Notting Hill Carnival Strategic Review - Intelligent Space

2.53 In 2000, the circular Carnival route that had been introduced by the MPS in 1988 when the
numbers attending Carnival had been considerably less, had been in operation for over ten
years. In assessing the impact of the Carnival’s growth on public safety, levels of crime and
the local environment, there was a clear acknowledgement amongst the majority of
stakeholders that although the Notting Hill Carnival is rooted in Notting Hill and should
remain so, the event had nevertheless outgrown the current area. Residents in particular and
some Carnival participants expressed support for extending the Carnival area, only insofar as
such an extension would ease congestion and reduce crowd density. The congestion and
overcrowding experienced at Carnival 2000 provides clear evidence of the failure of the
current circular route to take account of and respond to Carnival’s increasing popularity and
the dramatic growth in visitor numbers. In its Interim Report, the Review Group concluded
that the inherent inflexibility of the current Carnival route was a fundamental flaw, presenting
serious public safety questions for those seeking to safeguard the welfare of Carnival
participants, spectators and residents.
2.54 “We believe that the current circular design of the Carnival route is closely linked to the
problem of crowd density and congestion. The design of the processional route, absence of
rest areas and exit points, pedestrian flow systems (e.g., one-way routes), location of stewards
and police, and lack of signage significantly influence the safety of crowd movement and
dispersal. We therefore recommend:
a. The immediate introduction of a non-circular route that incorporates an effective entrance
and exit strategy for bands/floats.
b. The use of Hyde Park as a “savannah”. We believe that Notting Hill, is the historical
home of Carnival and must remain at the heart of the festival as the “Carnival Village”.
However, we are convinced that the interests of public safety and the inconvenience
caused to residents requires the creation of an open space dispersal point that will draw
crowds away from residential areas. Crowd management would be easier and safer in a
large open space such as Hyde Park.
c. That a detailed analysis of the current Carnival area be undertaken to assess the risks of
different route designs, pedestrian flow systems and operational plans. We believe that
the Carnival Safety Liaison Group should make use of the services of public and/or private
sector bodies specialising in crowd safety and management. This will facilitate the
establishment of an informed public safety planning process, which identifies potential
areas and patterns of crowd build up, dispersal and movement so that alternative
strategies can be developed and additional resources allocated to minimise the risks to
crowd safety.” 64
2.55 Altering the Carnival area and route was by far the most controversial and sensitive
recommendation of the Carnival Review Group for a number of reasons. For Carnival
participants – masquerade bands in particular – change signified the emergence of huge
logistical questions that would have to been overcome to their satisfaction if implementing
change were to be beneficial and effective. For the statutory agencies, any change, which led
to a wider or dispersed ‘footprint’ of the Carnival area, would raise serious resource
implications for them. Certainly, there had been no rigorous assessment of the design and
function of the processional route in recent years. More than anything else, the
64 Notting Hill Carnival Review: Interim Report & Public Safety Profile Recommendations, Recommendation 4
96