Forum topic: Fox Lane low-traffic neighbourhood

I don't understand the repeated "view from behind the windscreen" references. The comments I make on this scheme result from what I see through the windows of my home, from the pavement as I walk the streets and from the road when I'm cycling along it. All this 'Two Wheels Good, Four Wheels Bad' thing is divisive, and many people use their cars as a vital part of modern life whilst - as I do - also walking, cycling and taking the trains and buses . They are not usually using their cars for joyriding. Lumping all car users into a box marked 'Naughty' is too simplistic. Driving is a useful option for most and a necessity for some.

I also don't quite understand the 'reclaim the streets for the children' line of thinking. I grew up in this area the best part of 60 years ago and as children we didn't expect to use the road as our playground. The Tufty Club made sure we knew that roads were for road transport, not for drawing pictures on. When we played we did it in our back garden (most of the homes round here have access to a garden, however modest) or the wonderful Grovelands, Arnos and Broomfield Parks. We walked to school all year round in any weather, but used the pavement for that and crossed the roads with due care.

It sometimes seems as though there is an ambition to turn this area into an evocation of Trumpton or Camberwick Green. Sadly, the Palmers Green of Evans and Davies, Courts, Grouts and Victor Value is long gone and it won't be coming back.

David you asked for clarification about the ambulance and bin lorry reversing down the roads. I checked with my sources and the ambulance was in the Bowes Park area and the bin lorry was in Lakeside Road opposite Aldermans Hill going a very long distance. Regardless of where they were it must indicate an issue for these services. Time will tell if they make a response to the council asking for things to be changed.

Thank you Neil L. By chance I cycled down Lakeside Road this morning, but didn't pay special attention so I'll do it again in the next few days. Bowes Park might take a day or two more dependent on weather and other commitments. Whether taking note helps me in thinking about the area we'll see.

Several personal impact issues being raised where the LTN trial can sensibly assess the breadth and depth of such problems as well as its benefits. But looking broader I’ve previously mentioned the policy move away from car priority. Standing outside the British Library on the Euston Road at the w/e this move confronted me: previously a three lane road and always chocca with traffic in both directions it has changed dramatically: the pavement obviously remains for travellers choosing to use feet and legs; the inner lane is now for people choosing to travel by bicycle; the middle lane for people choosing to travel by bus or taxi; and the outer lane (only) for people who choose to travel by car. A floating bus stop fills part of the cyclist lane to allow bus passengers to embark / disembark. Like LTN’s, I guess that’s putting money where your policy is.

I walk the LTN every day and there's a discernible increase in people walking, cycling and using scooters. In particular cycling to St Monica's has increased - so much that a new bike shed is needed. Result: healthier, more active children, less obesity and pollution. Neighbours can chat in the street without noisy rat runners drowning them out.- and several thousand people are enjoying less pollution, a better night's sleep and safer streets. And everyone can reach their home or place of work by vehicle.

The comment on this show just how unpopular this scheme is

www.change.org/p/london-borough-of-enfield-objection-to-low-traffic-neighbourhood-and-immediate-opening-of-roads-to-traffic/c?source_location=petition_show

Thanks to Richard Carlowe for supplying that link. With a (Government) initiative, fitting with London’s agreed and heavily consulted / challenged strategy to move from cars to active travel, I have no surprise that the initial impact is seen (and indeed felt) as negative by many drivers. The future is not the past in the transport policy space. Whether this particular version of this particular LTN will be the final version only experience and evidenced input over the trial period will reveal. I doubt that such off-the-cuff initial emotional driver anger in the link will cut it in that analysis – best that individuals give it a period to bed in and then supply experience to the consultation process. That should produce a more considered outcome for all. It might be helpful if many of the authors realised this is not a one-off LTN.

I’m sorry but this scheme does not need a “period to bed in”. It needs to be stopped immediately

It is hated. It is ill thought out and incorrectly signed. There are no warnings that some roads are dead ends.

Let’s see how many sign a petition in favour of it. I’d guess circa 200 at best.