Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Green Lanes Area Transport Study - consultation
http://www.haringey.gov.uk/transport/green-lanes-area-transport-study
Tags for Forum Posts: consultation, harringay traffic study, traffic
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Charlotte A on
-
Anyone who lives on a road that will take the traffic that was otherwise on Wightman/the Ladder wouldn't, surely. Like the people who live on Turnpike Lane.
-
-
Well I breathe and I definitely won't be supporting "filtering". As a point of comparison I have enjoyed the quiet and lack of diesel train fumes during the Barking to Gospel Oak line closure. The difference being that I am not so deluded or so selfish to think that my quiet enjoyment of my garden is more important than the needs of 1,000s of people who use that route to get to and from work/school etc.
-
Permalink Reply by Rich on
-
Nobody is talking about quiet enjoyment of their garden. Joe is talking about the improvement of air quality which is good for all residents in the area. There are around 9.5k deaths from air pollution in London every year, selfishness is not trying to do things to improve this for the convenience of travel.
Now, I'm not saying there wasn't issues when Wightman was shut last year, however we must be pushing for a solution that is going to improve air quality, and encourage people to use alternative forms of transport to a car.
As has been mentioned multiple times, mitigation measures that could have been put in place, weren't done or weren't investigated as the closure of the road was seen as temporary, but there are things that could be done.
I assume if the issues with buses were sorted or largely mitigated, you'd be far more supportive of the idea? I'd certainly agree that with what ever package is selected, it should be making bus/train journeys more appealing
-
-
Your view is that mitigating measures weren't put in place because it "was seen as temporary". My view is that they weren't put in place because they were impractical and politically difficult to implement. They remain that today. So my starting point is that those mitigations have as much likelihood of being put in place now and they did before the bridge closure, and there can be no justification for "filtering" Wightman Road if those measures can't be put in place.
-
-
-
Mitigation's cost money and you can be pretty sure they keep the amount spent on these to an absolute minimum when Wightman was closed as it was only for 6 months.
There is even a section in the proposal about mitigation measures tied to the filtering of Wightman option.
-
-
-
Rich....I've already pointed out at least half a dozen times now that they could have suspended parking on Green Lanes for almost zero cost. They chose not to do so fo poltical reasons not financial ones
-
-
-
If they had suspended parking, they would have had to at the very least:
- Make some provisions for loading, are these going to be simple loading times, are they going to need some kind of loading bays, maybe they want to make the bottom of the ladder roads loading. All this would need to be consulted with the traders along Green Lanes.
- Actually put all these provisions in place, make sure they was noticed to all traders of when it was going to happen (note if they only released how much of an issue it was going to be once Wightman close, there was no way enough time to deal with this).
- What ever they had decided this would all have to be signed and market correctly and then reverted once the road reopened.
I don't doubt there was some political influence, but at the same time cost will have also have been a factor.
And that's just looking at one mitigation measure. There are multiple that may or may not be useful discussed in the threads already posted.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Don't think that analogy quite works
- the railway line has been there since something like the 1860s, so before the houses were built
- traffic on the line has decreased rather than increased over the years as freight has switched to roads
- trains were first steam (very noisy and very polluting), then diesel (noisy and polluting) and will soon be electric (not very noisy and non polluting)
- several trains a minute don't pass a few feet from your bedroom window 24 hours a day.
- no one is forced to walk or push a pram alongside a railway line
-
Permalink Reply by Nick on
-
I don't see how I'm misrepresenting the results. There were 62 responses clearly against and 39 responses clearly for. Clearly there is a certain (read: high) level of opposition to the closure of the road. Denying that this opposition exists is hardly going to help your cause.
Stating that the closure benefits everyone, when clearly it doesn't, is a little arrogant. Even the Living Wightman survey found a number of ladder residents who were negatively affected.
As for pollution levels, correlation doesn't imply causation. Weather is a major factor. Green Lanes traffic was virtually at a standstill during the closure - hard to see how this could improve air quality. A difference in traffic levels of 8% doesn't even imply evaporation as this could easily be down to seasonal variation.
If the concern is pavement parking, why not support removing parking on one side of the road and moving the the opposite bays onto the road?
-
Permalink Reply by JoeW on
-
Do you have any evidence that the weather was different in July-Sept 2015 compared to the same period in 2016? The most significant difference between these period was Wightman filtering in 2016.
-
-
Do you have any evidence that June traffic on these roads is normally 8% lower than January traffic because of seasonal factors? I wouldn't be surprised if June was normally higher, so the evaporation rate due to Wightman filtering even greater than 8%.
-
-
"I don't see how I'm misrepresenting the results"
So you've misunderstood them then. It was an engagement tool to collect ideas. There were 1323 individual bits of feedback covering around 200 different issues or proposed improvements. It wasn't a "vote" on Wightman filtering. Some people used it as an opportunity to indicate what they thought of Wightman filtering, but most raised different issues or possible solutions.
The integrity of the feedback tool was also suspect. It was trivially easy to login multiple times to upvote your pet solution or downvote those you opposed - I reported this at the time after I noticed that one of my comments received about a dozen down votes almost immediately after I posted it.
But, even if the tool's integrity was better, the nature of the process means you can't interpret the frequency of each piece of feedback as if it were a plebiscite on a single issue.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
