- 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
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
City of London (licensed CC BY-SA 4.0 by Colin and Kim Hansen).jpgCity of London urges "irresponsible cyclists" to curb their speed
“Irresponsible cyclists” in the City of London are being urged to drop their speed, with the City of London Corporation, which governs the Square Mile, warning that their behaviour is threatening initiatives aimed at promoting cycling, such as the ban on vehicles other than buses and bicycles at Bank Junction.
That initiative, which began in May last year and applies between 7am and 7pm on weekdays, has resulted in the number of road traffic casualties halving at the junction, and the City of London Corporation will decide in the coming weeks whether to make it permanent.
But it warns that a small number of inconsiderate cyclists at peak times are jeopardising that and other potential safety initiatives through riding at excessive speed, and is calling on riders to adhere to “considerate cycling” on its streets.
A statement from the Corporation, quoted on trade journal BikeBiz, said: “Our message is simple – in the City, please ride at a speed where you can easily stop if a person walking happens to step out.
It said that efforts to get more people cycling, such as the changes at Bank junction, were “under threat due to the behaviour of a small minority of irresponsible cyclists. Travelling over 10mph is simply not acceptable.”
The Corporation continued: “In terms of danger the biggest issue is that some cyclists travel too fast for the crowded environment we experience at peak times, and it must be expected that pedestrians may step out at any time.
“Attitudinal studies show that the majority of road users see cyclists as the biggest cause of concern.
“We are also seeing that collisions between pedestrians and cyclists are the cause of an increasing number of injuries, which is a priority to address since this type of collision tends to lead to two injuries, as both the pedestrian and cyclist are injured.
“Studies show that the vast majority of cyclists are responsible and polite, and we call on this silent majority to help us promote considerate cycling.”
Those issues were highlighted in the Corporation’s Road Danger Reduction and Active Travel Plan 2018-23, which outlined a Vision Zero for road casualties by 2041, including through issues such as preventing cyclists being injured through ‘dooring’ by promoting the Dutch Reach technique to licensed cab drivers and private hire drivers and their passengers.
The Corporation also launched, last November, four “road etiquette principles” to coincide with the start of Road Safety Week and targeted at reducing the number of people killed or seriously injured in road traffic collisions in the Square Mile.
Aimed at all road users, the four principles urge people to:
Look around – keep your eyes open and focus on what’s around you.
Be aware – the City of London’s a busy place, so always expect the unexpected.
Be considerate – remember other road users are people too.
Less haste – take an extra second to think about what you’re doing and any potential hazards.
The “considerate cycling” campaign will be formally launched at next week’s inaugural City Cycling Festival, running from 13-15 June, and hosted at Guildhall jointly by the Corporation, the LCC and the International Cycle History Conference.
Among the events on the programme at the City Cycle Festival will be a panel discussion chaired by Alderman Alison Gowman entitled, “Why do so many people have a problem with cyclists and what can be done about it?”
The panel will include comprise cycling author and BikeBiz editor at large, Carlton Reid, cycling journalist and road.cc contributor Laura Laker, Rachel Lee from the everyday walking charity Living Streets, Ashok Sinha of LCC and Jackie O’Donovan who runs the waste disposal business O’Donovan Waste.
NB: An earlier version of this story said that the "considerate cycling" initiative was being run in conjunction with the LCC.
We have been informed by the LCC that this is incorrect and are happy to put the record straight.
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
- jamesha100 3 hours 36 min ago
I have been in Belfast for work this week and have been shocked by the congestion around the city centre. There are lots of frustrated drivers...
- David9694 3 hours 58 min ago
Cyclists should be made to have insurance etc https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/24757516.four-vehicles-seize...
- A V Lowe 4 hours 30 min ago
On a bus the driver has a fully glazed double set of doors that give a direct view of any cyclist or pedestrian travelling right into the left side...
- matthewn5 4 hours 55 min ago
A friend in my cycling club has a new Ribble Allroad, I think the model with 105, and when I asked how he was finding it (before reading this...
- Rendel Harris 5 hours 4 min ago
Well yes but that's if you're looking at an equation x = n x 3 where n is any number less than 5. If you're looking for a number that is three...
- check12 6 hours 22 min ago
Get them back? They've never gone away for me, cheap tdf winning bikes on eBay with rim brakes and cheap rim brake aero wheels, just don't tell...
- Simon E 7 hours 5 min ago
It used to be called Buy Nothing Day as a protest against the the Black Friday discounting madness. The constant BF adverts, promos and stuff...
- chrisonabike 9 hours 20 min ago
Apologies - you're quite right! Something about presentation and comprehension...
- wtjs 9 hours 41 min ago
You can find out whether they're lying about 'taking action' by asking them what they actually did. When they refuse to tell you, citing various...
Add new comment
76 comments
And here is the news. Due to some incredibly selfish cyclists, klling and maiming at will, speed limits have been reduced to 3mph, for cyclists only, obviously those nice drivers never kill or maim anyone.
It is so comforting to know that the City of London make decisions based on the evidence, not their own prejucidices.
If people on bikes are being asked to cycle no more than 10mph by definition of the increased hazard motorvehicles should be driven at no more than 2.5mph, just to ensure that pedestrians AND people on bikes are safe!
utterly clueless, targetting the wrong group especially when the governments own report states that out of 20 pedestrian deaths nationally only 4 were the fault of a cyclist. Whilst Alliston is fresh in the mind we can remind ourselves that his speed just before impact was as low as 10mph, this was admitted in court by the prosecution. This speed is well below pretty much every at fault motorist who ever killed or maimed a pedstrian or cyclist.
Cycle safely yes but some onus of responsibility has to be spread to the zombies too, they are capable of killing a cyclist when they step in to your path suddenly and as we see from the Alliston case if they are running at 10mph then it would be manslaughter right?
" and it must be expected that pedestrians may step out at any time." .. So therefore cyclists riding within the speed limits (even if they actually applied - On a side note I am still trying to get a speeding fine on my bike here in Norway where it IS possible) need to slow down, rather than trying to persuade pedestrians to actually look (up from their mobile device) before stepping into the public highway in front of a moving vehicle ?
That's got to be politicians logic that.
Side note 2, maybe it's time the speed limits did apply to all vehicles, not that many cyclists exceed them anyway.
Thank you for bringing this concern to my attention, and I'm sorry that you think that bicycle speeds of more than 10mph are unacceptable. I should be grateful if you would provide me with any element of statute, leglislation, the Highway Code or semblance of primary evidence backing this up to enable me to come to a more informed position as to tell you how hard to go away.
Highways Act 1835 - pedestrian vs cyclist collision this afternoon at 5:30 at Bank Junction. The pedestrian has “life changing injuries”
Still want to the Corporation to “go away”?
that act is nearly all repealed and there isn't anything about going no more than 10 mph.
Until the circumstances of the incident are kniwn, it would not be sensible to comment or draw conclusions.
Is that the terrible and ancient Victorian legislation which is allegedly not fit for purpose (see every tabloid reporting on the Alliston/Briggs case) and which means we MUST review cycling and then introduce more and harsher legislation?
Having cycled around there numerous times, advice should be directed at pedestrians to cross after checking it is clear. Then a whole of nots: staring at your phone, blocking out traffic with music, walking in the middle of the road, playing chicken with the lights.
Be easier to ban everyone but pedestrians if they are so worried.
Maybe pedestrians should be advised to cross at crossings, wait for the green man and maybe not be on the phone whilst crossing?
Maybe we should all take responsibility for our own actions a bit more, and blame others a bit less.
Just be excellent to each other, then?
...and party on, dudes!
Are those buses going to be limited to 10mph too?
My bike has no speedometer... what does 10 mph feeel like? Surely it is possible to be inconsiderate at any speed? Surely it is possible to be inconsiderate in any kind of vehicle?
You need to cycle in Bushy Park. I know I must be riding at less than 10 mph because, despite my exertions, cars routinely overtake me beyond this point on a weekend: https://goo.gl/maps/QvJLYtgiKNn
Problem are shared commuting paths,especially canal ways. I am equally amazed at people letting their dogs run loose on busy shared paths, than I am at fellow cyclists whizzing around pedestrians and oncoming cyclists at 20 miles an hour on tight shared canal paths. Now that the weather is warm again and those shared paths are even busier than usual, I tend to avoid them because I find them more stressful and dangerous than the road options on my commute.
I’m not sure 10mph is reasonable, but what’s wrong with asking cyclists to ride reasonabley. I would suggest that 10mph sounded like a good number, and better than something seemingly odd, like 12, or far to high, like 20mph. There is a small monority (a lot of them couriers) who ride like total bellends. The angry response just comes across badly and helps no one. There are people who ride too fast and, like it or not, bikes take longer to stop than cars from the same speed, and you have less concentration on what is around you when going hard. Just take a look at the crashes in races running in to stationary objects.
Why is 20 far too high for cyclists, yet apparently far too low for motorists (who pretty much invariably exceed that limit, and are semi-officially allowed to by the police)?
Reasonable is reasonable, but 10mph is simply too low a figure.
And for me, at lesat, the anger is due to to (as a pedestrian more than anything) constantly having to deal with motorists doing 30 or more (sometimes _far_ more, i.e more like 60) on 20mph limit roads. As long as that is just accepted and taken for granted and rarely prosecuted, complaints about cyclist speed don't sit well with me (even if it does piss me off when cowardly pavement-riders don't have the decency to at least ride slowly, it's just nothing like the same scale of problem)
Edit - it's not clear in the story, but if they are solely talking about speed at Bank junction then I'm more sympathetic than if they mean roads generally...but 10mph is still too low a figure.
Either drop there speed limits to 10 miles an hour for all road users or they can get fucked.
Perhaps they should also threaten motorists with not repairing pot holes until a they stop killing people too.
I think the Corporation are being reasonable trying to prevent collisions before the pedestrian/car/Daily Mail/Daily Express lobby use any coming togethers between cyclists and pedestrians as a reason to bear down on cyclists.
If an area is busy shouldn’t you adjust your speed so you are safe? We know a lot of car drivers don’t but this isn’t aimed at car drivers (who are mainly banned from that junction in any case).
Housecathst. I can only assume that you were apoplectic which accounts for your spelling and telling people to “Get fucked”
Can you give any examples of motorists being given a similar message, ever ? If not I stand by my comment.
There are advisory speed limits all over the country, usually on bends, brows of hills etc....
so they do exist.
Incidentally there was a pedestrian vs cyclist collision this afternoon at 5:30 at Bank Junction. The pedestrian has “life changing injuries” so there’s your KSI.
So those of you ranting on here about how fast you should be allowed to go might want to reflect on that.
A couple of StreetView urls might help, I'm struggling to think of any "advisory" limits.
Plenty of rural roads with bends have a max speed sign. There is even the odd one on a motorway slip road which has tight curves. No real need for a street view link.
Here you go, this is a bend I can see from my window right now:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.8602558,-4.2726847,3a,75y,90.65h,80.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUbEAfQSv36vRwg2eq92YfQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
The image below, which includes the description of the signs meaning, is taken from the government publication "Know your traffic signs"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
advisoryspeedlimit.jpg
ok, so where the suggestion that other motorists should in force these advisory speed limits or the threat that if people don’t drive to at these speed limits they’ll stop build roads for instance.
The city of London threat is far more sinister. There in effect suggesting they will stop making improvements for cyclist ineffect putting people lives at risk. Perhaps there suggesting they’ll reopen bank therefore putting cyclist and pedestrians at greater risk.
What was the cause of this collision? Inattentive ped stepping out into the road or a "speeding" (whatever that means) cyclist?
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/bank-junction-crash-woman-rushed-...
"A female pedestrian has been rushed to hospital with possible life-changing injuries after being hit by a cyclist at the notorious Bank junction.
Police officers were called to the junction in the City just after 5.30pm following reports of a collision.
The victim was taken to Royal London Hospital with a head injury, City of London Police said."
So, was 'hit by a cyclist' - so, does that mean the bicycle had nothing to do with it? Do we even know if they were riding their bike at the time? After all, since its always a pedestrian hit by a car (not a motorist) then presumably the Standard is being very careful in its language...?
I'd say that "speeding" is not being able to safely stop within the distance you can see to be clear ahead. However, that doesn't include someone stepping into your way without warning. I have no problem with reducing my speed around pedestrians and being extra careful in shared spaces, but I don't have a lot of sympathy for peds that step out into roads without looking.
There's always going to be a small percentage of idiots walking, cycling, driving etc. Rather than bleating on about the dangers of behaving dangerously, they need to employ police to prevent/stop the worst ones and thus send a message about what is and isn't acceptable.
The link to the story posted by Brooksby (thanks) does not explain the circumstances of the collision, so the fact is, we have no facts.
For the record, nobody's "ranting" about how fast they should be allowed to go - just pointing out the rank hypocrisy on show and the ignorance of setting 10mph as an "acceptable" speed for a bicycle.
Pages