Residents of London’s most expensive road objected to its becoming part of one of London’s cycling Quietways on the grounds that use of the road by “the masses” would somehow compromise security.
Kensington Palace Gardens, gated at either end, runs north to south from Bayswater Road to Kensington High Street. One of the most expensive residential streets in the world, it is the location of the Russian and Israeli embassies, among others, while residents include the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and oligarch Roman Abramovich.
A planned Quietway which would have made use of the road was scrapped in July and there will now be a gap of half a mile on the Crown Estates-owned road.
Kensington and Chelsea council and Transport for London (TfL) received 15 responses to the consultation, including “several respondents (who) referred to the Quietway proposal posing security risks, unspecified”.
Residents’ letters about the Quietway have been released to the London Evening Standard under the Freedom of Information Act, with names and addresses redacted.
One wrote: “The residents on this private road should not be responsible for the use of the masses. Open use of this private roadway by the masses will cede its exclusivity and surrender its security.”
Another said: “Those who already use the cut-through… are oblivious to the dismount notices and feel the right to pedal through, causing pedestrians to move and young mums with buggies to move out of the way. This is annoying to all, residents and visitors alike, we pay for the upkeep of this private road… in our high council tax and expect to keep the standards of privacy this brings us.”
We have previously reported how the road is not currently off-limits to those on bikes, who can access it round the clock – unlike drivers. However, one letter writer said they wanted to go further and prevent all cyclists from using the road in the future, while another wrote that there were “far too many cyclists on the roadway as it is,” calling for “a blanket ban”.
37 thoughts on “Kensington Palace Gardens residents objected to Quietway because “the masses” would compromise their security”
The only thing you can say
The only thing you can say about the letters is that rich people are selfish, but I think I’d already worked that out.
burtthebike wrote:
Its a private road, not public. Would you allow the council to put a path across your property, im sure it wont impact you as you must be poor giving you are complaining about the rich.
The real issue here is which moron in planning allowed the route to be approved without prior consent of the private road for inclusion, they should have known it was an issue and made a better route.
STATO wrote:
It’s Crown Estate land, which pretty much has its own unique status in law.
And anway, lots of private land does have public paths across it, don’t make me quote the Ramblers on this!
STATO wrote:
The real issue is if it is a Right of Way. There are thousands of miles of “private” roads, tracks and paths in the UK which are rights of way. And the public have every right to use them (as it says on the tin). You don’t have to be particularly rich to own one, my last house had a private road at the back, we (the other people in the street) had to maintain it but anyone could go down it.
I’m assuming this road is owned by the residents, but is a right if way. No dobt they will now attempt to get some sort of banning order like the one in Mansfield.
RedfishUK wrote:
No, it’s owned by the Government, but technically the Queen. Welcome to the fun special status of the Crown Estate, publically owned private land.
STATO wrote:
It’s not ‘private’ but is public proprety technically belonging to the Crown Estates
Guarantee you their council
Guarantee you their council tax isn’t proportionately high at all.
Poorly known fact that the lower your income, the greater percentage of tax you pay.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jun/16/british-public-wrong-rich-poor-tax-research
Anyway, doesn’t matter. Do love the use of the word ‘masses’ though. The new acceptable face of ‘pleb’.
unconstituted wrote:
Given the road is private it will not be covered by council tax, so repairs and maintenance at cost to the residents. But have a dig anyway.
Not sure how rich you are applies to how much you need to pay for council services though? they already pay the most possible as the houses will be in the top bracket. What services will they be using, other than roads outside their street probably nothing, i bet they are rich enough they pay for their own rubbish collection service too.
STATO wrote:
It’s okay, calm down You’re a bit confused on a couple of things. You’ve already been hoisted on the road issue.
The residents brought up council tax to start with, and they were the ones saying it was high.
The point here is that there is a long standing problem with council tax banding, and tax in general, in the country, so referencing them paying the ‘top bracket’ means you don’t understand the issue to begin with. Everyone knows they’re paying the top bracket. No-one cares. That’s not the point.
No-one in this country pays just for their own ultility and infrastructure. Crazy talk. In fact, if you want, lets bill them exactly for all infrastructure they’re using. Happy to hand them a multi-million pound bill.
You up for that? I definitely am. Lets get the calculators out.
Ok, corrected, its not
Ok, corrected, its not private, its private but made open to the public. The council still knew they had no right to the land to make it a cycle way, yet still they aimed a cycle path at it then acted surprised when it couldnt be finished.
Id be interested to see how someone with a big house suddenly uses millions of pounds of ‘utility’ compared to a normal terrace.
STATO wrote:
Still not quite right, it’s private but owned by a company which is essentially nationalised and is required to consider public interest for much of the estate it manages.
You should note that the new cycle routes also run through many of the Royal Parks, which have a similar status in law. And then there’s the small matter of the City of London Corporation (with Epping Forest as a bonus). How would any transport project happen without someone creating proposals and then consulting, when massive chunks of London are owned by quasi private/public bodies?
STATO wrote:
Me too.
I didn’t say a big house uses millions of pounds of utlity though, or that it was in comparison to a normal terrace. So not sure what you’re on about.
You definitely have issues keeping up, it’s frustrating for people to have to reply to your poor comprehension.
STATO wrote:
There’s a private road on my commute to/from work… it’s also an official cycle route…
Paul_C wrote:
Ok, corrected, its not private, its private but made open to the public. The council still knew they had no right to the land to make it a cycle way, yet still they aimed a cycle path at it then acted surprised when it couldnt be finished.
— Paul_C There’s a private road on my commute to/from work… it’s also an official cycle route…— STATO
Same here, and mine is even over Crown Land!
unconstituted wrote:
It’s not even actually high. The maximum cost for South Kensington is £2085.60
(Source: https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/council-tax/band-values-and-charges)
Or about £800 more than I pay.
They should move to Westminster, it’s about 40% cheaper.
alexb wrote:
Heeeehh!??? That’s considerably less than I pay in Surrey. Sounds like social housing run by the Crown Estate. What a bunch of plebs.
Anyway, I’ve had nice chats with both Crown Estate wardens and (City of London) Corporation officers in their Surrey domains. They’re all for cycling on their property. But then again the people concerned were clearly hoi-polloi, so that’s what they would say, innit bruv.
Aa the feeling of entitlement
Aa the feeling of entitlement of the wealthy who like to create their bubbles and keep them exclusive. Unfortunately they including some politicians run the risk of loosing touch with reality in their safe bubbles. But just imagine the bikes you could own if you lived in such a bubble. Lol
They allow young mums with
They allow young mums with buggies to use the road?
How squalid!
The road is not ‘private’ but
The road is not ‘private’ but owned by the Crown Estates which, in my book, is public property; it’s just another of the undeomcratic, post-medieval hangovers that obstruct cycling in London along with Corporation of London (the ‘City’) & more modern institutions such as Royal Parks Agency & Canary Wharf Group.
“the masses”? Moi?
“the masses”? Moi?
I use this road almost every
I use this road almost every day and it’s the best part of my commute. There’s always a nod and a wave from the security at the gate who open them up for cyclists. The lack of motor traffic and the tooled up diplomatic police also make it pretty much the safest road around.
cervelbro wrote:
My browser had a brain-fart while typing a comment so this leap-frogged what I had to say, but it’s nice to see that common sense is still used in some areas of this city 🙂
cervelbro wrote:
Agree, although I only use it in the winter when Kensington Gardens is shut after dark. The security gate staff are always very helpful.
I don’t understand the comment about riding on the pavements, because the road is so wide and quiet that surely no-one rides on the pavement? I suspect htis bit of the complaint was made up.
Having the Russian and
Having the Russian and Israeli Embassies on the same road isn’t worrying in the first place?
And why should cyclists walk their bikes – there’s enough road, are all those car drivers pushing their vehicles around? Oh, they must be given that it’s where all these Mums-with-prams are standing…
I bet the resident grumbling
I bet the resident grumbling about the high council tax, was Abramovich.
Quote:
The cut-through referred to is the path that joins Hyde Park to the East with York House Place to the West, running across Kensington Palace Gardens. So the dismount signs are for those using that path, I believe, while riding along the road is fine. I don’t know which was part of the quietway proposal, so possibly the cut-through comment is irrelevant anyway.
Why would anyone want to
Why would anyone want to cycle in this area? You’d be better off taking the long way round and enjoy the ride. Cyclists are so selfish upsetting rich people. 😉 lol
What do I have to do to
What do I have to do to become a duke? It sounds like a quite a well paid job if it allows you to pay the rent on a place like that
GREGJONES wrote:
shag a duke then you will have duke status lmfao 😉
Jimnm wrote:
Reports concerning the Duke of York, suggest that may not be enough.
Mustn’t forget CS3, Canary
Mustn’t forget CS3, Canary Wharf being a massive blob of privately owned public spaces. A cycle superhighway on not just a private road, but a private road with barriers!
Which just goes to show that
Which just goes to show that Cycle Routes in one form or another are relentlessly taking over the World inspite of the protests of the landed, rich and privileged…
must make a note for my great grandchildren just incase it could happen
I’d also add that ‘the
I’d also add that ‘the council’ didn’t have anything to do with it.
It’s London based so TfL would have negotiated with Royal Parks etc and then presumably got overruled when the residents got involved. Usually TfL would have won out but it’s a street with rather a lot more than the usual out of political clout (perfectly possible that the main objection was from an embassy).
It’s unfortunate though, it would have been a very useful route.
racingcondor wrote:
It still is.
bikebot wrote:
It still is.
— racingcondor
I have to admit, that ‘s what I don’t understand here. Cyclists have ridden along this road before, and will continue to do so. The only difference is that it won’t be part of an official TfL “Quietway”. So what?
Could be worse….take Har
Could be worse….take Har Adar for instance…they have #checkpoints
“Palestinian laborers are forbidden to walk around the community of Har Adar in the Jerusalem corridor. They are allowed to work, but cannot simply roam the area. This is the local council’s policy.”…
Mums with buggies??? Spooks
Mums with buggies??? Spooks more like it with listening gear.
I ran a contract down there about 30 years ago to spray the beautiful Bath stone with a mix of toxic resins and crushed stone to make the appearance “more even”, broke my heart to see it. The good news is that in terms of disribution of wealth, we need rich idiots.
It is important in the long term to keep the throughways open otherwise the super-rich will turn our city into ghettos, the King of Saudi tried to close a beach in the Cote D’Azur for personal use this year but the Frenchies had none of it and he went home.