Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
The Banner
Just seen the banner and my opinion is that its pretty damn crap.
Why?
You still see much of the shoddy paintwork on the bridge.
The banner is all wrinkled.
The overall design is so crap.
I could go on but I'll give everyone else chance instead.
Oh well.
Tags for Forum Posts: glsg, harringay banner, harringay bridge
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Mr Growbag on
-
And there I was naively thinking last night how pleased everyone on here would be that it read Harringay Green Lanes....
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
You're secretly in the pay of the Labour party, admit it!
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
For my part, I've already expressed on a previous posting that I'm happy the area name on the banner is reflecting what people said they want. I'm not sure you'll get a lot of excitement about the banner though, Mr G.
Of the local residents who responded to the Councils' consultation, the LCSP voted for no advertising, the GRA reported that 9 people out of 10 voted for limited local sponsorship (I'm not sure if what has been put up is what they expected) and about 70% of the 218 residents who voted in the HoL survey came out against any advertising at all.
Given that the whole point of the consultation was to ask if people wanted to retain advertising or not, and given those results, I'm at a loss to understand where we're at now. Wouldn't it be better not to consult rather than to consult and just go against what the majority say.
I'm all for keeping things positive. I try my darnedest to focus on positives and constructive criticism, but I'm not sure we can expect people to be pleased overall with the situation as it is.
-
-
So, reading back the previous posts on this, am I right in thinking that the consultation process was done by the residents' associations which are part of the Green Lanes Strategy Group? I'm unclear whether HOL is part of the GLSG. Was the survey on here part of the consultation, or just something done to gauge how people on HOL felt?
-
-
Along with the GRA & LCSP, HoL was invited by the Neighbourhoods Manager, Dasos Maliotis, to submit our feedback on the question of advertising on the banner.
So although the survey went beyond the single question we were asked, it included feedback that was officially solicited from the Council. But for me that's beside the point. The point is, solicited or not, our feedback represented the views of a sizeable segment of the local population.
Residents' Associations are groups of people who get together physically to try and improve the neighbourhood. Membership tends to be very small so the views represented are those of just a few. HoL is a group of people that connect online and compliments the work the RAs do (and from Month 1 has sought to support them and collaborate with them). HoL broadens the opinion base the Council has access to - something councils are, in general, very keen on since they find it so tough to get responses from residents.
Because of its nature HoL can gather the views of a far greater number of people than the residents' groups. As I understand things the residents' groups tend to gauge sentiment from about 6 to 10 people who meet every month.
Neither HoL nor the residents associations are official in any way and the views both represent are not part of any official process.
Some might feel feedback channelled through HoL is somehow of less value. I'm unsure as to what your views are on this Mr G, but would be interested to understand if you're drawing a distinction between the relative values of 'part of the consultation' versus 'just something done to gauge how people on HOL felt'. As I understand it, a consultation all about just gauging how people feel?
-
-
I'll leave it to the local RAs to comment on how they gathered the info Billy. (Although GRA have been admirably transparent about the number of their members who responded).
-
-
Apologies, I've just realised I left your question about the GLSG unanswered.
We have not sought membership of the GLSG for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that no person or persons is elected to represent any constituted body. However, Liz and/or I have attended as residents over the past few years to contribute to the non-crime related elements of the meetings, usually the first 90 minutes.
I imagine with the new Area Forums starting this summer, the work of the GLSG will be taken up by the more democratically constituted local body (though I expect most of the faces will be the same).
-
Permalink Reply by Takaokagiejin on
-
Those signs are so poor that I can't add anything to TWs "think of the children" comment. However I am pretty miffed that P Simon have been allowed to advertise while still displaying this illegal sign on No 2 Hermitage Road. The Planners wrote to me a year ago saying it had been passed to Enforcement but nothing has happened. How about using the money raised from the bridge advert to pay Enforcement to take P Simon to court over their illegal signs elsewhere?
-
Permalink Reply by David Schmitz on
-
I agree that this is not the greatest civic amenity in the world. Babylon had the hanging gardens, while we have to make do with the hanging curtains.
Still, the appearance will improve somewhat and some of the advertising revenue will benefit the area.
The matter has been under discussion at the Green Lanes Strategy Group. For those who aren't familiar with this, it is a group which meets every few weeks and which comprises representatives of residents associations, and of the Green Lanes traders together with the local councillors (both Labour and Liberal Democrat) from Harringay and St. Ann's wards. If anyone wants anything about this to be raised there, just speak or write to any of the participants. You can also raise it at the new Neighbourhood Committee (replacing the old Area Assemblies) which will be meeting for the first time on the 21st July. Please watch this space for more about that.
Essentially the considerations are these:
Firstly, it seems desirable to cover the bridge with banners, because Network Rail has yet to find a means of stopping people from placing grafitti on the bridge (They get access via Harringay Green Lanes Station).
Secondly, it is deliberate that the Harringay part of the banner covers only the middle part of the bridge. That's because there is money to be gained for the local area by selling advertising space on either side of it. Moreover, the benefit to the area can be enhanced if the advertisers are local businesses rather than large chains.
Thirdly, the scheme for getting advertising does give rise to problems. Because businesses vary in the amount of advertising which they can afford and the length of the period during which they wish to commit to the expense of advertising, it follows that it will not always be possible (especially at the beginning) to cover the whole of the bridge, nor will it be possible to have a single coherent design. Each business, after all, will wish to draw attention to itself, and in order to do that, it will need to make use of its own distinctive logo.
Fourthly, the arrangements for getting advertising displayed are cumbersome. The bridge is owned by Network Rail and is situated over a main road. Therefore the safety considerations are considerable. As a result, the Council can only work with contractors who are approved by Network Rail. It can't just take an order and put up the banner itself.
Fifthly, and this will be a matter to watch out for, it is not yet clear how the monies generated will get into the local area. Until the recent reorganisation of the council's governance, the money could have gone to Neighbourhood Management. Because that service has now been wound up, however, this remains to be resolved. I hope to be able to report more on that before too long.
David Schmitz
Liberal Democrat Councillor for Harringay Ward
-
-
Thanks for the comments David. Are you able to comment on the apparent mismatch between the consultation feedback and the decision to include advertising?
-
-
Because the emphasis is on advertisements from local businesses and because the welcome on the principal banner is from Harringay Green Lanes, I think that the approach is broadly in line with the preferences which have been expressed.
For myself, I think that HoL performs an invaluable service in providing a forum for exchanging views, for giving out information and thereby for improving the quality of discussion. In conducting informal referendums, it perhaps does not yet mirror the views of residents as a whole, though that of course may change as participation continues to increase.
David Schmitz
Liberal Democrat Councillor for Harringay Ward
-
Permalink Reply by JeremyS on
-
I've only just seen this thread. Thankyou for your comments David.
As I understand it the only people who expressed a preference for advertising were 9 people from the Gardens area, 30% of people who replied to the harringayonline survey and, I suspect, the traders. With every respect to you David, I'm not clear how the action the council took is broadly in line with expressed preferences.
If what is written on this thread is accurate the council asked if people wanted advertising. People said 'no' quite clearly. The Council gave us advertising. Strange behaviour. I'm struggling to think of any other situation when I've seen this happen.
On the other hand it is to be applauded that the Council changed the banner wording to Harringay Green Lanes.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
