Plans for Fox Lane low-traffic neighbourhood published

Print Email

Written by Basil Clarke    Category: Quieter Neighbourhoods

Share this article share on facebook icon share on twitter icon

fox lane ltn proposal nov 2019Enfield Council's plans for the low-traffic neighbourhood. Cars can only enter the area via one end of Fox Lane or the other, and can only leave the same way. Bus gates will allow the W9 to run through the area, and the gate in Fox Lane will also let through emergency vehicles.

Ahead of the public exhibition on Tuesday 12th November (3pm to 8pm in the former Starbucks shop), Enfield Council has published a map of its proposals for removing through traffic from the Fox Lane Area Quieter Neighbourhood (reproduced above), along with some of the explanatory material that will be on show (see the box below). The scheme is such that, if implemented, all addresses in the area will continue to be accessible by car, but it will no longer be possible for drivers to enter the area at one location and leave it at another, ie drive through the area. People on foot or riding bikes won't be affected by the "filters" at the ends of roads, which will let them through, but once past the barriers will find their journey considerably quieter, safer and pleasanter. Greatly reduced traffic within the area will also reduce air pollution and make the streets quieter for those living there.

Currently a high proportion of the traffic using these residential streets is simply cutting through the area, creating noise, unhealthy air and road danger, and inhibiting human-level interaction in the area, which includes two beautiful conservation areas. Traffic counts carried out in 2018 measured 42,000 vehicle movements a week along Fox Lane, 30,000 along Meadway and 26,000 in Amberley Road. During the busiest hour of the day a car passes along The Mall, Old Park Road and Amberley Road every nine seconds - exposing children on their way home from school to physical danger and forcing them to breathe in air containing noxious gases and particles. Hence the need for drastic measures.

On Tuesday residents are invited to drop in and review the plans, speak to council officers and leave comments. At the same time as the physical event, comments will also be able to be made online. Based on this feedback, the council will review the plans.

The next stage will be "a period of statutory consultation and/or a trial", scheduled to start in spring 2020. This probably means that the council will use experimental traffic orders to authorise the placement of the blockages at the ends of roads - this can be done without a statutory consultation - and run both the trial and the formal statutory consultation concurrently. The advantage of this is that people will be able to comment and object on the basis of how the scheme actually works in practice, rather than making assumptions. The intention is to run the trial for six months, allowing everyone to assess its longer-term impacts, both positive and negative. Depending on the final assessment, the scheme may be made permanent, modified or completely removed.

Fox Lane Area Quieter Neighbourhood: Public exhibition information*

The Journey so far

  • Local residents have concerns over too much traffic travelling too fast through residential streets in the Fox Lane area.
  • The Council have previously implemented a trial using planters in an effort to discourage traffic cutting through the area. This was unsuccessful.
  • The Council have committed to a further trial to take a more robust approach. Those plans are on show today.

The Project Stages

Stage 1
Ask residents to share their ideas on problems and potential solutions in their area.

Stage 2
The Council will review these ideas and develop some plans.

Stage 3 (Now)
The Council will host a public event to explain the plans and provide an opportunity for residents to comment.

Stage 4
The Council will then conduct a further review of the plans.

Stage 5 (Spring 2020)
A period of statutory consultation and/or a trial will take place.

Stage 6
Decisions and implementation of the plans in a particular area.

Stage 7 (Autumn 2020)
Where appropriate, monitor and review post implementation

The outcomes

Benefits

  • Through traffic removed
  • Calmer & quieter streets
  • Safer neighbourhood
  • Greener and cleaner environments and air
  • Improved public realm
  • Increased physical activity
  • More connected communities

Dis-benefits

  • Slightly longer journeys to access homes
  • Increased vehicle levels on primary roads
  • Possible reduction in street parking in some areas

The next steps

Over the next few weeks the plan for Fox Lane will be finalised and a decision made (by a formal report) on implementation.

The first decision on whether to implement the trial is expected by early in the New Year. If implementation is to take place this would occur in Spring 2020, with the experimental period lasting until Autumn 2020

The intention is to trial this plan on an experimental basis. This means that the plan is introduced for a minimum of 6 months and during this time, residents can make formal comments.

At the end of the experimental period a decision is made on the project, which could be:

  1. Remove the scheme entirely
  2. Make some amendments to the scheme
  3. Make the scheme permanent

*Source: https://letstalk.enfield.gov.uk/2734/documents/3265

Links

Fox Lane Quieter Neighbourhood page on Enfield Council website

Fox Lane area traffic counts and speed data (Palmers Green Community)

Low-traffic neighbourhoods (London Living Streets)

Discussion about the plans on the Better Streets for Enfield Facebook page

Log in to comment
Posts in discussion: Plans for Fox Lane low-traffic neighbourhood published

Karl Brown's Avatar
Karl Brown posted a reply #4876 10 Nov 2019 09:04
This is progressive. As I’ve posted several times over several years, London's agreed (necessary) transition from cars being the primary focus of public realm development to their currently agreed position of the lowest means of movement on transports modal hierarchy is going to mean major readjustments. It’s going to be important not to get lost in the micro of this particular scheme but rather see it as a relatively early mover of the types of UK-wide (but city and London in particular) pressures to get away from sole-use cars and onto other transport means for a large part of our movement needs.
Newer residential estates, our own Leigh Hunt and slightly further away the development around the Friern Barnet hospital, are vehicles in-and-out but not through developments – exactly as is now proposed to be retrofitted to the wider Fox Lane area.
The modal shift we are now experiencing has well-rehearsed arguments behind it, ones that have been successfully evidenced and will very soon form part of London’s spatial framework, and need no rehearsal. Recent climate emergency acknowledgements will only accelerate the pressure for change.
Doubtless there will be some unintended consequences of this scheme, and just as likely some unintended benefits. Those the trial will reveal. Until then it’s probably a time for reflective input rather than the community eroding off-the-hip, typically non-evidenced, anger we all witnessed with cycle lanes.
PGC Webmaster's Avatar
PGC Webmaster posted a reply #4878 10 Nov 2019 23:09
A group of residents who support creating a low-traffic neighbourhood in the Fox Lane area are looking for volunteers to post flyers through doors and talk to neighbours.

If you are interested, you should contact .
steven downes's Avatar
steven downes posted a reply #4882 11 Nov 2019 18:44
Whilst I agree with the principle of the quieter neighbourhood scheme. This scheme is not particularly green with residents having to drive further. Would it not make more sense to close the roads at the Fox lane end of each road
Karl Brown's Avatar
Karl Brown posted a reply #4884 11 Nov 2019 20:49
I guess there are many options. i believe the Local Authority came to the pilot option on the basis of traffic flow data and recent point-to-point video evidence, so i presume there was some "this end or that end" consideration in getting to where we currently are.
I'd suggest the real green sustainability win would be seen not in relative vehicle miles but instead in modal shift, ie less school runs, more walking and cycling, so removing some vehicle traffic miles altogether; part of the pilot measurement indicator suite i would hope.
David Hughes's Avatar
David Hughes posted a reply #4885 11 Nov 2019 23:33
I walked into a shop on Southgate Green this morning to buy a newspaper to hear two women nearly as old as me (I'm 82) discussing these proposals. Roughly translated the bones of the discussion were: "What a silly idea; where does the Council get them from? I'll be going to the proposals/consultation tomorrow afternoon. ". Which I suppose will be the sort of response of many car-bound people who can't imagine the issues from emissions to kids freedoms.

I began opening my mouth to make a response, but my wife was already tugging at my sleeve because we had other fish to fry, and we were late. Perhaps I'll come across them again tomorrow afternoon.

Meanwhile the incident demonstrates just how far the needs of cars have come to dominate people's priorities. With the next bout of local authority elections in mind you can see why Council's are cautious.

Personally I see residential streets as part of home; never mind 20mph speed limits I think traffic should be even lower. These streets should be people places.
David Berkovitch's Avatar
David Berkovitch posted a reply #4886 12 Nov 2019 11:55
Regardless of being car bound or not, everyone's jounrey will be made longer as traffic is forced into existing traffic jams up Alderman's Hill, Green lanes and Bourne Hill all of which are already heavily congested. Therefore the proposal will have a negative impact on the environment, health and the community - the opposite of its intended legacy. For most the streets in the lakes estate, the issue is primarily one of speeding, so futher speed enforcements (20mph) make more sense in my view.
Darren Edgar's Avatar
Darren Edgar posted a reply #4887 12 Nov 2019 14:16
My understanding is that the data collection identified entry/exit points for the Lakes roads. Therefore it wasn't just speeding (and, by your implication, the residents' own traffic) but the data showed it was rat runners. People weren't driving 50MPH+ to pull up outside their own house - it was drivers entering at one end and shooting out the other.

Can't afford to sit police on every street so the only other enforcement would be a camera, or two, on every road. Which Enfield have never had an appetite for (repeatedly petitioned for an Aldermans Hill).
Jenny Perkins's Avatar
Jenny Perkins posted a reply #4888 12 Nov 2019 18:49
I am a Southgate resident, living near Meadway. I already use public transport for a large percentage of my travel. Currently, that involves walking along High Street to the tube, breathing in fumes from queues of traffic that are often queuing from Southgate Circus to Blagdens Close/The Close because of significant congestion on Southgate Circus, usually caused by one or more car parking badly on Chase Side and snarling the whole thing up.

I do use my car locally to transport my disabled husband, and we do use the Meadway cut-through, so as to keep the overall journey distance down and to avoid causing unnecessary pollution by idling in the queues on High Street, trying to get to Southgate Circus. I also walk along Meadway when going to the park on my own when my husband is too ill to get out.

If you really want to reduce pollution, you will take action on congestion in Southgate Circus/High Street by enforcing legal parking effectively on Chase Side. The problem in the Fox Lane area is not really pollution. It is a lovely, leafy area and when I walk there, I never have to breathe in car fumes in the way that I regularly do on High Street.

Forget this idea, which will only increase overall pollution in the local area and do what is actually needed in the Fox Lane area, i.e. traffic calming and speed bumps. The problem is not pollution but excessive speed. This can adequately be solved by well thought through traffic calming.
Read 109 more comments