Greenwich Park commuters beware!

deptfordmarmoset

The 20mph police will be out looking for speeding cyclists this autumn...you have been warned!!!

I came across this on the Greenwich Cyclists group list a couple of weeks ago and promptly forgot about it.

Here is some feedback from this evening's Greenwich Park SPT meeting [Safer
Parks Team]. These are my notes of cycling-related matters only, not
official minutes.

Cycling is once again going to be a "priority area" this autumn (it has not
been during the summer). The focus will be on commuter cyclists in the
morning rush hour, with two routes to be patrolled in particular - the main
route from Blackheath Gate down to the town centre where faster cyclists may
not be keeping to the 20mph limit; and those entering at Maze Hill Gate and
going down Love Lane (the narrower path down the hill that is not an
official cycling route). The Royal Parks police (as mentioned before) do
not have the power to issue fixed-penalty notices ("on the spot fines").
They would like to be able to, but do not at present. So anyone stopped for
a cycling offence will be reported (ie potentially face a court summons)
though as yet no cases have actually reached court.

Since the 20mph limit was introduced, the actual average speed of traffic on
the through route has reduced from 45mph to 27mph, which is considered a
success.

A specification is being prepared for tender for various road works in the
park, which would include the long-awaited cycle lane on the footpath of the
uphill side of The Avenue. What is holding this up at present is that the
scheme also includes a re-design of the junction at the top of the hill
(near the cafe) for Olympic construction traffic. The park manager, to his
credit, rejected the first version as being dangerous to cyclists - it would
have included a low build-out of the kerb where you turn left to go down The
Avenue, which would force cyclists out into the middle of the lane just
where lorries would have to swing out before turning left themselves. A
redesign is in progress.

Since CCTV was installed at Blackheath Gate there have been several
collisions at the roundabout immediately outside the gate, which can now be
viewed on CCTV recordings. This is not in the SPT's remit, being a public
highway outside the park, but is concern to the park police as they get
called to deal with incidents. All the incidents involving cyclists were of
eastbound traffic failing to give way to a cyclist coming off the Heath via
the toucan crossing (many drivers presumably do not expect traffic from the
right at that point). The junction is due for redesign, including widening
of the gates, to allow 2012 construction traffic in (all construction
traffic for the stadium at the bottom of the park will enter by this gate).

zerostar

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

Since the 20mph limit was introduced, the actual average speed of traffic on
the through route has reduced from 45mph to 27mph, which is considered a
success

These people are making their data up.
No way has average speed ever been 45 mph in greenwich park.

Canny Jock

As above 45 sounds like nonsense. And yes, it's a 20mph limit, but generally all traffic down the hill including cars does around 30, I fail to see what targeting cyclists individual will do. Really, there's no problem today so why bother? [/list]

Stevo_666

Thanks for the tip - I go there occasionally.

I wonder if this is the start of the 'war on cyclists'....

Butterd2

Canny Jock wrote:

As above 45 sounds like nonsense. And yes, it's a 20mph limit, but generally all traffic down the hill including cars does around 30, I fail to see what targeting cyclists individual will do. Really, there's no problem today so why bother? [/list]

+3 however I do use this everyday and the average speed certainly seems to have dropped. I'm on my FG now so max out at 22mph with legs spinning wildly so think I'm ok on that front.

May have more issues at the Maze Hill gate as I refuse to get off for the 20yard gap between cycle lane and road but interesting to note the Park police do not have on the spot fine powers...

Thanks for the post though.

Headhuunter

I don't see how they could ever take you to court for speeding on a bike. The magistrate would ask, "Were you aware that you were travelling at faster than 20mph?", the cyclist could respond in all honesty "No" and that would be the end of that. Last time I looked it was not a legal requirement for cyclists to have speedos, so how can they enforce speed limits for cyclists?

In any case how would they stop a cyclist travelling down that hill at more than 20mph? The hill's is not very long and the cyclist would be down the hill and out of the gate at the bottom before anything could be done. What they going to do? Run after the cyclist? Speed after the cyclist in a park van heading out of the park and down the road where they have absolutely no jurisdiction?

This sounds like another load of old cobblers like the "Midtown" property developers saying that they are going to stop cyclists on the pavement and telling cyclists that they should not cycle on main roads in "Midtown". These people have no legal leg whatsoever to stand on...

notsoblue

Headhuunter wrote:

This sounds like another load of old cobblers like the "Midtown" property developers saying that they are going to stop cyclists on the pavement and telling cyclists that they should not cycle on main roads in "Midtown". These people have no legal leg whatsoever to stand on...

What? Really? Where *are* they meant to cycle then?

mybreakfastconsisted

notsoblue wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

This sounds like another load of old cobblers like the "Midtown" property developers saying that they are going to stop cyclists on the pavement and telling cyclists that they should not cycle on main roads in "Midtown". These people have no legal leg whatsoever to stand on...

What? Really? Where *are* they meant to cycle then?

Yep, they said cyclists should avoid main roads and use quieter back roads.

The silly chuffers.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Headhuunter wrote:

I don't see how they could ever take you to court for speeding on a bike. The magistrate would ask, "Were you aware that you were travelling at faster than 20mph?", the cyclist could respond in all honesty "No" and that would be the end of that. Last time I looked it was not a legal requirement for cyclists to have speedos, so how can they enforce speed limits for cyclists?

In any case how would they stop a cyclist travelling down that hill at more than 20mph? The hill's is not very long and the cyclist would be down the hill and out of the gate at the bottom before anything could be done. What they going to do? Run after the cyclist? Speed after the cyclist in a park van heading out of the park and down the road where they have absolutely no jurisdiction?

IIRC, in Richmond Park the cops wait at the bottom of the hill, with a radar gun. And they step out and tell you to stop. Much like the cops I saw on the pavement on Chelsea Bridge the other morning, nicking cyclists who'd ridden over the bridge (though I think that I I was on that pavement, I'd spin around as soon as I saw the cops and take a different route).

I doubt the "I didn't know I was going that fast officer" defence will get very far. At least, if I thought it would, I'd be prepared to rip the speedo out of my car.

Headhuunter

Greg66 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

I don't see how they could ever take you to court for speeding on a bike. The magistrate would ask, "Were you aware that you were travelling at faster than 20mph?", the cyclist could respond in all honesty "No" and that would be the end of that. Last time I looked it was not a legal requirement for cyclists to have speedos, so how can they enforce speed limits for cyclists?

In any case how would they stop a cyclist travelling down that hill at more than 20mph? The hill's is not very long and the cyclist would be down the hill and out of the gate at the bottom before anything could be done. What they going to do? Run after the cyclist? Speed after the cyclist in a park van heading out of the park and down the road where they have absolutely no jurisdiction?

IIRC, in Richmond Park the cops wait at the bottom of the hill, with a radar gun. And they step out and tell you to stop. Much like the cops I saw on the pavement on Chelsea Bridge the other morning, nicking cyclists who'd ridden over the bridge (though I think that I I was on that pavement, I'd spin around as soon as I saw the cops and take a different route).

I doubt the "I didn't know I was going that fast officer" defence will get very far. At least, if I thought it would, I'd be prepared to rip the speedo out of my car.

But seriously, how could they take it beyond a slap on the wrist? They might stop you but how on earth are you supposed to KNOW that you're going over 20mph? Guesstimate? How can they base a court summons on you not being able to guess your current speed? It just wouldn't stack up... If I get stopped I'll just say, "sorry mate, had no idea I was doing 25mph..." What they gonna do about that?

deptfordmarmoset

Seeing as none of the cases have come to court and, to the best of my knowledge, no cyclist has ever been convicted of speeding in the park, it's difficult to say for sure what their powers are. Personally I've been threatened with a summons in the park twice* before without anything coming of it. But they can spoil your day and make you late unless you naturally have fugitive tendencies....

([supplementary rant]*1st incident, last millennium, cycling along an empty path on a day that was so hot that speeding was out of the question, I got forced off the path by a police van. So they stopped me, ''cautioned me'' and asked for proof of identity. Had proof of identity but instead offered a copy of ''The Secret Agent'' that had my signature in it. If you know the book, you'll guess it was an ironic gesture on my part because it refers to a serious crime in the park. ''Revisiting the scene of the crime, are we?''..... 2nd incident, out early one day, started to attach my bike to the railings at the top of the park where the deer park is, ''It could be a bike bomb'' was the poplar policeman's rationale. So I asked said copper of the copses whether he could tell me where else in the park I could lock a bike and rosebush rozzer had zero idea. Nevertheless, he insisted, laws is laws...I was so angry that when I whipped the D-lock off he took a couple of steps back fearing for his compost-addled cranium. And the next day I returned in an estate car at the same time and parked it legally, and freely, 20 metres away. Yes, PC McLeod, if you're harassing a cyclist at 7 in the morning for possibly having inserted explosives into my bike frame when I can park a car (which could have a thousand times more explosive concealed within it) legally 20 metres away, then you've been in the park so long you don't know when you're barking up the wrong tree....[/supplementary rant])

EDIT: I blame the cider for the rant.

Canny Jock

Can't beat a good rant deptfordmarmoset, don't apologise! My post above was also written after a few drinks, what I was really trying to say was why are they specifically targeting bikes when all vehicles there are doing a similar speed?

Headhuunter

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

Seeing as none of the cases have come to court and, to the best of my knowledge, no cyclist has ever been convicted of speeding in the park, it's difficult to say for sure what their powers are. Personally I've been threatened with a summons in the park twice* before without anything coming of it. But they can spoil your day and make you late unless you naturally have fugitive tendencies....

([supplementary rant]*1st incident, last millennium, cycling along an empty path on a day that was so hot that speeding was out of the question, I got forced off the path by a police van. So they stopped me, ''cautioned me'' and asked for proof of identity. Had proof of identity but instead offered a copy of ''The Secret Agent'' that had my signature in it. If you know the book, you'll guess it was an ironic gesture on my part because it refers to a serious crime in the park. ''Revisiting the scene of the crime, are we?''..... 2nd incident, out early one day, started to attach my bike to the railings at the top of the park where the deer park is, ''It could be a bike bomb'' was the poplar policeman's rationale. So I asked said copper of the copses whether he could tell me where else in the park I could lock a bike and rosebush rozzer had zero idea. Nevertheless, he insisted, laws is laws...I was so angry that when I whipped the D-lock off he took a couple of steps back fearing for his compost-addled cranium. And the next day I returned in an estate car at the same time and parked it legally, and freely, 20 metres away. Yes, PC McLeod, if you're harassing a cyclist at 7 in the morning for possibly having inserted explosives into my bike frame when I can park a car (which could have a thousand times more explosive concealed within it) legally 20 metres away, then you've been in the park so long you don't know when you're barking up the wrong tree....[/supplementary rant])

EDIT: I blame the cider for the rant.

I am almost tempted to go through Greenwich Park at 20+mph just so that I can make my point and find outr what their response would be.... Trouble is it's slightly out of the way for me. If anyone else gets stopped could they ask about this? I really would like to know on what basis they would be able to issue a court summons! As you say, it's essentially just harrassment by park gardeners with no legal clout...

lost_in_thought

Greg66 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

I don't see how they could ever take you to court for speeding on a bike. The magistrate would ask, "Were you aware that you were travelling at faster than 20mph?", the cyclist could respond in all honesty "No" and that would be the end of that. Last time I looked it was not a legal requirement for cyclists to have speedos, so how can they enforce speed limits for cyclists?

In any case how would they stop a cyclist travelling down that hill at more than 20mph? The hill's is not very long and the cyclist would be down the hill and out of the gate at the bottom before anything could be done. What they going to do? Run after the cyclist? Speed after the cyclist in a park van heading out of the park and down the road where they have absolutely no jurisdiction?

IIRC, in Richmond Park the cops wait at the bottom of the hill, with a radar gun. And they step out and tell you to stop. Much like the cops I saw on the pavement on Chelsea Bridge the other morning, nicking cyclists who'd ridden over the bridge (though I think that I I was on that pavement, I'd spin around as soon as I saw the cops and take a different route).

I doubt the "I didn't know I was going that fast officer" defence will get very far. At least, if I thought it would, I'd be prepared to rip the speedo out of my car.

Hypothetically speaking, what would they do if you didn't stop? Knock you off your bike? Run after you?

Headhuunter

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

I don't see how they could ever take you to court for speeding on a bike. The magistrate would ask, "Were you aware that you were travelling at faster than 20mph?", the cyclist could respond in all honesty "No" and that would be the end of that. Last time I looked it was not a legal requirement for cyclists to have speedos, so how can they enforce speed limits for cyclists?

In any case how would they stop a cyclist travelling down that hill at more than 20mph? The hill's is not very long and the cyclist would be down the hill and out of the gate at the bottom before anything could be done. What they going to do? Run after the cyclist? Speed after the cyclist in a park van heading out of the park and down the road where they have absolutely no jurisdiction?

IIRC, in Richmond Park the cops wait at the bottom of the hill, with a radar gun. And they step out and tell you to stop. Much like the cops I saw on the pavement on Chelsea Bridge the other morning, nicking cyclists who'd ridden over the bridge (though I think that I I was on that pavement, I'd spin around as soon as I saw the cops and take a different route).

I doubt the "I didn't know I was going that fast officer" defence will get very far. At least, if I thought it would, I'd be prepared to rip the speedo out of my car.

Hypothetically speaking, what would they do if you didn't stop? Knock you off your bike? Run after you?

Exactly. Although I suppose if you go through there regularly they'd see you again but then again, what are they going to do. Personally I would stop but I would ask them how they would intend to pursue me legally. I genuinely have no idea what speed I am travelling at and there is no requirement in law for me to have any device on the bike to show my speed so how would the defence "I didn't know what speed I was doing" not work?

asprilla

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

I don't see how they could ever take you to court for speeding on a bike. The magistrate would ask, "Were you aware that you were travelling at faster than 20mph?", the cyclist could respond in all honesty "No" and that would be the end of that. Last time I looked it was not a legal requirement for cyclists to have speedos, so how can they enforce speed limits for cyclists?

In any case how would they stop a cyclist travelling down that hill at more than 20mph? The hill's is not very long and the cyclist would be down the hill and out of the gate at the bottom before anything could be done. What they going to do? Run after the cyclist? Speed after the cyclist in a park van heading out of the park and down the road where they have absolutely no jurisdiction?

IIRC, in Richmond Park the cops wait at the bottom of the hill, with a radar gun. And they step out and tell you to stop. Much like the cops I saw on the pavement on Chelsea Bridge the other morning, nicking cyclists who'd ridden over the bridge (though I think that I I was on that pavement, I'd spin around as soon as I saw the cops and take a different route).

I doubt the "I didn't know I was going that fast officer" defence will get very far. At least, if I thought it would, I'd be prepared to rip the speedo out of my car.

Hypothetically speaking, what would they do if you didn't stop? Knock you off your bike? Run after you?

We'll they would drive after you. They usually have a car parked up either at Ham cross or at the roundabout for White Lodge.

rjsterry

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

I don't see how they could ever take you to court for speeding on a bike. The magistrate would ask, "Were you aware that you were travelling at faster than 20mph?", the cyclist could respond in all honesty "No" and that would be the end of that. Last time I looked it was not a legal requirement for cyclists to have speedos, so how can they enforce speed limits for cyclists?

In any case how would they stop a cyclist travelling down that hill at more than 20mph? The hill's is not very long and the cyclist would be down the hill and out of the gate at the bottom before anything could be done. What they going to do? Run after the cyclist? Speed after the cyclist in a park van heading out of the park and down the road where they have absolutely no jurisdiction?

IIRC, in Richmond Park the cops wait at the bottom of the hill, with a radar gun. And they step out and tell you to stop. Much like the cops I saw on the pavement on Chelsea Bridge the other morning, nicking cyclists who'd ridden over the bridge (though I think that I I was on that pavement, I'd spin around as soon as I saw the cops and take a different route).

I doubt the "I didn't know I was going that fast officer" defence will get very far. At least, if I thought it would, I'd be prepared to rip the speedo out of my car.

Hypothetically speaking, what would they do if you didn't stop? Knock you off your bike? Run after you?

Don't think riding away from the police (even Royal Parks Police) is going to play very well if they do catch up with you (in a car, say).

Butterd2

No need for hypothetically speaking, I have had a Park Rozzer jump out into the road in front of me as I was riding up to the Greenwich gates the wrong way up the one way street. I just smiled spun the bike round and rode back down the road again. He didn't even bother to shout let alone jump in a car and set off in hot pursuit.

Plod were out this morning with the speed gun on the road at the top between the observatory and Blackheath gates. Given that is a flat section not many cyclists are likely to be exceeding 20mph there.

Canny Jock

Butterd2 wrote:

No need for hypothetically speaking, I have had a Park Rozzer jump out into the road in front of me as I was riding up to the Greenwich gates the wrong way up the one way street. I just smiled spun the bike round and rode back down the road again. He didn't even bother to shout let alone jump in a car and set off in hot pursuit.

Plod were out this morning with the speed gun on the road at the top between the observatory and Blackheath gates. Given that is a flat section not many cyclists are likely to be exceeding 20mph there.

I was there at about 7.40am and didn't see them, and I was exceeding 20

Butterd2

Canny Jock wrote:

Butterd2 wrote:

No need for hypothetically speaking, I have had a Park Rozzer jump out into the road in front of me as I was riding up to the Greenwich gates the wrong way up the one way street. I just smiled spun the bike round and rode back down the road again. He didn't even bother to shout let alone jump in a car and set off in hot pursuit.

Plod were out this morning with the speed gun on the road at the top between the observatory and Blackheath gates. Given that is a flat section not many cyclists are likely to be exceeding 20mph there.

I was there at about 7.40am and didn't see them, and I was exceeding 20

This would have been around 8:15, they were probably still drinking coffee and eating doughnuts at 7:40

deptfordmarmoset

Butterd2 wrote:

No need for hypothetically speaking, I have had a Park Rozzer jump out into the road in front of me as I was riding up to the Greenwich gates the wrong way up the one way street. I just smiled spun the bike round and rode back down the road again. He didn't even bother to shout let alone jump in a car and set off in hot pursuit.

Plod were out this morning with the speed gun on the road at the top between the observatory and Blackheath gates. Given that is a flat section not many cyclists are likely to be exceeding 20mph there.

Greenwich Council have plans to put a cycle contra-flow lane in King William Walk. In effect, they've given up because so many people cycle up it anyway. So, in a funny kind of way, Butterd2, by cycling up it you appear to have done local cyclists a favour. Not that I'd encourage anybody to break the law...

zerostar

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

Greenwich Council have plans to put a cycle contra-flow lane in King William Walk. In effect, they've given up because so many people cycle up it anyway. So, in a funny kind of way, Butterd2, by cycling up it you appear to have done local cyclists a favour. Not that I'd encourage anybody to break the law...

Am a bit surprised by this. I imagine redesigning and altering the junction at the bottom with Romney Road might be quite expensive. It isn't just a case of slapping some green paint up the side of the road.

But welcome news.

deptfordmarmoset

zerostar wrote:

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

Greenwich Council have plans to put a cycle contra-flow lane in King William Walk. In effect, they've given up because so many people cycle up it anyway. So, in a funny kind of way, Butterd2, by cycling up it you appear to have done local cyclists a favour. Not that I'd encourage anybody to break the law...

Am a bit surprised by this. I imagine redesigning and altering the junction at the bottom with Romney Road might be quite expensive. It isn't just a case of slapping some green paint up the side of the road.

But welcome news.

No doubt they'll stick a a central green line in Romney Road (is that what it's called? I've only lived round there for 40-odd years ), modify the traffic island, maybe even put one of those push-button traffic controls that I keep forgetting to press, and then slap some green paint up the side of the road. Job done.

Oh, but it's Greenwich Council! You better wait until after the Olympics, recession, elections, etc, before it happens.

Butterd2

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

Greenwich Council have plans to put a cycle contra-flow lane in King William Walk. In effect, they've given up because so many people cycle up it anyway. So, in a funny kind of way, Butterd2, by cycling up it you appear to have done local cyclists a favour. Not that I'd encourage anybody to break the law...

Well that's just the kind of community spirited individual that I am.

navt

New signage has gone up. Pedestrians have priority (yeah, right). All park users need to respect one another. Simples.

Better still, the cyclist dismount sign has been removed from Vanburgh Park Gate (no doubt to be replaced soon) and re-positioned at St. Mary's Gate. Alas, cyclist need to dismount if the gates are closed.

deptfordmarmoset

Funny that this thread should get bumped up now. I was just wondering whether it was worth a new Greenwich thread about a councillors' cycling survey that I just found out about this morning.
So, though it has nothing to do with the park itself, I'll post the survey link here where Greenwich cyclists are likely to see it anyway.


http://www.greenwich.gov.uk/Greenwich/Y ... enwich.htm

hatbeard

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

Funny that this thread should get bumped up now. I was just wondering whether it was worth a new Greenwich thread about a councillors' cycling survey that I just found out about this morning.
So, though it has nothing to do with the park itself, I'll post the survey link here where Greenwich cyclists are likely to see it anyway.


http://www.greenwich.gov.uk/Greenwich/Y ... enwich.htm

typical greenwich gov website

"if you would like to opt into cycle newsletter...blah blah blah... give us your email." is a required field. so much for opting in

but have completed it anyways.

shouldbeinbed

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

I don't see how they could ever take you to court for speeding on a bike. The magistrate would ask, "Were you aware that you were travelling at faster than 20mph?", the cyclist could respond in all honesty "No" and that would be the end of that. Last time I looked it was not a legal requirement for cyclists to have speedos, so how can they enforce speed limits for cyclists?

In any case how would they stop a cyclist travelling down that hill at more than 20mph? The hill's is not very long and the cyclist would be down the hill and out of the gate at the bottom before anything could be done. What they going to do? Run after the cyclist? Speed after the cyclist in a park van heading out of the park and down the road where they have absolutely no jurisdiction?

IIRC, in Richmond Park the cops wait at the bottom of the hill, with a radar gun. And they step out and tell you to stop. Much like the cops I saw on the pavement on Chelsea Bridge the other morning, nicking cyclists who'd ridden over the bridge (though I think that I I was on that pavement, I'd spin around as soon as I saw the cops and take a different route).

I doubt the "I didn't know I was going that fast officer" defence will get very far. At least, if I thought it would, I'd be prepared to rip the speedo out of my car.

Hypothetically speaking, what would they do if you didn't stop? Knock you off your bike? Run after you?

same way they catch people in cars not willing to stop I'd guess

...call the police give them your description, tell them that you've 'evaded lawful custody/absconded when instructed to stop' something that'll make you sound like Ronnie Biggs and get you (or some poor sod that happens to look a bit like you) into bigger trouble with the regular cops.

I also reckon they'd knock the no speedo argument by suggesting that you should ride conservatively and should know that it's better to guess low than bomb along at full tilt and pretend you though it was only 15mph. Ignorance is no defence (as I was told when done for car speeding just off a motorway having not seen any 30 signs and being on a dual carriageway with a central reservation and without a habitable dwelling in 50 yards of the road- not that I'm bitter or owt )

navt

And if that was not bad enough, this PM they were hydroblasting the cycle lane markings off down the Avenue! So technically, no cycle path.

jeremyrundle

Are people aware that a 20mph speed limit is in fact not legally enforceable, call the general enquiries and ask, this is a fact.

electric_blue

jeremyrundle wrote:

Are people aware that a 20mph speed limit is in fact not legally enforceable, call the general enquiries and ask, this is a fact.

This one is - it's in a Royal Park - I can't remember the ins and outs but have actually read the clause in the legislation which applies.