Forum topic: Mini-Holland and the Triangle

Criticism matters, but can be counter-productive if well-intentioned people under pressure are doing their best in difficult circumstances and/or with insufficient resources. And I feel that is sometimes the case in relation to local council efforts to meet every jot and tittle of public consultation.

Also it’s not usually a question of whether staffing levels or councillor commitment are sufficient to carry particular functions; sometimes they are, sometimes they aren’t. The real problem is that, unlike private business whose function is simply to make money, councils always have several aims at once to deal with and disruptive criticisms coming from all directions. I might think that redesigning a street or road to make it more cyclists-friendly is a matter of technical expertise, but for the people charged with the job it’s also likely to be a matter of managing competing political opinions, handling public enquiries and complaints from residents who are entitled to know, whilst keeping an eye on the general aims of the council; which could mean anything from health issues, to translation services, to equal opportunity matters.

Consultation takes time – often within the context of a tight staffing budget and councillors being buffeted from every quarter – which could otherwise be spent on getting the job done. Perhaps we should cut the council a bit of slack if things don’t always go perfectly, especially as in the case of the Mini-Holland bid things had to be done under time pressure and possibly in ways that didn’t reveal the council’s hand to other competitors.

I have a lot of trouble understanding the debate about the Palmers Green Triangle and I sometimes wonder whether I’m thinking about something quite different to other contributors. For me ‘The Triangle’ is that shape defined by very pleasant red-brick buildings at the junction of Green Lanes and Aldermans Hill; certainly not that featureless little bit of tarmac bounded by railings and clouded by deadly traffic exhaust sitting at the bottom of Aldermans Hill.

So if I were designing the future I’d begin by breasting the railway bridge on a sunny summer morning, and asking myself these questions: “How can I use this splendid space before me, meanwhile harnessing the buildings and the street surfaces to create the heart of Palmers Green?”

Two things are paramount:

• to remove pavements and install a single continuous surface – if funds permit using a high quality material – to maximise and emphasise the the space (which has something in common with the council's drawing) , and
• to control traffic to a low speed without traffic lights so that safety and air quality is improved.

After that deciding the details, whether planting, seats, clocks or other ornament, will follow as a matter of course, and can be chosen to maximise the appeal of the space.

In short I’d plan something as near the idea of a town square as possible, much as suggested by Karl Brown all that time ago; partly to improve the town for local people, but also to attract the pedestrian footfall which is so crucial to strong communities and thriving shop owners. The presence of cars in the space should not be a problem because - as illustrated by the many formal Shared Space schemes across the world – equal priority and low traffic speeds means that the two can co-exist with greater safety than under our present segregated system. Furthermore, if short car journeys are to be replaced by more cycling under the provisions of the Mini-Holland plans, traffic density will be reduced.

But inevitably there will be difficult problems. Two spring to mind: three bus routes and HGVs. Personally I think the bus route issue hardly matters because drivers are managed by Transport for London which can control speed. Also bus stops can be moved. However HGVs are a different kettle of fish because controlling their presence is really a matter for national government, although personal observation suggests that they are relatively infrequent users of either Green Lanes or Aldermans Hill.

Speaking generally I think it is next to certain that the future of cities, towns and villages is on the cusp of change to a society which puts quality of life before the convenience of travel by car. Society will doubtless resist because mindset says that current mores are the only way to live, but the facts which argue against that are stark.

Here’s one of them: published statistics say that car ownership in London per person is dropping, but looking around me, and occasionally driving locally, I see streets more clogged with traffic and parked cars than ever before. Indeed the parked cars are often the best insurance for the safety of cyclists and especially pedestrians. But now a clue emerges which probably explains the apparent dichotomy: Transport for London is forecasting that congestion will have increased by 25% by 2031 in Inner London, apparently as a result of population growth. Presumably this growth will also affect the outer boroughs because this is where most of the growth will occur, but can you imagine what anything like a 20% increase locally would do to our streets? No wonder the council worked so hard to secure funds from the Mini-Holland scheme to encourage people to cycle.

And so back to the future of the Palmers Green Triangle. Quality of life, cleaner air and harsh statistics demand change to an urban culture which walks and cycles more often, and depends far more on public transport. In these circumstances local shopping could well become more fashionable again, which presupposes a better environment – the so-called public realm – for walkers and cyclists close to home. The Triangle could become a significant part of that public realm.

I think there are times when we need to let the council draw on what information they have, and in the case of Palmers Green that’s now quite a lot, plus their own experience to move items forward a stage. Consulting on everything, at every step, is one huge overhead and also near guaranteed to stymie even the best laid plans. It strikes me that’s why we both elect and pay for various individuals to lead, oversee and carry out such background work, reflecting a plethora of stakeholder plus regulatory, legal and political requirements.

Coordination or cross functional working is a problem in most every organisation and one that has kept numerous consultancies in profit for several decades. No doubt due to the twin influences of individual power thirsts and the frequent employee trait of seeing trees rather than the wood they will still be drawing profit from the same issue for several decades to come.

But how brilliant that LBE succeeded and will be bringing home £30m+ plus a potential substantive addition through match funding. Often it’s the winning that counts and in this case they surely all deserve a hearty well done rather more than why a general consultation on public perceptions of town centre issues didn’t publically dovetail with planning for a live, heavily cycling-based initiative. Now we can look forward to the spending of some of the crumbs seemingly slated for the Palmers Green improvements, long argued for, and long accepted, pending capital becoming available.

Looking forward does seem to require a what it is “we”, being all stakeholders, may be seeking as objectives. For me it’s a future rather than a past. Looking at the core shopping area plus the Triangle fulcrum this would include:
• Improved traffic flow;
• Safer and easier pedestrian / shopper movements;
• Business benefits; and
• Reduced air pollution

In achieving such objectives I would seek to clearly differentiate PG centre from the mile after mile of Green Lanes look-a-like shopping parades.

Like David Hughes I’m baffled by any fixation to a piece of tarmac which only serves as a hindrance to traffic flow and is close to useless as a useable public space. Only this week in working with the Business Association senior team on their Shopping Festival we concluded the range of facilities we could put on the tarmac, for what should be one of the most important annual events in that space, was close to zero.

So as an objective I would add, to maximise the ground level area of the Triangle – as defined by David Hughes - as useable public space without compromising the needs of through traffic. What that looks like I don’t know, nor care, but give me a space where it would be possible to occasionally erect a stage for performers; a bouncy castle for kids; gazebos for street food; and permanently to have the option of tables for shoppers to enjoy a refreshment break; locals to meet and chat and a plethora of other possibilities. That seems a whole lot more attractive than sitting on a bench in a badly shaped roundabout with its unnecessarily complex traffic management arrangements. A tarmac triangle with the occasional horse and cart was well before my time and I’m happy to leave it there.

Perhaps we should let the tarmacked traffic island triangle shape go the same way as the WC railings because after all, despite all the fuss, have they really been on anyone’s top 1000 items of local issue-concern these last few election months. Let me suggest not and doubt I’ll be shot down in too many flames by saying so.

The money is won, a mandate is held, and overall it seems a good time to design a future that fits. I suspect there won’t be a better chance for this generation.