Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
More Traffic Headed for Wightman - 2 days to Act
Last October I raised the issue that possible street closures in surrounding areas would displace traffic our way.
One of the areas was Crouch End.
A consultation for those living/working in the area is in progress and one of the options being consulted on is the closure to through traffic (except for buses, emergency vehicles and cyclists) of one or more major roads, such as The Broadway.
A traffic survey for the Crouch End project suggests such a change might mean 2000 more vehicles a day in both directions for Wightman.
Harringay residents can make their views known via the questionnaire.
To complete the questionnaire go to:
https://www.haringey.gov.uk/parking-roads-and-travel/roads-and-stre...
After the initial section you can opt to only complete the one on traffic. The deadline is 2 February.
Postscript navigation note: (For oversized lorry stuck on Warham, see P14, here.)
Tags for Forum Posts: liveable crouch end, liveable neighbourhoods, oversize hgvs on warham, traffic
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Cat Kenyon on
-
I'm planning to respond to the consultation to let Haringey Council know we are worried about air pollution across the borough - and want to see schemes to reduce through traffic across all wards. If Haringey can make a success of the Crouch End Scheme - we'll be more likely to access funds from TFL for future schemes across the borough to reduce traffic and create healthier streets. Liveable Neighbourhood schemes are about reducing overall traffic, not diverting it, and there are suggestions in the survey which would enable this. At the same time, I would recommend this group instead of opposing the CE scheme, continues to mobilise to demand for more traffic filtering and traffic reductions across Haringey Ward and beyond - Hugh, do you think you might still be interested in setting up a group? If so, I hope we can mobilise neighbouring wards to support your efforts, we need to work with each other on this. We need to challenge the status quo - I think it is interesting that Haringey Council is being more open to bolder measures in the survey - if they manage to deliver them in CE, surely it means they'd be more will to try them on Wightman and beyond in future?
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
I’ll support anything in principle in Crouch End that doesn’t result in the residents of one of the most viscously trafficked and worst polluted residential roads in the borough having to put up with an even worse situation whilst yet again being promised jam tomorrow. All the Council need do is recognise how closely interconnected are the traffic flows of Crouch End and Harringay and match the approaches used in both areas.
Fifteen years ago, the Council suggested that the “trial” closures of the Gardens and Hermitage might one day be copied in Harringay ward. In the meantime, residents were told, nothing could be done about the resulting huge increase of traffic on the Ladder
Surely, at some point, someone has to call time on allowing the Ladder to soak up the overspill of neighbouring improvement schemes. The Council had a chance two years ago to tackle our traffic, but yet again dodged the opportunity. I will fiercely oppose anything that yet again carelessly adds to the burden of Wightman Road.
Yes, I still think there’s value in a Harringay group being set up. But, along with HoL, I don’t have the bandwidth to lead it myself.
In the meantime, I wish you the best for your scheme in St Ann’s and Chesnuts.
-
Permalink Reply by Adrian Hackney on
-
I'm repeating myself - apologies
1) Ask Haringey why the next Liveable Neighbourhood in Haringey will be in Tottenham and not the ladder/turnpike lane
"There is an aspiration to align future plans for Turnpike Lane with..."
2) form the group, if one does not already exist and demand a place in the Liveable CE Stakeholder groups. They can't argue you do not have a stake.
-
-
Who are the people currently driving through Crouch End who are going divert on to the Ladder roads? Why aren't they getting on to the 41 bus? Or going on the tube to get from wherever to Wood Green or Tottenham? What are you so sure that this scheme will immediately move all the cars to you. Thats not how it worked in Walthamstow. Modal shift happens - the no of car journeys overall reduces as people turn to walking, cycling and public transport. Those single drivers in their cars on the commute need to be forced to change their habits.
-
-
Encouraging a modal shift is appropriate; enabling displacement is not. We know the displacement is likely following recent extensive traffic modelling and trials. Experience tells us this is a more accurate way of predicting outcomes than wishing for modal shift.
-
Permalink Reply by Frederick Guy on
-
Encouraging modal shift requires, among other things, actively discouraging driving. It doesn't come about by, as you say, wishing.
Most plans to actively discourage driving have some potential for displacing traffic.
Haringey traffic officers happy to play game of predicting displacement from one neighbourhood to another because in fact they don't want to close any streets to through traffic if they can help it - Wightman residents should know that as well as anyone.
If you don't want displacement from Crouch End to Wightman, then insist that any experimental Crouch End closure where such displacement is predicted, be accompanied by an experimental filtering (buses allowed through filter, camera enforced) of Endymion/Tollington Park Rd at the bridge near the Hornsey Gate of Finsbury Park.
-
-
Good solution, and I agree on the modal shift
-
Permalink Reply by PeterPiper on
-
"Project Centre" would appear to suggest approx 2000 displaced vehicles would use Wightman Road from the published models in 2 of the 3 options. Folks on the Ladder speak from past experiences. Hence the kickback.
Crouch End respondents opposed proposals to filter Wightman Road in the Green Lanes Area Traffic Survey amongst others. "What's good for the goose..."
-
-
Adrian are you referring to LBH's "Improving Turnpike Lane" document which states: "The council’s aspiration is to bring more people to the area by walking and cycling" whilst also proudly proclaiming "Haringey Council has agreed to reconfigure parking spaces on the side roads to create 54 extra pay by phone parking spaces" and "Six underused loading bays have been converted to 18 pay by phone parking spaces"
Let's not forget that Turnpike Lane is served not only by a TfL tube station, but also a TfL bus station and umpteen buses going east-west along Westbury Avenue, and north-south along the High Road / Green Lanes.
Which is it do you think? Pro public transport + walking/cycling, of pro cars?
Seems to me a classic case of 'the one hand not knowing....etc.'
-
Permalink Reply by Alison P on
-
Has anyone had any contact with our councillors about this? I saw an email that said Zena was aware of concerns about the impact on Wightman but realise I’ve seen and heard very little from or about the others recently.
-
Permalink Reply by andy thomas on
-
I mentioned this to a LibDem councillor for Crouch End who is adamant pushing a problem from one side of tracks to the other is not a solution and who will be opposing this proposed scheme. Reducing overall vehicle usage is the answer - how many cars do you see driving by with just one occupant (the driver)? Public transport in London is excellent and the envy of many other cities - and could be even better if there weren't so many private vehicles clogging the streets.
-
-
All the yes to this. Modal change is the only real solution. It won't be easy and it wont be universally supported, but you can't declare a climate emergency and then... well... do nothing other than small piecemeal changes.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
