Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

The council have put out a draft Request for Quotation for a Transport Study of the Harringay area and are asking for comments - to Razak.Mahama@haringey.gov.uk - by the 6th of November.

The link to the page on the council website page about it is:  http://www.haringey.gov.uk/parking-roads-and-travel/roads-and-stree... or the document itself is attached here: Green%20Lanes%20Transport%20Study%20Brief.pdf.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out. From the historical traffic changes in the area we've some reason to be nervous, so for example, its interesting to see what is and isn't included in meeting notes from the traffic meeting mentioned in section 1.4 - no mention at all of the Hewitt No Right Turn prompting the meeting to happen or of the problems that the Hewitt change has caused. And the establishing a stakeholder group of key representatives, which from previous similar groups often seem to be dominated by a few and not always serve some residents so well. But lets be optimistic for now...

As is the councils way, the document is uncopyable text so i can't cutNpaste it in here so here are the pages as scanned images: 


Tags for Forum Posts: harringay traffic study, traffic

Views: 2355

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Seems quite an exaggeration to be claiming this is down to the few people in your traffic group Justin. My comment about being optimistic is due to their trying to make sure this doesn't just get dominated by the usual suspects, lets hope that continues.

I'm surprised that there is no mention of the St Anne's Hospital redevelopment considering it has outline planning approval and/or the potential impacts that the local development plans are likely to have?
Absolutely, grabbers and lorries galore down St Ann's Road. This will need to be closely monitored to avoid any cycle or pedestrian deaths, a twenty zone will have to be rolled out. I expect concrete will come from Hornsey, which way will the waste go? Their not saving much from demolition.

I agree. To ensure that the issue is fully scoped out for potential consultants at the earliest possible stage, there could be clearer signposting of the potential impact of that and many other local developments on future traffic flows. Feedback on this issue and others has already been formulated and will be sent to the Council by the LCSP group. 

One of the exceptional things about this process is that the Council appear to be giving residents the opportunity for real involvement. This includes giving feedback on the RfP prior to its release - unheard of in Haringey as far as I know. It's long been my belief that residents have much to offer working in a genuine partnership with the Council. I hope this process will be an opportunity to show how that can work.

Of course anyone can offer feedback on this draft RfP - either directly or through a residents' or stakeholder group - for example via Justin and the LCSP Traffic Group for the Ladder, the GRA for the Gardens and WPRA for the Woodlands Park area. The possible absence of group for the Hermitage Road area (Warehouse residents' groups notwithstanding) has already been flagged. Also, I'm not sure about the existence of any groups for residents living directly on Green Lanes. I'm sure either the GRA or LCSP group would be happy to act as a conduit for them.

...and also via one of the many other residents groups we have these days so don't feel pushed into one of those big old groups. The Friends of Harringay Passage has a traffic group, the NHRA was started with traffic in mind, the HCG which has done related things like the Harringay air quaility study, the individual street RA's like the FRRA etc.

As the document says - "It is important that the community feel they are part of the process and have ownership of any outcome" - so we shouldn't feel pushed into having to be in one large group which may have different motivations and that may not be able to adequately represent us or our localised issues.

Of course, yes, a useful clarification. As far as I'm aware no one is pushing people in any direction at this stage. I'd add that if there are any other groups who want to raise their hands here, they'd be very welcome to do so. 

In addition to going via any number of groups, as I said in my last post, if you don't fancy tying your colours to any group whatsoever, there's no reason that you can't make representations independently at this point. 

The one way system was introduced on the ladder after a sustained lobbying effort by a black cab driver who lived on Hampden Rd.

The Hewitt Road no-right-turn ban was lobbied for quietly by an unconstituted group of Hewitt Road residents.

The Hermitage Rd closure was done on the quiet, I suspect in an effort to shore up selection votes in Seven Sisters.

The gating of the gardens was done to shore up selection votes in St Ann's, four councillors at the time lived on Warwick Gardens.

So yes it's great that the council are going to allow residents to clean up the mess they have created now that the councillors are so politically hamstrung they can't do anything.

For f**** sake.  This myth about Hewitt Road residents is still being perpetuated.

There was a consultation. Some Hewitt Road residents responded to that consultation.  Someone somewhere became concerned about the flow (and type) of traffic through their shiny new plaza.   There was an idea that changing the flow of traffic might be a solution.

There was another consultation.

It was deemed not to be a solution because of objections from residents of Pemberton and Beresford Road - who (according to the consultation analysis)  came up with the solution of implementing the no-right turn.

Followed by another hoo ha about whether the no right turn would be permanant or not.

Law of unintended consequences and all that malarky.   (also note the sheer paucity of the numbers of people concerned in responses to this stuff)  

I think it's great this is being addressed as a whole - but still think that by focusing in on one such small geographical area we are merely going to move the problem onto someone elses doorstep instead.

June 2013 - Statutory Notification Analysis

To be accurate there wasn't actually any public consultation about it was there?

It first popped up in the GL regen statutory notification without having had any mention about it during the consultation, the analysis of the responses, which you link to, shows only 17% of people supported the Hewitt change.

Then there were some non-public meetings with a few select people from just a couple of streets and the no right turn was come up with and described as a 6 month trial, another statutory notification (though not very widely advertised one) and that also came back overwhelmingly against with just 36% in favour of the no right turn. But it was done anyway, and as a permanent traffic order not a trial one.

There was an FOI asking why and what evidence the council had for the need of doing it and they had nothing, no evidence of congestion, no models of what the change might improve, nothing.

After 6 months there was to be a review and report but that never happened. There was an attempt to show the change had improved things by showing some bus journey times had improved but that turned out to be flawed and bus data could also show things were actually worse now, so that was never published.

So myths around it aside, the way it got done does seem a bit unusual and interesting. As a consultation comparison, when FoHP wanted to do things like add a few planters down the passage we ended up having to send out a survey to every house in Harringay!

You compiled a traffic survey how did it pan out, did you manage to do all the roads?
Wow John, didn't realise that we got the one way system due to one determined black cab driver! So the lobbying and letter writing from people on my road was a pointless exercise then?

there's no reason that you can't make representations independently at this point.  

Surely this was the whole point of and trigger for the 16th Century Reformation? Let Everyman & -woman be his/her own Pope. Let no one presume to speak for you or for your road or part thereof. Let no jumped-up pontiff flog you an Indulgence to miss a meeting. You are Infallible master/mistress of your own road frontage, so set up your own wayside pulpit thereon: nothing should move there without your say-so - this is the ultimate goal.  

On second thoughts, I can't help noticing that the authors begin by equating Green Lanes and Wightman Road as "two well connected, north south radial routes." While they go on to identify Green Lanes & Turnpike Lane as the A105 & A504, they fail to mention that Wightman Road is a primarily residential road with a secondary existence as a merely B138.

There may be a need for the WRRA to arise from oblivion and reappoint its Pope & Curia to ensure that whoever tenders successfully for this "7 Day a week" survey encounters even more Wightman Road so-called "problems caused by places of worship". 



© 2023   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service