Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

I'm not sure whether this has been shared elsewhere on HOL - can't see it in a search but...

We have recently received a note through our front door that the St Ann's Low Traffic Neighbourhood will be implemented on 22 August.

This is a heads-up for anyone living in or driving through the area between West Green Road and St Ann's Road.  There will no longer be a direct route between the two major roads unless you are a bus or have a 'X2' exemption pass. 

Woodlands Park Road, Black Boy Lane, Cornwall Road and Avenue Road will all be closed to through traffic. 

The restriction points will be monitored by CCTV, so no doubt LBH will be issuing lots of PCNs!  Drivers beware!

I attach two documents, one a map of the area showing the traffic cells as they will be after implementation, and the other the supporting document.

Tags for Forum Posts: low traffic neighbourhoods, st anns ltn, traffic

Views: 2876


Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

This may sound silly but does every vehicle entering these roads then have to turn around or reverse to get out again. Or is  it a one-way exit filter?

I suppose the aim is anyone entering the roads are doing so to get to their house or business. I'm guessing it's only the people who enter the roads thinking they can get through to somewhere but then realise there is a camera will have to turn round.

For St Ann's they are putting in some new one way restrictions. I am a bit confused by a diagonal 'barrier' near me and how it works, I need to write to Ann Cunningham to get an explanation/clarification. 

There is already a barrier at St. Annes Road & North Grove because of the school gates very close by.

An opening for pedestrians, cycles and now apparently motorcycles gives access.

The scale of the map is too small to see clearly but it does not seem to show this.

There are side roads into Cornwall Road but as has been said this would lengthen car journeys by some way if one was going Northwards. It would also add to congestion in the roads it affects as vehicles manoeuvre  to find a convenient route.

I'm no lover of the motor car but this does seem a little unfair.

As always with social media, it's not quite clear which particular comments people are responding to. So, in case there's been any misunderstanding, let me be clear, I am fully supportive of schemes to control traffic on the Ladder and Woodlands Park and I have been putting significant energies into actively fighting for the Ladder one for almost a quarter of a century. I am actively involved with the Harringay Ladder Healthy Streets campaign around the current project. I am also very supportive of reducing car usage generally, in London and locally.

My own annual car usage is now only about 2,000 miles. I almost always walk when travelling to Hornsey, Crouch End, Wood Green and all points south. I would encourage all who have the time and ability to do the same.

My call for a widening of exemptions is not because I think the car should rule. Nor is it because I drive everywhere. I call for the exemptions because I am not convinced of the value stopping local people using the shortest route. Something like 90%+ of Ladder traffic is through-traffic. Stopping that wold be a huge win. Barring most local people the convenience of using the most direct route doesn't seem like a clear win.

The truth is, all of us engage in, or benefit from, behaviours that have negative consequences for the environment. We do that simply because we make choices for a more enjoyable or more comfortable life. We clearly need to go further and faster in taking action to curb lasting harms to our environment, but there will continue to be decisions which are compromises, balancing immediate life quality with long-term benefit. The extent of low-traffic-neighbourhood (LTNs) exemptions is one of them. 

There still appear to be many wrinkles to iron out with LTNs. Press coverage of a scheme in neighbouring Islington this Spring showed that the Highbury LTN had inadvertently increased pollution in the main streets.

An independent audit of the council report found that NO2 pollution in the Highbury scheme had in fact increased by 26 per cent.

The audit also found that the original report had underestimated the increased traffic levels on the “boundary road” of Blackstock Road North. 

Islington Tribune

So, all things considered, for me there isn't a slam-dunk case for the most stringent approach to exemptions. The Ladder isn't just a generic neighbourhood: it is one that's hemmed in by the railway on one side and two busy A-roads on two of the remaining sides. The scheme as currently conceived will block Endymion Road with a bus-gate. So, a scheme without exemptions would mean that car journeys from all but the northern section of the Ladder will need to be routed via one or two, probably very heavily congested A-roads. Now, as my annual mileage will tell you, I rarely drive those routes, but occasionally I do and other residents may have good reason to do it more than I. Given the uncertainty about the impact of exemptions, one way or the other, would it not be worth trialling a wider exemptions policy?

I support the introduction of the scheme whatever, but let's try and make it the right scheme for Harringay: one that achieve its environmental and road safety objectives whilst not creating too many barriers to people's day-to day lives. Show me the evidence of a significant negative impact of a wider exemption policy and I'm all for it. 

I feel sorry for all the residents of Green Lanes, St Ann’s Road, and West Green Road. Their quality of life will most likely be negatively impacted by increased traffic and pollution. Green Lanes will also most likely return to being a car park and add to the pollution from the restaurants, making my walks less than healthy.

Hugh, you write above "The scheme as currently conceived will block Endymion Road with a bus-gate." Which scheme is that - I've looked at the HLLS site and can't see a Ladder scheme there. I know Black Boy Lane will get a bus gate...

I have always opposed this scheme on several grounds:

The council acknowledges that there are only three roads in the ward that cause problems, including Avenue and Black Boy Lane, but no alternatives to massive road closures were considered (eg filtering, directional flow at certain times, chicanes, etc). Residents in side roads will be adversely affected by a scheme designed only to tackle specific blackspots.

Closing through routes to everyone will displace traffic on the three busiest roads onto boundary roads that the council itself acknowledges are already at capacity (Green Lanes and West Green) or almost (St Ann’s). GL and West Green have accident and crash statistics that are many times worse than any of the St Ann’s roads — they are already far more dangerous, so this looks likely to get worse. Hugh’s recent comments on the 1990s road closures plans for the Gardens, etc, and the justified complaints over 20:years from Ladder residents, highlight that supposed “evaporation” of traffic is a myth. Has the council asked West Green, St Ann’s and Green Lanes residents how they feel about increased traffic and pollution on their equally residential roads?

The council was reported to be deferring the St Ann’s LTN until improvements had been made to Green Lanes. There is no sign of any current or planned changes to enable GL to take the increased traffic, or mitigate the knock-on effect on the Ladder roads as traffic from east of GL tries to get through on the west instead.

All this is being done just as public transport (primarily buses) faces its largest and most devastating cuts for decades. It’s all very well to put in bollards and flowerpots but, as always, no provision is being made in advance for alternative public transport. Unlike the council planners, not everyone in St Ann’s is young enough or able-bodied enough to walk or cycle. If bus routes are curtailed or abolished and remaining buses can’t get through because of massively increased congestion on main roads (cf the effect of the notorious Wightman closure) many, many people will be seriously disadvantaged by this scheme.

Yes, we need to decarbonise overall, but persuading people out of cars requires councils to take the initiative by improving  public transport and offering viable alternatives before closing roads, not afterwards, and to show they’re serious by electrifying all their own vehicles and installing EV charging points across the borough. LB Haringey has conspicuously failed to come up with any plans in this area. It’s all very well trying to kick residents into changing behaviour, but a responsible council would be leading from the front and showing that they’re doing their utmost to improve their own behaviour before imposing ill thought-out restrictions on residents with insufficient mitigation in place.

What behaviour do you want the council to change?

Sarah —

a) Sort out Green Lanes: completely remove or severly reduce all parking from the Arena to the Salisbury and install a northbound bus lane; restrict loading and deliveries to specific bays at specific times — and enforce it; work with TfL/DfT to limit or prevent traffic turning to/from the North Circular at morning and evening peaks (preserving north/south access to/from Palmer’s Green only at these times).

b) Electrify all Haringey’s own fleet vehicles and insist that all their contractors, such as Veolia, use all-electric vehicles or don’t get the contract.

c) Fit lamp-post EV charging points across the whole borough and negotiate an affordable borough-wide pricing deal.

d) Work with all other London councils to require that all service and “last-mile” delivery vehicles (BT, DPD, British Gas, etc, etc) across the whole GLA area are electric — if Amazon and UPS can do it, so can they.

e) Combine with all other London boroughs and the Mayor to lobby the Treasury to prevent their imposition on TfL of devastating cuts to buses and lobby hard for rail fares not to go up by (probably) 15% next January, on the inflation+ formula.

f) As this will cost more than a few bollards and CCTV cameras do, finance it with a precept on Council Tax for bands D and upwards — Crouch End subsidises Tottenham.

And, while we’re at it… Install ANPR cameras at the junctions of Lancaster, Florence and Victoria Roads with Upper Tollington Park to stop all those “holier than thou” car-owners from the Ladder using them as rat-runs — sorry, “short cuts” — to avoid the Stroud Green traffic lights or get to Crouch End. Oops — only joking….!

Banging on about LTNs in Walthamstow or Islington, as so many campaigners do, is also irrelevant: the former has specific geography that enabled the LTN to be an island surrounded by roads able to carry extra traffic, and Islington admits that pollution and congestion have both increased on boundary roads. Harringay also has specific geography (the railway line that’s an almost impenetrable barrier) that means that unless Green Lanes is dealt with nothing will improve.

If the council is seen to be leading from the front it will be able to make a far more convincing case for everyone else to follow. At present, it isn’t.

I love your Green Lanes ideas, it's the only thing that will work there.

I think it's still early days for the new Islington LTNs, the thing with LTNs is that they are designed to discourage car use. Behaviour change takes time though so it hasn't quite had the intended effect yet. 

I agree with you on all your points Don.

I think the deadline for spending the funding allocated to St Ann's LTN is September so I'm guessing that's why they can't wait for the GL/Ladder project.

if we don’t make any changes now then when? Electric cars do no ease congestion. Think we need to do something and gradually we will see an improvement and with less car traffic on our roads public transport can work more efficiently. Let’s support the council on taking this first step to making our borough a better place for us all.

Excellent article that explains it all! 



© 2022   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service