Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

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

Views: 11533

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

     "so if the Crouch End road closures go ahead it could be years before any other changes/mitigations happen"

Perhaps that will no longer be the case now that we have HoL, an effective mouthpiece for the Harringay community that is read, discussed and even contributed to by LB Haringey councillors. 

One can but hope but I think for that to be the case we need a community group directly engaged with our councillors.  Is there a regular meeting or forum we could use to host this conversation?

This is a reply to Matt Fenby Taylor. We used to have Area Forums but we don't now. 

The option to reply directly to MFT does not appear on my screen.

Thanks Adrian. I think we've hit the thread depth limit for the forum software!

Anyone else have any ideas?  If not... shall we create one and invite our councillors?

Yes HoL is great, but it's not a new thing (which is what I think you mean, sorry if I've misunderstood you). I've lived in St Ann's ward for 16 years and have seen/contributed to conversations about traffic since I moved here.

My point was making changes/mitigations take a long time, regardless of how much public involvement there is. I went to some of the stake holder meetings for GLATS and the consultants explained the process of making changes to roads. It's not quick, easy or cheap.

The LCSP traffic stakeholder group formed over the Wightman Rd closure played by the council's rules and was ignored. I don't think you'll get anyone else stepping up.

Don't forget that there is the LCSP if you don't mind meetings.

Well I care about even one more car on Wightman road is has too many now they have made such a mess of it, it is only a matter of time before someone hits my car as I turn out of the end of my road, they created so may blind junctions. It did nothing to reduce the road speed, just made it more dangerous. I wish they would just put it back as it was. Anyone would think this this was the plan all along to say "calming failed" so we are now making it an A road.

We have had 50 years or more of an assumption that car use is the most effective form of travel - schools have become bigger, and then bigger again, Coleridge is now 4 form entry, when my kids went there it was generally two and for one year a one form entry only.  Hospitals have become bigger but further away, Haringey plans provision for children on live births in the borough but... there are no maternity hospitals in the borough so they do not know what education needs are.  They are trying to find transport solutions but do not know what the transport problems actually are.  London needs an approach which looks at transport across the whole of the city, not at borough level, certainly not at district level, certainly not at this level.  If the scheme is implemented (although we don't actually know what the scheme will be) it seems certain that traffic will be displaced, whether that will be to Wightman Road or Ferme Park Road it means that any gain in Crouch End will be to someone else's detriment.  Any reduction in Pollution outside Coleridge will lead to an increase in pollution outside St Marys.  Apparently Crouch End must be a success to enable further funding for other areas.  Only a London-wide approach has a real chance of success and that has to recognise that we are not a village or town of 50,000 people but part of a city of 8 million...

Yes, you are spot on Paul.

Dr R Beeching in the early 60s, & then the iron lady carried on, on steroids in the 80s, but she was doing it more to destroy the unions I think. They both have  legacies to be proud of, not! The iron one was more impressed with tarmac & really pushed motorways through.

At the time many warned of the consequencies and began to speak of sustainability for the first time, WitnessHistory-The Book That Predicted An End To Civilisation , but were pooh, poohed, in the same way that Greta is now.

Who trusts Nero, Johnson with COP26? We should be aiming for carbon negative in every new-build, but it won't happen in time.

Coleridge may have been expanded but the catchment area has remained postage stamp sized. Everyone in the catchment is no more than 15 mins walk away and there is no reason to drive to school. One issue is that people catchment hop at secondary level to try and get into APS or Fortismere and then realise they have created themselves a longer journey back to primary for younger siblings. They need to be persuaded on to the buses. At Coleridge we've been campaigning for school streets and for green wall protection from the rush hour traffic fumes. We dont want worsened air quality around any of the schools. We want less traffic now. And as to Haringey not knowing the nos of children because there is no hospital in Haringey that is just not true. Maternity services in London are arranged on a sector basis. North Central London covers UCLH, the Whittington, Barnet and Royal Free, and North Mid. The Maternity commissioner is based in the Haringey CCG and relationships with all the councils are close particularly as some services are delivered by Borough of residence and not place of birth. Pupil nos are looked at across the boroughs and across London as a whole. Speak to any school Governor and they'll tell you about the fluctuations up and down. And yet again the scheme is intended to create modal shift and not just displace. The evidence is that modal shift happens although many on this thread seem to not believe the many years of evidence to that effect or indeed the example of Waltham Forest. School streets which are about as micro level as you can get as far as traffic planning goes can significantly reduce traffic round schools without displacing it elsewhere. Not everything has to be London wide or Borough wide or even ward wide to work. Although all that said the proposal and planning of this scheme has been pretty hopeless from Haringey even if the aims are laudable. 

I totally agree. My concern is that as a borough Haringey doesn't have a strategy for model shifts on anywhere near as ambitious a level as needed.

As an old Coleridge parent (in one sense of the word) and former chair of the Parent Staff Association as we called in those days I am well aware of the catchment area debate.  Weston Park school has a catchment area so small (OK it is one form entry) that parents who live in the same road and can see the school from their front door cannot send their children there. I wonder just how far some of those huge SUVs parked up by Coleridge every afternoon have actually come from?  And I well remember a debate at school some 30 odd years ago when a red-faced Haringey education officer explained that their statistics are based on birth registration, which in turn is determined by the geographical location of the facility in which the hild was born.  The area covered by a health authority has nothing to do with where children's births are registered.

RSS

Advertising

© 2024   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service