-
unsustainably high footfall which is permanently changing the landscape there.
Its not some natural untouched idyl - its a managed park and has been for centuries.
65 follows the Ham side of the park all the way to Kingston
From Ham to Ham gate is quite a long boring walk. On the Ham/Kingston side I don't think a bus stops close to the actual park. Say you wanted to visit the Isabella Plantation - in the middle, with the lovely gardens and flowers and streams, and go for a nice gentle potter. Say you've got a three year old and a six year old in tow too. From Richmond gate that is like two miles. Ever tried walking two miles with a three year old? Knowing you've got to walk two miles back? And you haven't actually started the walk you wanted to do?
Perhaps this could be alleviated by some kind of internal shuttle train a la:
But get stuck behind that on the wrong section and your strava section is still gonna be ruined. You'd need loads of them, shuttling folk all over to get to the bits of the park they wanted to go to. - The great play park at Petersham gate, the bike hire at Roehampton - Bacon sarnie by the ponds in the middle.
I just don't see how the park, as it is currently used, could really ban cars completely. It's too big and I still think it is important to encourage more people to use it - not less - just not for driving through on unrelated errands.
Scrabble
-
I just don't see how the park, as it is currently used, could really ban cars completely.
No one suggested banning cars, simply that they should pay for the privilege of being in the park
and
Its not some natural untouched idyl - its a managed park and has been for centuries.
And as someone who's visited pretty regularly over the last 20 years it has changed pretty significantly in that time
branwen
If only there were ways to get to the park that didn't involve driving ...
(Richmond has pretty good Rail/Underground/Bus access, and 371 goes right by the Richmond hill entrance, 65 follows the Ham side of the park all the way to Kingston)
Edit: and this is a hard thing to argue (where do the restrictions land?), but Richmond Park has an unsustainably high footfall which is permanently changing the landscape there. If some of that footfall is reduced by excluding those who could use public transport to get there but are too lazy to, then honestly that sounds fine