Forum topic: Fox Lane quieter neighbourhood: More information published as consultation is extended to July

It's good that the Council are listening to carers and people with disabilities - and perhaps this particular engagement should have been done earlier. And it's understandable that some carers need vehicles to complete their visits - however the cause of delays is not LTNs but too much traffic. We need to reduce the high percentage of journeys made by car which could easily be made by walking, cycling or public transport (and then there will be more space for those who must drive). LTNs have proven to one effective tool in the box marked 'how do we reduce vehicle journeys' alongside road charging, cycle lanes , improved public transport and better pavements. Plenty of research studies over the past year have shown a majority of people support these measures - as well as central government, GLA and Enfield Council . There will also be measures that can be taken to smooth flow on peripheral roads including traffic light phasing . Finally LTNs make the area much safer for those using mobility aids - in my residential road someone who is slow crossing a road no longer had to be fearful of through-traffic racing along at up to 60mph. We need many more LTNS in Enfield.

Another reason we need more LTNs - they reduce road injuries www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/23/low-traffic-schemes-halve-number-of-road-injuries-study-shows

And to underline the point about support for LTNS redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/steady-support-for-for-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-in-london/

re the press letter highlighted, I never cease to be amazed that however extensive the level of consultation there comes along a claim that there was no consultation; a claim as inaccurate as the Fox Lane LTN area being The Lakes Estate, that non-defined and much smaller area made up by an estate agent a decade or so since for marketing purposes. “Hampstead Borders” sounded much better to me but was perhaps a step too far.
As for the rest, numerous evidence reports behind eg the Mayors Transport Strategy and the linked same of Enfield Council will assist and correct much of the (apparent absence of) understanding and I’d specifically commend reading a report from this week’s PGC newsletter
climateexp0.medium.com/why-we-need-road-pricing-7fc151f1ca1d
“There is no solution that does not require large-scale modal shift to active, public and shared transport for moving people.”
The draft Enfield Local Plan, now out for consultation, captures the same conclusion:-
(13.2.1) “The healthy streets approach, set out in the London Plan and Enfield Transport Plan, and aims to achieve a significant step-change away from car use to more sustainable transport modes such as walking, cycling and public transport.”
Denial may still be widespread but the status quo is gone; we all need to discover our legs much more than has been the case. LTN's are one tool in the box to encourage us all - UK wide - on exactly that path.

And less than 50 protestors at this morning's well-publicised demonstration against Enfield LTNs on Southgate Green. That's around 0.01% of the Borough's population....the 'majority of Enfield residents oppose' claim doesn't quite ring true!

Moderator's note: 3 or 4 subsequent posts arguing about whether there were 50, 60 or 100 demonstrators have been deleted. Too boring, try Facebook instead.

I think your numbers are wrong. Bystanders dont always get the best picture. Huge support from passing traffic Saturday morning 10.00 am in the rain. Local people making extended journeys adding pollution to surrounding roads. And let me add to below post re. Consultation: in the only limited engagement some residents had to this LTN, 73% said NO to blocked roads. This is from Enfield Council’s own website. To add insult to injury, no one from the impacted roads now considered to be inside the LTN were even invited to participate. To be clear, this means residents of Bourne Hill, The High St, Cannon Hill, Aldermans Hill or Palmers Green High St/Green Lanes. Yet Enfield Council says they are inside the LTN. Consider these are our neighbours. This is our neighbourhood.

So that’s no consultation but there was consultation. At least that’s cleared up.
In reality there has been a rolling series of informing work over many years, typically residents’ association and /or council inspired, or involved. Perhaps the most familiar for the current LTN was the large exercise typically referred to as “Starbucks”.
The consultation on the live Fox Lane pilot lasted many months and ended only recently. I understand it was available to anyone and everyone. A report will doubtless follow.
But even then a consultation is an informing exercise – informing two ways – and forms part of a balancing decision which necessarily will factor in other dimensions such as cost, risk / reward, HMG policy, London policy, local plan requirements and more. An often repeated phrase, that a consultation is not a referendum, is accurate. That’s not how UK democracy operates.

Drury McPherson Partnership?

new.enfield.gov.uk/services/planning/conservation-areas/lakes-estate-conservation-area/heritage-conservation-and-countryside-information-lakes-caa.pdf

Anyone in the country could fill-in the Fox Lane LTN consultation - as many times as they wanted. It was publicised throughout the Borough on all relevant social media channels and websites as well as by pro- and anti-LTN groups both within and outside the LTN. Short of door-to-door calling on every household in the Borough not sure what else could've been done (and given lockdown that might've been awkward...).