Charlie Fulford

London drivers grumbling about Ken’s inflation-busting increase to the congestion charge should count themselves lucky. If they lived in Paris, they might have to abandon their cars altogether. If the city’s socialist mayor has his way, three square miles, encompassing such landmarks as the Bastille and the Place de la Concorde, will be car-free other than for emergency vehicles, residents and delivery vans by 2012. Could we perhaps be staring London’s future in the face?

There have certainly been some high-profile initiatives to reclaim our streets. Trafalgar Square and the forecourt to Buckingham Palace have been part-pedestrianised. Sir Terry Farrell wants to turn the Euston Road into our own Las Ramblas, Lewisham is preparing to see off its notorious roundabout with a major mixed-use development in which tarmac is replaced by new buildings and public squares.

This activity is not confined to London. Witness Birmingham’s spectacular transformation as a result of the Bullring redevelopment; the renaissance of Piccadilly Gardens in Manchester; and the regeneration of Newcastle Quayside, to name but a few.

Although it is unlikely that we will go as far as Paris, this type of initiative should be applauded and encouraged. Reducing the dependency of an area on the car has obvious environmental advantages through a lowering of pollution levels. But it also has more esoteric benefits. Contrary to the views of “le tout automobile” brigade, economic prosperity does not go hand in hand with pampering the whims of the car driver.

Cities and areas within them thrive, despite, or perhaps because of, an element of the chaos and congestion that accompanies narrow, inconvenient roads and fine-grained street patterns. Many of our most economically successful and vibrant areas, such as Kensington & Chelsea, are high density and built around a network of streets. By contrast, many of our least successful areas, and hence the subject of today’s regeneration agenda, are low density and are built following a highways-led model. Swaths of east London fall into this category.

We should bear this in mind if today’s regeneration programmes in areas such as the Thames Gateway are to be a success.

Many of our most successful areas are built around a network of streets. By contrast, many of our least successful areas are built around highways

To deliver this vision it will require highway engineers to throw away the rule book. This is currently a manifesto for the “people are stupid” philosophy: sweeping wide roads to help easy cornering and crash barriers to stop cars inexplicably careering onto the pavement.

It has also been responsible for the inexorable rise in street clutter – railings to stop people from jumping out in front of oncoming traffic and a forest of signs telling you what to do and what not to do.

Nowhere is this philosophy more amply demonstrated than in the highway engineer’s holy grail – the roundabout. Great for drivers. Not so good for pedestrians, cyclists or anyone interested in creating attractive places.

With the rulebook consigned to the dustbin, we stand a chance of being able to create what Livingstone would call “civilised” public spaces. And if all this seems a bit too difficult, then try living in Paris for the next few years.

Charlie Fulford is regeneration director at Amec Developments