Westminster Bridge to get segregated tracks

I'm not happy to put up with shitty road conditions, but I'll make it very clear: Westminster Bridge did not have shitty road conditions, and the people in this thread who actually use it everyday seem to agree.

And what's wrong with putting in lanes where u can if it encourages people to take up cycling so be it, in the long run every one will benefit from it. I just came back going over Wandsworth bridge this morning and I struggled into a headwind as a reasonably fit male and I dread to think what a middle aged woman on a pashley bike would think of it. A bike lane would have helped her. I civilised society is one that caters for the weakest not just ignore them because your doing just fine with things as they are.

Some people feel very uncomfortable with people revving up behind them or a 10 ton lorry/bus with in arms length. Most of us here can deal with it, but to the masses it fills them with horror.

If you'll forgive me sticking my oar in...
I thing actual safety is a red herring when it comes to segregation arguments. If the aim is to get non-cyclists cycling (which it is, whether we like it or not) then perception is everything.

@fizzy.bleach your argument is based on your feelings and backed up by other commenters in this thread, but the very fact that you already use the route makes you biased towards proclaiming it acceptable. Your feelings appear to be backed up by safety stats too, but it doesn't really matter at the end of the day - normal people don't make a statistically supported analysis of a road before they ride on it. They just look at this and think "fuck that".

Edit: If I showed that Streetview to my mum she'd shit a brick and she's been cycling daily for basically my whole life. People are naturally resistant to the idea of cycling on wide multi-lane roads, even if they're not necesarily any more dangerous than backstreets. They just look scary.

Looks like the next battle ground will be the experienced cyclists not using the cycle lane, which is perfectly reasonable and legal. Boris has recently said he doesn't use the cycle lane bus by pass in Whitechapel and even the Euston under pass which has segregated crossing on street level.
As cycle lanes increase we will see dick head motorist being aggressive towards cyclist not using lanes.

Reminds me of priory lane in Roehampton where no one uses them because they are useless for cyclists and only there so children can cycle to the nearby primary school.
https://youtu.be/_6e0t8sDevs

But why pander to a demonstrably incorrect perception by changing reality (at great cost) to fit in with the incorrect perception?

If you wanted people to eat more fruit, but they thought the only "safe" fruit was blue with yellow dots, would you go around painting all the fruit blue with yellow dots?

It's madness.

Madness? Evening Standard comments section is that way >>>>>>

He was a chef, or something? There was a thread about that incident.

That is my biggest concern with cycle paths, aside from the increased proximity to pedestrians. It's nice if they actually get more people cycling, however they do give the minority of bad drivers an excuse for their road rage. Rather than argue about high vis, helmets, and bike lights, they can do things like that guy in the video.

That isn't an isolated incident, and my personal experiences are in line with the video.

Wait where's that segregated/non-segregated argument thread? >>>>>

In my experience they need no excuse to be dicks

I just think it's a waste of money and time, and adds to the general perception that the only way that cycling is safe is if it's done in a physically separate area of the UK's road network.

The biggest problem is that there's not enough space for pedestrian, which tend to be fairly common due to tourism.

Because no matter how convincingly you argued that it is safe to cycle in traffic it would still remain unpleasant. You can't talk people out of their own feelings.

People spend hours in very expensive therapy to rid themselves of ridiculous irrational fears, like spiders for example. By comparison beig run down by a bus is actually a pretty rational fear and not one that many people are in a hurry to confront.

To use (twist) your fruit analogy - If the blue and yellow fruit could only be provided by the government and everyone was terrified of the other fruit that was already available, would you withold it and let them all die of scurvey?*

*Just to make the analogy more tortuous you could equate scurvey to, say diabetes in the real life cycle lane scenario.

My fruit analogy would be along the lines of moving the fruit aisle away from the massive vehicles that can kill you

Or banning man eating tigers from the fruit aisle

Etc

Yea, but then how do the Mamils in lycra on the morning commute get their exercise, without man eating tigers beeping and throwing pennies out the windows of their Chelsea tractors?

And what's wrong with putting in lanes where u can if it encourages people to take up cycling so be it, in the long run every one will benefit from it.

The problem is that there's a serious lack of continuous cycle lane, even with the recent CS6 et all, it's still not 100% segregated the entire route.

They might be ok going from a certain distance of the lane, but they still may not be comfortable enough to ride straight from their door, this is where the issues is.

I welcome it, what I don't welcome is the serious lack of changes in regard to driving, lots of effort going to make people ride, but almost no effort in encouraging people to drive properly around cyclists (i.e. not to aggressively threatening them for choosing not to ride in the cycle lane).

Before this fully turns into "but Amsterdam" let's move back onto the actual point of Westminster Bridge and the surrounding area.

I ride bikes, I cycle over Westminster Bridge twice every weekday and most weekends if I'm heading into central.

I have NEVER had an incident on the bridge, I've never felt threatened or unsafe and I get along perfectly with all the other road users when approaching and crossing over it.

Can somebody explain what the difference is between how I conduct myself on the roads surrounding the bridge and the bridge itself, and someone else who wouldn't be able to use this bridge without having a segregated cycle lane?

Also what will happen to cyclists that depend on the segregated cycle lane on the bridge (which is essentially a straight line) when the cycle lane ends and they get flung into Westminster Square? Which is a little more complex as it involves communicating and changing lanes to get to you desired exit. Will they immediately get run over because they have no kerb to keep themselves from heading into cars and vice versa?

I have NEVER had an incident on the bridge, I've never felt threatened or unsafe and I get along perfectly with all the other road users when approaching and crossing over it.

What about before and after the bridge?

like on Westminster Bridge Road near the railway arches, the bridge itself is not the problem, it's the road layout surround it is.

I'm comfortable riding there, but I can understand why some people are not comfortable riding there.

The traffic lights are really short and its a pain in the arse under the railway arches, only about 4 cars get through before the lights change again.

Westminster square is a bad example for your argument. It will very soon have a segregated Lane taking you to Hyde Park and beyond.

But more generally I would suggest more segregation on more main roads.

For those on dutch bike or just want to take it easy, not so great.

That's where people need to work on, address complicated junction and road that encourage impatience.

Also the road surface under the arches is completely shit, it's dangerously potholed, money needs to be going into tarmacking that road.

Can somebody explain what the difference is between how I conduct myself on the roads surrounding the bridge and the bridge itself, and someone else who wouldn't be able to use this bridge without having a segregated cycle lane?

Can I guess at your demographic? 20 to 30 male? . If so you are fitter and stronger than most people in the city. Do you think you might start experiencing problems if you were to take on this route at 5 to 10 mph?

The cycle lane look really small, doesn't help that pedestrian are likely to overspill onto the cycle lane during peak time.

Tbh parliament Sq was more of a priority but unfortunately the bridge was an easier target for segregation.

On the subject of the conflict between fast and slow riders in these lanes - I can't see them ever extending more than a few miles from the center. Being forced to pootle for the last 3 miles of my journey would add maybe 10 minutes to my total commute. I can live with that.

1.8m on the plans. Possible to pass, but not easily.