Each month, we email a bulletin to everyone who has signed up on this site. Below is the edition that we sent in December 2021. If you like it, please sign up on our Get Involved section – you will be showing your support for our work and you will receive our free monthly bulletins a month before they appear here.
IN THIS ISSUE… +++ Pollution in the park “dangerously high” +++ Are nearby external roads really as busy as some think? +++ Verbal abuse aimed at visitors to stables +++ Cyclist driven off road, and two motorists collide +++ Gates restricting access for cargo bikes +++ Dip your lights!
EYES ON THE ROADS
It’s our final bulletin of the year – and we would like to say thanks to all of you for subscribing to our monthly updates during 2021. In 2022, and with the Movement Strategy trials due to reach their conclusion in March, we will turn our attention to data covering road usage as we continue to build a case for ending through traffic. One key metric is likely to be pollution, with figures circulating on social media last week suggesting that levels within the park may be dangerously high. The Royal Parks points out that the figures are projections from 2013, not actual measurements of the current situation – to which the sensible response is, please measure the air quality in the park.
In the meantime, we are shooting video footage at random times of the week to explore the belief that the park must remain open to through traffic so it can relieve pressure on the local road network. The first clip, which we ran on social media last week, showed that most of Queen’s Road and Star And Garter Hill down to Ham was deserted on a weekday evening in rush hour. Take a look.
EMISSION STATEMENT
Returning briefly to the subject of pollution, The Royal Parks stated last month that carbon emissions from through traffic in the park have not been included in the measurement of the organisation’s carbon footprint. TRP was responding to questions fielded by Tim Lennon from the Richmond Cycling Campaign after he and ourselves attended the latest biannual stakeholder meeting, chaired by Tom Jarvis, the Director of Parks.
Here are Tim’s questions and TRP’s replies.
Will TRP be recruiting a new transport lead to replace Mat Bonomi (who introduced the Movement Strategy and left in April)?
A final decision on this recruitment has yet to be made.
When will a decision be made on the results of the Movement Strategy?
At the start of March 2021, we announced we would keep the measures to reduce cut-through traffic in place for another year until March 2022. We will monitor additional data to ensure a clear picture of the impact of the schemes, before determining whether they should be made permanent.
Will TRP make the trialled closures in Richmond and Bushy Parks permanent, and if not, why not?
As Q2
What is TRP’s plan to deliver on its commitment in the Movement Strategy to end the use of Richmond Park as a through route?
As Q2
Does TRP have a net zero plan? When will this deliver?
We are working on various initiatives to reduce carbon emissions, with a focus on the main sources contributing to our carbon footprint. Some of these projects will require feasibility assessments to identify the most appropriate solutions (e.g. replace the heating source in the Hyde Nursery) and will be medium term projects that are expected to start delivering carbon reductions by 2023/24. Other areas are quicker to achieve, such as specifying battery powered landscape maintenance tools (e.g. hedge trimmers, mowers).
What part does through traffic play in any carbon reduction strategies in Richmond Park?
The carbon emissions from through traffic have not been included in our carbon footprint. We are currently focusing on the direct emissions from our operations and those from our contractors.
What data, qualitative or quantitative, will you use to make decisions on traffic in the park?
We are engaging with TFL and LA’s regarding the availability and suitability of data to inform our decision-making process. We are monitoring additional data and information including incident statistics, monitoring how visitors use these new spaces, traffic and car parking management.
During the meeting itself, Tom and Simon Richards, the manager of Richmond Park, referred respectively to “comparing with the current situation” and “undertaking internal monitoring” regarding the usage of roads inside and outside the park during the current restrictions. And in a response to an enquiry on Twitter regarding the possibility of future policies on “reducing traffic dominance” in the park, TRP said it has “aspirations to take things further” than the current trials.
Even though TRP’s tweet did not relate solely to Richmond Park, could it signal a route towards our goal of eradicating through traffic? We’ll be investigating this tantalising prospect in the coming weeks and months.
UN-STABLE BEHAVIOUR
Now for an important clarification. In last month’s bulletin, we stated that drivers with permission to travel through restricted areas of the park have a permit displayed in their vehicle. A subscriber who has a horse at Holly Lodge contacted us to point out that this is not always the case – and she has experienced abuse from some cyclists who wrongly assume she is breaking the rules when she travels to and from the park’s stables.
In her email, she explained that she and many other authorised visitors are permitted to drive there at weekends – but The Royal Parks only issues permits to park staff. She says: “I have been verbally abused on numerous occasions, had cyclists deliberately block my way and punch my car, had someone throw something at my car and been followed on a dark morning to the gates of the yard. It's a truly horrible experience. Please also be aware that a therapy centre is run at Holly Lodge specialising in adults with learning difficulties. Obviously these people will find the abuse they get significantly more difficult.”
Another subscriber from the stables tells us: “Many of the riders – sadly, only the women – have reported abuse from cyclists when driving in.”
As we revealed last month, the park’s police have agreed with our request to prioritise the targeting of genuine rulebreakers who drive around the no-entry signs on roads. So please do not approach any driver, even if you suspect them of flouting the restrictions – and if you see any cyclist abusing a motorist, politely but firmly tell them to stop. Their actions can affect the reputation of us all.
TWO TOO MANY
There were two concerning incidents on the park’s roadway last month – one involving a cyclist.
On Thursday, November 11, at around 12.40pm, 53-year-old cycling instructor David Williams was driven off Queen’s Road moments after being subjected to a close pass. He was left with a broken collarbone, bruising, and a shattered helmet. You can read more on Kingston Nub News. If you witnessed the incident or have any information, call the police on 101 and quote the crime reference number TW/01/0000779/21.
The second incident, in which two cars collided on Tuesday 23, also took place on Queen’s Road. We took footage of the damaged vehicles around 3:45pm. An officer at the scene said one of the drivers had been blinded by low sun. Thankfully, no one was injured – this time, at least.
Queen’s Road is the busiest part of the park’s roadway, and these incidents show, once again, why through traffic should be removed. Cyclists and pedestrians should not have to run the risk of being exposed to such dangers in a National Nature Reserve.
CARGO NO GO
A mum who cycled through the park last month in a cargo bike with three kids in tow tells us that she arrived at Kingston Gate at 4.55pm and found that only the kissing gate was open. This is standard procedure – the contractors who work for The Royal Parks lock the straight-through gates so that the deer do not leave. But as her cargo bike was too big to fit through the kissing gate, she and her kids were stuck in the park. So she called the police – who, thankfully, sent someone to unlock the gate.
Cargo bikes have become a commoner sight in recent years – and thanks to their practicality and usefulness, they are likely to become even more popular. Clearly, the park’s pedestrian gates should be adapted for them so they can be used at any time, just like other types of bike, and the park’s management assure us that they will consider doing this. We will speak to them about this issue in more detail when we have our next quarterly meeting with them in January.
LIGHT RELIEF
Finally, now that the nights are drawing in, here’s a brief request to make sure you don’t dazzle your fellow cyclists.
A subscriber asked us to point out that unless dipped, your front lights can momentarily blind oncoming riders – and when we rode on the Quietway on a weekday evening last month, it was notable how often this happened in a relatively short space of time.
Even though there is no street lighting in the park, it’s perfectly safe to use the standard setting and dip the angle, if not already adjusted to face the roadway, when passing riders going in the opposite direction. Your fellow cyclists will appreciate your courtesy.
SEE YOU NEXT MONTH...
All of us at RPC would like to wish you a happy Christmas and brilliant New Year. Everyone who receives these monthly missives is valuable, as without a subscriber base behind us our dialogues with The Royal Parks and stakeholders to improve the park for cycling and walking would be far more challenging. As ever, thank you for allowing us to pop into your inbox, and let us know what you think about anything related to cycling in Richmond Park – we reply personally to every email you send us. If you enjoyed this bulletin, please share it with your cycling friends – and if they like what they read, encourage them to sign up to our mailing list too. The more subscribers we have, the bigger our voice.
See you in 2022,
Richmond Park Cyclists