Select Committee on Transport Written Evidence


APPENDIX 3

Memorandum submitted by the London Borough of Enfield

  1.  The Olympics will provide an opportunity for all parts of London. Enfield believes it can play a role in providing facilities and infrastructure for a successful Olympic Games. As a borough rich in sporting history, Enfield is committed to bringing the Olympics to London and ensuring that the games are successful.

  2.  Enfield is a diverse Outer London Borough including both areas of wealth alongside areas of deprivation. The Borough lies within the London Stansted Cambridge Corridor and therefore within a growth area identified within the Government's Sustainable Communities Plan. Enfield is also within the Upper Lea Valley Opportunity Area identified within the London Plan.

  3.  Enfield can play more than a supportive role and feels there is much that Enfield can offer to help London host a successful Olympic Games. This belief is based on three core assets. They are:

    —  An abundance of green open space;

    —  Excellent transport links, although one in particular needs major improvement;

    —  A range of accommodation.

  4.  It is generally accepted that transport will be one of the key factors in ensuring a successful games. Although London does have an extensive transport infrastructure which is used by millions of travellers each day, during an Olympics there will be special and varied demands that will require not only innovation but also major investment. This is highlighted in the Transport Assessment submitted with the Planning Application for the Olympic Site. Transport is likely to be one of the major regeneration benefits and important legacies from a successful Olympics. The transport system during the Olympics will need to be flexible enough to cater for the movements of spectators, competitors and officials, all of whom will have different needs.

  5.  As one of the largest sporting spectator events in the world, staging the Olympic, Paralympics and associated events in East London will have a significant and widespread impact on transport infrastructure throughout the south east of England.

  6.  The London Plan indicates that there could be a considerable growth in jobs and housing in North London though there is no provision for the major transport infrastructure improvements required to support such growth. The Mayor of London should be looking for transport projects that are deliverable within the timeframes of the London Plan and the Olympics. Consideration should be given to fast-tracking proposals for transport improvements to ensure they are ready for the period of the Games and do not conflict with the event itself.

  7.  It is generally accepted that orbital travel, particularly in Outer London is difficult and there will undoubtedly be a demand to make orbital journeys during the Olympics, particularly between Wembley Stadium and Stratford. The North Circular Road is the key link between east and west London, avoiding the congestion on road, rail and bus in Central London, and forms part of the Olympic Route Network. The improvement of those sections of the A406 that have not been improved are in our view essential to ensure ease of transport between the major centres and the Olympics and should be recognised for the regenerative and environmental legacy benefits that it would bring. The improved A406 would also assist in improving orbital public transport links in North London.

  8.  The London Boroughs of Barnet, Enfield, and Haringey, as part of the North London Strategic Alliance, and on a cross party basis, have considered the future of the North Circular Road within North London and have agreed to work together to seek the improvements required for this important part of the infrastructure of North London.

  9.  The Transport for London (TfL) Board has given its approval to a £25.4 million scheme which it believes will reduce levels of congestion on the North Circular Road bottleneck between Green Lanes and Bounds Green. TfL claims its latest proposal will increase road capacity by 20% and though promised to the Boroughs, insufficient information has been supplied by TfL clarifying how the revised scheme will reduce congestion. TfL believes this scheme is an improvement on its proposals in 2002, which were rejected during consultation for not doing enough to address congestion and rat-running.

  10.  We are concerned about the effectivness of Transport for London's (TfL's) proposals for the North Circular Road in North London. These are the Bounds Green to Green Lanes Improvement, Golders Green Road Junction Improvement and the A406/A1/A598 Regents Park Road Junction Improvement. We are concerned about the inadequacy of the proposals brought forward by TfL. We wish to see a major improvement to this section of the A406 to address the serious issues of congestion, safety and environmental impacts in a wide area surrounding this part of the A406 and to maintain a consistent six lane dual carriageway, with grade separated junctions, between Wembley and Stratford.

  11.  The Mayor's publicly stated position is that he would have proceeded with the major improvements, had the Government provided sufficient money. He maintains that the allocation to London, although an increase, fell well short of his bid and as such he does not have sufficient money to proceed with major improvement schemes, possibly those inherited from the Highways Agency for the schemes in Barnet, and a lesser scheme for the Bounds Green to Green Lanes section, currently estimated at £150-200 million. We are disappointed that having assisted the Mayor and Transport for London in lobbying for additional funding for London as part of the Spending Review only £25 million of the £10 billion allocated has been given to the A406, no real increase from the funding allocated in TfL's original Business Plan.

  12.  The concern with the decision to abandon progression of major improvement schemes is that it was done without sufficient consultation or full consideration of the implications of that decision. The Mayor's Transport Strategy identifies the need to reduce traffic congestion and improve journey time reliability for car users, which will particularly benefit outer London where car use dominates. In addition, it accepts that there are a few locations where new road capacity could be appropriate to overcome a critical obstruction or bottleneck in order to assist wider economic, environmental and social objectives.

  13.  Conditions on the North Circular worsen day by day, and we believe that in its present state, or with the modest improvements proposed by Transport for London, it will impede access to the London 2012 Olympics and jeopardise the ambitious plans for new jobs and homes in this area of North London. TfL's Business Plan explains that the schemes will have a "Neutral effect (journey times) on general traffic". To spend £25 million on improvements and not reduce congestion is unacceptable on any analysis, but particularly for a host city of the Olympic Games.

  14.  The proposed schemes do not provide any grade separation, nor will it improve the quality of life of people living alongside the road. Moreover, the Mayor's decision to include a bus lane on the Bounds Green section without full carriageway widening will negate the perceived benefits of his modest proposal. Congestion, rat-running and pollution levels will continue to be appallingly high. For instance there is a Primary School on Bowes Road, which the Mayor visited and saw for himself the disgraceful environmental state in which young children are being educated, unable to have proper breaks because of the high levels of pollution.

  15.  The London Plan paradoxically proposes 45,000 new homes and 25,000 new jobs for North London by 2016 with a focus on the Upper Lee Valley, Tottenham Hale and Cricklewood/Brent Cross. The success of this growth and that of the redevelopment of Wembley Stadium, irrespective of the Olympics, will also be dependent on improved transport links in North London. The London Plan indicates very little transport infrastructure improvements in North London, in particular to assist with orbital movement. The North Circular Road is the key link between east and west London, which enables travellers to avoid the congestion on road, rail and bus in Central London. The improvement of the A406 will be key to the success of the London Plan and should be recognised for the regeneration and environmental benefits that it will bring, and past planning mistakes should not be repeated. The improved A406 would also assist in improving orbital public transport links in North London.

  16.  We are concerned that the proposals from TfL for the A406 are those that do not have the majority support of the local community or their elected representatives and were widely rejected when consulted upon in 2002.

  17.  The Boroughs would like to work jointly with Transport for London to implement improvements, which are appropriate to the strategic role of the North Circular Road. The Boroughs are willing to work jointly with Transport for London to identify the funding required for any programme of works.

  18.  The Boroughs welcome the £4 million allocated by TfL to tackle problems created by traffic avoiding the North Circular Road and using streets in adjacent residential areas. We are working together to develop complementary traffic calming and traffic management measures for these residential areas.

  19.  We recognise the constraints on public expenditure and are not necessarily looking for the original scheme at Bounds Green, excellent as it was in environmental terms, to be implemented at this stage. We are currently developing an "alternative" scheme costing considerably less than the current estimate for the inherited scheme, £315 million, but more than the £25 million scheme on the table. What we do insist on as an absolute minimum is grade separation as this has been shown to be the only way that sufficient capacity can be created.

  20.  For the two sites in Barnet, the original schemes have passed through Public Inquiries, one sitting for more than 100 days, and all the necessary planning and order making processes are complete. We understand all the required properties are in TfL's ownership and are either demolished or beyond economic repair. With minor updating, the two schemes could progress to detailed design and construction almost immediately. Thus two very quick wins could be achieved in tackling the chronic traffic congestion which blights North London.

  21.  Many of the current rail projects being proposed are not deliverable in time for the Olympics but the West Anglia Route Modernisation Enhancements (WARME) could be delivered by 2012, if the funding is available. Unfortunately, it no longer figures in either the SRA's Strategic Plan or the Mayor's Rail priorities. The WARME project has been developed over a number of years and has shown it could bring significant benefits for rail passengers in the Lee Valley, including reinstating connections to Stratford and improving connections to Stansted Airport. The role of the Lea Valley Line is underplayed and could make a far greater contribution to improving access for the Olympic Zone.

  22.  The parking capacity of current stations on the Lea Valley Line and stations adjacent to the M25, such as Cockfosters Underground Station, needs to be carefully assessed to ensure they can accommodate any predicted increase in the demand for car parking during the event. Many of these stations could be attractive alternatives to the proposed park and ride sites in Hertfordshire, for spectators.

  23.  In terms of legacy, consideration must be given to the sitting of facilities to ensure that they do encourage access to the local community. Facilities should be placed as close as possible to local communities, with safe walking and cycling routes and excellent links to public transport. Facilities should be part of a healthy transport route, offering changing and storage facilities for walkers, runners and cyclists. Facilities should aim to be seen as healthy living centres rather than elite sports centres, incorporating health centres, education, training and information points

26 August 2005





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 16 March 2006