Comment by Alan Sitkin on March 17, 2014 at 15:13

I agree totally Joshua that pinch points that don't pinch make no sense

We made this argument to the Council officers and supposedly won the day. They have yet to tell us when they are planning on adding the extension, will chase and revert. Of course, once this happens, cars will have to queue up to let each other through. Which is fine if it dissuades rat-runners - the purpose of the whole exercise. At the same time, there is a chance of increased road rage if cars get impatient because they have to wait now.

Comment by Matthew Kitching on March 17, 2014 at 19:34

Alan, I welcome your post which follows the outcome of the discussion at the Autumn consultation where residents agreed that a solution for Warwick must also include a solution for York, to avoid a problem unfairly transferred rather than resolved.  I hope the impact assessment will be available to residents and will await the outcome with interest.  At this stage I would only express one word of caution - the policy of making Warwick unattractive for rat-running traffic is the right one and pinch-points-that-actually-pinch are a logical solution.  I read with interest the views of one Warwick resident who believes that these pinch points simply 'formalise' the traffic pattern that was always there on Warwick (i.e. 'wait-go') but I say give these measures a chance.  I'm not saying significant changes won't ultimately be required (we discussed a comprehensive range of options at the meeting you facilitated) but before we rush to judgement on additional measures involving changes such as right/left turn bans that ripple outwards onto adjoining roads, let's see what effect the enhanced traffic calming measures on Warwick have, or at least allow the time necessary to build an assessment of their effect into the impact assessment.

Comment by W cousins on March 25, 2014 at 9:11

Alan,

This is very welcome news and await the trial and results for the banned right turn to reduce the rat-running. The way forward - if not closing the road completely, will dissuade people from short-cutting off the north circular to turn right at the end which it has become. Once we have established the trial and its impact it will become clear that the 50% additional rat-runners now using it will stay on the north circular - It can only be assessed once implemented so lets see the results - A question at the meeting in September was the possibility of moving the pedestrian crossing down by the tube on Brownlow road and reintroduce the banned left turn onto Brownlow which is a question could now be asked again to Haringey?

Comment by Alan Sitkin on March 25, 2014 at 9:39

Haringey said no again, Will, so we have to consider what if any leverage we can get. They are right to want to ensure the safety of pedestrians coming out of Bounds Green but as you write, we think that can be achieved by moving the crossing a bit further up from the junction. Otherwise, as you see from our latest letter, TFL seem to be reacting more positively, although they continue to be very very slow! 

Comment by Nev Martin on March 25, 2014 at 12:42

Tom makes valid points that I agree with.  Any decision or implementation needs to be conducted in conjunction with Haringey's residents and it would be unfair and inappropriate to foist a displaced traffic problem without their awareness.

Saying that "if any problems are thrown up then it might make Haringey look at their decisions again" would be totally wrong and in poor spirit.

Comment by Alan Sitkin on March 25, 2014 at 13:43

At present, Warwick Rd/Bowes ward is the victim of a past decision made unilaterally by Haringey (ca 2008? 2009?) to no longer allow northbound turns onto Brownlow for traffic travelling eastwards on Bounds Green Rd. This happened well before I had the honour of becoming councillor but I'm not aware at the time that Warwick Rd (and indeed Highworth Rd) residents were told that their congestion levels would rise by 50% due to displaced rat-running. I'm not aware that they signed up to Haringey's changes. To use your words again, I'm not aware that the original decision was taken "in conjunction" with them. I'd wager strongly that it wasn't.

So I actually agree with you that the original modus operandi was wrong. The problem is that it has already taken place (again before I became cllr). Raising in turn the question whether we try to do something to remedy it. If we do nothing, we would simply be sanctioning what you agree is a wrong, and ignoring the distress of Warwick Rd residents. I can't do that, for ethical reasons but also because as my constituents' councillor, I have the duty and indeed the privilege of representing their interests. Something that gets lost in some of these posts is that all of the mooted remedies we are looking at come from consultation with the residents afflicted by the original decision, and none will be adopted without consultation. And that is the way it should be. 

I totally support the aim of ensuring the safety of pedestrians leaving Bounds Green station but am convinced that if Haringey Council can show some flexibility re; resituating the crossing (for instance, moving it about 30 yards up), we can square the circle. In the mean time, the situation has become untenable for residents of Warwick Road, i.e. the status quo sees them suffering a much deteriorated quality of life as a result of decisions taken by Haringey/TFL, i.e. decisions not taken by Enfield Council. But Enfield does have the right - and indeed the obligation - to speak out for its residents as well. And that is all we are doing here. 

Comment by Administrator on March 25, 2014 at 13:46

Please see the following information sourced from Enfield Council:

Enfield council provides details of expenditure awarded via The Enfield Residents Priority Fund through their website. The costs for Warwick Road Traffic Calming  are in the public domain.

See this link:http://governance.enfield.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=8257 item 4 on this list will open a detailed document: http://governance.enfield.gov.uk/documents/s43411/EnvERPFJan14v1%20...

Cost for the removal of the speed tables and building of the pinch points is £10.500 (Bow032) plus £11,500 (from Bow 039) = £22,000 total

Further money on changes in Warwick relates to different items: the origin and destination traffic study: Bow037 (£7,500); and potentially a larger development,  banning the right hand turn , the rest of Bow 039 (around £10K).

Out of the £22k total for the actual traffic measures only a very small share went to taking out old and worn speed tables, most was spent on new introductions.

The original scheme was decided several years ago by a previous administration. The new proposals around Warwick have been developed at the request of local residents, in part funded by the Residents Priority fund,  and have been implemented following resident consultation.

Comment by Richard McKeever on March 26, 2014 at 11:42

Tom

The detail you are requesting here is beyond the scope of this volunteer-run website to deliver.

We are set up as a community project and have no remit as an official source of local authority information. However for the purpose of this debate an attempt was made to provide background information.

You may find a more satisfactory response if you request council figures through official council chanells. So if you really need this level of data I suggest you contact Enfield borough council directly: www.enfield.gov.uk tel: 020 8379 1000

Should this not get the detail you are asking for you can follow-up with a Freedom of Information (FOI) request.

Comment by Matthew Kitching on February 25, 2016 at 18:35

I note with interest a post on the Bowes Labour website in respect of the junction of Warwick Rd and the North Circular that indicates that "After 3 long years, TFL has finally accepted a trial of the right hand turn ban! But we're worried that other interested parties will now try to scupper the change."  I assume that the interested parties referred to are Haringey council who fear the impact this will have on Maidstone Road.  A number of interested parties with similar concerns for York Rd were represented at the community meeting where this was last discussed and where, as per the post at the beginning of this thread, it was agreed that this measure, if adopted at all, would need to be "combined with a banned left turn onto Brownlow Road by cars travelling eastwards on York Road".  I therefore assume that any trial will also include this left turn ban.  I also recall that the data gathered during the traffic monitoring activity preceding the trial was to be made available for residents.  It remains to be seen whether this could possibly work in a fair manner (I doubt it). While the right turn ban on the North Circular will enforce itself through the timings of traffic lights and sheer volume of traffic, a left turn ban from York Road onto Brownlow will be difficult to enforce without installing cameras and remodelling the junction.

Comment by Angie on April 26, 2016 at 17:21

Dear Matthew Kitching - can you direct me to the specific post on Bowes Labour regarding the RH turn ban for Warwick Road? I cannot see it but am very interested to look into this. It is great news!

Add a Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page