Forum topic: Problems caused by the cycle lanes

This topic has been separated out from the discussion about the Fox Lane neighbourhood planters. Peter Caskey changed subject in the middle of a post, diverting the discussion to one about the cycle lanes.

Referring back to Peter Caskey’s contribution yesterday to the debate on this website about the use and misuse of cars on purely residential streets the following points strike me.

Firstly I don’t know whether the majority of residents on the Lakes Estate head immediately for the through roads which surround it when they set out on a journey, but I know that I do, and that other people I know also do. I also do my best not to drive to other destinations via residential streets, although on territory new to me I have made mistakes.

Secondly I agree with Peter C. that the Lakes Estate streets are lined with cars, and that we can agree that most of them are probably well-used. By contrast Enfield Council’s policy is to encourage car owners to reduce the number of driver-only short journeys they make by walking, or cycling, or using public transport. How well that policy is working I don’t know, but standing and watching cars go by doesn’t convince me that it is. On the other hand I hear of greater use of the cycle lanes so perhaps something is stirring.

Thirdly, of course Peter C. had to arrive by van when he was a decorator.

Turning now to the cycle lanes I have not noticed or heard that they’ve caused ‘huge problems’ as Peter C. alleges, but I know that part of the Council’s strategy when it introduced them was to reduce road space; perhaps in the interest of reduced speeding, but also to convince drivers that for short journeys there are often better ways of travelling: walking, cycling and public transport. And now we can add the urgent need recently highlighted by scientists and government to reduce carbon emissions in order to limit the damage from climate change. From several points of view walking, cycling and using public transport have much to commend them.

Cars are wonderfully useful and adaptable, but that has led to serious misuse. Children’s freedoms have been curtailed, a very high proportion of our population is under-exercised, urban air quality is dreadful, many drivers have come to a sense of entitlement which expects that everything should be done in their interest.

Just a couple of points in response to David Hughes. There may be-and I do say May be- some greater use of the cycle lanes in and around the Triangle, but only there. However when another Council visited recently to see the scheme for themselves, they stated that they saw 12 bikes in 5 hours, not quite the numbers we are being told. And they voiced concerns about the effect on local businesses.
As far as traffic being slowed is concerned, surely cars sitting in traffic for longer causes more pollution, if a bus stops along Ridge Avenue, nothing can overtake it, and drivers do one of two things, sit in the traffic with fumes belting out, or, use the side roads to join Church St and then Bury St West,.

In Edmonton the cycle Lanes have caused several accidents , floating parking bays which have caused confusion, planters at the head of some side roads, which means that vehicles joining the main road have to actually swerve to the other side of the road to do so. We now have roundabouts which are not legally roundabouts, !!! That means where there were once traffic lights controlling traffic, it is now a free for all.
Pedestrian crossings are now called, "Courtesy crossings", No signs, it is pot luck if a vehicle stops to let you cross as there are no signs warning the drivers.

I notice that at the junction of Bourne Hill, HGVs can no longer access the N. Circular and have to therefore drive their vehicles through Plamers Green centre, past the shops and places where people sit outside and eat or drink,,,,, how does that make sense?

It would have made sense for TFL and the Council to get together and improve public transport, encourage people to use it, but no, we are stuck with a second rate service.
I can't say that I agree with the statement that children's freedoms have been curtailed, how would our children get to all the activities now available to them without he use of a car, and most parents would feel much happier if their child was travelling in a car rather than hanging around waiting for public transport.
And as for making the roads narrower, where is the sense in that, just keeps traffic on the road for longer-I know, I have already said that, but,,,-

We have our own issues with speeding traffic in our street, vehicles use our street just to avoid speedbumps nearby, and very recently a young girl suffered a broken leg having been hit by a car.
However, just imagine if every area took the actions of Fox Lane area,,the roads would be gridlocked and the fumes would be even worse.

Something needs to be done admittedly, but making car users feel like criminals is not the way forward, they are already penalised for driving into London.

What we've seen with both the cycle lanes and the planters is the problem of unintended consequences. I am sure that the intentions of the planners of both schemes were laudable. The issue is that unintended consequences are hard to systematically anticipate - hence the term.

Personally, I used to cycle Green Lanes, but no longer do so, because the cycle paths have too many interruptions (especially bus stops) and I now face abuse from motorists for using what's left of the roads!

One technique that helps spot and monitor consequences is called Consequence Scanning. It's used in digital projects, but is equally applicable to physical planning. https://doteveryone.org.uk/project/consequence-scanning/

It's also Creative Commons and so even cash-strapped councils can use it. Collectively, as a society, we have to get better at anticipating consequences of design decisions and managing them. The room for design errors is decreasing as our towns and cities become increasingly dense.

"they voiced concerns about the effect on local businesses" - anyone actually provided any factual hard evidence of this yet? The muppets at SOGL couldn't hence why they got booted out of Court and forced to pay costs.

"the cycle Lanes have caused several accidents" - bad/incompetent driving causes accidents. Not inanimate objects/road markings.

"I notice that at the junction of Bourne Hill, HGVs can no longer access the N. Circular" - presume you mean heading southbound on the A105. I'll have a look next time I'm passing through but is there a signing banning HGV's from using the left turn filter? I can't remember ever seeing an HGV turning right from Bourne Hill onto the A105 to go through PG so assume that's what you're referring too. Must be nice for the those living on the residential Hedge Lane though at least....

"TFL and the Council to get together and improve public transport" - any suggestions as to how exactly??! Other than influencing buses (one of the issues being TfL refusing changes that would slow down bus routes) I can't see what Enfield can do to change/influence Tube or Rail networks.

"they are already penalised for driving into London" - a classic nonsense phrase. Very Daily Mail. Other than professional drivers (trades, deliveries, cabs), why the hell does anybody ever need to drive into central London?! It's ridiculous. Clogs the streets and chokes the lungs.

Yes David Eden, I mean HGVs turning left going south along the A105, and if you had looked you would have seen the sign, must be nice t have all those lorries driving past shops etc along the main street.
The visitors from another council spoke to traders along Green Lanes and the traders told them about a drop in trade.
If you think only bad driving causes accidents then you are mistaken, bad signage, misinformation and badly situated so called flower beds that protrude into the main road do not exactly help. And yes, poor or non existent road markings do cause accidents. Take for example the "pedestrian crossing" recently installed at the junction of Bury Street West and Church Street, some weird gaudy painting on the road, no notification that there is now a crossing there, and it doesn't even look like a crossing.
As far as improving the public transport is concerned I would have thought that would be obvious. You know the idea, more buses, better routes, buses on time etc etc. If the idea is to encourage the public to use buses more, then provide a better service.
Of course people need to drive into London, do you suggest that I shove my old parent on to public transport for a hospital visit in town while seriously ill, and it has been proved that the underground is just as bad as travelling by road anyway. Yes , drivers are penalised for driving into London,,never heard of the congestion charge.
Oh, and while we are on the subject of traffic fumes and so on, our Mayor actually wants to see a Formulae 1 race in London,,couldn't make it up could you.
Finally, I take it that you are in full agreement with the cyclist being equally blamed for the highly publicised accident with a phone watching pedestrian recently, as you say, bad incompetent driving cause accidents,that includes cyclists.

Ticking off the last two Peter Caskey posts against my anti-Mini Holland topics bingo sheet I’m only left with cyclists not paying road tax, being uninsured and riding red lights, so an outstanding (near) catch-all in so few words.

"Yes David Eden, I mean HGVs turning left going south along the A105, and if you had looked you would have seen the sign, must be nice t have all those lorries driving past shops etc along the main street." Happy to take your word for it.

"The visitors from another council spoke to traders along Green Lanes and the traders told them about a drop in trade." Ahhh.....must be nice to live in a world of evidential absenteeism. My fish was this big..... etc etc <rolls eyes>

"If you think only bad driving causes accidents then you are mistaken, bad signage, misinformation and badly situated so called flower beds that protrude into the main road do not exactly help. And yes, poor or non existent road markings do cause accidents." And careful conscientious driving makes all those unlikely to cause an accident. If you drive like a complete idiot whipping round blind corners without looking and hit a planter - that's your fault, not the planter, for example.

"As far as improving the public transport is concerned I would have thought that would be obvious. You know the idea, more buses, better routes, buses on time etc etc. If the idea is to encourage the public to use buses more, then provide a better service." So by PT you do only mean buses, as per my comment. In which case, your hyperbolic post is again absolutely free of detail or how this could be achieved - unless a bus route starts & finishes in Enfield, how do you expect EBC to do anything? The 141, for example, starts in the City and runs all the way to the A406/Enfield (time dependent). How could EBC suddenly get a bunch more EBC's on the road? Or change the route? Or make it cheaper....?

"Of course people need to drive into London" Not in the volumes they do, it's a luxury.

"do you suggest that I shove my old parent on to public transport for a hospital visit in town while seriously ill" extreme minority example. And your extremely ill elderly parent can take advantage of the free hospital transport anyway.

"it has been proved that the underground is just as bad as travelling by road anyway" Proof? Ooh, lovely, you have evidence of something. Thanks - please cite your source/provide a link. Always happy to acknowledge new evidence.

"Yes , drivers are penalised for driving into London,,never heard of the congestion charge." Of course I have. It's effectively a luxury tax. I'd double it and remove all the various concessions available.

"Oh, and while we are on the subject of traffic fumes and so on, our Mayor actually wants to see a Formulae 1 race in London,,couldn't make it up could you." He doesn't. Moving on.

"Finally, I take it that you are in full agreement with the cyclist being equally blamed for the highly publicised accident with a phone watching pedestrian recently, as you say, bad incompetent driving cause accidents,that includes cyclists." Of course not. Now you're just being silly. The preposterous judgement is why £50k was raised for him in days. If he had had the sense/cynicism to counter sue at the same time then he would have got compo from her also and the costs would be split (as the judge said 50:50). He didn't cycle into an inanimate stationary object - if a cyclist ever smashes into a planter I'll be happy to blame the cyclist.

David Eden, Firstly I will say that I am happy to debate with anyone, but on a sensible basis. Your attempts at sarcasm do you no credit.
So let me give you and Karl brown some real facts.

Pop along to the following businesses if you dont want to roll your fish eyes. David Way, Cherry Newsagents,The Builders merchants claim the cycle lane work has cost them £20,000. Keymakers state that contract work is ok, but retail sales have not recovered. Businesses were only given a 10% reduction in rates while the work was going on, and as the work was carried out under a "Temporary" measure no compensation was payable for loss of income,,clever that eh!!
Hope that fills your bingo card Karl.
Because someone has a different point of view, you assume that they are against the cycle lanes, when in fact it is how the work has been carried out and its negative impact that causes disagreement.

So are you saying that there should never be an accident, my point about the planters is-oh by the way in case you haven't been out they have been removed-, drivers should be informed of any changes in the highways, regardless of speed , if a driver is used to entering a road without an obstruction in the middle of it, shouldn't they be informed??
We are being told that the Council and TFL want to encourage more people to walk, cycle and use public transport,,their aim, not mine. Therefore it would make sense to provide the means for the public to actually use the buses, I assume that would raise revenue, my comment is not hyperbole, it is common sense,,you want people to use something,,,then guess what? Provide it.
You obviously have no idea how many patients have to travel to hospitals out of the area, and obviously no idea how the system works. If at all available , transport has to be booked well in advance and one hospital visit can mean a very long day for the patient.

How on earth can you regard the Congestion charge as a Luxury charge. Do you really think people enjoy driving in to London,,perhaps you have never seen those cattle carriages where people stand for the whole journey into London despite paying for a seat,,, still I guess you think that's luxury too.

How Bad Is Air Pollution on the London Underground? - CityLab
https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2019/01/london...underground-air.../580387/
15 Jan 2019 - According to the study, some of the PM 2.5 in the system does indeed derive from exhaust fumes wafted underground. These concentrations then increase thanks to particulates emitted by wheel friction, brake pads, and even particles that come off clothing worn by passengers.

Moving on as you say, F1 exploring options for a London grand prix, says Ross Brawn | Sport ...
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/.../f1-exploring-london-grand-prix-options-ross-bra...
19 Dec 2018 - In July, Sadiq Khan said he was interested in the capital hosting F1 and ... a race in London and has asked his team to explore options with F1.

Finally , you are very wrong. I do not agree with the cyclist being equally blamed for the accident, he should have been blameless,, woman should not have just walked out into the road.
However Karl can tick off another bingo number, it seems that if he had third party insurance , his legal costs would have been minimal. I walk dogs, and I insure myself against anything amiss happening. I wouldn't dream of using the highways without some sort of insurance, but that is down to the individual, and nobody should jump red lights, motorists or cyclists.
It's just a shame that neither of you can indulge in debating the rights and wrongs of the cycle lanes-because there are plenty without resorting to caustic and sarcastic comments.
Have a safe weekend