o hate big supermarkets, but used to suffer them, until we got stuck for 45 mins trying to get out of Sainsburys GL. Enough was enough. No more driving to Sainsburys. They are a bunch of rip-off-merchants anyway.
However, can't really blame Sainsburys for the traffic that night; I tried to turn right our of Beresford to go along GL and up Allison. Stuck for 30 mins at the bottom of Beresford, so got annoyed and drove along GL on the wrong side and up Allison. Nice I thought... Also got me past the chavvy fools that were beeping their horns and shouting abuse at all and sundry, for no particular reason. Any copper or council camera that may have moaned at me would have suffered a blurt of wrath about turning perfectly good two way roads into a time wasting set of one way roads with stupid road humps. The ladder roads were perfectly good as they were, without Haringey pissing around with them and wasting hours and hours of time, let alone all that petrol, and additional damage to roads + cars from the badly installed road humps. I hate the one way system still, and still feel anger for Haringey for imposing it upon us. Occasionaly, traffic is so bad, I simply avoid GL and drive into Allison the wrong way, from Wightman. Not legal I know, but I'm not going to allow my life to be wasted by the piss poor traffic management that Haringey demonstrates time and time again.
We now do most of our shopping at Yassir Halim. Much better fruit and veg, and a quick walk. I take an old basket on wheels too that belonged to my Grandmother, to help get up the hill (Allison) again. Get some funny looks, but it's very convenient and often a cheaper way to go.
If we need a big supermarket for any reason, my wife either goes to Sainsburys in the week (which we still use as a last resort), or I go to Tesco Colney Hatch, or better still Sainsburys in North Finchley - a bit more of a drive, but an easier to escape from car-park, and a far less busy shop. Also, they often do really good deals on fish at the counter, just before closing on a Sunday :-)
Pitta bread. 45p + per packet in Sainsburys, 4 packs for a quid in Yassir, or 5 packs for a quid in the shop over the road from there. Got to be a better deal! Support local shops anyway, why use the big giants unless you can possibly avoid it?
Anyone who drives to Sainsburys on Green Lanes is clearly mad. If we all stopped using it, it wouldn't remain there, and there would be no problem ;-)
Next is lame, Argos is like hell (who could possibly stand to queue once to buy something, then once again to pick up the item purchsed - Amazon is a better option there), and HomeBase is a bloody rip-off charging near on double the price of other DIY stores on many items. So, we live without using that retail "park", and would rather the whole lot was levelled and grassed over...
Reply by Alison P 20 hours ago Totally agree with you on your comments about the shops in the park but have to challenge your comment about driving the wrong way down roads like Allison. That's outrageous, how dare you. I nearly crashed the other day when someone turned left off Wightman into Seymour Road. Think what you like about the traffic system, but don't put other people's lives at risk because you can't be bothered to go the right way.Reply by Joe Bailey 15 hours ago Alison, might sound a little obvious, but it's worth pointing out that I do make sure nobody is coming the other way, and live right at the top end next to Wightman... It's not that I "can't be bothered", it's that sometimes it's near on impossible to get home and that's how I "dare" to, as you put it.
No lives are ever put at risk from that aspect of my driving, I assure you... If I crashed, that would hurt auld golfey, and that's the last thing I want to do!!
What is one supposed to do if GL is chocker, and it's going to add 1/2 an hour or more just to get to your own house, which you were pretty much outside when on Wightman in the first place? I'm not going to argue as the whole matter is silly, and I'm just working it the only way I can, and certainly I will not change my perceived evil ways - my life is just too short, and it's only done out of necessity; mostly I go the "right" way, which is much longer, and a waste of time... It's just the odd occasion that the direction of travel has to be reversed...
Quite frankly, you can't drive fast enough to crash on those roads anyway... If you've found a way to do so, either you need to fix your brakes, or you've got much better suspension than me, or dare I say you just aren't looking where you're going, which is going to cause an accident no matter what anyone else does.
Certainly I look before making a turn, and make sure that everything is clear before turning in to Allison from Wightman, so I can't really see any real chance of causing an accident as there's plenty of visibility from wightman to the top of the Allison hill, which has several road bumps to cross, giving plenty of reaction time.
Rules were made to be broken after all ;-)
Reply by matt 15 hours ago Children break rules too Joe, especially when crossing one way streets. They're not used to looking out for drivers breaking the law. And their bones break a lot easier than the bumper on your Golf.
Next time, you could park in another street and walk back to your house.
Reply by Joe Bailey 14 hours ago Matt, "could" might be the operative word here ;-)
Being serious though, if I'm not driving fast, then I am very unlikely to hit anyone... If by some freak chance I did, it wouldn't hurt them anyway at speeds as low as 5MPH - I know, I've been hit at low speed and it does sweet naff all. And yes, that's when I was a kid and cars were much less soft than they are these days with their pesky crumple zones that make even a nudge encountered when parking, cost the earth to repair.
I don't go tearing down the road the wrong way - that would just be silly! I don't even hit 10 MPH, as if needing to go the wrong way, I would stop at the top of Allison, look, or in Health and Safety terms, I make a "risk assessment" and mitigate against any potential collisions by waiting until all is clear, then drive all of 5m the wrong way, turn around, then park up outside my house... After all, if I hit a kid or anyone else, I fully appreciate that it would be entirely my fault, and there's no chance that I'd want to get all that grief, let alone hurt anyone. Given how close to the end we live, I really see no massive issue. It seems quite likely that you're both reading far too much into this, and this really is just not an issue that is likely to arise, especially as going the wrong way is an exception to my normal driving rather than the norm.
Nobody will die, nobody will get hurt, and nobody will get hit, so I think it quite possible that you are both over dramatising things and making a fuss about nothing.
As a side note, in case nobody has noticed, in event of whoever being right or wrong, it's actually not possible to park on Beresford if you live on Allison, as they are in different zones, and I'm not going to be towed just because of bad traffic! Silly yes, but that's the way Haringey deemed it best to split things up.
Also, if kids aren't looking out for drivers breaking the rules, then they aren't from our area for sure, or will one day get a rude awakening when they encounter someone who drives like a nut job; at least I take good care and judge the situation before making my move, have insurance, tax, MOT and plenty of driving experience, unlike many of the motorists in the GL area.
I'm not going to change my ways, I very much doubt that I'll hit anyone, and your warnings have been duly noted.
Reply by Alison P 12 hours ago Very glad you "very much doubt you'll hit anyone", ever so reassuring.
I still can't quite get my head around why you're so blase about this - maybe Allison road has a far better view on it from Wightman, but if I tried doing this into Seymour, esp if I was turning left from Wightman, I'd have a nanosecond to do my "risk assessment" and decide whether or not to turn. Certainly the charming young man I came across doing the same into Seymour last week didn't get the best of views before he turned directly into my path.
I totally know how annoying it is to have traffic gridlock which will add time on to your journey, especially when you can practically see your home from Wightman. But I just couldn't do this, I just think it is irresponsible, no matter what speed you drive at. Sorry.
Do you have kids by the way? Hate to pull the parent card, but I find it hard enough explaining to my son why people go through red lights. Explaining why someone nearly crashed into our car because they were going the wrong way down the road was pretty hard too. Rules eh, just made to be broken. That's a good one to teach 'em early, guess that's where I'm going wrong.
Reply by Joe Bailey 12 hours ago Alison, you can twist words however you like; "very much doubt" is tantamount to me saying it's not going to happen. Whether you feel reassured or not, I'm not going to hit you or anyone else, so don't worry about it - there are far more serious problems in life I'm sure.
I'm not being blasé - I'm being realistic. If it takes all night to get home, that's all night that I can't be drinking wine - that's a damned serious situation which needs to be avoided at all costs, even if it involves driving 5m down a one way road in the wrong direction. I am honestly not saying that this should be done every night, but on the odd occasion that Green Lanes is impassable, it's a damned fine option that I feel perfectly acceptable, and fortunately, I don't need your approval on this to justify my opinion. It was after all safe enough with recent road works, when roads were allowed to be reverted to two way and no signage was erected... And I would point out that I’ve only done this a few times (countable on one hand) since the conversion of the ladder roads to one way, so it’s not over frequent.
You say that you have difficulty in explaining this type of rule bending or breaking to your kids. I would ask if you have such difficulty in explaining to your wee nipper as to why cyclists use the pavement, go down the wrong way on a one way road, or don't use lights in the dark? I'm sure we could labour all sorts of points, and could verge on the ridiculous, but the fact of the matter is that people do break rules from time to time, and often with good reason. Be it right or wrong, you need to be able to explain the facts of life. Certainly it was always made clear to me by my parents that nothing is ever set in stone, and also that casting scorn is not productive to a happy life. And, certainly, I was always taught to look both ways when crossing, regardless of one way streets or not – that’s just good sense!
Indeed I have a perfectly good view going onto Alison from Wightman – after all, it was always fine before it was made a one way road a few years ago, and likewise, with appropriate caution is perfectly safe now it is a one way. If you don't believe me, you could try looking for yourself!
No idea about your experiences on Seymour, and to be honest, I'm not going to comment on that, as I can't be bothered to put down my glass of wine and go looking right now ;-)
I would say that I certainly would not go the wrong way down Allison if someone was coming the other way at the time and agree that this would be silly.
You can feel free to pull whatever cards you like, it changes nothing for me. I drive perfectly safely (at least in this respect), and would not needlessly put anyone at undue risk. Just have a look; stop on Wightman just at the top of Allison. Observe. See if you REALLY think that going 5m the wrong way down Allison when nothing is coming the other way is really that dangerous. See if you really think that a car or person could appear from nowhere, or out of the blue. If you don't, then no apology is necessary. If you do, then that's life and we must agree to differ. After all, if we all agreed with everything, then life would be far less interesting. Maybe we can simply agree to differ in any case. I certainly wouldn't want to be accused of being over cautious in life!
Reply by Danzigger 10 hours ago So is it ok for everyone to occasionally drive the wrong way down a wrong way street? Imagine if everybody stuck on Green Lanes decided to take a quick, illegal detour the wrong way down a one way street. You'd very quickly have a complete snarl up. Your shortcut only works because most people don't do it.
Perfect example of an immoral act.
Reply by Joe Bailey 9 hours ago I actually did GL on the wrong side on that occasion, not Allison (which for the umpteenth time, I only go the wrong way down for very short distances, when nothing is coming), in any case... Nothing was coming for about 10 minutes down GL towards WG, but towards MH, it was blocked completely solid. The options were to leave the car at the bottom of a road in the wrong CPZ, or take to the wrong side of the road which was completely clear, on that particular occasion. I was indeed only there due to the one way system (hence the rant on that). Apologies for not being more clear.
I had waited 30 minutes before going down GL on the wrong side - it was pretty desperate! I bet anyone stuck in the car-park would have done the same if it was possible from there. Couldn't turn left down towards WG, as someone had pulled a special move and blocked that up too, just at the bottom of the road. Really, there were few options. I could remain there and be part of a complete snarl for god knows how long, or I could drive down an empty lane and quickly escape. I favour my option. If you don't, that's your call.
It's great that in agreeing with the sentiment of the post (that it was sheer hell on GL at the time, and that Sainsbury’s car park is a bloody nightmare), that so many people could get quite so ratty - what fun, I must post more often ;-)
Reply by John McMullan 11 hours ago I do understand that if you've only been driving in London 30 or 40 years you may not remember that the streets/roads used to not be so much the domain of the car. Car drivers have "assumed ownership" of the roads through a supplicant government supporting a burgeoning car manufacturing industry and a general "love affair" with the motor car. Don't believe me? Take a look through the lovely photos that have been collected here.
The tax you pay as a car driver, including your fuel duty, in no way covers the cost of road maintenance let alone the damage an internal combustion engine does to the environment. Roads are paid for mostly by income tax. Even cyclists and pedestrians pay income tax.
Private property owners have also joined this present day Klondike where the car is fair game to create an income.
Turnpike lane is so called because that is where a turnpike operated. This was an opportunity for people in need of a well maintained road to make sure it was well maintained. Nothing has changed.
As for the care of the environment, have they considered how much more petrol is being burnt unnecessarily by the slow and non-moving traffic resulting from the increasing implementation restriction at the same time that the number of vehicles on the roads are increasing.
Interesting. At what point do you think there will be enough/too many cars on the road?
You make a very good point about the road closures around Green Lanes. I suspect that the Harringay Ladder was the last area to get its act together and so now the council are wise to what happens when you gate an area. This is the downside of allowing residents associations to influence planning.
Reply by John McMullan 11 hours ago And here speaks the mind of a sensible person!
With all due respect, I'm not sure Huren would appreciate the approval of an avowed law-breaker.
;)
Reply by Birdy_Too 11 hours ago Sorry Joe but everyone I know in this area apart from one thinks that the councils traffic system implemented around 2002 was a vast improvement on what we had. It aint perfect and needs tweaking here and there, but it use to be hell, pure hell and I lived on Allison for eleven years.
You must have lived in a parallel existence to me.
Reply by John McMullan 10 hours ago Or on Lausanne Rd which was quiet and had no lorries before... (am I that one?).
Reply by Joe Bailey 10 hours ago I live happily in a parallel existence to lots of different folk, it’s nice where I am, a select few are welcome to join me ;-)
I am also perfectly happy for people not to appreciate me; live and let live I think - albeit with reasonable exception, but I hope I wouldn't be classed as a mass murderer, even though I prefer my car to a bicycle!
Being right at the top of Allison, and mainly wanting to use Wightman to go or come, I guess it might be different where I am. More often I need to use Wightman than Green Lanes which has, for as long as I can remember, been a road to avoid when driving, so it was nice to be able to turn in at the top, then around to go out. It’s so frustrating to have to drive so close to your house, only to have to go all the way down into a really sticky traffic spot, only to come back up, practically to the same point as you were, just 5, 10, 15, 20.... minutes before. Sometimes I park on Hewett, but sometimes it’s raining, sometimes I’ve got things to carry, and I also actually quite like my car, so like to be able to keep an eye on it – it was only left for two days without regard, and the council slapped a clamp on, nearly towed it, and all because I’d not remembered to renew the permit which had just expired, while they happily admitted to not having sent out any reminders that month, whilst smiling at the £140 or so that they took from me to un-clamp it.
For what it’s worth, I think that where you live might be the crux of liking, or not liking the one way system – the end you mostly need, coupled with where are positioned along the length of your ladder road, and the direction of your ladder road.
Some roads seem to have loads more traffic now, there can be big queues when I remember this was rarely the case before... So being one way for some at least seems to have given that road loads more traffic, which isn't really an ideal thing for those who live there.
Ours is great when I want to go to work (straight out onto Wightman), but crap when I want to come home (have to go all the way down Hewett or Beresford, then all the way back up Allison), and let’s face it, coming home from work is often more desired than going to work in the first place. Hence, out of sheer desperation (as in, when Green Lanes is totally stuffed), I’ve been known to break the law, yes indeed, but I don’t really think it needs apology, like it or not, as I did so with appropriate caution.
Reply by Birdy_Too 10 hours ago Mmmm..... how do you know where I lived on Allison? Me thinks a well known alias! I haven't seen the verbal and physical fights since. I haven't seen the damage caused to vehicles since. I haven't seen the commuters parking since. I never had to park four streets away since. I never saw boy racers bombing down Allison road since. I haven't seen the global tail backs since (I know there's a couple of roads that suffer).
As I said it's not perfect but ten times better and the people who moan are the folk who use their cars the most and drive two streets up - tough!
Oh the inconvenience of having to go round! Myself along with the vast majority (according to democratic means) supported and still support some logic to the traffic on the Ladder
Reply by John McMullan 9 hours ago I think the Police are a LOT more picky about boy racers having licensed cars. After all, we require 3rd party insurance here and that's very expensive if you're under 25 and own a Subaru Impreza. A relative visiting from New Zealand recently asked where all the boy racers were. They are plagued by them, but then, they don't have compulsory 3rd party insurance. Nanny state and all that.
I still get the odd 40 year old in a golf GTI bombing it down over the humps at 70+mph hanging onto the steering wheel for dear life and certainly the O'Donovan's skip trucks weren't bothered by the humps.
Anyway, we're taking this off topic and I blame Joe and his unlawfulness.
Harringay Arena traffic nightmare. Thank you.
PS Nice to see free advertising for Sainsbury's in this week's update ;)
Reply by Birdy_Too 9 hours ago Actually John for once, you're not far wrong.
If people had better manners and acted lawfully, things would be a hell of a lot better.
Reply by Joe Bailey 9 hours ago It clearly is all entirely my fault, I’ll cough to that, you’ve rumbled me!
Yes, I stuffed up the junctions, and also recently knackered the lights on Endymion Road just to bugger up Wightman every morning for a week. I also caused all of the traffic snarls, road crashes and deaths in recent memory. And I'm only 30, so feel I've achieved a great deal in a reasonably short time. It’s also me that leaves all the rubbish everywhere. Spits out all the gum on the pavements of Green Lanes, abandons crappy old cars, and dumped the old telly in your garden. If I naffed off, you’d have a village like Highgate.
But I won't admit to clinging on to the wheel for dear life whilst driving up the ladder roads at speed. Why would anyone need to do that in a nice straight line; this is the function of a seat. Arm-rests and well designed bucketed seats do however help keep you in place through the tyre screeching corners when turning in... And ABS was surely designed to stop you just short of the five year old that leaps out in the road while you hurtle by. But of course, if it fails, there’s always the squidgy plastic bumpers to help cushion the blow. Being the devil, that’s how things roll – of course, I preferred the old bumpers lined with metal as they were much easier to fix after a hit – and it took a good one to even bend them at all ;-)
Reply by David T 7 hours ago Now we seem to have departed somewhat from the topic I would like to share a stroll down memory lane. In the early 80's I lived in Duckett Road, at the bottom of which was a shop selling very fast motorbikes. Prospective customers would try them out up our road - the objective of the exercise being to see how quickly they could hit 100 mph - usually outside our house. If I was out in the street on these occasions I would stand in the middle of the road with my arm up (silly boy) and stop them. The worst I ever had was a mumbled "sorry mate". Plus ca change...
Reply by matt 1 hour ago A relative visiting from New Zealand recently asked where all the boy racers horse & carts were. Because in New Zealand ...
This discussion is certainly wandering, as they do. Maybe drivers entering Harringay are affected by a strange alien source (likely to be located upon Hewitt Hill) whereby they drive around without purpose or direction; bit like a bee with one wing.
Not even Holloway Rd is as bad as 'Harringay Green Lanes'.
Reply by Clive Carter 17 minutes ago At least the general standard of driving is a hell of a lot better here than in NZ. I feel safer riding a motorbike in central London than driving a car in NZ due to the much lower incidence of homicidal drivers in Britain. The casualness and recklessness of many NZ drivers is just frightening. Why do they need to drive like an escaped prisoner high on crack-cocaine, driving a stolen XR3i and being chased by the police?…
2013. Some are not current threads but reside within the Top 10 nonetheless;
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coming in at No 1, a more current thread, is the alleged Labour Selection 'Fraud' in St Anns. At an incredible 24 pages and showing little sign of slowing down leading up to the May 2014 local elections. (local politics)
2. Your Neighbourhood Name: whose right to choose? (neighbourhood identity)
3. HGVs - Enforcement of the weight limit on Wightman and ladder roads (traffic)
4. Bye bye Banksy! (art)
5. Harringay Green Lanes (regeneration) scheme
6. The Banner (on the railway bridge over Green Lanes - neighbourhood identity)
7. Ally Pally market organisers threatening Harringay Market (local business)
8. Cat sitting group (pets)
9. Sainsburys car park meltdown! (traffic)
10. Big savings needed in Haringey. Where should the savings come from? (council services)
And that's from 14,871 Forum Discussions.
This discussion is sponsored by the Monty Python Reunion ....
…
or the reduced price of £2.50 (recently risen from £1.50) and about 52 of such journeys a year. We are issued with a card which is swiped by the driver but as the taxi is usually booked via their office, (unless one happens to go past your door when you want it) there is already something like £3.40 on the clock when you get in it.
Yesterday though, my driver didn't know his way around north London and took me to the hospital via Kings Cross and the full length of Euston Rd in the rush hour. This of course meant the clock was spinning like a good 'un whilst we krept through the slow moving traffic. In the past we were allowed to have the card re-swiped allowing another subsidised journey to be added to the current one, but this time the rules had been changed. Only one swipe was allowed. At the end of my journey the fare, including the subsidy, was £9.90. It seems that Haringey had neglected to tell me this and as I'd only taken £12 cash with me to pay for the there and back rides I didn't have enough to get home.
Luckily the driver of the taxi home (whom I'd hailed in the street thus saving at least £1) was very understanding and with his expert road knowledge I was home with the total fare costing only £5 this time. He waited while I went inside and rumaged my pockets for the extra cash to pay him.
Now I understand that the council is cutting back on services and the way they've worked this one is going to save them mega bucks. I, for one (and I'm not the only one), am not going to use the taxicard anymore unless it's for a really local journey. It's cheaper by minicab. So that means that the council is not only going to be making a saving on the 'one swipe' policy but also on the fact that a lot of us just won't be using it at all so more saving for them.
What really gets my goat though is the fact that we're limited to the amount of journeys we can use the card for per year. Why can't we be allowed to use them when we want to? Two or three swipes if necessary for the one journey. When they're gone, they're gone. End of.
The way it stands at the moment is just pointless for most journeys in London. Is it Haringeys (and some other councils) idea to make sure that disabled people are kept out of sight and dependant on others for shopping and errands that previously we were able to do with that little bit of assisitance that the taxicard gave us?
(eg. I used to use the card once a month to go to Sainsburys in Green Lanes. One day we got caught in that notorious traffic jam just trying to get out of the carpark. Two swipes were needed that day to get home. I won't be doing that again.)…
ponded to the interim results after 10 days. I met another of the councillors at the check-out queue in Sainsbury's on Sunday (whose name I will withhold out of, perhaps misplaced, tact). This councillor, on being asked if they'd respond, said “well what does the survey tell us that we don't already know?” I'm sorry. I hadn't been aware that they'd previously conducted a survey on PRIORITIES before.
In a recent meeting I had with Councillor Haley he offered to meet myself and a group of residents about the traffic about four weeks ago. Then he changed his mind and said that he was only prepared to meet me on my own as a representative of the residents. (You figure out why – I have my suspicions). I declined, explaining that I held no mandate to act as the residents' representative. I explained that I believed that people who claim to represent residents should have a mandate to do so and hold accountability to them. I asked him to honour his promise to meet a group of residents. That was 2 weeks ago and no reply.
I'm getting very concerned that our councillors are not really very interested in hearing what the residents think. I'm sending them the final results of the survey tonight. I hope we may all get some response from them. But on past performance, I think it’s a case of don’t hold your breath.
It may be that they do listen, but don’t want to let on that they do. I timed the sending of the interim results so that the councillors had them three days before the recent meeting of the Green Lanes Strategy Group (the most influential council group in Harringay who refuse to publish minutes or any accounting of their activity)., I've been told by a member who attended the group that last week, after 5 years of dodging the issue, there may finally have been agreement to establish a working group to look at Harringay traffic. (why is that so secret they can't publish it on minutes?) Now the fact that this issue came clear number 1 in the survey, may just be a coincidence or maybe they do listen. Either way, I wish they'd tell us something.
Sorry, I digress. Below is Carolyn's response in full (and PS I'm not a member of the Lib Dems and hold no party affiliation):
Hi Hugh,
Please see below for my response:
Satellite dishes - this is a planning issue and we will respond to this on an individual basis where it comes to us through planning. Not all dishes will be subject to planning control.
Traffic - We will support the LCSP call for a holistic review of traffic in Harringay and Green Lanes. We have asked officers to include a review of the crossing at Frobisher road with Green Lanes and Alfoxton avenue in a Sustrans review of Green Lanes and to suggest possible alternatives to improving it. We will continue to ask officers to make this available to local residents to comment on when it is completed through the ward panel and other local residents groups.
Crime (Harringay passage) - will continue to work to raise issues with enforcement where they are brought to our attention and with the SNT.
Cleanliness - Am pursing the council to find a copy of the report on Harringay passage cleaning that the council have agreed to produce. I have also asked for a meeting with the contractors to walk the passage, look at the issues and find a way forward. Karen and I are now doing regular ward walks which include the passage to report dumping and check whether previously reported items have been removed.
Parking bays - I am currently in the process of seeing if a meeting can be set up with officers and representatives to discuss the situation. We need to make sure that this is done on a case by case basis to protect roads from excessive traffic, while preserving the ability of people to access places of worship, schools etc. without impediment.
New CPZ hours - We will continue to raise residents concerns on this
HMO's - we will be carrying out a survey to assist us in locating potential HMO's and to alert enforcement we will continue to press enforcement for greater action where conversion appears to have taken place illegally. We always respond to planning requests in Harringay of this type in the negative as the ladders are a protected area.
Mix of shops - We definitely see Green Lanes as a flourishing family shopping area and keep an eye on all planning developments related to shops in the area to aim to keep a healthy mix. We would like to see something like the initiative of shops in Crouch End to work together as 'green' businesses in Green Lanes and will work with traders on looking at how this might be achieved.
Cycle lane - Will look at the sustrans review when it comes out and seek residents views.
On shop fronts and signs - We will try to organise a walk with neighbourhood management to look at this.
Carolyn…
reen Lanes Station and the potential to reduce traffic impacts currently experienced on Green Lanes. As part of a comprehensive development, the allocation seeks the retention of a retail frontage onto Green Lanes, improved public realm, and new access routes into and through the site created. The remainder of the site would be mixed use, providing new residential development, employment floorspace and community floorspace. The footprint of the units to front Green Lanes would depend on the overall design and layout of the scheme and, potentially, the need to re-house some the tenants should they wish to retain a retail presence in the area.
The allocation recognises that retail trends are changing rapidly, and the continued rise of internet shopping is impacting upon the long-term viability of big box retail parks in particular. It also recognises that supermarkets have, and are continuing to change their retail formats in response to significant competition between operators. In reality, I don’t think anyone really knows what the future retail landscape will look like in 5 - 10 years time.
The site is currently in two separate private ownerships – Pension Funds. We have meet with them and they have confirmed their long-term interest in bringing forward these sites. We and the landowners are aware of the tenancy agreements in place, and hence why we do not expect any proposals to come forward until post 2020. It will be for the landowner to then engage with their tenants about their redevelopment proposals at that time, including negotiations/buying out of any tenancy agreements or reprovision as part of any new scheme.
The two landowners would need to either work together to bring forward a comprehensive development – although this would not prevent each site being developed out separately if a masterplan has been agreed for the entire site area. It is unlikely that the Council would intervene, as the use of Compulsory Purchase Orders is always a last resort and would need to be in the wider public interest.
Original discussion of this topic here.…
ave reached agreement with Arena's owners, Coal Pension Property Ltd, to occupy the former Royal Mail space and to add a mezzanine floor to it. This will create a store of just under 24,000 square feet (2,200 Sq m), which is just under 15% of the total retail space at the Arena shopping Park.
"Big Labels, Small Prices" store TK Maxx opened in 1994 and is part of TJX Companies, which also owns Homesense and Marshalls. In October 2011 it had 261 stores across the UK and Ireland. The company claim that a typical store has 50,000 items in stock and receives about 10,000 new items a week.
In a recent mini poll by The Guardian newspaper, TK Maxx was the overwhelming favourite in in a face-off with bargain basement competitor Matalan. TK Maxx took 68% of the 1,169 votes compared with Matalan's 18%.
One survey respondent commented:
"Had some fantastic bargains in TK Maxx on homewares. Dartington crystal decanters and jugs typically down from £70-£80 to £10-£15. Great for gifts (especially if you "accidentally" leave the original maker's price on). Good deals on Tefal, Le Creuset etc."
I'm not sure TK Maxx would be my first choice as tenant for the premises, but with John Lewis unlikley to move in, I guess I'll have to welcome the opportunity of bagging some bargain basement clothes and Homeware
Good for the Area?
Under the banner LCSP, local resident Ian Sygrave has submitted an objection to the planning application because of the loss of the Royal Mail Sorting office which is part of the whole change.
For my part, I'm hoping that the planning committee will take a very careful look at the impact that a store of this size will have on traffic. Opening a TK Maxx isn't just adding 15% more retail space, it's adding 24,000 square feet of retail space that will likely be very well used.
Have the Council required a transport impact study to be done? Remember how they totally missed this when Sainsbury's expanded? Remember the chaos the ensued?
A travel plan submitted by the former Arena owners in 2007 prior to the opening of Fitness First estimated that retail space generates six times the traffic than that generated by leisure activities such as a gym.
The current planning application from the Arena landlord says:
The application premises are located in a sustainable location with good public transport links located in close proximity to the site. In addition there is a large resident catchment population thereby enabling local residents to either walk or cycle to the application premises.
Really? I wonder what proportion of their customers will live in walking distance and how many will cycle? Has anyone calculated the likely extra number of car trips it will generate on local roads?
So, a cautious welcome to TK Maxx, but I'd like some reassurance that this time round the traffic impact is being properly looked at and the Council aren't sleep walking their way in to this again.
…
m that reduced or expensive parking reduces footfall in shops is largely incorrect". I've taken a quick look at the study. I'm an economist, and I'm familiar with the methods used. It's an interesting study but I have to say that its findings are pretty inconclusive.
(1) They find no statistically significant effect from the number of parking spaces. However, with only 80 observations (and they throw two of those out because they don't like what they do to the results), this is not surprising. The study includes shopping centers of various types (regional, local, etc.). They try dividing into two types, and get different results for different types (and, since their samples of each type are now much smaller, they lose most statistical significance).
(2) They find that higher prices for parking are associated with higher retail turnover (sales). There are two difficulties in interpreting this finding. One, which they acknowledge, is that we don't know the direction of causation: (1) high turnover may *create* higher demand for parking, allowing prices to be raised; (2) high turnover may occur in areas that are very busy for other reasons, in which parking is high priced; or (3) high prices may keep parking spaces free, making it more convenient for shoppers to park. Of these, only (3) says anything about the price of parking affecting turnover (rather than the other way around), and their study can't distinguish between 1, 2, and 3.
The other difficulty in interpreting the finding that higher parking prices are associated with higher turnover is that the study doesn't tell us how high the prices are for the areas studied (in technical terms, they don't provide summary statistics - the means, variances and ranges of the variables they use in their study). The effect would probably be different at different levels - too low, and people park as long as they're allowed; too high, and nobody parks at all. In Green Lanes, last I checked, it was £3 per hour. Anybody have an idea what it costs to park in a comparable neighborhood in the Netherlands? I don't.
(3) More generally, lack of descriptive statistics makes it impossible to evaluate the practical importance of the effects they find (even assuming we have confidence in their results).
So, as far as the study goes, it's a good effort in an under-studied area, but it doesn't tell us much.
Why do I care, and take the time to read the study and write this? I don't have a car. I think the use of cars for grocery shopping is a blight on the face of the planet, and that free parking, as we see in abundance at superstores, has a big role in this blight (for more on this, see my blog post, Sisyphus aims to tax parking, any day now). But if we're worried about traffic in Green Lanes, put the blame where it belongs - Sainsburys, McDonald's, the Arena shopping centre, and all the more distant car-oriented shopping centres that draw traffic through here: don't fuss about whether it's a little bit less expensive to park your car while shopping in Green Lanes.…
t on Wightman Road alone out of at least 350 houses (and God knows how many households) we have just 53 HOL members. From 1500+ members how many can reasonably be expected to have a Wightman Road bus high in their priorities? We might hope to garner a few hundred, but I think a few minutes face-to-face with residents on or near the WR route would give a clearer picture of likely use of the service.
@ Stephen, those R8 and K1 examples look like real buses - midi rather than mini. Yes, I am caught between two stools - getting a 'proper' bus with something approaching the W5's passenger capacity, yet making sure that the model doesn't add to Wightman Road problems and will fit in with any future traffic calming measures we might get this year or next (especially if those measures included such things as 'pavement build-outs'). Anything between 7.1 and 9.0 metres, rather than a monster over 10.5, might well fit the bill.
@ John, my response last night was a bit brusque - mainly because I thought that a petition just now would be asking people to commit to something which doesn't take account of some of the suggestions made earlier. The W5 shuttles between a Sainsbury carpark and Archway tube stn (with a Co-op just opposite). Would an alternative for the 'W1' be possible, turning left into Stroud Green Rd, stopping near Finsbury Park stn (but not entering the bus station), turning into Seven Sisters, Isledon Rd, Tollington Rd to Waitrose - returning by Seven Sisters etc. ?? Maybe that introduces too many complexities, including getting tangled up with the 29 and other bendy bus routes. And someone mentioned a LIDL link - maybe a bit of a 'class' war here with Waitrose!
I just think we need a few people (?five or six) committed to the idea to sit down and thresh out the route details (with a conference link to Berlin of course), then move to a combined online and door-to-door petition.
As for the Irish ploy of asking for the world and settling for Kilburn, remember sometimes it leads to the Oval Office. :-)…
. Sirdar, Boundary and surrounding streets in this area are great. I've met so many lovely people just in the street. One lady I met invited me to go out with her and other mums to the Westbury one evening. Lovely. I may be biased but I think south of Westbury Ave is superior to Noel Park. It just feels a little bit more sketchy there (I am sure I'll get loads of comments to the contrary - it's just a feeling).
I was really sad to leave the ladder but I've found some things that make up for it. Proximity to Lordship rec and Downhills Park (another friendly community around the cafe there and lots of mums I've met live in that area both N15 and N17), proximity to Turnpike Lane. Belmont Park is also lovely. Proximity to lots of children's centres. I use both of the onese in Noel Park -there's a lovely stay and play in the Russell Park one. Similarly a lovely children's centre at Broadwater farm - it has under-floor heating and a nursery with a long waiting list. Lovely massage classes there for free! There are some good Turkish shops with the usual produce - bakery, butcher, olives etc. And Sainsburys means that there is a cash point and those supermarket products that you sometimes need. The Westbury Medical practice is excellent.
On the downsides (I live on the corner of Boundary and Westbury very near Lordship Lane) there is traffic noise. But if you avoided living on Westbury Avenue that would be fine. The shops on Lordship Lane are limited. The buses don't go anywhere useful really - I can walk to TPL and they don't go any further than that. It's 15 mins walk to TPL - which is fine if you're a mum with a buggy like me but if you have to drop at childminder and then go to work that's not great. There are some unsavoury types and lots of dog poo but then that's no different to the ladder to be honest. Can't think of anything else.
It's a little early to be researching schools for us but I hear Belmont is very good and it looks nice. Ditto on catchment areas. We weren't really looking at schools when we moved here.
I hope this is helpful - please feel free to message me or come and visit!…
Added by Sophie BBARR at 12:59 on October 15, 2013
ra Park. As currently proposed, this licence would permit a significant increase in the number of commercial events in the Park. The Board meeting is immediately preceded by a joint meeting of the Consultative and Statutory Advisory Committees, which I will attend as usual, as representative of the Friends of Alexandra Park. I believe the increase in Park events is a significant change for the Park, and I would like you, if you have time, to read the following and the proposal, and let me have your views before the meetings on September 29th.
The Premises Licence is not in itself the issue, but the probable size and frequency of future events for which the Trust management is seeking permission, is causing some concern. The Appendices to the proposal show the areas proposed for events (The Grove, the Upper Field, the South Slope, the Pavilion car park, and Newlands Field) and the audience/visitor capacity and type of event which would be considered for each area. The Events team at the Palace have carried out safety studies and noise modelling to support this, and as a consequence only the South Slope is proposed for major music events. The other areas are identified for a variety of possible events such as smaller music events, theatre, opera, food festival, arts festival, corporate events etc.
As you will see from the proposal, the Trust management is not proposing anything like the Wireless Festival, which caused so many problems at Finsbury Park, and I can confirm from discussions with the AP&P Events Director that the Trust management is very conscious of the potential impact of Park events on neighbouring residential areas. However, the proposal in no way addresses the main impacts of events on the Park and its users, namely, the loss of access to parts of the Park, the presence of vehicles in the Park, particularly during setting up and breaking down, or the cumulative effects of increased footfall and pollution on the ecology of the Park. These effects are a function of the number and scale of the events. The maximum number of events noted in the proposal are:
Large (15,000 – 30,000) 8 event days per year Medium (5,000 – 15,000) 11 event days per year
Small (0 – 5,000) 26 event days per year
Hence, as most of these events will be in the summer months, there could be a large or medium event every other weekend, with associated vehicle traffic in the Park in the days before and after.
The Friends of Alexandra Park recognise that the Trust needs to generate additional income, and that some of this can come from commercial events in the Park. In my view the Trust management has established a reasonable and improving track record of managing significant events in the Park with sensitivity to local residents (e.g. the Summer Festival, Red Bull Soap Box Derby, Foodie Festival), and I feel some increase in the number of events is acceptable. However I am doubtful whether the level of events contemplated in the proposal is compatible with everyday enjoyment of the Park, or with the proper maintenance of the Park as a Local Nature Reserve.
The Park is already accumulating damage and deterioration from events in the Park, not all of which can be quickly or easily repaired. It is essential that there is investment in the infrastructure of the Park ahead of the expansion of events in the Park, such as the re-building of paths and roads so that heavier vehicles do not cause damage at every event.
It is unfortunate that the Trust management has put forward this application for a Premises Licence without first properly setting out its intentions for increased event activity in the Park. Nevertheless we need to take this opportunity to make clear our position to the Trust committees and Board. The Friends’ committee want to understand how you feel about this proposal for an increase in the number of events in the Park, so please let us know your views by email to allyparkn10@gmail.com, by September 28th if possible.
My own response is as follows:-
Dear Friends of Alexandra Park,
I was shocked to receive your email about this matter and the Licence Application by the APP management to hugely increase the number, size and type of events to be regularly held in the parkland.
As most, if not all of these sites within the park overlook residential areas the likelihood disruption and disturbance seems great.
I am also most concerned about the almost certain impact of increased traffic along High Street Hornsey.
Already a narrow and busy road this is already suffering the impact from the building of the Sainsbury/Smithfield Square. And this is before we get the increased traffic, day and night, from many hundreds of new residents and Sainsbury delivery trucks.
To add to that with whatever number of huge trucks to set up all these events and the increased numbers of visitors is unimaginable and will be intolerable. I also wonder whether the current parking spaces within the park will cope - or will local residential areas such as the Campsbourne estate have even more non residents trying to park on already overcrowded streets.
I hate to thinks of the negative impact of vehicles and people on the grass areas and the wildlife of the park.
I was stunned to see that the area already lost to Go Ape will also have sports. Discos and corporate events. Now we know why the deer were removed.
I thought Newlands Fields and the rest of the park was protected Metropolitan Open Land - how can these proposals possibly be protective of the parkland?
The map makes it clear how much of the parkland will be unusable and out of bounds to locals who use the park.
The available space for free use by the public (which I believe is what it is meant for, will be severely reduced and impacted upon.
I strongly object to these proposals
…
Added by Lesley Ramm at 16:58 on September 25, 2016