Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
More Traffic Headed for Wightman - 2 days to Act
Last October I raised the issue that possible street closures in surrounding areas would displace traffic our way.
One of the areas was Crouch End.
A consultation for those living/working in the area is in progress and one of the options being consulted on is the closure to through traffic (except for buses, emergency vehicles and cyclists) of one or more major roads, such as The Broadway.
A traffic survey for the Crouch End project suggests such a change might mean 2000 more vehicles a day in both directions for Wightman.
Harringay residents can make their views known via the questionnaire.
To complete the questionnaire go to:
https://www.haringey.gov.uk/parking-roads-and-travel/roads-and-stre...
After the initial section you can opt to only complete the one on traffic. The deadline is 2 February.
Postscript navigation note: (For oversized lorry stuck on Warham, see P14, here.)
Tags for Forum Posts: liveable crouch end, liveable neighbourhoods, oversize hgvs on warham, traffic
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Elizabeth M on
-
It appears that lots of traders seem to believe that they should get to drive to their shops and in Crouch End at least hop between the East and west sides of the Broadway to avoid the CPZs.
-
Permalink Reply by andy thomas on
-
But this behaviour is so 19th century!
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Thanks, Tom. But your ‘inclination to think’ that traffic won’t be displaced to Wightman rather echoes Elizabeth’s faith in the likelihood of modal shift. The consultants’ work, as shown on the maps, tells a very different story. Sadly, that narrative matches our own bitter experience. I say again - simple solution - deal with Harringay & Crouch End simultaneously. Ah, but there’s the rub. Very recent experience tells us that Haringey is just not willing to tackle Wightman’s issues. Until they prove beyond doubt that they are, how can you expect any reasonable person to be in the least reassured by your well intentioned inclinations or Elizabeth’s blind faith?
-
-
I don't have blind faith - modal shift is a fully researched and evidenced phenomenon. It happened in Walthamstow. It happens all over the world. These schemes would be pointless if all they did was displace or increase traffic. Perhaps you are right and car drivers going through Crouch End are particularly special and immune to modal shift but I doubt it. I do fully agree with you that Haringey should have done a scheme which was much much wider.
-
Permalink Reply by Zena Brabazon on
-
I am surprised by Living Streets. Success for who and at whose expense? If the price is displaced traffic I can't see how that can be successful. Traffic schemes demand a big overall holistic approach. Otherwise, it seems to me , they run the risk of pitting one community against another. Not very sensible or sustainable.
Zena Brabazon
Deputy Leader, Haringey Council
Cabinet Member for Children and Families
Cllr, Harringay ward
-
-
Zena - as per Tom’s point the scheme must deliver overall traffic reduction (and increased walking/cycling/public transport) that’s what is deemed a success. It’s absolutely not about displacement, the ambition is reducing car journeys. A message went out to members to show their support for ‘safer, greener, less polluted streets across the community’ , we’re working hard to call for low traffic neighbourhoods across the borough, and a number of local ward level groups have set up to ask for exactly that. We’d love to see more central resource from the council to support this, at the same time we need to show TFL that we are a borough committed and able to deliver liveable neighbourhood schemes. We’re saying the CE scheme has to be delivered well, and ultimately extended across the borough. I think that’s fair?
-
-
Thanks Catherine. Nothing to disgree with, except I am not convinced that Liveable Crouch End will lead to what you are saying. the maps tell a very different story. I hope the meeting with Kirsten and the officers will give me more confidence than the survey. The fact that Harringay councillors have had to press for a meeting isn't a very good starting point. But, onwards and upwards.
Zena Brabazon
Deputy Leader, Haringey Council
Cabinet Member for Children and Families
Cllr, Harringay ward
-
-
Zena,
It's really important to note that traffic modelling done by Project Centre is extremely limited in scope and subject to a number of assumptions (see the last page in the report). It would be really wrong to take this as gospel. Particularly:
1. There's no modelling of modal shift/induced demand. (A key aim of the scheme! Note that this is also generally poorly done in most traffic studies due to the cost/complexity of this kind of model - hence, e.g. traffic in Waltham Forest being better than predicted prior to the Mini Holland implementation)
2. No local traffic is included. (Another key aim of the scheme, to enable modal shift for local traffic).
3. Traffic re-routing is done based on distance, not on journey time. (i.e. the assumption is that no-one uses Waze etc!)
I just want to caution against using "2000 vehicles more on Wightman" as a fixed outcome. Of course, more detailed modelling may show a variety of outcomes; and this is not to negate the basic point that the situation in Harringay is untenable with or without the Crouch End scheme.
Please, however, recognise that the kind of treatment being proposed for Crouch End is the "right answer" (based on lots of evidence of what works) and Haringey as a whole needs more schemes like this (a lot more!) - the issue is the extent to which Harringay is being excluded/forced to suffer.
Edit E.g. see https://www.highwaysmagazine.co.uk/Limited-visibility-How-do-we-mod... for evidence that current best practice in traffic modelling generally does not capture modal demand effects.
-
-
+1 to that Daniel.
-
Permalink Reply by JoeW on
-
Daniel, the forecast map seems to suggest a 5000 vehicle per day increase on Wightman, not 2000. And that's only between 7am and 7pm. Previous measurements showthere are already about 14000 vehicles per day on Wightman. So the projections suggest the Crouch End scheme would increase Wightman by well over 30%!
I note your points about modal shift etc. but Wightman's traffic is already unacceptable for a local street, to contemplate the Crouch End without at the same time mitigating the impact on Wightman (the cheapest and most effective solution being filtering) is pretty shocking.
-
-
Good spot. Yes, I don't disagree, the situation on Wightman is untenable as things stand. I just really wanted to highlight the issues with over-reliance on traffic modelling - it's just a piece of the evidence puzzle in what is a complex system and debate.
-
Permalink Reply by JulieB on
-
IMHO closing/filtering Wightman Road isn't 'cheap and effective'. As GLATS showed the cost of mitigation for this was 'high' in their study - several £millions from memory. So if closures in Crouch End need mitigating measures on Wightman Road, then I would say we need corresponding mitigating measures on a much wider area before any changes take place.
Like others have said, I agree that it needs to be looked at on a holistic level, not small piecemeal changes. Experience shows us that changes take a long time to happen (lack of funding, consultations are not quick and easy etc), so if the Crouch End road closures go ahead it could be years before any other changes/mitigations happen.
Thank you for the heads up Hugh, I managed to complete the survey before the deadline.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
