- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Tower Bridge (licensed CC BY-SA 2.0 on Flickr by Davide D'Amico).jpgCyclists fined for not dismounting at Tower Bridge
Officers from City of London Police have reportedly been fining cyclists riding on the walkway at Tower Bridge, where the carriageway is currently closed to allow urgent maintenance and repairs to the 122-year-old structure and its road surface to be carried out.
Cyclists are allowed to push their bikes along the bridge’s pavements while the works, which will last until the end of the year, are carried out, but they are not allowed to ride across.
Following complaints that some people were riding bikes on the footway, the Evening Standard reports that City of London police were today issuing fixed penalty notices to cyclists who had not dismounted.
Transport for London (TfL) says it will station eight Road and Transport Enforcement Officers on the bridge – two of them at each end – while the works are ongoing, with a spokesman saying that “cyclists will not be able to get past on their bikes without being stopped.”
Information on TfL’s website about the bridge’s closure from Saturday 1 October to 30 December includes details of alternative routes for cyclists.
Those heading southbound across the river are advised to use London Bridge, while those riding in the opposite direction should use Southwark Bridge. Signs are in place on Tower Bridge itself telling cyclists to dismount.
Tower Bridge is closed to motor traffic until 30 December 2016. Cyclists can walk their bikes across. https://t.co/zv4LbFOXa6 pic.twitter.com/FWs3hPsfyT
— LdnCyclingCampaign (@london_cycling) October 3, 2016
Motor vehicles are banned from the bridge altogether, with diversions in place for the routes that cross it, and a higher than usual volume of pedestrians is anticipated during the period of the works – although it will be closed to people on foot, too, for three weekends from 26 November to 11 December.
Unmesh Desai, Labour London Assembly Member for City and East, told the Standard: “It’s really important that TfL and the Corporation challenge the minority of cyclists who are not dismounting whilst crossing the pedestrian walkway on Tower Bridge.
“I personally witnessed several cyclists weaving in and out between vulnerable pedestrians on the bridge yesterday evening and feel that there is a high risk of a serious accident unless enforcement action is taken,” he added.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- mark1a 1 sec ago
Most bike radars don't only alert you to approaching vehicles, they change the flash pattern of the rear light to give drivers of approaching...
- TheBillder 9 min 11 sec ago
If there’s anything in nominative determinism, Ken Skates should be great for active travel.
- TheBillder 22 min 33 sec ago
In that £1000 exactly scenario, beginners should probably be made aware that pedals will be extra.
- don simon fbpe 50 min 11 sec ago
What's wrong with dropping down on to the Millenium Bridge, or the swing bridge, then the brief, but satisfying climb back up the hill? #training....
- chrisonabike 1 hour 31 min ago
The relatives might of course disagree, but in general I'd countenance a relatively light sentence* if only we could fix it so that those who...
- ktache 2 hours 10 min ago
Id forgotten that I got a second hand set of project two's for my getting to work bike over twenty years back.
- Veganpotter 3 hours 7 min ago
My bet is that all these tires popping off are from people with bad pressure gauges or they're simply just putting too much air in on purpose. ...
- Hirsute 3 hours 29 min ago
You have to add images via a reply to yourself after the topic is created. One at a time too.
- chrisonabike 4 hours 23 min ago
David9694 - you were right! These new autonomous vehicles really are conspiring to run out of control!...
- HoarseMann 4 hours 54 min ago
Decathlon have the Garmin Varia RTL515 on offer at the moment for £129.99: https://www.decathlon.co.uk/p/rearview-radar-varia-rtl515-65-lumens/_/R-...
Add new comment
38 comments
Who'da thunk it would be so complex? But it's undeniably true that, as a general rule, circular signs give orders and instructions whereas rectangular signs give information and advice.
( Don't follow through with the exceptions please, it's just a general rule.)
I am puzzled as to why we are having this discussion or that people are expressing support for those fined.
You take the risk and break the law, you get caught, you get fined.
I'm sorry, but, if these people are looking for sympathy they can find it in the dictionary between shit and syphilis!
Maybe.... if the whole of london doesnt implode, this road closure will demonstrate that space can be taken away from cars... and maybe town bridge could become a cycleway in the future?
You should be able to ride a bike on the pavement in most places anytime... assuming that when you ride on the pavement you are courteous etc and do so at an appropriate speed (walking pace). However, its unlikely to ever be appropriate to cycle over the pavement on Tower Bridge at anytime, given that its full of gawping tourists and the pavement snakes around the arches.
The notion that you need to put a sign up or fine people to police this obvious inappropriate behaviour is so annoying, people shouldnt be doing it anyway. Its idiots like this (+ children on one wheeled mountain bikes) that made a 'no cycling zone' appear on a pedestrianised area outside my work (which is empty at 7:30am when i arrive at work.... which is also when a police man told me off for cycling... even though i was probably the only other person in that town centre at that time).
Slow crime day in London?
Until December Tower Bridge is subject to a road closure making it illegal basically for wheeled transport to use the bridge (with the exception I suspect of wheelchairs and mobility scooters). Therefore I would suggest that the best way to avoid being finedis to obey the law.
Is it too hard to understand?
For some (a significant minority?), it appears so.
I really don't get all the back-and-forth on this, or trying to make points about drivers ignoring redlights in a totally different area.
This is about London Bridge - it's never had a shared use path, it's illegal to cycle on the pavement (which also, btw includes rollerskates, skateboards, scooters, hoverboards, etc.) so get off and walk, it's really not that hard, is it?
Reminds me of the myth discussed here:
http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/comment/london-bridge-...
Fair enough. It has been well communicated and posted. Cyclists are also subject to rules and regulations, contrary to the opinions of (too) many of them...
London has become such a building site that three sections of my quiet(ish) commute route (which I won't tweak) require a bit of pavement action. Given the early(ish) hour I leave I could cycle on all of them. I opt to walk, much as I opt to wear bright clobber. Anything to keep the moaners quiet(ish).
So, at the sametime the met are responding to the standards top story for the last 3 days "cyclists on a pavament" there are no reports of any deaths as a result of this as far as I'm aware
Across town another child is seriously injured by a motorist you have to scroll to the bottom of the page to find that story
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/kensal-rise-crash-boy-rushed-to-ho...
As I understand it, read somewhere else, the big red Cyclists Dismount sign does carry the force of law, unlike the advisory blue one, though I am quite happy to be corrected on this.
And John Stevenson, I think the City of London Police are not The Met, they are something different. Totally surrounded by them but not part of them.
Regardless of the colour of the sign. If the pavement is not designated as a shared use path you can't cycle there.
Nope. Has be next to a highway. Have a look at the relevant legislation (Section 72 of the Highways Act 1835).
Can ride or drive down any footpath if its not by the side of a road?
I think this one is a "depends" and once more quite happy to be corrected. I have been a bit obsessed about riding the ridgeway, from Avebury to Goring is all bridleway and resricted byway (with a few tiny sections on roads) so legally cyclable, it's footpath between Goring and Ewelme, the bridleway continues almost to Princes Risborough (which was where I stopped) then it becomes a bit interchangable. I think a lot of this is over private land, and the footpaths are not legally cyclable, at least according to those who look after the ridgeway. I think footpaths on public land are somehow different, hence the "footway" discussion.
I tried to ride the Thames path from Reading, downstream, lots of no cycling signs, had to push the bike more than ride it, my shins hurt.
By the way the ridgeway is fantastic to ride, very well signposted. I was pleased to have a full mountainbike, though it might be doable for a harder CX/gravel. I was also glad it was dry, the bare chalk becomes a frictionless nightmare when wet. For me 2 days worth, based around Reading.
My experience of the red Cyclists Dismount signs have all been on shared use paths, where construction work is being done, which was why I tried to find out the legal type stuff, the blue ones might make a difference when, and I have only really seen them when a cycle route crosses a road, and if a collision occurs and it might have an effect on liability and insurance.
I do not ride on pavements, I dismount when presented by the red signs, and take extra care when shown the blue.
Unless there is a separate bye law on that particular route. Although on country paths right of way etc makes it all a bit weird I believe.
Hence the simple rule. If there's a TRO in place (traffice regulation order back by by-law ), it will have a no cycling sign, bike symbol, red circle.
If there isn't, and there's a councillor who wants to be seen to be doing something, it will have a cyclist dismount sign, which is advisory. That doesn't mean you CAN cycle, because they use the damn things everywhere. It means whether you can cycle or not depends on the nature of the path, not the sign, which was created purely so you can have fun conversations with some of the areas retired population.
True - but in this case it is.
.
Having recently come back from hols in Slovenia (Ljubljana) and been to Graz (Austria) a few year agos, their shared usage paths vary between as bad to far better than ours, and occasionally people seem to cycle on the pavement too.
Does anyone seem to get out of shape about it? Not that I can see...
On the other hand, in both people will patiently wait for the lights to cross before walking across the road when there's nothing coming for miles, society norms 'n' all that...
Entirely apropriate as even walikg at normal pace across that bridge is diffuclt given its tight barriered walkways and lots of tourists.
Good luck walking if you're using certain types of clipless.
Easy...get of the ruddy bike, walk and you won't get fined. Are these the same cyclists who think red lights are optional. We can't reasonably expect motorists to follow the law if we are not seen to do the same..
No disagreement with your first sentence. (In any case, having to walk the bike across still demonstrates why cycling is better than driving! Motorists can't carry their cars across and resume on the other side).
But it's a pity your final sentence seems to invoke the cyclist hive-mind/collective responsibility fallacy. There's no "we", and whatever some other cyclists do on Tower Bridge doesn't mean I can't reasonably expect motorists to follow the law (whether I'm being a pedestrian or a cyclist).
Twats. What hardship is it to walk that short distance? If it was voluntary I would have nothing but disgust for anyone walking. As its a rule it is to be obeyed. Failiure to comply is appealing. I assume that those who break the rules are happy for others to break any rule that they don't like as well . maybe pushing a free of those riders off their bikes would be OK.
A cyclists walking a bike takes up more space than a cyclist riding a bike. As long as cyclists travel at a slow pace and prepare to stop it should be fine.
Unfortunately some people ruin things for others with their behaviour. It only takes a few dodgy cyclists to get a Daily Mail readers heckles up.
Whilst probably wise that you're not trying to cycle along TB it does amuse me TfL can magic 8 enforcement officers from nowhere. Strange how they can't allocate those to police CSH infringements by vehicles.
What constitutes riding? Wondering if you'd get away dabbing along standing on the non-drive side pedal. Bit of a tongue-in-cheek question, doubt that its defined anywhere...
Pages