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: 27915


Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Chris - Couldn't agree with you more. The St Ann's LTN campaign was driven by a tiny pressure group with a membership in the low hundreds and, as I said, I see no sign of the apparently numerous residents who favour blocking Ladder roads giving up their own cars (after complaining for decades about the knock-on effect of the Gardens closure, allegedly a result of the presence of councilllors living there). Nobody supporting this scheme appears to care about those living on St Ann's, West Green or Green Lanes, whose quality of life is clearly deemed less important than that of people in the quiet streets of the St Ann's enclave.

I think they used a form of ANPR Hugh to track individual vehicles from some distance around the study area. 

I believe (believe from memory) they found 90% (+/-) of all traffic moving across the Ladder started and/or finished their journeys outside Haringey. I am hazy on the detail, but it was pretty stark. If anyone is really interested I can try and dig it out again.

Quite right Hugh.  Whatever definition is used, anyone who doubts that there is through traffic on ladder streets may like to consider why the busiest ladder street (Warham) was more than five time busier than the least (Seymour) with plenty of other compelling examples in between these extremes.

As to what “through traffic” is, the study itself took the crude view that vehicles that didn’t stop anywhere in the area (which was pretty large) were simply passing through.  This may have been a necessary approach for practical reasons of data collection but it avoided the difficult question of how to differentiate between streets and between interest groups.  In thinking about this, I feel it would be better to start from the proposition that each street has a purpose.  There are streets (or parts of streets) which can properly be regarded as mainly residential (because of the buildings on them) and which may be physically unsuitable for dense traffic (because of their dimensions).  Some other streets, by virtue of their commercial buildings and their dimensions are better suited to carrying more traffic.  It is worth mentioning here that the business community has its pressure groups and it is equally valid to ask whether Green Lanes, for example, is actually wide enough to accommodate all the demands on it.  Sadly, the answer to this question is no so there is a permanent tension between the needs of pedestrian shoppers, businesses that want customers who drive, buses and all the other traffic (some of which is just passing through).

I would say that the purpose of a residential street is to ensure access to the houses for residents, their visitors, deliveries and tradesmen.  They are also necessary as routes for the underground utility services (gas, electricity, water, telecommunications, sewers).  The 2016 traffic study could have estimated how much vehicular traffic is endemic to a ladder street, ie how many vehicle movements per day arise from residents and their visitors etc).  As each ladder street has about 80 cars for 200 households one could hazard a guess that 280 movements per day would be a generous number.  As it happens, Seymour Road averaged about double this number and Warham ten times.  It's a fair bet that some of the movements on ladder streets are Green Lanes shoppers looking for parking places – as all the streets are one way, every such ladder parking incident involves traversing two ladder streets and a bit of Wightman Road,

Very good point but it is worth mentioning that the 67 bus runs this route and several more in Green Lanes.  These sort of short to medium journeys are unnecessary by car and sometimes more time consuming, particularly if you have to find parking at the other end

Buses are extremely important, which is exactly why I've argued against increasing traffic on main roads that will slow them down and complained that Haringey has done nothing to help public transport (eg a northbound bus lane) in Green Lanes before imposing the LTN. The "two wheels good, four wheels bad" mantra that's infected Haringey and other councils ignores both pedestrians and bus users in its zealotry. For a nearby example of the outcome, look at Parkway in Camden during peak times: more or less one big car park, following the closure of significant local side streets that acted as a safety valve. Never try taking a northbound 88 bus between 4pm and 7pm unless you've got several hours to spare!

I have a hunch this isn’t going to improve West Green Road’s accolade as London’s ‘unhealthiest high street’, as designated by the Royal Society for Public Health. Nor do anything to improve the already poor air quality, which last time I checked exceeded EU & globally recognised air quality standards. While I’m pleased the LTNs are being introduced & support the bold measures & benefits it will bring to our neighbours on quieter side streets, it does feel a blow to those of us living on the main roads. We’re generally living in flats &/or social housing, often above shops, with no outdoor space. I’ve seen the aftermath of four accidents of pedestrians being hit by vehicles since I’ve lived here & almost daily near misses. In my response to the consultations for the LTN I asked if we could have more zebra/pedestrian crossings on our road & that the speed limit be reduced to 20 mph but the LTNs bring no benefits to those of us living on the already dangerous & contested roads. I’d love to have a play street one day but when I’ve enquired it’s completely dismissed because we live on a bus route. As I say, I’m completely supportive of efforts to reduce vehicle use, I just wish our road was included in that, rather than being expected to accommodate more traffic, with no mitigation (such as those extra crossings, reduced speed limits etc). 

I asked if we could have more zebra/pedestrian crossings on our road & that the speed limit be reduced to 20 mph

I think this is very important. You can't just abandon the boundary roads. There may not be a willingness to filter them but at the very least more mitigations such as crossings need to be considered by the council.

I know that some of the Healthy Streets groups have been pushing on this and the council isn't that keen but have indicated that they would revisit this after 6 months or so of the trial. I have a feeling that on one of the roads (Belmont Rd/ Downhills Way) there was some kind of commitment that if traffic stayed the same or increased then they would implement further interventions. I can't remember where I saw that though.

it already is 20 isn't it?

Not all of it.

I've just done a Google Streetview tour of the whole street, lots of 20 signs, no 30.

Just a ting ,

as this rolls on, it would be great if folk could give an indication if you live within , outside or boundary in your posts. The LTN will impact everyone in the wider area  in different ways and would be interesting to get a mental map. 

Opinion map. As I should have said. 



© 2024   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service