If you support segregated cycling infrastructure in Hackney

Edited for not getting sarcasm fail.

#fail

this whole thread makes me feel sad and disappoint :(

Stepping away from the pro- and anti- protected lanes for a moment.

TfL (which has come up with a few decent designs recently) is about to shit out the biggest most steaming turd of a junction it has designed in years:

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/a2-deptford-broadway-deptford-bridge-junction

Please , pro-protection and anti-protection people, unite to respond to the consultation and tell TfL how utterly lousy this design is.

That is truly horrible, why the hell do we need so many lanes?

Woah wait, here's my quote:

why don't you use your voice to make the people of Hackney/London aware that there are free cycle training courses available to empower cyclists by teaching them how to use the road safely?

To answer your question, no I didn't do cycle training. 4 years ago when I decided to just go out, jump on my new "fixeh" and take off on the road and see what happens, I genuinely didn't know cycle training even was a thing. This is my point, would I have taken it then if I knew it existed? Instead of learning how to actually use a road the hard way all on my own, probably obliviously nearly get killed a lot? Yes.

4 Years later, I've had one traffic incident with a vehicle (someone tried to park on me) and two verbal bust ups. I don't cup people up, piss people off, get beeped at, flashed at, shouted at by other cyclists, I just go with the flow in my own line and not put myself into the path of any madness.

I've never said I'm a good cyclist, I never will, I just personally feel safer on main roads with fast moving traffic. For e.g Me and a mate did the West Way after work/before SE's this Tuesday just for laughs because we hadn't done it since summer. It's a cool fast road where we can be free amongst it all without busses pulling out/peds etc. Just cars going in a straight line, lots of fun, kept us on our toes.

In answer to your other q about my whip skid, yes I could have handled this differently, probably a lot better if I had cycle training.

This morning's commute and other commuting stories

in General •

Avatar for Antidotes

I had an accident earlier this year on Whitehall involving an pedestrian and a cyclist. A ped walked out on me on a green light for traffic, I pulled a massive emergency stop which left me dead still at 45 degrees in the road only for a second later to be struck by a cyclist. I initially thought that he had clipped my back wheel so I felt really guilty about my stopping technique, 2 days later a massive yellow/black/blue tyre mark bruise on my leg appeared that lasted for two months. This put him right on my rear wheel, he was drafting me. The crash trapped my leg between his front tyre and me top tube, couldn't walk properly for about 3 weeks...

And no you don't sound like a dick, I think you're super cool and I get you for calling me out.

Ha ha, the daft fucking plum has linked to one of my comments and purposefully misinterpreted it to suit his own arguments.

Of course the tedious shitehawk also has a habit of favouriting and positively commenting on my cycling tweets. He loves me, he hates me, he loves me, he hates me, he's a cunt...

Twitter 'favorites' are not like facebook 'likes'. Its a way of storing tweets. He probably doesn't love or hate you but finds what you say worth referring back to

Looks like @cyclelove came on here desperate for further signatures on his petition. Not sure that went well! It looks like more people commented negatively on this thread than actually signed the petition. Fail thread >>>>>>>>

It seemed to me that his mind is already made up, and he just need to grab some comments for his blog.

@tricitybendix said it best;

Needlessly aggressive cycle campaigners are probably more off putting to newbie cyclists than London traffic. Whatever their opinion.

Right, this I can directly relate to. I know that junction like the back of my hand and have to in order to navigate it without being road kill.

The cycling infrastructure on the map along the Broadway/Deptford bridge is already there but I'm usually going straight on so I'm not "in it" so to speak.

The proposed two way cycle track outside Lewisham college is putting cyclists into oncoming traffic on the inside of a turning!? Am I wrong about that?

With all the confusion of the six lanes this wall keeps all road users in the right direction... And I know it's stopped crashing cars from heading into oncoming traffic under Deptford bridge, yet...

Removal of brick walls on the central reservations on the A2 and Deptford Church Street.

I don't understand why that is necessary?

No U-turn at the junction for traffic travelling eastbound along Deptford Broadway.

That's good tho, not that anyone will pay attention.

"WAR ON THE MOTORIST"

If this is his mentality, he obviously doesn't want to share the road, I annoy him so much because I choose to do so. It's freedom of choice.

I think you've misinterpreted that. He's saying [in light of the continuing increase in spending on the roads what is this] "WAR ON THE MOTORIST" [that we keep hearing about]. Essentially he's saying that the Mail/Telegraph/Pickles favourite cry of "The war on motorists" is just bullshit. In light of that misinterpretation, the rest of your post makes no sense.

Yeah, that makes sense, point retracted...

Just when I thought it couldn't get better, Mark has been digging trough my posts, and doing some potato chopping. mobile.twitter.com/AsEasyAsRidin­g/status/540227250059485184/photo/1

What Mark left out is that the "two minor rider down incidents" we're appalling cyclists crashing into other cyclists, absolutely nothing to do with motorists what so ever.

And if he bothered to do any research my "new", much faster and safer route, the Old Kent Road has zero cycling infrastructure. Compared to the "terrifying" Camberwell Church Rd>Camberwell Green>Kennington Rd route with cycle lanes on the outside of the road, perfect for *undertaking *.

None of this is relevant. His point is that even for experienced, fit cyclists who have had cycle training (I think he's assuming that you have), the roads are "horrendous and genuinely quite scary", and have "solid angry traffic all the way" resulting in you feeling like you're "going to get killed". If this is the case, what are the chances of getting 8-year olds riding to school, even if they've had cycle training?

The anti segregation bias here is really disappointing and appears to be, as far as I can work out, based on (i) bullshit scare-mongering about being forced off the road and have to ride with the nodders and (ii) a purely ideological stance that building any cycle-specific infrastructure is just cowardly capitulation in the war against motorists. Roads shouldn't be handed over to motor vehicles but that doesn't mean that all segregation is evil.

Roads shouldn't be handed over to motor vehicles but that doesn't mean that all segregation is evil.

Agree with that. In some places separate places for different modes is a good intervention that may make cycling easier for some.

I suppose the issue is that some of these people think that only segregation is what it will take, and no other things ... such as training and education, driver culture change through law and enforcement, shared space, filtered permeable networks, lower speeds etc.... will get mass cycling. The truth is we need as many of these things, all of them have a place in ending the hegemony of the car driver.

It's a slow process yet change is possible and hackney is a good example of this work in progress

@multigrooves Spot on. I get very little aggro, listen, I know it s not Hackney but heres my shout on 30 years 2 wheels on road (including near death crash)
http://jasonmfalconer.co.uk/wp/?s=reading+the+roads+we+ride

Yeah definitely, that was a really bad morning, I saw loads of dick moves on everyone's part,

It's relevant because is he is twisting a post I made 6 months ago about everyone being shocking on the road to target motorists when that's not what the point in context of that post was at all.

So I have now had to clarify what I said six months ago so because this buffoon posted it on twitter to use it for his own personal gains. You've just read what he's posted and fallen for it.

If he did his research and you did your research before trying to make a hollow point, my routes are clearly outlined - you both would have discovered that my old route is solid chockablock full of cycling lane nearly all the way to work and it's still utter chaos. The infrastructure hasn't any difference at all, you cant polish a turd. It was the worst route I could have taken into work.

Now I take, fast, safe route into work, there's no stress and it's a pleasure to ride on.

The reason? It's quite simple. The traffic is moving at a really good flow, it's a good route. I'm on main roads keeping it simple. About 10% of it has cycle infrastructure (London road) and that's just a bus lane so I don't even know if you can class it is cycle specific and it doesn't matter, because its a good route no matter what colour the tarmac is.

Get your facts right.

Now I take, fast, safe route into work, there's no stress and it's a pleasure to ride on.

But how much stress would you feel if you went fast? Cycle infrastructure isn't about you. It will probably make your life worse. But you are expendable. Yeah sounds like shit but that's it. You wouldn't expect a kid to follow you on that route and that's the point of infrastructure

None of this is relevant. His point is that even for experienced, fit cyclists who have had cycle training (I think he's assuming that you have), the roads are "horrendous and genuinely quite scary", and have "solid angry traffic all the way" resulting in you feeling like you're "going to get killed". If this is the case, what are the chances of getting 8-year olds riding to school, even if they've had cycle training?

I think it's important to note here that the average london commute is probably longer, and on busier roads, than the average trip to the local school. Yes, cycling in london is dangerous even for the fittest and most experienced. But the fittest an most experienced put themselves in more dangerous situations, for longer periods of time, and more often.

Deptford Bridge junction makes me so pissed off, it's literally a horrorshow for people on foot, cycles and in/on other vehicles.

I'd like to see some green space there, and the A2 maintained as just two lanes throughout, like it is everywhere either side of the junction.

When I say a fast route I mean it's a route where traffic is not stopping at junction after junction, its a route which doesn't provide any hairy challenges that's why there's a good traffic flow and that's why it's safe.

I'm all up for redesigning whole swathes of road to improve traffic flow on the whole for **everyone ** no matter what you're driving. If its better for everyone then all road users can feel the benefit and interact in a safe manner.

Just sticking a couple of cycling lanes in each side of a shocking road does not mean it's all going to be fine.

I wouldn't expect or want a kid to take my old route which was about 70% cycling infrastructure.

and the A2 maintained as just two lanes throughout, like it is everywhere either side of the junction.

Far from first person I have heard say that. Level it and start again, all road users will benefit.

I think key point here is that most of the cycling infrastructure that has already been built is so shit that it's better to avoid it. Infrastructure that's not shit (and that sorts out the junctions, too) is worth having, on busy roads. None of your 'kerb nerds' want shit infrastructure. All of them also want filtered permeability, driver education, strict liability etc - because these will make an effect on the 98% of roads that still won't have infrastructure. Also, irrespective of infrastructure, cycle training becomes more vital as more people cycle. Even with infrastructure, they'll still need to know how to use that 98% of roads without infrastructure safely..

Well said, even with infrastructure very few people are likely to have 100% segregated journeys. As such strict liability, driver training, cycle training are also required.

The problem is that many UK roads don't have room for dedicated cycle infrastructure and learning/enforcing how to use and share the space is needed to help people with their unsegregated sections of their journey.

The debate becomes more difficult when kerb nerds deny that cycle training/strict liability is going to help people (and they start to cite young or old people) and that the only way is segregation.

I'm not sure I know any kerb nerds who deny that cycle training will help people (I am not sure about the evidence on strict liability, though can't see how it would do any harm). All children get cycle training in the Netherlands. I think what they are saying (rightly) is that we need high-quality protection on busy roads and all these other measures. Just one or the other is not enough.

.