Motspur Park Gas Holders Development

 The Motspur Park Gas Holders will be familiar to anyone who lives in or travels through the Motspur Park area. They are visible for a considerable distance away. They've been out of use for some years now, as gas is no longer stored here, and in common with other similar sites around London, it's being redeveloped. 

The development plan was rejected by Kingston Council, but this has now been called in by the Mayor of London.

Here's the site:

 

 

 

 

The planning documents for the development are here:  

https://publicaccess.kingston.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=T3HWRUNHJXJ00

 We're only commenting on the transport aspects.

 This is a relatively low-car (but not zero car) development with  586 dwellings and 89 surface-level car parking spaces. The surface area occupied by this car parking is significant, and could be used for other purposes such as to reduce the overall height of buildings, provide more housing, or provide attractive public realm. We'd estimate the population to be somewhere around 1000 - 1500 people. So one car per 15 people on average. It is unclear how car parking spaces are allocated. Will with have cars that are parked but seldom used, or used for short journeys with a viable PT/active travel alternative, or will the space be reserved for people with a genuine need? It seems likely that most journeys by residents won't be done by car, so how will these be made? The very poor PTAL points to active travel as the quickest way to do most relatively local journeys, yet there's no meaningful assessment. There's no mention of hire bikes (Lime, Forest) or cargo bikes.

 Looking at the most important documents:

 

Car Park Management Plan:

The Proposed Development is residential comprising 586 homes inclusive of 35% affordable units, by habitable room.

There are 89 car spaces, = 0.15 spaces per dwelling, inclusive of 18 blue badge bays. So it's low-car, but not zero-car, plus 4 loading bays and 3 car club bays

So that's 71 general bays in total...

Bays are next to the railway track.

It is unclear where visitors park.

No motor access from the north entrance, this is pedestrian/cycle only.

Motor entrance is only from  Kingshill Avenue to the south of the development, which will serve as the only vehicular access into the development.

Retained and improved access from West Barnes Lane for pedestrians, cyclists and emergency vehicles; there's new access from Marina Avenue for pedestrians, cyclists and emergency vehicles

No restriction on ownership of/parking of is proposed. So large SUVs are treated the same as small cars, it appears.

There is no mention of hire bike parking, motorcycles, or electric bike charging in this document.

There is no mention we can see of restrictions on vehicle ownership by residents, which means that residents could potentially own a vehicle and park it offsite e.g. in neighbouring roads (which are currently not CPZs (Controlled Parking Zones).

Public Transport Access Level PTAL:

(PTAL is used to assess how easy it is to get around by public transport)

PTAL in this area is very poor by London standards (officially PTAL of 0-1b - very poor and poor respectively). To get to Kingston you have to change trains at Raynes Park, or walk to Worcester Park to get the SL7/213. 

Buses:

The K5 bus takes absolutely ages to get anywhere, has a frequency of 2 per hour, and doesn't run Sundays.

Rail:

Table 3.1 Rail Service Summary – Worcester Park / Motspur Park Destination Approx. Journey Time Approx. Peak Hour Frequency 

from Motspur Park:

Chessington South 14 minutes Every 30 minutes 

London Waterloo 25 minutes Every 10 minutes 

Dorking 31 minutes Every 30 minutes 

Guildford 49 minutes Every two hours 

from Worcester Park: 

London Waterloo 28 minutes Every 10 minutes 

Dorking 28 minutes Every 30 minutes

So cycling should be a very attractive mode.

P16 :  "The A2043 [Malden Rd] also benefits from a high-quality public realm"  - really ??

P19 :

Looking at the cycle facilities on surrounding roads:

Motspur Park cycle lanes are advisory and have no parking restrictions. Central islands are a hazard as the general traffic lane width past these is inadequate.

North of Blakes Ave the northbound lane becomes compulsory with double-yellow lines.

Compliance with the 20mph limit is likely poor as no effective traffic calming.

Junction with Claremont Ave is complex and dangerous.

Motspur Park itself  (W Barnes Lane) is not pleasant to cycle along, parking spaces proving a hazard and  width is generally inadequate . There are no cycle facilities north of the Claremont Ave junction. Cycle routes towards Raynes Park and Wimbledon are poor, with difficult crossings, mixed surfaces and inconsistent levels of safety. The area generally lacks a cycle route network of reasonable quality.

Add into the mix the new development at Tesco New Malden, that's 2 large new low-car developments, with very poor PTAL, yet no attempt to serve residents with a usable cycle network.

There's a need to formally allow cycling through the Joseph Hood playing fields site. People should be able to cycle from Marina Ave to Green Lane...access rights are unclear at the moment (the eastern track has a sealed surface and has reasonable width, but is signed as a "footpath"), there are inaccessible chicane barriers, and the path between the horse fields is a dirt track that gets very muddy in winter/wet weather. 

Caverley Way does have a modal filter so would likely make a good route to Worcester Park. However Green Lane (between Worcester Park and Kingshill Ave) is impossible to avoid, is quite busy, and the narrowings are problematic for cyclists, creating conflict and danger. This really needs a re-think. 

P20 - NCN 208 is difficult to get to and difficult to navigate. It doesn't go to Wimbledon Station. 

Is Blakes Lane a rat-run? This is the cycle route to Coombe Boys school. Looking at the anti-parking bollards around the school, there must be a significant problem with school-run traffic, which should likely be addressed with traffic reduction measures.

 

Residential Travel Plan

This document has a "boilerplate" feel to it: it does not seem that much thought has gone into the practical obstacles to cycle travel. As far as we are aware, London Cycling Campaign has not been approached for information or advice about the practicalities of the cycle facilities listed on P19. There is no mention of the fact that the main issue that prevents people from cycling is fear of motor traffic, or any assessment of the safety level of any routes.

P6:

"Cycle parking is provided in line with London Plan Standards and provides a total of 1035 long-stay cycle parking spaces for residents, and a total of 28 short-stay spaces for visitors."

There's no indication of where this parking is located, or how security is achieved. No indication of how many non-standard bikes are provided for (cargo bikes, trikes, etc.).

No mention of electric bikes, which are increasingly popular, or the need for charging facilities for these.

No mention of hire bike parking (Lime, Forest, etc.). Our sense is that ~50% of cycle journeys are make on hire bikes, so this is a major omission.

Local Elections Update

We've been out and about handing out flyers to make local cyclists aware of us and our work, and to get everyone to pressure election candidates to work to improve cycling in our borough. It's really great to meet and talk with so many cyclists. There's been a sea-change recently, in that a large proportion of riders are on electric hire bikes (Lime, Forest). In talking to them, many e-bike riders also ride their own bike at other times, and are using e-bikes for trip legs where they can't use their usual cycle. Others may not have cycle storage at home, and may live in areas with poor public transport access so hire bikes make their journeys so much quicker and easier.


We attended the Wimblecomm hustings, and submitted a question which was selected to be asked. The party representatives were: 

• Conservatives: Daniel Holden

• Green Party: Pippa Maslin

• Labour Party: Ross Garrod

• Liberal Democrats: Anthony Fairclough

• Reform UK: Ed Gretton

It was encouraging to hear support for our cause! We chatted with some of the representatives after the event.
We've contacted all the parties asking for them to pledge to build a local cycle network, asked them to meet with us, and partnered with Merton Active Travel in further lobbying.
In partnership with Merton Active Travel, we met with Cllr Stuart Neaverson (Labour, and the current Cabinet Member for Transport and Cleaner Streets), and with Cllr Anthony Fairclough (leader of the Merton Liberal Democrats).
We talked with each of them about cycling and active travel, and you can watch a short video of each of them talking about their plans :
Cllr Stuart Neaverson:

Cllr Anthony Fairclough:

 What you can do

It's very important that candidates know cyclists are out there, and they vote! You can help by contacting the party leaders - we've made this super-easy - just visit
https://action.lcc.org.uk/streets
You can customise your message to include local issues that are important to you. Please contact your ward's candidates as well. You can find their contact details here:
https://whocanivotefor.co.uk/elections/local.merton.2026-05-07/merton-local-election/
AND VOTE IN THE COUNCIL ELECTIONS ON MAY 7th ! Polling suggests the result in Merton may be very close, and talking to people in local politics, results in individual wards may be decided by a small number of votes!

Local Elections 2026!

 You may have seen us out locally handing out flyers to cyclists in the morning, to get momentum behind London Cycling Campaign's efforts to put cycling front-and-centre of the local elections. We've been busy lobbying local candidates to get them to pledge to build a safe cycle network in Merton.

 We're also working with Merton Active Travel.

 You can help by contacting the party leaders - we've made this super-easy - just visit

https://action.lcc.org.uk/streets 

With the popularity of electric hire bikes (Lime, Forest), no-one can now deny how much suppressed demand there is for cycling. We saw 200,000 Lime journeys last July alone! People want to cycle, but are prevented from doing so by a lack of secure storage for cycles, and primarily by fear of traffic and a lack of safe routes. Enabling more people to cycle gives people so much more freedom to travel. As cyclists we know that cycling is very often the quickest (and almost always the cheapest) way to make short journeys. Plus it enables people to get more exercise as part of their daily routine, without the expense of gym membership. Merton has the worst deterioration in bus speeds of any London borough over the last 10 years (source: London Travelwatch). Getting more people on bikes instead of using cars for short journeys would reduce congestion, speeding up buses, commercial vehicles and other motor traffic.

Furthermore, the funding for a local cycle network comes from Transport for London. If Merton doesn't get the funding, it will go elsewhere - we've seen this over recent years where Merton has failed to bid for funds that could have been used to improve our borough.

 

Over the last couple of years, we've pushed for a Merton to publish a Cycling Strategy, and put a lot of time and effort providing input for it. The document has now been delivered and approved. 

You can read it here (unhelpfully, it's in 2 parts):

 

https://democracy.merton.gov.uk/documents/s58364/Appendix%20A%20-%20Walking%20Wheeling%20Cycling%20Strategy.pdf  

 

https://democracy.merton.gov.uk/documents/s58365/Appendix%20A%20-%20Strategy%20Part%202.pdf 

 

The challenge now becomes how to deliver it on the streets!

 

Winter Solstice Ride CANCELLED

 Regrettably, our Winter Solstice Ride scheduled for Sun Jan 4th is CANCELLED due to expected adverse weather conditions (sub-zero temperatures).

 Sorry folks!  

Merton's Cycling and Walking Strategy - in consultation phase now!

 Merton's Cycling and Walking Strategy has been long (too long) in the making, but it's now in the consultation phase for 6 weeks starting 24th October 2025. 

 Please take a look and complete the consultation survey. We'll be publishing our thoughts on it soon!

The strategy document is here:

 https://merton-walking-cycling.commonplace.is/en-GB/proposals/v3/read-the-walking-and-cycling-strategy?step=step1

 

 The strategy document and consultation can be viewed here:

https://merton-walking-cycling.commonplace.is/ 

 

Support Abbey Road Traffic Reduction scheme today!

 

Merton has been trialing two 'modal filters' in a mini 'Low Traffic Neighbourhood' or LTN in Abbey Road. And the consultation for this scheme ends on Friday. We'd love any Merton residents who live, work and/or cycle or walk through this area to use the survey link below and spend just one minute supporting the scheme. The area has been a ratrun for ages, residents are rightly deeply fed up with it, and more, this is Merton doing something positive for walking, wheeling and cycling and to encourage residents to drive more responsibly. As most of you will be aware, the trial scheme has been met with angry resistance and there's been a lot of myths and 'fake news' circulated about the scheme, LTNs in general etc. But really, the evidence says clearly reducing ratrunning in residential areas has huge benefits for walking & cycling rates, pollution, overall motor traffic volumes, crime. Without bunging up nearby main roads, the result is community streets where neighbours can chat, walk more, cycle, kids can play out etc. We want more of this kind of approach in Merton, and we want to encourage our council to help more people ditch the car when they can, and get cycling. So please, if you do cycle in the area or would like to, take the survey today and say "yes" to supporting the scheme and ask for more like it to give communities back their streets. Merton Abbey Road Survey

Healthy Streets Scorecard - 2025

 The 2025 London Healthy Streets Scorecards have been released, which cover progress during the previous year. What do Merton's results say?

https://www.healthystreetsscorecard.london/results/your_borough/merton/

Sustainable mode share slipped from 62.6 % in 2024 to 61.9 % in 2025. 

People cycling 1x a week fell sharply from 13.7 % to 11.1 %.

Walking rates improved slightly from 34.1 % to 34.9 % people walking 5x a week.

The proportion of households without a car rose from 29.7 % to 31.5 % 

Protected cycle track provision has slipped from 3.6 % to 3.5 % of road length, and Bus priority length stayed at 14.5 %. 

School Streets coverage dipped from 40.5 % to 39.2 % of schools. Merton claims to be committed to school streets, but this result says otherwise.

The number of low-traffic neighbourhoods is unchanged. 

Our view is that over the past few years, Merton's approach to highways has not been working. It has failed to make credible bids for LIP funding (the main source of funding for cycling improvements), hence provision of protected cycle tracks and low-traffic neighbourhoods remaining static. Merton is one of London's most congested boroughs , and has the biggest decline in bus speeds of any London borough over the last decade. It is home to 2 of the top 5 worst bus services in London (93 and 154), based on passenger compaints. Yet there has been no new investment in bus priority (Bus priority length stayed at 14.5 % of road length). We recently enquired what work is being done on Merton bus priority schemes and what schemes Merton may bid for in the next year - and have received no response. 

These facts are all inter-related. Congestion affects bus service speed and reliability, and the failure to tackle traffic in residential areas with school streets or low-traffic neighbourhoods, coupled with the failure to expand protected cycle tracks, means cycling is less attractive.

While the proportion of car-free households is going in the right direction, this may be due to financial pressures rather than the quality of sustainable transport options. Thus if cost-of-living pressures reduce, this progress could easily reverse. 

Poor bus services and a failure to make cycling safer means the car remains the default transport mode for many people. This in turn drives up traffic, making bus services worse and cycling less attractive. And of course more traffic and more congestion is bad for everyone: cyclists, bus users, car users, and businesses. Yet there seems no sense of urgency at Merton Council to address a transport situation that is clearly getting worse as a consequence of them sitting on their hands. This really cannot continue. And it need not: funding is available from TfL to invest in the cycle network, traffic reduction and bus priority.

Merton actually has a lot going for it in terms of historical legacy. It has a significant number of very popular low-traffic neighbourhoods and it was an early adopter of School Streets. Parts of it have very good public transport: Tramlink, great connections from Wimbledon mainline station, and 2 tube lines. It wouldn't take that much to leverage those assets better so that areas with lower public transport access level (PTAL) are better-connected with the light-rail, heavy-rail and underground networks. Such connections would include cycling (including the increasingly popular hire bikes), and a faster and more reliable bus network. Why should good transport options be the sole preserve of the west of the borough?