Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Consultation Documents Issued for Harringay's High Street
Further to my post last week, Haringey Council have today started a consultation for the Trader and GLA led project to spruce up Harringay's stretch of Green Lanes.
A copy of a six-page fold out document detailing the options for consultation is being posted through the letter boxes of Harringay residents today.
If you're a home and you've seen it, what do you think? Do you like the lights on top of the Salisbury?
Link: Online Consultation
Tags for Forum Posts: harringay regeneration 2012-13, high street parking, high streets, outer london fund
- Attachments:
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Would, not just could. I'm not convinced about TfL's bus lane feelings. I think we need to keep up the pressure.
Keep in mind that the council's long term plan for traffic in Harringay was to build a one way bypass to the east of Green Lanes, make Wightman Rd one way the other way and pedestrianise Green Lanes. The intersection of Wightman Rd and Hornsey Park is illustrative. Those roads never used to meet at all and the current configuration is a hangover from when London was going to tie itself in knots with urban motorways.
-
Permalink Reply by Burgoyne Bec on
-
I think there are some very clever ideas in the consultation document, but share the concerns about the removal of bus lanes. Whilst improving the pedestrian experience would be ideal, we can't lose sight of the fact that Green Lanes is a busy public road, and the impact on journey times and driver frustration must be taken into account. In that respect, I am glad to hear tfl are in the lead.
On the street narrowing at the bottom of various roads, I can see the appeal and from a purely selfish point of view I support it. However, the roads selected must be ones with potential for outdoor uses having a narrower road where there are estate agents and betting shops just seems a bad idea! So whilst i understand the comments about moving the Burgoyne Road one yto allow traffic to move faster, i also think it would be a shame to miss out on having an outdoor pub experience at the old ale emporium, simply to allow more traffic onto the lanes.
-
-
I wonder if that could go on the 'table' for consideration? I wouldn't be against traffic going up Burgoyne if it meant we could have more outdoor spaces!
-
Permalink Reply by Maddy on
-
I would vote against traffic going down Umfreville - we had it for almost a year at one point and there was a constant traffic jam stretching back to the middle of the road. I think Burgoyne should be left as is, because it functions quite well; if it were made narrower the residents would suffer a lot from the back-up of traffic.
-
-
the wood green plan -the scheme is disappointing. there is no timing, not even a proposed or estimated end date.
and the plans are disjointed - the wood green plan goes as far as turnpike lane - the green lanes plan as far as hewitt road just north of the salisbury. so there is a big stretch between turnpike lane and the salisbury where there are no planned improvements.
I can see 3 new trees proposed around turnpike lane station and some clutter ( including safety railings !!! ) removed in the artists impression. thats about it for ducketts common as the plan doesnt include it.
the paving was replaced some years ago on wg high st, unfortunately badly laid and poor quality. if they propose replacing this - they might use quality paving laid properly. etc etc etc etc. this is basic stuff.
the council etc should put together a decent plan before asking for comments, and at least explain why there plans are disjointed.
-
-
"Safety" railings are being removed all over London. The general thinking is that they cause more problems with cyclists being squeezed up against them without an exit route as opposed to the small risk of a car mounting the pavement.
There's also a general movement towards "decluttering" the pavements in the past few years.
-
Permalink Reply by Col on
-
Does anyone know if TfL have ever actually done any traffic modelling on the one way idea with Green Lanes and Wightman Road? I raised it earlier - and whilst rubbished, my experience of Wightman road is that it's not exactly quiet and there is traffic flowing both ways (as with Endymion road as well - that whole area as a cyclist is a nightmare). All I'm wondering is, would it really make a huge difference in the volume of traffic - i.e. what % increase would there potentially be? If it does then clearly it's a problem, but given the level of noise against removing bus lanes (whilst also appreciating that traffic on Green Lanes around the ladder is a bit of a mare at the best of times) it does offer some form of a solution - which don't seem to be particularly forthcoming...
-
-
good idea and should be looked at, 2 way traffic on green lanes and often on wightman rd isnt working, regarding the difficulty to residents of 1 way which has been posed, i would say that the ladder is key here, there are so many roads between green lanes and wightman, that the disruption might be minimised.
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
I drive up and down on Green lanes and Wightman every day with no problems. what do you mean it isn't working ?
-
-
You know, i think its worth thinking about too. I know that residents of Wightman and Endymion wouldn't necessarily be keen on it, but if it was clear that 70% of traffic was one way - and that it would actually reduce the load on their road, surely changing the traffic flows would make sense? My point here is - before we all jump up and down about things it's good to have the actual evidence of what the impact on the area is.
-
-
A couple of summers ago we did a traffic survey and from it I found that a lot of the traffic which you think is heading North/South on Wightman is actually heading East/West. If the traffic lights at Wightman/Hornsey Park were to allow more traffic through Turnpike Lane rather than hiding it in the ladder them this whole point might be moot.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
