Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Traffic group meeting this week
Anyone able to give us an update on what happened at the traffic study meeting on Monday? One of the steering group members have suggested "The next couple of months could be critical and we will need to lobby", so would be good if we could all be kept updated on what happens at the meetings.
On a related note, these from the HCC meeting minutes:
(1) Gary Smith of LBH is working on a 2-way scheme for Tottenham lane existing 1-way section
(2) There are sketch proposals for a W bound segregated cycle lane on Turnpike Lane W from Wightman Rd.
(3) Wightman Rd:
- it was agreed the pinch points must go
- filtering ladder roads at the lane a possibility but would increase travel distances for residents traveling E/W.
- Pavement parking should be removed, parking one side of road (alternating) possible.
- Introduce zebra crossings.
- There should be a timed N bound cycle lane on green Lanes as a minimum.
Those all sound interesting. (1) could help a lot with all the congestion that was around the bus stop by the New River there while Wightman was closed. That (2) means up the hill under the railway bridge I think, would be good, I usually ride on the footpath there as the road seems too dangerous.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by 1vut8bf3om5m9 on
-
Again, on the one hand we are talking about an entire city, so concepts are much higher level, versus a very granular look at 22 streets in particular. It sounds like what she has already done (per your article) is roughly akin at some level to what Haringey propose to do?
-
-
I put my comments and reasoning to the Council as suggested in this thread. I got a generic answer, but I reprint it here because it's the first time I've seen any reference to a further potential budget beyond the £350K (It may be the Council brought this up because I pointed out some funding sources in my comments, I'm not sure):
Thank you for your email. Your comments on the medium list options packages have been noted and will be given the due consideration.
The study is currently focused on developing feasible options to help address the traffic and safety concerns identified within the study area, and you will be pleased to know that a proposal for a £350k bid was included within the Local Implementation Plan (LIP) submission for 2017/18 related to the outcomes of this study. If awarded, this would help to deliver short term outcomes of the study. There is a potential for similar amounts in the 2018/19 and 2019/20, making a total of circa £1m.
-
Permalink Reply by ant on
-
There was a steering group meeting a couple of weeks ago where they were shown the short list of options that will soon be going out for 'public engagement' (not formal consultation), then a final report on recommendations will be produced by around September this year. Any steering group members able to share that short list of options with us here?
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
One of them is "make Wightman Rd one way". That's the one the council have always wanted. They'll have it in a consultation with two other similar sounding schemes and ask people to rank them. It'll be the most common second choice and therefore the winner. We're doomed.
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Yes, this seems to be the Council's preferred option. It fits in nicely with their plans for wood Green. The current plans seem to aim at consolidating Wightman Road's roles as Wood Green by pass and shopping access road.
I don't favour the one-way option. Everywhere else around London, including in Haringey, one way systems are being removed with good reason. Far from controlling traffic, they tend to favour and encourage traffic. Look at how dehumanising it was for the Seven Sister's- Tottenham Hale circuit. Locally Salisbury Road was made one was to create a traffic route. That hasn't worked out well for Salisbury Road at all.
-
-
What about the option with bollards blocking all the Ladder rungs perhaps around the passage. That seemed popular'ish with some groups, did that one make it to the short list?
-
-
So looks like no. From that doc mentioned in the other thread here there short list for the Ladder area is:
-
-
I don't favour the one-way option. Everywhere else around London, including in Haringey, one way systems are being removed with good reason. Far from controlling traffic, they tend to favour and encourage traffic. Look at how dehumanising it was for the Seven Sister's- Tottenham Hale circuit. Locally Salisbury Road was made one was to create a traffic route. That hasn't worked out well for Salisbury Road at all.
So whats to be done about that Hugh? From the cursory look a lot of people will give to this they'll likely think along the lines of "Alternative 4 - too disruptive, Alternative 1 - too minor, lets pick Alternative 2 or 3 as at least that should halve the traffic and add a cycle path". Even with a completely random distribution of answers "one-way" will come out on top because its 50% of the 4 alternatives. Seems like we need an anti-one-way-wightman campaign?
-
Permalink Reply by JoeW on
-
Ant, Packages 2 or 3 (Wightman one-way north and one-way south) would not halve the traffic, they would actually make ratrunning on the Ladder even easier and would draw even more through-traffic through the area. Over time - particularly with all the new housing developments and expansion of Wood Green Shopping City - we'll end up with even more traffic than now.
Package 4 - filtering Wightman - is the only option guaranteed to protect against ratrunning. And remember it is filtering with numerous other interventions to mitigate any possible disruption elsewhere.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
