Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Last chance to Support Living Wightman, go the extra yard & make your mark.
We can't be complacent, many leaflets have been dropped advocating no change, which will be the poorest outcome for residents across the Ladder,
this is the first time our lungs have been considered, don't let Haringey council muddy the water, we need to go for it now.
I'm sure there are other posts on interventions, but this is my reminder.
Living Wightman's link here:
http://www.livingwightman.org/p/faq.html?m=1#faq11
or follow the 10 step guide through below:
Q11: How do I complete the survey to support the filtering of Wightman Road?
https://www.research.net/r/GLATS
Haringey council's engagement survey asks for your opinion on ten different 'Packages' of options, each Package has between 5 and 14 options.
For each option you can click a button to indicate how strongly you support or oppose that option:
In total there are over 70 options across the ten packages, (yes really,)
so allow yourself time if you want to read all the accompanying details & wish to answer every question.
It is possible to simplify the options, if you just want to support Living Wightman's aims.
If all you want to do is indicate support for "Package WL4: Wightman Road Closed (Filtered)",
follow these steps:
• Go to https://www.research.net/r/GLATS and click Next
• Click No to "Would you like to comment on this Package (AW - Area-wide Improvements)" - then click Next
• Also click No & click Next for the next two Packages PC and GL
• Click Yes to comment on Package WL
• For Package WL1, click "I don't know/not applicable" for each option
• Also for Package WL2 and WL3, you can click "I don't know/not applicable" for each option (you can click Oppose to options WL2-01a and WL3-01a if you are against one-way)
• for Package WL4, click "Strongly Support" for all options
• Question 13* is where you can indicate your preferred package as WL4
(note that the question number may be higher than 13 if you clicked Yes to comment on any previous packages.)
• Click No & click Next for the last two Packages HE and SA
• The final question asks for your house number and postcode, this is just to allow the consultants to classify responses according to where they live (and stop the same household responding more than once!)
If you did want to comment on any of the other package options you can click Yes to any Package and then support or oppose the options as you wish. Most of us are strongly opposed to one-way (package WL2 and WL2) and generally support the various area-wide traffic calming and streetscape improvements and cycle schemes.
For Living Wightman the single most important goal is to maximise support for Package WL4 as this is the only option to ensure long-term drastic reduction of traffic on the worst affected Wightman Road.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by matthew cuthbert on
-
Harringay Online here in 2010. 32 seconds in, the issue of 'Diverting Traffic' off Green Lanes to the Ladder roads, raised in discussion.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hATqB3jXel4
-
Permalink Reply by 1vut8bf3om5m9 on
-
I don't buy it because it is premised on the view that the vehicle numbers will be the same pre and post filtering. This was shown not to be the case per last summer and even if we didn't have last summer, I wouldn't buy it anyway.
-
-
Aim high, aim high everyone!
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
It's not a referendum Nick, it's a consultation. Haringey will look at the comments, weigh them up and ultimately go with what THEY want.
-
-
This morning on Alroy Road the cyclist in front of me got taken out by someone who abruptly pulled a U-turn.
As I have stated many times, of all the roads in London I cycle on, Wightman Road is the worst and most dangerous. But it's worth killing and injuring cyclists now and again so the opposers here are not inconvenienced and can get to where they want to go ostensibly faster.
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
There will be a lot more of this if Wightman is filtered as motorists realise that they can go no further and want to turn round.
-
Permalink Reply by Sandi on
-
Really??? During last summer's filtering, I saw a few cars do a U-turn on Wightman, but don't remember any cyclist being knocked off their bike in the process. I don't see why these accidents should increase if filtering is brought in and it's made super clear to motorists well in advance that WR is not a 'through-road'.
-
-
I was just starting to type the same thing. And moreover, once the reality sets in, there won't be motorists arriving who then come to realise they would need to make a U-turn (which I don't really get anyway since all of the ladder roads are one way--who would do a U-turn to go to the road they just came up?)
-
-
I can only speak from observation at the North end of Wightman last summer. Even in September, after months of closure and in-your-face signage, drivers were still turning off Turnpike Lane and U turning at Lausanne. At peak times there were literally queues of cars waiting to turn round.
-
-
Like all habits, it will take time to change. There'll always be rogue motorists who don't see the signs, but I'm guessing having been caught out once, they won't do it again.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Cars would come up Lausanne and do their usual rat-run turn towards Crouch End, not realising that the road was closed until it was literally in their faces and then.... do a U-turn. It wasn't done at speed from a line of traffic though which is when it's really dangerous so, straw man John D.
-
-
People were doing U-turns in order to be able to go straight over the lights at the Turnpike Lane junction weren't they? You can't turn right out of Turnpike Lane so you had no option (to get to the tip for example) but to do a U-turn on Wightman.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
