Forum Topics

RICHMOND PARK

The cycling lobby is some piece of work - now they've got the whip- hand in the discussions about Richmond Park - see the story on front page here.Richmond Park said: “We’ve been working hard to find a way to allow cyclists to return to the park that supports their safety and the safety of other park visitors. This interim measure will allow us to fully assess the impact of lifting restrictions, including whether any further safety measures are needed.“By re-opening in a limited capacity, we will be able to accurately monitor the impact of the re-introduction of cyclists on the park, and on other park visitors, informing any future decisions around opening the park more widely to cyclists.“We would like to thank everyone who has supported the temporary restrictions which have been in place during these unprecedented times, in order to enable the park to stay open for everyone who needs it. We would also like to thank all those cyclists, cycling groups and other park users who have given constructive feedback and suggestions on how to re-open the park safely. "Very happy for cyclists to cycle safely in R.Park - they have a very pleasant cycle track well away from any motorised traffic and can meander along enjoying nature, trees and wild animals.  But oh NO those cyclists want to use R.Park tarmac roadway as a training ground and a racing circuit.  They frequently overtake or frighten the life out of me, zooming at speed down hill towards me.  Agree, some road closures or restrictions need to be taken to stop the Park being used purely at a cut through.  As a disabled person I just want to drive slowly along enjoying our beautiful natural park - what do this vocal cycling lobby want?  They want a racing circuit NOT Richmond Wildlife Park!  Clear off and let those of us, walkers, gentle cyclists and drivers freely roam through this beautiful place.

Jennifer Selig ● 2172d34 Comments ● 2166d

Council budgets for 'temporary' road closure for three years

Although this article specifically mentions Lambeth, it makes interesting reading, nonetheless:A Freedom of Information response offers an insight into how 'low traffic neighbourhoods' planter costs span three years.Councils introducing controversial road closures meant to be temporary are instead planning to keep them for three years amid fears town hall bosses may secretly want to make them permanent, it can be revealed.Lambeth Council is claiming hundreds of thousands of pounds to close off London streets while budgeting for three years of maintenance for bollards and planters. A Freedom of Information request has highlighted how it has claimed nearly £200,000 of Government cash to block off five streets in an affluent area as part of its “Oval Triangle low traffic neighbourhood (LTN) temporary scheme”.The breakdown reveals how nearly £50,000 was spent installing new signs and road markings, £25,000 was ploughed into “design and project management", and nearly £5,000 forked out on ‘traffic counts’ to monitor how the road closures were working.However, the majority of the money claimed was invested in technology to fine motorists breaching the new rules, with £90,000 - nearly half the total obtained - used to buy automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras and fit columns or bollards.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/11/22/council-budgets-temporary-road-closure-three-years/

Leslie Wilson ● 2167d2 Comments ● 2166d