Riding the wrong way up one way streets legally

They've spent £45,000 on this. How?

There's quite a long procedure to go through in making a traffic order. Audits like safety audits need to be done. Some engineering measures may be required, e.g. kerbline re-arrangement. It all adds up, and while £45k may seem a lot, in traffic engineering terms in this country it's actually pretty good whack for their buck.

wasn't this already happening in westminster or somewhere over that way?

Kensington and Chelsea, as a result of campaigning by Kensington and Chelsea Cyclists.

Why is this a trial? it has been legal in 10+ streets in Hackney (between Dalston Lane, Graham Road and london Fields

Hackney is the original home of the 'permeability' approach. It's one of our most important objectives:

http://www.hackney-cyclists.org.uk/permproj.htm
http://www.hackney-cyclists.org.uk/permeability.htm

A current campaign aims to return the Stoke Newington one-way gyratory to two-way operation. TfL have just published a scandalous 'feasibility report' claiming it's not feasible:

(See under 7th January, 2009:)
http://www.hackney-cyclists.org.uk/new.htm

(1.3MB PDF)
http://www.hackney-cyclists.org.uk/stoke_newington_tfl_feasibility_study_2008.pdf

The report is completely ridiculous and we'll be campaigning hard to have a proper one done and to move this project forward, although it has to be said that in the current funding climate it could be years. Traffic engineering is generally cautious and conservative and to effect any change is hard work. But we've had lots of successes over the last few years and remarkably few setbacks, and we'll keep going.

So what are they doing? Are they actually putting a cycle lane in. At the moment I hop onto the pavement if I want to go the wrong way on and one-way, but being more careful due to peds.

Understandable as your reaction to such an annoying (and mostly completely unnecessary) permeability restriction is, you shouldn't cycle on the footway. It is more gracious to a street environment that is already poorly designed to cycle in accordance with the highway code. Naturally, people's patience is tried the more of these obstacles are in your way. More help with campaigning against them is always needed.

Does anyone know about the motorbikes in bus lanes thing? I've just had a look here, and it turns out one of my main roads to work is now even more unfriendly to bike.

Report any experiences at Bus Lane Watch:

http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?Pageid=1250

What's this about being already legal in Hackney? Perhaps you mean with a 'contra' cycle lanes, yeah this has been done a fair bit where the road is wide enough, But not enough.

A contraflow lane is recommended under certain circumstances. See Traffic Advisory Leaflet 06/98:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tpm/tal/cyclefacilities/contraflowcycling

In practice, contraflow cycling works fine even in narrow streets with parking on both sides. We've had contraflow arrangements in Navarino Road and Greenwood Road in Hackney for more than ten years now, and even when the markings are really worn off there are few if any problems reported.

Maximum route choice, minimum diversion FTW.

This 'trial' is pathetic. A lot more could be done surveying cyclists' 'desire lines' to implement better traffic management for us. Seven little roads (all in the city?) aint gonna do much.

City Cyclists started to campaign for this (among other things) in 2001. If you know how these things work, you'll recognise that there's a massive shift in approach behind it. The City of London now has very high levels of cycling indeed and is increasing its responsiveness to the requirements of cycling. It would be expected that if this works well, that the approach would be rolled out generally in the City and perhaps other local authorities will follow suit. In each local authority area, there are hundreds of cycle permeability restrictions to remove--access restrictions like street closures, one-way-streets, and gyratory systems.