Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Three trial LTNs recommended to become permanent
Just looking at the agenda pack for next week's council meeting the recommendation is that all three are made permanent.
https://www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk/mgChooseDocPack.aspx?ID=10862
It's all pretty dense, this is a ChatGPT summary of it I've seen which seems to tally with the bits I've looked through but no guaranteeing how accurate it is:
Recommendation
Make all 3 trial LTNs permanent due to improvements in active travel, reduced traffic, and safety benefits.
### St. Ann's LTN
1. *Traffic Reduction*: Achieved a 57% reduction in traffic on internal roads, equating to 35,834 fewer vehicles per day, with a modest 5% increase on boundary roads.
2. *Active Travel*: Encouraged dockless cycling with 15,500 trips starting or ending in the area monthly.
3. *Air Quality*: Observed minor changes in air quality, with no significant statistical impact.
4. *Safety Improvements*: Reduced collisions by 29% on internal roads and 21% on boundary roads.
5. *Public Feedback*: Mixed views but growing support for walking, cycling, and safety enhancements.
6. *Recommendation*: Make the trial permanent due to improvements in active travel, reduced traffic, and safety benefits.
### Bounds Green LTN
1. *Traffic Reduction*: Saw a 66% reduction in traffic on internal roads (16,076 fewer vehicles daily) with a minor 2% increase on boundary roads.
2. *Active Travel*: Increased dockless cycling by 9,000 trips monthly, though traditional cycling dipped due to weather.
3. *Air Quality*: Minimal changes, with no significant statistical variation observed.
4. *Safety Improvements*: Collisions decreased by 50% on internal roads and 17% on boundary roads.
5. *Public Feedback*: Mixed responses, with an increase in support for quieter, safer streets.
6. *Recommendation*: Support permanent implementation, highlighting gains in reduced traffic, active travel, and safety.
### Bruce Grove West Green LTN
1. *Traffic Reduction*: Achieved a 51% reduction in internal road traffic (43,316 fewer vehicles daily) with a slight 3% rise on boundary roads.
2. *Active Travel*: Cycling rose by 33%, supported by dockless bike use.
3. *Air Quality*: Slight improvement in nitrogen dioxide levels on internal and boundary roads.
4. *Safety Improvements*: Collisions reduced by 56% on internal roads and 18% on boundary roads.
5. *Public Sentiment*: Improved acceptance and satisfaction with walking, cycling, and reduced noise levels.
6. *Recommendation*: Make permanent due to substantial reductions in traffic and safety benefits.
[Report of the Director for Environment and Resident Services. To be introduced by Cabinet Member for Climate Action, Environment & Transport.
“Consider all feedback, objections and monitoring data of the trial LTNs and decide whether to make permanent the associated traffic orders.”]
Tags for Forum Posts: low traffic neighbourhoods, st anns ltn, traffic
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Don on
-
Just for clarity: I’m not a petrolhead or even a car driver (no licence), and I commuted every day, for over 10 years, from Harringay to Waterloo by bus and tube. The increasing unreliability of public transport — in principle, my far-preferred means of transport — and ever-greater difficulties of actually getting on at peak times, might well even have made me contemplate learning to drive, but I actually became self-employed and was at liberty to walk and also to see just how quiet and unimpeded by traffic all day St Ann’s was before it was LTN-ed. At present, I need to use taxis more than walking, and the Islington LTN example I quoted shows, I’d suggest, how a slegehammer policy can have (maybe unforeseen) deleterious consequences. I very much doubt I’m the only one whose necessary journeys have been extended by a policy primarily designed around the fit and the able.
-
-
-
Living near the Bounds Green LTN I can say this is complete nonsense. Blake Road is now a no-through traffic road so of course the in-LTN traffic is massively reduced. But at a huge cost of the boundary and neighbouring roads. Durnsford Road to Bounds Green station is practically at a standstill in peak hours and the emissions must be horrendous. The traffic increase is way beyond 3%. As far as I can see the wellbeing and convenience of a smallish number of people on roads within the LTN is put above the wellbeing and convenience of the vast majority living in the area who want to get around.
-
-
The Bounds Green outcome was envisaged by one of the then-St Ann's councillors, who actually opposed creation of the LTN here. Enfield created one on their side of the borough boundary, which just shunted all their traffic into Haringey, so the Haringey LTN was a tit-for-tat response, with the entirely predictable results Maurice reports.
-
-
It looks like the council approved these last night and they are now permanent.
Regardless of whether people are for or against them it is clear that improvements are still needed in the area and I'd recommend keeping the pressure on the council for whatever you feel needs improving.
West Green Rd it looks like they are doing something there with removing car parking and some other improvements to try and improve the bus flow so it will be interesting to see how it goes there.
Green Lanes obviously needs serious looking at and it will probably be difficult to make changes on Green Lanes without carrying something over to Wightman Rd as well.
Turnpike Lane is just a bit grim and made worse by the constant roadworks up in that direction. There is a consultation for that street (or just has been one, I can't remember) but it already said that it wouldn't be touching the traffic or parking so can't see it making much difference to the area.
-
-
Andrew: Both Cllr Mike Hakata (cabinet member for transport, environment, etc) in an e-mail to me and Anne Cunningham (the officer in charge of parking, traffic, etc) in a public response said that a plan for Green Lanes would be in place before the St Ann's LTN was instigated, but – as is obvious – absolutely nothing has been done, other than to increae the volume of traffic on the road. When I subsequently queried this with both of them I got no response at all, which appears to be the council's default position, whether councillors or officers. So pressuring the council to improve things is a good idea, but I suspect unlikely to achieve much.
In practice, Haringey – along with several other boroughs – seized the opportunity, and the money, provided by City Hall at the start of the pandemic to use emergency legislation to create LTNs; they're a cheap solution in comparison with any meaningful changes, such as bus lanes, junction realignment, reduced parking on main routes, etc, that would make a real difference, especially to Green Lanes, so anything that would really help seems unlikely to happen. The scale of effective changes would also require real co-ordination between the council, TfL and the Dept of Transport (especially re the GL/North Circular junction), and I suspect this is filed in the category of "too difficult to consider".
-
-
Hear, hear, Dyl. Such a pity Ken Livingstone's plans for new north/south and east/west tramways came to naught, thanks to entrenched opposition in parts of west London and overall funding problems. Mind you, Crossrail was still funded, so evidently money can always be found when there's political will (just not in Haringey).
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
