Remember Me     Forgot Login?   Sign up  


Share this article

This week’s Enfield Independent carried a traffic regulation notice from TfL stating that cycle improvements works (unspecified) on the A406 would result in eastbound traffic being diverted along Powys Lane, Aldermans Hill and Green Lanes and westbound traffic via Green Lanes, Aldermans Hill, Powys Lane and Wilmer Way at unspecified times from 5 Jan to 31 Dec 2019!

Even if infrequently invoked these diversions would have potentially devastating effects on already busy roads and add potentially large loads to local pollution levels.

I therefore asked Councillor Daniel Andersen whether Enfield knew about this. His answer is:

I understand that officers first became aware of this earlier in the week and immediately raised concerns with TfL. 

It now appears that there are also some issues regarding the proposed cycle route south of the NCR and the cost of the scheme. The bottom line is that the works will now not be taking place until next financial year, so we have time to properly engage with TfL about the traffic management arrangements.

I have made clear my dissatisfaction with TfL’s lack of engagement.

Log in to comment

David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #4303 17 Dec 2018 09:36
OMFG that's absolutely disgraceful! Especially as there's no info on even what works are being carried out!

From memory, the Q10 consultation was going to amend the crossing at the top of Palmerston Road, better connecting with P Crescent, but that's all I can think of.
Colin Younger's Avatar
Colin Younger posted a reply #4304 17 Dec 2018 11:22
This appears to be the consultation by TfL. Interesting that the letter drop was entirely to the south of the A406 as I read it.

David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #4305 17 Dec 2018 12:54
Yes, that's the one, remember replying. Didn't get a letter drop so assume I just saw it on London cycling forums.

Wouldn't surprise me if TfL only letter dropped the residents they assumed would be affected by the scheme once completed, didn't think about their crazy implementation plans and give thought to consulting on those with those affected residents.

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

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

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

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
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

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.


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

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

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

 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.


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

Share this article

speeddown right2SpeedDown themepage

In the UK speeding is still a major problem. It causes needless crashes, untold suffering and stops people living safe and healthy lives.

Driving is unpredictable and if something unexpected happens on the road ahead – such as a child stepping out from between parked cars – it is a driver’s speed that will determine whether they can stop in time and, if they can’t stop, how hard they will hit.

Yet newer vehicles are more powerful than ever before and reach high speeds quickly. Driving fast is glamorised and often encouraged by programmes and adverts that worship the cult of the car. We all live busy lives and there is a temptation to speed up in the hope of saving time, where in fact we could be costing lives.

That is why we are encouraging everyone to Speed Down Save Lives for Road Safety Week 2017 (20-26 November).

We can all play our part in raising awareness about the dangers of driving too fast and this year's campaign will focus on:

  • speed causes deaths and serious injuries on our roads
  • rural roads are not race tracks
  • 20mph is the only safe speed in heavily built-up areas used by pedestrians and cyclists
  • going slow = stopping in time
  • speed is scary and noisy. It stops communities being enjoyable places for children and families to walk, talk and play
  • speed cameras work. They save lives.
  • Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA) is an important development that is likely to be fitted to all vehicles in the future

Register now to be part of Road Safety Week 2017 and get a free electronic action pack. Take part in the Week by promoting our Speed Down Save Lives theme, or focusing on any other road safety issue that is important to you.

A few facts on why our theme is important:

  • Breaking the speed limit or travelling too fast for conditions is recorded by police at crash scenes as a contributory factor in one in four (23%) fatal crashes in Great Britain [1].
  • Drivers with one speeding violation annually are twice as likely to crash as those with none [2].
  • A recent Brake survey found that four in 10 (40%) UK drivers admitted they sometimes drive at 30mph in 20mph zones [3].

Article source:

[1] Reported Road Casualties Great Britain 2015, Reported Road Casualties Great Britain: Annual Report 2016, Department for Transport, 2016, table RAS50008
[2] Crash involvement of motor vehicles in relationship to the number and severity of traffic offenses, SWOV, 2013
[3] Report on safe driving: speed, Brake, 2016

Log in to comment

Share this article

Transport for London (TfL) is consulting on a proposal to make changes to the pedestrian/cycle crossing of the North Circular Road between Palmerston Crescent (north of the NCR) and Palmerston Road (south of the NCR).  The intention is to make it easier and pleasanter for both pedestrians and cyclists to cross.

The existing shared crossing would be relocated slightly to the west and converted into separate pedestrian and cycle crossings. Motorised traffic would no longer be able to turn into Palmerston Road, making it exit only.

ncr palmerston road junction changes

The crossing will connect the TfL Quietway 10 (Farringdon to Palmers Green) to the southern end of the Cycle Enfield A105 cycle lanes scheme, which will run between Enfield Town and Palmers Green.

The deadline for responding to the consultation is 1 November 2017.

Log in to comment

Share this article

Increased police focus on enforcing safe passing of cycle riders by drivers of cars and trucks, originally associated with West Midlands Police, is gradually spreading to other forces, including the Met. It has now been taken up by police in Winchmore Hill ward, who will be doing more to educate drivers.

Earlier this month, at the N21 Fancy Fair, Clare Rogers and Hal Haines of Better Streets for Enfield spoke to PCSO Antony Rivas from the Winchmore Hill Safer Neighbourhoods Team.  A good choice, as Antony not only cycles on patrol, but does all the cycle training for the Enfield Metropolitan Police Service.

One subject they discussed was the Close Pass Initiative that originated with police in Birmingham. This involved the police pulling over drivers who passed plain clothes officers on bikes too closely – in other words, by less than 1.5 metres – and educating them. They produced a mat showing what the safe passing distance is, and how far from the kerb someone riding a bike should be (75cm). Both distances come as a surprise to many drivers.

overtaking a bicycle

PCSO Rivens and his colleagues will be doing their bit to enforce the "close pass" rules, and the latest bit of kit issued to the Met will come in very handy.  This is a body-worn camera, which records video and audio in 30 second loops. If an incident kicks off, you press the central button twice and the camera stores the last thirty seconds and keeps on recording.

PCSO Rivens has been using Twitter to explain how drivers and riders should position themselves on the road, as shown in the graphic below (produced by a Twitter user @lstwhl)

how to overtake cyclists lstwhl

 (Click on the graphic to enlarge)

In summary, on a road with a single lane in each direction, drivers should only overtake bicycles when they can move into the empty opposing lane.  There is no requirement for bicycles to keep to the left and cyclists are perfectly entitled to ride abreast - in fact, doing so makes it easier for cars to overtake.


The next open meeting will be on 28th October 2017, when our speaker will be Stefan Dickers, Special Collections and Archives Manager at the Bishopsgate Institute. He will present a history of street photography in the East End of London, from the 1850s to the present day.
The East End of London has played a central role in the development of photography where the social conditions of the area and its people have fascinated generations of photographers in their work. Using the extensive collections on London History held at Bishopsgate Institute, this talk will explore the development of street photography from the 1850s, when fledgling photographers attempted to catch the flourishing docks and shipyards of the Isle of Dogs, to the work of their contemporary counterparts.
Stefan Dickers is Special Collections and Archives Manager at the Bishopsgate Institute and looks after its numerous collections on London History. He started at the Institute in 2005 and has previously worked in the archives of the London School of Economics and Senate House Library.

Log in to comment

David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #3101 20 Jul 2017 09:21
Tempted to get front & rear cycle cams to test whether Winchmore Hill police are true to their word re prosecuting drivers like West Mids did (excellent case since the lorry driver exhibited every ounce of arrogance and ignorance to be expected).

My only question is, as a resident I fall within Winchmore Hill police catchment, but my cycle route takes me into central london - if I get close passed down near Finsbury Park do the Winchmore Hill guys still take an interest??
PGC Webmaster's Avatar
PGC Webmaster posted a reply #3125 24 Jul 2017 23:02
Unbeknown to me, when I wrote the report above about police in Winchmore Hill taking steps to improve driver behaviour around ryclists, the Met had already issued a press release, under embargo until last Friday, announcing that the Space for Cycling initiative was being introduced throughout London. The statement began with a warning: "We can't be everywhere, but we could be anywhere".

Cycle Safety Team officers from the Met's Roads and Transport Policing Command will go to any location, at any time, on any borough, based on intelligence and complaints, to ensure drivers properly obey the rules of the road.

The officers will now be working be in plain clothes, wearing video cameras and riding unmarked bicycles donated by BMW, to identify and deal with the offences that most deter people from cycling:

Unsafe following (tailgating)
Unsafe overtaking (close passes)
Unsafe turning (left or right turns across the cyclists path)

If officers encounter a driver committing any of these offences, they will identify them to a nearby, marked police motorcycle rider who will stop and engage with them.

In line with any police roadside stop, the driver will be required to provide evidence of insurance, a driving licence, pass a roadside eyesight test and have their vehicle checked for roadworthiness.

The driver will be reminded (through a short presentation) of the Highway Code rules regarding the offences and the standard of driving that they should reasonably be expected to attain (in particular, rules 126, 163 and 179,180 & 182).

Rulse 163 of the Highway Code is completely unambiguous about how to overtake a bicycle, including the image beRule 163 in the Highway Codelow, which is captioned "Rule 163: Give vulnerable road users at least as much space as you would a car".

The complete MPS press release is online at news.met.police...ety-252101 .

For some clarification about rules of the road in relation to cyclists, see ukcyclelaws.blo...lists.html .

Be aware also that police officers don't necessarily have to be at the scene of the crime to detect it. In the West Midlands police have been successfully prosecuting close pass offenders using evidence recorded on cyclists' head-cams and drivers' dashcams - see
David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #3126 25 Jul 2017 11:59

Might leave us with no taxi or bus drivers though!!
David Eden's Avatar
David Eden posted a reply #3130 26 Jul 2017 17:09
Harringay MPS currently running a twitter survey for worst affected streets. Hopefully Enfield will be as pro-active.

Share this article

This week there have been two instances in Palmers Green of cars mounting the pavement and causing damage.  Fortunately, it seems that in neither case were there any injuries to people walking along the pavement - but if there had been, they would probably have been killed or seriously injured.

The first incident happened in Fox Lane on Sunday evening. After hitting and wrecking a parked car, the car that was out of control ended up damaging railings adjacent to the railway bridge.  Given the high speeds that are common on Fox Lane, despite its 30mph limit, it is inevitable that crashes like this will occur from time to time - unless strong measures are taken to enforce speed limits.

The second happened this morning (Wednesday) at Palmers Green Triangle at a location where pavements are often crowded and bus queues form.  A car crashed backwards through the bus shelter outside the Wishing Well in Aldermans Hill and also damaged the front wall of the pub.


Like Fox Lane, Aldermans Hill is plagued with with irresponsible speeding drivers and there have been multiple "accidents" involving cars mounting pavements.

The monthly police crime statistics always include "motor vehicle crime", but this refers to thefts from or of vehicles.  The far more serious crime of speeding and other dangerous driving doesn't even merit inclusion in the police priorities list - I think it's time it did.

Photo sourced from MPS Enfield Twitter feed

Amended at 22:00 hours on 17 May: Change of photograph, revised description of Triangle crash.

Log in to comment

Bill Linton's Avatar
Bill Linton posted a reply #3022 18 May 2017 11:02
There is a countrywide campaign for "20's planty where people live", i.e. everywhere except major arteries. Green Lanes might just qualify for exception, but Fox Lane and Aldermans Hill certainly wouldn't. I live on Fox lane and often see cars speeding down it - or indeed up it. It's bendy and there are parked cars on both sides most of the way and frequent side roads, so going much more than 20 is dangerous.

About 10 years ago there was money available from TfL to make Fox lane 20mph, plus (I think) other measures, but the local councillors nixed it! I know there are commentators on PGC who can fill in the details on this.

The Green Party campaigned for a 20mph limit on Hoppers Rd and the surrounding streets and was partially successful - we got it on Hoppers Rd only, leaving Woodberry Ave in particular a racetrack. The Labour council are to an extent sympathetic to the blanket 20 idea (at least, Chris Bond was when he was enviro-supremo; I don't know Daniel Anderson's views), but aim to get there bit by bit. That's going to take too long.
Karl Brown's Avatar
Karl Brown posted a reply #3024 18 May 2017 12:40
Picking up Bill’s point, yes there are local people who could fill in on the loss of (very substantial) external investment to help make our local roads more appropriate to a residential estate. Terry Neville wouldn’t come out of such explanation looking too good, having undertaken a destructive u-turn on a par with the car through the bus shelter, something he quite recently described in the local press as “his credentials”. Nor would shadow cabinet colleagues, who u-turned precisely the other way, saying, “we were wrong a decade ago”.
So the swerving all over the road and often back again that particular exercise revealed, since repeated with the yes then no support for Mini Holland, just leaves such people wondering if it’ll take the same decade before hands are again put up and the necessary realisation of London (and so many other UK and world cities) moving, via investment, to a useable cycle infrastructure will be acknowledged.
Chrystalla Georgiou's Avatar
Chrystalla Georgiou posted a reply #3026 24 May 2017 00:53
This incident is horrifying. What is needed are Bollards on the kerbs along the main roads and road bumps in order to increase the public's safety.

Share this article

The Department for Transport (DfT) has today announced a competition seeking proposals that would encourage more people to make journeys by bicycle and/or on foot.

The text below is an abridged version of the announcement extracted from the website.  To read the complete announcement visit

innovation in cycling and walking

This competition seeks proposals for innovations that encourage more people to make journeys by bicycle and/or on foot.

The government’s vision is for cycling and walking to become the natural choice for shorter journeys. The draft cycling and walking investment strategy sets out the Department for Transport’s (DfT) ambitions for increasing the number of journeys and journey stages made on foot or by bicycle.

To meet these aims, DfT intends to focus on:

  • better safety: safety and safety perceptions have been cited as the biggest barriers for people wanting to take up cycling and walking
  • better mobility: to make cycling and walking normal, easy and enjoyable, we need better links and networks to key destinations
  • better streets: well-designed and accessible streets can encourage people to walk or cycle more as part of their daily routine

This is an open competition run as a Small Research Business Initiative (SBRI). DfT is looking to fund a portfolio of projects that propose innovative means of tackling the barriers to walking and cycling, leading to more journey stages being made by bicycle or on foot.

Key areas of interest include (but are not limited to):


  • making it easier for people to cycle to work
  • improving the image of cycling so that more of people feel it is an activity they can incorporate into their daily routines
  • improving road safety and helping people, particularly teenagers and women, feel safer. This follows that once children leave school there is a significant drop in the number who cycle, and women make less than half the number of trips by bicycle than men
  • making it easier to undertake journeys that include both cycling and travelling by rail


  • increasing walking among target groups, including those aged between 30 and 49, and over 60
  • improving actual and perceived road safety for pedestrians through safer crossings, increased personal safety and design of objects and equipment installed on streets (street furniture)
  • using open source data to encourage walking as part of a longer trip involving public transport

The benefits of increasing rates of cycling and walking are substantial. For people, it means cheaper travel and better health. For businesses, it means increased productivity (with, for example, regular cyclists taking one less sick day per year than non-cyclists) and increased footfall. And for society as a whole it means lower congestion, better air quality, and more vibrant, attractive places and communities.

Cycling’s contribution to the UK economy is around £3 billion. Existing measures to increase cycling and walking include:

  • cycle training
  • cycle hire schemes
  • cycle parking
  • cycle sharing
  • safety innovations
  • journey planning tools
  • initiatives that encourage people to cycle or walk to work/school
  • electric bikes
  • various Walking Cities programmes

Log in to comment

Share this article

As part of the Cycle Enfield works, resurfacing of Green Lanes at and near the junction with Station Road and Fords Grove will be carried out overnight for four nights starting on Monday 10th April.  Buses 329 and N29 will be diverted away from Winchmore Hill between 8pm and 5am.

The section that will not be covered is likely to be between Bush Hill Parade ("Church Street" bus stop) and the Green Lanes/Hedge Lane/Bourne Hill junction in Palmers Green.

Log in to comment