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 JoeW on
-
Timely reminder thank you Matthew.
Just to recap what this is about, the daily volume of traffic on Wightman looks like this:
That is over 1000 vehicles per hour during daylight hours, with peaks over 1200 in the morning and over 1400 in the afternoon. A typical scene looks like this, looking north:
And from the same point (near Fairland Park), looking south at the same time:
The volume of traffic is higher than several local A-roads including Turnpike Lane. All this on a street with narrow house frontages, narrow (and inaccessible) pavements, pavement parking, and narrow (and hostile to cyclists) carriageways.
It's a disgrace that this volume of traffic is allowed to flow along a street which is entirely unsuitable and purely residential for most of its one-mile length. It also runs completely against GLA and Council objectives to reduce pollution and increase walking and cycling.
But we do have a chance to change things permanently - by supporting filtering (plus measures to mitigate disruption on neighbouring roads) in the council's survey here: https://www.research.net/r/GLATS. Filtering is the only option which will achieve a lasting, drastic reduction in traffic for our own and future generations - let's not let the opportunity slip by!
-
Permalink Reply by matthew cuthbert on
-
Thank you for putting a picture to the problem
-
Permalink Reply by andy h on
-
Joe, I just don't recognise 1000 - 1200 vehicles an hour along the whole length of Wightman every hour of daylight.
I'm sure you'll have some stats though.
Anyway, the vote's over so ...
It would be great if you could post the numbers for/against and let us all know.
-
-
Andy, the stats are in that chart in my previous post. I guess the reason you don't recognise it is because you don't live there? But if you want to check the stats, stand at any point on Wightman (or maybe walk along it) for ten minutes, and count how many vehicles pass by. Multiply by 6 to get the per hour number.
I don't have the numbers for/against - we shall have to wait for the council to publish those...
-
-
Joe.....stats....what's the phase? I can't remember?
Sorry, just my natural scepticism
-
-
There's lies, damned lies, and ... if you don't believe it walk along Wightman for 10 minutes and count the vehicles. Let me know how you get on.
-
Permalink Reply by Living Wightman on
-
Thank you for the reminder!
Living Wightman has now received statements of support for filtering Wightman Road from GLA London Assembly members Caroline Pidgeon and Caroline Russell - both members sit on the Transport Committee, you can read the statements here: http://www.livingwightman.org/2017/05/messages-of-support-from-lond...
Plus we've also had statements of support for filtering Wightman from walking, cycling and environmental campaign groups Sustrans, Living Streets, Friends of The Earth, and London Cycling Campaign - you can read their statements here http://www.livingwightman.org/2017/05/who-supports-living-wightman....
Haringey Cycling Campaign 9have published a great article on their website in support of filtering: Daddy, can we please cycle to Finsbury Park again this weekend?
But we still need as many residents as possible to complete the council's survey - please don't leave it too late!
The survey closes today - Sunday 14th May: https://www.research.net/r/GLATS
Thank you!
-
-
But no support from a single Haringey Councillor who clearly have the common sense to realise that you can't blight tens of thousands of public transport users lives in order to achieve a good result for a few hundred Wightman Road residents. Option 1 is a proportionate and realistic response to the problems faced. Vote for sanity. Vote Option 1.
-
-
Wightman Road is about an aspiration in reducing the traffic for the eight thousand people who have made the Ladder their home, not the cause of traffic.
True there has not been any ownership taken by our Councilor's on the issue publicly.
I think we need to take note of how traffic has steadily risen and why journeys are made, and by whom. Public transport should also win from this, and be an attractive choice.
Our overland stations are neglected, and give a poor impression of the area, they should be treated as gateways.
-
-
To be fair, Cllr Emina Ibrahim is on record as saying "We need a Traffic and Parking Review in Harringay", and we can at least partially thank her for helping to initiate the current consultation:
"Harringay desperately needs a traffic and parking review, we have got to the stage that the amount of traffic coming down the ladder roads really needs to be dealt with. I will be writing to officers and the lead member because we can no longer I believe sustain this inequitable distribution of traffic in the area."
Option 4 (Filtering Wightman) is the only option which meets the "really needs to be dealt with" criteria isn't it?
-
-
That's a nice spin, but at no point in that statement or any other has she expressly supported the filtering of Wightman Road ..and neither has any other councillor
-
-
That's a nice spin, Antoinette, but at no point has she expressly opposed the filtering of Wightman Road either.
Your guess is as good as mine. I guess we'll find out soon enough. And all the councillors are up for election next year so we'll have a chance to elect others if we don't think the current ones are acting in the best interests of their constituents.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
