student flats in a part of Tottenham that is being rapidly transformed into a high-rise cityscape have been approved by councillors.

Developer Jigsaw PMG has won permission to build 451 homes for students in Tottenham Hale, in a block located at the northern tip of an ‘island’ created by surrounding roads The Hale, Hale Road and Station Road.

This comes despite a clash between Jigsaw and the developer of a neighbouring tower, which claimed the scheme would leave some residents in their block with “little or no direct light” in their rooms.

Plans for the student block were presented to a meeting of Haringey Council’s planning subcommittee on Monday. As well as the living units, the student accommodation includes kitchen and lounge areas, co-working space, a gym and roof terraces.

A series of tall towers have already been approved in the neighbourhood – previously an area of low-rise homes and businesses – some of which have already been built or are undergoing construction.

Planning chiefs at the council recommended Tottenham Hale’s latest high-rise scheme for approval, writing in their report to the committee that it was of a “high-quality design” that “responds appropriately to the local context”. One key benefit listed in the report is that the council will receive £6.5million from the developer to fund affordable housing elsewhere in the borough.

Developer Argent Related and housing association Sage Homes objected to the scheme. They claimed it would block out light from a neighbouring building, which is being built by Argent and will contain affordable homes managed by Sage.

Ian McKenna, daylight consultant at Hollis Global, spoke against the plans on behalf of Argent during the committee meeting. He claimed Jigsaw had “understated” how many windows met a light target set using its own assessment.

Claiming some neighbouring residents would be left with “little or no direct light in the rooms”, Ian said this “would lead to a very poor, arguably unprecedented level of daylight for future occupiers”. He added: “The rooms will be gloomy, with the inevitable impacts on health and wellbeing, energy use and sustainability.”

Lucian Smithers, chief customer officer for Sage Homes, told the committee: “This development would wrap itself around our residents’ affordable homes, blocking natural daylight from around 30 of these households, meaning darker homes and higher energy bills.”

Speaking on behalf of the applicant Liam Dunford, a daylight surveyor at Point 2 Surveyors, said the Jigsaw scheme would have a similar impact to a building that had been proposed by Argent for the site.

He added that the approach used to test light levels demonstrated that most reductions were within 20%, which were often regarded as “unnoticeable” by the Building Research Establishment (BRE).

Another spokesperson for the developer said the planned scheme had been revised to reduce the impact on the neighbouring Argent development. He listed a range of financial benefits to the borough if the scheme went ahead, including the £6.5m for social housing and the creation of 300 construction jobs.

Under questioning from Liberal Democrat committee member Luke Cawley-Harrison, the council’s head of development management Robbie McNaugher said officers considered the developer’s approach to measuring light impacts as a “fair assessment” which had been independently reviewed.

Councillors also raised concerns over how students would move their belongings into the block, which will have no car parking spaces. Labour’s Lester Buxton asked if students would be expected to “take their duvets and blankets on an overground train to Tottenham Hale?”.

Council transport officer Maurice Richards said those moving into the development would be able to make use of two nearby loading bays. A spokesperson for the developer said the process of moving in would be “staggered” with students allowed to move at different times, which he said was a common practice in student accommodation.

Following the debate, seven committee members voted in favour of the development and two abstained. Only one, Labour’s Matt White, voted against.