Forum Topic

Calls have been made to stop speeding cyclists through Richmond Park

About time too.  Article on the homepage.

Sue Hammond ● 1584d58 Comments

From the Highway code (Section 62) Michael:"If you are sharing a path, take extra care and give plenty of room to children, the elderly and disabled people. You should always be riding at a speed that would allow you to slow down and stop if necessary."Sorry but cyclists are not following this they are swerving at high speed around pedestrians. There is no way that they could stop in time at those speeds. The question is why? Is it ignorance or on purpose?I will take some photos this week when I cycle there. Signs are near the Pen ponds Junction and also at the junction with the road that goes to the Isabella Plantation Disabled Only Parking.

Ed Robinson ● 1577d

I think we may be talking about the same road (it is not a path) and there is no signage indicating pedestrian priority. Nor would anyone expect pedestrians either to have or to need priority on a single vehicle width road. The Tamsin Trail is the one cycling allowed path and that does have pedestrian priority and signage to that effect.Giving way to pedestrians on that is really a fait accompli. Either they move out of the way when you ring your bell (or they see you) or you have to slow down or stop for them. The only alternative would be to plough into them. "Pedestrian priority" is thus a bit of a nonsense. I suppose it also has the meaning that pedestrians could if they wished be bloody minded, string themselves across the path and force a cyclist to stop, then protest against any cursing, pointing out that they have "priority". In practical terms it is meaningless - the faster traveller - ie the bike - would always have to look out for the one they are passing.

Michael Winstanley ● 1577d

Michael,Assuming we are talking about the same shared cycle pedestrian priority path : There is a bridleways that runs parallel for some of the route and one that crosses it. Apart from that as far as I know horses shouldn't be on it. Obviously if it's out of control it may stray.I guess some cyclists just have an issue with the: 'shared' and 'pedestrian priority' bit when it comes to such paths. Why they do not say so you can draw your own conclusions. Poor behaviour undermines the whole cycling movement IMO. a pedestrian that has a repeated bad experiences with cyclists is hardly likely to support cycling. I guess that's is why countries with stricter rules have far better infrastructure.

Ed Robinson ● 1577d

Path? There is a tarmaced road section, turn left after Roehampton Gate, up the hill, turn right past the cafe, then down to Ham. It is restricted to vehicles, but it is most definitely a road by any normal definition of such.Rode that way today actually as I had to go to Kingston. There is a 10 mph sign somewhere there which I take to be entirely advisory and also a waste of space. The only hazard there today was an out of control horse - cyclists (and any pedestrians) both patiently waited for it to be guided through - but really - aren't there enough dedicated bridleways to keep this sort of thing away from the rest of us?I have no speedometer and no intention of getting one. I dare say I exceeded 10 mph for long stretches of this (except the uphill bits). The idea of a 10 mph speed limit there is totally ridiculous. On the other hand, the idea that any cyclist (or horsist, or user of any other conveyance) should look out for others on the road is totally sensible. I don't think your typical cyclophobe ventures out that far.

Michael Winstanley ● 1577d

Michael there is a 10mph pedestrian priority path that runs from pen ponds to  near Ham junction.When I say whizzing past at speed I mean including from behind and very close. Either they are unaware of their actions and should not be allowed on a bicycle or they are doing it on purpose.

Ed Robinson ● 1578d

I don't think there is any safety issue passing a pedestrian on a path at a speed in excess of 10 mph. Provided the cyclist makes sure that the pedestrian sees them (use bell or shouts) and gives them enough room.There is one single path encircling Richmond Park open to cyclists (the Tamsin Trail) and dozens of pedestrian only paths, together with many acres of land upon which pedestrians only may roam. Pedestrians with some peculiar allergy to cyclists might be better using other paths.Outside of the weekend and more than 50m from the car parks, there is hardly a pedestrian to be seen on this path.

Michael Winstanley ● 1578d

I really don't know what this continual discussion is about if a copper jumps out of a bush and fines you it's too late for any discussions.

Barbara Stevens ● 1580d

Possibly Michael W,But I do think it is interesting that the changes to the act only happened just a year ago. I assume if they wanted to they could have been more explicit about bicycles.Clearly the RP have gone for voluntary guidelines which are routinely being ignored (like the Ministerial code). Perhaps they will revisit the act if there is enough opposition to the speeding.And yes this is a safety issue when pedestrians are walking along a path and cyclists are whizzing past at speed!Perhaps they are just ignorant or perhaps there is a strategy to take ove the 10mph pedestrian priority path just for cyclists??

Ed Robinson ● 1580d

This is a moot point. The definition of "vehicle" is not something which applies universally across all UK laws. Typically UK law talks about a "motor vehicle" rather than a vehicle per se (is a horse a vehicle I wonder) so there is not much there to help us. In the Regulations you cite (from 1997, as amended), there is no definition given of "vehicle" but there are separate clauses which apply differently to pedal cycles and to vehicles, suggesting that the former are not the latter.So you would have to ask a lawyer for an opinion and a definitive decison could only be taken by a court. The Royal Parks though, it would appear, have decided that for the purpose of these regulations, a bicycle is not a vehicle. It is almost worth deliberately riding through the Park at 21 mph every day to create a test case. I can't go that fast for very long so can't volunteer - but wait: there are people who do that every day and have done so for some considerable while. Maybe the police should address some extra resource to this and ease up on some other area like women's safety? Is that what people want?

Michael Winstanley ● 1580d

They have actually updated it since my last search to include 20mph.Note the word vehicles. Bicycles are vehicles. But there again as with Putney Common Acts of Parliament and the Law are two different things I guess."Speeds at which vehicles may be driven or ridden on a Park road1.  On the Park roads in Bushy Park, Greenwich Park, Hyde Park (except for the Serpentine Road), The Regent’s Park, Richmond Park and St. James’s and The Green Parks, at a speed not exceeding 30 m.p.h."https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/1639/schedule/2/part/II/made"On a Park road in Bushy Park, The Green Park, Greenwich Park, Hyde Park (other than the Serpentine Road), St James’s Park, The Regent’s Park or Richmond Park, at a speed not exceeding 20 mph.”;"https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/1027/regulation/2/made

Ed Robinson ● 1580d

IvonneYes obviously it is a race and obviously the roads are closed for it - but closed to cars. Pedestrians are still allowed in the Park and deer still live in it. I thought the manufactured concerns regarding cyclists exceeding 20 mph concerned the safety of pedestrians and deer.Nonetheless, if speed limits apply, something would have to be done to suspend them for the races - hence the enquiry which was made. The answer, if it is genuine, appears to be that there is nothing to suspend since the speed limits do not apply.In passing, I must remark that I am grateful we are able to have an intelligent and reasonable discussion about this issue, trying to reach the actual truth, rather than calling each other stupid names and accusing each other of being on drugs. It is a refreshing departure from what seems to be becoming typical rude and loutish behaviour on this forum.

Michael Winstanley ● 1580d

Heather,It is annoying when you have to tell your child when they are cycling child not to follow the example of a large number of cyclists :(Michael W/Ivonne,Just to add to the legal confusion if you look up the Act of Parliament concerning the roads in the park it still mentions 30mph.

Ed Robinson ● 1580d

Hello again Michael W,I am not too sure that the letter itself makes me think it is a fake.  It is a combination of it being on Twitter as well as the originator of the thread or better said, the account it is on.  I do not like Twitter because of the misinformation it carries on many issues, very much as other social media.What does surprise me enormously is that the contents of the letter purporting to be from the Royal Parks contradicts the information contained on their website.  Michael, there used to be a Prudential Cycle race every year, which was shown on TV, up to the COVID lockdown.  You must know the route better than I do but, as far as I am aware, roads were closed to allow this race to take place.  As the name indicates, it was a race!  Also, I am aware that Richmond Park is closed for another cycle race (cannot remember the name), in addition to the Prudential Cycle race.  Perhaps it is rather obvious, but the closure of the Park for these races is very specific and self-explanatory.That does not mean that cyclists may race in Richmond Park, or other roads, at any other times.  Very much the same applies to cars that speed wherever they are but certainly not in Brands Hatch or Silverstone.I have heard about the website that records FOI requests.  I do not, however, visit it regularly.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1580d

Hi Ivonne yet againI do not know what it is about the letter that makes you think it is a fake. It is similar to other Royal Parks FOI replies, same stationery, same numbering system. If it is a fake, it is a very clever one.The other difficulty is the subject matter of the letter. If cyclists are by lasw restricted to 20 mph in the Park, HOW COME they run these officially sanctioned races in which the cyclists go much faster?There is an independent site which records FOI requests generally and maybe we should look at that in a few weeks and see if this one has appeared.

Michael Winstanley ● 1580d

Hello again Michael W,I Googled the Department of Parks and Recreation" and this is what I found:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Parks_and_RecreationI apologise for saying it was an official department in the US as the Department applies to Canada and the US. The letter posted on Twitter does appear to be genuine. There again, it as a photograph and difficult to decide one way or another.However, it is difficult to see how the Royal Parks state in the letter that the speed limit does not apply to cyclist while their website indicates the opposite.  Left hand not know what right hand is doing/saying?Does being fined mean prosecuted?  I do not think so. All these calls for penalizing speeding cyclists happened after a deer (fawn?) was seriously injured by a cyclist and the poor animal had to be put down.  There was an incident afterwards involving a cyclist and a child though the child was not seriously injured.  Thank goodness.And of course road cyclists are carrying on with their practices/fun in the Park with gay abandon.  In the same way as cars speed in the Park and on our roads.  The same principle applies to all not a few.  There are certainly no "kings of the road" as we are all road users!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1580d

Parks and Recreation is a well known (in cycling circles) pro-cycling activist Twitter user.  It’s hard to implement a law for speeding cycles when they cannot know their speed due to lack of speedometer, although arguably Strava stats might assist a prosecution in such cases where a cyclist is using it. I cycled round the park at the weekend with the family, first time in a while and we took our (young, untrained) kids on the roads because the shared use trail looked busy, and rode outside them (ie two abreast) to protect them.  With through traffic restricted, the cars were fine - courteous and safe around us, I guess they were all heading to the nearest car park and not in a hurry.  I didn’t notice any ebikes.  But the racing cyclists were dangerous - as a cyclist I am used to complaining about close passes by cars.  But close passes by fellow cyclists not allowing room for a wobble as they skimmed past us at high speed was a new one.  At a right turn we were too scared to pull out, and ended up stuck for ages at the side of the road as they were shooting past so fast we could not find a safe gap to cross on foot.  It felt threatening and unpleasant, and although the park is lovely, it was a shame to see that to a handful of aggressive types it is just a race track.  If there were fewer aggressive racers on the roads, non-racing cyclists would not feel the need to stick to the relative safety of the shared-use track.

Heather Christie ● 1580d

IvonneThe "Parks and Recreation" moniker is that adopted by the guy/gal tweeting. Strava is indeed a cycling app. The FOI request reproduced, however, was answered by Royal Parks. You seem to want to believe that this is some kind of forgery. The letter reproduced looks genuine enough to me. There is further discussion of it here:https://richmond.nub.news/n/cyclists-claim-immunity-from-20mph-speed-limit-in-richmond-parkAs I do not knowingly speed in Richmond Park myself and am not a keen road racer, I don't feel interested enough to contact Royal Parks myself to clarify this. However, I would be very surprised if it were a fake, given that people like Tim Lennon, head of the local cycling campaign, seems to think it is genuine.I think one thing which might bring it to a head is if there really were calls for cyclists to be prosecuted for speeding (there aren't - this appears to be an invention of one of the journalists feeding PutneySW15) and for some of them to actually be successfully prosecuted. If you hear of such a successful case, maybe you could post about it here.The road cyclists meanwhile seem to be carrying on their practice/fun in the Park with gay abandon. I don't think they are doing anyone any harm.

Michael Winstanley ● 1580d

Hello Michael W,I looked up the link you posted on this thread on 3/10/21 @ 13:46hs.  I found it rather suspect because it is a link to a posting on Twitter.  I could not remember the exact name of the Department it belonged to but now I can confirm that it referred to the Department of Parks and Recreation which is a US government department.  And Strava is from the US but has somehow become "important" in the UK.  It is quite extraordinary that Richmond Park Office answered an email of mine of 7 April 2021 regarding Strava and the Tour de Richmond Park.  They are very aware how Strava operates (they have unsuccessfully tried to contact them because they are based in the US).  The answer also indicated:"Ultimately the individuals that are speeding / riding in an inconsiderate manner are at fault, Strava and websites, social media and closed networking groups all contribute part of the culture."As always, there are not enough resources to enforce speed limits in the Park and they hope that, by introducing car parking charges, they will be able to do so.  Draw your own conclusions.  I have certainly reached mine.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1581d

Ivonne your patience in dealing with idiots is admirable.👏🏻It couldn't be clearer than that!

Sue Hammond ● 1581d

Good morning Michael W,Thank you for your reply.  Could I possibly invite you visit this website please?  https://www.parkcycle.co.uk/about-richmond-park/royal-park-rules.aspxBelow is an extract of the information contained there:Parks RegulationsThe Royal Parks have special rules. A fully copy (called the Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces Regulations) is posted at each gate, but some of the main points for cyclists to note are:Speed Limit in the Parkspeed limits on the park roads apply to pedal cycles as well as other vehiclesyou must have lights on your bike if you are cycling after darkyou can only cycle on the roads and shared pedestrian and cycle trails - not over the grass or in the woodsFrom what I read, it appears to me that the speed limits do apply to cyclists too.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1581d

Ivonne I don't use Strava but have used a similar app and what it does is track your average movement by GPS, thereby allowing overall times and average speeds to be computed. This does not mean that they provide an accurate instantaneous speed check - or that all cyclists use them.As regards the signs to which you refer, I've not noticed them and thus don't know exactly what they say, but on evidence so far presented it appears(a)Royal Parks say that 20 mph speed limits don't apply to cyclists;(b) This fact is well-known throughout the cycling community.Thus I'd expect them to regard the signs as some kind of administrative error and take no notice.This explanation does not apply to the motorists that come down my road ignoring the 20 mph speed limit. They seem to get less attention though.

Michael Winstanley ● 1581d

I've no idea where the link comes from. I just got if off Google. The same information was posted on the West Putney site. If you doubt its veracity, it is a response to an FOI, so you could check it out online. Or just ask Royal Parks.

Michael Winstanley ● 1581d

Not doing  over 20 mph they are not!But there is only one shared path circuiting the park whilst there are dozens of pedestrian only footpaths.In Bushy Park the restrictions are different - all paths are shared - I've never heard anyone complain about cyclists in there. I wonder what the difference is.

Michael Winstanley ● 1581d

Hello Michael,I agree that bicycles do not have speedometers at the moment but they really should. Having said this, it is odd that some cyclists follow Strava and are able to publish their times and speed on it.... But it should not be too difficult to conclude that if they are overtaking cars doing 20mph and disappearing in the horizon (to say something to explain their speed), then it must be because they are doing speeds over 20mph.The signs in Richmond Park are small signs on the side of the road, but they can be seen easily.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1583d

Hello Ivonne. I must admit I've not been to Richmond Park recently so I've not seen the latest signs. Speed limits for motorcycles would apply because, as for any other motorised vehicles, they must have a working speedometer and the rider can check they're not speeding. However I can see that applying the law to bicycles would be difficult as there's no legal obligation for them to have a speedometer fitted and a cyclist could argue they have no way to monitor their speed. Obviously, if they're timing themselves and posting those details on one of the websites someone published on the forum a while ago it could be demonstrated they'd been exceeding the limit knowingly and asctung recklessly. I'm not saying cycvlusts should be allowed to speed, just that there may be legal difficulties implementing the law unless the law also mandates speedometers are fitted to all bicycles; perhaps that's the solution?

Michael Ixer ● 1583d

Hello Michael,Yes, I had read the article.  I have seen signs on the edge of the road indicating 20mph speed limit and it applies to cyclist and motorbikes as well.I think the problem is that there are some cyclists that believe that speed limit does not apply to them. As always, the problem is the lack of enforcement.  But I was surprised - and may I add delighted - to see the Parks Police stop three speeding cyclists in Richmond Park last Thursday.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1583d

Looking at this article it would appear that speeding as such isn't an offence in Richmond Park (or elsewhere):https://www.mylondon.news/news/south-london-news/fury-richmond-parks-20mph-limit-21738328But it would that other laws such as cycling without due care and attention, or infringing park regulations not to act recklessly and disregard other visitors' safety do apply.

Michael Ixer ● 1583d

Good morning Michael W,That link you posted seems rather suspect (if that is the correct word to use) to me.  It is run by Strava?

Ivonne Holliday ● 1583d

Good morning Matt,Those words expressed my opinion; I was answering your comment "Seems stupid that you can buy bikes that exceed the legal limit to me but maybe that's a bit like saying it's stupid to be able to buy a car that can exceed 70mph?"My small car can exceed 70mph, but I do not.  Following the discussion here, many roads in Putney and Richmond have a speed limit of 20mph.  So does Richmond Park and that speed limit applies to all.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1583d

Michael, bikes at speed are dangerous to animals.

Barbara Stevens ● 1583d

I didnt say that it means you should feel entitled to break the speed limit, please dont put words in my mouth.I'm just questioning why it's acceptable to buy a car that can easily break the speed limit but not acceptable to buy a bike that can? Double standards? Car is king?

Matt Palmer ● 1583d

Michael W,"pedestrians to keep off the roads"Unfortunately or (fortunately if cycling considerately) bicycles are also on the shared pedestrian priority paths!

Ed Robinson ● 1583d

I gave a link to where Royal Parks confirmed the 20 limit doesn't apply to cyclists. I can't really add further -ask Royal Parks to explain. For those that find examining this source and considering what it says too difficult, I can't help them.As regards e-bikes, they are heavier and can potentially go faster for longer. I think different limits should apply to them. Whilst there is such confusion even over the  potential danger of and limits applying to ordinary cycles, there seems little point exploring this.The simplest solution though would be for cars to keep out of the park and pedestrians to keep off the roads. Then the racing bikes wouldn't bother anyone (except the people who hardly ever or never go to the park but feel they should have an opinion about it).Myself, I don't think I ever go this fast but have no speedometer and no intention of getting one. Maybe I will get one when I am decrepid enough to resort to an e-bike.

Michael Winstanley ● 1583d

Perhaps Matt.The fact that the vehicle you are riding/driving can achieve speeds higher than those permitted it is not new.  All cars can achieve speeds higher than 70 m/h.That does not mean we should all feel entitled to break the speed limits, regardless of the vehicle we ride, on any road.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1583d

To be honest Ash the Richmond Park cyclist speed is a bit of a mess with different documents/laws saying different things hence the article:https://www.mylondon.news/news/south-london-news/fury-richmond-parks-20mph-limit-21738328

Ed Robinson ● 1583d

Matt you can buy e-scooters too.All perfectly legal on private roads but not public roads.

Ed Robinson ● 1583d

Don't hold back Ash.😅

Sue Hammond ● 1583d

Answered my own question! Seems stupid that you can buy bikes that exceed the legal limit to me but maybe that's a bit like saying it's stupid to be able to buy a car that can exceed 70mph?

Matt Palmer ● 1583d

Oh really? I just thought they were hard wired with that limit, is there a way of hacking them to up the speed? Presumably you can't actually buy ones that go faster and you have to modify them?

Matt Palmer ● 1583d

Winstanley you don't cease to amaze me with your BS.The speed restriction in Richmond Park applies to all road users, the mode of transport is irrelevant.

Ash Jones ● 1583d

The speed signs are in Richmond Park.  They clearly state 20 m/h for cars, cyclists and motorbikes.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1583d

Matt I think you are mixing up what is legal and what is on the road.Been over taken a few times by ebikes on flats going 30mph with no pedaling.When was the last time you saw a ebike pulled over and inspected?Clearly they will be in deep trouble if they have an accident.

Ed Robinson ● 1583d

I thought e-bikes were limited to 15mph? so anything higher than that is purely pedal power?Not disputing that some cyclists go over 20mph though

Matt Palmer ● 1583d

I believe that the Royal Parks can decide their speed limits so it isn't the same as on the rest of roads.

Philippa Bond ● 1583d

Michael you are out of date, e-bikes and a decent road bike can do over 20mph.I would struggle on a flat with my fat tired mountain bike but fairly confident I could on a road bike. Not sure what you ride :)But you are right about the law. The Government has not changed it and choose not to enforce the laws that do exist with regard to cycling.Most cars seem to stick to the 20 mph - I have seen it extensively ignored when it has gone past gate closing time and they panic driving gate to gate!

Ed Robinson ● 1583d

Sue the Home Secretary appoints the Commissioner of Police who  directly accountable to the Home Secretary and the public nationally ...

Ed Robinson ● 1583d

Hello Michael W,Well, the signs that indicate 20 m/h speed limit for cars also show that it applies to cyclists and motorbikes...

Ivonne Holliday ● 1583d

There is no law which requires cyclists to limit their speed to below 20 mph on the roads around Richmond Park*.That said, it is a difficult speed to sustain on a bicycle, except for short bursts or on downhill sections.That said too, I would like to know (a) Where these "calls" have been made, except in the clickbait produced by the PutneySW15 reporter.(b) How many deer have been injured by speeding cyclists in the last couple of years. It would seem to me to be a better way to safeguard the deer if someone went round fining owners with dogs not on a lead - because this behaviour has actually harmed deer whereas the cyclists' doing so seems to be only in someone's imagination.*https://twitter.com/ldnparks?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1443630319542882304%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Froad.cc%2Fcontent%2Fnews%2Frichmond-park-speed-limits-do-not-apply-cyclists-286783

Michael Winstanley ● 1584d

Most cars respect the speed limit on Richmond Park.  But it is true that some do break the speed limit.I sometimes find it difficult to stick to 20 m/h, particularly going down hill so the breaks go on.  But cyclists have overtaken me - without shame or care!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1584d

I often used to cycle around the park, I found the majority of cars were quite respectful of the 20mph limit, perhaps it has changed in the last few years or perhaps it depends on the time of day

Adam Tripp ● 1584d

Well they should be fined too. The 20mph limit applies to everyone.

Sue Hammond ● 1584d

Almost no cars in Richmond Park drive under the 20mph limit. Most do 20-30mph

Sean Hodges ● 1584d

The Government legislate to make the laws and it's up to the police and local government to uphold them.

Sue Hammond ● 1584d

Yes Sue I agree although I should add that it the government's responsibility to uphold the law.

Ed Robinson ● 1584d

Cyclists are an absolute nuisance in Richmond park. My wife nearly got mowed down by a cyclist a few weeks ago. They must have been doing 35-40MPH. The cars stick to 20MPH so why can't the cyclists? I would happily sign a petition for a cycling ban.

Colin Redmond ● 1584d

Hi Ed.  It's a shame your peaceful walk was blighted by those arrogant entitled prats in Richmond Park. I think you and I both know that it really doesn't matter what is in the Highway Code, too many cyclists will just ignore it, as they do now. This is because they are rarely held to account and almost never prosecuted.  Nothing will change until they are.

Sue Hammond ● 1584d

I shouted at a several cyclist that were too way too close and too fast on the 10mph predestination priority path the other week.Might as well been shouting at the trees!With regard to the 20mph road, this is partly the government's fault for not updating to the highway code. ebikes and racing bikes could be required to have a speedometer or the rider accept the risk if caught speeding. Bikes and technology have improved enormously in the last 100 years.Several ebike I spotted speeding along the 10mph path looked heavier than many motorcycles.

Ed Robinson ● 1584d

Yes Sue, I read that, well I think a few use it as a race track.

Barbara Stevens ● 1584d