[Hindmost]

This will be of interest to anyone that rides in Regents Park, one of London’s most important training areas for cyclists. To keep it short – there is a possibility that speed humps could be put in place as part of the CS11 plans.

If you use Regents Park and oppose the plans, please join the Facebook group to get involved.

[url]https://www.facebook.com/groups/regentsparkcycling/[/url]

[quote]With the upcoming introduction of the cycling super-highway (CS11)
through Regent’s Park, various groups and organizations have taken the
opportunity to think about how Regent’s Park is used.

Various CS11 proposals are being looked at in Regent’s Park. Closing
some or all of the gates to motor traffic during peak times is being
considered, which likely make cycling in the park a much safer
proposition.

Additionally however, proposals for multiple speed humps and or a
20mph limit for motorcyclists and cycles could negatively impact the
ability to exercise on a bike around the outer circle.

It would impact thousands of road cyclists who use a unique area of
London to cycle and train safely.

An action group is being formed from various clubs and cycling bodies
to try to mitigate the risk of this happening. If you would like to be
involved, please join the page on Facebook.[/quote]

Topic

[Hindmost]

Final week to have your say

Final week to have your say in the consultation.

A link to RPC guideline responses:-

http://regentsparkcyclists.com/how-to-respond-to-cs11-consultation-form/

An update from Regent’s Park Cyclists…

[quote]Hi all,

As many of you already know, the consultation is scheduled to finish
this week.

We are at a critical stage of the whole CS11 / No speed hump campaign.
WE NEED YOUR HELP NOW!
Background
As you will know RPC managed to reduce the original plan to put 14 speed humps down to 4, which along with gate closures
North and South (open only from 11-3) puts recreational / sports /
disabled cyclists in a better position than when we started. But that
position is not secure yet.
Platform designs
More recently, holding back our Pro CS11 votes pushed Andrew Gilligan / TFL to force TRP to provide more clarity on
the “heritage friendly” materials they are able to use for these
platforms. They agreed no cobbles or rough surfaces! It has been a
massive battle.
We now need to win CS11
There was an un-veiled threat that without CS11, TRP may very well revert back to other designs, which
will most likely be against our longer-term interest.
What we need from you
In simple terms, we need the CS11 Consultation to succeed and go ahead, but we are up against it –
because a STOP CS11 group have been working hard to gain votes against
the plans.
How can you help?
Each of us needs to complete the consultation and gather as many additional responses as we can.
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/cs-11%5B/quote%5D

[Hindmost]

http://www.standard.co.uk/new
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/sports-cyclists-fear-treacherous-road-humps-plan-for-regent-s-park-a2993011.html

[Hindmost]

Zoodax on the 3rd
Zoodax on the 3rd October…

On the 3rd October, Justin McKie, chair of the Regent’s Park Cyclists
group, will be cycling around the Outer Circle of Regent’s Park 113
times to complete 500km. He will be raising money for The Regent’s
Park Cherry Tree Fund.

http://uk.virginmoneygiving.com/team/RegentsParkCyclists

Why?

Cyclists numbers have grown in London and in Regent’s Park
particularly and we want to say thanks.

With pollution levels killing thousands each year we need more trees
(and less cars). With cyclists getting killed in London, Regent’s Park
is our safe haven to exercise in London. There are no others.

[Hindmost]

A petition has been started:
A petition has been started: Stop The Royal Parks using TFL cycling funds for anti-cycling infrastructure

If you could take a minute to sign/share and show your support for cycling in Regent’s Park, that’d be much appreciated.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/106967

Also, the Royal Parks tweeted this last night:-

https://twitter.com/theroyalparks/status/642008862279774208

It might be a good opportunity to let them know what you think before the consultation phase.

[zanf]

Can you ask them to change
Can you ask them to change the settings on the facebook page so people dont have to login before viewing it?

[Username]

deblemund wrote:We do

deblemund wrote:

We do actually under the Parks’ worry that reduced motor traffic levels will result in more speeding by motorists (at quiet times, 45mph cars are not uncommon).

I experienced this last week. I went for my regular spin around the Outer Circle and had to give up because despite hoping the park would have less traffic due to the school holidays, in fact there was less but it was all travelling faster, noisier, and was just worse. I decamped to the Inner Circle.

I don’t know what the solution is. Be careful what you wish for; there are many campaigning for a traffic-free solution but when you look at the photos of joggers walkers and cyclists sharing the new traffic-free roads in Central Park you just know that would be the death of using The Regent’s Park for a bit of training. They would slap a 10 mph limit on us overnight.

Traffic calming would also be a disaster for cycling.

So I’ve sort of come around to thinking we have to keep the traffic.

Maybe the best solution would be some closed gates to prevent the commuting rat-runs PLUS speed cameras to control the remaining traffic – including the Royal Parks’ own vehicles.

I would imagine the Royal Parks would object to cameras on the grounds of ‘heritage’ but it’s bizarre how parking a two tonne Range Rover in the park never seems to cause heritage problems.

[Hindmost]

crikey wrote:If it’s a shared

crikey wrote:

If it’s a shared space, if it is to develop as a safe haven for all kinds of cycling, I don’t see how you can combine the ‘needs’ of road cyclists and other users without some form of compromise.

I’m not trying to be difficult but I don’t fully understand what you’re getting at. Car drivers are speeding; not cyclists – speed calming measures will be put in place to slow cars down but these measures will affect and compromise all other road users. Is there a problem that other solutions are being investigated ie. closing the gates to the park at busy times?

[crikey]

Sounds like the road cyclists
Sounds like the road cyclists who use it are trying to have their cake and eat it; traffic free at times, but you’d object to physical attempts to restrict speed and to the 20 mph limit?

If it’s a shared space, if it is to develop as a safe haven for all kinds of cycling, I don’t see how you can combine the ‘needs’ of road cyclists and other users without some form of compromise.

[Hindmost]

The speed limit is currently
The speed limit is currently 30mph. How often do cyclists exceed this on the Outer Circle? Not that frequently and when they do, I doubt it’s for sustained periods. Cars are frequently going well over 30mph and some have been caught doing up to 91mph (recorded during April – May 2014). Let’s not get distracted about the real dangers.

[LondonDynaslow]

crikey wrote:I’m less

crikey wrote:

I’m less concerned by the speed humps and more concerned that cyclists would appear to think that controlling speed is something that should happen to other forms of transport.

Making it car free for some time or distance sounds great. Assuming that cyclists can go as fast as they want sounds counter productive.

Not really. There is already a 30mph speed limit, which we think should be fully enforced against all forms of transport. Not many cyclists are breaking that law, unless they have borrowed Chris Froome’s invisible electric motor. Some cyclists are jumping red lights, so RP Cyclists are carrying out active education of RLJers (which has in general been well-received, and the amount of RLJing in the last few weeks has dropped dramatically).

The answer regarding physical counter-measures is complex, in part due to low lighting in the park and the varying uses of it. Nobody seriously thinks that 30mph cars (or 30kph cyclists) are dangerous. The problem only arises in the first place due to the plans to reduce traffic by as much as 80% through gate closures. We do actually under the Parks’ worry that reduced motor traffic levels will result in more speeding by motorists (at quiet times, 45mph cars are not uncommon). However, we do also consider that speed bumps and raised platforms are an un-necessary and dangerous addition.

RPC are working to get a balanced response for all users of the park including commuters, road cyclists and disabled cyclists that use the outer circle to exercise. The road surface and layout is a unique resource in central London, not just a through road.

[crikey]

I’m less concerned by the
I’m less concerned by the speed humps and more concerned that cyclists would appear to think that controlling speed is something that should happen to other forms of transport.

Making it car free for some time or distance sounds great. Assuming that cyclists can go as fast as they want sounds counter productive.

[LondonDynaslow]

BTW you can also follow the
BTW you can also follow the campaign on Twitter and Instagram (in each case via @RPCyclists) and get involved by joining the regular Monday night meetings at the Stag in Hampstead. Matt Barbet was at the last one!

[vonhelmet]

crikey wrote:Eh?
Putting

crikey wrote:

Eh?
Putting speed humps in would destroy the place as a safe haven for cyclists?
How does that work then?

I would have thought that restricting speed in a public park was a good thing for everyone.

it depends on the type of humps. Riding over speed bumps every 20 yards isn’t exactly a barrel of laughs.

[LondonDynaslow]

crikey wrote:Eh?
Putting

crikey wrote:

Eh?
Putting speed humps in would destroy the place as a safe haven for cyclists?
How does that work then?

I would have thought that restricting speed in a public park was a good thing for everyone.

Lots of reasons: cars slamming on their brakes in front of us, low lighting levels in the park, loss of control and crashes especially where they use cobble facing. Also, cycling is not just a utilitarian form of transport; Regent’s Park is an important resource for commuting, young riders, and serious training, all of which would be pretty negatively affected by the installing of 14 speed bumps.

What we really need is to reduce access to motor vehicles using it as a rat run.

But if you don’t agree, you don’t have to get involved.

[crikey]

Eh?
Putting speed humps in
Eh?
Putting speed humps in would destroy the place as a safe haven for cyclists?
How does that work then?

I would have thought that restricting speed in a public park was a good thing for everyone.

[Author]

Replies