Forum topic: Planters in Fox Lane area 'not reducing through traffic'
Planters in Fox Lane area 'not reducing through traffic'
Karl Brown
06 Jun 2019 15:17 #4574
Share
Share by email
I am surprised to see that the introduction of speed bumps resulted in a significant INCREASE in speed. That one is unexpected.
Planters in Fox Lane area 'not reducing through traffic'
Neil Littman
08 Jun 2019 12:40 #4579
Share
Share by email
Worth mentioning the cost involved for the planters was over £13,000. This was given by the council under a Freedom of Information request in February. If the scheme had been fully implemented it would have cost more than £30,000 based on a unit cost of £1030. Plus the cost of the speed bumps, that is a substantial amount. I do agree with Karl Brown that the speed bumps should have been more effective. Maybe the combination of both caused a lot of bad driving. I think the speed bumps on their own should have been a sufficient deterrent. Would be interesting to see how speeds are after removal of the planters but with the speed tables still in place.
Planters in Fox Lane area 'not reducing through traffic'
Karl Brown
09 Jun 2019 17:59 #4581
Share
Share by email
An earlier posting includes, “I think the speed bumps on their own should have been a sufficient deterrent”. Best part of 20 years and I suppose 5 administrations ago, the then ruling Conservatives first intended speed bumps on Fox Lane, presumably believing exactly that same assumption, but instead opted for a wider all Fox Lane area approach, something which they later rejected despite available, approved grant funding and instead installed three VAS’s on Fox Lane. Move on a few years and they then suggested planters at the ends of the streets, and then lost power.
So now we’ve seen their ideas in action, and they seem not to work, but the very long running issue of residential streets being used by large numbers of speeding drivers remains. Indeed, I would suggest a minority of those are now exhibiting really appalling driving behaviour, perhaps as engine power goes up at the same time as police numbers go down.
It appears we’re now on the cusp of something new. Top whack £13000 or so for a pilot to hopefully lance what has been an issue for call it two decades, and where we are now seeing the authorities rebalancing the power between drivers and the rest so more radical outlooks are required, may not seem such a bad investment in the round.
and surely the planters will have a use somewhere for something visually attractive.
So now we’ve seen their ideas in action, and they seem not to work, but the very long running issue of residential streets being used by large numbers of speeding drivers remains. Indeed, I would suggest a minority of those are now exhibiting really appalling driving behaviour, perhaps as engine power goes up at the same time as police numbers go down.
It appears we’re now on the cusp of something new. Top whack £13000 or so for a pilot to hopefully lance what has been an issue for call it two decades, and where we are now seeing the authorities rebalancing the power between drivers and the rest so more radical outlooks are required, may not seem such a bad investment in the round.
and surely the planters will have a use somewhere for something visually attractive.
Planters in Fox Lane area 'not reducing through traffic'
peter caskey
10 Jun 2019 18:09 #4586
Share
Share by email
Correct me if I am wrong please. All the planters have done is to move traffic to other roads. People need to get from A-B, so there is no reduction in overall traffic.
The latest idea seems to mean: Drivers will be able to drive into a street, but will have to do a Uturn or similar to get back out,,,is that really a safe suggestion?.
As for the speed of traffic, my local street applied for some sort of speed reduction action, the Council's response was, as there had been no injuries in the street there was no need for it, despite cars etc speeding up to 50 mph.
The latest idea seems to mean: Drivers will be able to drive into a street, but will have to do a Uturn or similar to get back out,,,is that really a safe suggestion?.
As for the speed of traffic, my local street applied for some sort of speed reduction action, the Council's response was, as there had been no injuries in the street there was no need for it, despite cars etc speeding up to 50 mph.
Planters in Fox Lane area 'not reducing through traffic'
Adrian Day
10 Jun 2019 20:58 #4588
Share
Share by email
The Council's traffic monitoring figures show that the planters haven't moved traffic to other roads - in fact in several roads with planters traffic volume and speed have increased. Experience in other areas show that the only way to deter rat-running traffic (and the associated danger, pollution and noise) from residential streets is to prevent that traffic with physical barriers. I'd much rather that a handful of residents' vehicles do a three-point turn in my street than have the 400 vehicles an hour, many speeding, weaving in and out. Experience elsewhere also shows these measures reduce total amounts of traffic - more people walk and cycle.
Planters in Fox Lane area 'not reducing through traffic'
Karl Brown
11 Jun 2019 09:58 #4589
Share
Share by email
The Councils reaction to Peter Caskey’s request seems to be old world authority thinking in its approach (albeit noting he doesn’t state a “when”). Traffic related injuries to pedestrians on individual residential streets are fortunately rare while car on car bumps tend to converge on junctions but it’s the long assumed low impact of traffic volumes and the “50mph” speeders he mentions which do the incessant damage to local community, public health and the general freedoms of the many. That’s where the Mayors Healthy Streets and the emerging London Plan are centred - and hence Enfield needs to be - and about time too.
What still sticks with me is the chart in the original Mini Holland bid which, by memory, showed something like two thirds of all car journeys in Enfield were less than 5km – effectively walking distance. Eat into a slice of that and the volume issue at least all but goes away. Currently that’s a personal choice but is increasingly being “encouraged”.
What still sticks with me is the chart in the original Mini Holland bid which, by memory, showed something like two thirds of all car journeys in Enfield were less than 5km – effectively walking distance. Eat into a slice of that and the volume issue at least all but goes away. Currently that’s a personal choice but is increasingly being “encouraged”.
Planters in Fox Lane area 'not reducing through traffic'
David Hughes
11 Jun 2019 23:29 #4590
Share
Share by email
I was very struck by Peter Caskey’s bewilderment about the trial of planters on the Lakes Estate to reduce traffic speed/encourage drivers to take a route away from residential streets/use public transport/walk or cycle. As he says people do have to get from A to B, but there are lots of ways of doing it which don’t blight the lives of residents generally and kids especially. Basically car drivers should use main roads rather than residential streets apart from any departure/arrival points which are in residential areas.
But of course main roads are generally slow these days especially at peak periods. Which I think is a good incentive to walk, cycle or take public transport.
Time now to introduce a good mantra: residential streets are for living, not driving along.
On Peter C’s complaint about his Council’s response to a request for reduced speed I have a lot of sympathy. Speeding is antisocial anywhere in town or city, and especially in residential streets where kids should be able to socialize/walk or cycle to school from an early age. But Council’s must be consistent in their decisions.
Unfortunately most drivers seem to have acquired a ‘sense of entitlement’ to right of way and speed which mitigates against Council's best intentions.
But of course main roads are generally slow these days especially at peak periods. Which I think is a good incentive to walk, cycle or take public transport.
Time now to introduce a good mantra: residential streets are for living, not driving along.
On Peter C’s complaint about his Council’s response to a request for reduced speed I have a lot of sympathy. Speeding is antisocial anywhere in town or city, and especially in residential streets where kids should be able to socialize/walk or cycle to school from an early age. But Council’s must be consistent in their decisions.
Unfortunately most drivers seem to have acquired a ‘sense of entitlement’ to right of way and speed which mitigates against Council's best intentions.
Moderators: PGC Webmaster, Basil Clarke
Time to create page: 0.492 seconds
