RPC Bulletin #42, July 2021

Each month, we email a bulletin to everyone who has signed up on this site. Below is the mailout that we sent in July 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… Your chance to communicate your thoughts and ideas to the park’s management +++ Fresh opportunity for a car-free day +++ Close passes, two collisions and the Police Panel +++ Gates to replace barriers +++ Three new food outlets opening soon 

MEET FEAST

A meeting about meetings may not sound like the most thrilling opening item for this bulletin, but the outcome of a chat we had a couple of weeks ago with Simon Richards, the manager of Richmond Park, should help make the capital’s greatest free cycling resource an even better place to ride a bike.

Simon has agreed to meet us quarterly to better understand issues surrounding riding in the park. Being given the chance to meet management on a formal basis is a valuable opportunity, and we thank Simon for giving it to us. These management meetings will complement the meetings and regular communications we have with Sgt Peter Sturgess and his parks’ police unit.

We need you, our subscribers, to tell us about issues you want us to raise. We had a meeting (yes, another one!) on Wednesday to discuss amongst ourselves how other cyclists can contribute ideas for the quarterly meetings as well. We will let you know our plans when they are finalised ahead of the at our first get-together in September. 

CAR-FREE ATTITUDE

Remember pre-pandemic times? Long-term subscribers may struggle to recall that, at the tail end of 2019, we floated the idea of having a car-free day in Richmond Park. The concept briefly resurfaced in February last year when The Royal Parks stated that it wanted to implement the idea across its green spaces. The following month, we included the recommendation of a car-free day in our submission to the Movement Strategy.

Fast forward 15 months later, and the indications are that a car-free day could get off the ground. We will be speaking to stakeholder groups to garner support, which we are confident of receiving. 

The car-free day would be a family-friendly event, enabling all types of cyclists to use the park’s roadway, regardless of their levels of confidence or experience. We will keep you posted with our progress.

GATE OUTTA HERE

Begone, unsightly plastic! The temporary barriers and cones which limit the movement of motor vehicles during the ongoing traffic trial are scheduled to be replaced this autumn by timber gates and permanent roadways for cyclists. This is welcome news for those who are often surprised to find the layout of the barriers changing from week to week.

The gateways, which are designed by road engineers, will be clearly signposted and designed for easy navigation. They are removable but should stay in place at least until the conclusion of the traffic trial in March next year, when The Royal Parks decides on the extent to which through traffic is curtailed.

Following the conclusion of the Movement Strategy, The Royal Parks will begin installing courtesy crossings next to car parks, which are already busy pedestrian zones. We have yet to see the designs but we are hopeful they will have a cycle-friendly design and clear signage for pedestrians and cyclists.

PASS NOTES

How often do close passes occur in the park these days? With the numbers of cyclists coming to the park remaining high and traffic patterns returning to normal, there is good reason to suspect that the frequency of close passes is too much, especially for a recreational space. 

That’s why we are asking the park’s police team about the possibility of measuring the incidence of close passing. This would have to be carried out by a specialist unit, rather than the park’s officers. We will make this request at the next quarterly Police Panel meeting, which takes place on Wednesday July 14. Let us know if there are any other issues you would like to bring up.

As usual, the police will provide figures and details at the meeting regarding cycling-related incidents in the park during the past quarter-year. We’ll go through them in our next monthly bulletin. In the meantime, here is some information about a couple of incidents that took place recently.

• A driver collided with a cyclist at the entrance to the car park on Dark Hill on Tuesday, June 8. The cyclist only had minor grazes. The incident took place at around 6.50am, which is ten minutes before the park’s police unit came on duty. The local officer from Kingston who recorded the details mistakenly filed it as a restricted report, leading to a delay in the details being made public (and a false theory propagated by a deeply odd Twitter account that the police were “oblivious” to the collision). Many thanks to Sgt Sturgess from the park’s police unit for tracking down the details and successfully requesting that the report should not be restricted.

• On Wednesday afternoon, a driver crashed into a fence at the bottom of Dark Hill. He claimed that a group of cyclists coming in the opposite direction went for an overtake in his lane so he had to choose between taking them out or going into the fence. There were no witnesses or CCTV, and the other side of the story is not yet known. If more information on either incident comes to light at the Police Panel meeting, we will let you know.

TWO’S COMPANY

You wait years for a food and drink outlet on the eastern side of the park and then two come along almost at once.

The old police hut in front of the toilets at Kingston Gate has been turned into a mini-cafe run by Colicci which is scheduled to open this weekend for a temporary summer trial. Round the corner on Park Road, the site of the old Richmond Park Cafe and vegan cafe Tava appears to be under new management after lying vacant for two-and-a-half years. It’s called Fika, and is yet to open its doors. Both look like welcome additions if, like us, you usually exit the park at Kingston Gate and fancy scoffing or imbibing a cheeky reward for knocking out a few laps.

Meanwhile, over at Sheen Gate, The Royal Parks plans to open another food and drink outlet in the next few weeks. It’s like they’re trying to fatten us all up!

PADDLE DO NICELY

A quick word about the free credit-card-sized flyers featuring the cycling Code of Conduct which local businesses are stocking. A rowing club whose members cycle in the park has contacted us to get their hands on a batch, and we have offered to give some to them. So if you are part of a local organisation and you too would like a few cards to distribute, please drop us a line.

SEE YOU NEXT MONTH...

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.

All the best,

Richmond Park Cyclists

RPC Bulletin #41, June 2021

Each month, we email a bulletin to everyone who has signed up on this site. Below is the mailout that we sent in June 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…Traffic data gathering has begun +++ What are the aims of The Royal Parks’ trustees? +++ Code of Conduct cards available in two more local stores +++ E-scooters – time for TRP to rethink +++ A brief explainer of the 20mph limit

TUBE SERVICE

The collection of traffic data, which was the reason behind the decision to extend Richmond Park’s traffic trial for one year, has now begun. Tube counters – two black leads set about a foot apart – have been laid across the road by Ham Gate, Richmond Gate and Roehampton Gate by the surrounding borough councils. There are also counters on nearby roads in Richmond and Kingston.

Their purpose is to estimate how much traffic is being displaced from the park to the neighbouring roads as a result of the trial. At the same time, Transport for London is monitoring traffic movements on main roads near the park. TfL has data going back a considerable length of time, which should enable it to distinguish between historic traffic patterns, those related to the pandemic and those caused by the park’s trial.

Our aim, as long-time subscribers will know, is for The Royal Parks to exclude through motor traffic in the park. Traffic data will form part of that debate. TRP believes all the data from the boroughs will be shared on an open basis, so we’ll be keeping an eye out for when it appears and letting you know when it does.

OBJECTS LESSON

With the clock ticking on the extension of the park’s traffic trial, we are now turning our attention to the charitable objects that The Royal Parks’ trustees have to work towards and how they are seemingly at odds with allowing the park to be used as a shortcut for motorists.

The objects state that the trustees will “promote the use and enjoyment of the Royal Parks for public recreation, health and well-being, including through the provision of sporting [...] activities”. As the experience of lockdown showed, lower traffic levels increase the use of the roadway for recreation and exercise in the form of cycling, walking and running. But removing through traffic was not given as an option in the questions that formed the Movement Strategy’s final public survey.

TRP’s charitable status is underpinned by its objects. If the trustees believe they have other duties to the park which override the need to tackle through traffic, then we should know what they are.

CARD HOLDERS

Our thanks to Giant Twickenham and Sigma Sport who join Cycle Exchange, La Ciclista and Pearson on the list of local businesses who are stocking the credit-card-sized versions of the cycling Code of Conduct for their customers to pick up. And thank you to those on social media who were not quite as supportive as our subscribers have been – your comments did at least earn us more sign-ups than we usually get over the course of a month!

The full version of the Code, as we mentioned in last month’s bulletin, is in a newly-erected noticeboard near the Roehampton Gate car park. We’ll review the wording of the two-abreast section once the Government publishes its revised wording on Rule 66 of the Highway Code, which we discussed with Cycling UK, British Cycling and the Institute of Civil Engineers, and will look at updating the rest of the Code of Conduct at a later date based on the feedback we receive.

ELECTRIC FAULT

This Monday sees the start of Transport for London’s 12-month trial of electric scooters which will be available for hire, initially across six selected boroughs. Richmond upon Thames is one of them – but, curiously, Richmond Park will be out of bounds. The Royal Parks has refused permission as it believes e-scooters pose “an unacceptable risk to pedestrians” and “undermine the peace and ambience” of its green spaces. This is despite the three firms who are hiring out the scooters limiting them to a relatively sedate maximum speed of 12.5mph.

Of course, what really makes the park less pleasant than it should be is the high level of motor traffic. TRP will not immediately shut out motorists who use the park as a shortcut as it has already agreed to extend the duration of the trial restrictions in order to measure and analyse traffic data. But with this announcement, it has put itself in a questionable position. When the trial finishes in March next year, would TRP really choose to leave cars cutting through the park unimpeded, making many cyclists and pedestrians feel less safe, while keeping its ban on e-scooters, which are a far less polluting and less dangerous form of transport than motor vehicles?

This isn’t the first time that e-scooters have been sent packing from a royal park. More than two years ago, TRP turned down no fewer than eight scooter hire companies who wanted to run trials in Hyde Park. Mat Bonomi, TRP’s former Head of Transport, cited the idea of using scooters to traverse Hyde Park as one of many concepts that were attempting to reimagine the movement of people through cities. The Movement Strategy is intended to be TRP’s own vision, independent of outside influence, of how people move through its green spaces. 

Our view is that the two should not be mutually exclusive. The Movement Strategy can rebalance Richmond Park’s roads in favour of cycling and walking while also allowing this new, legal form of scooter travel. TRP should evaluate which parts of the park are safe for them to be in and use geofencing to keep them within those areas.

A blanket ban is not the answer – and as more people choose e-scooters for commuting as restrictions are lifted and they return to their workplaces, the pressure is surely on for a rethink.

COOP DE GRACE

What’s the difference between a chicken shed on wheels and a bicycle? The answer is probably not much, as far as the law is concerned.

Our cycling Code of Conduct, which states that cyclists should respect the 20mph speed limit in the park, has prompted a debate about its enforceability. Some wise legal heads have argued that it does not apply to cyclists. But there has never been a legal challenge on this basis, let alone a successful one – and until there is, the practical and sensible approach is to treat 20mph as the maximum. 

The theories recently put forward have been lingering on cycling websites and forums for many years. Some reason that as bicycles do not need to be fitted with a speedometer, speed limits do not apply. This contradicts the golden rule that ignorance of the law is no excuse – and other vehicles, such as motorbikes with an engine smaller than 100cc and first used before April 1984, also do not need speedos yet are still subject to speed limits. 

Others point to The Royal Parks’ advice that speed limits do not generally apply to cycling in its parks, and overlook its recommendation that cyclists “keep to appropriate speeds”. The Royal Parks police are clearer. They tell us: “We deem the appropriate speed to be the sign-posted speed limit.” This is 20mph on the outer roadway and 10mph on the Quietway through the centre of the park.

Then there is TRP’s regulation that “no person using a park shall drive or ride any vehicle on a park road in excess of the speed specified”. The regulations do not consistently define bicycles as vehicles, which leads some to the conclusion that the speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists. This is where our mobile chicken home trundles into view. In case law, a poultry shed on wheels has been defined as a vehicle, as has a moveable stall with tyres. The police say: “It is therefore possible that a court may conclude that a bicycle is a vehicle and therefore the speed limit does apply.”

It is certainly true that the law and the park’s regulations could do with some clarity. But it is a general principle that the substance of the law should be followed where the form is unclear, particularly when there has been no specific legal challenge. And in this case, the big digits reading “20” and “10” that are painted on the park’s road are a fairly obvious indication of the maximum speeds the general public and police expect us to adhere to. (A less obvious indication are the small signposts dotted around the park, which feature a little graphic of a bicycle next to the 20mph limit. Slow down or you might not see them!)

One of the joys of riding in Richmond Park is that the roadway is unencumbered by some of the more extreme forms of traffic calming measures. If The Royal Parks came under pressure to deal with the minority of cyclists who speed, then that might change. The simplest way to avoid greater traffic calming in the future, or legislation specifically targeting cyclists’ speed, is to follow the advice of the Code and keep within the 20mph limit.

It’s a fairly simple rule which helps make the roads a bit more hospitable for less confident or inexperienced cyclists. So let’s all keep up the good work and set an example of riding well to others. 

SEE YOU NEXT MONTH...

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.

All the best,

Richmond Park Cyclists

RPC Bulletin #40, May 2021

Each month, we email a bulletin to everyone who has signed up on this site. Below is the mailout that we sent in May 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…

Code of Conduct – physical copies are out now +++ An analysis of road incidents in the park +++ Collision outside Roehampton Gate car park +++ Farewell to The Royal Parks’ transport boss

CODE AND GET IT

It’s out, chums! After months of being confined to our website and this bulletin, the Code of Conduct for cycling in Richmond Park has finally been set free in the wild. 

The full text is pinned on our new noticeboard near the Roehampton Gate car park (you’ll find it on the pathway opposite the ramp up to Colicci) while our friends at Cycle Exchange, Ciclista and Pearsons all have the credit-card-sized version on their countertops for customers to take. The park’s police unit also has a batch of cards to hand out. 
Many thanks to all our subscribers who have contributed to the Code and support its aims to make the roadway a more hospitable place for every type of cyclist and visitor to the park – we couldn’t have got this far without you!

DANGER OF ASSUMPTIONS

It’s a common assumption in some quarters that more cycling in the park leads to greater danger for other visitors – but the latest quarterly figures revealed at the Police Panel meeting we attended two weeks ago suggest that is an exaggerated claim. During a period when the roadway has been much busier than it was pre-Covid, there were only 15 reported incidents from January to March, and nine of those were simply cyclists falling off their bikes, either due to an error on their part or, on two occasions, animals appearing in the road (for the record, one was a dog and the other was a goose). 

It’s true that four incidents involving cyclists, all of which are currently under investigation, were more serious. As we reported in February, the danger of leaving the park open to through traffic was highlighted when a motorist caused a collision with a female cyclist at Ham Cross before mistakenly hitting the accelerator and smashing into a tree. Then, in March, a driver pushed a member of the public for filming them losing their rag with a couple of cyclists who had been riding two abreast. And later that month, a motorist going down Sawyer’s Hill had to brake suddenly, causing a cyclist to hit the back of the car and suffer concussion, after an oncoming vehicle moved out to overtake. Additionally, in January, a driver pulled an off-duty police officer from their bike, causing minor damage to the bicycle, after he spoke to him about driving carelessly.

There was also an incident in January where a driver and a cyclist had a verbal confrontation in which, the police report states, “one party is alleged to push the other”. Neither of them wished for any action to be taken.

But with cyclists covering tens of thousands of miles in the park during that three-month period, all of these incidents are few and far between. As for the notion that pedestrians face risks getting from one side of the road to the other, there was only one collision on a crossing – and it was a car that hit them, resulting in a dislocated shoulder. 

CROSS PURPOSES

Some of you who ride in the park on weekdays may have seen two ambulances parked on the road outside the Roehampton Gate car park three weeks ago. They were called out after a cyclist unfortunately hit a 12-year-old girl.

The rider’s partner who came to pick him up afterwards tells us that he had slowed down for a car pulling out and was travelling at around 15mph. A man stepped out into the road followed by a friend’s three children who he was looking after. The rider shouted and all stopped, except the girl, and the collision occurred. We understand the girl was taken to hospital for stitches, and the cyclist had minor abrasions. The man looking after the children was apparently very apologetic and wanted to know how the rider was.

While pedestrians have priority on the park’s roads, this incident shows that a sense of shared space must be created around the car parks to allow for easier crossing. In our response to the final consultation on the Movement Strategy, we called for such measures to be implemented in various areas across the park. 

On the subject of pedestrian safety, we should correct a claim we made in our last bulletin – that “no accidents in recent memory have been reported that have resulted in the hospitalisation of a pedestrian after a collision with a cyclist”. It seems we misheard what Sgt Peter Sturgess told a previous meeting. He points out there were, in fact, two incidents in the park last year where a cyclist colliding with a person on foot resulted in hospitalisation (one with a pedestrian, the other with a jogger) and a further two incidents in the past nine months where a pedestrian was injured by a cyclist but did not go to hospital. We’re happy to set the record straight, sergeant!

MAT’S IT

Finally, we would like to wish a fond farewell and the best of luck to Mat Bonomi, who left his post at The Royal Parks a couple of weeks ago to begin work on implementing transport schemes over in Tower Hamlets. We’ll miss you, buddy!

Mat relocated from Australia to join TRP as its Head of Transport and Access and ushered in the Movement Strategy which has brought lots of ordinary people to Richmond Park on bikes, many for the first time. His willingness to speak to us and encouragement of our work has helped to strengthen our relationship with TRP. 

The next step in the Movement Strategy process that Mat’s successors are likely to implement is a measurement of traffic levels in and around the park. The aim should be to find out how traffic patterns have been affected by the year-long extension to the trial, and how much is Covid-related as more people avoid public transport and use their cars instead. We look forward to seeing the results and continuing our ongoing dialogue with TRP.

SEE YOU NEXT MONTH...

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.

All the best,

Richmond Park Cyclists

RPC Bulletin #39, April 2021

CHARGING AHEAD… BUT NOT YET

It seemed like a shock to some when The Royal Parks revealed on Monday that 81 per cent of the 12,000 people who responded to its consultation on introducing car parking charges are against the proposal. But was it really a surprise? In effect, TRP was asking those who choose to drive to the park if they would like to pay for a facility they are already getting for free. Rather like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas, “no”, was a predictable response.

Nevertheless, TRP now plans to go ahead with the charges, which are £1.40 per hour Monday to Friday and £2 at weekends, up to a maximum of six hours. Blue badge holders get to park for free within the same time limit. In response to 84 per cent of respondents opposing the seven-day charging schedule of 9am to 6pm, TRP has reduced the proposed hours to 9am to 4pm on weekdays while keeping nine till six at weekends. The charges would bring Richmond Park and Bushy Park in line with TRP’s other green spaces, none of which offers free parking (and neither do most other parks and beauty spots.) You can see the full update here.

We would like to thank all our subscribers who took part in the consultation after we backed the proposal in October’s bulletin. Any reduction of motor vehicles increases the chance of more diverse populations of visitors coming to enjoy the unique environment of the park’s roadway by bike, many for the first time, as the restrictions during lockdown and the ongoing traffic trial have proved. Additionally, TRP has pledged to invest the revenue from charges on projects to help visitors access the park without a car.

But it is not a certainty that charging will happen. For a start, it requires parliamentary approval, which may take many months to table. In the meantime, Richmond Park’s MP Sarah Olney is seeking “urgent clarification” on the impact that displaced parking would have on the roads where her constituents live, and a petition opposing the move has attracted more than 2,700 signatures since it began last year. (For a good overview of the background, the current plan and reactions to it, have a look at Ross Lydall’s report in the Evening Standard, in which we get a brief mention. Thanks, Ross!)

Whatever the outcome, we commend TRP for pushing ahead. The original plan to introduce parking charges was kiboshed by the government of the time a decade ago – and since then alternative sources of vital funding have failed to materialise. TRP is now a charity, which means it must raise its own funding rather than rely on a government grant. And Richmond Park’s car parks are now in such a sorry state that the one at Roehampton Gate now has a hole the size of a large paddling pool. Surely those who drive to the park will want the surfaces they rely on repaired? 

OUR PANEL OF EXPERTS

The parking charge issue may come up in the next meeting of the Police Panel, which takes place on Wednesday, April 14. As usual, Richmond Park Cyclists will be attending along with other stakeholders. The meeting sets out priorities for the police team over the coming quarter-year, so if there are any issues you would like us to bring up, perhaps in relation to the ongoing traffic trial, please get in touch.

COP A LOAD OF ABUSE

In November last year, we pointed out that delivery drivers, teachers at the ballet school, the Royal Parks’ staff and contractors all display permits in their vehicles that allow them to drive in the restricted areas of the roadway. You can also add police to that list.

Like the aforementioned workers, a blameless officer driving to Holly Lodge in his own  unmarked car at the start of his working day has recently been the target of foul-mouthed abuse from cyclists who think he has broken the rules when, obviously, he hasn’t. 

It was heartening that our social media post on this deplorable behaviour last week was one of our most viewed – clearly many of you feel the same way as we do. Nevertheless, the advice bears repeating: do not abuse any motorist, and if you see anyone do it, please ask them to stop. Their behaviour affects the reputation of us all. 

CALLING THE POLICE

While on the subject of the park’s police unit, a small reminder about reporting incidents which was prompted by a direct message sent to us last month.

A Twitter follower was on Queen’s Road when he saw a moped rider grabbing a cyclist’s handlebars in a bid to take him off. The eyewitness said he was not sure how to share the information.

If you find yourself in a similar situation after witnessing an incident, please tell the police by dialling 101, or 999 if it is an emergency. You can also make a non-emergency report online or direct to @MetCC.

Also on Twitter this week, someone mentioned that a cyclist descended Sawyer’s Hill and hit the back of a car after it came to a halt. Sgt Peter Sturgess from the Parks Police has since told us the driver braked due to another car overtaking in the opposite direction, and the cyclists had minor cuts and concussion. If any more info emerges about either incident, we’ll let you know.

CROSSING THE DIVIDE

The report on the responses to the current traffic trial, which was published three weeks ago when The Royal Parks announced that the restrictions are being extended for a year, revealed that alongside the increase of traffic in surrounding areas, “dangerous interactions between cyclists and other park users” was the joint-second concern of respondents. One respondent in Kingston feared “dangerous speeds” of cyclists were putting pedestrians at risk, while another in Richmond predicted a fatality.

That’s the perception. What about the reality? 

At the last Police Panel meeting, the park’s police said no accidents in recent memory have been reported that have resulted in the hospitalisation of a pedestrian after a collision with a cyclist – and, remember, that is after a period of time when more people have been riding bikes in the park than ever before. So it isn’t actual danger that is the cause of concerns.

The real root of the tensions between visitors walking in the park and cyclists is most probably confusion over pedestrian priority. Outside the park, cyclists generally understand that they should stop at crossings. Inside the park, they do not automatically know that pedestrians always have priority (although our Code of Conduct now exists to start getting that message across, as well as reminding everyone that the speed limit of 20mph applies to cyclists). 

We have asked TRP to create a sense of shared space on the roads next to gates, car parks and junctions to calm traffic flows and allow easier crossing for pedestrians trialing of zebra crossings. We’ve also asked for more signage to get road users and pedestrians to yield and take care. TRP is understandably averse to making the environment of the park, which everyone values, look more urban. But in the interests of making everyone feel safe, we think some of these measures should be implemented.

VULNERABLE TO CRITICISM

Well, it had to happen some time. More than three years after making its debut, this monthly email bulletin has finally received its first series of complaints.

Last month’s report on the driver who caused a collision with a female cyclist at Ham Cross stated: “With more cyclists visiting the park – particularly women and other road users classed as vulnerable – it seems likely that there will be more incidents like this if the road between Kingston and Richmond gates remains open to through traffic.” Five people objected to the term “vulnerable”, arguing that the description implied women cyclists are not as competent as men and, therefore, more prone to accidents.

That was not our intention. It was meant to reflect a study in 2015 headed by the University of Westminster’s transport expert Rachel Aldred which found female cyclists are twice as likely to be subjected to near misses or harassment than men, with the cause attributed to women generally riding at slower speeds than their male counterparts. In that sense, women do appear to be more vulnerable – through no fault of their own.

Nevertheless, we recognise that many women who ride in the park are more confident than the average cyclist and, therefore, quite rightly do not consider themselves vulnerable. And, of course, the park is relatively much safer than roads outside it, which slightly alters the context. We’ll take both these aspects into account in future. In any case we apologise for any offense caused.

AND ON THAT BOMBSHELL...

It’s just as well that this bulletin has arrived in your inbox just after midnight, otherwise you might think that this final item is an April Fool’s joke. But it’s all true!

At around 7:45pm on Sunday evening, as the park was shutting its main gates, we were cycling along the Priory Lane section of the park’s outer road towards Roehampton Gate when a car, which was a fair distance ahead, came to a halt. It could go no further as there was a police car parked diagonally across the road. Two officers got out and advised us and the motorist to turn around and exit at Richmond Gate instead. Their manner was polite, but there was a slight air of urgency.

We have since discovered the reason for the detour: an unexploded World War Two German incendiary device had been discovered in the fields. Specialist officers removed it that night, and the park gates opened as normal the following morning. Amazing stuff!

SEE YOU NEXT MONTH...

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.

All the best,

Richmond Park Cyclists

RPC Extra Bulletin – response to Movement Strategy extension

ONE YEAR MORE

The Royal Parks has announced that the current trial in Richmond Park will be extended for a year to evaluate the impact of displaced traffic on the surrounding roads. 

The announcement should have marked the conclusion of the Movement Strategy, which began almost two years ago. Instead, there is a 12-month wait. And there is no guarantee that a year from now we will get something better than the trial, which has removed or restricted through traffic from more than three-fifths of the perimeter road.

But with uncertainty comes opportunity. The overall reduction in shortcut journeys by motorists during the pandemic has led to a wider variety of people visiting, and many have taken up cycling in the park. Yet if the trial had been made permanent this week, through traffic would still have had unrestricted access to Queen’s Road – the stretch between Kingston and Richmond gates which is the busiest section of the roadway – inhibiting the presence of less confident cyclists. 

Richmond Park Cyclists and the wider cycling community now have the chance to show, once and for all, that through traffic should be eliminated from all the park’s roads, at the very least during weekends, to make it a more pleasant place for every kind of visitor. 

And the results of the survey show that this is the outcome that people want: around half of the responses in the open comment section said they would support further restrictions on motor vehicles in the park.

Here, we look at the background to the decision, examine some of the data from the third public consultation and look at a way forward.

WHY EXTEND THE TRIAL?

Judging by the form of questions in the final public consultation, which related solely to the trial, it would have been a fair bet that TRP was going to make the current restrictions permanent if respondents favoured them. Indeed, that seemed the likely outcome based on indications we were getting from the management of Richmond Park in recent weeks. But TRP’s trustees convened on February 17th, and as a result of discussions at that meeting,  the extension was announced.

All of the trials in TRP’s parks will now end in a year’s time. But with 10,000 of the 18,000 responses to the public consultation centered solely on Richmond Park, and the restrictions causing more debate than any other of the royal parks, it’s likely that the 12-month extension was influenced by Richmond upon Thames Council – particularly because that is exactly what its deputy leader Alexander Ehmann requested.

Councillor Ehmann, who also chairs Richmond’s transport and air quality committee, wrote in the council’s formal response to the consultation: “We would like to be able to carry out some additional traffic counts and parking surveys in the surrounding area and we hope that the traffic trial will be extended so it runs for at least an additional twelve months. This is particularly important as we have not seen a return to ‘normal’ traffic patterns within the initial six months of the trial. This extension should provide an opportunity for more robust data to be collected.”

This data will only be truly robust if it is balanced against the detrimental effect cut-through traffic has on limiting access to the park’s roads for less confident cyclists, and its urbanisation of the park’s environment which affects the experience of all types of visitors. The data should also be placed in context with wider London traffic patterns. For too long, there has been an assumption that journey times on areas close to the park are much worse than other roads (indeed, statistical evidence in the responses from Richmond and Kingston councils to the Movement Strategy is notably absent). In fact, a TfL survey from 2017 suggests that Petersham Road – invariably the first place mentioned when complaints about traffic levels arise – mostly has higher average bus speeds than Roehampton Lane, which also takes some of the traffic that would otherwise go through the park. (The TfL survey, which Tim Lennon from the Richmond Cycling Campaign has allowed us to share, is available here in the file marked “TfL borough book”). 

And let’s not forget that TRP launched the Movement Strategy to prioritise walking and cycling. Can councils in the surrounding boroughs provide statistical evidence that TRP should override that aim on the busiest section of the roadway to accommodate shortcut journeys?

10K RUN-THROUGH

There were 10,765 responses to the Richmond Park traffic trial public consultation. The vast majority said that the restrictions should be made permanent, the park was now a more pleasant place to be and the trial had had a positive impact. Here’s a quick run-through of some other figures in TRP’s 83-page report on the responses to the consultation…

• A total of 73 per cent were in favour of the measures taken on the east of the park and between Richmond and Roehampton, while 69 per cent were in favour of the closure to all cars on the East Sheen link.  

• The text box for open-ended comments at the end of the survey was used by 6,389 respondents. According to TRP, the most common theme raised by nearly half of these was “support for further measures discouraging motor vehicles in the park”. 

• About half again (presumably more than 1,500 responses, an astonishing number given this was an option which TRP deliberately chose not to give) called for the complete removal of all through traffic. 

While accepting that this was not a referendum, we nevertheless wonder why TRP would go through such a lengthy and rigorous process and then ignore the clear direction of public consensus. How is it that Richmond Council, which has no authority in the park, seems to have such influence over TRP’s trustees?

In next month’s bulletin, we will cover the “dangerous interaction between cyclists and other park users” which was raised by some respondents.

SEE YOU NEXT MONTH...

Thank you for allowing us to pop into your inbox with this special bonus bulletin. Our next regular monthly email will be with you at the start of April. Please let us know what you think about the trial extension and our approach to it  – 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.

All the best,

Richmond Park Cyclists

RPC Bulletin #38, March 2021

AT A CROSSROAD

With The Royal Parks due to announce permanent restrictions on through traffic in around seven days’ time, dramatic images of a car crash following a collision with a cyclist the week before last provided striking evidence of what can go wrong when motor vehicles are given unrestricted access to sections of the park’s roadway.

An elderly driver, who was carrying a passenger, drove uphill on Ham Gate Avenue, stopped at Ham Cross and then pulled out to turn right – but failed to see a female cyclist coming towards him from the direction of Kingston Gate. He drove into her path, causing the collision, and she fell to the ground. In a panic, the driver hit the accelerator instead of the brake (he was driving an automatic) which caused his car to speed off down the hill and crash straight through the metal barrier towards a tree.

Sergeant Peter Sturgess from the Royal Parks’ Police tells us: “Had the driver not turned his steering towards the end, he would have gone straight into the tree – and almost certainly he and the passenger would have died.”

The driver was taken to hospital with burn injuries to his hand. The cyclist had facial injuries and was discharged from hospital the same day. The attending officer’s accident report has been passed to the police’s traffic offenses unit in Sidcup, Kent, which will decide whether the driver should be charged.

The woman who fell victim to the driver’s apparent inattention was cycling on Queen’s Road – the busiest section of the perimeter road which, unlike the rest of it, is not subject to restrictions on through traffic as part of the current trial. No one can say for certain what permanent restrictions TRP will announce next week as the Movement Strategy draws to a close. But with more cyclists visiting the park – particularly women and other road users classed as vulnerable – it seems likely that there will be more incidents like this if the road between Kingston and Richmond gates remains open to through traffic. 

TRP should recognise that the welcome increase in the number of ordinary cyclists visiting the park should be matched with appropriate restrictions to make them feel safe at all times.

REBUKES OF ‘HAZARD’

Sarah Olney, the Lib Dem MP for Richmond Park, caused a few eyebrows to be raised three weeks ago when she told Radio Jackie that some cyclists treat our favourite cycling destination as “a sports venue” and in doing so present a “hazard” which puts people off cycling there. 

Well, it’s certainly true that no one likes inconsiderate riding. But as we have said in previous editions of this bulletin, the significant increase in people choosing to ride in the park for the first time, and doing so alongside sports cyclists, shows that most people recognise it is a safe environment for cycling. What really puts some people off riding in the park is high levels of through motor traffic.

So it was in a spirit of understanding that we requested a Zoom meeting with Sarah to put the other side of the story – and we were delighted when she accepted. And we are pleased to announce that she has chosen to endorse our Code of Conduct. Here’s Sarah’s statement in full:

“I encourage cycling of all kinds in Richmond Park, whether for leisure, exercise or just getting from A to B. Cycling in the park has become even more popular recently, so any measure to improve relations between park users is to be commended. I am, therefore, delighted to endorse and promote the new Code of Conduct prepared by Richmond Park Cyclists.”

Sarah will feature the code in her newsletter to constituents, and we look forward to working with her more closely in the future.

NOTICE ANYTHING DIFFERENT?

Speaking of the Code of Conduct, the full text of our guidelines will soon be publicly displayed on a brand new noticeboard which eagle-eyed readers may have spotted on the pathway next to Colicci. Our thanks to park manager Simon Richards for arranging its installation, thereby giving our organisation a permanent physical presence in the park. The noticeboard is empty at the moment, so please email us with any cycling-related non-commercial notices you may feel are of interest to others. It’s there for all of us, so please use it!

CLOSE TO THE LIMIT?

How many is too many? When it comes to visitor numbers, Richmond Park may be nearing the limit, if the closing remarks of a short report delivered at the last meeting of the Police Panel is anything to go by. 

Park manager Simon Richards told RPC and the other stakeholders attending the virtual meeting in January that some damage to grassland caused by more people coming to the park “will never be reversed”. Other areas will take years to recover. The minutes show that TRP is also concerned that the deer are “reacting to the continual disturbance from high numbers of visitors and their dogs”.

Most weekends, the car parks appear to be running close to full capacity – and Saturday was exceptionally busy, with some drivers once again parking on the grass. The overflow from the car parks back up onto the roadway, causing an unnecessary hazard for pedestrians and cyclists. TRP has resorted to costly marshalling, and with many new visitors having discovered Richmond Park, we anticipate many of them will carry on arriving by car.

If TRP has to eventually restrict the number of visitors to protect the park, then limiting access to the car parks would surely be an effective place to start – and, of course, it would make the roadway better for cycling. Or maybe there will be fewer visitors arriving by car if TRP decides to bring in parking charges as planned. We shall see...

GREAT SIXPECTATIONS

A few dates for your diary. The big one is Monday, March 29, when you will be able to enjoy riding in the park with five of your buddies as the rule of six comes into effect again as part of the Government’s easing of Covid restrictions. In roughly two weeks, the bi-annual deer cull will be over, which means you will be able to ride in the park again before 7:30am and after 8pm. And from Monday, March 8 until Saturday, March 27, Church Road in Ham will be closed for the annual toad migration – so if you usually enter the park by Ham Gate, you had better hoppit and find another route!

A MOMENT OF SI DRAMA

Finally, we’re bracing ourselves for accusations of bias as Simon Richards makes his third appearance in this bulletin – this time as a have-a-go-hero of sorts. The source is the park’s police unit, so you can take this as gospel.

It turns out that back in December a bike owner came out of the loos at Roehampton Gate car park one morning to find some toerag mounting his pride and joy and riding off. Simon, who was nearby, hears the cyclist shouting, and the two set off in hot pursuit. The thief rides over the cattle grid and climbs over the fence, leaving the bike behind him. The thief escaped, and the bicycle was reunited with its owner.

As ever, the lesson here is to take a portable lock if you are heading to the park, and consider removing a wheel as well if you are going to leave your bike unattended. Simon cannot be on hand to stop every thief, you know!

SEE YOU NEXT WEEK...

A special bonus bulletin will arrive in your inbox in around seven days’ time once The Royal Parks releases details of the permanent restrictions to motor traffic. Whatever happens, it will be a momentous day, chums! 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.

All the best,

Richmond Park Cyclists

RPC Bulletin #37, February 2021

Each month, we email a bulletin to everyone who has signed up on this site. Below is the mailout that we sent in February 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.

CULL OF DUTY

Welcome to February, chums – and prepare for the usual scheduled restrictions to the park as the first of this year’s biannual deer culls begins.

From today for approximately six weeks, the pedestrian gates will open at 7:30am and close at 8pm, which means you will not be able to ride your bike in the park outside these times. Remember that the restrictions are for your own safety as firearms are used.

The Royal Parks’ team locks the gates in rotation each night. If you arrive at one of them shortly prior to locking time, please do not enter unless you are absolutely certain you can easily reach your exit before 8pm. Arrive at, say, 7.59 and you will most likely find your exit gate is already locked – so you will have to ride back to where you entered, which will now be shut as well, then wait for TRP’s team to return on its final sweep and open it for you. Save yourself the bother by using the roads around the park instead. 

The cull, which TRP has a duty to carry out in order to control the number of deer, could last longer or shorter than the allocated six-week period, depending on the health of the herd. We will let you know via social media if the pedestrian gates reopen before our next monthly bulletin comes out.

CODE SHARING

It’s out, pals! After months of refining, with lots of helpful suggestions and pointers from you, our super subscribers, the official Richmond Park Cyclists’ Code of Conduct is finally up on our website. Hooray!

These guidelines will help to create a safe and welcoming environment for every type of cyclist and other visitors to the park. If you see a cyclist falling short of the code, politely ask them to adjust their behaviour in future. And if you are an experienced cyclist, your good behaviour can be an example to others.

Put together with the help of The Royal Parks, the Royal Parks Police and the Friends of Richmond Park, the Code will also strengthen RPC’s links with these three important organisations as well as raising the profile of cyclists’ concerns among stakeholder groups in general.

To publicise the Code to the wider cycling community, a brief summary of it will appear on credit-card-sized flyers which will feature the link to the full-length version. We’ll let you know when they’re out. 

ALMOST THERE...

It has been more than a year and a half since we attended the stakeholder meeting at Holly Lodge where The Royal Parks officially launched its Movement Strategy – and now its project to facilitate cycling and walking in its eight green spaces, including Richmond Park, is in the finishing straight. 

Huge thanks to everyone who took part in the survey on the ongoing traffic trials after we issued our final reminder last month before the consultation closed. The permanent restrictions on through traffic in the park, which TRP will base on the findings of the survey, are due to be announced some time this month. We’ll send you an extra bulletin before our usual monthly missive as soon as it becomes clear what the plan is.

Even if the trial restrictions are made permanent, the park will still be an even better place to ride your bike than it was in those faraway pre-pandemic days. But as mentioned in our previous two bulletins, we have written to TRP’s trustees to make sure that they listen to the view that through traffic should be eradicated in the park (you can read the letter here). Making this a reality would be the best possible outcome of the process, and we are hopeful that TRP has a plan that is much bolder than the current restrictions. Let’s see what happens.

FROST REPORT 

Finally, a word of caution regarding the road conditions in the park. The ground has become waterlogged due to the recent wet weather, and some road users are consequently hogging the middle of the road where the standing water is shallowest, so please be mindful of others. Some of the water inevitably turns to frost, and when it is forecast, TRP’s contractors carry out salting – although it may not have bedded in sufficiently by the time you arrive in the park, and they may not be able to tackle it every single time. Please take care!

SEE YOU NEXT MONTH...

Thank you for allowing us to pop into your inbox. As ever, let us know what you think about any of the subjects in this bulletin, or 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.

All the best,

Richmond Park Cyclists

RPC Bulletin #36, January 2021

Each month, we email a bulletin to everyone who has signed up on this site. Below is the mailout that we sent in January 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.

LAST CHANCE

Hello, lovely subscribers! This month’s bulletin is relatively brief and has one chief purpose – to remind you that The Royal Parks’ survey on the traffic trial in Richmond Park closes in a matter of hours. 

If you have yet to fill in the survey, please do so now using this link. It takes just a couple of minutes, and there is a small box on the third page where you can tell TRP in your own words how the trial has impacted your visits. 

Use those 1,000 characters wisely, friends! Describe your own experiences, good and bad – and if you think completely eliminating through-traffic is a good idea, explain why with specific examples. 

You can also email your views to movement.strategy@royalparks.org.uk.

And remember – we have written to TRP’s trustees to make sure that they listen to the view that through traffic should be eradicated in the park. Whatever permanent restrictions TRP decides upon will be announced in February, followed by roadworks to install permeable barriers reflecting the outcome of the Movement Strategy. 

We would like to take this opportunity to thank all the staff and contractors of The Royal Parks, and all officers of the Metropolitan Police Royal Parks Team who, with scant resources and much pragmatism, have looked after the park during this most tumultuous year.

And our thanks, chiefly, to yourselves. The readership of these monthly missives has doubled this year, with many of you providing us with valuable ideas and information, including contributions to our Code of Conduct for riding on the park’s roads which is due to be published in the next few weeks. Rest assured that we will continue acting on your behalf and for everyone else who rides a bike in Richmond Park.

Finally, have a great New Year – and please note that the park will shut tonight at 8pm to prevent the spread of coronavirus and reopen at 6am tomorrow.

See you in 2021!

All the best,

Richmond Park Cyclists

RPC Bulletin #35, December 2020

Each month, we email a bulletin to everyone who has signed up on this site. Below is the mailout that we sent in December 2020. 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.

BOX CLEVER

Big thanks to every one of you who took part in The Royal Parks’ public consultation on the traffic trials in Richmond Park after reading our special bulletin last week. The response was superb – more than three times the average number of clicks compared to similar emails. 

The third and final consultation on the Movement Strategy is your last chance to tell TRP what you think. If you have yet to fill in the survey, please do so now – and remember that the third page of the four-page questionnaire has a little box at the bottom where you can tell TRP in your own words how the trials have impacted your visits. 

Use those 1,000 characters wisely, friends! Describe your own experiences, good and bad – and if you think no through-traffic is a good idea, explain why with specific examples.

To refresh your memory, or to give yourself some inspiration, take a look at our formal response to TRP, which also sets out our vision of how the park can become more visitor-friendly. But whatever you think, do take part in the consultation – you will be helping to shape the future of London’s No1 free cycling resource for the better.

NO EX-SKEW-SES

None of the questions in the survey asks if you think that permanent restrictions can go further than the trial, which means that the only opportunity you have to express such an opinion is in the little box at the end of the third page. As many of you have pointed out, this looks like it is simply a rubber-stamping exercise to turn the trial restrictions into permanent measures while ignoring all calls for a total elimination of through traffic. We will be writing to management ourselves, requesting that any response calling for more robust measures than the current trial should be given extra weight given the bias implicit in the form of the consultation.

If you think the format of the survey is skewed and you would like through traffic eradicated, please tell The Royal Parks by emailing Movement.strategy@royalparks.org.uk or writing to: TRP – Movement Strategy, The Old Police House, Hyde Park, London W2 2UH. 

As the car ban during the first lockdown showed, an absence of through traffic attracts a greater diversity of cyclists to the park, including the less confident and vulnerable. It is important that TRP realises this.

WHO SAID IT?

"What is a landscape without people to use it? Watching a child learning to cycle on one of the [park's] closed roads recently – that experience that individual has at that age will potentially stay with them their whole life. That's what these green spaces are able to do – they are able to provide those unique memories and experiences. In conversations I have with people, their strongest memories tend to be those that trigger within their times around green space. They are such important spaces to people that we're bound to see a great deal of pressure on them, but that's even more of a responsibility on us to try and protect and conserve them."

Those words sound like they could have come from us or another cycling advocacy group. In fact, it was Tom Jarvis, TRP’s Director of Parks, who said them. Tom was addressing Ham and Petersham residents via Zoom at a meeting in October which was kindly set up by Green Party councillor Andree Frieze (you can now watch the event – Tom’s quote is at approximately 1hr 10min – or read the minutes.)

It is encouraging that one of the most notable people in The Royal Parks has publicly recognised the importance of protecting Richmond Park as a place to cycle. One of the pressures on the park that Tom may be alluding to is the notion that it should accept some through traffic to keep the surrounding roads from getting clogged. But judging by what has been happening before and during the second lockdown, that argument is weaker than ever.

We have been filming the roads in the park and those outside at various times of day over the past month and a half – and traffic levels in the evening have been much lower than pre-pandemic times. In fact, on one recent evening, there was more traffic queuing inside the park at Richmond Gate than there was in the same direction on Petersham Road. More of these traffic checks will appear on our Instagram stories and highlights. 

Working from home is bound to become more commonplace in the future, so some commuter traffic will become a thing of the past. Meanwhile, TRP is monitoring car journeys in the park, and councils in the surrounding boroughs are watching theirs. If the figures that emerge tell the same story as our footage, how can Tom and his team fail to eliminate all through traffic?

KEEP BUSHY CUSHTY

Time for a big shoutout to Richmond Park’s little brother, Bushy Park. We’re rooting for you, buddy! The Teddington tiddler also has a traffic trial running at the moment, with cars currently banned from using the central road as a shortcut. The route is popular with many cyclists, so if you want to keep the north-south route between Hampton Court Gate and Teddington Gate a pleasant, welcoming space for pedestrians, family groups and cyclists, please take part in the separate survey. 

RIGHT ON QUEUE

Lockdown two will be over tomorrow – and, hopefully, so will the huge influx of cars queuing up outside the car parks every weekend, blighting the park’s roads for everyone who cycles on them. 

With so many restrictions on people’s movements, it was sadly inevitable that Richmond Park and other public spaces all over the UK would become a magnet for visitors, many of them driving to their destination. Recognising the frustration that many of you felt, we requested ahead of last month’s stakeholder meeting that TRP tells visitors to use another form of transport if they can, so it was pleasing to see it doing something along those lines on Facebook. And it appears they deployed marshals at Pembroke Lodge to turn away motorists after the car parks become full – thank you, TRP!  But if the weekend gridlock continues, we’ll be pushing them to take a firmer stance.

GATE FOR IT... 

Finally, a reminder that you will need to avoid the park for another two weeks or so if you usually cycle through it early in the morning or at night. The deer cull is ongoing, which means the gates are still closed from 8pm to 7.30am, so please do not cycle through if you arrive shortly before locking time unless you are confident that you can easily reach your exit within ten minutes – otherwise you may find yourself locked in. 

As usual, the cull could finish earlier or later than the set six-week period, depending on the health of the herd, so keep an eye out for announcements. 

SEE YOU NEXT MONTH...

Thank you for allowing us to pop into your inbox. As ever, let us know what you think about any of the subjects in this bulletin, or 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.

All the best,

Richmond Park Cyclists

website: richmondparkcyclists.org

twitter: twitter.com/richmondpkcycle

facebook: facebook.com/richmondparkcyclists

instagram: instagram.com/richmondparkcyclists

RPC Bulletin #34, November 2020

Each month, we email a bulletin to everyone who has signed up on this site. Below is the mailout that we sent in November 2020. 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.

LOCKDOWN LOWDOWN

Before this month’s bulletin gets properly underway, a few quick (and, perhaps, obvious) points about the new lockdown restrictions announced by the Government yesterday which come into force on Thursday. 

You will still be able to ride your bike in Richmond Park, but please be aware that you should only ride with a maximum of one other person from another household. You can exceed this limit if your riding companions live with you or are part of your support bubble, as outlined on the Government’s guidance (under section 3,  “Meeting with family and friends”). 

The park’s roads may be less busy as there could be fewer commuter journeys due to more people working from home in line with the latest rules – and with gyms shut, perhaps there will be more people getting out on their bikes, despite the cold weather. We shall see. For now, though, on with the newsletter!

VIRTUALLY CONNECTED

If you had the opportunity to speak directly to the people who run Richmond Park, what would you say to them? Well, it’s time to get your thinking cap on, because the next stakeholders’ breakfast meeting is taking place in just over a week and, as ever, we are one of the groups who have been invited to attend by The Royal Parks.

Hosted by Tom Jarvis, TRP’s Director of Parks, and Richmond Park’s manager Simon Richards, the event will take place virtually on the morning of Tuesday, November 10th. The Royal Parks Police will also be presenting. Richmond Park Cyclists has a slot to address the group, which we will use to speak about our proposed cycling Code of Conduct (and we’ll fill you in on small developments on that front later in this bulletin).

The stakeholder meetings enable us to represent the interests of all types of cyclists who visit the park. Please hit reply to this email and let us know what issues you would like us to bring up.

HERE IT CULLS AGAIN

The second of the biannual deer culls begins tomorrow (Monday) – which means that, for approximately six weeks, you will not be able to ride your bike in the park from 8pm until 7.30am the following day. These restrictions are for your own safety as firearms are used.

TRP’s team locks the gates in rotation each night. If you arrive at the park shortly prior to locking time, please do not enter unless you are absolutely certain you can easily reach your exit before 8pm. Arrive at, say, 7.59 and you will most likely find your exit gate is already locked – so you will have to ride back to where you entered, which will now be shut as well, then wait for TRP’s team to return on its final sweep and open it for you. Save yourself getting into a right pickle by using the roads around the park instead. 

The process, which is a sensible measure to control the number of deer, could last longer or shorter than the allocated six-week period, depending on the health of the herd. If we receive news of when the pedestrian gates will reopen after next month’s bulletin comes out, we will let you know via social media.

TRIAL SOMETHING ELSE

Not long now, chums! The third and final public consultation on the Movement Strategy is due to open in roughly a couple of weeks, and we will let you know via social media as soon as TRP announces a date for commencement. We will also give some tips for your response that should help increase the likelihood of Richmond Park becoming an even better place to ride your bike once whatever the specific measures TRP decides upon are put in place in February next year.

In the meantime, take a look at the letter we wrote to Mat Bonomi, TRP’s Head of Transport, and the park’s manager Simon Richards earlier this week. It sets out suggested improvements to the current traffic trial in the park that would benefit every type of cyclist and park visitor. Here is the main text...

Richmond Park Cyclists (RPC) welcomes The Royal Parks’ Movement Strategy and the efforts it is making to reduce through traffic in Richmond Park. During the first half of the six- month trial we have observed a very substantial and pleasing reduction in through traffic in all parts of the park, with the notable exception of the roads between Kingston, Ham and Richmond gates. We are now proposing a modest change to the Movement Strategy trial in order to observe the impact of a restriction on this stretch at weekends.

For the second half of the six-month trial RPC proposes that weekend restrictions on the through movement of motor traffic are extended to include the roads between Kingston, Ham and Richmond gates. The effect of these restrictions can then be compared with those of the first half of the trial when these roads have been largely open to through movement at weekends.

We suggest that to maximise the benefit to park users, vehicle access is restricted at weekends, which is when most people visit. Our suggested restrictions are as follows:

• Via Kingston Gate to the car parks at Kingston Gate, Broomfield Hill and the disabled parking facility at Isabella plantation, and through movement to Ham Gate.

• Via Ham Gate to the car parks at Isabella plantation, Kingston Gate and Broomfield Hill, and through movement to Kingston Gate.

• Via Richmond Gate to Pembroke Lodge car park.

We believe the visitor experience will be safer, quieter and substantially enhanced as a result. During the weekend, those who would normally choose to drive through the park as a means of taking a shortcut may instead walk, take a bus, cycle or ride an ebike to their destination. Some will persist, possibly out of necessity, and use roads outside the park to make the same journeys anyway.

The community impacted most by any displaced traffic at weekends would be Ham and Petersham. The traffic added to Petersham Road and nearby areas will be like that experienced in communities surrounding government-supported Lower Traffic Neighbourhoods. LTNs have brought calmer, safer shared roadspaces into the heart of communities, with the surrounding roads bearing the burden of the traffic they displace. But in the case of Ham and Petersham, our suggested restrictions would last only over weekends. An argument has been expressed by Ham and Petersham residents that additional restrictions on through motor traffic on their side of the park means safer, quieter roads for cycling into and out of their area.

The Ham and Petersham community already bears all displaced motor traffic from Richmond Park in the morning and evening rush-hour periods during winter as all vehicle gates in the park are closed during the hours of darkness. Petersham Road copes. We suggest that substantially more traffic evaporation would develop as resident and non- resident weekend motorists adjust and the burden falling on Ham and Petersham should fall.

We are confident that this proposal is in line with what other park stakeholders would like to see. But, as ever, we welcome any feedback, so please let us know what you think.
 

GONE IN 20 SECONDS

A quick word on security for your bike, following a theft at the beginning of October. Well-known local racer Jake Martin had his distinctive yellow and red Carrera pilfered from outside the Roehampton Gate toilets after popping inside for just 20 seconds to fill his water bottle. The speed of the theft, and the fact that a number of bikes have been nicked from there in recent years, shows that you should always take precautions. Use a portable lock, remove a wheel – do both, if you can – or, if you are riding with someone, get them to keep an eye on your bike. 

In an unrelated development, the park’s police unit recovered a bicycle which they believe was stolen from the park but they could not be completely certain as the identifying frame number was on a sticker that had been removed. The park’s police sergeant Peter Sturgess advises dabbing a solution known as ImmobiDot on your bike, which will make the ownership details viewable on the Police National Mobile Property Register and therefore increases the chances of your stolen bicycle being returned to you. See the Immobilise website to buy a marking kit and register or to find out more.

Staying with the lost and found theme of this item, a kind Facebook follower came across a rather expensive pair of headphones on Broomfield Hill last Saturday and has offered to post them back to the owner. If this is you, please email us with a description of the headphones and we will pass on your details.

ANGER? DON’T GO DOWN THAT ROAD...

With the traffic trial ongoing, it may seem like there are motorists breaking the rules by driving on closed or restricted roads. In fact, there is a long list of vehicles authorised to travel within the park, including those driven by teachers at the ballet school, delivery drivers, TRP staff and contractors – some of whom have been upset by the anger directed at them by cyclists who have leapt to the wrong conclusion.

It should go without saying, but please do not abuse any driver, and ask anyone you see behaving in this way to hold back. More prominent permits may be displayed in some vehicles in future, but in any case you should leave enforcement to TRP’s security and the police. Confrontations and anger can only damage the reputation of all cyclists who visit the park.

CODE TO PROGRESS

Finally, a note on some small but notable changes to our proposed Code of Conduct, which aims to make the park’s roadway a hospitable environment for every type of cyclist and other visitors. Following more suggestions from the park’s police unit, TRP and stakeholders, we’ve added the following:

• The long version of the Code will now begin: “Richmond Park is a National Nature Reserve, and cycling in it is a privilege as well as a pleasure.”

• The introduction advises: “If you are an experienced cyclist, your good behaviour can be an example to others.”

• Under Stopping And Slowing: “At the raised crossings, you should stop for pedestrians.”

• Also in Stopping And Slowing: “Deer are wild animals and can be unpredictable. Learn to read their behaviour – are they grazing or do they want to cross?”

• And in “Show care when passing” under the Care And Courtesy heading: “Overtake smoothly, without a sudden surge in speed.”

If you haven’t seen the previous version of the proposed Code, which did not have the above changes, or you want a reminder of what it said, take a look at last month’s bulletin and give us your views.

SEE YOU NEXT MONTH...

Thank you for allowing us to pop into your inbox. As ever, let us know what you think about any of the subjects in this bulletin, or 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.

All the best,

Richmond Park Cyclists

website: richmondparkcyclists.org

twitter: twitter.com/richmondpkcycle

facebook: facebook.com/richmondparkcyclists

instagram: instagram.com/richmondparkcyclists