As previously reported, the Cabinet will be invited to approve moving on to the next steps of the Cycle Enfield A105 scheme at their meeting on 10th February.
Previously we provided links to the Cycle Enfield documents as part of a 600-page Agenda Pack. We are now able to provide links to individual documents (see the box).
Additionally, we have extracted from two of the documents lists of concerns raised during the consultation process and the responses provided by the Council.
Cycle Enfield A105 scheme documents provided for the February 2016 Cabinet meeting
- Report to Enfield Cabinet by Director of Regeneration and Environment (includes an overall summary of the scheme, consultations and impact assessments)
- A105 Scheme Consultation Report (Executive Summary plus additional annexes showing detailed
methodology and qualitative analysis)
- Air Quality Assessment by Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants
The following lists of concerns and responses are taken from the Consultation Report and the Equality Impact Assessment/Analysis. They have been reformatted to be suitable for reading on mobile devices but are otherwise unchanged.
Excerpts from the Consultation Report
Table 8 – Enfield Council Response to key concerns raised in the A105 consultation
Concerns that the proposals may have a negative impact on shops & businesses along the A105.
The proposals for the A105 have been subjected to an independent economic impact assessment which concluded that once installed the cycling infrastructure would have a negligible impact on town centre impact viability (with some minor negative/negligible impacts during construction). However the report identified a series of measures that if implemented could result in a neutral or positive level of impact. They further identified that if as anticipated, the scheme has a transformational effect on town centre attractiveness and liveability, there could be a longer term uplift of up to 10-15% of town centre revenue.
In both Palmers Green and Winchmore Hill, the plans result in a net increase of overall shopper car parking. Whilst in places there is a reduction in some on street car parking spaces, significant on street parking is retained (and will be increased as a result of the consultation).
In Palmers Green, Lodge Drive car park will be re-designed to include an additional 20 spaces. Improved signage from the high street will be provided. Additionally, a 30 minute free parking zone will be created within the car park containing 20 spaces, encouraging the car park to be used for shorter shopping trips.
In Winchmore Hill, Fords Grove car park will be converted to pay and display to discourage people driving short journeys to park for the station and create additional capacity for shopper parking. Following the consultation, the number of high street parking spaces will also be increased (see table 9 below). Additionally, a 30 minute free parking zone will be created within the car park containing 20 spaces, encouraging the car park to be used for shorter shopping trips.
We are aware that these concerns have been heightened by claims from anti-campaign groups such as ‘Local people wouldn’t be able to park in Palmers Green and Winchmore Hill to use their local shops restaurants etc’. These suggestions were factually incorrect, but we understand that their constant repetition by a vocal minority will naturally have caused concern for a number of local residents and business owners.
Concerns that proposals may increase congestion.
Increases in the population in Enfield and any forecast growth in traffic volumes will lead to increased pressure on our roads, resulting in significant increases in congestion and further reductions in air quality. Doing nothing will lead to increasing levels of congestion.
An assessment has been carried out on the impact on journey times along the length of the corridor, factoring in both the re-designed junctions and the impact of the bus stop boarders.
The average journey time for the length of the corridor is approximately 10-15 minutes depending on the time of day.
The modelling suggests the following increase in journey times:
- AM Peak northbound 1.8 minutes or 33 secs per mile
- AM Peak southbound 1.3 minutes or 24 secs per mile
- PM Peak northbound 1.3 minutes or 25 secs per mile
- PM Peak southbound 2.5 minutes or 47 secs per mile
Providing infrastructure like that proposed, to enable increasing levels of active travel in future years, will provide an ongoing means of addressing the issue of congestion.
Concerns that proposals will cause danger at bus stops.
The bus stop bypass and bus stop boarder designs that are proposed have been used in other parts of London and the UK. There are a number of councils who have implemented these designs (e.g. Camden Council and Brighton & Hove Council) who have monitored their impact and have not reported any significant issues.
Whilst it is acknowledged that this is a design not previously seen in Enfield, it is apparent from the consultation comments there are some misunderstanding of how the bus stop boarders will work. To better illustrate the layout of bus stops a detailed explanation has been added to the Cycle Enfield website. There will also be some adjustments to the design explained in table 8.
Concerns that there are not enough people cycling to justify the proposals
Enfield Council understands that there are currently very low levels of cycling in the Borough. Indeed, it is believed this is one of the reasons why Enfield was successful in securing this external investment from TfL.
We know from our survey of Enfield residents (we asked 3,516 people across the borough) that the number one thing that the council could do to increase cycling is to create safe cycling routes. Evidence from across the UK and beyond indicate that these routes need to be direct and convenient in order to encourage some people to choose cycling instead of the car for some of their local journeys.
Concerns that the proposals may have a negative impact on air quality.
The proposals for the A105 have been subject to an independent Air Quality Assessment. This report concluded that although there are some increases in concentrations at junctions, with a 2.5% reduction in traffic, annual average NO2 concentration is predicted to decrease by 0.25 µg/m³ to 0.5 µg/m³ at roadside locations. This would bring improvements to air quality, a foundation to be built upon as active travel is increased further in future years.
Suggestions that the money should be spent on other issues.
It is not possible for Enfield Council to spend this money received from TfL on other council services.
It is anticipated that implementing our Cycle Enfield proposals across the entire borough will cost approximately £42m over 4 years. The significant majority of this funding comes from the successful ‘Mini Holland’ bid which secured £30m from the Mayors of London cycling budget. A further £7.7m is funding that Enfield would always have received from TfL to contribute towards transport improvement programmes. A further £1.5m will be received from Network Rail and £1m gathered as developer contributions.
All but two of the twenty outer London boroughs bid for the opportunity to attract the ‘Mini Holland’ funding because they all recognised what a significant opportunity this was to bring economic, health and transport benefits to those boroughs that would be successful in their bids.
Concerns that alternative routes should be chosen, away from major roads.
The New River route was investigated but would not be a workable solution. In the first instance, there are a range of land ownership and access issues. Those aside, this scheme is intended to increase cycling as a normal form of transport.
The routes selected need to connect the places that people want to travel to on a daily basis (shops, train stations etc) and should be accessible at all times of day and night. Other quieter routes are also part of the overall Cycle Enfield network. Like any transport system, the network should be made up of quieter smaller routes, connecting to major routes that enable direct and convenient travel.
More detail of why the A105 route was developed instead of a New River route is at Annex C.
Concerns that ‘rat running’ may increase.
In addition to the main road routes, Enfield Council intend on implementing an initiative called Quieter Neighbourhoods. This programme divides the borough into approximately 40 residential zones and will consider ways in which traffic can be calmed and ‘rat running’ reduced through these residential areas. The scheme will be resident led, which means the council will hold workshops to discuss the various measures that are available to a particular area, and allow local residents to decide what measures they wish to implement. Some initial pilot work for Quieter Neighbourhoods has already started. However, the full rollout of this work will be sequenced in concert with the major Cycle Enfield road schemes, providing an opportunity for any ‘rat running’ issues to be addressed.
Concerns that the proposals do not do enough to make cycling safe.
The proposals for the A105 will provide a transformational improvement in safety for people cycling. As part of the wider Cycle Enfield programme, the Council are striving to create a borough wide network of cycling infrastructure. This is an ambitious programme and as much as possible will be achieved with the resources available, whilst delivering balance with the needs of other road users.
Table 9 – A105 Consultation You Said, We Did
You said you were concerned about stepping on/off the bus into the cycle lane.
A buffer strip (at pavement height) will be introduced at 22 of the bus stop boarders, creating an additional space between the bus and the cycle lane, 6 bus stop boarders will remain as the original design.
We have produced an illustration available on the Cycle Enfield website to help better illustrate how bus stop boarders will be designed as from the comments received it is clear that there were some misunderstanding of how this would work. This illustration shows that bus users will not have to jump down from the bus into the cycle lane and then up onto the pavement. The design of these areas will ensure that pedestrians have priority, extending the pavement area across the cycle lane. This design will now be developed further by the introduction of the buffer strips.
You said you were concerned that the cycle lane would prevent access to places by people with a disability who are transported by private vehicles. You were also concerned that the cycle lane would restrict the dial-a-ride from operating at locations such as the Ruth Winston Centre.
Any blue badge holder will be able to set down and pick up passengers at any point along the route, even if that means temporally entering the cycle lane to position their vehicle by the kerb edge. The situation is the same for the dial-a-ride buses operating in Enfield.
You said you were concerned about loading at points along the route where we have not designed loading bays
The same volume of formal loading bays in the high street areas as currently exists is incorporated into the designs. We are currently investigating the feasibility of temporary loading permits for loading / unloading in additional areas along the route. This would be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
You said you were concerned that in places the cycle lane was located on the outside of parking bays, when it could be located on the inside of parking to provide greater protection.
We have amended the designs so that they cycle lane will now remain on the inside of parked vehicles along the entirety of the route, providing a greater sense of safety and distance from moving motor traffic.
You said the removal of the informal crossing point outside of Regency Court would make it difficult for residents to cross the road to access the north bound bus stop.
We will introduce a new zebra crossing directly outside of Regency Court, this new addition will mean that the bus stops will now remain in their current position (minor movements were proposed in the original consultation).
You said you did not want to see the removal of the northbound bus stop located outside Bush Hill Gardens.
We will change the design to ensure this bus stop is included in the designs. This will result in the removal of the three car parking spaces at this location. The consultation demonstrated some confusion over the car parking that is currently available in the service road by Bush Hill parade – all of these car parking spaces will be retained in the design.
We will also amend the proposed junction of Bush Hill Road/Church Street/Park Avenue. This will provide improvements for pedestrians, stopping all motor traffic when pedestrians are able to cross – enabling pedestrians to cross diagonally (should they wish) from one shopping parade to another. It will also enable left turns (travelling North) into Bush Hill. Finally, the new junction design will also improve the connection between the A105 route and the Quietway that will connect Enfield Town to Edmonton Green.
You said that you did not like seeing Vicars Moor Lane converted to an exit only junction.
Vicars Moor Lane will now remain as two-way operation but with the northbound slip road removed. This will enable the increase in public space and improve cycle safety without restricting access.
You said you did not like the proposed closure of the left hand turn traveling northbound from Green Lanes into Station Road.
We will amend the designs to maintain a slip road that allows northbound traffic to turn left into Station Road.
You asked where the 125 bus would terminate if we removed the stopping point by Station Road,
The original proposals were for the 125 bus to terminate off the route. However, we will now include a bus stand in the same vicinity as it is currently.
You said that you wanted to see some more of the high street car parking kept within Winchmore Hill high street areas.
Along Winchmore Hill Broadway we will introduce an additional 3 high street car parking spaces compared to the original consultation proposals. One of these spaces will be incorporated into the design of the left hand slip road into Station Road, and a further two will be incorporated into the designs for Compton Road by converting some of this parking into diagonal bays. This will result in a slight reduction of the new public space created in this area.
Fords Grove car park will be converted to pay and display to discourage people driving short journeys to park for the station and create additional capacity for shopper parking. Additionally, a 30 minute free parking zone will be created within the car park containing 20 spaces, encouraging the car park to be used for shorter shopping trips. Parking in this car park will be free to all users after 6.30pm to support the evening economy.
In Winchmore Hill, from Fords Grove to Sainsbury’s 76% of the high street car parking spaces (proposed 45 spaces versus the current 59) will be retained.
From Elm Park Road to Elsiedene Road, 89% of the high street car parking spaces (proposed 49 spaces versus the current 55) will be retained. A marked bay(s) for 10 parking spaces will also be provided to offset the loss of unrestricted kerb space in this area (surveys show an average occupancy of 10 vehicles).
You said that our proposals to move the Southbound bus stop at Sainsbury’s further away from the store would be inconvenient.
We have relocated the bus stops to maintain convenient access to Sainsbury’s. In addition, we will merge the two zebra crossings in this location, to provide one central crossing directly by the access to the store, conveniently located between both the northbound and southbound bus stops.
You said you were concerned about the relocation of the northbound bus stop outside of St Monica’s church.
In the designs, we have put the northbound bus stop back to its current position. This does mean that we have also moved the southbound bus stop back to its current position south of Hedge Lane (it’s not possible to have both bus stops outside of St Monica’s). The return of the southbound bus stop does mean a reduction of 2 car parking spaces to that described in the original consultation. Based on the town centres survey, and the understanding that more people travel by bus than car, this was deemed to be the best approach. This also resolves some issues that were raised regarding the use of this bus stop as an interchange. The informal crossing by St Monica’s will be upgraded to a zebra crossing.
You said you were concerned about reducing the flow of traffic through the Fox Lane junction.
We have converted the Fox Lane junction, removing the proposed traffic lights and created a T-junction. This will reduce the potential of northbound traffic queuing through Palmers Green. This does result in the removal of the proposed signalised pedestrian crossing at the junction. Pedestrians will continue to cross via informal crossings however the junction will become a raised area to reduce speed.
You said you were concerned about converting Hazelwood Lane into exit only.
In the designs, we have reverted Hazelwood Lane to two-way working.
You said you were concerned about the removal of The Fox Pub bus stop.
In response to the consultation, whilst we still propose to remove one of the northbound bus stops between the triangle and Fox Lane, we will locate the new bus stop into a more balanced central position on the high street, which will ensure the distance between bus stops remains less than the TfL maximum guideline of 400 meters.
This will mean that the southbound bus stop is located in the designs closer to its current location and will convert from a bus stop bypass to a bus stop boarder. At this bus stop boarder, a one metre buffer strip will be introduced between the kerb edge and the cycle lane. This change will also result in an additional car parking space on the high street.
You said you were concerned about the number of high street parking spaces in Palmers Green.
In the amended designs, in the Palmers Green high street from Fox Lane to Alderman’s Hill, the designs incorporate 87% of the current on street car parking spaces (41 spaces proposed versus the current 47).
For the Palmers Green section from Fox Lane to Bourne Hill 70% of the high street car parking spaces are included in the designs (26 spaces proposed versus the current 37). However, we will re-design the number of available car parking spaces in Lodge Drive car park, which will result in an increase of 20 car parking spaces.
We will improve the signage to this parking from the high street. Additionally, a 30 minute free parking zone will be created within the car park containing 20 spaces, encouraging the car park to be used for shorter shopping trips. The open hours of this car park will also be extended to allow access at any time (currently closes at 9pm). Parking will continue to be free after 6.30pm. This and increased night time accessibility will assist the night time economy.
We asked you to provide feedback on two different options for the junction at Alderman’s Hill.
Based on your responses, the design process will move forward using the options that retains the triangle and signalised junction.
As outlined in the consultation process, there will be further opportunity for the local community to influence what the final design will look like on the footprint of the public space contained with the triangle island.
We asked you to provide feedback on two different options for how the route could link with the cycle route into Haringey.
Based on your responses, the design process will move forward which routes people cycling via Palmerston Crescent.
Excerpt from the Equality Impact Assessment/Analysis
Comments from Key Stakeholders
Below are common issues raised by respondents, with officer responses shown in italics:
- Concerns about response times for emergency service vehicles
Officers met with the Metropolitan Police and London Fire Brigade to discuss possible impacts of the scheme on their emergency response times. No concerns were raised at these meetings or via the consultation. London Ambulance Service have so far turne d down our repeated requests for a meeting. However, there will be other opportunities for them to provide comments during the statutory consultation.
- Concerns about the effects of the scheme on shops and businesses
Loading bays at Winchmore Hill and Palmers Green will be retained in their existing locations. At Lodge Drive car park, we will create 20 new parking bays. These will be free for the first 45 minutes to enable people to visit local shops and takeaways. After 6.30 pm parking will be free to support the evening economy. At Ford’s Grove car park, we will introduce pay & display parking to increase turnover of parking spaces. As at Lodge Drive, 20 parking bays will be free for the first 45 minutes to enable people to visit local shops and ta keaways. After 6.30 pm parking will be free to support the evening economy. Concerns about the effects of the scheme on the night time economy
- Concerns about cyclist behaviour
These will be addressed by cycle training and enforcement
- Concerns about a lack of parking close to shops
As much on-street parking as possible is retained given the need to maintain continuous segregated cycle facilities. Additional parking is provided in Lodge Drive car park and Fords Grove car park will be managed to better support the town centre.
- Concerns about the level of provision of disabled parking
Apart from the disabled bays in Lodge Drive and Ford’s Grove car parks, there are currently no disabled parking bays along the A105. We will review disabled parking provision during the detailed design phase and statutory consultation, including looking at the need for additional dedicated bays for blue badge holders in side roads. Although not directly raised during the consultation it is acknowledged that some blue badge holders may be parking on the residential sections of the A105 even through there are no dedicated bays at pr esent.
This will be addressed at the detailed design stage and footway crossovers provided (subject to planning permission being granted) where parking is displaced by Cycle Enfield and parking can be safely provided off-street.
- Concerns about Dial-a-Ride services
Dial a Ride vehicles will be able to stop briefly in cycle lanes to pick up and set down passengers
- Concerns about loading
The loading bays at Palmers Green and Winchmore Hill will all be retained in their existing locations.
- Concerns about the arrangements for pedestrians at bus stop boarders and bus stop by-passes
Bus stop boarders and bus stop by-passes have been successfully introduced in Camden, Central London and Lewes. Accident rates did not go up and people soon got used to the new arrangements. As a result of comments received, we have incorporated a 500mm wi de buffer between the kerb and the cycle lane at most bus stop boarders.
- Concerns about the removal of informal crossing points and central refuges
The proposals involve installing new zebra crossings and replacing some informal crossings with zebra crossings
- Conflict with the blind and partially sighted
We will follow the relevant guidance during the detailed design phase.
- Allocation of spending
The funding can only be used to deliver the Mayor’s Cycling Vision for London.
Below are the comments of disabilities groups consulted relevant to the EQIA. Officer responses are shown in italics.
Over 50s forum
The Enfield Over 50's forum partially supports the Cycle Enfield proposals for the A105 and submitted the following comments: We have no problem with the idea of the A105 corridor being safe for cyclists. However we are concerned about pedestrians getting off buses and having to cross the cycle lane to reach the pavement. In addition we oppose the loss of on-street parking, for residents on the route as well as for businesses, and the lack of convenient stopping places for service vehicles, e.g. minibuses picking up elderly or disabled people from their homes, because of the restriction of parking kerbside where there is a cycle lane. This is of particular concern because those who use such vehicles are less able physically, often have sight difficulty and find a particular problem in inclement weather.
Officers have addressed these concerns by:
- improving the design of most of the bus boarders so they incorporate a buffer st rip between the bus and the cycle lane.
- Minimising the loss of parking in residential sections and allowing blue badge holders and dial-a-ride vehicles to park in the cycle lane to set down and pick up.
- Providing additional parking in Lodge Drive and Ford’s Grove car parks which will be free for blue badge holders.
- Reviewing the provision of parking for blue badge holders as part of the development of detailed design.
Guide Dogs for the Blind
Guide Dogs for the Blind do not support the Cycle Enfield proposals for the A105 and submitted the following comments. The comments provide a useful checklist of issues to be addressed as part of the detailed design but officers’ initial responses are set out below in italics.
- Shared surface streets
The shared space concept is intended to be a way to provide an attractive environment, with slower traffic, less street clutter and a people friendly space. All of which we would support. However, one of the ways of implementing a shared space scheme is by introduc ing a shared surface street, sometimes called a level surface. This is where the footway and carriageway are of the same level with no kerb upstand. There may also be on uncontrolled pedestrian crossings.
The shared space concept has only been applied to two lightly trafficked service roads along the A105. These will be carefully designed to mitigate the concerns of people with impaired vision and mobility. Key concerns:
- You have to make eye contact
Pedestrians, motorists and cyclists have to make ‘eye contact’ to decide who moves first. This obviously compromises the safety, independence and confidence of blind and partially sighted people Blind and partially sighted people face a similar problem when crossing a standard road.
However, bringing the road up to footway level will lead to drivers being more cautious and improve safety for all road users.
- People rely on the kerb
Blind and partially sighted people, particularly guide dog owners and long cane users, use the kerb as a navigation clue to know where they are in a street.
A low kerb will be incorporated at the detailed design stage to provide a navigation clue.
- Tactile paving
Tactile paving should be provided at signal controlled crossings; dropped kerbs; or where the footway and carriageway are level at a junction; top and bottom of steps; at station platforms; and shared cycle and pedestrian routes. It is important that the ap propriate tactile paving surface is used and the correct specification followed. All the different types and the recommended layout are provided in the Department for Transport ‘Guidance on the use of tactile paving surfaces’.
We will follow best practice where applying tactile paving to the A105 scheme at the detailed design stage.
- Pedestrian crossings
Controlled crossings should be provided and must have visual, audible and tactile signals. In addition they must have tactile paving as recommended in the ‘Guidance on the use to tactile paving surfaces’.
A number of new controlled pedestrian crossings are proposed in the A105 scheme and these will be of great benefit to the visually and mobility impaired. These will all be constructed with the relevant visual, audible and tactile signals and paving.
- Street furniture
Street furniture should be provided in a consistent pattern and not create obstructions on the footway. They should have good contrasting features and at the same time not cause glare as can be the case with stainless steel.
The A105 proposals provide an excellent opportunity to declutter the high streets and provide a consistent pattern of street furniture.
- Visual contrast
Material, features and street furniture should have good tonal and colour contrast to enhance visibility for blind and partially sighted people with some residual vision. In addition, they should retain their contrasting features in wet and dull weather conditions. Uniform lighting is also essential and should enhance the street environment at night.
These principles will be applied at the design stage.
- Bus Stop By-passes
We understand that from a cycle safety point of view, this is a positive design, to segregate them from the traffic, and allow an easy approach to the bus stop for buses. However, Transport for London/Enfield Borough Council has a duty of care to pedestrian s, especially, in this case blind and partially sighted pedestrians - in its current form, we don't believe that has happened.
We believe that the current design for bus boarders does make it clear that pedestrians have right of way. However we will carefully consider all the points made by Guide Dogs for the Blind at the detailed design stage and make amendments w here necessary.
Royal National Institute for the Blind
The RNIB do not support the Cycle Enfield proposals and provided some general comments. Concerns were expressed about inaccessible crossings, a negative impact on public transport and the disruptive impact arising from proposed changes to the locations of crossings.
These comments will be addressed during the detailed design phase, building on the more detailed comments provided by Guide Dogs for the Blind.
Age UK
No comments or suggestions were received from Age UK
Enfield Disability Action
No comments or suggestions were received from Enfield Disability Action
Enfield Vision
No comments or suggestions were received from Enfield Vision
