Reader views (98)

 Add your view

I'm absolutely horrified by the comments of car drivers and even pedestrians in this page.

As a pedestrian and car owner I know how to behave in town, looking in both direction before crossing is something I constantly repeat to my son.

There's far too much cars in London, they are usually occupied by the driver only and I wonder what will be the treshold in the petrol price before they start to think to burn their own calories.

Cyclists riding on the pavement are a disgrace, the few that I have seen are usually thugs who intimidate people with "cute" dogs.

I went accross this article after coming back from shopping in town, I am making a detour to avoid taking a one way road which have been set up only recently and I'm just upset that the council has made this change without marking a cycle lane especially as this road was leading to a cul de sac for the cars but not for the bicycles.

While riding on the detour I had to take a busy road and oh surprise the cycle lane was purely ignored by 25 cars stucked in front of a red light, there was enough space for me to overtake those cars and by reading the hainous comments about forbidding the use of a bicycle in London I can now understand the frustration of some car drivers.

Reading some comments here make me realise that when one day a car driver overtook me and blocked my progression then came to me brandishing a trunket because he felt I was not riding fast enough seems acceptable?

What's the legacy for our kids?

- Phil, London UK, 01/12/2010 14:30
Report abuse

Lots of emotive terms here. Carnage is my favourite. The proposal works ok in Europe and our national pride must surely mean that if 'they' can manage it, so can we

Someone might walk out in front of a cyclist? Yeah, might happen but every road user has a responsibility to be aware of what goes on around them - and that includes looking both ways as a pedestrian when you cross the road. I frequently see car drivers taking short-cuts the wrong way up a one way street (off Pulross Road in Brixton) so it pays to double check even as a pedestrian.

- Simon, London, 31/03/2009 16:33
Report abuse

I spend alot of time on the roads in question, and since this was first announced, 2/3 weeks ago, I've experienced disdainful glares from cyclists riding the wrong way down a one way street. NONE of these occurred on the designated areas for this to happen.

A cycling proficiency test pass should be mandatory for anyone wanting to use our roads.

At the end of the day, I ride a scooter, and I'm wearing motorcyclists body armor and a helmet, in a collision with a cyclist I'm not going to come off any worse. These people need to apply some common sense before they end up dead or another white cycle by the roadside.

- The Roadside Avenger, London, 13/03/2009 11:31
Report abuse

What happens when a pedestrian is run down by a lycra-lout because he/she is crossing a one-way street and quite reasonably only checks one way for traffic?

Ridiculous idea.

- Nobby Clark, Perth, Scotland, 12/03/2009 15:37
Report abuse

Dangerous and foolish. Don't these Lycra wearing morons think they own the road enough!! What next, traffic lights and pedestrian crossings are advisory? Oops, I forgot, that mindset already exists.

- Peter M, London, UK, 10/03/2009 14:44
Report abuse

I'm not sure what this scheme means, is one way on the road, or one way on the pavement, where most cyclists seem to spend most of their time in London?

- Ronnie, Billericay UK, 02/03/2009 16:52
Report abuse

Why doesn't the Evening Standard commission one of their groovy on-line polls to go something like this:

Are you pro-cycling both ways up one-way streets and hang the boring old safety issue?

Or:

Do you foam at the jaws at the very thought of cyclists being allowed to wreak even more havoc than we all know they already know they do (and probably enjoy it, sadistic little devils that they are)?


I think you'd get a landslide result but I don't want to spoil everyone's fun by saying what I think it might be (whisper: I think the cycle-haters would outnumber the pro-cyclists about 100 to one!)

- Stuart Plummer, London, 23/02/2009 14:00
Report abuse

Reading these comments, one thing seems very clear to me: most of the cyclists are simply in the wrong environment. They are expecting conditions that are never going to be materialise in London. I think they need to wake up and face up to the fact that they need to go and live someplace else. Somewhere quiet and calm with big open spaces where they can live out the 2nd childhoods they obviously yearn for. Until they are in a position to do that, I suggest they hire themselves a nice big empty tennis court to ride round in circles, like so many hamsters on an invisible wheel. They could chunter at one another as they go about all those awful car drivers and pedestrians that previously spoiled their fun. It could be like their own little club. Think what fun that would be!

- Tanya, London, 23/02/2009 13:48
Report abuse

I'm so glad I don't live in London any more. At least in South Yorkshire, not all the cyclists jump red lights/ride on pavements/the wrong way up one-way streets. Some do, and they're a menace to motorists and pedestrians alike.

- Yvonne, Doncaster, UK, 23/02/2009 10:48
Report abuse

Well done The City for this.

Now can the City Police stop using their Plastic Police, sorry PCSO's, to harass cyclists at the junction of Beach Street and Aldersgate Street. There is a disproportionate use of resources against cyclists by the City Police, as they stop cyclists I see illegal activity by drivers on their mobiles, no seat belts, illegal number plates (makes a farce of the Ring of Steel and its number plate recognition system!) etc. etc.

- Andy, Central London, 14/02/2009 13:42
Report abuse

David, Dereham, UK: "This is just legalising what cyclists do already. How long before they make riding on the pavement legal?"

It already is legal on many pavements, certainly around London.

- Prj45, London, 14/02/2009 09:34
Report abuse

This is a fantastic initiative, and a big thumbs-up from me to the Corporation. Of course, being allowed to cycle 'both ways' is standard in mainland Europe and I think transport planners there would view our pondering on the subject rather amusing! The neighbouring borough of Hackney has been busily snd successfully introducing similar measures for years of course, with a resulting increase in cycling. Now all the city needs to do (rather urgently) is to reduce road danger for pedestrians and cyclists alike by reviewing the layout / operation of its awful one-way gyratories and 'fast junctions'. Fancy having such 'motorway-like' streets in a place that really should be designed for pedestrians and cyclists first and foremost. Anti-cycling prejudices are not helpful; not all pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, bus drivers, car drivers, taxi drivers, lorry drivers are 'model citizens' as we all know. The issue is that we need to focus our efforts on identifying and controlling which modes cause other people the greatest danger. In the scheme of things, cyclists represent a miniscule risk to others, yet we are just as at risk of danger from motors as pedestrians. Cyclists would not have to use the footways if they felt safe using the streets!

- Richard Lewis, Hackney, London, UK, 07/02/2009 13:14
Report abuse

This is just legalising what cyclists do already. How long before they make riding on the pavement legal?

- David, Dereham, UK, 06/02/2009 21:31
Report abuse

"Will the Highway Code have to be amended?"

Hopefully, and with an emphasis on murderous motorists staying out of cycle lanes and boxes, rather than cyclists staying in them, which is the current slant. I won't hold my breath though, as politicians, lawyers, judges and magistrates are amongst the very worst offenders for serious motoring crimes.

- Reg, London, 06/02/2009 14:19
Report abuse

An absolute joke, with them already jumping Red lights and Pedestrian crossings, its a recipe for disaster for the man/woman on foot.
Also, does this mean the footpaths need to painted look bothways instead of left or right, and what about utilities who have to work in these streets.
Will the Highway Code have to be amended ???

- Des Creighton, Rochester Kent UK, 05/02/2009 17:24
Report abuse

I would prefer for disabled persons to have complete rights of way up and down teh 1 way streets. It would be nice gesture. The biker expects to be given it all and for once they should not. They should be placed quiet in garage or may be the nursery with the other childhood things one does not take on the street when one is past adolosense. Character building for them. In the United States they call it time out and I think this also would g be good for the temper tantrum of teh average biker. Thank you.

- G Uunk, Peckham, 05/02/2009 15:46
Report abuse

"you can only manage 15? And you think that's not going to hurt a frail pensioner when it hits them eh?"
Ah yes, all those frail old pensioners who work in the City.

- Cyrus, Hackney UK, 05/02/2009 15:32
Report abuse

Very sensible proposal, already used successfully in inner London.

I enjoyed this fantasy of secret killer cyclists:
"all this tosh about cyclists only killing 3 people a year - how does anyone know, when the cyclists always flee the scene at slightest spot of trouble"

- Cyrus, Hackney UK, 05/02/2009 15:28
Report abuse

John, London - Of course hitting a "frail pensioner" would do damage at 15mph. No one was not arguing that point. N Wightman was trying to demonise cyclists, making out that they all zoom round on the cusp of the speed limit, between parked and gridlocked motor traffic. That is utter balderdash.

As for "only" managing 15mph in central London/commuter traffic, what exactly do you think the average speed of motor traffic is in central London? I'll tell you, it's not much more than 10-12mph. Your average commuter cyclist does not travel at 3 times the speed of motor traffic!

I don't believe that you could manage 30mph on a bike even along a straight country road, unless perhaps you're a competition cyclist or triathlete?

- Zab, London, 05/02/2009 14:24
Report abuse

Bike Commuter - so you can't manage 30 mph, you can only manage 15? And you think that's not going to hurt a frail pensioner when it hits them eh? You should really think before you start splitting hairs mate!

- John, London, 05/02/2009 13:43
Report abuse

N Wightman - Very, very few cyclists can manage 30mph. I cycle regularly with a top London cycling club and we may reach 30mph in a peleton formation along a flat road. No cycle commuters would ever make 30mph especially travelling in "zags through heavy traffic, around juggernauts and through red lights".

To hit 30mph you need a lightweight bike, not a heavy mountain bike laden with panniers and a rucksack. Most London commuter cyclists might make 15mph on a good day.

You really do need to think carefully before making your broad, generalising comments in future....

- Bike Commuter, London, 05/02/2009 12:15
Report abuse

To all you bikers out there: two wrongs don't make a right. That means you can't justify your rubbish behaviour by critizing everyone else. My gran was nearly mown down by one of your lot the other week and is now in a state of permanent nerves going outside her own door. That make you happy does it? It disgusts me and should disgust any other decent minded person.

- J.C., Paddington, 04/02/2009 16:13
Report abuse

N Wightnman,
If you could pull yourself out of your parallel universe & read my comment correctly, you will see I never stated that cyclists do not cycle on pavement. I'm just sticking up for cyclists that seem to take more abuse than either drivers or pedestrians, and throw some back. Neither cyclists, pedestrians or drivers are angels, all make mistakes.

Over time I have also learnt to predict motorists behaviour, impatient & always trying to get a couple of meters in front of cyclists, even in a queue (pointless excerise), regardless of lack of space for the cyclist.

I do drive, but choose not to sit in traffic for an hour going nowhere, and cycle instead. Why I should take abuse for this, I dont know.

At the end of the day, cycling will never be banned in London (again, another decision by motorists who think they should be the only ones on the road), so motorists , pedestrains & drivers will have to lump it & get along together. It works in many other countries in the world, but not the UK. Too many stress heads behind the wheel too, often running late, does not help matters.

- dom, London, 04/02/2009 14:53
Report abuse

This comes as a surprise to me - cyclists have been routinely riding the wrong one on one-way streets in the City (Bunhill Row, for one), for many years now - they then have the nerve to shout abuse at anyone who happens to get in their way!!

With the short-term closing of one side of the road along Chiswell Street, Cyclist still bomb along the road and, yes, shout abuse at anyone who may step into the road after ascertaining that no traffic is coming from the remaining (correct) direction.

I shall have great fun if one points out to me that it's legal - I shall retort that I still have a few of those bad cyclists to shout at myself, so put up and shut up.

- Kaz, London, 04/02/2009 13:41
Report abuse

To Dom from London - Of course car drivers aren't perfect, we all make mistakes, and there are plenty to be made. There is also a welter of stupid behaviour to indulge in when you have been driving for many years and become complacent. But the point is that most car drivers and pedestrians are fully aware of the damage that a misplaced car can do. It is not common to find a car driving along a pavement at all, nevermind at speeds in double figures, but it is a very, very common occurrence to find bikers on London's pavements and if you deny that fact then, my friend, I can only assume you are living in some parallel universe. Similiarly, you do not find pedestrians hurtling at 30 mph in zig zags through heavy traffic, around juggernauts and through red lights. Over time drivers and pedestrians alike learn to predict one another's behaviour to an extent (both consciously and unconsciously). It is impossible to do this with cyclists who behave so erratically and that is why they are putting themselves in so much danger.

- N Wightman, Brixton, 04/02/2009 12:59
Report abuse

As a cyclist and a pedestrian, this is a seriously stupid idea. For example, the streets where I work are mostly one way and pedestrians generally only look one way when they cross the road.

Leaving aside the danger of cycling towards oncoming traffic, there will be a lot of unnecessary injuries to both pedestrians and cyclists as a result of this.

- JL, London, 04/02/2009 12:53
Report abuse

It makes me laugh all these anti cyclist comments about them lawbreaking.
I cycle to work every morning (on the road 100% of the way)& all I see is drivers on their mobile, shaving, talking to kids in the back (not even looking where they are going), jumping red lights, speeding, not stopping at Zebra crossing, parking on zigzags, cutting up cyclists, stopping in box junctions. I could go on. Also, how many drivers are still over the limit from the night before.
I also get pedestrians walking out in to the road with out looking, walking in the road when there is an accessable pavement, dog walkers letting their dogs walk into the road, and mothers who just push their kiddy buggy in front of you expecting you to stop dead while they cross the road.
Just my observations from 25+ years of cycling over 3000 miles a year.

- dom, London, 04/02/2009 10:31
Report abuse

Dear Rabid Cyclists, if an expert in any other field was pointing out something of real value to you, would you not at least listen to their words? I find it extraordinary that you are automatically discounting the words of car drivers as some kind of vindictive campaign against you. It sounds like paranoia on your parts but I'm guessing that you just won't listen to common sense because it means your own bit of fun might get spoiled. Pretty childish really. Oh, and isn't it interesting how all these years drivers and pedestrians have managed to rub along together, but you throw a load of hooligans with pedals into the mix and NEITHER the pedestrians nor the drivers like it? What does that tell you? I'll tell you what it tells me: that the majority should be listened to. In other words, get rid of the cyclists now! By which I don't mean run them off the roads (clearly a lot of them don't have the brains they were born with so why add to their problems) but make the very act of bicycling on London's streets illegal. Then everyone would be happy. Except the cyclists, of course, but who cares how they feel!

- M Farbiash, Highgate, 04/02/2009 10:20
Report abuse

is this initiative sponsored by the federations of ambulance chasers and funeral directors?

- M.O'Brien, london.uk, 03/02/2009 18:35
Report abuse

Deborah: "Cyclists ALWAYS cycle the wrong way up one way streets - it may come as a surprise to most of them that this is a special new rule just for a few roads in the City. (They also ignore all traffic lights and ride on the pavement.) Why are they not punished? I know I would be if I knocked one off his bike with my car, even if he was in the wrong."

Hi Deborah, I'm a cyclist and I've never ridden the wrong way up a one way street and I don't jump lights or ride on the pavement (where I'm not allowed to). I also see quite a lot of cyclists who do jump lights stopped by police and given a £60 on the spot fine. Want to revise your statements?

- Prj45, London, 03/02/2009 12:52
Report abuse

Let them give it a try for about a year, then if the body count is high enough, let them keep it!

The riding at night without lights seems to be working o.k, only seen two very bad cyclist accidents at night over the past month or so (DUE TO NO LIGHTING WHATSOEVER ON THEIR MACHINES), so that's all right then!

One must not let ones prejudice with cyclists overide their (Cyclists)moral high ground, after all, they do not produce any carbon, other than what they breathe out!

GERONIMO

- Geronimo, LONDON MIDDLESEX, 03/02/2009 00:40
Report abuse

Melvyn, as a motorcyclist, I am perfectly happy with being given the responsibility to read the signs and act accordingly. I have been riding through central London every day (apart from when I cycle) for about 6 years and I use bus lanes when I can and have never had an accident. It's not that hard to do if you accept a little bit of individual responsibility instead of blaming everyone and everything else at every opportunity.

- St, London, 02/02/2009 12:53
Report abuse

St. London Trouble with Boris allowing Motor-bikes in bus lanes is the signs are wronly located and at the Elephant & Castle highly dangerous. At the Elephant the symbol has been added on a section which contains two buses lanes, problem is the kerb-side lane leads to the contra-flow bus lane in London Road! A motor bike rider travelling at speed who does not know the ares could end up in a highly dangerous situation.

While on red routes which become yellow routes there are no signs telling motor bike riders to leave a bus lane as they are not permitted in the yellow section.

A classic is on Picadilly where motor bike symbols have been added to the eastbound bus lane none of which is red route! The only red route is where Park Lane (red route) has a junction with piccadilly.

When one considers how efficiently both stages of the c-charge were introduced as the botched errors I alone have seen it goes to show what happens when things are rushed for poilitical purposes by someone who after a year in office still has so little to show.


Anyway this scheme is aimed as preventing tory politicians getting prosecuted for breaking the law. Pity the new commissioner did not arrest Boris for some of his cycling wrongdoing in order to show he is no-ones poodle!

- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, 01/02/2009 16:51
Report abuse

It's good to see some comments from cyclists here following recent cycling stories. In the past all we had was wild, hysterical rants that cyclists are "the most dangerous things on the road", cyclists "terrorise" people etc.

As I and others have pointed out time and time again, motorists are the biggest killers of both cyclists and pedestrians. Cycling quite simply makes complete sense in a busy city like London. The more people cycling the fewer motorists are on the road resulting in less congestion, less danger to pedestrians and less damage to road sufaces (which has to be subsidised by general taxation). It also means there are fewer people on the Tube and trains, giving train and Tube users more space to breathe and resulting in less wear and tear to the rail and Tube systems (repair of which, again, is funded through general taxation). Last but not least, we have the envionmental argument. Beyond production of the bike itself, cycling causes no unnatural CO2 or other emissions, resulting in cleaner air and what's more leads to a healthier population, reducing obesity, removing consequent stress and strain on the NHS (once again, funded though taxation). I could go on with reasons to cycle...

So, let's get some perspective and clarity of thought and less of the rabid, unfounded generalisation.

- Bikist, London, 31/01/2009 14:09
Report abuse

This is a sensible and pragmatic recognition of what is already happening where a 1-way street system is inappropriate for human powered travel - many of the locations are already used as 2-way streets by cyclists and formal recognition will make it safer and release resources fromn petty enforcement of laws which are disrespected because of their inappropriate use.

In the UK we have a regime which is the complete opposite from much of mainland Europe, where 2-way cycling is the default for 1-way streets (for motorised traffic), and only where a hazard of fast moving or high volume motor traffic exists is contra-flow cycling banned.

Perhaps the Corporation will now look at a number of light controlled junctions where a left turning cyclist poses no hazard and simply filters in to the moving traffic crossing their path. There is incidentally a way that this can be legally delivered - simply create a cycle lane through the stop line with a Give Way marking.

The Oxford-Cambridge survey of around 5000 regular cycloists revealed that over 50% were filtering past red lights and safely using 1-way streets. Respectable folk coping with bad law.

Remember also that the 1835 Highways Act (used to prosecute cyclists, and nowhere near enough motorists)for driving a carriage on the footway does permit this use to take place for the purposes of getting between 2 parts of the carriageway - now I'd love to see a legal interpretation of this. Can anyone comment?

Dave Holladay

- Dave Holladay, Glasgow, ex London, and Guildford (work), 31/01/2009 13:33
Report abuse

This should work providing it is well signed and given plenty of publicity. Cyclists will need to take extra care and watch out for the half-asleep motorist!

- Phil, London, 31/01/2009 10:46
Report abuse

Can we have free turn left on red as well?

And all those comments that cyclists breaking all the laws are rubbish. I see hundreds of car drivers jumping red lights and going over white lines and ASL's at traffic lights. Cyclists aren't killed by just by their own stupidity, but by other road users stupidity too. Take for example the lorry driver in the middle lane who went left without indicating!!! He should be locked up! And the taxi driver who cut me up twice, 1st by pulling into the left without indicating, then by doing a U-turn in front of me again without indicating. No one is a mind reader - that's why everyone has indicators - USE THEM!!!

- Patrick, London, UK, 30/01/2009 18:41
Report abuse

Derek Flint, if you believe that this will cause the deaths of cyclists, can you cite one, single death that has been shown to have been caused by a cyclist using a one-way street in a legal manner?

Here's a clue- there aren't any!

The schemes have already been introduced across Kensington and Chelsea and Hackney and have proved safe, successful and sensible. Too many people here are commenting from a position of rank prejudice and complete ignorance about what's actually happening I'm afraid.

- Claire Stringer, Clerkenwell., 30/01/2009 18:24
Report abuse

Enough bike riders who cannot obey the current law are being either killed or injured. Giving them this right of way will only end up with more deaths and injuries

- Derek Flint, London UK, 30/01/2009 17:52
Report abuse

One way streets, except for cycles, have worked perfectly well in Norway, Germany, Holland, and probably loads more places for years. I think the people of London can be trusted to handle this ok.

- Phil, London, 30/01/2009 17:47
Report abuse

"The fact that so many cycling readers of this site are writing on here that cyclists do no wrong "

Sigh. Nobody has said this or anything like it Jane. Me and other law-abiding cyclists have merely pointed out that even if the hysterical claims about the danger posed by cyclists were true, the real, unassailable fact is that cyclists kill on average 0.5 people a year whilst drivers kill ten a day. With that in mind, all the complaints about the risks this scheme will pose (risks that have not in the least appeared in similar schemes in Chelsea and by London Fields where cyclists use one way streets with no problem) appear to be based on prejudice rather than any actual evidence.
Cycling is safe, encouraging novice cyclists is to be encouraged to make the roads safer and more civilised. The more cyclists there are the safer the roads become, you can check this if you like, it may make you reconsider your hysterical belief that cyclists "terrorize" anyone.

- Susan Meadows, Barnes, 30/01/2009 17:22
Report abuse

The fact that so many cycling readers of this site are writing on here that cyclists do no wrong but simply float around the streets polishing their halos tells me that they do not have the cognitive reasoning ability to understand the danger they are putting themselves in with their feckless behaviour, not to mention the safety of innocent pedestrians who they regularly terrorize.

- Jane Snooks, BROMLEY, 30/01/2009 15:56
Report abuse

St London

If you are pulling out from a junction and cannot see clearly whay is that? Possibly because cars are parked illegally parked on corners? The following is taken from the Highway Code: Rule 243
"DO NOT stop or park: opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space"

If permission is given to cyclists to cycle the wrong way up a one way street (which as I've already commented is a bad idea), then they are doing so as a right. And given that you are joing the traffic flow, it is you that needs to take the extra care.

I suggest that if you cannot see past corners you inform the police or just take the care that you are supposed to. Perhaps your time so valuable that you - alone of all people - have the right to do as you wish on a public highway?

You seem to be of the opinion that you have a god given right to drive irrespective of others using the road. And yes, I do drive but unlike you I try to respect others using a public road.

- Al, Reading UK, 30/01/2009 13:35
Report abuse

Cyclists ALWAYS cycle the wrong way up one way streets - it may come as a surprise to most of them that this is a special new rule just for a few roads in the City. (They also ignore all traffic lights and ride on the pavement.) Why are they not punished? I know I would be if I knocked one off his bike with my car, even if he was in the wrong.

- Deborah, London, 30/01/2009 13:20
Report abuse

"Boris Johnson has allowed motorcycles and mopeds into bus lanes this year, but so far I have yet to see any street signs indicating this. It must be terrifying for cyclists unaware that they will have mopeds buzzing around their ears when they assume they are safely segragated. If you plan these things, please make it clear on the roads."
Umm, it's very clear on all of the signs. Perhaps you need to look a little closer? The change has not affected every bus lane, only those which are red routes and some others, but regardless, unless there is a sign, a motorcyclist cannot enter. I realise that, as a cyclist, you are not interested in road signs, but but I think you ought to check them before spouting spurious criticism of Mayor Johnson.

- St, London, 30/01/2009 10:04
Report abuse

Cyclists seem to do as they wish already. I frequently see cyclists with no lights riding in the pitch dark. They go through traffic lights, along pavements and across pedestrian crossings. They need no licence or training and pay no insurance or road tax. They are completely unregistered so can not be traced when they break rules or injure people or cause accidents. Now they are expected to respect a ruling that only affects 7 one way streets?
Any accidents and it will be someone elses fault.

- Mark, Croydon, 30/01/2009 03:14
Report abuse

Long overdue change. This works brilliantly in many countries in continental Europe where bikes & mopeds are allowed ride against the flow. It provides extra incentive to use bikes.All it needs is proper signage, marked lanes and intelligent, aware drivers (and pedestrians). Pessimistic naysayers and opponents of change are a deadweight in this country! Get over it & move on.

- Mike, Stafford U.K., 29/01/2009 22:28
Report abuse

No doubt a few deaths as a result of this change and it will be stopped. What muppet comes up with these idea's?

- Mike Kelly, London England, 29/01/2009 15:30
Report abuse

I work on a one-way street but I have to look both ways before crossing because cyclists routinely cycle the wrong way. I learned the hard way - had a couple of very near-misses, the lesson from the second being that the first hadn't been a one-off idiot.

- Suzanne, London, 29/01/2009 13:35
Report abuse

It is bad enough that at night, as a watchful pedestrian, I have to dodge cyclists cycling the right way down a road wearing black, with no lights/reflective jackets on their bike in poorly lit streets - fortunately I've been able to avoid an actual accident but it has been a close run thing.

As a cyclist (cycling in broad daylight) and having suffered injuries as a result of a pedestrian walking out in the road without looking - this will also result in carnage...

Will Boris & Co be responsible for the cost of any injuries caused by this madness?

- Andy, London, 29/01/2009 11:41
Report abuse

Thomas from London - I do not know how you can suggest drivers should re-take their tests when cyclists never have to take one at all. How is that fair or right? Personally I think cycling in central London is stupid and there is no excuse for it. If you want to stay fit take up sport and if you want to save the planet then take public transport. And all this tosh about cyclists only killing 3 people a year - how does anyone know, when the cyclists always flee the scene at slightest spot of trouble, which of course they always cause and probably take delight in the fact.

- N Musa, Hoxton, 29/01/2009 11:28
Report abuse

I also cycle through the City to work. I do about 100 miles on bike per week. My thighs are the size of tree trunks and I could throttle any rabid anti cyclist with them if they came too close on a 1 way street...

Seriously though, I also do not think this is a good idea without proper signage. BoZo has allowed motorcycles and mopeds into bus lanes this year, but so far I have yet to see any street signs indicating this. It must be terrifying for cyclists unaware that they will have mopeds buzzing around their ears when they assume they are safely segragated. If you plan these things, please make it clear on the roads.

As usual I see a pile of anti cycling tripe. Peds drivel on and on about the "majority" of cyclists riding on the pavement. I ride most of my miles through London and am a pedestrian and I very, very rarely see this. People, stay off the hallucinogenic drugs!

Motorists are "overtaxed"? Really? Last I looked, general taxation paid for roads as VED/road tax goes nowhere far enough to cover road costs. If we banned motorists, would we need expensive motorways? Junctions? Signage? In fact if we banned motoring altogether, the weather would probably do more damage to road surfaces than cyclists!

And pedestrians, please, please, please unplug the i-pod and look where you're going before stepping in front of me. Thanks....

- London Biker, London, 29/01/2009 09:35
Report abuse

On the one hand we have car drivers (aka wobble bottoms) claiming that bikes are not entitled to use the roads 'because they don't pay enough tax' (not actually true, but lets let that pass).

On the other hand, we have wobble bottoms claiming that bicycles are vehicles and should 'obey the highway code'.

The fact is that bicycles are responsible for, I believe, 3 deaths in the last seven years compared with some 21,000 deaths at the hands of drivers. Clearly the perception of reality of these irate car drivers is at odds with the real world and they should check that their cars aren't leaking small amounts of carbon monoxide into their cabins!

At the end of the day though, pedestrians and cyclists have an inalianable RIGHT to use the road. Drivers only have a revokable licence. With some of the agression and intolerance shown here, no doubt their aggression will see them either losing their revokable licences sooner or later, or even see them banged up for dangerous driving.

Everyone ignores the highway code to some extent. 99% of car drivers breake the speed limit, pedestrians cross the road without looking, and cyclists run red lights because its safer. Those who live in glass houses......

- George, London, 29/01/2009 09:20
Report abuse

Here in southampton we have had a similar scheme going for years. Several roads have no entry at one end except for cycles and you do tend to get one or two drivers who will swerve at you and shout abuse about "one way street you idiot". Where the road is wide enough for cycle and driver of an ordinary car some drivers will block the road forcing you to wait. You tend to know they#re doing it deliberately by the big fat smile on their face.

I really cant see the London scheme working.

- Dj Cook, southampton, 28/01/2009 22:45
Report abuse

Working in London I run a daily gaultlet of cyclists breaking the law and they are so rude. I once saw a pedestrian being punched in the face by a cyclist who thought that the green man on a crossing gave him the right to go through the lights and not the pedestrian to cross the road legitimately. A colleague of mine was knocked over by a cyclist riding on the pavement and suffered a broken bone in her foot. He sped off and did not even check to see if she was okay.

- Jan, London, 28/01/2009 22:10
Report abuse

The Corporation is to be congratulated in being at the forefront of promoting more cycling. One way streets are a major barrier to creating an efficient cycle network and this move is welcomed.

Central Government should do their bit too - the standard of driving has deteriorated drastically in recent years - the number of agressive drivers who don't bother indicating, speed over the limit whenever they can, don't bother checking their mirrors, is truly frightening. Drivers should have to retake their tests every 10 years and if they drive without a licence, be banned for at least 10 years.

- Thomas, London, 28/01/2009 22:01
Report abuse

I cycle to work in the City and would not be keen to use this new allowance. As we can see from some of the comments here, a lot of motorists hate cyclists. I can just imagine some angry cabbie/van jockey swerving at me if I were to be coming the other way and he thought I was breaking the law.

I'm amazed so many people drive in central London. What a waste of their time! If they don't have the guts/fitness to cycle, I hear that London has a very good network of buses and trains, some of which go under ground and are therefore even quicker!

And to answer some of you "cyclists break the law" people, that's nonsense. I and many others never break road laws. Cars, buses, scooters generally sit in the box meant for cyclists. They are never penalised, though it is a traffic offence. On the other hand, cyclists are regularly fined for red lights etc.

Let's hope driving in London becomes too expensive.

- Mlang, London UK, 28/01/2009 16:35
Report abuse

It would be a much better idea to postiviely encourage the driving of as many personal vehicles (usually with a single occupant, in spite of their ability to carry several more) into the City, and every other part of London and our nation's towns and cities. It would slow down traffic to a near (if not complete) standstill, and enormously improve the safety of vulnerable road users (starting with pedestrians, the most vulnerable of all, and includng people on bikes).

Until the 10 deaths a day at the hands of drivers and the 0.5 deaths a year at the hands of cyclists stop, no-one has the right to claim superiority over road behaviour.

But thank goodness for cheap flights and ferry trips, which allow me to ride my bike in mainland Europe much more safely than is possible in the UK.

- Tom, Manchester, UK, 28/01/2009 16:30
Report abuse

Goodness me, judging by some of the responses to my comments, a lot of cyclists don't think motorists have any right to expect nothing coming in the opposite direction when they enter a one-way street. Frightening!

- St, London, 28/01/2009 16:27
Report abuse

When I see what some of the riders of bikes do on London's roads I think to myself "He or she must not be a car driver because if they were, they would know they are making a highly dangerous situation for themself". My heart is often in my mouth when one of them weave in front of my wheels. I think much of this behaviour comes from an ignorant place, not a bad place (although sometimes maybe it comes from a bad place also) Of course most of us drivers have had lessons and past a test, with a bike you can just get on for the first time and cause mayhem any place, even in front of Buckingham Palace. It is childish to try to justify the wild behaviour by saying car drivers and foot pedestrians do things they should not. Two wrongs don't make a right and why can't they try to set a good example instead of making the road so much worse for us all?

- Margaret Salafrio, St John's Wood, 28/01/2009 16:26
Report abuse

I checked, the comment below is true, an AA survey found that cyclists have the lowest "at fault" rates of any road user, despite what the rather strange anti-cyclist posters here would have you believe.

- Susan Meadows, Clapton, 28/01/2009 16:19
Report abuse

So it will be Boris; fault when I drive over some poor cyclist in the fog

- Keith Price, Luton, England, 28/01/2009 16:12
Report abuse

Someone should gives these local authorities (Hammersmith & Fulham were considering this) notice that they will be partly, mainly or wholly responsible for any injury or damage caused by their promotion of dangerous riding.

- The Masked Avenger, Castelnau UK, 28/01/2009 16:12
Report abuse

Perhaps Michael Eaves, you should take off your blinkers and be a bit more objective. These anti cyclist views come from the general public who are objective and intelligent enough to see the cyslists have brought this unto themselves entirely by themselves through their behaviour.

- Rg, London, 28/01/2009 15:51
Report abuse

Oh yes, this plan will not cause any problems or accidents at all.

- Trunk, US, 28/01/2009 15:51
Report abuse

"The statistics show that the majority of accidents involving cyclists involve absolutely nobody else or a stationary object."

I think that tells us everything we need to know about the average cyclist's capabilities, both in the saddle and mentally!

And it was posted on here by a pro-cyclist! Marvellous! You couldn't make it up, could you?

- Sarah Bradshaw, Enfield, Middx, 28/01/2009 15:51
Report abuse

You numpties realise that this will include Rickshaw bikes?
Just sit back now and wait for the casualty list to be published.

- Thomas The Taxi, UK, 28/01/2009 15:49
Report abuse

Errr, st, your points make no sense, you don't have to get out of your car when turning into a main road! You claim traffic coming the other way (shock horror!) causes you to be unable to turn a corner in your car without getting out! Seriously mate, hand your licence in, you're terrifying!

- Susan Meadows, Clapton, 28/01/2009 15:44
Report abuse

In response to Austen - London and Amsterdam are not comparable, due to size and volume of traffic. This is why you will not find them used for purposes of comparison in any official study on transport systems. Not only that, but cycling grew up organically in Amsterdam and is treated as the norm, whereas here the fad has exploded in the last few short years. Plus - and perhaps most importantly - Dutch bikers generally behave as though they are sharing the streets, treating pedestrians with courtesy and respect. I believe many Londoners who have taken to the bike do so with a large chip on their shoulders and could do with intensive anger management. They also frequently endanger their own lives with their reckless behaviour. I am not a cycle hater, but merely stating the facts as I witness them on a daily basis.

- D Woodstock, London, England, 28/01/2009 15:39
Report abuse

"No problem with this proposal at all - as long as part of the law makes the cyclist soley responsible for any and all damage caused by them using a one-way street the wrong way."

Good lord, read the article, there wouldn't be a "wrong way"-that's the whole point!

Where on earth do these rabid anti-cyclists come from?

- Michael Eaves, London, 28/01/2009 15:28
Report abuse

Cyclists have to be THE most dangerous, law flouting, smug, arrogant nuisances that populate the roads and pavements. Perhaps they should stop being adulated, br brought down a few pegs and learn some manners and humility. Furthermore, they should be fined for any / every misdemeanor and taxed to the hilt as car owner / drivers are. Why are they so revered when they just cause trouble ! It's infuriating and no doubt they (cyclists) cause a great deal of stress to the greater percentage of other road / pavement users. Stick by the road rules cyclists, be humble and earn your respect !

- Rg, London, 28/01/2009 15:19
Report abuse

“Don't be so puerile. How can you say you would have done nothing wrong?” Al, Reading

I live on a one-way street [in London]. The street is wide enough for one car when vehicles are parked on both sides of the street. On each corner of the entrance are buildings. If I turn into the street, I do so in the knowledge that nothing will be coming in the other direction – that is probably the main reason for it being a one-way street and cars being allowed to park on both sides.

Are you proposing that instead of driving onto my street as I currently do, I should stop, get out and check to make sure no cyclists are coming it up from the opposite direction before getting back into my car and proceeding?

Does that sound sensible to you? Or does it sound a little bit silly? Perhaps a little more thought before posting your comments next time might not be a bad idea...

- St, London, 28/01/2009 15:13
Report abuse

"The statistics show that the majority of accidents involving cyclists involve absolutely nobody else or a stationary object."


That's cos mountain biking injuries are included in the stats, which is like including in road safety stats injuries caused by stock car racing.

It is very rare for a cyclist to be found at fault in a bike-vehicle collision, despite this mysterious air of "smugness" they all appear to have. Some of these comments are depressing, the dangers of cycling are hysterically inflated and the law breaking of a few is used to demonise people like me, just trying to get to work, cycling in a none-smug manner.

- Michael Eaves, London, 28/01/2009 14:58
Report abuse

st, sorry to spoil your rant, but cyclists do indeed have the lowest "at fault" stats according to a survey by those notorious tree-huggers, er, the AA! The more cyclists there are the safer the roads become. And yes, if you failed to notice traffic coming the other way perfectly legally and you collide with them then you would be at fault, the fact you're unaware of this fact is genuinely scary.

Can I ask something? If a story about a new road appeared here and someone posted the comment "Why oh why do motorists get drunk and crash into people" then they would appear to be very tedious, prejudiced and negative. So why do stories about cycling attract such prejudicial and sweeping generalisations/demonisations of cyclists?

- Michael Eaves, London, 28/01/2009 14:50
Report abuse

No problem with this proposal at all - as long as part of the law makes the cyclist soley responsible for any and all damage caused by them using a one-way street the wrong way.

- Roger, England, 28/01/2009 14:36
Report abuse

It will need to be made very clear to pedestrians, motorists and the cyclists themselves which roads are affected and who has priority. I assume this is where the £45000 comes in as I can't think how else they can justify spending this much money on something that is already practised.

- Claire, London, 28/01/2009 14:15
Report abuse

When I lived in Holland a few years ago, cyclists were permitted to cycle the "wrong" way up one-way streets. There must therefore already be evidence of whether this leads to more or less accidents.

- Jan, London, 28/01/2009 14:12
Report abuse

Allowing two-way cycling down one-way streets is the norm in the Netherlands, without leading to the negative consequences predicted by some on this page.

Rather than exchange snide comments, I'd prefer to see motorists and cyclists unite against one-way streets. With few exceptions, they are an unnecessary and out-dated inconvenience. Bring back two-way streets for all!

- Austen, London, 28/01/2009 14:11
Report abuse

The vast majority of cyclists I encounter are a menace to pedestrians, not just riding up the wrong way of a street, but also running red lights, riding on pavements, and speeding. On top of it they are smug, being told by politicians how oh-so environmentally friendly they are. The pedestrian is the weakest link in this hacking order and deserves the greatest protection. I expect the Corporation of London will pay medical bills for pedestrians injured and possibly killed by cyclists going the wrong way (at speed)? A bicycle can be just as much of a deadly weapon as a car, and as such all cyclists ought to be tested, hold a license, and issued with tickets and points, just like drivers.

- Alex, London, 28/01/2009 14:06
Report abuse

Without lanes this sounds like a recipe for collisions. I'm a cyclist and am constantly battling with irate car drivers who for some reason believe they have more rights. This will just give them a licence to clip bikes as they pass.
For £45,000 couldn't the Corp of London laid down a few lines segregating the flows?

- Mike, London UK, 28/01/2009 14:04
Report abuse

I saw a cyclist stop at a red light the other day. I mean, what is the world coming to?

- Neil, london uk,, 28/01/2009 13:58
Report abuse

Why not just ban motor vehicles - except public transport, taxis, delivery vans, residents cars and vehicles for disabled people.
This would make the City a much better and cleaner place for workers, residents and cyclists.

- S Needham, London WC1, 28/01/2009 13:57
Report abuse

It works in Berlin for cyclists to go into one-way-streets.

- Katrina, Berlin, Germany, 28/01/2009 13:57
Report abuse

"What happens if I turn right into my one-way street and a cyclist is approaching from the other side - I think we all know the chances of the cyclist giving way is pretty much zero, so if I collide with him/her, who is going to pay for the repairs to my paintwork? I've done nothing wrong, so why should I have to pay? Can I sue the council?"

Don't be so puerile. How can you say you would have done nothing wrong? You would have pulled out into traffic without due care and attention. Don't forget that you are in control of a machine which kill easily seriously injure or kill someone. It is your responsibility as a driver to be aware of what is happening around you at all times. If you are not then you should not be driving. I say this not as a cyclist (which I am), but as a driver (which I also am).

This is yet another sympton of people refusing to take responsibility for their own actions. You may have a right to drive, you do not have a right to be on the highway as a cyclist or driver without paying due care.

As I cyclist I happen to agree that cycling the wrong way up a one way street is a bad idea, but that does not negate your greater responsibility when driving.

- Al, Reading UK, 28/01/2009 13:45
Report abuse

This is a bad move and should not have been considered until the majority of cyclists start obeying the rules of the road and showing consideration for other road users, in particular pedestrians!

- Michael, London, 28/01/2009 13:19
Report abuse

Reg appears to be making things up when he says "Motorists are proven to be culpable in the majority of accidents with cyclists, yet are rarely penalised with more than 3 points even when limbs are lost or death caused."

The statistics show that the majority of accidents involving cyclists involve absolutely nobody else or a stationary object.

The biggest issue that I see with this is that pedestrians assuming that traffic is flowing only one way will step out into the path of a cyclist without looking. The cyclist if conforming to type will not apply the brakes and a collision will occur. I don't a problem for cars as they will at least see the cyclist coming.

- Bruce, London, 28/01/2009 13:15
Report abuse

More moral panic, this in time in favour of cyclists who have no regard for their own safetly let alone that of other road users. I am sick and tired of narrowly avoiding being hit by cyclists riding on pavements and ignoring traffic lights and pedestrian crossings. The simplest thing would be to ban cyclists from the City and to impose large fines on the many cyclists who routinely break the law. Giving in to their self-righteous whingeing will simply encourage them to terrorise more pedestrians.

- Warren Alexander, London, UK, 28/01/2009 13:14
Report abuse

Michael Evans: All I can say then is that you are a very, very rare cyclist! On my way to work each day I must see at least 10 cyclists blatantly going through red lights, and cycling on the pavements when it suits them as well. Then the same amount going home again in the evening.

- Sue, Orpington, Kent, 28/01/2009 13:03
Report abuse

"Motorists are proven to be culpable in the majority of accidents with cyclists, yet are rarely penalised with more than 3 points even when limbs are lost or death caused."

Are we playing the made up stats game? Here's one for you: 97% of cyclists admit to riding the wrong way up one-way streets already.

What happens if I turn right into my one-way street and a cyclist is approaching from the other side - I think we all know the chances of the cyclist giving way is pretty much zero, so if I collide with him/her, who is going to pay for the repairs to my paintwork? I've done nothing wrong, so why should I have to pay? Can I sue the council?

- St, London, 28/01/2009 12:57
Report abuse

a SIGNIFICANT MINORITY ALREADY CYCLE ON THE PAVEMENTS, WHAT ABOUT BRINGING all CYCLISTS INTO LINE BEFORE GIVING THEM EXCEPTIONS.

- Martin H. Watson, Teddington, 28/01/2009 12:55
Report abuse

As a cyclist myself I think the proposal's a stupid idea, there are too many cyclist who flout the rules of the road already and this just encourages it further.

- Bob, Cheam, 28/01/2009 12:46
Report abuse

They should be clamping down on them on the pavements, not giving them relaxed rules on one way streets.

- P Staker, London, 28/01/2009 12:23
Report abuse

The main danger in such streets is always the parked car, and a dolt suddenly opening their door without looking. Can't see a problem with the new rule, but until cars are automatically crushed for stopping in the cyclist box, and alternate phasing introduced, I don't see much progress for their safety in London.

Andi-M - overtaxed? Motorists are the most heavily subsidised class in the whole of the UK, with VED only covering a fraction of the cost of damage by cars to the road. The rest from general taxation.

And now the motoring industry has its begging bowl out again, asking for £10 billion from honest pedestrian taxpayers. Bunch of beggars - wish they'd pay their own way in life instead of sponging off the rest of us.

Motorists are proven to be culpable in the majority of accidents with cyclists, yet are rarely penalised with more than 3 points even when limbs are lost or death caused.

- Reg, London, 28/01/2009 12:17
Report abuse

"Most of them do already, and go through red traffic lights!"

Drivers, you mean?

I don't break any laws when I cycle, and although I would dispute your "most", even if that is partly true then it's remarkable that injuries caused by cycling are rare, and falling? Cycling is no more dangerous than walking, and mixing cyclists in this way, granting them allowances and making London cycling-friendly and so on will all serve to encourage more people to take up cycling. Surely we can all support that!

- Michael Eaves, London, 28/01/2009 12:03
Report abuse

I am a cyclist, but I fully agree with the AA on this. Pedestrians stepping in front of cyclists is one of the biggest dangers not only to pedestrians themselves but also to cyclists. It will increase the ill feeling towards cyclists from motorists who see cyclists approaching them apparently illegally. If it is to go ahead these streets must be properly and clearly signed.

- Patrick Griffin, Dalston, London, 28/01/2009 11:54
Report abuse

Most of them do already, and go through red traffic lights!

- Sue, Orpington, Kent, 28/01/2009 11:24
Report abuse

These rule changes have been introduced elsewhere with no problem, cyclists generally avoid collisions with peds on an Ipod blundering about because they hurt. And Edmund King is on record for calling for the complete segregation of cyclists from other traffic, a very silly idea since cycle lanes are proven to be more dangerous serving as they do as a handy place to park cars, install phone boxes etc. Asking Mr King's opinion is daft, of course he opposes anything that may encourage our obese next generation getting on a bike and realising what a fantastic way of commuting in London cycling is.

- Michael Eaves, London, 28/01/2009 11:21
Report abuse

Oh Great!


More Carnage no doubt, only to be blamed on the hapless motorists when it all goes horribly wrong!!


Why don't they just have done with it and let them all ride on the pavements, through red traffic lights, the wrong way down every one-way street and while we're at it, let them all cycle at night withought lights too - most of them do all these things anyway so it won't make any difference to the average overtaxed and over persecuted motorist really....

- Andi-M, London UK, 28/01/2009 11:17
Report abuse

Add your comment