- 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
Cyclists in Richmond Park with London skyline (copyright Simon MacMichael)Charity that runs London parks wants new laws to prosecute cyclists for breaking 20mph speed limit in Regent's Park and Richmond Park
The charity responsible for London's Royal Parks has asked the government to amend legislation "with a view to setting speed limits for cyclists" in its parks which, if introduced, could see riders exceeding 20mph speed limits prosecuted.
The organisation runs London's Royal Parks — two of which, Richmond Park and Regent's Park — are popular with the capital's cyclists and attract a large number of two-wheeled visitors throughout the year.
Writing to Sir Chris Bryant, the Minister for Creative Industries, Arts and Tourism, the Telegraph reports that The Royal Parks chairman Loyd Grossman (the former presenter of MasterChef and Through the Keyhole) has asked government to amend laws so that cyclists failing to adhere to the parks' 20mph speed limits can be prosecuted for speeding.
The letter comes at the end of a summer when The Royal Parks cited cyclists riding "at excessive speeds" and causing crashes as the reason for it reviewing its cycling policy, while also cancelling early-morning time trial events in Richmond Park and the London Duathlon.
In May, Strava deleted "Regent's Park as a segment on the app" following pressure from The Royal Parks, the move coming following the death of a pensioner who died from her injuries sustained in a collision with a cyclist riding laps of the park at 25-29mph.
The death of Hilda Griffiths in 2022, a case much-publicised earlier this year following a coroner's inquest, sparked Royal Parks action on cycling, as well as Conservative MP Iain Duncan-Smith to launch his campaign for stricter punishments for cyclists who kill or injure.
It was heard at the inquest that the cyclist involved, Brian Fitzgerald, would not face prosecution as the Metropolitan Police deemed there was "insufficient evidence for a real prospect of conviction". He was riding laps of Regent's Park as part of a group ride travelling at between 25-29mph when he hit the 81-year-old pedestrian as she crossed the road, causing her several broken bones and bleeding on the brain, injuries she died from in hospital two months later.
The letter written to government seeks an amendment to The Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces Regulations 1997 "with a view to setting speed limits for cyclists".
"This will match what is already in place for motor vehicles on our park roads, namely a maximum speed limit of 20mph," Mr Grossman writes. "Whilst we recognise there are challenges associated with this request, most notably on enforcement, we believe it is a change that would improve safety within the parks for both cyclists and other park users."
A spokesperson for the charity added: "We have a responsibility to everyone who uses the parks to ensure we are acting in a way that protects and promotes their safety."
A source from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport said the proposal would be considered "carefully".
Discussion around speed limits in The Royal Parks, notably Richmond Park, have 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".
In July, we reported that a group claiming to represent cyclists who use the park (Richmond Park Cyclists) had clashed with the charity over its speed limit advice for riders using the park.
This summer's Richmond Park Time Trials were also cancelled by The Royal Parks. Organised by the London Dynamo cycling club and first run in 2009, they were due to take place on 23 June and 7 July this year – and had been praised for their inclusivity and for providing a gateway into the sport, enabling beginners to compete on road bikes and on almost traffic-free roads due to their 6am starts.
However, The Royal Parks cancelled this summer's events over fears riders would break the park's 20mph speed limit, a decision which left organisers "fuming" and arguing the decision had been clouded by "very irresponsible journalism" and that the alternative is "busy roads and fast-moving cars".
"Following several cycling-related incidents, it is our duty to take action to minimise the risk of accidents and our priority to ensure the safety of all cyclists together with other visitors," Richmond Park's manager said. September's London Duathlon in the park was subsequently also cancelled.
The Royal Parks has received plenty of criticism over the years for its approach to improving road safety in its parks. Many, including the London Cycling Campaign (LCC), have repeatedly asked why through-traffic is still allowed to use Richmond Park as a shortcut, the campaign calling the cancellation of well-organised events "weak" while "daily rat-runs" continue.
While some of Richmond Park's roads are closed to motor traffic on weekends, during weekdays the green space, which The Royal Parks proudly calls an "extraordinary landscape" that is also London's largest Site of Special Scientific Interest and a National Nature Reserve, is used as a cut-through for motorists driving between Kingston upon Thames, Richmond and Roehampton.
[Sunny summer weekend traffic in Richmond Park]
The LCC has campaigned for the park to be closed to through-traffic for years, arguing it would improve road safety and make them "far better for people walking, cycling and relaxing in".
💩 Want safety @theroyalparks? Don't use parks as through-roads.
We're disappointed, yet again, by the behaviour of Royal Parks charity. Having Regent's & Richmond Park as daily rat-runs while cancelling @londonduathlon is weak. Our CEO @TomFyans on @itvlondon pic.twitter.com/ixWtHbfT7j
— London Cycling Campaign (@London_Cycling) August 22, 2024
Two weeks ago, specialist cycling insurance provider ETA Services Ltd called it an "ongoing embarrassment" that The Royal Parks "allows this nature reserve to be used as a rat-run", the comments coming in response to the incident below.
Officers from @MPSRoyal_Parks have been dealing with a road traffic collision in #RichmondPark where a vehicle has left the carriageway and collided with a tree. The driver has been reported for dangerous driving and no insurance. pic.twitter.com/zsgkkoz4Lw
— Royal Parks Police (@MPSRoyal_Parks) October 8, 2024
Dan is the road.cc news editor and has spent the past four years writing stories and features, as well as (hopefully) keeping you entertained on the live blog. 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 joined road.cc in 2020. Come the weekend you'll find him labouring up a hill, probably with a mouth full of jelly babies, or making a bonk-induced trip to a south of England petrol station... in search of more jelly babies.
Latest Comments
- redimp 6 sec ago
I, long ago, reached teh conclusion that anything with the word "Royal" in its title, is not fit for purpose and should be replaced with something...
- Rendel Harris 2 min 32 sec ago
Firstly, Richmond Park and Regent's Park are two entirely different entities, the roads in Regent's Park have pavements on both sides and numerous...
- wtjs 11 min 28 sec ago
The police are taking it further with the driver, apparently......
- mark1a 19 min 51 sec ago
Thanks for the link, although my understanding was that PSA tests in isolation (without the finger) are of less value due to the possibility of...
- Pot00000000 1 hour 57 min ago
It depends on the hubs/ free hubs. Cost has little to do with it.
- mark1a 2 hours 26 min ago
Ah, your first name isn't Chrisona?
- wtjs 5 min 56 sec ago
I've given up on expensive HR straps. I've gone through 1 garmin and 2 wahoos at about £40 a pop...
- ktache 15 hours 56 min ago
https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/national/24641995.ex-racing-driver-bill...
Add new comment
33 comments
So they'll be banning motor vehicles from going through there, then?
Culture war isn't new...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2015/oct/29/scorchers-...
And in the States:
https://ephemeralnewyork.wordpress.com/2014/08/09/the-bicycle-scorchers-...
Of course it's also true that now, as then, some cyclists are more concerned about their sport and speed than others (think high-wheelers - expensive, dangerous and really not very practical for things other than going fast and showing you were a dashing young man of some means).
Naturally the police had their own pursuit vehicles:
https://british-police-history.uk/f/hertfordshire-scorchers
If it wasn't so stupid it would be funny. Cyclist kills a pedestrian and we have a national issue on our hands that needs addressing. Driver kills an entire family and its just a blip on the local news for that area. The fact this is reality is quite mind boggling.
Even though the tragic death can't be overlooked the police report at the time stated that the victim stepped off the pavement without looking when the cyclists were ~7 feet away.
Even if the group of cyclists had been doing 20 the victim would still have been knocked over and in all likelihood would likely have suffered similar injuries.
And even though the cause of the accident was the failure to look before crossing by the pedestrian, the royal parks are now taking it upon themselves to further restrict cycling whilst seemingly doing absolutely nothing about the tens of thousands of vehicles that pour through Richmond Park every day using it as a cut through from Kingston to Richmond.
Motonormativity. Four wheels good, two wheels bad.
It's shocking that all those dangerous trees haven't been removed. Any one of them could crash into a car.
20mph is a fair lick on a bike, through a park. Although the focus should be on safety against the greatest danger (cars), the Park authority must still get pressure to address danger from fast cyclists too, which does exist. I don't think its unreasonable to set a limit for bikes, but there should be wiggle-room for exceptions (like events, etc.) and enforcement should be applied with some wisdom.
If they do eventually ban cars through the park (which I think they should, or at least set a very narrow window when cars are permitted), it will increase the speeds of cyslists and the park authority can't let it get too Mad Max, (just look at the lawlessness of a lot, but not all) cyclists in the city at the moment, sadly. It would only be a matter of time before a peleton of fast moving weekend warriors smash into a bunch of kids on bikes, or some slower cyclists or a pedestrian and someone loses their life; then the whole place will be closed to all vehicles and that sucks for everyone. A 20mph limit isn't a huge price to pay.
Why would it only be a matter of time? Cyclists have been training in the park ever since I've been riding there (more than forty years) without speed limits being applied and presumably were doing so long before that and as far as I'm aware nobody has been killed by a cyclist in the park. There is ample provision on the trails all round the park for kids on bikes, pedestrians et cetera and they don't mix with the cyclists on the road, there is no more reason there should be a fatal cyclist/pedestrian incident in the park than there would be on any public road, in fact there is less reason due to the aforementioned segregation of users.
I'm sure someone said the same about Regents park. Its always a matter of time.
Firstly, Richmond Park and Regent's Park are two entirely different entities, the roads in Regent's Park have pavements on both sides and numerous crossing points, Richmond Park has pedestrian paths completely separated from the road and people only tend to cross the roads outside the car parks. Secondly, everything can be said to be "a matter of time", it's only a matter of time before an asteroid hits Richmond Park and wipes out everyone in it but it's not that likely that precautionary measures (compulsory hard hats?) need to be introduced. Richmond Park was fully opened to the public in 1872 and the first safety bicycles went on sale in the next decade, so people have been cycling around the park for nearly 150 years without killing anyone. Thirdly, the pedestrian death in Regent's Park was caused by a pedestrian stepping out in front of a cyclist when they were just a few metres away and if he had been travelling at 20 mph the result wouldn't have been any different, so it has no relevance as evidence for imposing speed limits on cyclists.
It's only a matter of time before it all goes Lethal Weapon, Pocahontas and Braveheart put together. Great actor, that Mel Gibson bloke. He's a keen cyclist, dontcha know. I was stuck in a lift with him once. He owes me a fiver.
It's like Mad Max out there - people are afraid to leave their houses! The parks are lawless!
(from Bicycle Dutch, see also here on the same place).
Having said that I believe there was a pedestrian death from a collision with a cyclist about a decade ago in Central Park in NYC ([collision], [death]). They also had a 25mph speed limit there which they lowered to 20mph (and it being NYC, police are happy to do occasional crackdowns).
Not to be flippant about unnecessary deaths but with a safety record like that, the city should have been begging for fast cycling everywhere instead of driving.
If there are sufficient cyclists that this is a real concern, perhaps everyone should be lobbying to build more dedicated cycling facilities?
It's only a matter of time before a giant asteroid strike wipes us all out, so... er... what was the point again?
Dammit - Rendel got there before me. And everyone knows asteroids never strike the same place twice.
If there's no law to say I have to have a speedometer on my bik, can I be prosecuted if I go 25mph down a hill in a 20 zone? If you don't know exactly how fast you're going and you're otherwise riding safely on a bike that's in good order, could a conviction stick? Genuine Q - IANAL.
It is an interesting question. Speedometers have not always been a requirement for motor vehicles. Cars registered before they were mandatory (1937) can still be driven on the road but the speed limits would still apply. As far as I can tell speedos for motorcycles only became compulsory in 1984, but you still don't need one to pass an MOT, and speed limits also apply.
Populist, anti-cycling cronyism. This is the accident data from the Royal Parks in case someone is interested in making decisions based on data and facts:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_RGJUK7G47iIr2CCFVvvO3PR6AS_3EYM...
Can't wait for the free Garmin Edges, Karoo, Wahoo etc devices along with speed sensors being given out at all entrances to London Parks.
You won't need one. They'll prosecute cyclists who overtake the cars which will all be travelling below 20mph.
There are far too many knee-jerk, anti-cycling responses to amplified risks.
Are there no grown-ups there?
I have to say I do have sympathy with them cancelling the time trials.
If you have a 20mph speed limit in the park, even if that doesn't legaly apply to cyclists, then holding an event where competitors openly endeavor to go as fast as possible, which will certainly be well over that for the keen ones, seems reckless and hypocritical, unless you have the infrastructure in place - such as closing the whole park during the event/barriers/whatever - to prevent any possibility of a crash with any other member of public.
These events were held early in the morning so that the risk to the general public has always been very low.
The time trials began at 6AM, an hour before the park is open to cars; with a startlist of around 60 riders in total (IIRC) and a 10 mile course they were pretty much over before any cars were on the roads. They've been run successfully since 2009 without, as far as I'm aware, any injuries being caused to non-participants, which would appear to indicate that Royal Parks have invented a problem/health and safety threat that simply didn't exist.
So given that the Met have routinely stationed traffic police at the bottom of hills in Richmond Park to point speed guns at cyclists, including the short period during lockdown when it was open to cyclists but not cars, are the Met and Royal Parks guilty of wasting police time?
Should this guy be refunded https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-cyclist-fined-for-speeding...
This is culture wars nonsense, not just because of the lack of attention to the real dangers on the roads. To make this law happen, you would need two things:
-enforce a rule requiring all cyclists (presumably including 3-year olds on their Thomas the Tank Engine tricyle) to have speedometers which are of the same level of accuracy as car speedometers. So not GPS-based ones which can be glitchy.
-have an accurate way of measuring cyclists' speeds by the enforcers. As I understand it, the system used in speed cameras won't work with cyclists because there isn't enough metal in a bike, even steel framed bikes, to produce a good enough measurement.
Without these two technological and legal developments, the system just isn't viable.
Less of a sledgehammer to crack a nut, more of a massive wrecking ball to crack a nut.
All bicycles would also need to undergo a regular MOT to check that the speedometer is fitted and working. There would need to be a database and testing centres and statutory fee etc. How many members of parliament in their right minds would really vote for such a law whilst thousands die each year from being hit by cars?
Judging by the hundreds of fools just elected - quite a few.
I agree wholeheartedly with your remarks in general but I think speed guns can capture bike speeds pretty accurately, can't they? In several places where I ride regularly there are those signs on lamp posts that light up with your speed and a smiling or frowning emoji depending on whether or not you are under the speed limit; the speed they show when I trip them is always the same as the reading on my GPS device. Before Royal Parks had to back down and admit that the speeding laws in their parks don't apply to cyclists they handed out quite a few speeding tickets to cyclists caught with radar guns, I don't recall anyone challenging the validity of their measurements.
Yes, they haven't been challenged yet. My understandign is that the accuracy with cyclists/bikes is nowhere near that of cars, and a measurement wouldn't stand up in court unless it was miles over the limit.
Trouble is it's quite easy to be miles over the limit in Richmond Park, there are several long steepish descents where you can get up to about 30 mph virtually freewheeling, especially coming down Sawyer's Hill from Richmond gate to Roehampton Gate, it's around 2.5 km, average 2.5% (7% maximum) gradient, if you set out about 15 mph at the top you can easily reach 30 mph at the bottom.
Pages