Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Friend or foe of the neighbourhood? MPMoran blocks most of the pavement on West Green Road
A new business, a big and established seller of construction materials, employing some local people, has just opened on West Green Road. Good signs, welcome to the neighbourhood!
However...
Notwithstanding their overwhelmingly enlarged logos on display in the big shop windows (Tesco and Sainsbury do it with pictures -- really offputting but that's another issue), M.P. Moran & Sons Limited, using portable barriers that display more of their logos, have decided to block the wider portion of the pavement during their business hours (6:30am-5pm).
On the corner of Langham and West Green Roads, their portable barriers block two-thirds (actually, even more) of the pavement, making it difficult for a person in a wheelchair (or mobility scooter) or with a pram or pushchair (especially if double width) to navigate a corner with a lamp post (Photo 1). On the other side, adjacent to another business, they eventually halved the barriers (Not shown in Photo 2), but still kept the one that actually hinders pedestrians' passage. By the way, the other side of the road is much narrower, has a bus stop, and more businesses.
The manager claims the portion of the sidewalk is their property. If I understand correctly, Haringey Council does not say so. The business may have paid for a license but even in that case, they would have to give reasonable access to pedestrians. https://www.haringey.gov.uk/business/licensing/licences-permits-reg...
It is very unlikely that they would be allowed to store their material in the whole area they claim to own because that would be huge. Besides, they have access for trucks in the back of the building.
So, why can they do this?
I looked at their other sites and they have not done this at locations with sidewalks (Kilburn and Kennington), i.e. that are not on an industrial estate.
West Hampstead: 020 7644 9022
Kennington: 020 7735 9291
Kilburn: 020 7328 5566
Watford: 0192 322 9700
Willesden: 020 8459 9000
Tottenham: 020 7644 9080
Therefore, why can they do this in Haringey?
Talking to the manager has not helped; sending an email has not helped since in both instances they claim ownership of the sidewalk?! Pleas for empathy have not worked. Possibly, some of the trade people might have said something that made them reason (as in, it looks bad for business), to adjust the side adjacent to a business in their trade, but not the one that is an obstruction to the general public.
Any recommendations how to proceed? Thanks!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh
-
It just occurred to me to check the planning records for this development. (See excerpt below) They certainly show that the developer claims to own the curtilage. So, either the developer's agents were trying it on (which seems the less likely explanation) or indeed they do own the curtilage. However, if future consultation of the land records accords with the Ordnance Survey map and shows that they don't in fact own this part of the land, then it's a real failure by the planning department.
-
Permalink Reply by Ivana Ćurčić
-
Wow, thank you very much, Hugh!
-
-
Just to add that Cllr Seema Chandwani has suggested asking the Planning Team to look into it, which is welcome. The situation as it is does not comply with Equality Act 2010 guidelines for mobility impaired persons.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton
-
Ivana, I've been a member and contributor of Harringay Online for many years.
This issue and the way you've approached trying to solve it is an excellent example of why every Haringey elected councillor should sign-up and give some time at least to dip into HoL pages.
I'm embarrassed to confess that your point about the potential use of Equality legislation hadn't hit me as hard as it should have.
-
-
Alan, I thought councillors did follow Harringay Online! ;-)
-
-
Some do, but others prefer broadcast mode to regular interaction and difficult questions.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter
-
JUST to clarify, has the councillor for West Green Ward suggested that you ask the Planning Team to "look" into it, or has the Cabinet Member for Resident Services and Tackling Inequality, directed that this is investigated as a matter of urgency?
For they are one and the same person.
According to the council website [here] "Councillor Chandwani is responsible for" (among other responsibilities):
- local welfare
- highways
- resident experience
Pedestrian pavement ("footways" in councilSpeak) are part of the Highways Department.
For the conservative Highways Department, footways have a low priority compared with "carriageways", because pedestrians have long been regarded as second-class residents.
The council sometimes publish material about walking and cycling, but there is little practical or political will for action.
An example is the council's tree planting programme. Instead of planting new trees in build-outs (and sacrificing a too-precious parking space), new trees are planted in the "footway", reducing the pavement width.
Highways appear to lack commitment to or interest in the Equality Act. This hidebound "team" interpret their responsibilities narrowly and are largely interested in easing motor vehicle flow.
Thoughtless pavement width-reduction can be seen in many places in the Borough and it illustrates the lack of joined-up thinking.
-
-
Clive, thank you very much for this information and some pointers! I took Councillor’s prompt reply as wanting to look into it — sooner, as there’s a simple solution of (re)moving/reducing the portable barriers, or as a long-term solution (e.g. investigate who the owner of the corner is, and consequently correct the root of the problem, which should have been done during the Planning process, as Hugh pointed out). Lesson learned for any planning permissions!
This morning the portable barriers have been reduced! I am relieved that common sense has prevailed, but you and others are right to point out at overall lack of consideration to pedestrians. The idea of joined-up thinking should be a goal — always.
-
-
IVANA, good, some progress!
I hope that Cllr Chandwani does "look into" this matter. In the past, the Cabinet Member for Highways appears to have seen her role as mainly to lavish public praise on her Department and to act as their spokeswoman, rather than to lead it or to direct it.
In order to reduce the extent of Council Pavement Width-Reduction, the Cabinet Member might consider checking out—or at least direct her "officers" (i.e. council employees) to read—the Guidance:
Disability: Equality Act 2010 - Guidance
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson
-
There is a whole piece of work to be done around public space being used for commercial purposes Clive.
A walk along Green Lanes from The Salisbury to Harringay Green Lanes Station is an obstacle course of pavement trading. It’s always annoyed me but it’s become a hinderance to actually going out as my husband is a recent wheelchair user and has to be pushed on and off the pavement to get around piles of fruit and veg. And don’t start me on the state of the actual footpaths. I have to get him from our side of Warham Road (tarmac surfaced) to the opposite side (paved) as I just don’t have the physical strength to get the chair over the humps and bumps.
-
-
-
"There is a whole piece of work to be done around public space being used for commercial purposes".
To my mind, Michael Anderson's new comment is an incredibly clear, valuable and large piece of the public policy jigsaw thoughtfully raised by Ivana. And the problem is not simply about commercial stuff intruding into public spaces. Thankfully, cities and towns are still about more than commercial exploitation of public goods.
-
-
-
That’s a great result, Ivana. No doubt that’s due to your airing this situation so promptly and bringing it to public attention as well as to the attention of elected officials.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2025 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
