Rockets

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!

It doesn't get suspended. @Penguin68 is right, Southwark do like to leave people guessing - probsbly good for revenue generation. In neighbouring Bromley their school streets signs clearly say term-time only and I am surprised Southwark don't have to call it out.

It was a wonderful event.

Ha ha, there's a throwback! Some cracking nights in there.

What are the rules in relation to dogs on leads on Peckham Rye? Within Dulwich Park they are allowed off the lead around the outer perimeter, just have to be on the lead in the central area.

For those of you who celebrate have a good one, yes even to those of you who have taken a disliking to me because I have a different viewpoint to you! Whatever you do, have a good one all!

There is a 5mph limit on the outer perimeter of the park. The outer perimeter is designated a shared use route and as such Southwark have set the speed limit for all vehicles at 5mph on it. It is the same as in Tooting Bec, that has a shared use route with the speed limit set at 12mph - which is where the council were issuing PCNs to cyclists. Whether Southwark would ever police the 5mph limit is another question. Dogs can be off the lead on the outer perimeter and are called out as part of the shared use group. They only have to be on the lead within the inner sections of the park. I suspect this is one of the reasons the speed limit is set at 5mph by the council.

Where are we heading to!? Somewhere nice I hope...I hope it has bike parking so I can cycle there! 😉

@exdulwicher You accept though that councils have the power to set speeds limits within parks don't you and that they would do this by specfic orders relevant to the park? And you accept that Dulwich Park has set that speed limit to 5mph within Dulwich Park and have clearly signposted it? And do you accept that if the said order calls out ALL vehicles having to adhere to that speed that bikes would also need to adhere? Many of your cohort would say that if the rules that are set by the order have been broken then it's a fair cop. But if it is the speed limit and you can't keep within it it's a moot point isn't it? Isn't that like someone saying their car is difficult to keep under 20mph? And this is the issue - mixing uses in a confined space creates challenges especially if some are travelling at much greater speed than others. Lime bikes are an issue and so are cargo bikes in Dulwich Park and a number of dog walkers who saw the angry cyclist vs dog incident said that there have been a number of cyclist vs dog accidents in the park.

But under the UN's 1969 Vienna Convention on Road Traffic bicycles are defined as vehicles so thus are bound by the 5mph speed limit in Dulwich Park are they not? It is a private road with speed limit set by the council.

The speed limit doesn't apply to joggers as they are not a vehicle.....;-)

I wonder what bye-law they are leaning in to for issuing the PCNs and why the GLC initiated it? I doubt Southwark would go after cyclists in the way Wandsworth do - as I said they tried to issue one to me on my bike many years ago and I can't imagine Southwark driving a speed monitoring van with a speed camera in the back into the park to issue PCNs (as Wandsworth have)....although let's be honest the gusto with which Southwark issue PCNs to car drivers if that ever dries up they'll probably come for the cyclists! If they enforced the 5mph speed limit in Dulwich Park though there would be rich pickings given the majority of cyclists are doing far faster than that. Maybe something has to be done that goes beyond the stencilled message to cyclists at the entrances to Dulwich Park to watch their speed as at times it feels very dangerous - does anyone know who the man is who flies around the park doing fast laps on that half recumbent bike?

Even on private land like within a park, do local councils not have the power to set the speed limit within parks? Southwark's website says the 5mph speed limit in Dulwick Park applies to ALL vehicles and there is 5mph signage throughout both the car accessible and non-car accessible parts. Also, and very interestingly, the weird policing by Wandsworth parks police of 12mph, which seemed like a rather odd and random speed to be enforcing, is, apparently, because there are some long forgotten bye-laws about cycle speeds from the GLC days that still apply across London which means they can issue PCNs and the speed limit in the park does very much apply to bikes which they are invoking due to problems caused by cyclists in the park. https://road.cc/content/news/speed-gun-deployed-wandsworth-parks-317353

The dogs on lead signs are on the inner section of the park - around the lake etc.