If you support segregated cycling infrastructure in Hackney

There's a new group called Hackney People on Bikes who are calling on Hackney Cycling Campaign to drop their (well-known opposition) to protected cycle lanes:

We are a group of people who ride bikes in Hackney, who have come
together with a common goal of seeing protected space for cycling on
main roads and major junctions in Hackney. While acknowledging the
previous successes of HCC, including 20mph limits, modal filtering and
park access, we are convinced that without separation from motor
vehicles on main roads and at junctions,we will never see mass cycling
in Hackney, including children, the elderly and those with
disabilities.

You can read their open letter to HCC here and
add your name to the list using this form.

Don't understand why people are against segregated infrastructure in general? Having ridden in Belgium, and seeing tiny kids cycling to school, the situation in London seems barbaric.

Surely training would help some conquer those fears?

Subtle use of italics there, I was about to flame you :)

Yes, maybe, but that's not the heart of the issue. The entire road hierarchy in the UK is upside down. Having a cycling group who are anti cycling lanes is counter productive...

some cyclists might fear cycling lanes cause it might lead to government requiring cyclists to get licences, paying taxes, insurance, etc.

No sane government would do that, especially given money spent on cycling is an investment because of savings on public health spending etc

I'm sure you know the arguments against segregation; they're hardly mysterious. If you've been following the HCC you've probably heard them so your "don't understand" question above is puzzling.

It's good to see anyone encouraging more people to cycle, but setting up a group to characterise one of London's more notably successful and popular cycling initiatives as 'counter productive' feels like a massive waste of time. And pretty divisive. And yes, counter productive.

Nope, haven't heard of HCC's argument before that's why I'm asking! Could you spell them out for me?

They're not against the HCC, just this one part of their policy. Did you read the link above?

(It's also odd given that LCC run the #space4cycling campaign which is very much in favour of segregated bike lanes).

SHEESH, have any of you folks ridden a bike in a city with proper bike lines?

Enforced segregation of cyclists on major roads will increase driver agression towards cyclists who choose not to use the cycle lanes, I have experienced this first hand, and often. It would be great if there was a way of increasing cycling among the young, and among the population in general, which did not make life harder for the thousands who have integrated into the traffic flow have found they are safer behaving like a car, i.e keeping up with traffic where possible, taking primary position on bends / chicanes etc.

There is one junction in Stockwell where a small section of segregated lane causes a chicane and leaves a cyclist with a split second choice as to which side of a kerb to go. There is also a long section of segregated lane running east from tower bridge, which gives priority to every minor road it crosses, and is too narrow to overtake another cyclist safely. I use the dual carriage way instead because the traffic is actually more predictable there than the cars pulling out onto the cycle lane, cyclists weaving / overtaking, pedestrians not looking etc. These are probably an extreme examples, but the lanes will need to be very carefully thought out so they don't cause as many problems as they solve.

One common argument against segregated infrastructure - particularly infrastructure focused on 'conflict points' - is that by taking cyclists partly off the road it creates a greater danger from motorists who no longer expect cyclists as a normal component of road use. There are other arguments but that's one of the strongest.

For a group against just one part of HCC policy they seem pretty frothily worked up, with all their threats to resign membership as per their webpage.

Ah, I see @winnifred1849 got there first.

Edit: I'll just leave this instructive post here

http://buffalobillbikeblog.wordpress.com/2013/09/30/hackney-cyclist-hackney-cyclists/

I would be very interested to see a proposal than addresses the issues I have outlined.

Understood, but the 'thousands' who are ok taking in the lane must be a minority compared to all the other people who would cycle if they could do so without battling traffic. (many of whom might not even own a bike at the moment). Would you deny them that pleasure?

None of this is rocket science, just look at a country who started rebuilding their roads 40 years ago to accommodate bikes. The Dutch don't take bikes 'off' the road onto the pavement, they just redesign the roads so that bikes are catered for properly.

"The perception of safety is the single greatest obstacle to increased cycling in London. If any politician, council or business is serious about increasing active travel, then the only solution is the delivery of kerb-protected routes on main roads. There simply is no amount of training or marketing that will have the same impact as basic, proven, kerb protection."

https://cyclingworks.wordpress.com/2014/11/19/segregated-lanes/

Understood, but the 'thousands' who are ok taking in the lane must be a minority compared to all the other people who would cycle if they could do so without battling traffic. (many of whom might not even own a bike at the moment). Would you deny them that pleasure?

I would say it should be done carefully and gradually to avoid carnage. Immediate and large scale change in road use has resulted in deaths, a combination of drivers not expecting cyclists to be there, and cyclists putting themselves in dangerous positions. To get kids cycling, why not start with cycle lanes to our parks, and cycle lanes through our parks? Or cycle lanes on the more dangerous roads around schools? Perhaps if lanes were clearly geared towards a certain kind of cyclist, there would not be the antagonism of "get off the road and use the cycle lane" from drivers.

When the Dutch introduced their cycle lanes, it was probably a very different situation to what we have here in London today.

By taking cyclists partly off the road it creates a greater danger from motorists who no longer expect cyclists as a normal component of road use

That doesn't make sense. Proper infrastructure will lead to (a very visible) uptake in cycling. People driving will be MORE expectant of seeing bikes around.

^^ Perhaps alot of people who have been cycling in London for a while will just have to accept their lives are going to be made harder for the 'greater good'. Don't expect us not to grumble about it though...

As the Dutch klaxon has been predictably sounded, I feel honour bound to sound a correspondingly stereotypical vehicular cyclist one:

http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/research.html

Cycle lanes aren't the panacea you suggest, even in Holland or Denmark.

Agreed, it can't happen over night.

When the Dutch introduced their cycle lanes, it was probably a very
different situation to what we have here in London today.

Not really... they were suffering from traffic carnage and high mortality rates too, and a car-centric road network.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuBdf9jYj7o

Proper infrastructure will lead to (a very visible) uptake in cycling.

No guarantee of that.

People driving will be MORE expectant of seeing bikes on the pavement

ftfy

Fuck it then, let's just leave things the way they are, and crawl back into our holes in the ground.

@winnifred1849 has summed it perfectly. The paint alone has caused a lot of grief where drivers take the mindset of you've got your bit and we've got ours. The stretch that leads to Butchers Row from Tower Bridge is pony at best and dangerous at worst with FA priority given to the majority. Given the overall lack of space, I don't trust the powers that be to make infrastructure suitable or with much common sense. Planning engineers seem to ignore most advice from cyclists on a lot of schemes, so I don't expect anything decent.

The most frequent headache I suffer on the roads are from cyclists, most of which would be eliminated by doing a FREE course, if, many would get over their egos/ignorance....

But in Hackney they haven't 'left things how they are'. They've introduced a range of innovative methods to reclaim road space from cars and improve sharing of other spaces. It's just not as simple a process as some infrastructure advocates make out.

This is why I find the above group's shrill, tearing-up-the-membership-card antics to be quite perplexing.

Yes but this isn't about "cyclists", it's about all the people who aren't currently cycling, but could and would if it was safe to.

In other countries it's quite normal for kids to ride to school.

It could be here as well...

These campaigns for cycling ghettos are tedious and only aim to address a misconception of where danger is. Given that most accidents occur at junctions putting cyclists into out of sight, out of mind, segregated lanes which acquiesce priority at every road they converge with is a recipe for disaster.

Address the perceptions of where the risks are, explain and educate people as to where to ride to be safer. Campaign for strict liability on UK roads.

I get enough aggression from drivers shouting at me to use poorly designed dangerous infrastructure already. Your ill thought out campaign aimed at the people who have transformed Hackney into one of the most cycling friendly boroughs is a shame and poor use of your time and resources.

^^^^^

1. Denial
   
2. Anger
   
3. Bargaining
   
4. Depression
   
5. Acceptance
   
   

Sorry, but for many of the reasons more eloquently put by other posters above I don't want to have to support segregated cycle lanes. I genuinely think the marginalisation will end up doing more harm than good.

First step in my revolution would be to bring back cycle proficiency in all schools (we've fucked up at least two generations of people now driving on the roads who missed out on it) and hope to fuck it gets better in the next 20 years. In a similar vein, taking away teaching the Green Cross Code is probably partially responsible for the current generation(s) of lemming pedestrians.