Disabled cyclist ordered off trike as confusion reigns over London South Bank cycling ban

The problem has arisen as a result of the increase in commercial activity along the South Bank. This has hugely increased the numbers of pedestrians, unlicensed food vendors, human statues, skateboarders etc on the Thames path. I have cycled along this stretch of the Thames for around fifteen years. It would be a shame to no longer be able to do so, because Lambeth Council are unable to deal with the conflict-in-use in a constructive manner. Why single out cyclists rather than acknowledge that the increase in pedestrian traffic is the main culprit? Considerate cycling (and walking), allowing the path to be shared, would be a far more civilised solution.
Perhaps Kate Hoey would support cyclists if they agreed to hunt down foxes while cycling along the South Bank?

I'm a Lambeth resident. I'll contact my MP.

The trike, presumably set-up for riding with a disability fully complies with the criteria set out for a Class 1 Invalid Carriage - the PCSO should have been told that this was the case and thus the user was legitimately using her mobility aid, preventing her from doing this could be considered as discrimination against a disabled person - could the PCSO provide his details so this could be reported....

There is an 'alternative' wording for PCSO which I'm trying to remember, that highlights their not quite a real polis position and the issues it delivers.

There should by 'Pedestrian Priority; Considerate Cycling Permitted' signs here and enforcement action against reckless cyclists, not against all cyclists.

To support this send an email saying this to cycling [at] lambeth.gov.uk

Look through the Thames Path posts on my Kennington People on Bikes blog to see the path at different times and on different days. And you can check out the quality of the on-road alternative.

http://kenningtonpob.blogspot.com/search/label/Thames%20Path

Also, the comments about the ban not having any legal validity because of incorrect signage are, to put it bluntly, nonsense. Very little of the South Bank is public highway and there is no public right of way along most of it - the vast majority of it is private property with negotiated permissive access.

Even as an avid cyclist, I have to say that I welcome this ban.

The South Bank has become a rat-run for large numbers of inconsiderate cyclists who show no consideration at all for the pedestrian users of the path and this ban is long overdue.

It must be AWESOME to be a PCSO. I reckon I'd have a more-or-less permanent boner if I had such power. I've got a promising semi just thinking about ordering disabled women off their tricycles.

The ban is not enforceable, because no traffic management order has been issued. The black signs have no legal validity. (I think a legal ban requires the DfT design-standard white circle with red border, with a cycle sumbol in it). PCSOs are not supposed to stop people cycling, let alone those with disabilities, but instead are supposed to have a word with any cyclists abut considerate behaviour.

I have written to Hoey - twice - and she claims it is not her decision, so interesting to read that she supports the ban. She tells me that "pedestrians have no "organised" [her quote marks] lobby like cyclists in London, and so tend to get ignored. Well, if this is what a "disorganised" lobby does for you, maybe that is what we need!

Interesting - I go to the South Bank a good deal and often with my kids at the weekend when it's busy - rarely have any issues with cyclsits. We've even taken our own bikes or my kids take their mini scooters. Are those banned also? And what about the BMXers at their regular area? For that matter, what about skateboarders? Those things don't even have brakes. It strikes me as an ill thought out policy.

If Lambeth Council really wanted to deal with a health hazard at the South Bank it would do well to enforce existing rules to get rid of all the many unlicensed fast food food sellers supplying digestive ailments to unwary tourists, rather than addressing a problem that isn't there. As for its safety attitude, Lambeth Council is also removingfunding for lollipop ladies/men from schools to save money, which shows you just how short sighted and ill informed its road (lack of) safety policy can be.

This is the result of a campaign led by Kate Hoey (spelling?), and the typical knee jerk reacion to a few cyclists that were not too kind to pedestrians. Also, what really gets to me is how fast the powers that be react when there is a complaint about cyclists. Same happened in Clapham Common. We cyclists have been complaining about cars parked on cycle lanes and vehicles using the ASL to no avail. It goes to show the place that cycling occupies in our society: bottom of the food chain.

Is this a case of someone in Lambeth Council having a problem with Borris bikes and cycle "Superhighways" but can't do anything about them so is being vindictive? Or is it a legit response to growing conflict between pedestrians and cyclist in the area? If it's this though you would expect the council to have highlighted the problem as back up to their actions? It does seem to be a very arbitrary action.