Remember Me     Forgot Login?   Sign up  

Traffic, Roads & Parking

Share this article

Last week the Metropolitan Police were on Bourne Hill and The Bourne to carry out an operation designed to dissuade drivers from failing to pay due care and attention to people riding bicycles.  Clare Rogers was with them and reports what happened.

met cycle team on bourne hillGood news for anyone who cycles in Southgate: the Met Cycle Safety Team on The Bourne N14. In the centre is team leader Rob; PCSO Antony is second from right

This week the Metropolitan Police Cycle Safety Team came to Enfield to carry out a ‘close pass operation’ on The Bourne, Southgate. Their mission: to pull over and educate people who drive dangerously around people on bikes.

The team came thanks to lobbying from Better Streets / Enfield Cycling Campaign member Hal Haines and Winchmore Hill Community Support Officer (CPSO) Antony Rivas. As Hal was unable to go on the day, I got to go with PCSO Rivas to see the action.

It was hugely significant day for me personally. For three years I rode my tandem to school with my daughter along The Bourne. On many of those days we were close-passed, often at speed, by inconsiderate drivers. So it was very gratifying to stand on that street and watch the Met team pull over driver after driver and politely educate them. I was there for an hour and in that time they caught six drivers – even the police were surprised at the number.

This is how it works. A plain clothes officer cycles back and forth along the road.

bourne hill cyclist

If a driver passes him too closely – i.e. leaving less than 1.5 metres between car and bike – the cyclist radios a description of the car to the team waiting further up the road. The driver is then pulled over, either by an officer at the side of the road or (if the driver is heading the other way) by a police motorcyclist.

bourne hill motorcycle cop

One of the police officers speaks to the driver, carrying out various checks (e.g. sight test, insurance), before talking them through what the Highway Code says about passing someone safely on a bike.

Below is some of the information the officers show the driver – how to overtake, how to follow and how to turn.

How to overtake, how to follow and how to turn.

highway code rule 163Highway Code Rule 163: Leave as much room as you would a car

highway code rule 126“Only a fool breaks the two-second rule” – stay back!

why is the bike in the middle of my laneAt times you have to ride centrally – e.g. at pinch points in the road, to prevent dangerous overtaking. Some ill-informed drivers abuse cyclists for doing this

do not overtake just before turning leftDrivers have to take special care when turning – a frequent cause of collision with bikes

space for cyclistsAnd finally … the legal underpinning for the close pass operation

I posted the details of this operation on Better Streets for Enfield’s Facebook page and was overwhelmed by the reaction – more than 100 likes in less than 24 hours and a dozen shares. This the most attention one of our posts has received, suggesting that many of us are relieved to see dangerous driving tackled on our roads.

Is this a good use of police time?

Yes. The first close pass operations in the country were carried out by the pioneering West Midlands Police, and resulted in a 20 per cent reduction in cyclists being killed or seriously injured in the first year. Many police forces around the country are now following suite. This action is much needed in Enfield. We have something of a reputation for our Wild West driving. Very few drivers seem to know that they need to give cyclists a 1.5 metre berth, or hang back patiently until it is safe to pass, or that people need to cycle in the middle of the lane in certain conditions. This ignorance is not just dangerous to those who currently cycle  – it’s also a  reason why so few of us ride bikes as transport in Enfield in the first place (only 0.7% of our journeys in 2014). The attitude of a significant minority of drivers makes riding a bike on the road feel far too intimidating.

Changing the street design

the bourne google streetviewThis image from Google Streetview shows how much room there is to add safe space for family cycling

As well as carrying out these operations, the Cycle Safety Team recommends changes to road layouts where necessary for safety. Team leader Rob told me that The Bourne needs need separate space for people cycling – perhaps on a shared-use footway – rather than having to mix with traffic on this busy road.

We wholeheartedly agree. Southgate is outside the scope of the Cycle Enfield funding, but separate funds should be found to make The Bourne and Bourne Hill a safe route for anyone not in a car. Bikes could be accommodated either on widened shared use footways away from the road, or segregated cycle tracks – that would mean even families would feel safe to cycle instead of drive the school run. The carriageway should be narrowed to encourage drivers to slow down, limited to 20mph, and given formal pedestrians crossings rather than traffic islands. Traffic islands create dangerous pinch points – most close passes are here, as drivers try to squeeze through them with or ahead of anyone on a bike.

How you can help

Do you drive in Enfield? If so, thank you for reading this post – now you know how to overtake anyone on a bike safely and courteously! Your good driving will hopefully set an example for others.

Do you cycle in Enfield? Are you aware of trouble spots for close passing? If so, please do two things:

  1. Tweet @metcyclecops with the name of the road – if they get several messages about the same road they will come and do a close pass op when they can. The three cycle safety teams are massively stretched, covering all of London’s 32 boroughs, but if we don’t ask they won’t know where to come.
  2. Take part in London Cycling Campaign’s #StayWiderOfTheRider campaign – you can drop a pin in a map to show where you were close-passed, helping to build a picture of problem locations. You can also get a free #StayWider sticker for your car or bike. Watch their great video below.

Log in to comment

PGC Webmaster's Avatar
PGC Webmaster posted a reply #4115 17 Oct 2018 23:29


Every police force in the UK is to be offered a free ‘close pass’ virtual reality film and headset after a successful Kickstarter campaign by Cycling UK. The cycling charity has met its fund raising target of £15,000 in eight days and now plans to start distributing the film, which will allow drivers to see how it feels to be ‘close passed’ by a vehicle, by the end of November.

The video above is a 2D version of the film.

Read the full story on the Transport Extra website
David Hughes's Avatar
David Hughes posted a reply #4125 22 Oct 2018 23:55
Speaking as a fairly recent returner to cycling - 40 years or so ago I brought my rural habit of cycling to London, but had to give up because my bikes were stolen so frequently that no one would insure me - I think that close passing is now the most frightening of all the bad driving habits. Much worse even than the risk of being squashed by lorries turning left at traffic lights. So I'm very grateful for the organisers of the police intervention on Bourne Hill described above, and to Clare for being there and writing it up. Thank you.

However I'd like to change the setting. The Bourne is quite a wide road, and clearly the best road locally for the police to carry out/demonstrate their intention of reducing close-passing and pointing out the dangers. On the other hand drivers often have space to overtake on such a road, but on narrower roads like the A1004 (High Street), and even on the A105 (Green Lanes), the temptation of a driver to pass dangerously close is high. I've had all my nasty experiences on such roads.

The drivers at fault may not have known the minimum clearance because cycling has faded since my 40 years-ago-experience, and worse, current-day drivers might not have cycled personally and therefore may not be aware that cyclists wobble (because they are riding slowly, or hit a stone or hole, or simply because they are new to cycling). Education is needed all the way round, and drivers must learn to share. They are not Kings/Queens of the road; the law gives cyclists the right to be there. And many drivers seem to have developed a sense of entitlement: my need to use the road is paramount. It's an attitude which has to be challenged in discourse or on paper, but not on the roads.

Yesterday Myrna (my wife) and I were approaching the pedestrian crossing on Cannon Hill (A1004) as a line of traffic also approached. The first car stopped for us and the second car ran into the back of it; "You stopped so suddenly." the driver the second car said to driver of the first car. Perhaps, but I think that the driver of second car expected to cause she and me to pause rather than the traffic. If so it was that sense of entitlement at work again.

Share this article

There are many reasons to regret the fact that so many children these days are driven to school instead of walking or making their own way by public transport.  Among the problems are lack of sufficient exercise, congestion and road danger caused by build-ups of cars near school gates, and exposure to toxic fumes, which recent research has found is actually more dangerous inside a car than outside.

The charity Walking Streets has issued a "toolkit" to help parents who would like their children to walk to school but are concerned about some of the practical aspects.

Download the toolkit from this link.

family walk to school kit cover

At Living Streets, we believe that every child has the right to walk. That’s why we’re campaigning to improve our streets and working with schools so more children can walk to school safely and happily. And it’s why we’re helping parents, grandparents, and carers reclaim their own walk to school. Our Family Walk to School Kit gives step-by-step tips for stress-free walking and safer streets. It’s got all sorts of ideas for all kinds of families.

Whether you’re exploring how walking to school can work for your family, ready to make walking part of your morning routine, noticing traffic dangers on the walk to and from school, or keen to campaign for better walking routes where you live, we can help you move forward.

Log in to comment

Share this article

clare rogers interview screenshot 2In the second of the Citizen's Eye series of video interview, Francis Sealey of Enfield Voices and GlobalNet21 talks to Clare Rogers about the genesis of the Better Streets for Enfield campaign.

Log in to comment

Share this article

  • London’s first Walking Action Plan targets an extra million walking trips a day
  • Streets will be designed, built and managed to support people walking with new infrastructure, better signposting and maps, and more pedestrian crossings
  • Walking helps connect communities, boost local businesses, improve health and wellbeing and reduce road danger, air pollution and noise

London’s first ever walking and cycling commissioner, Will Norman, has unveiled the capital’s first Walking Action Plan. It sets out how London will become a city where walking, for those that can, is the most obvious, enjoyable and attractive means of travel for all short trips.

The plan, which is supported by Public Health England (PHE), has an ambitious vision to make London the most walkable city in the world, with a million extra walking trips taking place each day by 2024*.

The Mayor of London wants to increase the proportion of people walking, cycling and taking public transport to 80 per cent of journeys by 2041, from 63 per cent now. And the Mayor is investing a record £2.2bn in streets across London to make them better for walking and cycling, and improve air quality.

Walking is an easy and affordable way for Londoners to integrate more physical activity into their daily lives. However, research shows that too many people are put off because of concerns about road danger or worries about their levels of physical fitness.

The benefits of walking

Greater London Authority research has shown that if every Londoner walked or cycled for 20 minutes a day, it would save the NHS £1.7bn in treatment costs over the next 25 years.

This includes 85,000 fewer people being treated for hip fractures, 19,200 fewer people suffering from dementia, and an estimated 18,800 fewer Londoners suffering from depression.

It is the ambition of the Mayor that Londoners walk or cycle for at least 20 minutes every day – currently only 34 per cent of Londoners manage to do this on any given day.

benefits of walking 1

The Walking Action Plan aims to help Londoners overcome these barriers by:

  • Designing, building and managing streets for people walking, by delivering better public spaces, more walking routes and more numerous and wider pedestrian crossings
  • Ensuring that walking is prioritised in every new infrastructure scheme, through London’s first ever pedestrian design guidance and a range of other tools and analysis to support boroughs to deliver local schemes
  • Enabling thousands more children to walk to school by doubling the number of Gold accredited STARS schools which champion healthy routes to school, and by supporting timed road closures, car free days and 20mph speed limits around schools
  • Rolling out innovative new traffic signal technology that makes it safer and easier for pedestrians to cross roads, while minimising congestion
  • Creating new ‘Active Travel Hubs’ at London Underground stations, making it easier to walk as part of an onward journey

Log in to comment

Share this article

London Play and Transport for London are using the opportunity provided by London Car Free Day on 22nd September to spread the good news about the Play Street movement.  As Enfield, and Palmers Green in particular, already has several established play streets, the probability is that we live in one of the "selected boroughs" referred to in this press release from www.londonplay.org.uk.

play street in devonshire road

A play street in Devonshire Road (photo: Phil Rogers

Residents in selected London boroughs are being offered support and freebies to transform their streets into temporary play zones on London Car Free Day on 22 September.

Supported by Transport for London, London Play is offering residents in selected boroughs the chance to run Play Street taster sessions and ‘reimagine’ their streets without cars for a few hours. The first 20 streets to apply will get a free volleyball net and giant beach balls - or a small fleet of spacehoppers(!) to get the action started.

Play streets, where roads are regularly shut to traffic for a few hours each week or month, are already popular across the capital.  But they do more than simply offer children a safe space to play outside with their friends, explains London Play’s Fiona Sutherland. “Children playing give adult neighbours the perfect excuse to step outside their front door and talk to each other; and people who live on play streets say that they feel friendlier and safer as a result. We can almost promise that people will love it – but Car Free Day is an ideal opportunity to trial the concept before deciding whether to make it a regular thing.”

TfL and London Play are hoping that up to 50 streets across the capital will apply between now and mid-August, in time for the September event. Unlike a street party, play streets require very little organisation – there is no need to plan activities, food or music. As long as there are adults to stand at the road closure points to deal with motorists, the newly liberated space in the middle of the road is all the enticement children need to get out their bikes and scooters and chalks and claim it as their own. “And where they lead, their parents, carers and adult neighbours will follow,” says Fiona.

The first 20 streets that apply to run a Play Street taster session on Car Free Day will receive free giant beach balls and a volleyball net to help transform their street into a play zone. They and all other streets will also get pavement chalks, bean bags and other items. Not only that, but they will also be entered into a prize draw to win a free day on-street Go Kart building workshop, worth £600 – to build the ultimate in low emissions vehicles. 

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan explained his support for the concept: “We will not successfully achieve my vision for London through action by TfL alone — we need to empower communities to shape their local streets. I am a great supporter of Play Streets and have asked TfL to explore with London Play the possibility of organising these as one big celebration of street play under the banner of Car Free Day 2018.”

Anyone  interested in going Car Free on their street in September should get in touch with London Play as soon as possible and ideally before August 6th via  or phone 020 3384 8513.

Log in to comment

PGC Webmaster's Avatar
PGC Webmaster posted a reply #3998 25 Jul 2018 20:26


London Play


@londonplay
Jul 20
Swap your car for a spacehopper this London #CarFreeDay! Run a #playstreet taster session and get free stuff to make it happen. But you need to act soon bit.ly/2uR3wCe
Karl Brown's Avatar
Karl Brown posted a reply #4066 23 Sep 2018 11:41
A mere storm and dreadful weather forecast wasn’t going to stop Old Park Road enjoying International Car Free Day. First the novel umbrella approach to catch the rain was put in place,


then the verticals could be suitable dressed.


There was then time for food before moving on to boomwackers, shakers, djembes, soundshapes and dun duns.
Prepping to the Great OPR (car-free)Wacky Race was extensive and the day ended (with more rain) and a win for “Guinevere” as we pretty much saw Autumn take over from summer.


With the UK’s largest concentration of street parties and the location of London’s pilot site for Play Quarters, many in PG will clearly say that if you don’t yet have a street party, or Play Street, then get a few neighbours together, check the council web site, and make 2019 the year you commit.

Share this article

Enfield Counncil is planning to consult residents in part of Bowes ward about a proposed controlled parking zone.

News about the planned consultation, expected at the end of June, was posted on the Bowes and  Bounds Connected website by Ellie Douglas.  The roads included in the consultation are:

  • Spencer Avenue
  • Belsize Avenue
  • Kelvin Avenue
  • Melbourne Avenue
  • Sidney Avenue
  • Palmerston Road (the part that runs the length of the North Circular up to the border with Haringey)
  • Russell Road
  • Marlborough Road (the part that is in Enfield, as the Haringey part already has a CPZ)
  • Whittington Road (as per Marlborough Road).

More details on Bowes and Bounds Connected

Log in to comment

Share this article

The My Liveable London campaign has moved into a new phase - asking everyone who supports its aims to email all candidates standing in their ward urging them to respond positively to the campaign's challenge to local politicians.

my liveable london logo lls lcc logos combined

Help make a city where everyone can walk and cycle safely and happily.

Imagine a truly Liveable London. A city where:

  • It’s enjoyable to walk and cycle your local trips
  • You can breathe fresh air on streets free from congestion
  • Children can safely roam, and walk and cycle to school
  • There are relaxing places to stop, rest and talk to your neighbours

Your local council can have a big impact on your streets. They can help create places where our families, friends and communities are put first, and where motor traffic, pollution and congestion don’t dominate our streets. Where everyone can live well, breathe easy, walk and cycle safely and happily.

With the council elections at the start of May, now is the moment to tell your next council leader you want them to help bring your borough to life.

Tell your candidates that you want a more Liveable London.

email your candidates today 1

my liveable london logo

In the first phase of the campaign local branches of London Living Streets and London Cycling Campaign wrote to leaders of political parties in their borough asking them to pledge to take action.

In our borough Better Streets for Enfield wrote to leaders of the Labour, Conservative, Green and Liberal Democrat parties asking them to sign up to a list of Enfield-specific pledges.  The Greens were first to respond:

Enfield Green Party are committed to making Enfield’s streets cleaner, safer and healthier for residents. We believe streets are for people, not traffic. The space has to be shared but on residential streets residents should come first. We are delighted to support the Better Streets for Enfield campaign and to pledge our support for the creation of people-friendly streets throughout Enfield.

Enfield Green Party has also responded separately to the London-wide My Liveable London campaign:

Dear Fran,

I am writing to you to confirm that Enfield Green Party and its 24 candidates in 20 of the wards in our council elections pledge to campaign for our new council to submit a high-quality Liveable Neighbourhood bid.

Indeed the creation of Low-traffic Neighbourhoods is the lead item in our Ward and Borough Newsletters (See attached copies)

Yours faithfully

Alex McRae & Kate McGeevor

Co-Chairs
Enfield Green Party

Labour also wrote back to Better Streets for Enfield:

On behalf of the Labour Party I am delighted to sign up to these commitments. All being well, on May 4th, the next Labour Administration:

1) Will seek to progress our first Liveable Neighbourhood bid to go forward later this year;

2) Will remain committed to the continuing rollout of our Quieter Neighbourhood Programme, which seeks to make our streets quieter and safer for residents; and,

3) Will continue to progress our Cycle Enfield Programme, which is about transforming our high streets and town centres, promoting more active travel, and creating safe and secure cycle lanes. We have demonstrated our commitment with practice not just words with the completion of the A105 cycle lanes and are now progressing works on the A1010 South.

No response was received from the Conservatives or Lib Dems, but on the basis of their campaigning literature Better Streets have concluded that neither party supports any of the pledges, since they both express opposition to the current Cycle Enfield schemes - indeed, the Lib Dems have gone so far as to describe them as "disastrous".

This article was edited on 25th April to correct a factual error.  The term used by the Lib Dems in their press release was "disastrous", not "catastrophic".

Log in to comment

PGC Webmaster's Avatar
PGC Webmaster posted a reply #3801 25 Apr 2018 20:42
This is what the Lib Dems say about Cycle Enfield in the transport section of their manifesto ( enfield.nationb.../transport ):

We believe that Labour's bungled Cycle Enfield scheme has unnecessarily damaged local businesses, ignored the concerns of local people, and failed to encourage local residents to take up cycling.  The purpose was to tackle the dangerous levels of air pollution but increased congestion leads to poorer air quality. Here's our vision for Enfield:
  • Cycle lanes need to be designed in cooperation with local communities, not imposed upon them by the council. Cycle Enfield was implemented in a way that frustrated many local residents and has set back the cause of cycling in Enfield. As the project is now being rolled out on the Hertford Road, it seems Labour have learned nothing from this failure.
  • There are serious safety concerns along the route. Lib Dems would make fixing these an urgent council priority. We want to see a safety audit of the entire route straight away.
  • To reduce the burden on businesses and local residents when projects such as Cycle Enfield are being built, we need to provide extra parking in areas where construction is underway. Disabled parking must be a focus.
  • The existing scheme does little to encourage and assist cyclists. Cycle lanes should not be built in roads where they could worsen congestion, as this exacerbates conflict and air pollution. We will plan and develop scenic alternatives, running through green spaces and on riverside routes, are far better for both cyclists and motorists.
  • We will build a cycling network connecting schools on safe, clean and quieter streets, incorporating green spaces where possible. This will help tackle childhood obesity and encourage our next generation to adopt a sustainable and healthy cycling culture.
  • We are committed to working with TfL to ensure that the money they are investing into our vision will not be tied up with wasteful remedial work to fix problems caused by poor council planning and implementation.
  • Cycle Enfield has eaten up much discretionary transport spending, which is inexcusable given the poor results. We request a full audit of the project to find out where our money is being spent.
  • Labour are now launching an expensive Quieter Neighbourhoods programme to help tackle the rat-runs that Cycle Enfield has created. Labour wasting more of your money!
David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #3803 26 Apr 2018 10:03
DIsgusting. Was great to see them get absolutely roasted on Twitter over this.

As THE anti-Brexit party, that's my vote gone, hopeless igorant populist tosh, looks like it's my first time voting Green....

Share this article

In the run up to the council elections on 3rd May two organisations that campaign for a fresh approach to London's streets have come together to set out a challenge for party leaders in each of London's 32 boroughs.

London Living Streets, who seek better streets for pedestrians, are combining forces with the London Cycle Campaign, who, unsurprisingly, would like pleasanter and safer conditions for people riding bikes in London. They are calling their joint campaign My Liveable London and they want boroughs to create more "low traffic neighbourhoods".

What is a Liveable London?

my liveable london logo

A Liveable London is a city where it’s enjoyable and safe to walk and cycle for all your local trips, where there are relaxing places outside where you can watch the world go by or chat with your neighbours, and where children can safely roam and walk or cycle to school.

It’s a London where our families, friends and communities are put first on our streets, and where motor traffic, pollution and congestion don’t dominate our public spaces. A city where everyone can live well, breathe easy, walk and cycle safely and happily.

What is the challenge to party leaders?

In each London borough local branches of LLS and LCC, or affiliated organisations like Better Streets for Enfield, will be contacting the leaders of each political party, inviting them on walk-arounds to see the worst, and the best, examples of their borough's streets, and challenging them to bid for money from Transport for London's Liveable Neighbourhoods programme - the successor to the previous Mayor of London's "Mini-Hollands". Councils can bid for up to £10 million to transform residential areas, town centres, transport interchanges and connecting routes.  (The first round of schemes will be starting soon, including one to transform the area around the clock tower in Crouch End.)

To back up the local campaigners, the next phase will be an email campaign when thousands of Londoners will have an opportunity to ask those bidding to run their boroughs to take advantage of the opportunity to make their constituents' lives pleasanter and healthier.

Why is a Liveable London important?

filtered residential street 1

  • Cleaner and safer air: Road traffic is a major source of the pollution that is causing ill health and premature death
  • Healthier residents - streets safe for walking and cycling will enable people go build physical activity into their everyday lives, improving their health and saving the NHS money
  • Getting children moving: Making it easier and safer for children to roam, and for them to walk or cycle to school is vital for their health. It also cuts motor traffic, reducing the number of ‘school run’ trips
  • Strengthening communities: By creating safe, quiet spaces that aren’t intimidating and where people want to stop and chat to neighbours, we can start to break down the barriers that leave so many trapped behind their front doors.
  • Keeping the city moving. Walking, cycling and public transport are the most efficient modes of travel. And we need to ensure that the popularity of apps such as Google maps and Waze don’t turn our quiet, residential streets into choked-up rat runs.

What are Better Streets for Enfield asking for?

Better Streets have produced a version of the campaign "asks" which takes account of the situation in Enfield, where we are mid-way through a somewhat delayed implementation of Cycle Enfield - one of the original "Mini-Holland" schemes - and the associated Quieter Neighbourhoods schemes are only just beginning to be put in place.

better streets for enfield logo

Better Streets for Enfield calls on all local parties to commit to supporting the health and happiness of all residents by creating people-friendly streets in Enfield – where traffic is reduced, where people have priority over traffic, and where walking, cycling and public transport are safe, attractive options for everyone. We ask you to commit to:

  1. Submitting a high-quality and safe, “Liveable Neighbourhood” bid, based in an area with high potential for walking and cycling, that provides big wins for both and that takes major steps to prioritise people walking and cycling over private cars in the area during the course of your term
  2. Creating low-traffic neighbourhoods, to reduce traffic speed and volume where people live
  3. Completing the work of Cycle Enfield, to allow all-age, all-ability cycling throughout the borough.

Links

My Liveable London (London Living Streets)

Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (Better Streets for Enfield)

Low Traffic Neighbourhoods - the Detail (London Living Streets)

Liveable Neighbourhoods (Transport for London)

Log in to comment

Karl Brown's Avatar
Karl Brown posted a reply #3789 11 Apr 2018 14:45
After all the campaigning over the last few years to refuse mini Holland funding for Quieter Neighbourhoods across Enfield, are we to presume that the local Conservative party and various associates will also decline seeking a Liveable London?

"The Goverment are making cycling and walking more accessible to everyone because of the substantial health and environmental benefits - it will also be a boost for businesses." The Rt Hon Chris Grayling MP, Secretary of State for Transport, 2017

Share this article

The following announcement has been posted on the Better Streets for Enfield Facebook page and is presumably being sent to residents in the part of Bowes ward that is referred to, ie streets to the west of Green Lanes as far as the railway line.  Note that at the Bowes ward forum held in January there were suggestions that consultation should be extended to streets to the west of the railway line, as these stood to be affected by a CPZ scheme east of the railway

Dear Residents

We thank of you for getting in touch with us in respect of introducing Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs). Some roads have now reached the numbers of petition signatures required to trigger the Council's consultation process. We appreciate this is time consuming and may seem bureaucratic but the Council has to justify its decision to all residents.

Our officer Jonathan Goodison now advises the following: I am now able to confirm to residents that the Council intends to proceed with an area-wide CPZ consultation in Bowes amongst its parking scheme work of the coming 2018/19 financial year.

Following Haringey's introduction of a CPZ along our borders, and the number of CPZ requests coming forward in the area from Green Lanes to the railway line going west, we have requested officers to look at an area-wide CPZ for that area. This was also strongly supported at a recent area forum. We agree with residents that the parking overspill from Haringey is making it difficult to park and generally move about in the area. Hopefully, consultation on the CPZ will start early in 2018/19.

Cllr Yasemin Brett
Cllr Alan Sitkin
Cllr Achilleas Georgiou

Bowes Ward

Log in to comment

Share this article

Two stretches of Green Lanes in Palmers Green and Winchmore Hill will be closed overnight for carriageway resurfacing later this month.

Tuesday 27th to Wednesday 28th March 8pm to 5am
Station Road to Elm Park Road, N21

Wednesday 28th to Thursday 29th March 8pm to 5am
Thursday 29th to Friday 30th March 8pm to 5am
Hedge Lane to Barrowell Green

These dates are subject to change due to unforeseen circumstances.

Log in to comment

Share this article

clare rogers riding urbo bike in palmers greenClare Rogers tries out an Urbo bike in Palmers GreenMonday saw the arrival in Palmers Green and various other locations in Enfield borough of the first Urbo "dockless" rental bikes.

Urbo bikes have been available in Waltham Forest since November.  Because Waltham Forest is a neighbouring borough to Enfield, users will now be able to make trips between the two boroughs. Initially, Urbo will provide 100 bikes in Enfield.

Palmers Green resident Clare Rogers, a leading member of Better Streets for Enfield, claims to have been the first person in the borough to hire one of the bikes.  She comments:

"It was easy to use and fun (I'd unlocked the bike in under a minute, unlike the first time I used a Boris bike, which took me about 30!).

"30 minutes is 50p although your first five rides are free. In my 30 mintues I went from Palmers Green to Winchmore Hill and back with time to spare to lock up again (you do this manually).

"The gears took a bit of getting used to - they are hub gears so they don't change while you are pedalling. It was a bit slower/harder than my usual bike, but I don't think they're designed for long distance, and need to be robust. The saddle height was easy to adjust and I loved the little basket at the front with elastics to secure your bag (says 'no passengers' - killjoys!).

"My only quibble was that because the tyres are solid, the ride was a bit rattly. A bit more suspension built in would be welcome."

So how exactly does the system work?  In December Clare wrote an article about Urbo bikes for the Better Streets for Enfield website, which is reproduced below in a slightly abridged form.

Dockless bikes come to Enfield

What, you might ask, are “dockless” bikes? Unlike central London’s famous Boris Bikes – which need to be taken from and returned to special docks on certain streets – dockless bikes can be found, and left, in any public place that isn’t causing an obstruction. In theory, you could get off a train in Enfield, find a hire bike right outside the station, unlock it with an app on your phone, ride it home and leave it parked on your street. You’d only pay for the minutes you used to ride it.

The potential benefits are huge. Better Streets for Enfield is delighted to see hire bikes reach us out here in the suburbs. We hope that more people will feel able to leave their cars at home and use this cheap, convenient and healthy mode of transport to get around – whether to shops half a mile away, or to the station as part of a longer journey. Of course there are potential downsides, such as bikes being left in appropriate places and cluttering up pavements, and this is an issue we would urge the providers and the council to monitor closely.

Last July Obike launched across London – the only problem was that nobody told any of the councils and the bikes were just dumped across the boroughs, including hundreds in Enfield. Some councils took a harder line than others but in the end all the bikes in Enfield were removed. This was a Singapore-based company and by all accounts, while the system for booking the bikes was OK, the bikes were horrible to ride.

Urbo bikes

Jump forward to December 2017 and Enfield have struck a deal with Urbo, an Irish company. Tom McGovern, co-founder of Urbo, said: “The bikes have proved a huge success in Waltham Forest. With this launch in neighbouring Enfield, it will allow us to provide riders in London with even more flexibility. The council has been pioneering the ‘Cycle Enfield’ initiative, which really strikes a chord with Urbo’s values for healthier citizens and better cycling infrastructure, and we are thrilled to support the scheme.”

How does it work and what do the bikes look like?

urbo bike

You'll need a smart phone to download the Urbo App, and then load some credit onto the app to ride the bike. The app will tell you where the nearest bike is. Each bike has a QR code that you will need to scan in. Once you are set up and sent a code you can punch that in the rear lock and the wheel is released. You can then cycle to your destination, find a “destination point” on the App, put the bike on its stand, click the rear lock and walk away. If you can’t find a destination point, then park the bike at any bike stand or place where the bike isn’t an obstacle (or on private property) . In theory they are “geo-fenced” so can only be ridden and locked within Enfield (or Waltham Forest) – the exact boundaries are yet to be decided.

Urbo will have eight wardens on the ground at any one time, to make sure bikes are in good working order and not parked inappropriately. They will also redistribute the bikes around the borough by van as needed.

Links

Urbo announces expansion in London with launch in Enfield

Dockless bikes are coming to Enfield

Log in to comment

Share this article

crashed car

If you were wondering why buses were diverted away from Green Lanes on Tuesday early evening, this photo shows part of the aftermath of a collision.  The location is on the eastern side of Green Lanes next to Deadmans Bridge and there was an ambulance nearby.

Log in to comment

David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #3588 31 Jan 2018 10:46
Holy moly, wonder how that happened. That's a serious collision! There was a police car pulled up, blocking Green Lanes southbound of the Library junction, when I went past on EMH cycling home 7pm but didn't see any crash.

Some shockingly irresponsible driving around.

Share this article

hostile streets cover cropped hostile streets report coverHostile Streets - Walking and Cycling at Outer London Junctions was published by the Greater London Authority's Transport Committee at the end of November. Shortly afterwards I went along to a meeting of Islington Living Streets to see a presentation about the report given by Caroline Russell.

Caroline Russell is one of two Green Party Assembly Members (AMs) and is a member of the Transport Committee. She was the Rapporteur for this particular study, which was carried out at her initiative. Apart from her the committee comprises three Labour AMs, three Conservative AMs and one AM each from the Liberal Democrats and UKIP.

Caroline began by commending Living Streets (of which she is a member) for teaching her some effective campaigning skills and that you can make progress by persistently chipping away at obstacles. She cited the example of a 20-year campaign to install a zebra crossing in Highbury Barn that had recently succeeded in its objectives.

Introducing herself, Caroline explained that her particular interest in the safety of vulnerable road users had been sparked some years ago by an incident where a 4-year-old in a push chair had been crushed under the wheels of a lorry in Blackstock Road, Finsbury Park. She and other local people with children of the same age had been particularly shocked by this death and it was a factor in her becoming a councillor in Islington, where she currently comprises the entire Opposition - the other 47 councillors are all Labour Party members (convincing evidence that we need proportional representation, since I think we can assume that that a lot fewer than 97.8 per cent of voters in Islington are Labour supporters, despite the presence of Jeremy Corbyn in the borough).

imageTaking in the scenery at Gallows Corner

A flyover over a flyover?

The report concerns problems for pedestrians and cyclists arising from the design of road junctions in outer London, particularly some of the major junctions. It was prompted by a proposal by the Chair of the Transport Committee that a flyover should be built over an existing flyover at Gallows Corner in Romford, which Caroline found rather alarming. So Gallows Corner was one of four major intersections that she and her research team visited, the others being the roundabout under the Bow Flyover in East London (as well as the flyover, there's an underpass here), a junction between the M4 (on a viaduct) and A4 (at ground level) in Brentford (once the site of the Brentford Nylons HQ, for those with long memories), and Fiveways in Croydon.

imageThis bike lane in Brentford sends cyclists in the direction of traffic accelerating away from the junction - straight towards them!

(If the video won't play, click on twitter.com/twitter/statuses/903574195526934528.)

 imageSchool's not far away - it's just the other side of the road

What the visits confirmed was how unpleasant, difficult, inconvenient and often dangerous it is for pedestrians and cyclists to navigate these intersections, even though they are all close to people's homes and, in the case of Brentford, on the home to school route for children and parents - many of whom choose to drive, even though the walking distance is only short.

On the subject of driving instead of walking a short distance, Caroline said that at the air quality meeting held at Bowes School in January, people had told her that the North Circular created such a severe severance that they got in their cars to go to a shop which should have been two or three minutes walk away

Changing the TfL culture

I'm not going to repeat everything that you can read in the report (which isn't long and is very readable), but I would like to touch on a major theme - the need to change the "culture" of traffic engineers at TfL. Caroline thinks that the undue emphasis on speeding up traffic flow is not just a reflection of many decades of prioritising cars (and of Boris Johnson's policy of "smoothing" traffic by reducing crossing times for pedestrians), but continues to be incentivised by the key performance indicators (eg "journey time reliability") that are used to judge their work and calculate their bonuses. To overcome this the report recommends devising new KPIs such as "walking and cycling mode shares", "car dependency" and "bus journey time reliability"

Indeed, pedestrians have been neglected to such an extent that little or no past data was collected by which to judge improvements. However, where there has been data about walking and cycling and this has prompted some improvements, this has occurred mainly in central London. At the major suburban junctions that the study looks at, what data there has been has suggested that there was little pedestrian or cyclist traffic and hence no great need for changes. In actual fact, the lack of pedestrians and cyclists arises because conditions for them are so bad that they very sensibly avoid these junctions.

Furthermore, some managers at TfL have expressed reservations about increasing walking and cycling because with more people using these modes there might be an increase in deaths and serious injuries, which would have a negative effect on their performance indicators.

Q&As

caroline russell AMCaroline Russell: Q&A session provided insightsAs so often, the questions and answers session after the presentation was the most interesting, since I already knew what was in the report.  Caroline was able to provide some insights into the discussions within the committee and what will (or won't) happen next.

What exactly is the status of the report? Caroline explained that the report consists of recommendations that the Mayor can accept or not. He has three months to respond and let the committee know which recommensations he intends to go ahead with. However, "purdah" ahead of the council elections begins at the end of March, so public consultations about changes arising from the report can't be expected until after Msy.

When it comes to overcoming resistance within TfL, Caroline sees the Healthy Streets Indicators as being of great potential assistance. TfL will have to test all their future proposals against the criteria which they set out.

TfL, of course, only control a very small proportion of London's roads. What will they be able to do if borough councils are lukewarm about or downright opposed to the report's recommendations? Caroline thought that TfL would need to ensure that the Local Implementation Plan (LIP) money that they give to boroughs for road improvements is conditional on meeting Healthy Streets criteria. But what if they're so anti these measures that they decide to do without LIP money? Well, ...

Lower speed limits?  "Unacceptable" for some AMs

Was the committee unanimous in its recommendations? No, the Conservative AMs refused to agree to the report and wrote a short minority report explaining their objections, in particular to any suggestion of reviewing speed limits. They tried hard, but unsuccessfully, to persuade Labour AMs to join them in opposing speed limit reviews.

The Conservatives were also opposed to researching a "Turning the Corner" scheme at traffic lights, on the grounds that it would cause delays. Caroline explained that the purpose of Turning the Corner was actually to reduce delays for all road users, since it would do away with the need for a separate pedestrian phase. ("Turning the Corner" is the name being given to the system which is very common abroad, including in the USA, whereby during the green phase all traffic, including pedestrians, has the right of way to go straight on, and traffic which is turning has to give way to anyone who is going straight on, including pedestrians and cyclists. My view is that this is a sensible arrangement, but it may be too late to implement it safely in the UK, now that so many drivers wrongly assume that they have priority over pedestrians and cyclists crossing side roads.)

The UKIP AM objected to the same two recommendations, on speed limits and Turning the Corner, and also to Recommendation 6 - "TfL should look beyond collision data and consider the potential to increase walking and cycling when selecting junctions to improve" - arguing that cycle lanes should not be created at junctions with few cyclists.

Caroline said that initially the UKIP AM had been going to object to recommendation 4 calling amongst other things for a check on side roads without dropped kerbs, since they made the distinction between pavement and carriageway less clear. But once it was explained that they made it possible for people in wheelchairs and pushing baby buggies to cross roads, this point was dropped.

Smartphone apps: "No side street is safe"

A bit off-topic, but the question of new technologies came up.  Caroline thought that smartphone apps could be invaluable if used to call public transport.  But she said that "Uber has caused a lot of damage" because it is undercutting the price of public transport and hence undermining its viability, while treating its drivers disgracefully.

Another big problem is Waze, which sends drivers along rat runs even in areas that they are unfamiliar with.  Her verdict: "No side street is safe".

Summing up

My conclusions? That Caroline Russell is a very valuable assembly member. That the report's recommendations make sense. That the probability is that they will be implemented to some extent. That local campaigners for safer roads should be persistent and will make progress in small steps.

Because Caroline would be giving this presentation and because it related in particular to areas further out from the centre, Islington Living Streets kindly invited Living Streets members from across London, giving me a chance to see the impressive interior of Islington Town Hall. There is no Living Streets group in Enfield (but there is Better Streets for Enfield, whose aims are not that different). However, London Living Streets hold regular meetings close to Farringdon Station and welcome members from across the city.

 

Log in to comment

David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #3467 03 Jan 2018 09:21
Like Caroline Russell a lot. Feel for her in Islington which has one of the most shocking records on cycle infrastructure provision in London - LBI controls something like 97% of road space in the Borough but in 10 years has only installed a couple of hundred feet of cycle lanes and 2 cycle hangars which are priced more expensive to use than a car parking permit!

Sad she jumped on the anti-Uber bandwagon though. Cheap populism, like free hospital parking.

Share this article

Transcript of evidence on cycling infrastructure given by Andrew Gilligan, former Cyclilng Commission to the previous Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, to a meeting of the GLA Transport Committee on 6 December 2017.

Keith Prince AM (Chairman): It now gives me great pleasure to welcome Andrew [Gilligan], a man I worked with a few years ago when he was the Cycling Czar. He is not any more. His title is ‘Cycling Czar emeritus’ or something, in the Latin. We are now going to do a section on all sorts of things to do with cycling. Thank you very much for coming along.

I am going to kick off with the first question and it goes like this. You have been critical of recent delays in getting cycling infrastructure built. What do you think has gone wrong?

Andrew Gilligan (Former Cycling Commissioner): It is weak political leadership. The key condition for cycling improvements to happen is strong political leadership. We have seen that in the Mini-Hollands in Waltham Forest and in Enfield, which are the only schemes to have seen anything really happening on the ground in the last 19 months. We have not seen that from City Hall. There does not seem to be any real willingness to make decisions that significantly alter the status quo on the roads.

Keith Prince AM (Chairman): Secondly, is borough capacity still a problem for delivering schemes and what are your views on plans for Cycle Superhighway (CS) 4 and CS9?

Andrew Gilligan (Former Cycling Commissioner): Broadly, borough capacity was always the most serious problem we faced. Not very many boroughs are both willing and capable. Some boroughs were willing but not capable. Some were capable but not willing. Only about five or six of the 33 [boroughs] were both. It is very noticeable that in the borough-led schemes, with the exception of the Mini-Holland boroughs, almost nothing has been achieved.

In the Quietways programme, for instance, Transport for London (TfL) said there were supposed to be seven routes complete by 2017. We have three weeks to go now and only one route is complete. Some routes have not even started. Most of the meaningful improvements proposed under the Quietways programme appear to have been dropped, things like the segregated lane on South Lambeth Road, a ramp being installed on a bridge that had steps in the Olympic Park, filtering in Hackney, filtering in Southwark and filtering in Lambeth. They have all been dropped. That is partly due to a lack of leadership in City Hall and it is also partly due to a lack of real political will in most boroughs.

The Quietways programme was always the one I was most worried about when I was Cycling Commissioner, but it is even more worrying now. It essentially seems to be more or less moribund. If you look at the TfL Quietway consultation website, there has not been a borough-led Quietway consultation on any scheme since February and there are no active consultations at the moment. It is difficult to know what is happening, but it does not look like very much.

Tom Copley AM: I was just going to say that you have publicly praised CS4, have you not?

Andrew Gilligan (Former Cycling Commissioner): I praised CS9. That is the only proposal of the seven or eight put forward since the election that has the potential to deliver anything serious for cycling. It is a good scheme. What we have seen since the election is a number of proposals. We have seen proposals at Camberwell Green and we have seen proposals at Fiveways in Croydon that basically make no change whatever, as far as I can see, to the status quo, maybe slightly prettifying the pavement. We have seen proposals at Lambeth Bridge and Waterloo IMAX that have benefits and disbenefits for cyclists. At Lambeth Bridge the benefits slightly outweigh the disbenefits. At Waterloo, it is the other way around. We are seeing a quite significant narrowing of the road at Waterloo. We are seeing cyclists brought into pretty dangerous movements there under the new proposals. We have seen two superhighway proposals and, as I say, CS9 is the only one really that meets the standards of the previous administration and it is the only one that has not been watered down from the proposals we were working on.

Tom Copley AM: I am going to come to one of the previous administration’s ones in a minute. You are in favour of CS9. What is your position on the backlash against the proposed route through Chiswick? What is your view on that?

Andrew Gilligan (Former Cycling Commissioner): My view is that a backlash is inevitable whenever a meaningful scheme is proposed. Cycling schemes nearly always have substantial majority support. We found in our schemes 60% support for the least popular, which was CS11, and 85% or 90% support for the most popular, which were the East-West and North-South. We did find that cycling schemes always create a lot of noise, but we also found that noise was not the same as numbers when the results came back of consultations and, in a few cases, independent opinion polls. We found that the opponents were in a small minority. I hope that will be the case here as well. It is interesting, the level of backlash that there has been against CS9. It is a sign that it is a good scheme because it does make a change to the status quo . The reason why --

Tom Copley AM: It is interesting that you think a good scheme has had a lot of backlash.

Andrew Gilligan (Former Cycling Commissioner): That is not the definition of a good scheme but it is the nearly inevitable consequence of a good scheme.

Tom Copley AM: You seem to be saying that the definition of a good scheme is that it creates a lot of --

Andrew Gilligan (Former Cycling Commissioner): No, I just said that it is not the definition of a good scheme. It is the inevitable consequence of a good scheme. Any change to the status quo, as I said, is going to produce opposition but our experience with the East-West and North-South Superhighways and all the others was that the opposition tended to be a pretty small minority. How this administration has dealt with the likelihood of backlash is mostly by not proposing anything meaningful. That pretty much avoids it.

Tom Copley AM: You acknowledge therefore that making progress on schemes like this is difficult?

Andrew Gilligan (Former Cycling Commissioner): Yes, absolutely, but it is possible with political will, which is what is lacking at the moment here.

Tom Copley AM: Also it demonstrates how important it is to get things right, which brings me to CS1. Why did you sign off on CS1 when it clearly was not up to standard, particularly around Seven Sisters? You have this whole area where the Cycle Superhighway goes onto a very busy pavement.

Andrew Gilligan (Former Cycling Commissioner): It was a compromise, inevitably. It was assessed as the quickest and most convenient route parallel to the A10. Cycling along the parallel streets beside the A10 was faster than any scheme we could have put in on the A10 because there were fewer traffic lights. The proposals included substantial changes, some of which have not been implemented, unfortunately, under the new administration. It is one of the schemes that has not been finished under the new administration.

Tom Copley AM: It is one where the proposals were not right in the first place. Do you think this demonstrates the importance of taking the time to listen to people and get these schemes right, rather than having to make changes later on?

Andrew Gilligan (Former Cycling Commissioner): On the whole, the complaint about our schemes was not of the nature of the one you have made. The complaint about our schemes was that they were too good, in a sense, that they gave too much to cyclists and took too much road space away from motorists. Certainly there was no opposition to CS1 from the road lobby. There was substantial opposition, if you remember, to the East-West, North-South, CS11 and CS2, and those are very good schemes.

The lesson for me is that you need to consult and you need to build as much consensus as possible but you need to recognise too that for some people, for some opponents, you are never going to be able to persuade them. You cannot achieve unanimity on schemes. In the end, you have to decide. Our most sophisticated opponents were not frontal. Their main weapon was the filibuster. They would give us the impression that they might be able to be won over if we had a longer consultation or we did this, that and the other, but we learned in the end that no consultation could ever be long enough. We had very substantial periods of consultation but for a lot of people, no consultation could ever be long enough. You have to consult, you have to build as much consensus as possible, but in the end, you have to decide.

Tom Copley AM: As you have acknowledged, this is a difficult process.

Andrew Gilligan (Former Cycling Commissioner): Yes, but I just do not feel much progress is being made on it. We left the new administration with nine TfL-led schemes designed up and publicly consulted on, all of them approved with large majorities and public consultation. As I say, the smallest was 60%. Of those nine, all came to a halt for the first nine months. Then at the beginning of this year, one restarted. Then another one was restarted during the year and then a third one - the North-South superhighway extension, I think - has restarted about three weeks ago. The other six have either been cancelled or remain in limbo. We have not seen any progress on some major schemes. We have not yet, for instance, had a decision on CS11. It is a relatively modest scheme that involves the closure of some gates to a park but 21 months after the consultation closed the Mayor still has not made a decision on it. That is a symptom of the general lack of energy that there is in the programme now.

Log in to comment

David Hughes's Avatar
David Hughes posted a reply #3448 21 Dec 2017 23:57
What struck me about this is that had I understood that three Council's were successful(or perhaps tried and failed) in obtaining Mini-Holland funds: Enfield, Walthamstow and Richmond, roughly £30,000 each. I can see why I might be ignorant of events, but I was surprised nothing came up in this discussion. Presumably Richmond backed out or was kicked out, but where has the money gone. Richmond was always a surprise.

Recently I had been feeling quietly confident that times were about to change across London; the new Mayor's policy is nothing if not ambitious (if not primarily cycling based). But effectively Andrew Gilligan is saying that nothing much is happening or, presumably likely to happen.
PGC Webmaster's Avatar
PGC Webmaster posted a reply #3449 22 Dec 2017 00:35

David Hughes wrote: What struck me about this is that had I understood that three Council's were successful(or perhaps tried and failed) in obtaining Mini-Holland funds: Enfield, Walthamstow and Richmond, roughly £30,000 each. I can see why I might be ignorant of events, but I was surprised nothing came up in this discussion. Presumably Richmond backed out or was kicked out, but where has the money gone. Richmond was always a surprise.

The third borough was Kingston, not Richmond. Andrew Gilligan comments:

The Mini-Hollands programme, as I said, has been very successful. It has delivered serious cycle infrastructure in two of the three boroughs. Kingston is not doing quite as well but it has still delivered cycle infrastructure on the Portsmouth Road, for instance.

It looks as if the Kingston scheme is continuing - see www.yourlocalgu..._completed

Anti-cycle lane opponents in Kingston excelled themselves in hyperbole:

Terrorist attacks, undiscovered unexploded bombs and a potential to poison the London water supply have all been listed as reasons against a proposed cycle path between New Malden and Raynes Park.

To discover what the fuss was about visit www.surreycomet..._professor
Colin Younger's Avatar
Colin Younger posted a reply #3451 22 Dec 2017 12:25
£30 million each surely, not £30 thousand?
David Hughes's Avatar
David Hughes posted a reply #3452 22 Dec 2017 23:12
Sorry that I referred to the wrong borough - I'm afraid I didn't read the notes of the meeting closely enough. I'm prone to that.

I still think Richmond was party to the issue in some way - perhaps submitting inadequate bid or campaigning against the whole thing. I had a friend who lived in that general area of London, though not in Richmond, so I take a little interest in what's going on there.

I certainly wasn't in form that evening: £30 thousand indeed. I normally write £30 million like this £30M in informal text.

My apologies on both counts.
David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #3455 27 Dec 2017 11:35
Have read chunks of this on Twitter. All very interesting, like Gilligan a lot. Will Norman is his replacement I guess but hasn't done much so far (though seems a decent enough bloke with his heart in the right place).

Soundbite Khan as ever is wonderful hot air but light on action. Closing gates to Regent's Park was one of his 'quick wins' and has never happened. Khan is still too much of a patsy to trade unions and lobbyists like the LTDA.

I suspect come the next Mayorals, little will have changed to improve cycling that can be put down to the Mayor, not predecessors or the wonderful working of local active travel campaign groups.

Share this article

its 20 for a reason"If we could reduce speed limits to 20mph in these built-up areas then anybody who's got children, anybody who works with children, anybody who sees what we see, would have to be supporting us."

Words spoken by a surgeon at Birmingham Children's Hospital as part of a video telling a true story.  Along with a policeman, an ambulance driver, a parent and the young victim of a road traffic collision, she makes the unanswerable case for 20mph limits on urban roads.

If vehicles in towns and cities didn't exceed 20mph, collisions involving pedestrians or cyclists would cause so much less injury and suffering, often life-long.  The police point out that serious road injuries have financial costs too, amounting to hundreds of thousands of pounds per patient, in the case of a fatal injury, two and a half million.

So why do we allow traffic to travel along our roads at dangerous speeds when these facts have been clear for so long?  Why do we not spend enough money on traffic police and speed cameras?  With enough traffic police and cameras, fewer drivers would risk speeding or drink driving and the costs arising from collisions would reduce - probably saving far more money than the spending on extra police.  It's absolutely clear that current policies make no sense financially or, more importantly, in terms of people's safety and happiness.  The thinking behind them is completely warped.

Log in to comment

David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #3441 18 Dec 2017 10:42
Think there's been some unhelpful 'evidence' shouted about in the papers today/yesterday where there has been an increase in accidents/fatalities somewhere that 20mph has been introduced.
Bill Linton's Avatar
Bill Linton posted a reply #3445 20 Dec 2017 17:46
This 'report' appears to be a load of baloney, with the newspaper write-ups making things worse. It seems to have been produced in an unscientific manner which invalidates it's conclusions - which in amy case were that not much had changed either way. See www.20splenty.o...nes-report for 20's Plenty's rebuttal.

Share this article

hostile streets cover croppedhostile streets coverA new report by the London Assembly's Transport Committee presents the conclusions of a study into the problems faced by people on foot and on bikes when they are faced with travelling along or crossing main roads in outer London, particularly at major intersections.

Hostile Streets - Walking and cycling at outer London Junctions concludes that even very recent junction improvements, such as removal of the gyratory system at Archway, have seriously neglected the interests of everyone except drivers.

In the introduction to the report, Hostile Streets - Walking and cycling at outer London Junctions, Caroline Russell, an Assembly Member representing the Green Party, points out that "Active travel improves people’s health, cuts air pollution, and when the streets are set up for it, is the quickest and easiest way to get around. However, many streets in outer London have been designed for cars, and not for people. Londoners who want to walk to school, cycle to work, or pop out to the shops face hostile streets that don’t meet their needs. Main roads and busy junctions disrupt journeys, and make walking and cycling less enjoyable, less convenient and less safe."

The report finds that junctions are particularly problematical. Three quarters of the 9,718 people who were injured walking or cycling on London’s roads in 2016, were involved in collisions at junctions. And 71 per cent of the 1,287 crashes where people were killed or seriously injured, happened at junctions. Yet even very expensive junction improvements carried out recently or still in progress, such as removal of the Archway gyratory system, have been done without proper consideration for pedestrians and cyclists.

The report also accuses Transport for London of neglecting outer London when carrying out work to enable active travel. TfL have also been giving low priority to the most dangerous junctions because they often have relatively low casualty figures - but this is because so few people have sufficient nerve to tackle them on foot and instead either drive or go somewhere else.

The Transport Committee is made up of members of all five parties in the London Assembly. While most of the main recommendations were agreed by all members, the Conservative and UKIP members refused to sign up to a recommendation for a review of speed limits on main roads managed by TfL (rather than the boroughs) and to make it clear that people breaking 20mph limits can be caught and prosecuted.

The same members objected to the ideas promoted by the Turning the Corner campaign, even though the recommendation was to first trial the concept off-road and despite the fact that the principles it uses have long been practised in many countries, including the USA, and result in less delay for all road users, including car drivers.

Log in to comment