Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Harringay Traffic meeting Outcome
Exactly three weeks ago today, I added a post on HoL pointing out the failure to convene a traffic meeting about Harringay's traffic. Just over a week later, a meeting seems to have been hurriedly arranged at rather short notice. I'm sure the two events were linked only by coincidence.
That meeting was last night at Alexandra House on Station Road in Wood Green. I was expecting to see a handful of the locals who normally turn up for these things. However, I was surprised to find a large room with about 50 - 100 people, all apparently eager to hear of progress.
We were graciously met at the building's reception desk by traffic boss, Cllr, Mike Hakata. Joking with Mike and looking about his person, I asked him where he was hiding his magic wand. His coy and slightly embarrassed reaction rather set the tone for the evening.
The meeting began with a long and very detailed explanation about why it had taken so long to get yesterday's meeting set up. The room was then given a clear message. In a nutshell, we were given the standard explanation of the past twenty years, that doing anything about traffic on the Ladder is too difficult and that all possibilities had been deemed impractical. Cllr Hakata didn't discount that one day the Council would magically find the solution that has been so stubbornly been evading them all these decades, but for the time being the focus was moving away from reducing traffic volume and on to safety - and away from Wightman and the Ladder rung roads and on to Green Lanes. More on that in just a minute.
Below is a copy of the slide Mike showed to explain the decision to abandon traffic calming on the Ladder.
There was plenty of disgruntled reaction to the slide but surprisingly little direct dissection of it. Having said that, whilst I think most people understand the issue raised in the first point and few have any appetite for clogging up Green Lanes, one person did make the point that once again the Ladder seems to have come at the end of the queue and the bowl is empty. The resident pointed out that with all other through routes already closed off by LTNs or other traffic control blockages, of course options are now limited because traffic is now so concentrated on Green Lanes and Wightman Road.
With regards to the second point on the slide, which essentially indicates technical reasons why filtering won't work on the Ladder, I asked Mike how the filtering currently works for the two school streets. He confirmed what I thought - APNR, but he hurried to add some explanation that now eludes me about why that couldn't work on the Ladder as a whole. I didn't want to get into a pointless disagreement with Mike about that, but as I understand it the LTNs at Hammersmith and Fulham work very effectively100% by APNR, where residents' cars are registered and are excepted from penalties. Clearly it would need more research, but having rechecked my facts this morning, here's what Google AI tells us:
How They Work
Enforcement: ANPR cameras record vehicle registration numbers. Drivers without valid permits who use restricted roads as shortcuts receive fines, which can range from £60 to £130.
Access: The schemes aim to stop out-of-borough traffic from cutting through residential streets, but they do not prevent access to any location within the borough.
Permits and Exemptions:Borough Residents can travel freely through the camera points if their vehicle is registered in the borough.
Visitors to residents can be registered for access using the RingGo app or website.
Carers can apply for free exemptions if they look after residents within the zone.
Some services like Uber have a technical solution to automatically exempt their drivers during a pickup or dropoff in the zone.
Mike swept away further concerns about traffic volumes with a reassurance that those same Ladder School Streets schemes that operate so successfully with APNR are lowering not only the traffic of the streets themselves, they are also having a knock-on effect on the neighbouring streets. The message seemed almost to be that we'll have to content ourselves with that for now.
As to Green Lanes, there are some plans. Mike was at pains to underline how very expensive these plans would be and how many millions each part of the plan would cost. There was no detail on exactly what the treatment would be, but the aim is to target the safety record of the road, which Mike explained is very much the worst in the borough. What we were able to find out is that the plans would see four (or was it five) junctions being somehow remodelled to improve safety. There was no slide to show the details, but from memory, going from North to South, I think those junctions were Turnpike Lane, Frobisher/Alfoxton, Colina Road and Endymion Road.
Quite a number of people suggested that the best solution for Harringay's Green Lanes, costing a fraction of the proposed plans, would be to remove parking from the road entirely, but the room was told that there are no immediate plans to do this. It seems, for some reason he didn't explain, that whilst reducing traffic volume is seen as the key to safety elsewhere in the borough, in Harringay magic roundabouts (or was it junctions) are the trick. Cllr Hakata also seemed unable to give any reassurance that the Green Lanes plans would ensure that traffic wasn't simply displaced on the the Ladder.
Perhaps, unsurprisingly, the meeting ended in quite a fractious mood with Mike Hakata appearing to be rather testily batting away an unwelcome swarm of autumn bees.
Was I or anyone else at all reassured by last night? No, I don't think so. If anything, I left with heightened concerns about the future for our neighbourhood. This in the year before local elections tells us that they see Harringay as in the bag already, I guess.
I conclude with the cartoon I used for my recent post on this issue and somewhat retract the apologies I gave at the end of that post for my uncharacteristic pessimism.
Tags for Forum Posts: traffic
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Caitlin
-
Hi Declan, thank you for sharing this. Did you start the petition or do you know who did? Someone from the Haringay Ladder living streets campaign is interested in coordinating efforts on this petition
-
-
I'm glad I called off going to this meeting. What a farce. The worst aspect of this omnishambles is that promising ideas have been floated by the Cllr, peoples' hope were raised, we had great expectations!
Labour have scored an own goal, the Greens are snapping at their heels and ready to pounce.
I would like to see some data:
- What percentage of cars parked on Green Lanes belong to the people who work in the shops and restaurants ?
- How much (if anything) to they pay per day for this privilege ?
- How many fines are issued during the daytime for unpaid parking ?
Would it be possible to get this with FOIs ? Even a simple daily survey would yield some answers.
I can give an anecdote: a premises that I patronise, at least 3 cars park belonging to the owners park outside their place for free on Green Lanes every day. Walk up-and-down and take a look at cars with packaging belonging to a premises parked outside.
While we are on the subject if cars, Haringey has THE WORST cycle infrastructure of any borough in North London. No wonder people are reportedly terrified of using Green Lanes , it's deeply unpleasant to cycle. Coming back up North from the City or Central during the evening rush hour, you have to dodge the parked cars ("just popping in the Yashar for a minute"), u-turns, busses and evil delivery scooters.
Thanks for letting me vent my 2cs.
The next LCSP* is on Thursday 20th (tomorrow), 7pm at the church on corner of Alison Rd. Traffic is on the agenda.
*Ladder Community Safety Partnership. (No website, no digital footprint ... )
-
Permalink Reply by Dick Harris
-
I am glad to say that the full draft local plan does have a sixteen-page chapter called Sustainable travel. This chapter is available as a pdf at https://haringeynewlocalplan.commonplace.is/proposals/sustainable-t...
and it is open for consultation. I have not studied it closely but it clearly contains many provisions that could be used to justify aims that have been expressed in this still growing thread.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter
-
DICK, Haringey Council has published documents relating to "sustainable travel" for at least 20 years.
One—written in 2004—mentions "sustainable" six times. I've attached at the foot, The Haringey Cycle Action Plan. That was also to go out for consultation … in June 2004.
Page 16 shows the programme for implementation and the timescale. Highways would likely have supported nothing in the council action plan, except for the introduction of 20 mph speed limits. As this is unenforced, it is of little or no benefit for cyclists in any event.
The production of pdfs without meaningful action leads to a credibility gap.
I've also retrieved my screenshot of July 2021 being a job description for Haringey's Head of Traffic Management (below). Residents can judge for themselves how much progress this department has made over the last four years ~
- Attachments:
-
-
Cycle_Action_Plan_1_.pdf, 82 KB
-
-
-
I was intrigued the following phrase in one of Mark Michael’s posts: “disproportionate impact on traffic flow, which would put the Haringey Council in breach of its network management duty.”
I hasten to say that I am not a lawyer but I have looked up what appears to be the statutory basis for this text. It is to be found in Sections 16 and 17 of the Road Traffic Act 2004 – extract in the attached Word docDuty%20of%20network%20management.docx. A layman’s first reading of this might lead one to suppose that any LTN would be unlawful but it is clear from the existence of guidance issued under this Act by the Secretary of State for Transport that local authorities have very wide discretion in how they comply with the duty.
The full 2004 guidance appears in the attached pdf Network%20duty%20guidance%202004.pdfbut, as an example, it points out that “traffic” includes pedestrians and that utilities who own and run the infrastructure under the road surface are also users of the network. The following useful paragraphs also hint further at what I mean:
“15. The duty is not limited to the actions of the traffic department within an authority. Local authorities will need to consider the duty when exercising any power that can affect the road network. Although the duty is framed by reference to a “local traffic authority”, it extends to the authority exercising its powers as highway authority and street authority under the 1980 Act and 1991 Act, and indeed any power to regulate or co-ordinate the uses made of any road.”
“38. Government and local authorities have been looking at ways of reducing the demand so as to moderate or stem traffic growth even when the economy is growing. This has resulted in changes to land use plans, the establishment of school and workplace travel plans, and the promotion of tele-working amongst other things. More directly this has led to the desire to make cycling and walking safer and more attractive and the encouragement of public transport through ticketing schemes or better information, bus priority and quality initiatives, and congestion charging. These can all help to secure the more efficient use of the road network and successful measures can have an impact on its operation. They should not be seen as being in conflict with the principles of the duty and it is for the LTA to decide on the most appropriate approach for managing demand on their own network.”
All of the recent LTNs in London were introduced after the 2004 guidance came into force. In response to the recent clamour against some of the LTNs, the government recently issued additional guidance on the implementation of LTNs specifically. This 2024 guidance is also attached - as a Word docStatutory%20guidance%20for%20LTNs.docx. Readers may be interested to know that it uses the expression through-traffic with what might be thought to be its natural meaning. The very existence of this guidance shows that LTNs can be consistent with Haringey’s statutory duty to manage the road network.
I would say that the bottom line of this analysis is, that Clive Carter is right to imply that decisions in this matter need not be the exclusive province of the “highwaymen” and that, if they are not satisfied by the present arrangements, councillors could change them.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- …
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
© 2025 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
