Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Do Haringey Council Consultations Deliver?
This discussion started on another thread about Wightman Road. To give that one space to breathe and to allow this one room to develop we've moved it here to a space of its own.
The discussion so far:
Colin Bannon:
I got a response from the Council re. the consultation. I guess it highlights the importance of getting in there at the beginning of the consultation. There is not much chance of changing anything by postal or email consultation. It just allows them to say that 93% are in favour of the proposed scheme.
Hugh:
I think there was quite a bit of discussion about the consultation on this site Colin, but I know how tough it is for us all to get the time to respond.
Colin Bannon:
Thanks Hugh. Yes looking through them I think I commented on some, just a shame i missed the actual initial consultation with councillors, residents groups, etc. Guess I'll just have to make do with my little hump outside, ha, ha!
Hugh:
When all the ladder one way stuff was consulted on, it passed me by, but boy how I wish I'd not missed it.
Michelle vonAhn:
When the consultation on the Bruce Grove one way system was done, I did participate. There was an incredibly low response rate - I think it was 2% - and after the "consultation", Haringey implemented a scheme that matched neither of the two proposals they put forward. Amazingly, they did not include a proposal to leave the roads as they were!
The main journey I do requires me to do a U-turn to return home, unless I want to have to go streets out of my way to get back.
Tokenism, indeed.
Hugh:
I know that it's really tough for councils nationwide to get a good response from consultations. Some of the responsibility lies with the councils in the way they do it, but a large part, as you point out Michelle, is down to us lot for not getting involved.
Alan Stanton:
I'm often publicly critical of our Transportation staff. So I'm pleased to say they were very helpful during the consultation on the extension of a 20 mph zone to our local streets (in Tottenham Hale).
But it also has to be a two-way process. Getting consultation on these schemes works better when residents cooperate together, and when there are people able and willing to put in a lot of time and work.
So one person let us meet for free in a very large room. Volunteers circulated invitations. Residents went carefully through the maps and proposals. We invited officers from Highways who came to meet us. These officers answered people's detailed questions and discussed possible options - for example, about chicanes; street trees, and whether we needed one hump or two to slow the traffic.
Subsequently when the contractors made errors they were sent back to correct them.
It wasn't perfect, of course. Lots of residents didn't take part; and some people may be critical. But in my view, the overall process was positive. We got real local input; with a genuine response from Council staff leading to an improved scheme.
John McMullan:
Correct me if I've read this wrong Alan but when you say:
But it also has to be a two-way process. Getting consultation on these schemes works better when residents cooperate together, and when there are people able and willing to put in a lot of time and work.
Are you saying that unless residents constantly look out for "consultations", involve themselves in the minutiae of the process and watch out for things they desperately don't want, and in numbers... that the council are going to do whatever they want (which is usually not what we want)?
I don't want to govern, I just want to be happy. You govern, you make me happy.
This is why we need a local charter.
Hugh:
As it happens the next meeting of the charter group is tonight J. It's still in development and don't worry I'm trying to ensure it'll be developed with full involvement of people (But watch this space for how many folks want to get involved).
As to your point above J, I know what you mean, but are you saying that you live in the expectation that you can elect a sufficient number of high quality representatives who you trust so much to look after your interests and to whom you'll happily hand over some of the most important decisions of your life? T'ain't nevvah gunnah happen mon petit kiwi.
Whilst on the topic of decision-making here's a thought provoking TED talk I happened across the other day:
The discussion so far:
Colin Bannon:
I got a response from the Council re. the consultation. I guess it highlights the importance of getting in there at the beginning of the consultation. There is not much chance of changing anything by postal or email consultation. It just allows them to say that 93% are in favour of the proposed scheme.
Hugh:
I think there was quite a bit of discussion about the consultation on this site Colin, but I know how tough it is for us all to get the time to respond.
Colin Bannon:
Thanks Hugh. Yes looking through them I think I commented on some, just a shame i missed the actual initial consultation with councillors, residents groups, etc. Guess I'll just have to make do with my little hump outside, ha, ha!
Hugh:
When all the ladder one way stuff was consulted on, it passed me by, but boy how I wish I'd not missed it.
Michelle vonAhn:
When the consultation on the Bruce Grove one way system was done, I did participate. There was an incredibly low response rate - I think it was 2% - and after the "consultation", Haringey implemented a scheme that matched neither of the two proposals they put forward. Amazingly, they did not include a proposal to leave the roads as they were!
The main journey I do requires me to do a U-turn to return home, unless I want to have to go streets out of my way to get back.
Tokenism, indeed.
Hugh:
I know that it's really tough for councils nationwide to get a good response from consultations. Some of the responsibility lies with the councils in the way they do it, but a large part, as you point out Michelle, is down to us lot for not getting involved.
Alan Stanton:
I'm often publicly critical of our Transportation staff. So I'm pleased to say they were very helpful during the consultation on the extension of a 20 mph zone to our local streets (in Tottenham Hale).
But it also has to be a two-way process. Getting consultation on these schemes works better when residents cooperate together, and when there are people able and willing to put in a lot of time and work.
So one person let us meet for free in a very large room. Volunteers circulated invitations. Residents went carefully through the maps and proposals. We invited officers from Highways who came to meet us. These officers answered people's detailed questions and discussed possible options - for example, about chicanes; street trees, and whether we needed one hump or two to slow the traffic.
Subsequently when the contractors made errors they were sent back to correct them.
It wasn't perfect, of course. Lots of residents didn't take part; and some people may be critical. But in my view, the overall process was positive. We got real local input; with a genuine response from Council staff leading to an improved scheme.
John McMullan:
Correct me if I've read this wrong Alan but when you say:
But it also has to be a two-way process. Getting consultation on these schemes works better when residents cooperate together, and when there are people able and willing to put in a lot of time and work.
Are you saying that unless residents constantly look out for "consultations", involve themselves in the minutiae of the process and watch out for things they desperately don't want, and in numbers... that the council are going to do whatever they want (which is usually not what we want)?
I don't want to govern, I just want to be happy. You govern, you make me happy.
This is why we need a local charter.
Hugh:
As it happens the next meeting of the charter group is tonight J. It's still in development and don't worry I'm trying to ensure it'll be developed with full involvement of people (But watch this space for how many folks want to get involved).
As to your point above J, I know what you mean, but are you saying that you live in the expectation that you can elect a sufficient number of high quality representatives who you trust so much to look after your interests and to whom you'll happily hand over some of the most important decisions of your life? T'ain't nevvah gunnah happen mon petit kiwi.
Whilst on the topic of decision-making here's a thought provoking TED talk I happened across the other day:
Michelle vonAhn:
I am glad you had a good experience, Alan. My experience is wildly different.
The Bruce Grove thing shows the usual level of engaging with the local population. If Haringey want to have real dialogue, they need to put some effort into it, and show that they will take on board what people way. About 15 years ago, some alterations to the local streets were proposed and local residents went to the Council meeting to express our concerns. We found there that the traffic engineers had not even walked the street, and were proposing a change based simply on their map-reading skills that would have produced a really dangerous layout.
They held that in abeyance for awhile, and came up with the maze that now exists in the one-way road network in Bruce Grove, implemented with about 2% of the local population's input and with no option of the status quo being offered. That sucks for "consultation".
Locally, in White Hart Lane, we had councillors out to meet with the street's residents to discuss traffic calming. This resulted in a scheme of road narrowings that was sold to residents as "traffic calming". This resulted in the loss of half a dozen parking places and our vehicles being used as road furniture to supposedly slow the traffic. Cars still raced down the street at 60mph, swerving to deal with the road narrowings and sideswiping our cars, knocking off wing mirrors, occasionally overturning, crashing through garden walls and into houses and totalling parked cars.
We had yet another meeting with councillors and traffic engineers and were promised alternative proposals. These have never been forthcoming - they simply lie to residents about what will be done. The "traffic calming" that we were sold then morphed into "pedestrian safety measures" - which was a priority but not the be-all-and-end-all of what residents were seeking.
We had a good level of public engagement - far higher than 2%, I can assure you - and yet local people have been left utterly disillusioned by the Council's response to a scheme that has done little to slow the traffic in the road.
I find it amazing that they utterly refused the idea of speed humps, while they were installed in Lansdowne Road (similarly residential, with a bus route) and now Wightman Road. We are the residential road that it is apparently perfectly ok to go 60mph on.
I am glad you had a good experience, Alan. My experience is wildly different.
The Bruce Grove thing shows the usual level of engaging with the local population. If Haringey want to have real dialogue, they need to put some effort into it, and show that they will take on board what people way. About 15 years ago, some alterations to the local streets were proposed and local residents went to the Council meeting to express our concerns. We found there that the traffic engineers had not even walked the street, and were proposing a change based simply on their map-reading skills that would have produced a really dangerous layout.
They held that in abeyance for awhile, and came up with the maze that now exists in the one-way road network in Bruce Grove, implemented with about 2% of the local population's input and with no option of the status quo being offered. That sucks for "consultation".
Locally, in White Hart Lane, we had councillors out to meet with the street's residents to discuss traffic calming. This resulted in a scheme of road narrowings that was sold to residents as "traffic calming". This resulted in the loss of half a dozen parking places and our vehicles being used as road furniture to supposedly slow the traffic. Cars still raced down the street at 60mph, swerving to deal with the road narrowings and sideswiping our cars, knocking off wing mirrors, occasionally overturning, crashing through garden walls and into houses and totalling parked cars.
We had yet another meeting with councillors and traffic engineers and were promised alternative proposals. These have never been forthcoming - they simply lie to residents about what will be done. The "traffic calming" that we were sold then morphed into "pedestrian safety measures" - which was a priority but not the be-all-and-end-all of what residents were seeking.
We had a good level of public engagement - far higher than 2%, I can assure you - and yet local people have been left utterly disillusioned by the Council's response to a scheme that has done little to slow the traffic in the road.
I find it amazing that they utterly refused the idea of speed humps, while they were installed in Lansdowne Road (similarly residential, with a bus route) and now Wightman Road. We are the residential road that it is apparently perfectly ok to go 60mph on.
Tags for Forum Posts: Wightman Road, consultation, traffic
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Utter indifference would be a huge improvement to the malevolence that the council seem to show "residents" sometimes. Michelle's road complaints are typical are they not? At what point do they become representative of the people who live here and not JUST the people who drive here? As for the laughable veto on the Hornsey railworks, they should have saved up their political capital to push just such a progressive (Trains. Hello!?) issue through. Instead it's all been wasted on single interest groups and nimby RAs.
Point taken but I'm not that much of a perfectionist.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
My reading of Michelle vonAhn's comments on the Bruce Grove and White Hart Lane consultations is that she wants better, more responsive consultation not to cede power to "the council". Of course, Michelle also wants a scheme which actually works to slow the traffic.
But John, you seem to be wanting councillors to "govern and make you happy". And not bother you with consultation.
Just suppose I was elected Executive Mayor (with a capital 'M'). If you expect me to go off to my executive suite and just run the show, you'd be very very disappointed.
My name's Stanton not Solon. So if residents are asking for a traffic scheme to solve a problem, as well as bringing in the professionals, I'd insist on properly involving the residents. The anarchist Colin Ward was fond of the saying: "The wearer knows where the shoe pinches". As residents we know about local problems. Perhaps partially or just in our own street.
We are like the fable of the blind men in the jungle who think they've found: a tree trunk; a rope; a fan; a spear; and a wall. In my version we put our knowledge together and recognise the elephant.
-
Permalink Reply by Old-Age-Emporium(OAE) on
-
Hugh: that thought provoking TED talk Are we in control of our decisions?
As another 67 year-old with two hip replacements after years of failing to stomach Ibuprofen, I'm not so sure that orthopaedic consultants ever consult.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
