Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Cycling along Green Lanes
There is growing impatience and frustration about the Council’s lack of action on improving cycling and pedestrian safety on Green Lanes.* This mounting concern was covered in a recent piece in the Ham and High (see link below) about this and the growing discontent from cyclist about the safety of cycling along Green Lanes – either as a commuter, or just travelling to the local shops and services.
https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/25393803.cycling-campaigner-wants-pr...
As Trump would say…. “Thank you for your attention to this matter.”
*and elsewhere across the borough. All the cycle routes from surrounding boroughs stop abruptly at the Haringey border!
Cycling along Green Lanes has been described as 'hairy' (Image: Carla Francome) (Image: Carla Francome)
Tags for Forum Posts: cycling
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Barbara
-
"Please also understand that people are cycling to get to places. So routes must be direct. If you’re trying to get to work, school, or the shops, nobody wants to add extra distance every single trip just for the sake of “fitness". Every day transport should be direct, safe, and convenient." Mark Williams.
Of course you are cycling to get to places! I do not assume you are on a cycling holiday!
You and Clive talk about a perfect world but this is an old city with many demands on it...with old infrastructure in poor economic times. It is not possible to have a perfect route for everyone! Every day transport should be direct, safe, and convenient ... You can't satisfy everybody - it's nonsense.
You and Clive are experienced cyclists - so for those poor souls who need London Transport they have my support. The geography on GL isn't easily negotiated at certain times of the day..school journeys, deliveries, working journeys for people who don't cycle...elderly and disabled people needing to "get to places " like you too! It's not just about one citizen I'm afraid and their desires. Unlike Thatcher I say that we all live in society!
The more vocal people are about cycling the more I see them as entitled.
You rarely get the low paid, disabled and elderly writing about anything on Harringay Online. Meanwhile the Council is always trying to alleviate and elevate the position of these residents which we should all support.
I put up with the overload of traffic on GL at school times early morning and mid afternoon because that's what is needed in our borough and ultimately in our country to make society work. Families and kids are our future. They don't necessarily cycle and they may not have the money to have a bike or even keep one with the cycle theft that goes on.
I know the borough having lived here for many years. The Council does a lot for its priorities. The new flats down St Anne's Road will add pressure transport wise to the area.Watch this space in the coming Autumn when most of those flats are sold/occupied. That's when the real problems begin.
-
Permalink Reply by Mark Williams
-
Several objections are put forward here, and I completely disagree on every single point.
"Old city / poor times”
London's age and complexity are exactly why we need safer, more efficient transport. Cycling is space-efficient and cheap for councils to support, certainly compared to car infra, road widing etc. Old and dense cities, like Paris, have built safe cycling networks in recent years. It's not about perfection, it's about political will.
"You can’t satisfy everyone / cyclists are entitled"
Asking for direct, safe routes isn't "entitlement". It's the same standard given to other modes of transport. No one suggests telling bus users to “zig-zag on side streets” or telling drivers to “just find creative routes.” Why should cyclists be singled out? Building safe cycle lanes helps everyone by reducing overall congestion and pollution, not just “one citizen.”
“What about the elderly, disabled, low paid?”
Firstly, many people from those groups already cycle. Many more would like to if it were made safer. It's plain wrong to assume elderly or disabled people can't or might not want to use a bicycle if they feel safe to do so.Secondly, pitting groups against each other like this is a false choice: improving active travel makes public transport more reliable and frees up road space for those who must drive.
Car ownership is lowest among low-income groups. These people depend more on walking, cycling, and buses. The majority of people in the less affluent east of the borough do not have access to a car.
“Families and kids don’t cycle / can’t afford bikes”
There have been surveys on this. The main reason families don't cycle is fear of traffic, not lack of interest. Where safe routes are built (e.g. Waltham Forest, Mini-Holland), school-run cycling rises dramatically.
A bike is far cheaper than owning and insuring a car. Theft is a problem, but it's a solvable problem. One solution is installing more secure storage. We can push Haringey council to roll out bike hangars and new developments like Peabody St Ann should include secure bike storage (it does, by the way). Several residents on my street have requested bike hangers be installed (we are still waiting on that...)
"We all live in society / cars at school times are necessary”
Nobody is saying families shouldn't get around. But if more parents felt safe letting kids cycle, school-run traffic would reduce. Right now, car dominance forces everyone, including families without cars, to breathe pollution and risk collisions. That's not fair either.
“New flats will add pressure”
Yes, all the more reason to shift trips to space-efficient modes. Packing thousands of new cars onto Green Lanes will gridlock it. If those new residents have safe cycle and bus options, the whole community benefits.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter
-
Barbara, I invite you to read carefully Mark's contribution in this thread. I would add a few points.
You and Clive talk about a perfect world
The supposedly "perfect" world is taking shape in other Boroughs and other cities, like Paris. I think it is not generally appreciated just how conservative and out-of-step that Haringey Council is when compared even to next-door Boroughs. Haringey achieves this lag of being years behind best practice, through transport policy paralysis coupled with public relations that trumpet tiny steps forward.
… this is an old city …
indeed it is, and whose infrastructure grew like topsy and was intended for horses and carts. There's a reason why the Highwaymen use the term "carriageway". Our roads are unsuited to SUVs and to unlimited cars. The Highwaymen and their employers carry on as though the carriageways can accommodate more and more bloated cars, without upper limit. GL often carries super-saturation of fossil-fuel burners.
You and Clive are experienced cyclists
I can't speak for Mark, but this experienced cyclist is often reluctant to cycle, due to the domination of the council's carriageways by cars, coupled with the too-often speed and aggression of car-drivers and the risk of being Doored.
I put up with the overload of traffic on GL at school times … kids are our future.
That "overload of traffic" has consequences that are not always visible. Do car-owners care about the side-effects, or are they blinkered to the unintended consequences of car-centricity?
.
-
-
-
THE LTNs do feel a lot safer, but from a cyclist's POV, these represent a few isolated islands in a sea of fossil-fuel burners.
It is misleading to characterise these islands as an alternative to to main roads.
If I cycle from Stroud Green to Tottenham, I need to plan the route with care. As far as possible, I do cycle through parks and quiet back roads. It's not about being creative or proactive, nor exercising effort or imagination: its about the necessity of minimising danger. Entitled car-owners don't have to go to this trouble.
Like other risk averse cyclists, I am prepared to dismount and walk my cycle across big busy intersections. Council Highwaymen are likely to be content.
Green Lanes continues as an open running sewer of pollution and congestion.
Haringey Council is unprepared to take any action on this sewer because they are more sensitive to powerful lobbyists than feeling responsibility to wider society or to the public at large.
Haringey's Director of Public Health has been silent or he has been silenced.
However the council are prepared to talk endlessly about a need to deliver and take action.
-
Permalink Reply by Charlie
-
How do you propose someone in a car would find alternative routes for the jounrey givdn the ltns have narrowed the options down to 1 or 2 routes? As a cyclist you can go any number of ways and google will provide you with lots of options. Once youve found your favoured route then stick to it. I think you should also desist in name cslling as its not really necessary. If you disagree with the council thats one thing but no need to label them as "Highwaymen" whatever that's supposed to imply.
-
-
Charlie, thanks for drawing attention to The Highwaymen.
However I do not label the (whole) council as Highwaymen.
"Highwaymen" refers to the (mainly) men in the council's Highways Department.
Sorry if this was not clear.
In my view, we need a new breed of Highway engineer. Too often, the present dept exhibits a lack of competence and lacks understanding of the needs of all road users. I include pedestrians.
I won't "desist" in referring to this bastion of pro-car entitlement, not least because it fits …
In my view, Haringey Council Stands still on Transport and does not Deliver.
The Highwaymen of the 18th century were infamous for holding up stage coaches; in the 21st century, the Highwaymen of Haringey Council are known for holding up progress in transport. And, aided and abetted by Members of the Council.
Meanwhile, I invite you to consider desisting from a wholly car-centric viewpoint.
.
-
-
As a lifelong non-driver, when I use buses or tubes I'd much prefer to be able to travel direct from A to B, but – horrors! – I sometimes have to change tube lines, change buses, or even walk between bus stops on my journey, so I plan my route accordingly. What's so bad about cyclists having to plan routes via back streets or lesser-used roads in exactly the same way, instead of assuming they should always go straight along major routes?
As it happens, I agree with Clive about Green Lanes. I've long argued that the Council should restrict parking from the Arena to the Salisbury, actually enforce waiting and loading restrictions, create a northbound bus lane, prioritise buses at traffic lights, and work with TfL and the DoT to restrict rush hour traffic at the GL/North Circular junction, to take pressure off what's both a major trunk road and a local shopping street. If GL congestion wasn't so bad, public transport would improve – creating more incentive to use it – and traffic wouldn't need to try and find ways through side streets. So far, the Council's has abjectly failed to fulfil their promise to mitigate the massive adverse effects of the LTNs on "boundary" roads, including both GL and West Green Road.
TfL's latest annual report says that bus speeds are continuously declining and reliability is now far worse than before the pandemic. I'd suggest this reflects the proliferation of "temporary" LTNs and cycling lanes created in the pandemic, narrowing roads, forcing yet more traffic onto major routes and creaing more congestion. It's not just private cars that use main roads, it's buses too – and there's no incentive for "active travel" if public transport is permanently unreliable.
-
-
Hi Charlie, I'm a resident who campaigned for the inception of the modal filters that now enable active travel across my neighbourhood. They don't solve the problem of car parking on Green Lanes, and how that affects people travelling north-south across the borough.
Other people exist, they have wants and needs, they don't have an imagination that enables them to somehow avoid the only way to easily traverse this part of the borough. Perhaps their lack of imagination is what stops them, perhaps it's parked cars, perhaps they should learn to fly.
-
-
Not everyone can cycle! You are speaking for the physically able as usual. We need the bus routes too and car drivers are not a homogenous group. How can workmen get to your homes if cars are banned?
-
-
Spot on. There are others apart from commuter cyclists who seem to think the infrastructure should be designed for their benefit. If you want to cycle and it means a little extra zig zagging then embrace the journey and think of the extra fitness you are getting rather than moaning and expecting that all other road users (those who pay for the road incidentally which you are using for free) to accommodate your very specific needs. The commuters as a group actually should be the least represented as they use the road for 2 identical journeys per day probably for less than 1 hr each way. As a general cyclist going about my business in the area I use the roads far more and I'm not complaining.
-
-
Well said! This is the annual London Cycling Campaign announcement for September..a lobby group that is determined to make other residents lives harder. I am a cyclist too but recognise that not all my neighbours are young, fit and healthy. The buses are essential for so many people to get around London. I spoke to a young woman carer yesterday who needs the routes around Green Lanes to cope with her busy day going from one client to another. The job would be impossible without bus routes through Green Lanes. She was badly low paid as it was without extra journeys.
-
-
It is not unreasonable to expect infrastructure to be designed to take into account the safety and needs of cyclists, a growing constituency of road users. Cycling is surely the one form of transport we need to be encouraging, for obvious reasons. Radically cutting down parking on Green Lanes would be a sensible move.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2025 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
