Consultation on draft Walking and Cycling Action Plan

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Don on November 12, 2021 at 15:50

The overall strategy is unexceptionable, but the policies have the same limitations as the LTN proposals: all stick and no carrot. There’s nothing about Haringey setting an example by committing to electrifying its vehicle fleet or requiring Veolia, etc, to do so, or working with other boroughs to insist BT, Royal Mail, DPD, etc, do the same (if UPS can have an all-electric fleet, so can they), no proposals for permanent two-way bus lanes in Green Lanes and parking reduction, and no figures to substantiate any claims that rat-running is the problem claimed in the three proposed LTN areas when stats show the boundary roads (especially GL and West Green Road) are far and away more dangerous. If Haringey committed to working with TfL and the DoT to deal with the outstanding and overwhelming borough problem — the fact that GL links the North Circular and Seven Sisters roads — and with TfL to restore cut or diminished bus routes such as the 29, then the plans would be far more convincing.

To get people to stop using cars it’s absolutely necessary to offer a viable alternative first, not just to tell people to stop driving and walk. If public transport is safe, reliable, frequent and affordable, especially for women and late at night, drivers might think twice, but just putting in flower pots and barriers and telling everyone to walk instead doesn’t cut the mustard.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jp quethiock on November 13, 2021 at 12:45

I agree with Don's comments: another massive paper exercise that I assume almost no residents will read but where is the real action the Council itself should be taking?

My own big issue is cycling. I cycle around the Borough outside of the rush hour but have found that the cycling schemes introduced do not make for a safer cycling environment. I won't use Wightman Road since the chicane style scheme was built. It is safer to cycle down Green lanes in the bus lanes. I won't use the cycle scheme on Broad Lane as it fights with pedestrians for space, has no right of way over the roads joining Broad Lane and ends abruptly when the road narrows. It is safer to cycle on the road here which is bizarre. But I am appalled by the cycling I see, wrong way down one way roads, on pavements, jumping lights etc etc. Where is the education about safe cycling and pedestrian safety? The Council document talks of providing "high quality walking and cycling infrastructure". I haven't seen this so far so why would I believe it now? Our roads and pathways are simply not policed so bad behaviour flourishes. The Council for instance allow parking half on roads and pavements but I've never seen a car ticketed when it is parked more on the pavement such that wheelchair users or buggy pushers can't get past. That is one stick that is missing. Ticketing cars without CPZ badges is a nice income stream but it does not make our pavements and streets any safer. Only a visible authority, not planter boxes, can deal with behaviour that is dangerous or anti-social so instead of parking enforcement wardens let's have street wardens committed to safety not income for more road "improvements". Oh well, one can dream.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Don on November 13, 2021 at 17:33

The Commonplace comments website for this consultation works really badly (what a surprise) as only some of the 80+ responses are visible, but the overwhelming balance is very negative. As an example, one commenter (not me) wrote: “Walking and cycling cannot be seen as similar. Most cyclists behave to walkers as cars do to cyclists. Closed roads are not safer for women walking on their own. There is safety in passers-by in cars..... We all want cleaner air. But we also do not need our jobs suffocated by insufficiently good overall planning. London is a working city not a series of villages as this plan seems to maintain. Please can someone enter the real world and find a workable solution.”

• ▶ Reply