Major General GW
Field CB OBE
Resident Governor
HM Tower of London
13 December 2001
Dear
General Field
We are writing on behalf of City Cyclists
and Tower Hamlets Wheelers, the City of London and Tower Hamlets branches
respectively of the London Cycling Campaign, to ask you to consider a trial
modification of the prohibition of cycling on Tower Wharf. The London Cycling Campaign is the principal
organisation in London campaigning for safer routes and better conditions for
cycling in the capital, with a membership of over 8000 cyclists across London.
The
present total ban on cycling on Tower Wharf is in our view unreasonable,
because at most times the pedestrian usage is low and there exists ample space
for pedestrians and cyclists to share the Wharf safely. Tower Hill, the only alternative for cycles,
is a very fast, busy and polluted road with a very poor safety record.
Many
public bodies in London and elsewhere, such as the Royal Parks and the
Corporation of London, are moving from the complete prohibition of cycling in
pedestrian spaces to a rational, case-by-case analysis of where cycling can
practicably be allowed and encouraged, while always making the safety of
pedestrians the primary consideration.
This has led in recent years to the opening
of new routes for cyclists in Richmond Park, in Kensington Gardens, along the
Thames towpath upriver from Hammersmith Bridge, along the Ravensbourne Brook in
south-east London, and along the south bank of the Thames eastwards from
Bermondsey, and the likelihood soon of new routes coming into being in Regents
Park, Wandsworth Common and Hampstead Heath. These routes, to help cyclists
avoid busy and dangerous roads, are an essential part of the Government’s
strategy to quadruple cycling levels by 2012.
We
believe that the Tower of London should also encourage visitors to arrive by
cycle. There is ample opportunity given that National Cycle Network Route
4 passes by just on the other side of the river. Providing and indeed
advertising dedicated cycle parking - high quality designs are available to fit
in with sensitive surroundings - could also help reduce parking pressures on
the west side of the Tower. We have
received a number of complaints about the difficulty of parking cycles around
the Tower, apparently due to the risk of cycles being filled with
explosives. In addition our proposal
fits in well with the proposed pedestrianisation of part of Tower Hill, about
which we would be grateful for further information.
In our view the main problems with
permitting cycling on Tower Wharf are firstly the restricted width and high
pedestrian levels at certain times on the south part of Tower Hill, immediately
next to the tourist entrance to the Tower.
The second potential problem is the large number of tourists on the
Wharf during some afternoons. The first issue could be dealt with through the
construction of a new footbridge to connect Three Quays Walk, Tower pier and
the Wharf, allowing cyclists and pedestrians,
such as those on the Thames Walk, to bypass the busy section. Obviously
this would need to include a gate to restrict access when the wharf is closed.
Without this we can accept the need for a cycle ban on that section from 10am
to 5pm. The second issue could be dealt
with by a ban on cycling during the busiest times, i.e. weekend afternoons in
the summer, though most cyclists will dismount. While we have a rough
impression of the number of visitors we realise that you will have more complete
and less anecdotal statistics.
Were cycling to be allowed on the Wharf at
certain times, there is the question of whether cyclists should be kept to one
side of the Wharf by, for example, marking off a section with metal studs or a
white painted line. In our view, this could be considered following a
trial period to observe the success or otherwise of allowing unsegregated cycle
access.
The main consideration is not the risk of collisions between
cyclists and pedestrians, as this is very slight, but of the fear of such
collisions, which could reduce visitors’ enjoyment of the Wharf. We do not
believe there will be problems: in other parts of the
world, pedestrians and cyclists are used to sharing road space, be it in
demotorised town centres in continental Europe or elsewhere, and the majority
of tourists will accept bicycles as a normal encounter on the Wharf. Indeed there is now extensive research on
shared use to support this view.
The cobbled surface of the Wharf is already
effective traffic calming and the views are so scenic that few would want to
speed. In the case of shared use, there
should be clear signposting applying the existing speed limit to cyclists and
giving pedestrians priority. These are the rules that are successfully applied
to shared cycle/pedestrian paths in the Royal Parks and the open spaces managed
by the Corporation of London.
We hope that you will consider our proposal
and would be most willing to discuss it further with you. We look forward
to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
Yours sincerely
Ralph
Smyth Owen
Pearson
Co-ordinator of City Cyclists Co-ordinator of Tower Hamlets Wheelers