Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Green Lanes Transport Study - Final Report
The Green Lanes Area Transport Study has taken two years, and cost about £200,000, to complete, and was intended to address the longstanding problem of excessive traffic in the area, and consequent issues of safety, pollution and (in the consultant's jargon) "loss of amenity" to residents. The final report was published today without much fanfare.
The above photo from the cover of the report shows motorists, cyclists and buggy-pushing pedestrians apparently co-existing in harmony at the tree-lined junction of Burgoyne Road with Green Lanes, with Stanhope Gardens (one of the side streets on the eastern side of Green Lanes which enjoys protection from rat-running) receding quietly into the distance. I assume the subliminal message here is that everything is already hunky-dory, there is little room for improvement and all we can do is tinker around the edges?
I've attached a copy of the report to this post or you can download it and various other documents from the Council's webpage at http://www.haringey.gov.uk/transport/green-lanes-area-transport-study.
I actually think £200K would be good value if the report recommended measures which would significantly improve the quality of life of local residents - measures to reduce traffic and pollution, measures to make walking more attractive, or make cycling safer so that more people would choose those "active transport modes" and have healthier lives. Unfortunately I can't see many measures that will make much difference.
Tags for Forum Posts: harringay traffic study
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
This consultation thing is new isn't it? I thought politicians had a list of things they intended to do (called a manifesto) and we elected them to do those things and then that was it? They put nothing in their manifestos so need to constantly consult with a much narrower audience. It's rubbish.
Give us candidates that have specific anti-car measures and we'll vote for them.
-
-
I have the trader's report. It does not deserve a wider audience but grab me next time you see me and I'll show you. Apparently they paid £5000 for it which is why there is no Christmas Tree outside the Salisbury this year.
-
Permalink Reply by Rory on
-
I wrote a long, angry response to this and then deleted it. What's the point.
-
Permalink Reply by Dolomite Police on
-
This is what you get when one political party dominates the council and knows it will continue to do so.
-
-
It's not that simple but thanks anyway.
-
-
I feel "lucky" I am blood type O.
-
Permalink Reply by Adrian Hackney on
-
From Twitter. He has a big majority to overturn, but the time and the mood might be right
IN the Haringey Council May 2018 elections, I will re-stand. I am pleased to confirm that the @HaringeyLibDems have selected me to represent the @LibDemsParty in Northumberland Park Ward. I intend to campaign on the #HDV issue and to offer a strong, coherent voice for residents.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Does that mean that Cllr Carter was deselected by the LibDems in Highgate where he is currently a councillor?
-
-
No! He was not deselected. He is a principled man of honour and a hero who is going to fight the HDV from Northumberland Park and bring attention to it. Lots of attention.
You Billy, are not cut from the same cloth as Councillor Carter. You would check the wicket and the clouds and ask to bat 4 if it wasn't in your favour but fight like a banshee to open on a flat track against 14 year-olds.
-
-
No, this was completely his choice. He’s opening the batting against Malcom Marshall and Joel Garner and relishing it.
-
-
My assumption is that Cllr Carter has chosen to take the fight to the front line. He is a determined opponent of HDV. This is well off the topic of GLTS for which I apologise. It is in response to Dolomite Police's comment "This is what you get when one political party dominates the council and knows it will continue to do so".
-
-
I’ve read the introduction to this report again to try and get some sense of the issues it purports to address. It seems to be in three main parts. I’ve only looked at The Ladder as it’s the area I know.
Traffic volumes. Where is it all coming from
When they looked at what was moving through the area they were able to identify journeys that started or ended in the study area. So that is someone leaving from a place in the area or arriving and ending their journey in the area - local journeys in other words rather than just passing through. Of these only 17% involved the use of a car or van. The remaining journeys were undertaken on foot (over a third), by bus, rail/tube or bike. I would expect the emphasis then to be on what was being put in place for those making 83% of non-car journeys
Traffic speeds. On Wightman 1 in 3 cars exceeded 20mph. On Hampden it was a staggering 1 in 2. The traffic data collected some of the speeds captured on Ladder Roads exceeding 60mph. Where are the concrete proposals to deal with his? We have road humps and road narrowing at the moment and this patently doesn’t work
Pollution
Turnpike Lane, Green Lanes, Frobisher Road, Endymion Road, Wollaston Road and Willoughby Road all failed the meet NO2 air pollution targets. While buses are a major contributor to NO2 levels on GL and Turnpike the same cannot be said for the other roads so they suffer because of high traffic volumes. Where are the proposals to reduce overall traffic volumes, with the majority of traffic passing through the area, to counter this?
I’m certain the consultants didn’t miss these issues. The report reads like possible solutions to these problems have been left out.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
