‘Lovelocks’ are removed from Millennium Bridge due to safety concerns

‘Lovelocks’ are removed from Millennium Bridge due to safety concerns

‘Lovelocks’ are removed from Millennium Bridge due to safety concerns

First published in News
Last updated

HUNDREDS of padlocks - intended to symbolise the everlasting bond between two people in love - have been removed from York's Millennium Bridge

City of York Council says it removed 300 of the 'lovelocks' last week because it feared such a suspension bridge could be unbalanced.

The authority's action comes a month after the Pont des Arts footbridge over the River Seine in Paris had to close briefly when the weight of thousands of locks caused a section of the mesh fencing to buckle and fall on to the pavement.

The love locks are considered to symbolize a couple's commitment to each other but they have become a source of growing controversy abroad, with critics saying that beautiful bridges are being blighted by the padlock epidemic. Two friends living in Paris, Lisa Taylor Huff and Lisa Anselmo, started a campaign called No Love Locks in January.

York's footbridge over the Ouse has seen an increasing number of padlocks appear on its mesh fencing in recent months, following the spread of the trend to Britain from the Continent.

Russell Stone, York council's head of public realm,said the authority decided to remove 300 padlocks last week to discourage the practice, which he claimed could compromise the safety and durability of a bridge.

"As happened in Paris and, depending on its design and construction, overloading areas could unbalance a bridge – especially a suspension bridge like the Millennium Bridge – which risks instability and handrails coming loose," he said.

“We were able to save some padlocks and anyone wanting to see if theirs was among them and reclaim it should email frontline@york.gov.uk.”

By last Thursday evening, there was just one lock on the bridge, inscribed with the message "S & L 2014", which had apparently been put there following the council's actions in a show of romantic defiance.

People walking over the bridge were in two minds about the locks and their removal. Caroline Hind said she had liked seeing them, feeling they gave the bridge a little character, while Claire Stephens said: "It's a bit of a shame," although she conceded the bridge now looked better. Catherine Robinson said: "It looks better without them."

*Did you place a padlock on the bridge to symbolise your love for each other? Email mike.laycock@thepress.co.uk, or call 01904 567131.

Comments (46)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:56am Mon 21 Jul 14

sheddie says...

They're starting to appear on Scarborough bridge footway too now.
They're starting to appear on Scarborough bridge footway too now. sheddie
  • Score: 15

10:02am Mon 21 Jul 14

notmyrealname says...

Who came up with this ridiculous trend - it's vandalism and littering in a different form - take the money you spent on the stupid padlock and buy your lover some flowers
and serves you right if you get your bike stolen !
Who came up with this ridiculous trend - it's vandalism and littering in a different form - take the money you spent on the stupid padlock and buy your lover some flowers and serves you right if you get your bike stolen ! notmyrealname
  • Score: 32

10:07am Mon 21 Jul 14

smudge2 says...

notmyrealname wrote:
Who came up with this ridiculous trend - it's vandalism and littering in a different form - take the money you spent on the stupid padlock and buy your lover some flowers
and serves you right if you get your bike stolen !
Steady Tiger ...or is it the Monday morning feeling.??
[quote][p][bold]notmyrealname[/bold] wrote: Who came up with this ridiculous trend - it's vandalism and littering in a different form - take the money you spent on the stupid padlock and buy your lover some flowers and serves you right if you get your bike stolen ![/p][/quote]Steady Tiger ...or is it the Monday morning feeling.?? smudge2
  • Score: 5

10:10am Mon 21 Jul 14

CHISSY1 says...

notmyrealname wrote:
Who came up with this ridiculous trend - it's vandalism and littering in a different form - take the money you spent on the stupid padlock and buy your lover some flowers
and serves you right if you get your bike stolen !
Could not agree more it is a stupid craze.
[quote][p][bold]notmyrealname[/bold] wrote: Who came up with this ridiculous trend - it's vandalism and littering in a different form - take the money you spent on the stupid padlock and buy your lover some flowers and serves you right if you get your bike stolen ![/p][/quote]Could not agree more it is a stupid craze. CHISSY1
  • Score: 25

10:21am Mon 21 Jul 14

eeoodares says...

Its just a variation on a theme, some cultures tie a ribbon around a tree branch.
15 years ago I tied a ribbon with my girlfriend, we are married now and one day will go back.
Its just a variation on a theme, some cultures tie a ribbon around a tree branch. 15 years ago I tied a ribbon with my girlfriend, we are married now and one day will go back. eeoodares
  • Score: 18

10:34am Mon 21 Jul 14

Ignatius Lumpopo says...

They should use that big guy with the bolt cutters from Storage Hunters...
They should use that big guy with the bolt cutters from Storage Hunters... Ignatius Lumpopo
  • Score: 38

10:48am Mon 21 Jul 14

Ignatius Lumpopo says...

... and why the Millennium Bridge? Shouldn't they be on Naburn Lock?
... and why the Millennium Bridge? Shouldn't they be on Naburn Lock? Ignatius Lumpopo
  • Score: 20

10:49am Mon 21 Jul 14

carshalton94 says...

Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.
Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue. carshalton94
  • Score: 31

11:01am Mon 21 Jul 14

piemagico says...

carshalton94 wrote:
Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.
If the bridge can't take the weight of 50 kilos (max) of locks then we are in serious trouble!
[quote][p][bold]carshalton94[/bold] wrote: Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.[/p][/quote]If the bridge can't take the weight of 50 kilos (max) of locks then we are in serious trouble! piemagico
  • Score: 33

11:11am Mon 21 Jul 14

TheTruthHurts says...

Ignatius Lumpopo wrote:
They should use that big guy with the bolt cutters from Storage Hunters...
Lol, you mean 'green mile' or sometimes 'half mile' :-)
[quote][p][bold]Ignatius Lumpopo[/bold] wrote: They should use that big guy with the bolt cutters from Storage Hunters...[/p][/quote]Lol, you mean 'green mile' or sometimes 'half mile' :-) TheTruthHurts
  • Score: 0

11:21am Mon 21 Jul 14

york_chap says...

piemagico wrote:
carshalton94 wrote:
Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.
If the bridge can't take the weight of 50 kilos (max) of locks then we are in serious trouble!
This is actually pretty concerning - if 50kg of padlocks can make the bridge unstable, what would happen if a couple of fat blokes (or women) were to lean against the railings?

Back in 2001/2002, not long after the bridge was opened, some idiot reportedly drove a Transit van over it and it didn't fall down. Surely if people put a similar number of locks on each side, there wouldn't be a problem. Anyhow, it's not that popular with tourists, so why are the council even bothered?
[quote][p][bold]piemagico[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carshalton94[/bold] wrote: Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.[/p][/quote]If the bridge can't take the weight of 50 kilos (max) of locks then we are in serious trouble![/p][/quote]This is actually pretty concerning - if 50kg of padlocks can make the bridge unstable, what would happen if a couple of fat blokes (or women) were to lean against the railings? Back in 2001/2002, not long after the bridge was opened, some idiot reportedly drove a Transit van over it and it didn't fall down. Surely if people put a similar number of locks on each side, there wouldn't be a problem. Anyhow, it's not that popular with tourists, so why are the council even bothered? york_chap
  • Score: 5

11:47am Mon 21 Jul 14

piaggio1 says...

Christ ! Next it will be hi-viz idiot jackets to cross tbe **** thing....welcome to britain.....mind how you go...
Christ ! Next it will be hi-viz idiot jackets to cross tbe **** thing....welcome to britain.....mind how you go... piaggio1
  • Score: -11

12:06pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Dave Ruddock says...

Yes Scarborough Bridge has had these since last year, I take it from "Now " on there will be signage, or the council bolt cutters will constantly be in use. Has for the bridge stability, I doubt it, Fencing instability I understand, Bridge Not. One ounders if certain people from Station Rise were involved as its a cycle route....
Yes Scarborough Bridge has had these since last year, I take it from "Now " on there will be signage, or the council bolt cutters will constantly be in use. Has for the bridge stability, I doubt it, Fencing instability I understand, Bridge Not. One ounders if certain people from Station Rise were involved as its a cycle route.... Dave Ruddock
  • Score: 1

12:13pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Pinza-C55 says...

What we need is for some vandal to go round changing the initials on one of each pair of locks. That would stir things up.
What we need is for some vandal to go round changing the initials on one of each pair of locks. That would stir things up. Pinza-C55
  • Score: 21

12:33pm Mon 21 Jul 14

PKH says...

piemagico wrote:
carshalton94 wrote:
Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.
If the bridge can't take the weight of 50 kilos (max) of locks then we are in serious trouble!
The locks encourage more locks so 50kg soon becomes 100kg and before you know it it's 1000kg plus. Better to nip it to discourage more and more locks.
[quote][p][bold]piemagico[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carshalton94[/bold] wrote: Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.[/p][/quote]If the bridge can't take the weight of 50 kilos (max) of locks then we are in serious trouble![/p][/quote]The locks encourage more locks so 50kg soon becomes 100kg and before you know it it's 1000kg plus. Better to nip it to discourage more and more locks. PKH
  • Score: 33

12:40pm Mon 21 Jul 14

AntMcM says...

The Millennium Bridge is very beautiful and shouldn't be ruined by this mindless vandalism. In Paris a couple of bridges have already been ruined.
The Millennium Bridge is very beautiful and shouldn't be ruined by this mindless vandalism. In Paris a couple of bridges have already been ruined. AntMcM
  • Score: 32

12:43pm Mon 21 Jul 14

again says...

Guess sticking a lock on a bridge is a lot cheaper than getting properly hitched!

Divorce would of course involve having to find the key.
Guess sticking a lock on a bridge is a lot cheaper than getting properly hitched! Divorce would of course involve having to find the key. again
  • Score: 20

12:48pm Mon 21 Jul 14

ouseswimmer says...

Anyone want to buy some locks?
Anyone want to buy some locks? ouseswimmer
  • Score: 9

12:53pm Mon 21 Jul 14

johnny_t says...

Why can't the council just be brave enough to say they are removing them because they are an eyesore, rather than having to invent some made-up 'health & safety' reason ? How many locks would add up to the weight of just one person ? There is no way that any number of locks attached to the bridge could ever, ever unbalance it.

This sort of use of 'health & safety' as a cover-all to avoid explaining your actions is exactly the sort of thing that gives it a bad name. I don't know why they didn't go the whole hog and blame it on 9/11 or something...
Why can't the council just be brave enough to say they are removing them because they are an eyesore, rather than having to invent some made-up 'health & safety' reason ? How many locks would add up to the weight of just one person ? There is no way that any number of locks attached to the bridge could ever, ever unbalance it. This sort of use of 'health & safety' as a cover-all to avoid explaining your actions is exactly the sort of thing that gives it a bad name. I don't know why they didn't go the whole hog and blame it on 9/11 or something... johnny_t
  • Score: 5

12:58pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Pinza-C55 says...

I suspect they actually found a pair of locks which said "JA + TSL" and removed the rest of them to divert attention.
I suspect they actually found a pair of locks which said "JA + TSL" and removed the rest of them to divert attention. Pinza-C55
  • Score: 20

2:11pm Mon 21 Jul 14

SpinningJenny says...

york_chap wrote:
piemagico wrote:
carshalton94 wrote:
Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.
If the bridge can't take the weight of 50 kilos (max) of locks then we are in serious trouble!
This is actually pretty concerning - if 50kg of padlocks can make the bridge unstable, what would happen if a couple of fat blokes (or women) were to lean against the railings?

Back in 2001/2002, not long after the bridge was opened, some idiot reportedly drove a Transit van over it and it didn't fall down. Surely if people put a similar number of locks on each side, there wouldn't be a problem. Anyhow, it's not that popular with tourists, so why are the council even bothered?
The extra weight makes the bridge railings unstable, not the bridge itself. If the railings collapsed the bridge would be unsafe as people could easily fall off the side.
[quote][p][bold]york_chap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]piemagico[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carshalton94[/bold] wrote: Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.[/p][/quote]If the bridge can't take the weight of 50 kilos (max) of locks then we are in serious trouble![/p][/quote]This is actually pretty concerning - if 50kg of padlocks can make the bridge unstable, what would happen if a couple of fat blokes (or women) were to lean against the railings? Back in 2001/2002, not long after the bridge was opened, some idiot reportedly drove a Transit van over it and it didn't fall down. Surely if people put a similar number of locks on each side, there wouldn't be a problem. Anyhow, it's not that popular with tourists, so why are the council even bothered?[/p][/quote]The extra weight makes the bridge railings unstable, not the bridge itself. If the railings collapsed the bridge would be unsafe as people could easily fall off the side. SpinningJenny
  • Score: 20

2:12pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Just_My_Twopenneth says...

again wrote:
Guess sticking a lock on a bridge is a lot cheaper than getting properly hitched!

Divorce would of course involve having to find the key.
The keys get thrown into the river below, as a part of the padlock ritual thing. Started in Paris.

So I can only assume getting the keys back out of the Ouse would be a larger HSE issue....LOL.
[quote][p][bold]again[/bold] wrote: Guess sticking a lock on a bridge is a lot cheaper than getting properly hitched! Divorce would of course involve having to find the key.[/p][/quote]The keys get thrown into the river below, as a part of the padlock ritual thing. Started in Paris. So I can only assume getting the keys back out of the Ouse would be a larger HSE issue....LOL. Just_My_Twopenneth
  • Score: 12

4:15pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Garrowby Turnoff says...

I've seen them in many European cities, and now they're appearing in the Americas. Seems like a bit of harmless romancing to me.
I've seen them in many European cities, and now they're appearing in the Americas. Seems like a bit of harmless romancing to me. Garrowby Turnoff
  • Score: -4

4:37pm Mon 21 Jul 14

beentheredidntdoit says...

of all the things we have to worry about and this seems to be of some importance to some body! crazy
of all the things we have to worry about and this seems to be of some importance to some body! crazy beentheredidntdoit
  • Score: -8

4:48pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Dr Brian says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
I suspect they actually found a pair of locks which said "JA + TSL" and removed the rest of them to divert attention.
No I think if there was a lock with the initials JA on it then the intertwining lock would also say JA!
[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: I suspect they actually found a pair of locks which said "JA + TSL" and removed the rest of them to divert attention.[/p][/quote]No I think if there was a lock with the initials JA on it then the intertwining lock would also say JA! Dr Brian
  • Score: 17

5:28pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Jonlogical says...

It was probably started by lock manufacturers to drum up some business.
It was probably started by lock manufacturers to drum up some business. Jonlogical
  • Score: 10

5:35pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Just_My_Twopenneth says...

It's the usual from the H&S department (or the 'Don't play with knives brigade'). They are such a miserable bunch themselves (in that job you have to be!) that they want to spoil anyone else having a bit of romantic fun (as mentioned above). The H&S dept probably have had their hearts removed anyway (as well as other organs).

Bridges are derated by at least 100%
It's the usual from the H&S department (or the 'Don't play with knives brigade'). They are such a miserable bunch themselves (in that job you have to be!) that they want to spoil anyone else having a bit of romantic fun (as mentioned above). The H&S dept probably have had their hearts removed anyway (as well as other organs). Bridges are derated by at least 100% Just_My_Twopenneth
  • Score: -4

6:37pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Abstemious says...

I hope they haven't removed the padlocks from Scarborough Bridge. They add so much to the general romanticism of the area.
I hope they haven't removed the padlocks from Scarborough Bridge. They add so much to the general romanticism of the area. Abstemious
  • Score: 2

7:04pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Not sure who I feel most sorry for.

The authorities who feel they need to make up some faux-science safety nonsense to justify an aesthetic political decision.

Or the people here who have so little love and such black hearts that they are unable to see simple romance and call it as a ridiculous mindless vandalism craze.
Not sure who I feel most sorry for. The authorities who feel they need to make up some faux-science safety nonsense to justify an aesthetic political decision. Or the people here who have so little love and such black hearts that they are unable to see simple romance and call it as a ridiculous mindless vandalism craze. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 4

7:21pm Mon 21 Jul 14

pedalling paul says...

I wondered what these were for when I wheeled my bike over Scarborough Bridge, last week.
I wondered what these were for when I wheeled my bike over Scarborough Bridge, last week. pedalling paul
  • Score: -10

7:30pm Mon 21 Jul 14

sniper 9964 says...

Meanwhile CyC are removing yellow cycles from around york last seen on a sunday. No doubt this employee was on over time been a sunday.
I just wonder how much toad da frog is costing York tax payers
Meanwhile CyC are removing yellow cycles from around york last seen on a sunday. No doubt this employee was on over time been a sunday. I just wonder how much toad da frog is costing York tax payers sniper 9964
  • Score: 3

7:46pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Maudie's nan says...

I go over the bridge every day and there was deffo not 300 padlocks. When you think of all the crap going on in the world doesn't this all seem a bit trivial - long live romance.

Maudie
I go over the bridge every day and there was deffo not 300 padlocks. When you think of all the crap going on in the world doesn't this all seem a bit trivial - long live romance. Maudie Maudie's nan
  • Score: 5

7:54pm Mon 21 Jul 14

HoofHearteds says...

Maudie's nan wrote:
I go over the bridge every day and there was deffo not 300 padlocks. When you think of all the crap going on in the world doesn't this all seem a bit trivial - long live romance.

Maudie
Last week the poor asking for help were removed from the City centre to allow the illusion of equality to waft around the Minster. I wonder what next?
[quote][p][bold]Maudie's nan[/bold] wrote: I go over the bridge every day and there was deffo not 300 padlocks. When you think of all the crap going on in the world doesn't this all seem a bit trivial - long live romance. Maudie[/p][/quote]Last week the poor asking for help were removed from the City centre to allow the illusion of equality to waft around the Minster. I wonder what next? HoofHearteds
  • Score: 2

7:58pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Pinza-C55 says...

When you think of the value of scrap brass this could be a nice little earner for the council, especially now they have to give the Lendal Lolly back.
When you think of the value of scrap brass this could be a nice little earner for the council, especially now they have to give the Lendal Lolly back. Pinza-C55
  • Score: 9

8:09pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Maudie's nan wrote:
I go over the bridge every day and there was deffo not 300 padlocks. When you think of all the crap going on in the world doesn't this all seem a bit trivial - long live romance.

Maudie
Agreed. Nowhere near 300 locks.
[quote][p][bold]Maudie's nan[/bold] wrote: I go over the bridge every day and there was deffo not 300 padlocks. When you think of all the crap going on in the world doesn't this all seem a bit trivial - long live romance. Maudie[/p][/quote]Agreed. Nowhere near 300 locks. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 1

9:36pm Mon 21 Jul 14

MouseHouse says...

Jonlogical wrote:
It was probably started by lock manufacturers to drum up some business.
or bridge builders to replace fallen bridges.

I'm glad I read this article, I've wondered for years why there were so many locks on the bridge.

Thirty years ago plus it was initials carved into trees, so I'd rather we didn't go back to that.
[quote][p][bold]Jonlogical[/bold] wrote: It was probably started by lock manufacturers to drum up some business.[/p][/quote]or bridge builders to replace fallen bridges. I'm glad I read this article, I've wondered for years why there were so many locks on the bridge. Thirty years ago plus it was initials carved into trees, so I'd rather we didn't go back to that. MouseHouse
  • Score: 9

9:38pm Mon 21 Jul 14

cloud8 says...

Bridges need to be maintained. If the entire surface of a metal guard rail on a bridge is covered in locks, any paint will chip or the bare metal can become misshapen. Either of these will make the bridge vulnerable to water ingress. Wet metal rusts, expands and breaks. This will cause unnecessary damage to the bridge, and the local taxpayers will have to pay to have the locks removed and disposed of then have the bridge repaired. Putting locks on bridges is vandalism and should be treated as such. It's also a waste of good metal locks that could be useful elsewhere, and a lack of imagination when it comes to romance.
Bridges need to be maintained. If the entire surface of a metal guard rail on a bridge is covered in locks, any paint will chip or the bare metal can become misshapen. Either of these will make the bridge vulnerable to water ingress. Wet metal rusts, expands and breaks. This will cause unnecessary damage to the bridge, and the local taxpayers will have to pay to have the locks removed and disposed of then have the bridge repaired. Putting locks on bridges is vandalism and should be treated as such. It's also a waste of good metal locks that could be useful elsewhere, and a lack of imagination when it comes to romance. cloud8
  • Score: 6

9:44pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Lxoxo says...

... Of all the health and safety matters for the council to focus on? Not the very real and almost daily river incidents? No padlocks.
In a world increasingly ravaged with war, I should have though any declaration of love would be welcomed.
... Of all the health and safety matters for the council to focus on? Not the very real and almost daily river incidents? No padlocks. In a world increasingly ravaged with war, I should have though any declaration of love would be welcomed. Lxoxo
  • Score: -1

11:01pm Mon 21 Jul 14

holyroller says...

Glad to see them go they were cluttering the aesthetic of the bridge and yes, not exactly imaginative.

Buy a ring, or get matching tattoos or something.
Glad to see them go they were cluttering the aesthetic of the bridge and yes, not exactly imaginative. Buy a ring, or get matching tattoos or something. holyroller
  • Score: -2

8:47am Tue 22 Jul 14

bloodaxe says...

A great pity that the clowns who chuck litter onto the roadside don't similarly sign it.
A great pity that the clowns who chuck litter onto the roadside don't similarly sign it. bloodaxe
  • Score: 4

1:53pm Tue 22 Jul 14

sonorbloke says...

johnny_t wrote:
Why can't the council just be brave enough to say they are removing them because they are an eyesore, rather than having to invent some made-up 'health & safety' reason ? How many locks would add up to the weight of just one person ? There is no way that any number of locks attached to the bridge could ever, ever unbalance it. This sort of use of 'health & safety' as a cover-all to avoid explaining your actions is exactly the sort of thing that gives it a bad name. I don't know why they didn't go the whole hog and blame it on 9/11 or something...
Not a made-up H&S reason, unfortunately. One of the bridges in Paris suffered a partial collapse of the handrails because of this trend, so they've removed them from all the bridges over there.

There may only be 50kg of locks now, but if it carried on? Who knows, so better to nip it in the bud early.

High Level Bridge in Newcastle is also covered in these padlocks.
[quote][p][bold]johnny_t[/bold] wrote: Why can't the council just be brave enough to say they are removing them because they are an eyesore, rather than having to invent some made-up 'health & safety' reason ? How many locks would add up to the weight of just one person ? There is no way that any number of locks attached to the bridge could ever, ever unbalance it. This sort of use of 'health & safety' as a cover-all to avoid explaining your actions is exactly the sort of thing that gives it a bad name. I don't know why they didn't go the whole hog and blame it on 9/11 or something...[/p][/quote]Not a made-up H&S reason, unfortunately. One of the bridges in Paris suffered a partial collapse of the handrails because of this trend, so they've removed them from all the bridges over there. There may only be 50kg of locks now, but if it carried on? Who knows, so better to nip it in the bud early. High Level Bridge in Newcastle is also covered in these padlocks. sonorbloke
  • Score: 3

3:13pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Just_My_Twopenneth says...

mitch2nd wrote:
notmyrealname wrote:
Who came up with this ridiculous trend - it's vandalism and littering in a different form - take the money you spent on the stupid padlock and buy your lover some flowers
and serves you right if you get your bike stolen !
well your a dick, flowers die and are a waste of money, leave these people alone, more locks we say everyone should do it, you are very obviously single
Mitch2nd:
There really is no need to be offensive to people, if you don't agree with them.
[quote][p][bold]mitch2nd[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]notmyrealname[/bold] wrote: Who came up with this ridiculous trend - it's vandalism and littering in a different form - take the money you spent on the stupid padlock and buy your lover some flowers and serves you right if you get your bike stolen ![/p][/quote]well your a dick, flowers die and are a waste of money, leave these people alone, more locks we say everyone should do it, you are very obviously single[/p][/quote]Mitch2nd: There really is no need to be offensive to people, if you don't agree with them. Just_My_Twopenneth
  • Score: 9

5:51pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Maudie's nan says...

sonorbloke wrote:
johnny_t wrote:
Why can't the council just be brave enough to say they are removing them because they are an eyesore, rather than having to invent some made-up 'health & safety' reason ? How many locks would add up to the weight of just one person ? There is no way that any number of locks attached to the bridge could ever, ever unbalance it. This sort of use of 'health & safety' as a cover-all to avoid explaining your actions is exactly the sort of thing that gives it a bad name. I don't know why they didn't go the whole hog and blame it on 9/11 or something...
Not a made-up H&S reason, unfortunately. One of the bridges in Paris suffered a partial collapse of the handrails because of this trend, so they've removed them from all the bridges over there.

There may only be 50kg of locks now, but if it carried on? Who knows, so better to nip it in the bud early.

High Level Bridge in Newcastle is also covered in these padlocks.
omg what next - are we all to be weighed before being allowed on to the bridge or only 2 adults or 4 small children on the bridge at any one time - don't you think a lot more locks might mysteriously appear now ???????
[quote][p][bold]sonorbloke[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]johnny_t[/bold] wrote: Why can't the council just be brave enough to say they are removing them because they are an eyesore, rather than having to invent some made-up 'health & safety' reason ? How many locks would add up to the weight of just one person ? There is no way that any number of locks attached to the bridge could ever, ever unbalance it. This sort of use of 'health & safety' as a cover-all to avoid explaining your actions is exactly the sort of thing that gives it a bad name. I don't know why they didn't go the whole hog and blame it on 9/11 or something...[/p][/quote]Not a made-up H&S reason, unfortunately. One of the bridges in Paris suffered a partial collapse of the handrails because of this trend, so they've removed them from all the bridges over there. There may only be 50kg of locks now, but if it carried on? Who knows, so better to nip it in the bud early. High Level Bridge in Newcastle is also covered in these padlocks.[/p][/quote]omg what next - are we all to be weighed before being allowed on to the bridge or only 2 adults or 4 small children on the bridge at any one time - don't you think a lot more locks might mysteriously appear now ??????? Maudie's nan
  • Score: 3

10:04pm Tue 22 Jul 14

baldiebiker says...

put some mesh up where it isn't a problem, sponsored by a locksmith, although I doubt it will help the British padlock makers, are there any left or are they made in China now?
put some mesh up where it isn't a problem, sponsored by a locksmith, although I doubt it will help the British padlock makers, are there any left or are they made in China now? baldiebiker
  • Score: 3

9:27am Wed 23 Jul 14

Bad Tackerler says...

PKH wrote:
piemagico wrote:
carshalton94 wrote:
Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.
If the bridge can't take the weight of 50 kilos (max) of locks then we are in serious trouble!
The locks encourage more locks so 50kg soon becomes 100kg and before you know it it's 1000kg plus. Better to nip it to discourage more and more locks.
Why not put a small structure at each end where the happy couples can fasten the pad locks on to ? Then when its full recycle them , happy days !
[quote][p][bold]PKH[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]piemagico[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carshalton94[/bold] wrote: Well done York Council. There are times when it is right to criticise H&S for spoiling the fun. In this case there was significant danger to the bridge structure if this were to continue.[/p][/quote]If the bridge can't take the weight of 50 kilos (max) of locks then we are in serious trouble![/p][/quote]The locks encourage more locks so 50kg soon becomes 100kg and before you know it it's 1000kg plus. Better to nip it to discourage more and more locks.[/p][/quote]Why not put a small structure at each end where the happy couples can fasten the pad locks on to ? Then when its full recycle them , happy days ! Bad Tackerler
  • Score: 4

12:33pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Cheeky face says...

The bridge and railings are designed to meet certain specific tensile levels for anticipated traffic.
The bridge will survive lots of locks, but the handrails/safety metal structure or whatever you call them need to have easy access for repainting and observation of rust etc.
The bridge and railings are designed to meet certain specific tensile levels for anticipated traffic. The bridge will survive lots of locks, but the handrails/safety metal structure or whatever you call them need to have easy access for repainting and observation of rust etc. Cheeky face
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree