Rockets

But it is because it is a shared-use route on private land and the signage itself makes it very clear what the speed limit is. What you or I think is irrelevant as the speed limit is 5mph. And it applies to bicycles too. If you have an issue with that you need to contact the council and ask them to increase the speed limit - I doubt they will as they are trying to protect the other shared-use users. No because as someone who does know what the sign says and shows it was clear to me you didn't have the foggiest clue as to what you were talking about. That's not weird.

@first mate I do wonder whether the warning of trolling the lady in the video was told sbout when she decided to go public may actually be from cycle lobbyists accusing her of betraying the oath of cyclists - that they're own recklessness can never be acknowledged. If people like @malumbu, who I believe has claimed to have taught cycling, cannot acknowledge the need for greater education within the cycle community and wants people to "move on" what hope is there?

The signs which are at all the entrances to the park (which are comprised of one round blue one and one round red one - can you remember from the Highway Code what that means.....;-)) show that it is a shared-use route to be used by certain groups only, that users must give-way and priority to pedestrians and unleashed dogs and that the speed limit on the shared-use route is 5mph. I am not sure it's right you suggest I am being "weird" I was merely asking if you had any knowledge of the sign you were talking about. Per the forum rules are you allowed to accuse someone of being weird?

@Earl Aelfheah I was just interested whether you actually knew what the signage said or whether you were arm-chair quarterbacking without actually having seen anything of the game! Needless to say your memory fails you. The signs, which are all over the park at entry points long since used for any car access don't say anything about "vehicle entry for permit holders only" nor do they say anything about "please observe 5mph". It might be worth you refreshing your memory next time you're there - take a look and let me know what you find! And this is exactly part of the issue and was one of the reasons Friends of Dulwich Park implored locals to review the consultation on the cycle spine through Dulwich Park back in 2015 and said in their correspondence to residents: The 5MPH speed limit in the park applies to cyclists just as much as those vehicles allowed in to the park (a typical cycling speed is 13MPH). At present, that speed limit is often not observed.Increased usage would heighten the need for observance. It's interesting because the whole subject of problematic cyclists in the park was discussed on here way back in 2011 too:

@Earl Aelfheah would you be so good as to describe the signage to us?

@exdulwicher of course it is. So now the havoc is being caused by other vehicles isn't it? Do you know what the signage says in Dulwich Park - perhaps you can help @Earl Aelfheah? Puppies are allowed off lead on the shared-use route - it's one of the reasons why the speed limit is set at 5mph to slow bikes down as it is a shared-use route.

@malumbu probably for cyclists to stop injuring themselves on bikes by jumping red lights - do you not want that?

@Earl Aelfheah come on - describe the signs to us in Dulwich Park. What do they show and say...?

It would require a TMO or specific site rules to be able to put the signage up in the park would it not that alerts users of the park to the fact that it was a shared-use route with a speed limit of 5mph? And if that stated all vehicles then it would apply to all vehicles wouldn't it (unless of course it called out an exception for bicycles)? Your words not mine - clearly that was not what I said. You're adding elements and making things up again. New Year, same old tactics!!! 😉 Tell that to the puppy that was killed by the cyclist...... I don't need to support extending it as it already does apply to cyclists - the council have done the work for me. I still don't know why you feel the need to get so angry when you find out a speed limit does apply to cyclists. Again, speak to the owner of the puppy....any havoc in the park is not being caused by high powered motor vehicles is it.....? When the discussion moves to something on the public highway you're more than welcome to play the "WHAT ABOUT THE CARS" hand but in a park you're on a bit of a dodgy wicket with that one..... What signage is there @Earl Aelfheah - perhaps you would like to describe it to us and tell us what it includes and what it doesn't......?

@exdulwicher we know that is the case on public roads but it is not the case on private land where the speed limit is set by the local authority. Dulwich Park is not part of the public highway. The route through the park is a shared-use route and Southwark have set the speed limit for all vehicles as 5mph. This is fact. You are wrong - the speed limit does apply to bicycles - whether it will ever be enforced is another matter. It does. You are wrong. It is a shared-use route with a speed limit of 5mph. Do you argue then that the 10mph limit on the shared-use path in front of Dulwich College does not apply to cyclists too? Again, why are you getting so vexed that a rule may actually apply to cyclists - I don't know how, as a cyclist, I managed to avoid this oppositional defiant disorder many cyclists, and their cheerleaders, seem to have? Honestly, why does it upset you so - this is a prime example of why so many people are fed-up with the blinkered approach many in the cycle lobby take? Who and what are you trying to protect - the divine right of cyclists to do what they want without hindrance? You seem to be prioritising the needs and wants of cyclists over every other shared-use route users in the park....is that not a little selfish? Nonsense. Firstly, the police would not enforce it as it is private land and not the public highway - it would be enforced by the council as they set the speed limit of 5mph. Secondly, the biggest groups this would likely impact are the e-bike and cargo bike riders who rattle through the parks at a hell of a rate without a care in the world for the other users and they are not doing a lot of exercise and if they were walking would do more! Now that's not very nice is it? Anyway, it wouldn't happen as I am a very considerate cyclist.... You seem to be trying cast doubts over my cycling credentials - is this because I dare question some of the more cultish elements of being part of the cycling community? BTW @exdulwicher and @Earl Aelfheah do you both cycle much? Funny isn't it....you love it when the rules get applied to drivers to the letter...less so cyclists....C'est La vie!

So you agree a bike is a vehicle - so if then the speed limit applies to ALL vehicles on a shared-use route then it does apply to bicycles too then? Or are you trying to assert that they are given a special "tho shalt go at whatever speed you want as you are a cyclist". I am afraid the rules on non-public carriageway are different and clearly there nears to be better education about this - Dulwich Estates are clearly trying to make that point on the shared-use path in front of Dulwich College!!! No I think you're the one being ridiculous now. I think you're missing the point @exdulwicher. This is about applying commonsense to the situation you find yourself in when on a bike - and unfortunately a lot of cyclists seem to leave commonsense at home when they jump on their bikes and default to a "I will because I can/am allowed to" mentality. And every time someone utters the "the speed limit does not apply to bikes" it is often as they try to defend stupid, inconsiderate or downright dangerous cycling and this is usually followed by the next most-used phrase in the lexicon on cycling excuses - "ah, that's not actually a bike". I dunno. I only tend to see people shouting at fast moving cyclists - I have never seen an issue with runners. Granted Park Run is a bit of a pain to navigate but it all seems to work harmoniously. And I don't see surgeons talking about rising admissions from runner-caused injuries: Jaison Patel, an orthopaedic knee surgeon at the Royal London, the national trauma centre that treated Stonkute, said he and his colleagues had seen a big rise in accidents involving riders or pedestrians as more commuters cycle to work since the pandemic, in part thanks to a proliferation of e-bikes. No just highlighting that there is little point taking a position on it because that is the speed limit - the same with the A205. We can think it is ridiculous but that doesn't change the fact that it is the speed limit.

No. Firstly because the speed limit is for vehicles only and secondly humans have an inbuilt mechanism to avoid one another - the problems tend to occur when you put them on or in devices to make them go faster. But regardless that is the speed limit for vehicles in the park isn't it so surely if you cannot cycle within it you should dismount? It was interesting because the cycle route through the park that was proposed back in 2015 got rejected and I do wonder if that was on the basis of the mixed-use nature of the park. It is clearly being used as a cut-through for many.

@Earl Aelfheah I would treat this with some caution as I think it is a slippery path doing a like-for-like comparison on comparable kinetic energy as being hit by anything at any speed comes with risk and could injure/kill people especially on shared use routes where more vulnerable users. Often it is not the collision of cycle vs pedestrian that causes the problems but the fall that takes place as a direct result and the kinetic energy values for that are much much less. The lady killed in Regent's Park died not from the injuries sustained during the impact with the cyclist but the fall that happened after the impact with the cyclist. And per the above it is exactly why the speed limit has been set at 5mph - shared use dictates the need for a difference approach. I am one of those annoying cyclists who tries to balance when I stop so slow speed cycling is not an issue for me!!! 😉 But if the speed limit is 5mph it is 5mph whether people agree or not - I think it is ridiculous that the A205 is 20mph but I still have to adhere to that limit. But we do when trends emerge that show that harm is being done because of a lack of regulation and whilst I don't think we are heading down a route of speedos for bikes I do think there will have to be more stringent policing of cyclists in future. On this thread and the red-light thread you will read a constant narrative of the need for better education for cyclists and much of what the police and authorities are doing are invoking what powers they have to stop cyclists and educate them - be that the speeding on Tooting Bec or showing red-light jumpers the video of the lady being hit by a bus (interesting that it seems the police in that instance seem to feel frustrated by what they can do). Of course, if the problems keep getting worse then more draconian measures will be required - if for nothing else to stop cyclists injuring themselves - the testimony from the surgeon in the FT red-light jumping article is an eye-opener.

But, as pointed out previously, runners are not classified as a vehicle are they so the speed limit on a shared use route does not apply to them does it? @Earl Aelfheah you seem to be missing the point here - on a shared use path the risk comes not from cars but bikes. Honestly, it is laughable, and quite telling, how vexed some get when they realise that a speed limit does apply to cyclists. I am sorry but on a shared route off the public highway then a speed limit can and often does apply to cyclists as well. You may not like it but it is correct. Now you can argue that 5mph is ridiculous for bikes but if that is the speed a local authority set then that is the speed they should be abiding to. And remember this speed limit is set to protect other users of the shared path that would be deemed more vulnerable. The Dulwich Estate (one presumes) has also set a 10mph speed limit on the shared use path in front of Dulwich College and painted large signs on it reminding cyclists of that speed. There is a problem in Dulwich Park with some cyclists bombing around it and through it they are a menace to other park users and often get very angry when they are told to slow down or a dog runs in front of them. A bit like red light jumping in the other thread it seems a lot of cyclists need to better educate themselves on the rules that do actually apply to them! And I think this part of the article about the puppy being killed by an e-bike in Dulwich Park is very telling and exactly why speed limits should to be adhered to: https://southwarknews.co.uk/featured/exclusive-an-e-bike-killed-our-puppy/ She said the man was riding a green rental e-bike, and claims he was definitely over the 5mph speed limit the park has for vehicles passing through. She said they were not interested in pressing charges, but wanted people to be more aware of the dangers of cycling. “A bike is still a vehicle. I want people to be more conscious of this. There are a lot of people who don’t respect the rules.” Trevor Moore, member of the Dulwich Park Friends committee – who help to maintain the park said: “This is terrible news. It’s as a result of lots of people on two wheels going too fast in a shared space. In a park, it has to be the people riding bikes and scooters that are aware of kids and dogs and vulnerable people around them.” Or better education of cyclists?

The data that was edited out of the RoadCC article is actually in the article in the FT and can be found here: https://www.ft.com/content/1a4d19a2-a4a5-407d-afe3-a891e64fdd58#:~:text=In the City%2C workers complain,red lights and zebra crossings. Text pasted below. ‘I was reckless’: City cyclist shares CCTV of her accident to save others Credit rating agency worker almost lost her life after cycling into a London bus Gabby Stonkute agreed to tell her story to raise awareness: ‘They warned me I might be subject to trolling but I’ll take it as long as it does some good’ The last thing Gabby Stonkute remembers was “the light going from green to red and thinking I could make it”. When the 35-year-old City of London worker awoke from an induced coma a week later, she learned she had cycled headlong into a bus after jumping a red light at a busy junction around the corner from St Paul’s Cathedral. Undergoing emergency surgery for bleeding on her brain, she had suffered a collapsed lung and 10 fractures to her face, breaking her jaw, nose, chin, almost all her teeth as well as both eye sockets. While in the coma, she had to be woken at regular intervals to check she had not also lost her sight. What shocked her most was that staff at the NHS Royal London Hospital were not surprised. They “see a lot of people being admitted [with similar levels of injury],” she said. “They told me that 70 per cent survive and only 25 per cent walk away with no long-term complications. I’m incredibly lucky not to have any of that.” The fact the bus driver, with a 30-year career and no points on his licence, had been going at 15mph, rather than the legal limit of 20mph, probably saved her life, she added. That is why the credit rating agency manager accepted the City of London police force’s invitation to share her story and the CCTV footage of her accident in July: cyclists who jump red lights will this year be given a choice of paying a £50 fine or watching a film about Stonkute. “They warned me I might be subject to trolling but I’ll take it as long as it does some good,” she told the Financial Times. Although most road accidents nationally are caused by motor vehicles, the City business district has the capital’s highest proportion of road casualties involving cyclists. And, ironically, the prevalence of cyclists can make breaking the rules feel safer because “you’re not alone” in jumping the lights, said Stonkute. Police, doctors and politicians say a national campaign is needed to raise awareness and minimise accidents caused not just by cars but by unsafe cycling. The City police have also called for legislation to outlaw kits, easily available online, to power up e-bikes beyond legal limits. Such bikes are often the vehicle of choice of both phone snatchers and food delivery drivers. Jaison Patel, an orthopaedic knee surgeon at the Royal London, the national trauma centre that treated Stonkute, said he and his colleagues had seen a big rise in accidents involving riders or pedestrians as more commuters cycle to work since the pandemic, in part thanks to a proliferation of e-bikes. Because they are heavier than traditional cycles, e-bikes tend to cause more severe injuries, said Patel. Data for the Royal London Hospital counted 202 limb injuries on traditional bikes and 125 on e-bikes in the first six months of 2025. ‘’Levels of cycling in London have been increasing in recent years, which is hugely positive. It means less congestion on our roads, improved public health, and that more people are being enabled to make different choices about how they travel,” said Fabian Hamilton MP, chair of the all-party parliamentary group for cycling and walking. However, he added: “It is essential that everyone follows the Highway Code, and doesn’t behave in a way that endangers either other people or themselves.” The Cycling UK charity sees progress in the fact that the Highway Code was recently updated to specify a hierarchy requiring each type of road user — HGVs, cars, motorcycles, bikes and pedestrians — to look out for the more vulnerable category than theirs. “The trouble is that most people are still not aware of the changes and the government must do more to communicate them,” said the charity’s external affairs director Sarah McMonagle. In the City, workers complain about near misses or collisions with cyclists and delivery riders jumping red lights and zebra crossings. Hamilton, the Labour MP for Leeds North East, expressed concern “that road traffic police numbers have been severely reduced, in the last decade and a half”. But even the City police force, which has an 11-strong cycling team, appears to be playing a game of whack-a-mole. “Our hands are tied [on fines],” said one officer. “Anything greater than £50 requires going to court.” While they stop cyclists who run red lights with spot patrols at junctions such as the one where Stonkute was almost killed, City police hope further measures will help to change people’s behaviour. “We’re extremely grateful and praise Gabby’s bravery for working with us on a cycling red-light campaign, which will undoubtedly save lives and prevent serious injuries,” said City police constable Brett Daniels. Citing the drop in the number of motor vehicle accidents after seat belts became mandatory, Patel said: “Prevention measures are possible, though how it’s done is beyond our control. What we can do as surgeons is highlight the issue, and hopefully somebody will take notice and do something about it.” While keen to put the accident behind her, Stonkute hopes that her story will not be wasted. “I was in a rush for a hair appointment,” she said. “I’m not brave. I was just reckless.” Additional reporting by Martin Stabe

I don't know about you @malumbu but for many of us Dulwich Park is our local park. The whole point of the thread is dispelling the narrative that "the speed limits do not apply to cyclists" which gets rolled out anytime anyone dares mention problems caused by fast moving cyclists - and to be honest it doesn't matter if they are delivery cyclists or those renting e-bikes (as in the case of the cyclist who killed the dog in Dulwich Park) - if they are fast moving in an environment that is a shared route there is likely to be a problem. This is why the speed limits are set on these shared routes (12mph in Tooting Bec, 5mph in Dulwich Park, 10 mph outside Dulwich College) to protect all shared route users. Surely you can acknowledge that the speed limits on these share routes are set on the basis of their usage? I am still struggling to understand why some people are so keen to argue that the speed limit on a shared use route would not/should not apply to cyclists? Surely it's commonsense that if you have small children playing, pedestrians or dogs off leads then speed should be managed?

Here is what Friends of Dulwich Park said during the cycle spine consultation 10 years ago: https://dulwichparkfriends.org.uk/2015/01/14/proposed-cycle-path-across-dulwich-park/ From that they said: The 5MPH speed limit in the park applies to cyclists just as much as those vehicles allowed in to the park (a typical cycling speed is 13MPH). At present, that speed limit is often not observed.Increased usage would heighten the need for observance. Can I ask, why are some getting so vexed that there is a speed limit for cyclists in Dulwich Park - much of it is designated as shared route and fast moving, often heavy bikes, with free exercising dogs, playing children and pedestrians seems like a bad idea. Does it not?

@exdulwicher but it is ashared use route isn't it and the TMO will state the speed limit for all vehicles within that won't it? I think you may have to agree that 5mph is the speed limit for bikes in Dulwich Park. Interesting that Friends of Dulwich Park states it does apply to cyclists dont you think - you'd expect them to know wouldn't you? Do you have any evidence 5mph does not apply to bikes in Dulwich Park?

It is a shared-use route with the speed limit set at 5mph and the signage for said shared route is very clear about that. It applies to all vehicles using the shared use route which will have it's own TMO set by Southwark as it is "private" as it is not part of the main carriageway. The same is true if you walk up the shared use route in front of Dulwich College - you'll notice big stencils of bikes every so often with a huge 10 underneath them reminding cyclists that the speed limit is 10 mph. Google AI certainly thinks it is: Yes, a 5mph speed limit is in place for all vehicles within Dulwich Park, and this is generally considered to apply to cyclists and e-bike users as part of efforts to ensure safety for pedestrians in shared spaces. While legal speed limits often only apply to motor vehicles, local park regulations can enforce a 5mph limit for all users. Although some sources state legal, non-motorized speed limits don't apply to cyclists in the same way as cars, within the context of Southwark Council's regulations for Dulwich Park, the 5mph limit is applied to cyclists. Certainly the Friends of Dulwich Park think it is as they cited the fact during the consultation for the cycleway through the park back in 2015. It also came up after a puppy was killed by a cyclist in Dulwich Park a couple of years ago: https://southwarknews.co.uk/featured/exclusive-an-e-bike-killed-our-puppy/ @exdulwicher so maybe you can present any evidence that it doesn't apply - rules are different once you are off the main public highway and on a designated shared use route and I don't think the "speed limits don't apply to us cyclists" argument doesn't work.

Ha ha, that Opinion piece pulls the Mail article apart like I pulled any number of Peter Walker articles apart for their biased, myopic, one-sided reporting! But I think some are missing the point and it goes back to the original article not the Mail's follow-up click-bait piece - and perhaps interestingly enough a news story that also ran on Roadcc that the opinion pieces links to: https://road.cc/content/news/speed-gun-deployed-wandsworth-parks-317353 Wandsworth can enforce the speed limit of 12mph because it is enforceable for cycles - many would have you believe cycles are immune to all speed limits - but they are not. It's whether anyone enforces it. The fact that Wandsworth have been suggests attitudes towards reckless cycling are changing. Of course, some would have you believe the speed limit of 5mph does not apply to cyclists in Dulwich Park but it does. Again, would Southwark ever enforce it - unlikely - but surely if the argument from some is that any time a motorist breaks the rules then they should be punished is applicable to any cyclist in Dulwich Park doing more than 5mph? So if Southwark set speed traps and started issuing PCNs for cyclists doing more than 5mph surely everyone would agree that is reasonable? What we can say is that the opinion piece in Road.cc is full of the usual tropes and name calling and does nothing to suggest the culture-war supposedly being waged on cyclists is one-directional! 😉 And I suspect this will depend massively on when it was filmed because the date of publication was Dec 28th so it could well have been very quiet if it was filmed during the Christmas holidays.

Interesting approach being taken by City of London police. If you get caught jumping a red light on a bike you will get the option of a £50 fine or watching a safety video of someone jumping a red light on a bike and getting hit by a bus (with the permission of the cyclist concerned as she wants to use her awful experience to raise awareness). https://road.cc/content/news/safety-film-option-cyclists-who-run-red-lights-317487 BTW does anyone know how to retrieve cached versions of articles externally or from within a browser as the article above has been heavily edited this morning (seemingly to add Simon Monks commentary) and the original copy had interesting stats on hospital admissions and comments from the police which have now been removed?

Residents on Court Lane doing a great job this morning clearing ice as that is treacherous in parts as well.

Did anyone actually venture in to that place? I recall it always being closed/very uninviting!

But as Southwark have set a speed limit for all vehicles of 5mph on a shared use route off the public highway then that is the speed limit that applies to all vehicles is it not? Well if someone was driving at faster than 5mph on the shared use route then clearly Southwark could issue a PCN...but then they could issue a PCN for cyclists too couldn't they? This is basically the same instance highlighted in the original post...in this situation a speed limit on a shared use route off the public highway applies to all vehicles does it not? Are they are vehicle...this vehicle issue appears to be your argument's Achiiles Heal! Only in the areas where it is required I presume - I know how you and many of your cohort on here are so keen on the application of rules and regulations to the letter (for cars)! 😉

That only applies to all vehicles in Dulwich Park @exdulwicher. Not sure what the speed limit is for Peckham Rye. This thread has helped establish two things: 1) there is a speed limit of 5mph in Dulwich Park (and it applies to bikes) and 2) dogs do not have to be on a lead in many parts of Dulwich Park. It seems some folks need to read up on the rules!