Forum topic: A chance to transform Green Lanes: Making the case for Cycle Enfield

Cycle Enfield is unsurprisingly controversial. Arguments rage about how it will affect drivers, shopkeepers, cyclists, pedestrians, bus passengers... But I think that it is a scheme that should be looked at in the round, not from the narrow perspective of any one group. I think that it has the potential to transform Green Lanes for the better. I think that it only takes a small leap of the imagination to see how this could be so.

Helen Osman (N21 Online) writes that "Green Lanes is about to undergo the biggest transformation since the coming of the tram in the 1900s". Well, it will certainly be a big change, but Helen has ignored a far, far bigger transformation that occurred in the second half of the 20th Century. The takeover of our streets by cars. Gradual at first, but since the 1960s gathering pace until the car has come to dominate our high streets and many of our side streets too.

People born in the 1960s and since probably regard it as an immutable law of nature that in between the shops on either side of Green Lanes is a region that you enter on foot at your peril - it's a bit like having to get from one river bank to the other, but the river is infested with crocodiles. Every now and then a light changes colour and the crocodiles (usually) keep back for a few seconds and we can quickly wade across.

OK, that's obviously an absurd comparison - or is it? The carriageway these days is the realm of drivers who seem in a ridiculous hurry to get somewhere else, driving big chunks of metal that can kill or maim, many impatient with the slightest delay. And also of lycra-clad cyclists similarly obsessed with getting somewhere else as fast as possible - not as dangerous as cars, but dangerous nonetheless.

Now, if we were talking about a motorway or trunk road, that would be one thing - clearly, the function of a motorway is to enable drivers to get somewhere quickly and no-one should be walking across the M1 on foot. But Green Lanes is a street where traffic movement is only one of many functions, where people shop, walk along to get to the station, eat and drink in cafes and pubs, or just stop to talk to their friends. And while they do these things they are subjected to cars travelling at speeds where hitting a pedestrian means serious injury or death, producing high levels of noise and emitting health-destroying fumes.

To my mind, driving (or cycling) as fast as you can through a high street shows a lack of civility because it's inconsiderate to other users of the street - people on the pavements, in the shops, in the flats on top of the shops. And the inconsiderate way that many (but by no means all) car drivers behave is infectious - it's taken up also by many cyclists and even by pedestrians - the ones who suddenly walk out in front of cars or bikes, for instance. The three modes of transport don't respect one another sufficiently and we end up with a dog-eat-dog scenario, in which, of course, the biggest dogs come out on top, generally those with little consideration for others. At sea there is a very civilised rule: "sail before steam", but on our streets the opposite rule prevails.

So would cycle lanes improve matters? And if so, only for cyclists? I think that, properly done, they could improve things for all users of the street.

To start with, it's a question of fairness. Cycling is the most benign method for travelling any distance that's too far to walk. It produces no emissions that harm health or cause climate change, it's virtually silent, it takes up very little road space, when in collision with pedestrians or other cyclists the consequences are relatively mild. Yet cycling on roads is dangerous for the person on the bike - but the danger comes not from the bikes, but from cars, lorries and buses. It's patently unfair that people using this most benign form of transport are exposed to mortal risk because of shortcomings in road design. Given the behaviour of some car drivers and the blind spots inherent in the design of lorries and buses, separate cycle lanes are essential if cyclists are to get a fair deal.

Secondly, cycle lanes, combined with 20mph speed limits, would narrow the road and make it more likely that cars would cease to weave in and out and alternate between accelerating and braking, as they do now. This would reduce emissions and noise and make their behaviour more predictable for pedestrians. I don't think it would prolong journey times much, if at all, as at the moment, even when there is enough width for two lanes, traffic in Green Lanes generally proceeds in single file, wasting a lot of road space which could be used to provide a safe space for bicycles.

Unfortunately, pedestrians would still be the most disadvantaged, as the circumstances in which they could cross the road safely would still be constrained. However, the Cycle Enfield proposals do (with some glaring exceptions, such as the Hedge Lane crossroads) provide more safe crossings for pedestrians, and their overall experience will be pleasanter if cars are driving more slowly and especially if people switch from cars to bicycles in any number.

Under the current proposals, bus passengers have some justified concerns about the removal of at least one bus stop and of some bus lanes. There is also concern about how bus stop bypasses would work. A bus stop bypass is a cycle lane running between the main pedestrian footway and a short length of footway designed for use by bus passengers when boarding or alighting. For this to work effectively and safely it is essential that cyclists give way to passengers crossing the bypass and also that pedestrians don't walk or wait in the cycle lane. In fact, for the civilising effect of the whole scheme to work, it is necessary for users of the different modes of transport to respect one another and one another's spaces. This mutual respect is needed in all permutations - eg cyclists must respect pedestrians, pedestrians respect cyclists, drivers respect cyclists, cyclists respect drivers and so on.

I believe that mutual respect, consideration and willingness to compromise are at the heart of the question of civilising Green Lanes. Unfortunately, the design of most streets in the UK tends to work against these values because it signals to car drivers that the road belongs to them and everyone else is secondary. Improved design, to include cycle lanes and raised pedestrian crossings, makes it clear that other modes of transport have rights too.

To really civilise the high streets in Palmers Green and Winchmore Hill we need these changes and we need a design that will reduce speeds - not just of cars, but of bicycles too. These are short stretches of road, insignificant in terms of total journey lengths. Who knows, if drivers and cyclists go slower, they might actually take pleasure in the places where they are, rather than always being on the way to somewhere else! And the shops in Winchmore Hill in particular might well benefit. It's a fine looking town centre, but the pavements are usually almost deserted. I can only surmise that this is because it's so difficult to cross Green Lanes in Winchmore Hill because of the speed that the cars come round those sharp bends.

An excellent piece Basil.