Report of Walk on Area 3: Elmfield. Sunday 17th May 11.00
I concentrated on the northern boundary of this area, as the southern is essentially the middle of Crouch End. The aim was to ascertain where we might make our first suggestion of boundaries, with of course the consultation being the opportunity for these to be discussed and altered in view of local opinion.
Priory Park & Middle Lane.
Priory Park as the northern boundary of the west side of Middle Lane is logical. The question is whether that boundary should extend to the east side. I talked to a gentleman in 114c Middle Lane, which is the last house before the Methodist Church. He was the opinion he was in Hornsey, although used both areas for shopping etc. He did indicate he used the old use of Hornsey = parish of Hornsey. However in view of the argument below re Lightfoot Lane I suggest we consider this as within the northern boundary.
I know of several people in Rokesley on both sides who would regard themselves as in Couch End, and I think it is beyond dispute that this road should be included. This raises the question of the northern boundary.
This probably is the most contentious area. On the southern side of Lightfoot Road lie a group of terraced houses. I spoke to one individual who definitely viewed themselves as being part of Couch End, and was interested in the forum. I know of another individual who has the same opinion. So this raises the question of whether Lightfoot Road should be in the CENF area.
The northern side of Lightfoot Road does not, strictly, exist any more, having been redeveloped into the Lightfoot Estate, with the back doors of properties on Minster Walk facing on to the northern edge of Lightfoot Road. I therefore put some effort into getting opinion in Minster Walk. One individual I spoke to at home was of the opinion that the house was definitely in Hornsey, and was interested in CENF but was certain their area was outside. I tried to engage with 4 people in the street but they were not interested in discussion. In contrast, one individual I met in Hillfield Avenue, a resident of Grove House Road, which is further north, called herself a ‘born-and-bred’ Crouch Ender, having lived before in Uplands Road.
Despite this, I would suggest that the southern side of Lightfoot Road be considered the northern boundary. There is some sensitivity about this, given that the two sides of the street have different housing tenures, but it some ways it matches the geography. Lightfoot Road is the ‘peak’ of the rise from Crouch End, and the land then falls away to Hornsey High Street from the northern side. This also fits with the issue of Hermiston Avenue (vide infra).
This is bisected by Rokesley Avenue. The northern part shows a steep rise to join Lightfoot Road. I talked to individuals at the top of the road, which has a fine view of Crouch End. They were firmly of the opinion of being in the CENF area, and were interested and engaged. I think therefore the all of Hermiston be included.
Hillfield shows a similar steep rise up from Rokesley, and I interviewed individuals on the eastern and western sides of the rise. They were both of the opinion of being in Crouch End, and were interested in CENF. I therefore suggest that this area be included. This leaves the difficulty of drawing the northern boundary cut-off.
At the top of the rise Harold Road joins from the east, and the road then descends. Kitchener House is a notable landmark building that straddles the peak. I had no success in talking to anyone in Kitchener House (multiple single room flats), nor the adjoining development, but it seems logical to include them.
Further down Hillfield I was able to interview two residents on the western side, one of whom was very certain they were in Hornsey, and one lower down who were equally certain they were in Crouch End (coincidentally, this was the house of a noted Hornsey and Crouch End activist). On the eastern side I was unable to get any engagement from 3 flats I called upon.
This is a difficult one, in view of the differing opinions. In the end, I reluctantly suggest that we let geography be our guide, with the top of the hill being the boundary.
Harold Road joins Tottenham Lane, and it is important to determine this with the corresponding junction at the east of Rokesley Avenue and Tottenham Lane. I coincidentally met the landlady of the Hope & Anchor whilst there, and she was very certain that her pub was in Hornsey. I called on several houses in the road, and of the two that answered neither were prepared to engage with me. I suggest that Harold Road be not included in the CENF area at first draft and the residents should make the case if they wish to be included.
The eastern end of Rokesley joins Tottenham Lane, and at the moment the boundary is proposed to be at that junction. As Hornsey Parish Church is the first building north of there, it seems this is logical. There is a building called North Point between the church and the Hope & Anchor. This is notoriously difficult to canvass, and therefore I did not try. I suggest we do not include this are and again let the residents make their case should they wish. Therefore this confirms the area 3 boundary as originally shown on the map.
Ten questionnaires were completed and are available for analysis.