Healthy Streets

This is an excellent opportunity for Enfield Town to be transformed from a motor vehicle dominated environment to a more attractive, people-friendly destination with the ability to draw in visitors both locally and from a much wider catchment area. Under these plans, parts of the one-way system would be returned to two-way operation bringing in a wide range of benefits. These include:

• a safer and more appealing walking environment (one-way streets tend to encourage more ‘weaving’, faster acceleration, and higher speeds)
• a sufficiently high quality cycling environment to attract a much wider cross-section of local residents and workers than the current cycling market (mainly male commuters in their 20s, 30s and 40s)
• In one of the options there is an easier to understand bus service (bus stops serving opposite directions can be on the same stretch of road when it’s two-way)

 In recent years as transport priorities change, many town centre one-way systems around the country have been returned to two-way operation. This helps to transform them into more attractive, people-friendly destinations, and this is Enfield Town’s opportunity to reap the benefits of such a transformation. Traffic dominated roads become thriving, people-friendly streets.

The proposed schemes would enable many of the short car journeys currently taken to the town centre to be switched to walking, bus or cycling. These forms of transport make a much more efficient use of limited highway space.

The schemes would include a combination of high quality cycle lanes and cycle paths on roads in the town centre. Opportunities will also be taken to improve public spaces to make them brighter, safer and less cluttered, in keeping with the latest thinking in transport and town planning.

OPTION 1

• This would see Cecil Road become a two-way street. Genotin Road would remain a one-way southbound street with access to the proposed ‘Cycle Hub’. London Road would remain a one-way northbound street but with high quality, segregated cycling facilities in both directions.
• Church Street would be closed to ‘general traffic’ to provide a shared space environment but with buses permitted eastbound and a two-way cycle lane. Loading would also be permitted at certain times of the day. Wide implied crossing will enable pedestrians to cross the road and the cycle lane without the need for traffic lights, signs and road marking.
• Southbury Road between London Road and Genotin Road would stay as a one-way street for motor traffic (eastbound) but with two-way cycling using protected cycle paths on either side of the carriageway.
• There would also be cycling facilities on London Road in both directions, and southbound on Genotin Road.
• Option 1 has been shortlisted for a number of reasons: supported by GLA and TfL; delivers transformational cycling improvements; a reduced traffic flow on Church Street; significant public space improvements in the town centre; enhanced pedestrian crossing facilities on Church Street; improved bus journey times along Church Street; and loading and access provision retained on Church Street.
• The potential negative impacts of Option 1 would be: increased amounts of motor traffic on Cecil Road; a small increase in north/south bus journey times; a slight reduction in network capacity for motor traffic (which will be offset by a switch to cycling); and a slight reduction in the pavement width east of the market on Church Street

OPTION 6a

• This would have two-way traffic on Cecil Road and London Road. Church Street would be restricted to bus and cycle traffic, in both directions, with loading also permitted at certain times of the day.
• Genotin Road would remain a one-way street (in the southbound direction) for general traffic, with access to the proposed ‘Cycle Hub’.
• Cycling provision on Church Street would be a central cycle path between the two traffic lanes. There would also be cycling facilities on London Road in both directions, and southbound on Genotin Road. Wide implied crossing will enable pedestrians to cross the road and the cycle lane without the need for traffic lights, signs and road markings.
• Option 6a has been shortlisted for the following reasons: a reduced traffic flow on Church Street; delivers transformational cycling improvements; improved town centre accessibility and journey times for bus users; access retained on Church Street; enhanced pedestrian crossing facilities on Church Street.
• The potential negative impacts of Option 6a would be: a reduction in network capacity for motor traffic (which will be offset by a switch to cycling); increased motor traffic flow on Cecil Road; and loading to be relocated to the side streets at the western end of Church Street and relocated from London Road to Genotin Road.