Takes a bit of time as there's a lot of detail - I've just spent a good hour with the document. It contains many good ideas, many things you might want to comment on, and some glaring omissions (no mention of improving pedestrian safety at the roundabout junction Alroy rd/Endymion road, for example).
I doubt they'll be able to carry out much of it - the document is peppered with caveats that these are just ideas, they all cost a lot of money and do not represent Haringey Council policy... but still, someone has gone to immense trouble to listen to locals and think things through and the least we can do is let them know what we think and would prefer to prioritise.
There's a chance tomorrow evening to go and see the plans and the planners at St Paul's Cavendish Church Hall, Cavendish Road, from 6.30 - 8.30 which I may well do despite already having submitted my comments.
You have until 14th May to comment.
U-turn bans. Practical. Umm.
How would you actually enforce the ban 24/7 (or even in bus-lane hours) in this real world? Cameras every 100 metres, with operators? Costed at?
It's not a single-point violation like the Hewitt Rd no right turn, where a single fixed camera captures every infringement, nor a head-on approach like a bus lane or box-junction infringement.
I have seen people come out of Iceland with shopping, put it in their car, do a U turn, park outside Yassar Halim and go into that shop.
It takes too long to walk to the crossing and wait for the lights!
Michael, where the camera is close to the u-turn and it starts on the bus lane side not the northbound side than perhaps some can be picked up. But really they're mostly 3 (or 5)-point turns so the vehicle is at an angle to the camera so that'll make it harder to catch reg. numbers.
The bus lane/box junction cameras are not ultra-high resolution, as I found during the Wightman Road closure when an impatient driver accelerated, swerved, changed lane, stopped just clear of the box and my emergency stop dumped me in the Endymion Rd box junction. The picture they sent me was pretty grainy even with the camera being right on top of the junction, rather than 100 yards away for the 3-point turns..
Michael. Not going to harp on - you know my views.. But a tram would hinder U-turns and totally revamp the street and cut down on traffic, as many provincial cities in the U.K. can now testify.
A working system could, for the price of one Crossrail, give three times as much route mileage, would not send people underground to free up space for cars overground. Provide pollution free efficient public transport for all with space for wheelchairs and baby rolls (royces).
Thanks. I support any work to the 'savage' area.
I have changed my comment from:
"Strongly oppose - given objectives of project and funding restrictions, this should not be considered a priority within the remit of the funding pot for this project. Should there be a political requirement to spend money on this area within this project, I strongly suggest that it is focussed on the very busy eastern section of Hermitage Road"
"Strongly oppose most of this proposal - given objectives of project and funding restrictions, this should not be considered a priority within the remit of the funding pot for this project. Should there be a political requirement to spend money on this area within this project, I strongly suggest that it is focussed on the very busy eastern section of Hermitage Road".
Thanks for that Hugh. Given your Note 3 about the problems one-way can cause I wonder why you support WL1-03 about changing Willoughby Rd to be one-way only?
That's a fair question. In my original comment I wrote, "I was going to just gallop through it (the bundle of proposals) and make a few comments in passing, but I ended up taking a slightly more considered approach." So what turned into a canter through this rather large bundle of proposals, I wasn't able to give every single one detailed consideration. This is why in part I said that I'm open to persuasion prior to submitting my comments.
My intuitive reaction to the particular proposal you focus on was this. Willoughby seems to be key to reducing traffic on the north Ladder rung roads. I don't support consolidating the entirety of the Ladder as a one-way system for the reasons I have explained. If this means we end up with a set of measures along the lines of those given in WL1, my thoughts were that making the traffic flow on Willoughby the same as that on the rest of the Ladder rung roads might help people who live there by reducing traffic flow.
Making a relatively short stretch of road one-way seems quite different to me to converting a much busier mile long road and by so doing creating a semi-closed one-way system.
Nudged by your comment, I've given this idea a little more thought. Haringey's document says, "Eastbound (sic) traffic may be displaced to Falkland Road". Thinking about the proposal more carefully, I suppose this change would almost certainly displace a great deal of westbound traffic on to the other Ladder rungs. Haringey's traffic count showed 31,000 cars using Willoughy. Let's say that making the road one-way displaced a third of that. This would mean an additional 10,000 cars using Falkland, Effingham and Allison. Let's say that the traffic was taken off the two westbound northern rungs in the same proportion as their current traffic flows and added to the new roads as 50% Falkland, 30% Effingham and 20% Allison (being more weighted towards the most northerly options). Using the numbers from Haringey's traffic count presented on Andrew's map (thank you Andrew), the effect on vehicles numbers would be this:
Raleigh - reduction from 11,500 to 5100
Lausanne - reduction from 7,400 to 3,900
Falkland - increase from 10,700 to 15,700
Effingham - increase from 12,200 to 15,200
Allison - increase from 6,580 to 8,580.
The change may also increase traffic flow on the eastbound northern rungs as drivers learn that Willoughby is now unimpeded by opposing traffic.
So, overall a more imbalanced outcome. It seems that making Willoughby one-way is probably not a good idea without effective mitigating measures. I've changed my comment from "Support in principle but reserve judgement until impacts are fully evaluated" to "Oppose - this would probably displace a high voulme of traffic to Falkland, Effingham and Allison and make the overall traffic distribution between rung roads more uneven"
What's your favoured solution for that patch within an overall plan?
The only, only way you can fairly distribute traffic across the ladder is to close Wightman Rd as it was last summer. Everything else you can dream of doing will just impact another ladder road.
"The change may also increase traffic flow on the eastbound northern rungs as drivers learn that Willoughby is now unimpeded by opposing traffic."
Making Willoughby one-way southbound would also create a new ratrun for south- and west-bound traffic from Wood Green and Westbury Avenue, so Raleigh and Lausanne likely to continue to be used as by-passes for Turnpike Lane.