Healthy Streets

I don't see how the Fox Lane/Green Lanes junction works without either the roundabout or a full set of traffic lights. The former uses a rule of the road which means that you give way to traffic from the right, so generally it works by sharing priority. Traffic lights imposes a rigid rule to regulate movement.

Neither diagram in the papers for the Board make the operation of the proposed system clear.

Having examined the document entitled Cycle Enfield Consultation Overview I feel that there are several outstanding problems with the scheme:
1. Buffer strip at bus stop boarders - this new 0.5m strip between the cycle lane and the main traffic lane seems far too narrow for anyone to stand on with shopping bags and totally inadequate for adults with children and/or buggies and the disabled. At busy stops such as PG town centre where several people need to get on or off the bus the passengers will end up in the cycle lane so will be very unsafe.
2. Parking bays outside (on road side) of the cycle lane - car doors will open either into cycle lane or traffic lane increasing chance of accidents. After 6.30pm cars won't be able to park outside restaurants/shops in PG and will have a detrimental effect on their trade especially those at some distance from Lodge Drive car park.
3. Removal of pedestrian refuges in PG town centre - many pedestrians use the refuges (such as opposite Waitrose,) as they provide convenient and safe opportunities to cross the road without impeding the traffic flow. These will now be lost and either lead to pedestrians taking risks crossing two lanes of traffic or longer stops at formal crossings leading to longer journey times and increased air pollution.
Specific points on main junctions in the Palmers Green area.
• Hedge Lane junction - Drawing 10 - Closure of slip road from Green Lanes to southbound Hedge Lane leaves a very sharp left turn for long vehicles/trailers etc. and loss of bus stand and turning point for W6 bus and will add to congestion at this busy junction. Also, it is still difficult for pedestrians crossing any roads here as no formal crossings and now have the addition of cycle lanes.
• Fox Lane junction - Drawing 11 - T junction proposal is very unsafe as appears to be no traffic lights control apart from pedestrian crossings on southern and western arms. It will be very difficult for motorists to turn right from Fox Lane into Green Lanes and they will be in conflict with those turning right from Green Lanes into Fox Lane and in both cases cyclists in the cycle lane are at risk. Existing mini roundabout is much better as it slows traffic down and allows traffic to enter from each arm by the rule of priority to the right. The roundabout also allows longer vehicles opportunity to turn round.
• Bus stop removed outside Fox pub and merged with stop further south - Diagram 11 Fox Lane bus stop well used (particularly by parents with buggies, elderly and those with shopping trolleys) and will lead to overcrowding at the southern stop (also a busy town centre stop). The residents of Skinners Court and other care homes in Fox Lane who are all elderly and/or disabled will find it difficult having to walk the extra distance and face delay getting on a bus.
• The Triangle- Drawing 12 - Pleased that the Triangle is being retained but it is smaller and only appears to have a few trees added. It needs to have benches, flower beds/planters, area for table for community groups and historic features like signpost, clock and information board explaining the Triangle's history (eg. suffragettes rally) to make it an attractive and interesting destination.
• The Triangle cont. - Changing the traffic flow by making the southern end two-way will cause problems at the bus stop (for 121 and W6) going up Alderman's Hill as no opportunity to overtake stationary buses so more congestion . Also will be unsafe period for pedestrians and cyclists while drivers get used to change in traffic lanes at Triangle and the removal of the railings round the Triangle will leave pedestrians with no protection from driver errors. Why not keep the original Triangle layout with cycle lane added and include public realm improvements as it will retain larger 'green' area, minimise the disruption and be much safer?
• Broomfield Lane (Library) junction- Drawing 12 - The introduction of cycle lanes seems to reduce the traffic to a single lane at all the approaches except for southbound Green Lanes approach where there is a right turn lane. The result will be considerable congestion particularly at peak times for all forms of transport as this is a very busy junction.

Note on air pollution

The study of air quality modelling seemed to be based mainly on the notion that fewer cars would use Green Lanes but did not take sufficient account of the effects of increased congestion caused by traffic waiting behind buses at bus stops and increased delays at all junctions. This will have an impact on all forms of transport but be most harmful for pedestrians and cyclists.
If, as expected, some drivers will divert to the side roads then there will be an increase in air pollution in these roads (even if the Quieter Neighbourhood schemes are introduced drivers will find other routes).

I'm very disappointed in the amendments made by Cycle Enfield in our area as I feel that the planners have not taken into account many of the concerns particularly regarding pedestrians and bus users and the loss of parking spaces after 6.30pm.

Sue Younger

I would strongly recommend to all a free exhibition “Streets Ahead” curated by New London Architecture, a network of over 400 leading private and public organisations concerned with influencing positive change in London’s built environment. It is on until 24 February at the Building Centre, Store Street (near Goodge Street tube). Simply portraying some of the major themes planners now face and what this means, including Borough by Borough – also capturing cycling - it helps visitors see the bigger picture outside of the local trees it can be all too easy to get mired in.


Yesterday the Institution of Civil Engineers published its manifesto for London Infrastructure, looking ahead 35 years and making 10 recommendations to the Mayor / London Assembly. ..population growth, climate change (we know the story) ..then it’s such as, road tolls / charges.. a plea for a commitment to the 2050 London Infrastructure Plan (do, do skim this to get a feel of the bigger picture we are walking into)..more tube, Crossrail and blow me – cycling.


It all sounds like Groundhog Day, at least at the strategic level. And of course with a lifetime change in transport infrastructure now underway (NLA quote there) that’s where the focus needs to be and alignment of all these and more key parties needs to be seen (and it really is). I’m not sure if I found the fact the London is growing by 9 residents per hour or will increase by the size of Birmingham plus Leeds over the next 25 years to be the most eye watering. Do try and get along, it helps fill some of the communication gap too often missing in Enfield.

I've been trying to understand the thinking about the Fox Lane/Green Lanes junction.

Below are extracts from the papers for the Council meeting on 10 February, which don't give me comfort about how pedestrians will cross either Fox Lane or Green Lanes here. The various diagrams circulated don't help, and anyway the attached papers seem to override them

1. Annex D - Respondents Priorities for the Scheme Page 344

Safe pedestrian crossings
Highest Priority 73%

Safe cycling
Highest Priority 49%

2. Para 5.7 Page 304

To accommodate the new cycle lanes, it will be necessary to remove all central refuges, two sections of bus lane and make changes to parking and loading as outlined in paragraph 5.9
below
.
3. Agenda Part 1 Item 9 Subject: Approval of Cycle Enfield Proposals for the A105

Page 329

Table 9 – A105 Consultation You Said, We Did

You said you were concerned about reducing the flow of traffic through the Fox Lane junction.

We have converted the Fox Lane junction, removing the proposed traffic lights and created a T-junction. This will reduce the potential of northbound traffic queuing through Palmers Green. This does result in the removal of the proposed signalised pedestrian crossing at the junction. Pedestrians will continue to cross via informal crossings however the junction will become a raised area to reduce speed.

So, the consultation shows a clear priority for pedestrian safety, but the outcome is no central reservations and the Fox Lane/Green Lanes junction with no lights, but informal crossings. What does this mean on the ground? What is an informal crossing, where are they?

What was the question actually asked about traffic flow? Were there no concerns expressed about pedestrians crossing Fox Lane and Green Lanes both to the immediate south and north of the juction?

It seems to me that pedestrians have been sacrificed first by the removal of the roundabout, presumably in favour of cyclists' safety, and second by the loss of any crossing control because this solution holds up traffic.

I also wonder how cars etc will negotiate this busy junction. Can't we keep the roundabout as the least worst solution? Or add zebra crossings?

Colin, I've not been keeping up with the details of the scheme but from reading your piece I'd say this is the key: ".....however the junction will become a raised area to reduce speed." to the safety issue. Haringey Council and others have installed several junctions/roundabouts of this type, and provided the rise is high enough and steep enough drivers will take it steadily. I'd say it will work for pedestrians on either side of it on Green Lanes if traffic is already moving fairly calmly and their are plenty of people about, but whether it will work at other times depends on the design up and down the line...............and as I say I've not been keeping up.

The more I watch the more I'm convinced that once you've broken he speed habit, the more calming schemes there are, the more people cycle, the better/safer life will be. Luckily we have Haringey on our border, unluckily we also have Barnet which does everything it can to increase drivers sense of entitlement

Colin, I don’t know the thinking behind the first move of a roundabout to a set of traffic lights. It may be cycle-centric; it may have been a result of the long running pedestrian-safety campaign in that vicinity run by a local trader; or perhaps an acknowledgement that the near daily occurrence of north bound traffic ignoring right turning vehicles on the roundabout who have right of way needed attention, but it is currently an unpleasant intersection for most modes.


But post the traffic light proposal I think there is a reasonable chance that the Council then moved based on the weight of consultation input against their proposal:


From GLBA
“The roundabout at the junction of Green Lanes with Fox Lane would be replaced by traffic signals – which would encourage more drivers to use Fox Lane as a “rat run”. This would be likely to occur because it would be easier for them to enter or leave Fox Lane from or to Green Lanes.”


From Opponents Views attachment to household poll - D Burrowes

“The roundabouts at the junctions of Green Lanes with Fox Lane and with Station Road and Fords Grove would both be replaced by traffic lights – which would encourage drivers to “rat run” on these minor roads .”


From FERAA


“Installing traffic signals at the Green Lanes / Fox Lane and Green Lanes / Fords Grove/ Station Road junctions would be counter-productive and lead to increased traffic in Fox Lane, Fords Grove and Station Road as drivers use these alternatives for access to and from Green Lanes. “

Personally I struggle with the notion that traffic lights would increase rat running on Fox Lane (and by implication some nearby residential feeders) , I would probably expect just the opposite but if these were the only views the Council saw then perhaps that is what they factored in and withdrew the lights.

I inputted directly to raise pedestrian concerns on the latest drawing.

The coversion of the roundabout to a junction with traffic lights was for cycling safety. As far as I'm aware they reverted back to a give way due to the modelling which gave unacceptable delays. In my view this is probably the best option but Fox Lane needs to be closed from rat running.