Share this article share on facebook icon share on twitter icon

A public notice published in this week's Enfield Independent gives notice that five experimental traffic orders relating to the Fox Lane Quieter Neighbourhood Area will come into effect on 7th September.

The scheme will be as shown below. Click on the map to enlarge.

map of fox lane quieter neighbourhood design july 2020

Notice published in Enfield Independent on 26 August 2020

LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD

FOX LANE QUIETER NEIGHBOURHOOD AREA

CONWAY ROAD N14, DERWENT ROAD N13, DEVONSHIRE ROAD N13, FOX LANE N13, GROVELANDS ROAD N13, LAKESIDE ROAD N13, MEADWAY N14, OAKFIELD ROAD N14, OLD PARK ROAD N13, SELBORNE ROAD N14 AND THE MALL N14 - EXPERIMENTAL ROAD CLOSURES, LOADING BAY, AT ANY TIME WAITING RESTRICTIONS, REMOVAL OF PARKING SPACE AND SUSPENSION OF A ONE-WAY TRAFFIC SYSTEM

AMBERLEY ROAD N13, BOURNE AVENUE N14, BURFORD GARDENS N13, BUTTERY MEWS N14, CANNON ROAD N14, CAVERSHAM AVENUE N13, CONWAY ROAD N14, CRANLEY GARDENS N13, CROMIE CLOSE N13, CROTHALL CLOSE N13, DERWENT ROAD N13, DEVONSHIRE ROAD N13, DEVONSHIRE CLOSE N13, DOVEDON CLOSE N14, FOX LANE N13, FOXGROVE N14, GREENWAY N14, GROVELANDS ROAD N13, HARLECH ROAD N14, KERRY CLOSE N13, LAKESIDE ROAD N13, LUCERNE CLOSE N13, MEADWAY N14, NORMAN WAY N14, OAKFIELD ROAD N14, OLD PARK ROAD N13, PELLIPAR CLOSE N13, PARKWAY N14, RIDGEMEAD CLOSE N14. ST GEORGE'S ROAD N13, SELBORNE ROAD N14, THE MALL N14, THE RIDGEWAY N14, ULLESWATER ROAD N14 AND WESTLAKE CLOSE N13 - EXPERIMENTAL 20 MPH SPEED LIMIT

Further information may be obtained on the project page: https://letstalk.enfield.gov.uk/foxlaneQN Alternatively, please email us on:

1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Council of the London Borough of Enfield on 26 August 2020 made the Enfield (Prescribed Routes) (No. 6) Experimental Traffic Order 2020, the Enfield (Waiting and Loading Restriction) (No. 187) Experimental Traffic Order 2020, the Enfield (Goods Vehicles Loading Bay) (No. 5) Experimental Traffic Order 2020, the Enfield (Residents and Shared Use Parking Places) (Palmers Green) (No. 1) Experimental Traffic Order 2020 and the Enfield (20 m.p.h. Speed Limit) (No. 2) Experimental Traffic Order 2020 under sections 9 and 10 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The Orders will come into operation on 7 September 2020.

2. The general effect of the Orders will be to:

(1) close Fox Lane N13 to through motor traffic by prohibiting motor vehicles from entering that length of Fox Lane which lies between the common boundary of Nos. 7/8 and Nos. 9/10 The Walk, Fox Lane and a point 45 metres north-west of that common boundary (this will be achieved by placing planters on each side of the bridge over the railway);

(2) close Meadway N14 to through motor traffic by prohibiting north-eastbound motor vehicles from traveling further north-east, and south-westbound motor vehicles from traveling further south-west, than the common boundary of Nos. 53 and 55 Meadway;

(3) suspend the one-way traffic system in Devonshire Road N13;

(4) prohibit vehicles, except pedal cycles, from entering or leaving:

(a) Conway Road N14, Derwent Road N13, Grovelands Road N13, Lakeside Road N13, Old Park Road N13, Selborne Road N14 and The Mall N14 at their junctions with Fox Lane N13;

(b) Devonshire Road N13 at its junction with Green Lanes N13; and

(c) Oakfield Road N14 at its junction with The Mall N14, by placing planters and bollards in these roads;

(5) introduce a loading bay in Meadway N14, outside Nos. 38 and 38A High Street, Southgate, that will operate between 7 am and 5 pm on every day during which
time only goods vehicles being loaded or unloaded may park there for not more than 20 minutes at a time;

(6) remove the resident permit holder's parking place and parts of parking places situated in Devonshire Road N13 (a) adjacent to the side of No. 397 Green Lanes, (b) outside Nos. 29 and 31 and (c) outside Nos. 56 and 58, and replace them with waiting restrictions that operate at any time";

(7) introduce waiting restrictions to operate at any time in (a) certain lengths of Conway Road N14, Derwent Road N13, Devonshire Road N13, Grovelands Road N13, Lakeside Road N13, Old Park Road N13, Selborne Road N14 and The Mall N14 by extending the double yellow lines at the junctions referred to sub-paragraphs

(4)(a) and (4)(b) above, and (b) Meadway N14 outside Nos. 48 to 54 and Nos. 51 to 57 Meadway; and (c) Oakfield Road N14, near its junction with The Mall N14;

(8) introduce a 20 m.p.h. maximum speed limit on motor vehicles proceeding in Amberley Road N13, Bourne Avenue N14, Burford Gardens N13, Buttery Mews N14, Cannon Road N14, Caversham Avenue N13, Conway Road N14, Cranley Gardens N13, Cromie Close N13, Crothall Close N13, Derwent Road N13, Devonshire Road N13, Devonshire Close N13, Dovedon Close N14, Fox Lane N13, Foxgrove N14, Greenway N14, Grovelands Road N13, Harlech Road N14, Kerry Close N13, Lakeside Road N13, Lucerne Close N13, Meadway N14, Norman Way N14, Oakfield Road N14, Old Park Road N13, Pellipar Close N13, Parkway N14, Ridgemead Close N14. St George's Road N13, Selborne Road N14, The Mall N14, The Ridgeway N14, Ulleswater Road N14 and Westlake Close N13.

3. Due to the current Coronavirus pandemic the experimental Orders, statement of reasons and plans cannot currently be inspected at the Civic Centre. However, in line with guidance from the Department for Transport, the following alternative arrangements have been made:

(a) the experimental Orders, statement of reasons and plans can be inspected online at: https://new.enfield.gov.uk/services/roads-and-transport/traffic-management-orders/

(b) copies of the documents referred to above can also be obtained by emailing or by writing to Traffic & Transportation (quoting reference TG52/1451), Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield, Middlesex, EN1 3XD.

These arrangements will apply until the experimental Orders cease to have effect.

4. The Council will consider in due course whether the provisions of the experimental Orders should be continued in force indefinitely by means of permanent Orders made under sections 6, 45, 46 and 84(1) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Any person may object to the making of the permanent Orders, within a period of six months beginning with the date on which the experimental Orders come into operation or, if any of the Orders are varied by another Order or modified pursuant to section 10(2) of the 1984 Act, beginning with the date on which the variation or modification or the latest variation or modification comes into force. Any such objection or any representation must be made in writing and must state the grounds on which any objection is made and be sent to the Head of Traffic and Transportation, the Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield, Middlesex, EN1 3XD, or by e-mail to quoting the reference TG52/1451.

5. Under the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, any letter you write to the Council in response to this Notice may, upon written request, be made available to the press or to the public, who would be entitled to take copies of it if they so wished.

6. If any person wishes to question the validity of the Orders or of any of their provisions on the grounds that it or they are not within the powers conferred by the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, or that any requirement of that Act or of any instrument made under that Act has not been complied with, that person may, within 6 weeks from the date on which the Orders are made, apply for the purpose to the High Court.

Dated 26 August 2020
David B Taylor
Head of Traffic and Transportation

Links

Let's Talk Enfield: Fox Lane quieter neighbourhood

Fox Lane quieter neighbourhood leaflet - July 2020

Slides with data visualisations

Log in to comment

Basil Clarke's Avatar
Basil Clarke posted a reply #5489 26 Aug 2020 17:53


There are probably still people who think that there isn't a problem with traffic in the Fox Lane area. If any of them live in Amberley Road, where this picture was taken at the weekend, then they're either deluded or get a kick from being narrowly missed by a heavy metal object travelling at high speed.

This was, and ought still to be, a quiet suburban residential street, but is plagued by rat-runners, some of whom drive much too fast along a short street with a sharp corner. This car wasn't directly hit by the offending driver - another parked car was shunted onto it and up onto the bonnet.

Once the low-traffic neighbourhood comes into effect, the only drivers using these streets will be people who live there or are visiting. They will treat their area and their neighbours with consideration, unlike many of the rat-runners currently speeding through the area who couldn't give a monkey's about the noise and danger they create.

PS Probably unfair on rats, perhaps we should call them cockroach runners?
Richard Carlowe's Avatar
Richard Carlowe posted a reply #5492 27 Aug 2020 13:24
Is there one person living on this neighbourhood who didn't know what the traffic, which really isn't that bad compared to many other areas in the borough, was like when they bought their house?

Now their NIMBY approach will increase traffic in the surrounding areas, whilst enhancing their house prices, none of which will be passed on to cover the costs of this scheme.

This is a selfish scheme , ill thought out and just totally unnecessary.
Adrian Day's Avatar
Adrian Day posted a reply #5493 27 Aug 2020 20:28
Yes - me. When I moved into the Fox Lane area 25 years ago the traffic in my road was a lot lower. It's increased (as it has on so many residential roads) due to apps such as Waze and Google sending drivers bypassing A roads. So much so it's now a high-traffic neighbourhood - with all the associated issues of pollution, noise and danger. And other things have changed since then - we have climate change, obesity and air-pollution related illness crises so we need to encourage sustainable travel. Low traffic neighbourhoods are one of several ways we can encourage walking and cycling and discourage car use for short journeys. The good news is LTNs are being rolled out throughout London right now - the Council's long term plan is that every residential area will be an LTN. In fact LTNs are one thing central government, the GLA and our Borough Council are all agreed on!
Richard Carlowe's Avatar
Richard Carlowe posted a reply #5499 28 Aug 2020 10:43
I'm sorry but I'd imagine that the increase in traffic since 1995 is fairly minimal and pollution levels will actually have dropped due to hybrid/electric cars and fewer diesel cars.

Fox Lane is a B Road and is , therefore, not designated as a side road. The speed humps on it are, possibly, technically against the rules.

LTNs, like the ridiculous, almost unused, cycle lane on Green Lanes are a fad and will be replaced in the future as policies change. Perhaps they are necessary for side roads but they are not for B Roads.
PG Celt's Avatar
PG Celt posted a reply #5500 28 Aug 2020 11:54
I am not sure the use of the crashed car which was the result of a stolen vehicle at 3am by two youths can be directly associated with the need to implement the traffic control measures.

20mph speed limit and speed bumps would feel sufficient to me. We are residents of London after all, a bit of traffic is inevitable but rat runners travelling at 40mph+ is a concern especially given the family orientated nature of the area.

Can’t help but feel all of this funding could be put to better use.
David Hughes's Avatar
David Hughes posted a reply #5501 28 Aug 2020 12:46
We know that the Council has spent a lot of time and effort on the scheme, and perhaps we should remember that the original idea stems from big changes made very successfully in Germany: basically a through road with residential areas on either side becoming the equivalent of quiet villages for children as much adults. A selfish scheme it is not; it is a very well intended scheme which is known to work though inevitably there will be difficulties before drivers get used to it, or decide to use public transport, or cycle, or walk.
David Hughes's Avatar
David Hughes posted a reply #5502 28 Aug 2020 20:32
I'm sorry that in my earlier contribution today I forgot to respond to Richard Carlowe's reference to the 'ridiculous' cycle lanes on the A105 Green Lanes between the North Circular Road and Enfield town. Certainly they are not as substantial as most cycle lanes in northern Europe with it's advanced cycling habit, but they are helpful for cyclist not used to cycling among traffic or through the various shopping areas where the cycle lanes are on the pavement.

But that is not all: from the Government downwards there is concern about our under-exercised population so used to automatically easing itself behind a steering wheel where public transport, or cycling, or walking would be a better option, especially as cars add many pollutants which are bad for everyone especially childrens' brain development. Don't forget the Government provided £100million to encourage cycling in London funneling it through Boris Johnson when he was London's mayor. Three London boroughs benefited from that sum, Enfield was one of them.

Richard C' is going to find it very difficult to find a source to stem the tide towards more walking and cycling, hence better, nicer and safer streets.
Karl Brown's Avatar
Karl Brown posted a reply #5504 30 Aug 2020 13:13
We should be clear, Fox Lane in not a B Road (nor a C Road), rather a heavily used residential street.
PG Celt’s preference for the sufficiency of 20mph plus speed bumps was indeed the outcome of three plus years of work by a large team of local residents plus the council over a decade since. GLA funding was secured, but ultimately not wide local support. So I think we have to say we’ve tried that one. Cutting edge at the time (except for Ealing), awareness of various traffic issues and preferred solutions has moved considerably since then.
I see the desire to tax any increases in property values as a consequence of lower traffic disturbance as simply highlighting what a nuisance, and indeed financial cost, traffic must therefore be. Externalities (the cost to society) were calculated at roughly £1600 per vehicle some years back by one university (a similar ballpark figure was published by the Cabinet Office). That before air quality and climate impacts would have been factored in at the level of awareness we now hold.
Good luck to Bowes residents. Many people have worked for an immense period of time in Fox Lane to address not dissimilar issues. We wait to see if our own latest trial provides sufficient answer. Certainly there is no magic bullet and there will be changes required to current behaviour. And as Chris Bland mentions, the intent to move away from cars and towards active travel – London wide in this case – is indeed policy, at all levels. The many LTN’s are about more than simply cutting out through traffic.