Forum topic: Fix this dangerous junction!

An elderly churchgoer was run over by a hit-and-run driver on Sunday evening, crossing Green Lanes after coming out of St John's church.  This is the busiest junction in Palmers Green, yet the lights have no pedestrian phase because this would hold up the traffic.  So which is more important -  traffic flow or pedestrian safety?  The Mayor of London this week set out his action plan for achieving "Vision Zero" road casualties...  but given himself and his successor until 2041 to actually get down to zero.

Totally agree , this is a lethal junction as pedestrians have no lights and are unable to see the traffic lights so have no idea when is safe to cross. In addition the islands are too small for a pram to shelter, which is vital as 1) two stage crossing is required & 2) there is a crèche in St. John’s so numerous parents cross here with their kids. The accident could have been so much worse.
When I saw the proposal for this junction I was amazed they were not upgrading it to have pedestrian lights and expressed my concerns to Better Streets For Enfield , and to a councillor. I also launched an online petition . BSFE thought I was rocking the boat and we should accept the scheme as if was.
The councillor too was abrupt with me however said once in operation a review would be made. I don’t know if this has happened

At the same time I criticised the turning into Sainsbury’s, as this too has no lights , iand is a fast blind corner. Neither parties were interested in my comments either

If we are to create a vibrant community around the high streeets , while not choking the planet , we need to be able to get to the shops on foot.
I live between the shops of palmers green and Winchmore Hill but would not visit them when with kids as these junctions were too dangerous. Quite simply there is no way of knowing when a car will appear 5 metres from you doing 50mph.

Apparently initial proposals had ped xings, either phased lights or zebra, but TfL vetoed it due to bus times.

Not sure I've seen any issues with the Sainsbury's turning, from any direction, but maybe that's just me.

Doesn't really matter what anyone says about this junction until there is a fatality.

I complained about the layout etc. a while ago to the council and they said it is an 'informal crossing' whatever that is and they had no intention of adding pedestrian controls. The junction in order of priority is for motor vehicles, cyclists (who now have their own lights) and pedestrians in that order.

As a long time but very unsuccessful campaigner for more community/people-centered streets I was very struck by Basil C's sentence: "So which is more important - traffic flow or pedestrian safety? " in the opening contribution to this thread. Why? Because in my very early days on the campaign trail when we were getting a lot of support from Council officers the issue of this junction between the A105 Green Lanes and Bourne Hill/Hedge came up and the officers were adamant that nothing could be done . And the reason given was that TfL (the London Mayor's transport department) wouldn't allow change because the weight of traffic on the A105 was such that jams would be inevitable.

This time I haven't been so close to the Council's plans or to current campaigners, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume that similar problems are envisaged. Now though the background is different in that the Council is aiming to reduce the number of car journeys, so perhaps the time will come when change can happen. At any rate it seems worthwhile for campaigners to raise the issue with officers, so that if the same problem still holds a change could be made as the number of cars diminishes. There's no point in me doing that because I'm not active as a campaigner now, and wouldn't know where to start.

Might be worthwhile putting in a Freedom of Information Act request to find out the reasons for the refusal to have a pedestrian phase at Hedge Lane.
At the Sainsbury's turning pedestrians walking straight on along Green Lanes don't get a safe time to cross - the safest time is probably when the bikes have a green light. So a pedestrian phase is definitely needed here too. However, it's safer than it was before, because pedestrians had to cross a very wide road with very little predictability about when cars would be coming and from which direction they would be turning. Now, at least, the lights make car movements somewhat easier to predict.

A certain website in Winchmore Hill has been campaigning to have the lights removed completely here, which would bring back the previous higher level of danger to pedestrians - so much for the concern about pedestrians that the website raises in connection with cycle lanes. It's true that the traffic backs up a bit more here than it used to - but it's either that or endanger the lives of pedestrians and people on bikes, and I know where my priorities lie. People truly concerned about congestion, pollution and road safety would be urging people to drive less, not campaigning for greater priority for cars.

Couldn't agree more! I hate having to walk across this junction, and when my child was a little younger having the pram was very hard to cross without having it hang out into the road. Crazy design. If TFL did remove pedestrian crossing options then that is shameful. I very much hope that the person that has been hit it recovering.

I noticed the Sainsbury's problem as well and agree that it is a matter of time before a similar probem happens, as pedestrians have to be super aware and take potential risk to cross.

Even the new layout at the end of Fox Lane/Green Lanes is a problem, now that the roundabout has gone. Fox Lanes often has a queue of cars. Again the island in the middle isn't big enough for a buggy and it is often unclear whether a car is going to let you cross/whether they have seen you, whether cars coming from the Green Lanes side of the high street are going to turn into Fox Lane etc. Cars also now often have to pull out of Fox Lane and force themselves into the traffic if they wish to turn right, otherwise they can be there for a long time. = bad for pedestrians and cars

Tim Wakeford's piece (above) is interesting because it illustrates the fact that many, perhaps most, people assume that the traffic behaviour on the new layout of the A105 Green Lanes will remain as now.

I don't know all the details of the design, but I do know from first-hand knowledge of the Council's intentions, that it expected the frustrations of a narrowed carriageway with long lines of traffic at traffic lights etc. would, over time, encourage car drivers, mainly those making short journeys, to leave their car at home, and bike, walk or use public transport. The tailbacks at the foot of Fox Lanes may or may not have a hand in that, but it will certainly take years for the overall strategy to work out.

There are a myriad reasons why the Council's choice of installing cycle lanes will take a long time to settle in and work well. Biking is not the normal, everyday way of travelling it was in my teens, twenties and thirties, so for the much younger people than me, who have never biked as a matter of course, there is going to be a lot to absorb and learn. Personally I feel that the bigger benefits are going to be felt when youngsters now learning on the cycle lanes take to riding on the carriageway as well as on the cycle lanes. Patience is a must.

I hadn’t realized there is a problem now at the Fox Lane/Green Lanes junction, and perhaps that’s because when I have needed to enter Fox Lane on my bike I’ve not experience a difficulty. But it may be that the junction doesn’t work well in heavy-traffic situations I’ve not experienced, or because there is still more traffic on Green Lane that is expected to remain in the long run.

On the difficulty of turning right from Fox Lane the solution may depend on common courtesy in heavy traffic conditions. Or perhaps the frustrations may be part of encouraging drivers to take to their bikes or public transport.

Probably I’ve not made myself clear, so in summary I’d say that we need to await the hoped-for drop in car use before we worry too much.