Green Lanes: Our top six likes and concerns

Cycle Enfield’s revised A105 plans were exhibited last month at Palmers Green library. Here at last is a round-up of our views on the changes:


Bush Hill Green Lanes junction

Bush Hill Road / Green Lanes junction

1.     The Green Lanes/Bush Hill junction – this is up to international standards, keeping cycles completely separate from motor traffic as they cross the junction. It’s the closest thing we’ve seen in the UK to a Dutch-style ‘simultaneous green’ junction. Surely worthy of an award!

 2.     Most cycle lanes now run inside the parking rather than between parked cars and traffic. This separates those on bikes from moving motor traffic and creates a greater sense of safety.

 3.     More bus stop boarders changed to bypasses, reducing the chance of bike/pedestrian conflict.

 4.     Safer cycle lane route across side roads: Bush Hill, Uvedale Road, Park Avenue, Village road and Vicars Moor Lane. Routing the cycle lane further away from Green Lanes and requiring cars to give way further back looks to be safer for everyone.

 5.     Aldermans Hill junction the  ‘hold the left’ signal phase will prevent left hook risks for northbound cycles going straight on. This is far preferable to the previous design of a ‘cycle gate’. We also liked the fact that cycles turning right onto Aldermans Hill can do so without interacting with motor traffic.

6.     Entrance to Sainsbury’s – the previous cycle gate design has been replaced by a separate phase for cycles turning left from Green Lanes. Again, we far prefer this option.


1.     Right turns for cycles. At many points along the A105, cycles wanting to turn right are put in a dangerous position. This is a concern for vulnerable users such as children cycling to school – they should not be expected to pull across the lane into the middle of the road to wait to turn right. We would like to see right-turn ‘pockets’, i.e. places of refuge usually set into the kerb on the left, where cycles can wait without blocking other cycles and with a good view of traffic in both directions.

2.     The Fox Lane junction. There is a hook risk for northbound cyclists from cars turning left into this junction – we would like this to be addressed. We would also like to see the radius tightened. For cycles turning right into the Fox Lane, there does not appear to be any protection, such as a ‘pocket’ to take refuge in.

3.     Devonshire Road. The plans show this as a contraflow and a recommended route for cycles, but this one-way road is currently a ratrun that encourages speeding. We think it’s too dangerous for bikes especially going against the flow of traffic. Filtering would be ideal here to provide a quietway.

4.     Hazelwood Lane. We’re disappointed to see that it is no longer proposed to be entrance-only. Some form of entry treatment is required here, as demonstrated by the fact that a pedestrian crossing Green Lanes was knocked down by a car exiting Hazelwood Lane just days before the exhibition.

5.     Bike/train connections. We would like to see safer connections for bikes with station entrances, and a big increase in secure cycle parking to enable many more commuters to reach stations by cycling.

6.     The last stretch before the North Circular While this is out of the hands of Cycle Enfield, we are disappointed that Haringey are not offering a continuation of the scheme along the A105, and the route therefore veers off towards Palmerston Road. A direct route connecting the boroughs and a safe junction for cycles at the A406 would be preferable.