Richmond Park Quietway Consultation – can you respond?

The Royal Parks Foundation is consulting on the suggested changes to make Richmond Park part of the quiet way network.

Riding on the Tamsin Trail.

Riding on the Tamsin Trail.

You can see their consultation here. We’ve started a Cyclescape discussion here, and we need your input.

As one commenter on the Cyclescape thread observes, it looks like cycling money is going to make things – in some places – worse for cycling!

Our key observations at the moment:

  1. The design clearly implies that the Tamsin Trail, with its pedestrian priority, is the proposed entry point at Roehampton and Ham gates. Not only is the surface poor for cycling, but it is likely to degrade very quickly under any volume of cycling. Worst of all, by far, is the designed conflict with pedestrians at both ends of the route.
  2. The central section is very narrow. We completely support pedestrian priority, but the section could be made much more comfortable for all by widening it to the same widths at each end.
  3. There’s no mention of gates. If this route is going to be of genuine use to everyone, it needs pedestrian gates which can be used by everyone, whatever their bicycle, tricycle or level of mobility.
  4. The easy, cheap way to make Richmond Park a quiet way is to curtail the volume of motor traffic. Yet there is no plan of any type to do this.

Your response is needed now! The consultation closes on October 18th: Please write to or comment on our Cyclescape thread – we’ll make sure we raise all these issues at the next meeting with Royal Parks Foundation.

We did a few images to show you all this …

‘Central section’ through quiet way.


Entering at Sheen Gate. Which way would you go? (NB the quietway runs from Roehampton gate, but the problem is likely to be the same  – the design encourages cyclists to go off road.)

Sheen Gate entrance

Crossing to Ham Gate. Please risk conflict with pedestrians before endangering motor vehicles!

(We did like the comment “How come there’s so much effort to put up signs about pedestrian priority on the route, whereas none of the roads get a big ‘cycling priority’ sign?”)

3 thoughts on “Richmond Park Quietway Consultation – can you respond?

  1. I would not like to see the volume of cyclists on the trails increased. I think they should shut Richmond Park to cars certainly on weekends. Alternatively they could make the park one way for cars and one way for cyclists on alternative sides of the road.

  2. A one-way rule may well increase car mileage inside the park, as drivers going to their nearest car park may then go the rest of the way round the circuit to get out again.

    Car control in the Park could be done through such steps as:
    – closing to motor traffic at 17:30 or 18:00 all year round, rather than only in winter.
    – using ANPR cameras at the gates to impose a toll for travelling through the Park. A vehicle entering one gate and leaving via another is billed for the toll, one entering then leaving by the same gate, or leaving by another gate over 2 hours later (i.e. after going to a car park, not straight through) is not charged, or is charged a lower fee as a parking charge.

  3. I cycled to Richmond Park in 2012 to watch the Olympic road race go through and then had a blissful tour of a car-free paradise. I think it lunacy for such a beautiful place to be little more than a rat run for morons in polluting tin boxes. It is a little-known fact that pollution inside a motor vehicle is up to TEN times worse than outside, so all these wet farts are doing is destroying their ability to think ‘outside the box’.
    Please BAN ALL MOTOR TRAFFIC from Richmond Park – at least at weekends. I write as a planner and leader of social bike rides who avoids Richmond Park as a direct result of both the pollution from motor traffic and the conflict with pedestrians on the Tamsin Trail

Comments are closed.