Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
The Hell that is Wood Green
Yesterday, I had the misfortune to find myself in the shopping mall. Walking out the big automatic doors and into the crowd of Star Wars pub extras who were smoking, spitting and squabbling on the footpath I witnessed what for me sums up the whole carbuncle on the arse of Haringey that is Wood Green High Road. One of the characters stormed through the crowd with his status dog in tow. I was reflecting on the fact that ‘status’ dogs don't seem to work (as the people who have them only ever seem to be what everyone else in society would consider low status). Everything suddenly went quiet except the ever present sirens. The status dog had stopped and released its copious bowels all over the footpath. It was like turning on the light in an HMO; the cockroaches screamed and scattered. The dog owner laughed and walked on. It was probably one of the most disgusting things I have seen or smelt in London. Eventually the crowd returned and watched the next horde trample the mess up and down the road. There was no-one to turn to, no-one to clean up and more importantly no-one with the authority to challenge and/or shoot the dog owner. Things just returned to normal.
The whole experience made me think how the council, local police and traders believe that we're all animals if they are happy for us to have to deal with this every time we go to the High Road. It's easy enough for me to hop on a bus and head off to Crouch End or Islington or even Enfield to shop but if you're older or disabled and have trouble getting around or not enough money for the bus it must be pretty grim to face it every day. Imagine how the standard little old lady dreads heading out into the crowds, litter, phlegm, smoke and anti-social behaviour of Wood Green every morning to get the milk.
Short of manning water cannons at each end of the High Road and employing some mercenaries with batons to control the crowds, I don’t know what can be done. Are there any clever ‘nudges’ or interventions that could improve Wood Green? Is it a matter of tarting the place up and hoping that the crowds respect their new surroundings? Is it signage to remind, and in many instances educate, people that spitting, littering and barging into other people is just not the done thing? Or do we just give up, bulldoze the lot and install a waterhole in the middle and let the law of the jungle and the status dog owners prevail?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Finsbury Park Ranger on
-
What would you like to see happen Alan ? If you were in charge what would be your big plan to make the likes of wood green more hospitable for the local people.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Apologies for my discourtesy in not replying sooner. But having frequently criticised outsiders with their "big plans", the last thing you should ask me or expect me to pull out of my pocket is a blueprint - to be lowered on the neighbourhood.
It seems to me that people are too ready to ask "Who?" (E.g. who should be in charge? Who should be on which decision-making body?") And also: "What?". What should be done? Usually based on their opinion.
People seem far less ready to debate or discuss the "how? and "why?". With a further drawback that the question: "What?" stresses plans, actions. While asking "Why?" can lead to some interesting questions about feelings and different people's perceptions.
To my mind one of the best things about this thread is that people seem to have felt they were free to express their feelings; especially their fears and discomforts.
FPR, you posed the question with an interesting phrase about making Wood Green "more hospitable for the local people". This thread has started to explore in what ways it may feel inhospitable/uncomfortable/unsafe for some people. But not for others.
For several people it seems this is quite important and determines whether or not they even want to use (or avoid) Wood Green. And although it's hard to tell online when people use pseudonyms, I suspect these are not young people with fears about "postcode wars" or gang loyalties.
So, a small idea, if I was "in charge". I'd propose a little plan to explore this more extensively and carefully. That idea is not original. And if it intrigues you, then you might find it interesting to read the short chapter called "Home from Home" in Les Back's book "The Art of Listening". It talks about the mental maps young people make about where they feel safe and where not. Or places where they are uncertain and uncomfortable and so try to avoid; or pass through quickly and cautiously.
All a bit obvious perhaps. But in 16 years as a councillor I can't remember once hearing a planning or regeneration "expert" refer to this as a factor affecting for example a planning decision or a policy issue. Yet plainly a street, or an alley, or a busstop, or a park, or a corridor in a shopping Mall, or a subway, can all be felt and perceived differently by different people. With patterns probably according to whether someone is young or old, male or female, black or white, has a disability, is in a group or usually on their own etc.
I'd guess that everyone who lives or goes to Wood Green has their own "mental map" which is a lot more than the street layout. It's got bits of their personal history and maybe friendships or family links. It's coloured by their own feelings. So each map is different.
-
-
Yes, you're right. It's pretty unequal with the poorest people paying relatively more in Council Tax and the very rich paying what for them is pocket money. While, like any other Council, Haringey is forced to try squeezing blood out of stones and with Court and bailiff's charges pushing people ever deeper into debt and into the hands of the payday loans companies.
In case you mentioned it, John McMullan posted a link to Michael Goldfarb's article in the New York Times. It mentions that:
"... property taxes on Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s $20 million London home come to £2,143.30 per year. That’s $3,430. Clearly, the mayor bought in at the right time. The Google executive chairman, Eric Schmidt, is reported to be house hunting here — he’s looking in the £30 million (about $48 million) price range. Yet he will pay a similar amount in property tax."
A Bloomberg owned website explained that:
"South Asian buyers account for two-thirds of new London homes sold before completion, according to Land Securities Group Plc, the largest U.K. real estate investment trust. The high-end market is dependent on pre-sales to overseas buyers to help get development finance and deal with rising land costs,
Michael Lister, a lecturer at the University of Westminster, said in a Nov. 22 interview.
The market “only needs a bit of an international hiccup for the buyers to hold back, and then you’re really stuck,” said Lister, a former head of U.K. property lending at Bank of Ireland Plc. “You can’t possibly afford to sell to the domestic buyers because they can’t afford to pay those figures.”
You might like to look at Michelle Hanson's latest piece in the Guardian: "Does London need internal refugee camps for its homeless people?" Sleeping on Hampstead Heath will save them paying Council Tax but the people who are working will still be taxed. And everyone pays the same VAT. Even Michael Bloomberg.
-----------------
Yes, we enjoyed the play "Bomber Moon" at the Park Theatre. Amazing? No. But strong, well acted and recommended. Although from my conversations with people who get 15 minutes "community care" from different agency staff, perhaps a little unrealistic.
But it's great to have a small intimate theatre a busride away. We didn't realise that Tuesday was £12 for people who live in N postcodes or under 25s. But that was welcome too. I notice they have a "Pay What You Can" night. Which seems an interesting initiative.
We have a huge publicly subsidised theatre on our doorstep. But that's another story.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Actually Dominic, the several hundred residents of the Brunswick centre are all social housing tenants as are many of those in the surrounding blocks. There is also one of the largest council housing estates in Camden on the doorstep. Kings Cross ward, where The Brunswick is situated, is one of the most deprived in London.
-
Permalink Reply by Gordon T on
-
Turn the clock back 20 years, when I worked nearby, and the Brunswick Centre housing was already in poor repair and at ground level the plaza was definitely a risk proposition even at lunchtime. It looked like it had been given up on. But it's a go-to place now, following a concerted effort and considerable investment by all parties. So turnarounds can happen, though it helps that the place has always been seen as a significant piece of architecture and urban design, and it has a lot of tourists passing through and fairly well-paid (I'd guess) people working in the surrounding area.
It's a bit more of a stretch to describe Shopping City in quite the same way, but I hope some of those lessons can (not for the first time?) be injected there, too.
-
Permalink Reply by Sharon on
-
Well, the Waitrose, Whistles and the Carluccios in the Brunswick sets the tone, also the flower beds and relaxed open space. If the residents ARE in social housing, which of course doesnt mean that they dont work or pay rent...Im guessing that a lot of those flats are now privately owned, I wonder if they can afford to shop and eat there? I work at GOSH and pop into the Brunswick regularly. Most shoppers seem to be Doctors, nannies, tourists. The residents are probably nosing around Tiger or TK Max in WG.
-
-
About one in 4 of the flats are owned Sharon, pretty average for a council block in London I would imagine. Many of them are specially adapted or designated as sheltered accommodation. I managed O'Donnell and Foundling Courts which make up the Brunswick Centre and also the Cromer Street estate on the other side of Judd Street in the late 80s and early 90s. The Brunswick was crime ridden and scary. A huge investment was made in it and it's lively and well used from early in the morning until late in the evening. Don't know what proportion of the locals use the shops there but before the works most of the units were empty anyway because no one wanted to go there.
-
-
Thanks Michael, Its pleasant shopping and perusing there but theres no place like home
-
Permalink Reply by Tammy Palmer on
-
I also work right near the Brunswick centre - it houses a lot of older people who have lived there for years and they tell us (I work for a charity) that they love the shopping area and love watching all the people and how vibrant and busy it is. The Waitrose there is very active in the community and I always see community police officers walking around and I think they might be local wardens too, they have made such an effort to make to keep the area free of litter and deal with any trouble, the older people I talk to enjoy living there and being part of the community, Michael is right in sayingthe whole area id actually very deprived, there are issues with gangs and muggings - a few of our staff have been mugged for phones over the last 2 years but I have never seen any real trouble in the Brunswick centre itself
-
-
I suppose it begs the question, if a shopping centre can be made to work in an area like Kings Cross, why not Wood Green?
-
Permalink Reply by Robert Pike on
-
Is it just a question of perception and fashion. Barbican, Brunswick, Trellick Tower are now perceived as sexy and reflect regenerated or evolving pockets of London. Even Park Hill in Sheffield has gone through identity change with a touch of the Urban Splash-ification. So what is the common theme? Is it better long term investment and whole life management that helps? Private money? Better tenants or re-engagement of existing occupants? Surely Waitrose is not the only factor to raising an areas profile.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
