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 Ruth on
-
Probably more cost effective to wait till there is more flem, on both sides, so can be cleaned in one go. which begs the question..... as you say. Most cost effective will be not to clean it at all. Keep the Flem, treat it as local art and part of building a better community.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Phlegm? Like spit etc or am I missing something? Curse my poor education.
-
Permalink Reply by Protheroe O'Shea on
-
FLEM is the graf what's written on the banners. Could it be the grafitti equivalent of gobbing out big greeny?
-
Permalink Reply by StephenBln on
-
@Ruth, John & Tunbridge :o) **press like button**
-
Permalink Reply by alistairj on
-
Stephen (and many of us) wishes that these buttons were on forum posts:
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Wonder what the size of the Banner Fund is. Can we expect more examples of this standard of quality?
-
-
I think this may answer your question
Dear Mr Swift
Thank you for the enquiries that you sent to Cllr Adamou about the advertising banners on the Harringay Green Lanes Railway Bridge. Please see below the Council’s responses to your questions, which I send on Cllr Adamou’s behalf.
1. Do you think it is appropriate for LBOH to use landmarks as advertising space?
The Council would consider the appropriateness of using landmarks for communications (sponsored or otherwise) on a case by case basis.
In this case the decision to put banners on the bridge was made by the Green Lanes Strategy Group. The Green Lanes Strategy Group was set up in 2002 by representatives of residents’ and traders’ associations and other key stakeholders in the area to address concerns raised by local residents and traders. It was considered that the banners would bring benefits by generating revenue for use in improving the area in accordance with the priorities of the Green Lanes Strategy Group.
2. How much revenue is currently being raised from the three adverts Gokyuzu, Hawes and Curtis, Paul Simon) currently spanning the bridge?
An organisation called Bay Media has managed the production and installation of the banner and the advertising on this site. Under the agreement with Bay Media, 21% of the revenue generated from advertising will be held by the Council. This revenue will be spent in accordance with the strategies and priorities of the Green Lanes Strategy Group. The commercial banners currently on the bridge have been installed for a twelve month period, and over this period they will generate £2,415 to be spent in this way.
3. How much annual revenue from advertising does LBoH feel the bridge will deliver? And how much of it will go to Network Rail and how much to Harringay.
As set out above, over a twelve month period the advertising on the banners will generate £2,415 which will be ring-fenced and used to deliver activity to address the priorities of the Green Lanes Strategy Group. None of the revenue will be given to Network Rail.
4. Will LBoH offer advertising space on the bridge to national and multinational businesses?
The banners have been mounted on the bridge by the Green Lanes Strategy Group. Following consultation with local businesses and residents through their representatives on the Green Lanes Strategy Group, it was determined that if advertisements were to be part of the branding of the bridge to generate income for future maintenance, priority to advertise should be given to local businesses that operate on Green Lanes.
5. Precisely how many residents were consulted on using the bridge for advertising?
Residents were consulted through residents’ association representatives who sit on the Green Lanes Strategy Group. This includes representatives from the Gardens Residents Association, the Ladder Community Safety Partnership and Woodlands Park Residents Association.
The feedback from residents was that in other circumstances they would prefer not to advertise on the bridge, however that in the current financial climate they appreciated the need to generate income to invest in the local area, in particular for the festival they are organising for September 2011, and that therefore they would like to go ahead with advertising on the bridge.
6. Precisely how many Businesses were consulted on using the bridge for advertising?
Businesses were consulted through the Harringay Green Lanes Traders’ Association who sit on the Green Lanes Strategy Group.
7. How much money did it cost to create the ‘Welcome to’ and ‘Thanks for visiting’ banners?
The Council paid £3,075 for the two central banners, including artwork design services, printing, production and installation. This also included work to clear the bridge, including the removal of graffiti and of a tree obstruction on the North-West side of the bridge.
8. Did LBoH ever consider other method of sponsoring the bridge?
The Green Lanes Strategy Group have discussed an option in the longer-term for artists to decorate the bridge.
9. Harringay is blighted by the often illegal use of estate agents signs. Paul Simon has history of illegally keeping let by and sold by signs up months if not years after their allotted 14 days and leaving wooden beams on the sides of properties in Harringay and beyond. Do you think LBoH acted appropriately by allowing such a business to advertise in tandem with LBOH’s banner?
The Council enforce against unlawful advertising, including unlawful advertising by estate agents. The company Paul Simon operates through a number of franchises. The franchise on Green Lanes changed hands in November 2009, and since this time has had a positive working relationship with the Council’s Enforcement Service, and has shown willingness to work in collaboration with the Council and with the community through the local traders’ association. As a result it is not considered to be inappropriate that this advertisement appeared alongside a Council banner.
10. Whose responsibility is it to keep the bridge painted and free of graffiti, LBoH or Network Rail?
The bridge is owned by Network Rail, and responsibility for all aspects of its maintenance lies with Network Rail. As part of work to install the advertisement on the bridge, Baymedia cleared graffiti from the bridge.
Regards, Kate
Kate Dalzell
Director's Office - Urban Environment
London Borough of Haringey
River Park House, 225 High Road, N22 8HQ
-
-
Ah yes, Bay Media. This company is apparently well in with the council and has previous form (in Crouch End) for eyesore banners on lampposts, with council complicity of course. I was going to give them credit for their financial nouse but really, dealing with the council is like taking candy from a baby.
They appear to have run rings round the Local Authority: the council is pleased to receive £2,415 (21%). Is it right that Bay Media score £9,085 (if my arithmetic is right)? Can their smaller banner-eyesores cost three times what the council paid for their eyesore-banner?
I say, ban the banners!
-
-
Yes LBoH have created an eysore and for a profit £2,415 a year. Its t shocking The revenu from the bridege brings in £6.61 per day. Utterly pathetic
-
-
Did the Gardens Residents Association, the Ladder Community Safety Partnership and Woodlands Park Residents Association. know how much revenue LBoH were going to raise from the adverts.
It would be interesting to hear their side of the story. I appreciate the LCSP did not want advertising.
Is there anyone from the GRA WPRA and LCSP who can answer this.
-
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
