Share this article share on facebook icon share on twitter icon

fox lane traffic data march 2019 1 1

fox lane traffic data march 2019 2

fox lane traffic data march 2019 3Examples of data visualised on the dashboard - in this case for the entire week

Detailed traffic speed and volume data collected during the 'planters trial' in the Fox Lane quieter neighbourhood area is now available via an online 'dashboard'. Over a one week period in March just under 260,000 vehicles passed the data collection points - 235825 cars, 18,594 lorries, 1682 bicycles and 351 cars pulling trailers. They included 25 vehicles doing more than 70mph (probably not bicycles), of which 14 were exceeding 80mph and two were recorded at speeds between 96 and 100mph (definitely not bikes).

The dashboard is the work of a PGC reader who lives in the Fox Lane area and is evidently a bit of a whizz kid with spreadsheets and data visualisation tools. It allows users to examine the data for the whole area or individual roads on individual days and at different times of day.

To access the dashboard visit Use the pull-down menus at the top of the page to focus in on different days, streets etc.

The dashboard is a work in progress - further charts will be added providing new views of the data.

As in the baseline data from late 2018, the heaviest traffic was along Fox Lane, Meadway, the Mall and Amberley Road. To discover which roads had the worst speeding, you'll have to spend some time filtering the data. Perhaps you could let us know what you find using the comments facility?

Log in to comment

Dru Loizou posted a reply #5102 10 Jan 2020 00:13
I’m gobsmacked by the speed data. I had a brief look through the dashboard and it was those on Ulleswater Road that were the fastest. Over 10% of vehicles on Ulleswater were clocked doing +41mph. And four vehicles at +90mph.

Oakfield Road was also bad, with eight vehicles doing between 86mph-95mph.

Absolutely shocking!
Klem Klem posted a reply #5103 10 Jan 2020 18:07
Four vehicles clocked in Ulleswater (not even a cut-through) at over 90mph. Really? and exactly how accurate is this data?

Its a while since I logged in and today only because of a meeting this evening in Burford. I doubt this contribution is in the right place and will probably be deleted, but never mind.

I have lived on Lakes Estate since the late 1980's, been commuting by bicycle for over 30 years, around 10,000 miles each year half in London, and driving the same distance. Certainly the traffic in my road adjacent Ulleswater has increased but is not excessive, and I probably spend 20 hours/week working in the front room. I don't have much time to look at these forums.

So far as I am concerned The Green lane cycle lanes are a disaster, and the small stretch that I use on my commute is by far the most stressful and potentially dangerous part of my journey, being littered with plastic poles, half dinner plates (actually set in the cycleway), razor sharp granite kerb-stones, ramped sctions, bus stops, and pedestrians. The cycle lanes have even been driven through the middle of the pavement through the Palmers Green shopping frontage! Cycle Enfield have effectively legalized cycling on the pavement! Which may be ok for ladies with baskets and flowers and young children but not so for middle aged male commuters.

And the lanes have been carefully channeled, so it is not easy to avoid using them and cycling through the pavement and mixing with pedestrians. I generally take an alternative route to Enfield to avoid the stress and upsetting car drivers by not using the cycle lanes.

But worse still is the is the arrangement at Bus Stops where the cycle lanes have been driven between the bus stop/shelters and the kerb. What an utter farce and who with half a brain would have designed this. The arrangement can only work if there are practically no cyclists using cycle lane, which is fortunately the case, or no pedestrians waiting for or alighting buses

The team really should have spent time in City of London and Westminster (rather than Holland) to appreciate how cycle lanes can be made to work properly for all road and pavement users in London.

Originally announced as dedicated cycle-ways as these lanes have subsequently been labelled as Shared Spaces!

I have made my points earlier on the absurd scheme for Quieter Neighborhoods presented by Enfield which had obviously not been discussed with either police of Fire Brigade.

There is also talk of allowing children to play in the streets here. But all properties in this estate are large family houses with generous gardens where council policy has restricted a max 10% change of use to flats. People have cars and expect to use them. Whilst I will happily trundle anywhere around London on my bike I am inevitably travelling on my own and very light. And it is dangerous. Using the bike is quite simply not an option for the weekly shop or a trip to the builders merchant.

My main concern now is that we are going to have a scheme imposed on us which has been designed by the same team that thought up the A105 cycle lanes, and who genuinely believe they have done brilliant. In your dreams.

And exactly WHO at Enfield is actually responsible for all this?
Klem Klem posted a reply #5105 10 Jan 2020 18:48
1,682 bicycles in a week, or 1 bike very 10 minutes in the whole of the Fox Lane area.

What exactly happened to the green electric bikes introduced with great acclaim by Enfield
Adrian Day posted a reply #5106 10 Jan 2020 22:03
It's unsurprising there's few bike trips given how dangerous it is. Would you cycle down Fox Lane with young children? That's why we need a low traffic neighbourhood that excludes rat runners. And do you have data that contradicts the Council's ? Why would they make it up - the easiest option for them is to do nothing.
Klem Klem posted a reply #5107 11 Jan 2020 07:01
Dru stated 4 vehicles were clocked at over 90mph in Ulleswater (during 1 week).
Instead of blindly accepting info and figures from the council (or anyone else) they should be interrogated and checked.
My reading of the dashboard is that 2 cars were clocked in Ulleswater at max 55-60mph.

Fox Lane is the feeder road into the estate. But it has bends restricting visibility and with parking on both sides is not even wide enough for 2 vehicles to pass in several areas. My wife avoids driving down it if at all possible.

I am a local cyclist covering 10,000 miles each year. If I had to use public transport or the car I would likley not live in London but I am the exception. I offered advice and comments on the cycle lanes, to be told they were not designed for me! So where am I supposed to go?

Fox Lane is patently unsuitable to cycle down with children and WHY WOULD ANYONE EXPECT TO??
More appropriate cycling routes for children would be to use the much wider Bourne Hill or Aldermans Hill (except for the recently introduced central restrictions) or their wider and better maintained pavements. There is also the historic footpath linking Green Lanes to Fox Lane opposite Derwent Road junction.

A single bike journey recorded every 10 minutes covering the whole of the estate (comprising 15+ roads) is an amazingly low figure but has nothing to do with the dangers of Fox lane

Haringey and other London Boroughs have introduced almost blanket 20mph limit which generally work. Speed is the problem. The easy, effective and resident friendly option would be for the council to introduce 20mph limit through the Fox Lane and all estates.

In which case I expect we would all be hearing
Dru Loizou posted a reply #5108 11 Jan 2020 12:52
Klem, you’re looking at the baseline data on page 1. You’ll find the higher recorded speeds on page 2 of the dashboard.

Happy to hear your suggestions about how we go about getting these checked.
Adrian Day posted a reply #5109 11 Jan 2020 13:27
Fox Lane is unsuitable now but if we are to address issues of obesity, climate change, low activity levels and dramatically increasing population in London then more people need to walk and cycle - including children - so streets like Fox Lane need to be safe for cyclists. And would you really take children down Bourne Hill today? Roads are not just for motor vehicles.
Speed is not the only problem - pollution and sheer volume of cars are also problems.
Klem Klem posted a reply #5110 12 Jan 2020 07:52
Your response should start 'in my opinion'.

Obesity and activity. When I was at school 1 entire day of each week (actually Wednesday and Saturday afternoons) was spent on Games , football, cricket, cross country running etc. So how much time is currently allocated in Enfield's schools this vital activity?

Letting 'Cycle Enfield' loose on Fox Lane will do absolutely nothing for obesity and activity, but it will hugely inconvenience practically all car owning resident, and add to both connection and pollution.

If a 20 mph speed restriction were imposed and enforced there should be no issues with supervised children cycling down Bourne Hill

Roads are for vehicles, both motorized and cyclists. Pavements are for pedestrians. If the law is changed and cyclist are allowed to use pavements their speed should be severely restricted so as not to endanger pedestrians.

Obviously cycling is to be encouraged but you really should appreciate it will only ever be a fair-weather option for most of the population. Are you out on your bike when its pissing down with rain, blowing a gale or below freezing? Are you really going to try to encourage people to use their bikes in such weather?

I note the number of cyclist recorded through PG triangle in December dropped hugely in December

I spent yesterday on my bike, 120 miles and almost 11 hours trying to keep my 70 year old body fit and active, most of it breathing hard and cleaning up the air for everyone else. What did everyone do?