please empty your brain below

I presume your comment on Jews petering out on the West Bank was not designed as apolitical comment on Palestine
Hasidic Jews on bikes isn't quite as uncommon sight as you may think - just not on the Sabbath, of course.
I think that you crossed Stoke Newington Church Street, not Stoke Newington High Street.

dg writes: I agree, thanks.
"Obviously it's really hard to shoehorn top-class cycling infrastructure into some of London's historic streets..."

They manage to do it in the historic towns and cities of the Netherlands.
Atherosclerosis of the transport system...I'm a former cyclist. I resent road space being reduced by these foul 'cycle lanes'.
CS2 has transformed my commute and has actually made it safe to cycle in sunshine/rain, day/night. Anecdotally, I have noticed ridership along CS2 increase substantially since the lane was protected the entire length.

I would doubt I would be saying the same thing if I had to instead rely on CS1. If councils don't want to build high quality bike infrastructure it would be better if they were to build nothing than to half-heart rubbish like this. Waste of taxpayers money for no real benefit. 8-80 cycling CS1 is not.
As an occasional cyclist, I am very grateful for this guide to the lower part of CS1. You've done it, so we don't have to!
The northern bit gets confusing again soon after it leaves the main road.
Road space isn't reduced by cycle lanes, it's made available to people who don't want to either use or share with massive space hogging cars.

CS1 is a total joke. It gets even worse just north of where DG stopped.
CS1 is better thought of as a first attempt at a 'quietway' and not a 'super highway'. It should be redesignated. See for comparison the new signs for Q2 which intersects with CS1.
> I am not (and will never be) a cyclist.

Is it strictly against your 'religion', or would you be a cyclist if only it were reasonably safe, e.g. as in Amsterdam? I wouldn't dream of cycling in London, but I did hire a Boris Bike during a Ride London Sunday wide-area road closure and thought it was fantastic. But with a cyclist killed every month in London alone, it's just far too dangerous.

Similarly, I tend to be a militant pedestrian when cyclists ride on the pavement, I deliberately don't get out of the way unless I feel imperilled. But I do now wonder whether cycling on the pavement should generally be allowed: my only other recent experience of cycling was in Japan where this is allowed (except in very congested areas such as outside stations). It seems to work very well, making cycling safe and pleasurable, and as a pedestrian you soon get used to looking out.

Japan tends to be a very polite society so I'm not sure that the experience could be transported successfully to this country, but it was interesting to see how something prohibited here can work so well elsewhere.

I would fascinated to see your reviews of other peices if cycling infrastructure in London- particularly from a pedestrian point of view.

CS 3 is also close to you!

dg writes: Here's CS3, from 2010.
Cyclist should never be allowed to ride on the pavement. The road is for cyclists the pavement for pedestrians. All cyclists should also wear a helmet and consider other road users and pavement users more! If the amount of money spent on making life easier for cyclists was spent on improvements for walkers the world would be a better place.
The road is for cyclists? Great idea. Let's ban the buses and cars and lorries. Oh.

And what improvements for walkers would you recommend, Tones? Segregated pedestrian routes, or "footpaths" as we could call them? Removing barriers so motor vehicles are encouraged to move more slowly and walkers can cross the road more readily? Or installing more barriers to make walkers safer from road traffic?

Just an idea, but how about if each of us recognises that we have to share the space with everyone else: walkers, those in wheelchairs, those with pushchairs or dogs, those on mobility scooters, cyclists, cars, buses, lorries. And indeed that today's cyclist might be tomorrow's walker, and yesterday's car driver... Perhaps if everyone had a little more consideration for other people, rather than charging around as if everyone else must get out of their way, it would all be a little easier.

Most people heading south down the line of CS1 would probably use the Lea towpath instead - that's what I used to do (and I thought that was where CS1 went!)
I read your story this morning and then heard about Germany's autobahn for cyclists on the radio...
@ Graham. "Road space isn't reduced by cycle lanes"
Er... sorry, I can number quite a few roads where it has been.
@ Andrew. "Removing barriers so motor vehicles are encouraged to move more slowly and walkers can cross the road more readily? Or installing more barriers to make walkers safer from road traffic?"
To an extent, I've become sadly convinced that the planners aren't always troubled by whether their designs will actually work in a real environment or not. They've already been paid once and - if they don't get it right the first time (ie. if enough people complain) - it'll be them who get paid again for improving it... or making it less worse. I mean, sheesh, where's the incentive to get things right!!!???... it's not as if it's their own money they're spending!
[Historic example, illustrated by DG: the traffic light arrangements at Bow Road / Fairfield Road]

Whether "road space" is reduced by cycle lanes is a matter of terminology.

If you take the "road" in its legal meaning of the whole public highway, pavements, cycle tracks, grass verges etc all included, then it is not reduced by varying those things.

If you consider that the "road" is the bit of the public highway where cars are allowed, then of course adding cycle lanes (other than the weird "optional" ones), or traffic islands, or wider footways, or bus lanes, or parking spaces (etc etc) does reduce that bit.

It is not legally permitted to drive a motor vehicle on any part of the footway (except to cross it to get access). However, it does seem to occur very frequently when a road is narrowed by cars on the other side, and the only alternative, for the driver, is to reverse out of the road they are in and go another way (often practically impossible because of a queue of vehicles behind).

And my point is? Not sure, actually.

"It is not legally permitted to drive a motor vehicle on any part of the footway (except to cross it to get access). "

Or any carriage unless propelled by a pedestrian - so pedalling a cycle is not allowed, but pushing it, scooting it (or an actual child's scooter), prams, handcarts, skateboards, are all allowed.

There is a legal distinction between a footway (alongside a carriageway) and a footpath (anywhere else).

Where pedestrians and cyclists are supposed to be allowed to mingle, this needs to be made absolutely clear - see Kingston Market Place for how NOT to do it.

TridentScan | Privacy Policy