Dear Resident,
Before I begin the Q&A, I want to say this is probably one of the most-lengthy and frustrating experiences I have had from my two years of being a Councillor. I am deeply shocked and also saddened by the lack of response and detail from the department and relevant officers that have implemented the Low Traffic Neighbourhood Scheme. I hope this thread helps you in your enquires. I will be making more enquiries and hopefully meet with officers soon.
Here you can submit your views on the scheme: https://letstalk.enfield.gov.uk/foxlaneQN/survey_tools/statutory-consultation1
Emails begin:
Dear Department,
I would like to vent my frustration at the plans and subsequent implementation of the Fox Lane Quieter Neighbourhoods scheme.
Last night I met with many residents (In a composed, safe outdoor environment with masks and socially distancing) on the Meadway triangle that joins both Meadway and Bourne Avenue.
The feelings of many residents towards the scheme was clear- they don’t want, they didn’t ask for it, and quite frankly many at least around the Meadway Estate want it taken out entirely.
I will go through each point separately:
- Extremely poor consultation
Residents feel that the consultation was pushed through too quickly. Many feel that the engagement event held on Tuesday 12th November should not have been the one and only consultation the council had with its residents. Yesterday residents were asking why the Leader and Deputy Leader of the council respectively, hadn’t met themselves with the residents to take their concerns on board. They were concerned that only one councillor-me- had tried to engage whereas the person who instigated this- Cllr Ian Barnes- was nowhere to be seen.
On top of that, we also have a lacking social media campaign which residents follow often and would have appreciated more information form the council on platforms such as Facebook and Nextdoor. Yesterday I did a show of hands, and residents vastly use these platforms, and mention how I comment more compared to any council account. That’s completely unacceptable and shameful that we have inconvenienced the lives of so many and didn’t even have the decency to advertise it properly. One resident was furious to receive a council letter with the face of the Leader and yet on this important issue complete silence.
Question (1) by Cllr. Ioannou: When does the consultation start and finish, and in light of COVID can we ask for an extension timeframe to gather more views?
Question (1) Response by Officer: The consultation is scheduled to start w/c 12th October – letters will be sent to homes in the area and we will update the project page. We will announce on social media too. This will last for six months.
Question (2) by Cllr. Ioannou: Can we expect more of an effort from the relevant department to advertise the scheme on social media?
Question (2) Response by Officer: As mentioned above
Question (3) by Cllr. Ioannou: Can we expect any officers or Leader/ Deputy of the council to have a meeting with residents?
Question (3) Response by Officer: Depending on Covid-19, pop-up events may be organised. Although obviously in the current climate we will not be encouraging groups to gather. Other online events can be considered.
Question (3) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: I feel the leader and officers should swiftly organise one or even two meetings in three month intervals to take questions and feedback. Covid gives an opportunity online for this.
Question (4) by Cllr. Ioannou: Residents are asking for what is credible and not credible feedback from the departments perspective. What points would/ won’t be considered by the officers when the final decision is made, is there a criteria?
Question (4) Response by Officer: All views, both for the scheme and against it, will be considered and reported on in the final report.
Question (4) Rebut by Cllr Ioannou: Similar to planning applications, is there any guidelines on what will be legitimate and considerable feedback? In planning we have acceptable and non-legitimate reasons for appealing/supporting applications. Residents are sceptical of giving feedback and think the department should be more clear on what responses are even considerable. Is there any guidance?
Question (4) Rebut by Officer: The consultation provides the right for individuals to make any comment which they feel is appropriate. All views will be considered and the purpose of the report is to provide a rational response to the issues raised.
Question (5) by Cllr. Ioannou: One resident mentioned worryingly that the department will only take on board negative comments as positives will only constitute a continuation. Is this the case?
Question (5) Response by Officer: All comments both positive and negative are logged and recorded and will be included in the final report
- Statistics
Residents are concerned with how the council will go about evaluating the positives and negative implications of the scheme. Let me make it absolutely clear, I have never seen and have never received any tangible stats to give a decent background to how this scheme started with regards to air pollution, congestion, collisions etc. Under what grounds therefore are the officers and those executing the final decision going to decide if the scheme was beneficial or negative from a stats perspective?
Question (6) by Cllr. Ioannou: Does the Council have data for many months before the installation of these planters at sites like the Meadway. If yes please can I have the FULL REPORTS FOR ALL SITES IN THE SCHEME.
Question (6) Response by Officer: The baseline traffic data is referenced and linked to from the report approving this trial. Details on this data is here: https://letstalk.enfield.gov.uk/2734/widgets/9482/documents/5348
Question (6) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: This document gives me serious concerns.
Question (6.A) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: Why did the department decide that an emergency gate was necessary for Meadway 20 going through to 1 and 3 when clearly the department can see from the data that this is one of the worst effected?
Question (6.A) Rebut by Officer: In response to feedback from emergency services.
Question (6.B) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: Why are the department promoting street closures to traffic entirely on other less affected roads and implementing a penalty and revenue generating scheme on the most supposedly congested road?
Question (6.B) Rebut by Officer: As above.
Question (6.C) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: From points one and two I am 99% under the impression the department are trying to generate revenue from this unfortunate scheme, can I please get some understanding why there is a gate here and nowhere else
Question (6.C) Rebut by Officer: As above.
Question (6.D) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: I am deeply concerned that only three different types of remedies have been issued. Why not street narrowing? Width restrictions? Humps even?
Question (6.D) Rebut by Officer: This has been trialled before and deemed not effective.
Question (6.E) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: On Page 15 of the report there is a clear anomaly in the data. You have dispersed the data from: Meadway, Parkway, Bourne Avenue, Greenway and have given on Page 8 a data that shows where the cut-throughs lead/origin from on the Meadway. I feel the sum off all the roads mentioned- leading to the Meadway- are exaggerated. Under what formula was the figure therefore of 1400 for the 12hour survey given upon? I want to understand the calculation.
Question (6.E) Rebut by Officer: We have raised this question with the external specialist who presented the data.
Question (6.F) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: I see there is a big change on the congestion levels from Pages 15-16, existing to proposed, which are increasing on Green Lanes, Alderman’s Hill, Bourne Hill, Cannon Hill and High Street. Can I add that Winchmore Hill Road be added to this immediately. Officers must recognise the increased congestion on this road also. Officers must also recognise that they have admitted congestion will be far greater on these main roads as a result of the scheme.
Question (6.F) Rebut by Officer: This issue is acknowledged at para 15 of the approvals report. We will collect data on Winchmore Hill Road as part of the monitoring.
Question (6.G) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: Leading from point (6) can I please understand why the department are deliberately pushing traffic from these supposed cut-through roads and simply diverting and congesting more towards the main roads? This worsens journey times, increases pollution as vehicles remain stationary and isn’t good for anyone!
Question (6.G) Rebut by Officer: The rationale for the project is captured in the report however the principle is that smaller residential streets should not need to carry large volumes of traffic that is better suited to the primary road network.
Question (6.H) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: Can I understand under what premise on Page 21 you arrived at these conclusions for estimates in post-scheme?
Question (6.H) Rebut by Officer: The estimates are based on a prediction of the traffic that was cutting through the residential streets being reassigned to the primary road network. The remaining traffic volumes within the area are the predictions, based on the origin and destination surveys of the number of trips by either residents or people visiting the area.
Question (6.I) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: Can I understand please why the department have blatantly agreed more congestion will take place on main roads on Page 22? This makes absolutely no sense and doesn’t again help anyone.
Question (6.I) Rebut by Officer: As outlined at point 7.
Question (6.J) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou: I agree with the 20mph flat implementation.
Question (7) by Cllr. Ioannou: How does the council plan to monitor pollution levels prior and post the installation of planters. If there are quality monitors can they please be stated. If there is not this facility then how on earth will you monitor pollution level changes
Question (7) Rebut by Officer: The Borough has a number of air quality monitoring sites, models can also be created based on traffic data. http://www.londonair.org.uk/LondonAir/Default.aspx
Question (7) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou:
The borough has four air quality monitors?????
Where is there one near the LTN?????
The closest one is literally on the North Circular and we all know that is a mess.
Question (7) Rebut by Officer: Air quality modelling can take place based on the traffic volume data collected during the monitoring.
Question (8) by Cllr. Ioannou: Following from that question, can I also get an idea of how the council will monitor traffic count before and after, and not just on the roads where these planters are installed but also on the surrounding roads such as Morton Way, Cannon Hill, Bourne Hill, Aldermans Hill, Oakfield Road, Greenway, Caversham Avenue, St Georges Road, The Bourne. I would like EACH ROAD INDIVUDIALLY
Question (8) Rebut by Officer: Air quality modelling can take place based on the traffic volume data collected during the monitoring.
- Signage
Question (9) by Cllr. Ioannou: Many residents feel that the signage is better in some parts and poor in others. The Meadway had only had a dead-end sign installed with no signage like that compared to The Mall or Selbourne Road. Is there a more detailed plan that shows the placement of LTN signage? Maybe we can as councillors in the next consultation before approval or rejection give our views on where signs need improving or tweaking.
Question (9) Rebut by Officer: If you have specific feedback on signage then please provide it. Additional signs have been placed during the implementation of the works.
Question (9) Rebut by Cllr. Ioannou:
My issue is:
The enforcement camera by definition on the highway code states: Area in which cameras are used to enforce traffic regulations.
This definition is far too generic and can mean either ANPR, CCTV or your term of enforcement. https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/information-signs.html
There isn’t even a sign which mentions the type of enforcement being enforced?? On approach it is only faiar a clear sign is placed stating no entry at all times If this isn’t implemented we are deliberately cash-cowing the scheme and will seem that we are footing residents with the bill.
Question (9) Rebut by Officer: Signs are in place to communicate that motor vehicles are not authorised to pass through. Further signs have been added to clarify this further. Additional camera signs are in place to warn drivers that camera enforcement is in operation. No entry signs cannot be used as it is not legally possible to provide an exemption to the emergency services if we use these signs – this closure is camera enforced to allow emergency services to pass through. The signs should be recognised by motorists and the Council will not receive any income if the lawful instruction that the signs provide is followed.
Question (10): Can you please confirm what the barrier and signage means on the Meadway so we can inform residents?
Question (9) Rebut by Officer: The Meadway sign indicates that motor vehicles are not authorized: https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/road-signs-giving-orders.html. The camera sign is to provide warning that the order provided by the road sign is enforced by a camera and as such a penalty notice is possible if contravened.