Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Haringey Scrutiny Committee Session on Harringay Transport Study
Last week I've learned there was a scrutiny committee session on the current Harringay Traffic Study (as far as I'm aware none of the local community groups was alerted to this by the Council). What is said probably gives some clues about the Council's current thinking.
Video above papers can be downloaded here.
Tags for Forum Posts: harringay traffic study, traffic
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
That PDF is printed out and scanned. So you can't google the text if it was on the internet and you can't search for stuff in it. They have no good reason to do this other than to be secretive.
If I read this right:
The council currently propose putting this Cycle Quietway over an enormous hill!
The other two takeaways from that document that I got:
- The trader's objections to parking being taken away are not to do with shoppers but to do with supplying their shops and businesses as there is no rear access. This is a legitimate concern.
- They consistently misspell Harringay as Haringey. Tedious.
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
The searchability issue was probably me trying (without luck) to reduce the file size sufficiently so I could append the document to this post. Try it now.
-
Permalink Reply by 1vut8bf3om5m9 on
-
I honed right in on 2.3 as well, but I ran into the problem of its not being text format! The Islington Council does make mention of this Quietway 11 proposal, and shows the Islington part of the route (click on pdf at the bottom of the page). They say it's being looked at but so early in stage that there is no commitment whatsoever. I also don't know what a quietway entails versus the cycling superhighway. If it just means painting a picture of a cycle on the road it won't mean much.
-
-
Quietways are generally rubbish. It's a way of moving cycling off main roads to free up motor vehicle flow.
The big problems though are that the quietways are inevitably rat runs and the cycling provision is generally a few painted cycle lanes (generally with cars parked on them or in the dooring zone) and a couple of signs.
On top of that, people follow desire lines, the quick routes between A and B. They generally have no inclination to follow a meandering, backstreets route with multiple roads and junctions.
There's plenty about how they're failing online http://lcc.org.uk/articles/quietways-they-arent-working
-
-
Fair enough but my point was more that the kind of cyclists who "might" use a quietway would not be the kind of cyclists who would prefer to head up over Ridge Road, the two little hills on Wightman are seen as bad enough.
-
-
I agree, quietways "are intended to appeal to cyclist who want to cycle slowly, in their ordinary clothes away from most of the traffic." (From the Islington Council website talking about Quietway 2).
-
Permalink Reply by JoeW on
-
Wightman Road during the bridgeworks was a very successful "Quietway" - it didn't need any armadillos or other expensive cycle lane segregation infrastructure, the filtered road layout completely eliminated ratrunning so was quiet enough for shared use by cyclists, motorists and pedestrians. Wightman Road, and every Ladder rung, instantly became safe enough for kids to cycle to the two local schools as well as local and non-local commuters to cycle to work down Wightman through Finsbury Park and onward through the generally decent cycle networks of Islington or Hackney.
If the council is serious about promoting active transport modes, what could be more cost-effective than filtering Wightman?
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
