If you support segregated cycling infrastructure in Hackney

I absolutely cannot stand whoever the fuck these people who insult, belittle and deride people who aren't totally behind segregation

Reading blogs like the 'Alternative Department for Transport' and its constant stream of strident bile against John Franklin (much of it based on out-of-context cherry picking of what he's written), HCC and anyone else who dares to put their head over the parapet is instructive, in this connection.

Haha, no. I suggest the roads should be usable by a 5 year old unsupervised.

Of London’s “cycle superhighway” plans, however, Gehl is sceptical. For starters: “I don’t like the word ‘superhighway’ – we’ve got that word from another branch of transportation.” And, he adds, these lanes will only ever get you part of the way. “Then, the last half-kilometre, cyclists will have to take chances in places where there is no infrastructure.” Much better if, as in Copenhagen, these grander cycles lanes also filter into good bicycle lanes on every street: “That makes it a system which is safe from door to door.”

Transport for London’s segregated cycle lane plan for Blackfriars junction.
http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/dec/08/jan-gehl-make-cities-liveable-urban-rethinker

You do get side swiped in London. It happens a lot, sometimes drivers want the lane you're riding in! You have to dominate, make eye contact, be assertive, and even then drivers side swipe you. Going south over London Bridge was dodgy as hell when bendy buses started. You will get pushed out of the way if you're timid on a bike in London.

@Antidotes, your response to @hairnetnic's comment about 5-year olds is quite telling. I know 4 year olds who can ride a perfectly decent line on a bike for a couple of miles. It would be great if their parents didn't feel that they had to put them in the car to go to school/the park/the shops. If you don't share the aim of making the roads accessible to cyclists of all ages and abilities then we're basically having two separate conversations. If you do share this aim then I think you need to accept that there is no amount of training that will make many potential cyclists (or parents of potential cyclists) comfortable on the road network that we currently have or will likely have for the next few decades. Your approach of "if I learned to cycle well, anyone can" is simply not true because you are (as far as I can tell) quite fit, fast and confident. Many are not and could never be because they are simply too physically weak or small. To paraphrase someone "a cycle route that you wouldn't send an 8 year-old on, isn't a cycle route".

We need to understand that these people don't look at the road the same way that we do.

This whole section from you is just a morass of assumptions about "these people's" motivations and opinions that isn't really any more valuable than saying "all these anti-segregationists are just wannabe-Wiggins-lycra-louts who just want to go fast", but there are a few things worth discussing.

There is no "share the road" with these people, it's an "us and them" battle, "cyclists vs motorists".
They don't care that cyclists, cars, busses, vans, motorcyclists are all road users, and are capable of sharing the road.

This has been done to death in various blogs. What does it mean for a cyclist to "share the road" with an HGV, van or even a car? The motorist genuinely has to make space for the cyclist because they have the capability to kill them. The cyclist can ride a good line, be aware of what's around them, remain visible and signal their intentions, but this is not "sharing the road" this is the cyclist doing everything they can to avoid being killed or injured by a motor vehicle. It's polite and sensible to do these things, but the motorist doesn't need them from the cyclist in the same way that the cyclist needs the motorist to give them space. Scale this all down to an 8-year old riding on the road and you'll see how absurd this false equivalence is.

They don't need a licence to ride a bike, therefore are not obliged to be trained or educated to use the road in a safe manner, so they want there own road, instead of learning or teaching themselves like I did how to use the existing roads.

As above, children simply do not have the road presence or speed that you have (and even if a small number do, their parents would be unlikely to believe that it would keep them safe). So what's your solution to getting them on the road?

When they see a bad road they don't ask the questions; why is road so bad? Why is this junction so chaotic? Why are road users at a standstill constantly? What is happening to prevent free traffic flow? Why isn't there enough space?

Of course these questions are worth asking. But do you honestly believe that we can find and apply a solution to enough of London's roads in the forseeable future to provide sufficiently safe unsegregated routes for a mass uptake of cycling?

Improve the bad road for everyone, make the bad junction easier to navigate for everyone and all road users will benefit.

All current road users will benefit and very slowly at that. Simply having to cycle in the same lanes as motor traffic will put a lot of potential cyclists off.

The louder this segregation voice gets the closer we get to this in London:

What was it I said about bullshit scare-mongering?

Cyclists have the right to be road users.

And we should maintain that right, but that doesn't have to be at the exclusion of building decent segregated infrastructure.

Just to note that confidence is not always a good thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxgUr75eCa4

Some very confident cyclists there...

Jesus, that was gruesome.

You have some very good points.

I think I get where our different approach to this subject lies now.

If you don't share the aim of making the roads accessible to cyclists of all ages and abilities then we're basically having two separate conversations.

See, I'm not trying to push to get everyone to cycle. And I think that's about it really.

If you want to make it possible for absolutely everyone in London to cycle no matter the skill or ability there will have to be segregated cycle lane on every street in London. You are going to have to level most of London, most streets are not wide enough. You will have to knock most buildings.

So my worry is that you can't put segregated cycle lanes on every London street, there simply isn't enough room. This means the "weak" or inexperienced riders are going to have to share to road with other road users at some point in their journey. This means these types of cyclists are going to need to at least be safe and confident enough to navigate with traffic.

But do you honestly believe that we can find and apply a solution to enough of London's roads in the foreseeable future to provide sufficiently safe unsegregated routes for a mass uptake of cycling?

No again that's where we differ, not mass uptake, just a safer road for all in general for those who choose to use it.

My question is, do you believe we can segregate every road in London to make it safe enough for our imaginary 5 year old to cycle on?

Also lol...

you are (as far as I can tell) quite fit, fast and confident

Fit - no. Fast - no. Confident - I like to pretend I am, positive mental attitude and all that.

But thanks anyway.

Oh man. That video is full of mugs, overtake or stay behind, undertake is death.

My question is, do you believe we can segregate every road in London to make it safe enough for our imaginary 5 year old to cycle on?

It wouldn't be necessary to do this because mass uptake of cycling brings with it safety benefits ("safety in numbers") that make narrow roads navigable by different types of cyclists without needing segregated infrastructure. A reduction in the number of motor vehicles, for e.g (because the drivers are maybe on bikes instead). The motorists already there being accustomed to being around large numbers of cyclists, for e.g. Motorised through traffic being banned from some of those roads entirely, 20mph zones, for e.g.

People who are campaigning for a high quality segregated network aren't saying "put bike lanes on every single road and street", but that's frequently used as a straw man argument anyway to dismiss the idea of having any segregation at all.

So my worry is that you can't put segregated cycle lanes on every London street, there simply isn't enough room.

This is also not part of the "segregation manifesto". I'd like to see segregation on the main trunk and distributor routes, filtering and calming on local routes.

This: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/cs2-upgrade + Hackney's current approach on side roads.
not this: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/a2-deptford-broadway-deptford-bridge-junction/consult_view

See, I'm not trying to push to get everyone to cycle.

Are you anti more people cycling? You don't to be 'pro' to see the current situation as iniquitous, favouring the strong and the brave.

The cyclists are only doing what they were told to do by the Highway Code, TfL, even the government.

And then everyone blame the cyclists for putting themselves at risk.

That video is full of mugs.

@Antidotes best not to blame them for doing this, but blame the culture of kerb hugging that encourage this behaviour.

unless you want to completely level the whole of London and start again?

Sounds alright. Who's with me? #nuclearoption

best not to blame them for doing this, but blame the culture of kerb hugging that encourage this behaviour.

It's also important to realise that they wouldn't be able to do this while in a segregated lane...

From orbit? It's the only way to be sure

What about on road that doesn't have the segregated lane? it still encourage kerb hugging nonetheless.

Ok I get it, so it's going to be a long, natural process then, we just need more people to start cycling, in order for more roads to be changed right?

Are you anti more people cycling? You don't to be 'pro' to see the current situation as iniquitous, favouring the strong and the brave.

Woah no don't get me wrong here, I love cycling, but I have a whole lot of "non cycling friends" and they live in town and they don't cycle.

I don't get that they don't cycle, they don't get that I do. That doesn't mean I'm forcing it down their necks, I'm in the pro do what ever you want camp because at the end of day that's all that people are going to do.

You have some very good points.

Thanks. I've got nothing to add what @bothwell and @hairnetnic wrote. They said it very well.

I'm in the pro do what ever you want camp because at the end of day that's all that people are going to do.

Well yeah, but people's decisions aren't made in a vacuum. I don't use my rocket-pack to get to work because the rocket-pack infrastructure round here is shocking. If you continue to provide a road network that is biased toward car use, people will continue to favour using their cars.

It's a dangerous culture.

Absolutely, the status quo is one that only 5% undertake the activity regularly. Cycling is vastly more popular than that.

Closer to 2% across the county

It's often said that the roads aren't wide enough for cycle lanes.

Green Lanes in Harringay is a good example of this, lots of traffic, mainly one lane in both directions with a southbound bus lane in parts. Pavements are always busy so no space to be taken from there. And loads of cars parked by the side of the road.

If the car parking was removed there'd suddenly be a lot more space. It's the same all over, look at Fitzrovia or Soho, just the same.

Oh but the traders, won't somebody think about the traders, if there weren't parking spaces alongside every single stretch of road then every business everywhere and the whole of civilisation would ACTUALLY AND IMMEDIATELY COLLAPSE

@gridds just posted this in the gifs thread and looking at all the peds crammed onto the footways on both sides of the bridge while so much space is given over to motor traffic has made me RAGE.

That was pretty much the Lib Dem election position in the local elections.

The most entertaining was when the traders produced plans for the regeneration of Green Lanes and one of their points was to remove the bus lane and replace it with car parking (which, according to the bumf would have, in some nebulous way, been better for pedestrians and cyclists). Fortunately TFL ignored them so they had to cope with 90% funded grants to replace their shop fronts.