21 flats planned near Fox Lane bridge

The issue of traffic along Fox Lane and the impact of the development of the Sherrygreen site and the the probable use of Dumayne House for 21 flats came up at last night's meeting of the Fox Lane and District Residents Association.

Fox Lane has been redesignated as an Unclassified road which removes some of the Council's ability to control what happens along it. For example they have traditionally resisted the provision of front garden parking and cross-overs on Fox Lane not only on Conservation grounds, but on traffic hazard grounds too. This latter is no longer a weapon at their disposal. This may well reduce their ability to propose measures to reduce traffic hazards stemming from the traffic flow to/from these two sites.

There was considerable dissatisfaction expressed about the increasing traffic problems along the stretch of road between Caversham Avenue, across the hump backed bridge, past the Fox car park and to Green Lanes. Car parking outside the Fox car park at night (increasingly common) was seen as an added problem.

There is uncertainty about what can be done about the Dumayne House application which is under the newly relaxed planning rules, and whether the process has anyway gone too far to intervene.

However, in discussion Councillor Martin Prescott who sits on the Planning Committee (and spoke on the traffic problems at the Committee meeting which agreed the Sherrygreen application) agreed to see whether anything could be done, in particular whether the Dumayne application could be "called in" for formal Planning Committee consideration.

Colin Younger

Like Colin Younger I attended the meeting of the Fox Lane & District Residents’ Association (FLDRA) meeting on 6th November. Unfortunately I wasn’t feeling too good, and therefore felt unable to contribute to the debate about the conversion of Dumayne House to flats.

Several arguments against the conversion were put forward, but I found none of them convincing. Least of all the concern about the fact that access to the car park is very close to the railway bridge, and nearly opposite access to the new houses which are to be built between Caversham Avenue and the railway line. It’s true that drivers coming from Green Lanes are blind to what lies beyond the bridge until they reach the top of the rise, and equally true that some drive so fast that it would be difficult to stop should anyone be leaving Dumayne House. But the key issue is this: “Would it be morally acceptable to deprive people of the possibility of somewhere to live in a city with an acute housing shortage because drivers can’t be trusted to drive intelligently and unselfishly?”. Surely not. It’s for the council to either satisfy itself that the situation isn’t any more dangerous than now or, if the danger is significant, to find ways of calming the traffic.

In fact the chairman of the residents’ association had already raised the issue of safety at the bridge with the council’s traffic engineers, and had been assured that they didn’t foresee a difficulty. Which it’s fair to say left members incredulous.

Nevertheless it’s worth evaluating the traffic engineers’ assurance, and my thinking is:

• a heightened possibility of accidents is not at all obvious from traffic travelling towards Green Lanes because parked vehicles narrow the carriageway reducing speed on the approach, and because the sightline to the exit from Dumayne House is long;

• traffic from the opposite direction has no sightline at all until the moment drivers breast the bridge so the danger is highest from that side, and

• because the bridge comes first the danger of accident is higher there than at Dumayne House.

The traffic engineers seem to have a point, especially as, to my knowledge, accidents at the bridge haven’t been common.

Finally there are the implications of the increasing tendency to park on the rise from Green Lanes towards the bridge to assess. Personally it makes me very cautious indeed as I approach the bridge, so I’m clear that if traffic calming turns out to be necessary this is the place to put it.

Unfortunately, the issue is now closed, since although Planning consulted Traffic and Transportation, no objections were raised by LBE and the scheme goes ahead.

I suspect that the decision to reduce the status of Fox Lane from "Classified" to "Unclassified" eased this through since it limits the Council's grounds for objecting to changes which might have an added accident risk. The definitions are:-

Classified unnumbered – smaller roads intended to connect together unclassified roads with A and B roads, and often linking a housing estate or a village to the rest of the network. Similar to ‘minor roads’ on an Ordnance Survey map and sometimes known unofficially as C roads.

Unclassified – local roads intended for local traffic. The vast majority (60%) of roads in the UK fall within this category.

I note that the changes in definitions don't somehow reduce traffic flow!

Interestingly, the responsibility for these designations appears to lie with Local Authorities, which in London might be the GLA i.e. TfL

Colin Younger

Although the original application to convert Dumayne House in to flats went ahead under relativley new planning rules which ease such changes of use, a subsequent application to add three more flats to the roof was refused by Enfield planners. The application was opposed by the Lakes Estate Conservation Area Study Group, the Enfield Conservation Advisory Group and the Fox Lane and District Residents' Association.

The developer appealed to the Planning Inspectorate, but on 18 September the appeal was dismissed on the grounds of the adverse impact on the adjacent Conservation Area.

Some costs (to be decided) were however awarded against Enfield's handling of part of the disputed application.