Police ticketing Chelsea Bridge

I wasn't riding my bike today (though will be pretty soon) though I was out by chelsea bridge this morning and the police were out giving tkts to cyclists as they were coming over from battersea end!! I promptly sent them this but be warned anyone riding along there may get nabbed at any moment now. and anyone who wants to write to complain type in simon ovens and get his email!!

Dear Superintendent Simon Ovens

I was privy to watching community support officers handing out tickets to cyclists riding over Chelsea Bridge citing complaints from neighbors regarding such matters. I have grave concerns regarding this as I have been a cyclist living in the area for over 13 years and never have had any problems sharing the bridge with pedestrians. The design of the bridge as such makes it safer for cyclists and pedestrians to share the path as opposed to being on the road with vehicle traffic. This is even more apparent when it is rush hour because the bridge is so narrow for vehicle traffic there is little to no room to accommodate cyclists as well.

The logic of cyclists sharing the path with pedestrians is made even more apparent because there is a path for cyclists leading up to the bridge (on both sides, both of which are narrower than the bridge path itself) and there is a path from Pimlico turning left directly onto the bridge path. It would make more sense to paint a designated path on the actual bridge to delineate the area for cyclists and pedestrians alike.

I might also point out it is rather out of order that your officers conveniently wait on the westminster side of the bridge waiting for cyclists to cross the bridge from the Wandsworth borough end where there is a cycle lane leading up to the bridge to hand out tickets and give ridiculous lectures on cycle law.

Please consider making time to consider a fundamental long term solution like the one described rather than a short term negative response that I witnessed this morning, especially as the long term aim for everyone's health and wellbeing is to have more cyclists and less cars on the road

Yours sincerely

Mr Watty Miller

It's probably a lots easier to just ride on the road instead of going on the pavement where the poorly designed cycle path is at.

don't be a fucking bellend for once ed.

pow!

Ed you frickin idiot if there's a path cyclists should be able to use it just as much as pedestrians!!

As I recall there are no "cyclists dismount" on either side of the bridge, hence the path is considered a shared surface. Might cycle by and have a look.

I'm with Ed. If there is a road - use it. Leave pavements and shared pathways for pedestrians and mothers with prams and pushchairs.

looking at it on google maps, it's a classic bit of sh*te (but officially encouraged) bit of infrastructure. there's no sign on the S side to say end of cycle lane but there is a pathetic apology of a give way sign from pavement to road - a dangerous manoeuvre usually done by cyclists without looking to see what's coming.

underlines the flawed approach to cycle infrastructure design - forcing bikes to rapidly and frequently switch mode between road user / slow motorised vehicle and pavement user / fast pedestrian' modes, often at difficult to navigate and understand junctions. Like most experienced cyclists, I stick to one mode - road user - and leave the pavements to the peds.

I've ridden over that bridge every day for the last two years. Idiots on the pavement deserve what they get. In fact these days I'm angrier with the way a lot of cyclists ride rather than the motorists as they give us all bad rep.

Get on the f*cking road if you're not on a 12inch kids bike.

Ed you frickin idiot if there's a path cyclists should be able to use it just as much as pedestrians!!

Let me ask you something (if you don't mind of course), if there's a cycle path between the road/kerbs that tell you have to undertake vehicles in order to get into the ASL box at the traffic light, would you take it?

I've ridden over that bridge every day for the last two years. Idiots on the pavement deserve what they get. In fact these days I'm angrier with the way a lot of cyclists ride rather than the motorists as they give us all bad rep.

Get on the f*cking road if you're not on a 12inch kids bike.

I totally agree. People who cycle on pavements or through pedestrian crossings or into people on red lights do an immense disservice to cyclists and give albeit flawed justification to motorists who behave poorly to cyclists. I have taken up shouting "get off the pavement" to such muppets.

Let me ask you something if you don't mind, if there's a cycle path between the road/kerbs that you have to undertake vehicles in order to get into the ASL box at the traffic light, would you take it?

Whether you WOULD use it is immaterial if you LEGALLY have the right to do so. No, I won't use it if it makes me unsafe. Therefor, I'm more likely to think that a BIKE PATH that very clearly goes up onto a PAVEMENT means the pavement is for SHARED USE, and if I consider the roadway to be too narrow to share with cars, I will use that path.

I totally agree. People who cycle on pavements or through pedestrian crossings or into people on red lights do an immense disservice to cyclists and give albeit flawed justification to motorists who behave poorly to cyclists. I have taken up shouting "get off the pavement" to such muppets.

Hear hear... I've not gone as far as shouting at folks on the pavement but I do make comments at RLJers. Equally if there's someone walking in the bike lane I try to brush as closely as safely possible and just quietly say 'bike lane' as I do.

I hope it creeps people out.

If the roadway is too narrow to "share" with cars, assert yourself and ride in the primary position with the cars in front of and behind you.

If the roadway is too narrow to "share" with cars, assert yourself and ride in the primary position with the cars in front of and behind you.

• Motherfucking one.
  
  

Even if this means moving at the speed of the traffic rather than filtering. This is called sharing the road.

Peds should not have to deal with cyclists on pavements unless there is a clearly defined and indicated shared use piece of path.

If you disagree, then lobby to have the HC changed, don't just flaunt the rules. In that spirit, I applaud the OPs letter. It should probably go to your MP as well.

Whether you WOULD use it is immaterial if you LEGALLY have the right to do so. No, I won't use it if it makes me unsafe. Therefor, I'm more likely to think that a BIKE PATH that very clearly goes up onto a PAVEMENT means the pavement is for SHARED USE, and if I consider the roadway to be too narrow to share with cars, I will use that path.

If you think the road is narrow and you're unsure of the pavement's legal standing then ride in the middle of the lane and give motorists that hassle you the lip they deserve. Point out that they should read up on the rules of the road.

... Ah didn't see that reply there. Repeat.

Cheers for the heads up.

Its always nice to know in advance when the Rozza are on my route home.

I havent been ticketed yet for my little misdemeanor's but im guessing its only a matter of time

was/is always fond of yelling 'what's wrong? mummy not let you ride on the road with the grown-ups yet?' at pavementengers.

is it still legal to ride on the pavement if yer under 16?

give motorists that hassle you the lip they deserve

Then post the consequences in this thread: http://www.lfgss.com/thread52449.html

not every cyclist is a lycra-armoured testosterone fuelled animal with the balls to defend prime position on the road...

let's not be divided and ruled. those cocks who want to fight the metal for equal rights on the road, all credit to them. for the rest, decent segregated cycle paths are the only way forward. so don't pity/harass - support....

decent segregated cycle paths are the only way forward. so don't pity/harass - support....

There's two view on this;

It will likely to encourage people to take up cycling, we've already seen this happening and it did work.

but...

They'll still be wary of riding on the road if there's no cycle path, especially if they think that the correct mindset is to ride on cycle path and road is for motorists only, and thus likely to be hugging the kerbs, trying to avoid getting in the motorists' way etc.

Personally I'd like to see a proper cycle superhighway, as in a cycling equation of the M25 (as pictured below), but decent segregated cycle paths I don't support, and I'm not even a lycra armoured testosterone fuelled animal.

Taking primary position does not mean you need to be defensive, just assertive, i.e. asserting your rights as a road user.

"Therefor, I'm more likely to think that a BIKE PATH that very clearly goes up onto a PAVEMENT means the pavement is for SHARED USE,"

Surely you've got enough experience of London's chaotic bike infrastructure to know this is not the case! It could mean absolutely anything at all.

...for the rest, decent segregated cycle paths are the only way forward.

Case study: The cycle path just ended. Where do they go now?

Then post the consequences in this thread: http://www.lfgss.com/thread52449.html

I'm no DJ but, on the safe side I'm also 6'7" which generally works.