|
|
 |
| |
‘Stop the Road’ lobby is a threat to a better Heath
• AS a long-term member of the Hampstead Heath Consultative Committee and resident of Dartmouth Park, I am concerned that the misleading “Stop the Road” campaign may derail the City of London application for a lottery grant to help fund improvements to the Parliament Hill Fields area.
The Heath authorities have already proposed modifications to meet understandable misgivings of residents of the Lissenden estate, and there will be further discussions in detail.
The proposed traffic-only route would follow the existing vehicle and pedestrian route alongside the Lissenden Gardens estate and then skirt the edge of the cricket pitch, so unobtrusively separating pedestrians and vehicles.
The pedestrian-only path would follow the existing path from the Lido, curving round to rejoin the present path towards the bandstand.
Regrettably “Stop the Road” campaigners do not appear to appreciate that measures to separate vehicles from pedestrians are essential to obviate the serious risk of injury from large vehicles on existing paths, particularly on that from the Highgate Road to the staff yard where currently thousands of visitors a day mingle with vehicles.
It would indeed be regrettable if City of London plans to make this area more welcoming and attractive, reduce vehicular traffic, complete the restoration of the Lido, improve sports facilities, and construct a new multi-sports area which would benefit many underprivileged residents south of the Heath, were to be scuppered by ill-informed opposition.
MARY PORT
Address supplied
On the right track?
• A NEW road across Hampstead Heath?
Headlines tend always to sensationalise the effects of any proposed development, if not actually to give a distorted picture.
From a brief examination of the rather vague map in the Evening Standard it would appear that the actual proposal is not nearly as outrageous in effect as the words seem to suggest.
The proposed route for this road actually takes traffic off the open fields area for the total length of what is new road, so that vehicles travelling between Gordon House Road and the depot would not need to pass across in front of the café; an arrangement that I have always thought to be dangerous.
And it should be noted that what is shown on the newspaper’s map as a new road is, for much of its length, the existing path that is routed between the Lido and Lissenden Gardens.
Does the current proposal need to make this path any wider so as to qualify for the term “road” rather than “path”?
While inevitably the new path, though the cricket field, would result in some area of grass being lost to Tarmac, which transgresses the principle of “not a blade of grass must be lost,” may I suggest that those who are protesting against the proposals, presumably motivated by this principle, might consider the advantages, respecting both safety and landscaping around the café before getting too excited.
However, it does not seem to have been made clear what would happen to east-west traffic that at present passes across in front of the café if that path is eliminated.
STEPHEN MOLESWORTH
Chetwynd Road, NW5
Rumours are rife
• COVERAGE in the New Journal regarding the City of London Authority’s plans to drive a new road into Hampstead Heath provided readers with a number of pieces of jigsaw from which there are undoubtedly still many missing parts.
Dan Carrier’s article (Heath road plan to be considered ‘in detail’, February 5) stresses the haste with which the authority “rushed through” the proposal and pushed the Heath consultative committee to “rubber stamp the scheme.” Meanwhile, area residents and Heath users from far and near are deeply opposed to the road and angry that this precipitate consultative exercise made little or no effort to secure their participation or consent.
Jeremy Wright’s statement that he “felt the final plans were still open for discussion,” presumably after the bid had succeeded, is not reassuring.
Rumours are rife. Speculation regarding the reasons for adding a new road when a perfectly viable entry road already exists off Highgate Road is intense and people want to know who will be using it.
The lack of consultation is also fuelling unrest. People are demanding to know precisely who was consulted and exactly when, that is, before, during and after the drawing up of plans. There is a call here for the New Journal to collate sound information with dates and details to discover which people this “Parks For People” initiative is really intended to serve.
JOYCE WRIGHT
Lissenden Gardens, NW5
Traffic fear
• I FEAR the Corporation of London has not done its homework about the existing traffic conditions on Gordon House Road where it is proposing to start its road onto the Heath.
Gordon House Road is heavily congested in the mornings and late afternoons with queues from Highgate Road to Fleet Road.
Opposite the proposed entrance to the new road is a building depot which has regular movements of very heavy vehicles.
Also, at this point Gordon House Road is narrowed by two railway arches and there is barely room for two lanes of traffic.
Add to this the fact that there are some four secondary schools nearby whose pupils use Gospel Oak station and three primary schools, many of whose pupils cross the road at this point.
We do not need a road on the Heath and we even more we do not need more traffic on Gordon House Road
MICK FARRANT
Oak Village, NW5
Ask the people
• THE City of London Corporation has only itself to blame for the growing opposition to its proposed new road on the Heath for the way in which it went ahead with its plans with virtually no consultation with local people.
Alas, they are not alone in failing to consult the people of Gospel Oak about their plans. Recent examples include the idea of renaming Gospel Oak station, refurbishing the Weedington Road Play Centre and the refurbishment of the Lismore Health Centre.
The latest plan is for a new community/youth centre, according to our local councillors.
Such a development is, of course, to be welcomed.
Yet so far no consultation with local people or recognition of the services being already provided by Queen’s Crescent Community Centre have taken place. To make matters worse, it is alleged that well over a million pounds is currently being spent on refurbishing the health centre, Weedington Road Play Centre and Wendling TRA Hall – yet these are all possible sites for the new community/youth centre. In any case these buildings are likely to be knocked down as part of the council’s property review, announced many months ago. Again where is the consultation?
Both councillors and officers of the local health, transport and Heath authorities seem to feel they can press ahead with their plans to do “good” to Gospel Oakers without bothering to seek local views. Perhaps the growing campaign against then Heath proposals will act as a timely reminder that the people of Gospel Oak refuse to be treated like sheep..
LARRAINE REVAH
Local Issues for Local People
C/o 18 Aspern Grove
220 Haverstock Hill, NW3
|
 |
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
