Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Harringay Ladder Traffic - Is One-Way a Solution?
I'm assuming that most Harringay residents will now have received a copy of the local traffic consultation leaflet through their door (scanned copy attached). On the leaflet you'll see four options for the future of how traffic is managed on the Ladder. These are copied in below, exactly as they appear on the leaflet.
Alternative package WL1: Minor improvements: Minor improvements relating to Wightman
Road and the Ladder area, but with lower traffic impacts and costs
Alternative package WL2: Wightman Road one-way (northbound): An intermediate alternative (with intermediate traffic impacts and costs), that would make Wightman Road one-way northbound, with the opportunity to create a continuous cycle facility along Wightman Road
Alternative package WL3: Wightman Road one-way (southbound): The opposite of alternative package WL2, that would make Wightman Road one-way southbound
Alternative package WL4: Wightman Road closed (filtered): The most radical and transformational alternative, that includes the closure (filtering) of Wightman Road, similar to the arrangement that was in place during the bridge replacement works in 2016; this alternative would have significant traffic impacts and costs
When people first heard about the one way option, it seemed to them to be a good option - not too radical, but radical enough to make a difference.
I have to put my hand up and say that I've been against the one-way option from the outset. Across the world one-way systems are being abandoned because they can cause more problems than they solve. Recently Haringey removed the Tottenham Hale one-way system.
Essentially one-way systems create an environment solely based around the needs of the car. Whilst the approach may have a role in certain areas, places where people live are not the right place for it. One way systems favour the movement of the car against all else. They dehumanise an area and make it much less liveable.
I'm told that the one-way option is the solution favoured by the Council. I have to admit to being somewhat suspicious about the reasons for this. Is it a coincidence that this comes at the same time as their plans for Wood Green have revealed that they want Wightman Road to be part of a new primary route to serve a revamped Wood Green? I can't say I'm thrilled about the Ladder being sacrificed as part of Wood Green traffic feeder system. (By the way you have two days left to comment on this, or any other aspect of the Wood Green Plans in the current Wood Green Consultation).
From various studies, I've gathered the following information about how one-way systems impact on neighbourhoods.
1. Studies show that speeds tend to be higher on one-way streets. Two-way streets tend to be slower due to "friction"
2. Safety tends to be lower with studies suggesting that drivers pay less attention on them because there's no conflicting traffic flow. One study showed that collisions are twice as likely in one-way streets as in similar streets with two-way traffic
3. Livability: vehicles stop less on one-way streets, which is hard for bikers and pedestrians.
4. Traffic flows on one-way streets are often significantly higher than on two-way streets.
5. A US study showed that one-way streets are associated with higher crime rates and lower property prices than two way streets. It says that two-way streets "bring slower traffic and, as a result, more cyclists and pedestrians, that also creates more "eyes on the street" — which, again, deters crime. A decline in crime and calmer traffic in turn may raise property values.
South Gloucestershire Council recently issued the following warning:
Many streets suffer from ‘rat-running’ or high volumes of traffic. Creating one-way streets is one way of solving this problem. However, there are also disadvantages to altering the direction of traffic flow in this way. Residents should be aware that the following may occur:
- Some through traffic will simply be diverted onto other, less suitable streets
- The new one-way street may attract more traffic, albeit in the remaining direction
- Residents may have to access their street by an alternative, and less convenient, route, which may involve the use of other neighbouring streets
- Traffic speeds may increase due to drivers’ perception that there is no on-coming traffic
- Without physical traffic calming, there may be an increase in accidents and their severity
- Some short sections of one-way street are likely to be contravened by drivers – which may require police enforcement.
With a possible hint about Haringey's wider agenda, they added "The council is unlikely to create a one-way street in isolation, due to the costs and resources required to carry out such a scheme. It is much more likely that it will consider changing the direction of traffic on a street as part of a wider review of traffic management in an area."
One US Study said, "If your goal is to move traffic quickly from one place to another, then one-ways are a great method to accomplish that. But, if your goal is a productive place with thriving local businesses, then slowing traffic with two-way streets is a much better plan. It's a tried and true method."
For me there's no case at all for a one-way street other than it serves the Council's plans for Wood Green.
Tags for Forum Posts: harringay traffic study
- Attachments:
-
-
Harringay Traffic.pdf, 3.4 MB
-
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Don on
-
Joe -- I'm several thousand miles from Harringay right now and can''t go back to look at previous threads, but thanks for this. I may be inaccurate about pollution and traffic dissipation, but my strong memories of the closure period all relate to sitting, frustrated, in buses on GL as normal journeys took two or three times as long as before and 29s were turned back or cut short because they couldn't make their journeys. It's not something I'd want to return to.
-
Permalink Reply by Jono Kenyon on
-
Hi Hugh,
Whilst historically I would agree with you entirely on the 1 way street issue it is worth highlighting more recent schemes. Tavistock place in Camden showed that the creation of a one way street with high quality cycling provision and widened footpaths could be of benefit to all. It avoids the well known problems associated with 1 way streets that you have highlighted. https://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/transport-and-streets/transpo...
FWIW I would fully support option 4, but I wouldn't discount 2&3 automatically.
Regards,
Jono
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Tavistock place isn't residential.
-
-
There are some shops and hotels, but not sure I would agree. Tavistock is hugely residential. The point I am making is not to be too quick to judge 'one way streets' They can look and feel very differently. Lane widths are of huge importance, as are what else is on the street in terms of pedestrian crossings, cycle tracks and parking.
-
Permalink Reply by JoeW on
-
Closer to home than Tavistock would be these examples:
The blue-circled streets are one-way, I don't live there but when I've walked around this area it seems generally effective at reducing ratrunning (most obviously, traffic cutting through from Tottenham Lane (A103) to head south.
The Ladder road layout is quite different so I can't see one-way reducing traffic; many ratrunning routes would become much easier so will actually increase.
The green-circled area is similar to the filtering option i.e. a "loop" going down one road and back up the next. This is obviously most effective at eliminating ratrunning since any traffic which has no business on those roads will have no reason to use them. The green-circled area is "filtered" i.e. pedestrians and cyclists can still continue on Uplands Road.
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Thanks for sharing this Jono. I'm not completely closed to the benefits of one-way systems in certain circumstances.. From what you say it does sound like the Tavistock Road scheme is well thought through and it might be that it's appropriate for the location.
Though I have my doubts, it may also be true that a well thought through, well funded and well implemented scheme would work for Wightman Road. However, I remain sceptical on several counts. Firstly this isn't just about creating a one-way road it's about consolidating a one-way system that already exists. We already have the 19 rung roads that have been made one-way to facilitate the flow of rat-running traffic. To add Wightman Road to that just makes matters worse in all the respects I noted above. I'd rather hoped for a solution that would put people first and not the needs of rat-running traffic.
Secondly, it seems likely that the Tavistock scheme was well-thought through, well implemented and above all well-funded. This may not be replicable locally.
It's also true, as John says that the route of this scheme is not mainly residential. It's certainly very different in nature for the suburban residential road that Wightman Road is.
-
-
Hi Hugh,
Yes all very good points! Regarding funding, have you considered speaking to the new walking and cycling commissioner, Will Norman? TfL have launched a new initiative called #healthystreets which is to prioritise people in streets rather than than motor vehicles. Maybe TfL could be brought in to look at helping make option 4 a viable option?
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
I worked in Planning (where this Transport Planning team were then situated) when this scheme was being worked up. To make it successful they involved Transport for London, Camden Cycling Campaign, London Cycling Campaign, Living Streets, University College London and the University of London as well as local residents (and there is a huge amount of residential on the street in the mansion blocks and above shops) right from the outset. From memory it was very, very expensive so they sought funding from a number of sources, not just money from Camden.
-
-
Oh so that makes Green Lanes residential too.
-
-
Not in the same way. The bit of Tavistock Street between Judd Street and Marchmont street is almost solely residential in blocks up to six stories high. Probably a couple of hundred flats in about 100m. It also has a huge hostel, The Generator, which houses something like 200 people at any one time.
I personally am not that keen on the one way at Tavistock anyway. As a pedestrian it's incredibly confusing when crossing as you just can't be certain which direction vehicles and bikes are coming from so your head spins around like Linda Blair in The Exorcist trying to judge when it's OK to cross.
-
-
HoL is ten years old in July and the fact that this is happening in conjunction with that milestone is utterly depressing. Combined with how the council are aiming their guns at the private householders of Caxton Rd and you see what this really is: Traderville.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
