Thanks to Paul Mandel (“Segregated cycle lanes clarification”, Opinion, April 22) for clarification of his proposal for a riverside cycle route parallel to Green Lanes. It sounds fine for leisure cyclists, but is unlikely to wean commuting cyclists away from their most direct route.

With regard to his letter:

• Cars may be able to carry seven people, but most carry just the driver travelling relatively fast

• Traffic doesn’t travel two lanes abreast on Green Lanes so allocating space to bikes will make no difference to traffic flow

• Quoting the A406 as an example of cycle lane use is unfortunate given that it isn’t a north-south route, and is an unpleasant cycling experience

• No mention of air quality, carbon-based fuel, health benefits, children’s independence

• It’s sad that the letter implies cyclists should become second-class travellers – sounds like the position of urban pedestrians.

Cycle lanes seem to give cyclists a sense of entitlement to match drivers. Best to replace the 30mph limit with 20mph. Something must also be done to reduce short, driver-only journeys by car to lessen congestion and improve air quality.

David Hughes

Palmers Green