Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Wightman road - surely 6 lane junction at north end creates extra traffic?
There's a lot of ongoing discussions on this site regarding local traffic issues, with the volume of traffic on Wightman road a key issue, both making Wightman road unpleasant (even with the poorly signposted 20 zone), and creating more traffic on the ladder.
Given this, I was amazed a couple of weeks ago to see the design of the junction of Wightman road & Turnpike line, which basically tells drivers 'come on in, this is a big through road'...
Wightman road at this junction has an amazing 6 lanes, in strong contrast to the one each way further south.
Maybe traffic volumes would reduce if there was a redesign of this junction, narrowing down & making Wightman Road much less attractive to through traffic?
If you don't see the junction often (I was on a passing bus), then the google street view of the junction is here (if the very long URL survives...):
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocod...
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by StephenBln on
-
@michaelw This is pure nimbyism..
I really hope the residents of all the streets you drive down do the same as you are suggesting here.
Big City.. big traffic .. big noise not some 19th century cottage gardens idyll (that never existed anyway) - most streets were clogged up with horse shit!
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Stephen, residential streets should not have to bear the brunt of overflow traffic from main roads because people count a set of traffic lights avoided as a massive success on their journey. I didn't think Michael was being a nimby at all and he hit the nail on the head when he said "in my view increasing control on Wightman is the best way to reduce volumes on the ladder".
-
Permalink Reply by Dom G on
-
Hi John,
I am interested by the term 'residential streets'. Are you able to explain? Is this a formally defined term - e.g. Are these all roads other than M, A and B? Or is the term related to the density of residents on the road or the proportion of residential to commercial use?
I'm not sure why reducing traffic volume on a residential street (however this is defined) is an automatic good, if it increases traffic volume on a 'non-'residential street.
I live on Grand Parade and don't mind the noise from the heavy traffic. In any case, the bedrooms at the back of the property are silent. What I do mind is the assumption that Green Lanes should take the maximum amount of traffic that it can bear so that the Ladder roads can be even quieter than they already are.
-
-
Sorry to disappoint you, but the only modes of transport that I've used on the ladder are (i) walking and (ii) cycling.
We don't own a car, and the last time I drove a car was around 15 years ago.
One of the reasons we live in this area is the good public transport links - 141, 341, 29 & 67 buses (with the 253/254 up at Manor House), the tube at Manor House, the trains at Harringay Green Lanes & Harringay.
Yes, there are a few places that it's hard to get to by public transport - and some people will need cars for various reasons. The drop off in private car journeys in central London after the congestion charge was brought in demonstrated that many car journeys are avoidable.
-
Permalink Reply by Germana on
-
I think Michael makes a really interesting point about the 6 lane junction at the entrance of Whightman - something far more useful to focus on rather than the current obsession on this site with the Gardens being closed being the main reason for all the problems which is a massive oversimplification and a distraction from finding real solutions.
I think the way this junction is designed is far more important as a factor in people's decision to drive down Whightman and cut through the ladder at some point - just as the sat nav issue and general increase in traffic levels in London is (although it's a bit harder to figure out what to do about the satnavs, and many people are affected by them even in rural areas that were previously traffic free).
I also can't see what's nimby about what Michael said. Of course a big city will always have traffic and noise but surely it's a pretty legitimate thing to discuss ways of controlling it - particularly when we are regularly living with unsafe air quality standards in London because of its continuous growth (which cause ashtma and other illnesses - causing an estimated 4,300 premature deaths a year) and because it generally lowers our quality of life.
-
-
Quite simple .. all stop at home and never go out again.. you all sound as if you consider yourself victims.. but you are part of the problem.. even John on his two wheels - the old story of butterflies wings in GB causing tornados somewhere else.
OK, let's test the nimby theory out.. what about removing all the gates on the gardens..? moving them to the ladder - gate all ladder streets and make all the gardens one-way streets - now that would really improve the situation n'est pas?
-
-
No it would not improve the situation because the Gardens would go back to having hundreds of cars passing through every hour (read parallel discussion on the bollards with a description of the pre-bollards situation). I would personally be in favour of considering the option of putting gates or other resitrictions for cars on the worst affected streets on the ladder as well as keeping the ones on the Gardens. It would have to be discussed carefully of course.
How can people who don't drive be part of the problem, Stephen? Also, for your information, Michael and I who are married and with a child lead a very fulfilling and busy life even without owning a car. So your argument about never going out again just doesn't stand up.
The reality is that people who like to drive a lot don't like the fact that there are people who try to find ways of controlling traffic and pollution as this restricts their freedom, even though this unrestricted freedom comes at very high societal costs. Are you one of them perhaps, and who'se the nimby then (meaning by nimby not the literal meaning but someone who only thinks of one's own interest?).
-
-
ah and other ideas could be to change the look of the north junction of whightman road, as well as perhaps forbidding parking altogether on the Green Lanes (there is plenty of parking in the Gardens but somehow it's under-used - again lazy and selfish drivers who feel they can't even walk a few meters to Green Lanes). I am not an expert on traffic problems but there are a number of things that need to be done to make this area more livable - and it's better to try to find solutions rather than get rid of things that make things more bearable e.g. in the Gardens just because car drivers don't like them.
I read other comments on traffic issues that you've written elsewhere, Stephen, and they seem quite sensible so I am a bit puzzled by how you are reacting to this discussion.
-
-
The point I'm trying to make is that a patchwork of management measures don't help but make the problems worse. And you as a city dweller expect to use other roads and therefore you should be willing for others to use yours. I am against infringements on (my) personal freedom to be able to get from A to B as quickly and sensibly as possible. Most traffic mangement schemes actually increase levels of traffic/pollution because they generally force it to travel twice the distance to get from A to B.
I also find this attitude to cars/motorised traffic rather childish. Oh wow, people who don't own cars and think they should given brownie points. I presume then that you also never use buses, taxis, ambulances or that your groceries are delivered by hand to the supermarket/shops. I think the old chestnut class system is rearing it's head here.. jealousy towards those who can afford (or not) larger cars.
BTW; I don't own a car either. I have a company car, which I also use very sparingly and mostly use public transport in fact, nearly every day. I only use my bike in summer. But that doesn't mean I automatically want to stop others using their cars.
-
-
These conversations seem to end up positing two at extremes (no cars vs complete car freedom). The reality is that neither is feasible.
But I'm sure people can discuss what is the perfect level of traffic on the ladder (current amount? 50%? 250%? turn green lanes (or wightman) into a 6 line highway?), and what can be done to encourage good driver behaviour (20 zones etc).
Going back to my original post, my feeling is that most people in the area would like to have less traffic on Wightman (and hence the ladder), which is why we have the (somewhat ineffective) 20 zone. In this context, the north end of Wightman should not be designed to attract traffic in & give an unrealistic expectation of the real nature of the road.
-
-
Hi Michael,
Do 20 mph zones lead to less traffic?
I don't think they do. I think they:
1) encourage (some) drivers to drive more slowly
2) increase the number of cars on the 20 mph stretch at any one time due to the compression effect caused by slowing traffic
-
-
1. Excellent!
2. Excellent!
And no, nobody here has said they lead to less traffic. Not that I can find anyway.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
