TfL paints over part of Cycle Superhighway CS2 in Stratford less than year after installation

For many years I used to go over the flyover at Bow on my commute into central London (it was extremely dangerous but safer that the roundabout believe it or not) I now go through the Olympic park then cross the A102 using the footbridge at Hackney Wick, this takes you into Victoria Park which you can use to ride east into the city (I go via Hackney Road at the top of Bishops Way) this route is not only more pleasant (the park is very nice to ride through) it’s far safer that using CS2 and negotiating the Bow Roundabout. I have no idea why this quiet east west route isn’t advertised more (although it’s getting more popular amongst commuters) but can only assume it’s because of all the money TLF have ploughed into CS2, it does make me wonder how many other better commuter routes are out there that we just don’t know about?

I don't think it's an issue of cycle campaigners not knowing what they want. Yes it was an inadequate measure in the first place which everyone agrees on, but there is some small benefit in that it prevents a slight challenge to the attitudes of many drivers that cyclists should not be in their path at all. I don't think any cyclist has any sense of security when riding on a congested London road with or without blue paint, a cynic might say they have removed it in case a rider is hurt or worst killed on a stretch of road which has been publicly defined as suitable for cycling. Let's hope the long term plans for improvement in London's lacking cycling infastructure aren't as long term as they currently seem, it's total gridlock in West London of late and nowhere to go if you're on a bike.

London cycling campaigners moaning shocker.

The origin of the common "just blue paint" complaint goes back to large parts of the cycle superhighway opening as just route marking.

Without a bordering line, either broken or solid, there's no lane. It's "just blue paint", see picture at top. As such they offered absolutely zero protection. In fact, the complaint was that by being "just blue paint", they offered a false sense of security.

That doesn't appear to be the case for the section in the video, so that isn't something that would have been said.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Even the cycle community can't agree on what's right for our roads, so road planners don't stand a chance.

Personally I think if there was a traffic speed limit of 20 mph was imposed within zone 2 London, then we can do with these bike lanes.

Cycle campaigners: "Blue paint is useless and doesnt do anything to improve or increase cyclist safety"

TfL removes some blue paint...

Cycle campaigners: "Dont take away my blue paint.... it keeps me safe when cycling"

This is what makes me laugh about cycle campaigners in London. Not a fucking clue.

Local cycle campaigners say strip of blue paint was better than nothing in protecting riders

No, it was worse, I've cycled down it dozens of times, it did not stop close passes, it is not a mandatory cycle lane, I really don't see what purpose it served other than a big blue advert for Barclays.

She said: “At least the blue paint and the bollards made the traffic slow down"

Bullcrap, traffic does not slow down. I've even had punishment passes from buses along the CS2.

I haven't cycled the Stratford part of the CS2, but I've got to say those bollards look dreadful and liable to cause an accident.

I use that part as my commute every day, and I was wondering why the took it away again? I thought it was working quite good - does anyone knows why it has been taken down again :-)?