- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Cyclists in Richmond Park with London skyline (copyright Simon MacMichael)Cycling group and Royal Parks disagree over cyclist speed limit advice in Richmond Park
A group which aims to "represent all cyclists and para-cyclists who use Richmond Park" is in disagreement with the Royal Parks over advice to cyclists about speed limits in the south-west London park.
The 2,360-acre green space is the largest of the Royal Parks and a popular destination for the English capital's cyclists due to the network of largely uninterrupted roads, which at some times of the day can be quieter than other parts of the city, especially before the gates are opened to motor traffic in the morning.
Last month, the Royal Parks said it would be reviewing its cycling policy "following several cycling-related incidents" and cyclists riding "at excessive speeds" causing crashes. The charity also cancelled cycling club London Dynamo's time trial events on safety grounds as "they directly encourage cyclists to go faster than speed limit", although curiously the London Duathlon in September (half of which involves a closed-road bike event) has not been called off.
Richmond Park Cyclists says it is to meet with Royal Parks management this month and will raise the question about why the Duathlon is allowed to go ahead but early morning, fully insured, heavily marshalled time trials cannot. The group representing cyclists also detailed its disagreement with the charity which manages Richmond Park over advice to cyclists regarding speed limits.
In an email to members, Richmond Park Cyclists said it had been asked to take down its 'Safer Riding Guide' from a noticeboard outside one of the park's cafes by the park's manager Paul Richards.
Formerly named the 'Code of Conduct', Richmond Park Cyclists' code for riders was not without criticism when it was first introduced, some riders who use the park and a campaign group saying it did not address the "real hazard" facing visitors – namely, motor traffic.
The Safer Riding Guide caught the attention of the Royal Parks last week when the charity apparently objected to its advice regarding cycling speeds.
Richmond Park Cyclists explained: "The park manager's concern with the Safer Riding Guide was its advice on the speed limit. The SRG, which was put together with the help of the park's police and our subscribers, states: Speed limits in the park do not apply to cyclists – but that does not mean you can ride as fast as you like all the time. The police enforce a regulation stipulating that you must not ride in a manner that would endanger the safety of other park visitors or yourself. So slow down for pedestrians, anticipate road furniture and other potential hazards, and always be aware that deer can run out at any time. Sensible speeds create a more welcoming environment for everyone.
"The Royal Parks' policy on cycling reads: We do ask that cyclists observe the motor vehicle speed limit for the park, the road or path in question. This varies from 5mph to 20mph. This helps to maintain a safe environment for visitors of all ages, and protects road users, as well as wildlife – particularly as wild deer in Bushy or Richmond Parks may behave unpredictably and run across park roads.
"Essentially, both the Royal Parks and Richmond Park Cyclists are encouraging people, in differing ways, to ride sensibly while remaining aware of any potential hazards around them. But Paul Richards tells us that we 'endorse that cyclists can speed in the park as long as it’s not all the time', which is incorrect. The SRG clearly tells cyclists to adjust their speed, show consideration to all park visitors and abide by the park regulations, while correctly indicating that actual speed limits in the park only apply to drivers – just as they do on all UK roads."
Richmond Park Cyclists said it would meet with Darren Share, the Royal Parks' new Director of Parks, in a few weeks' time "to find out more and discuss how we can work more closely with TRP to help maintain a safe, welcoming environment for all park visitors".
The group also questioned whether "following pressure from some quarters triggered by the inquest into the fatality in Regent's Park", the Royal Parks would "be able to introduce enforceable speed limits for cyclists across its estate?"
Richmond Park Cyclists suggests this would be "possible, but extremely challenging".
The issue around speed limits in the park and whether they apply to cyclists has been long running. Despite initially suggesting speed limits did apply to cyclists, in 2021 it was confirmed that the park's speed limits (which range from 5mph to 20mph) do not apply to cyclists, a stance in line with the wider law.
Then, in the summer of 2022, the Royal Parks said that even if the speed limits do not apply to cyclists, riders would still have action taken if they ride "recklessly".
Last month, the park's manager Richards confirmed to road.cc that time trials had been cancelled in the park in the wake of "several" high-profile incidents involving a "minority" of cyclists riding at speed.
Richmond Park Cyclists also addressed the situation around the time trials' cancellation in its email: "London Dynamo, which has been running the Richmond Park TTs for 15 years, does a risk assessment in conjunction with the sporting body Cycling Time Trials for the two popular, inclusive, fully insured events, and there have never been any safety-related incidents to our knowledge. Richmond Park is one of CTT's safest and most heavily marshalled courses – but despite a month of talks with TRP, we were unable to reverse the decision.
"And yet the London Duathlon, half of which is a cycling time trial, is going ahead in September. Obviously, we are pleased for the competitors that the event (which is much bigger than the RPTTs) has not been cancelled. But why 'pause' one and not the other? We hope to have an answer after our two meetings with TRP's management this month."
Dan is the road.cc news editor and joined in 2020 having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Dan has been at road.cc for four years and mainly writes news and tech articles as well as the occasional feature. He has hopefully kept you entertained on the live blog too.
Never fast enough to take things on the bike too seriously, when he's not working you'll find him exploring the south of England by two wheels at a leisurely weekend pace, or enjoying his favourite Scottish roads when visiting family. Sometimes he'll even load up the bags and ride up the whole way, he's a bit strange like that.
Latest Comments
- hawkinspeter 4 hours 41 min ago
Interesting theory - how many points does it take for them to drive carefully?
- eburtthebike 5 hours 4 min ago
At the end of the consultation in May 2025, a decision will be taken.........
- Grahamd 5 hours 29 min ago
The absurdity of it deepens when you realise that those points were acquired by the age of 26.
- David9694 7 hours 3 min ago
BAM!
- IanGlasgow 7 hours 39 min ago
"Polartec Power Shield RPM fabric – which has a 10,000mm hydro head to keep wet weather out, and an industry-leading breathability spec of 30,000g...
- mdavidford 8 hours 42 min ago
Oxfordshire councils are quite capable of letting you down too!...
- levestane 8 hours 56 min ago
'each spoke' (single) and 'leaf spring' (made of many leaves) seems contradictory.
- PenLaw 9 hours 48 min ago
I guess Morrissey could claim it.
- wtjs 10 hours 14 min ago
I do see a lot of delivery riders (on illegal e-motorbikes) with their faces covered...
- David9694 10 hours 54 min ago
Stuff like this seems more relevant than ever after the Trump victory. sorry not a funny
Add new comment
46 comments
The Royal Parks seem to have been seriously spooked by the newpaper headlines, rathre than looking at what is actually dangerous in the Park. Having said for years that the speed limit applied to cyclists before admitting it didn't they want to sound like they haven't moved there position.
Anyone cycling like an idiot can be prosecuted for other offenses if needed.
...
For those not familiar with speed limit enforcement in SW London....
20mph limits in residential roads or near schools - no police enforcement
20mph limits on more major, but still residential, roads with speeding HGVs - no police enforcement
Bottom of the long straight descent in Richmond Park (no car parks or cafes nearby, pedestrians rare) regular police speed enforcement, even during lockdown when RP was closed to motor vehicles.
Blimey how times have changed?
I remember going to park as a kid in 70s with my grandparents and driving through was like going through a safari park really slow so as mainly to see the Deer. Cars seemed pretty few and far and you would park up and have a picnic.
I don't think it was much of a rat run but not sure as only aged 8 or 9 at the time?
I would love to go there again one day but not sure I can as I think my rose tinted glasses would be shattered ☹️
Go on the weekend on a bike when 3/4 of the roads are closed to cars, I find it still just as lovely as it was when I was growing up and going to school quite close by in the 1980s. Actually safer on a bike now than it was when I first started riding round there aged 11 or so when all roads were a free for all and the speed limit was still 30 mph (unbelievably they didn't reduce it to 20 mph until 2001).
I might just do that one day 😊👍
Or go about 20 minutes after the published gate closing times. This time of year especially when the closing time doesn't keep up with the light evenings. The vehicle gates will be locked but the ped. ones not.
www.royalparks.org.uk/sites/default/files/2023-12/Opening%20Times%202024...
Doing this also gives you the additional "amusement factor" of seeing the occasional bemused driver, who failed to see the gate closing times, driving round trying to find how they can get out of the park with the gates now shut...
Erm....
As bicycles are not equipped with speedometers, how are all cyclists supposed to comply?
Appreciate many wouldn't dream of riding to the end of their road without it being on Strava but that's personal choice, rather than a legal requirement.
Cyclists may inadvertently forget to take their cycle computer or perhaps run out of charge in the "Royal Parks" so how can adherence to speed limits be fairly and proportionally enforced - if Police resources are sufficient to be deployed?
Not agreeing with RP's plans by any means but coming down Broomfield and Sawyers hills in the park it's easy to reach 40mph and more, I think it would be hard for an experienced cyclist to contend in court that they didn't know they were going more than 20mph when doing double that. In any event one could still be charged with dangerous and furious cycling if playing silly buggers, such as the twonker I saw there last Saturday on a Colnago TT bike slaloming in and out of slower riders seemingly just for a laugh at 45mph+, given that the other side of the (closed) road was completely empty for overtaking. As I said, I don't support RP's plans, which are more of a kneejerk reaction to an isolated incident in another park, but there are options for enforcement.
Personally, I'd be all for bringing in a new offence of 'Playing silly buggers'.
Don't believe everything you read in the headlines of the Daily Telegraph.
it's downhill my dude
I don't, I believe my Garmin, that's what I've done myself very early on a Sunday morning with absolutely no other traffic, bicycles or motorised, about (a few years back now). Looking even at my Strava for last weekend I was doing 35 down there and that was just with a brief launch spin at the top and the rest of the time virtually freewheeling down chatting to my mate. It's 6% at the top, easily enough to get up some very respectable speeds.
Cars aren't fitted with breathalysers, so how are motorists supposed to comply with drink driving rules?
If in doubt, ride more slowly, I'd say. Or imagine someone has offered to pay you £1 million if you manage to do a lap without going over 20 mph.
Do you understand that blood alcohol levels are not a property of the vehicle?
It's similarly illegal to drive when you can't see, but no-one is suggesting that the vehicle needs to perform an eye test. The vehicle should measure relevant details of the vehicle (e.g. fuel levels, engine temperature, revs and speed) but it's up to the driver to ensure that they're in a fit state and legal to drive.
Not sure what your problem is or why you find it necessary to be so rude. Are you ill?
If you think HP's rude, I can't imagine the amount of fits of the vapours a good chunk of the other posts here must give you. And as for the rest of the internet...
I find most of the posts here are pretty civil, and I generally tend to stay away from anything that resembles social media, so no, no fits of vapours.
I think I've developed an allergy to idiots
Oh I say! Well! really!
Also, if they can't remember how much they've had to drink, they're almost certainly over the limit.
They allegedly do when you drive to Barnard Castle
By not drinking prior to driving their cars.
Have far back does "prior to" go? It's not as black and white as you seem to be implying. Which isn't a problem, since if in doubt you can err on the side of caution.
Twelve hours from bottle to throttle is the aviation standard, more in commercial service as random testing applies...
It really should be a lot more than that though, at least 24 hours; you can blow clean on a breathalyser 12 hours after finishing a six hour session in which you drank 6 pints of strong beer, two bottles of wine or 2/3 of a bottle of scotch, but after that amount of alcohol the impairment of a hangover would definitely make you unsafe to fly or indeed drive.
FTFY
Cyclists must have insurance, number plates, bells, fluorescent clothing, a helmet that is securely fitted and on their head, reflectors on their pedals and in their wheels also front and back lights in working order and powered on at all times, an annual roadworthiness test, ride on the cycle paths and have a SPEEDOMETER fitted.
Should solve that problem
Pages