On Monday 14th July at 7pm, we held a vigil at Centre Road/Woodford Road, where, on 16th June, Barry Shonibare, who lived locally in Forest Gate, was hit by a car driver—he died in hospital 5 days later. We were joined by many of Barry’s family and friends, some of whom had travelled to be with us. Our deputy co-ordinator, Karen, read the following remarks. We then held a minute’s silence and laid flowers at Centre Road near the site of the crash.
Our deepest condolences go to Barry’s friends and family, who are here tonight.
Those of us who live here and travel through this stretch of Centre Road and Woodford Road on a regular basis know that it is dangerous. The relative safety of the wand-protected cycle lanes further up the road disappears. The road widens. As you can tell even now, speeding is endemic here.
We and our LCC colleagues in Redbridge have campaigned on this for some time. Surely now is the time to fund and build the measures that we know will prevent tragedies like this from happening again? We should not have to wait for someone else to be killed or injured before this danger is removed. As Barry’s family have stated, “no family or individuals should suffer this heartbreak again.”
We’ll now observe a minute’s silence to reflect, and to pay our respects to Barry Shonibare.
Newham Cyclists is deeply saddened to hear of the death of Barry Shonibare while he was cycling on the A114 Centre Road/Woodford Road. Our thoughts are with Mr Shonibare’s loved ones as they navigate an appalling loss that no family should ever have to endure.
People are exposed to danger every day on Centre Road/Woodford Road—with no protected space for cycling on the Newham part of the road, wide lanes and a painted median that invite speeding, and poor driver compliance at the zebra crossing at Capel Road. We completely concur with Mr Shonibare’s family in their call for speed cameras on Centre Road, and also urge the Mayor of London, TfL, and Newham and Redbridge Councils, to fund and deliver safe cycling infrastructure to ensure no-one else is killed or hurt on this important corridor.
Vigil
Newham Cyclists will be holding a short, low-key vigil to pay our respects to Mr Shonibare. We will be holding a minute’s silence.
Please feel free to bring flowers but be prepared to take them home with you. On account of the fire risk on Wanstead Flats, please don’t bring candles.
Our original statement follows:
We are deeply saddened to have received confirmation from the Met Police that the cyclist injured in a crash with a car on Centre Road in Wanstead Flats on Monday 16th June died in hospital five days later, on Saturday 21st June. He was 71 years old.
Our thoughts are with his loved ones, along with all those who witnessed and were involved in responding to the crash.
The Police have reported that the car driver, a 26-year-old man, stopped at the scene and1 has been helping them with their enquiries, and that no arrests have yet been made. They are asking for anyone with information such as dashcam or mobile footage to contact them on 101 quoting reference 3399/16JUN.
We are bitterly upset to be sharing news of another person killed while cycling in our borough at a place known by many of us to be dangerous, with high motor vehicle speeds and no protected cycling infrastructure. This gentleman’s death comes just over 5 months after the death of a man in his 20s at an unprotected junction on Stratford High Street.
Police Statement
For transparency’s sake, here is the Police statement received by our campaigning partners at the London Cycling Campaign on 02/07/2025:
Police were called at 12:22hrs on Monday, 16 June to reports of a collision between a car and a cyclist in Newham. Emergency services attended the scene at the junction of Centre Road and Capel Road where a cyclist had been severely injured. Despite the best efforts of medical staff, the cyclist – a 71-year-old man – sadly died in hospital on Saturday, 21 June. The family of the cyclist have been informed and are being supported by Family Liaison Officers. The driver, a 26-year-old man, stopped at the scene and has been helping police with their enquiries. No arrests have as yet been made. Enquiries are ongoing. Any witnesses or anyone with information, such as dash-cam or mobile phone footage, is asked to please call police on 101 quoting 3399/16JUN.
Although the Police initially reported that the driver stopped at scene, a later version of their statement said: “The driver – a 26-year-old man – who failed to stop at the scene but returned on foot, has been helping police with their enquiries.”↩︎
We have submitted evidence to the Bill Committee dealing with the Bus Services Bill (no. 2) which is currently making its way through Parliament. This legislation is generally about bus services outside London. However, a small number of campaigners opposed to protected cycling infrastructure have sought to add amendments which would ban bus stop bypasses across England, including in London. We felt it was important to highlight our view to the Committee.
We concur with the evidence submitted by our parent charity, the London Cycling Campaign.
We strongly oppose any clauses or amendments which would ban bus stop bypasses, also known as “floating” bus stops, which are a proven and safe solution to accommodate cycling and bus users on the same streets.
Most people will not cycle if they are expected to share space with high volumes of motor traffic—particularly buses. The differential in mass and kinetic energy between a person cycling and a bus is many orders of magnitude larger than that between a cyclist and a pedestrian. People do not need training or safety gear to “man up” on the road—they need fully separated, protected cycle tracks, which are the only way most people will feel comfortable cycling to destinations on main roads.
Bus stop bypasses, or “floating” bus stops, are a pragmatic solution to bus/bike conflicts. They reduce harm by eliminating dangerous crush movements between people cycling and buses pulling into the kerb at bus stops. They are established best practice in other European countries with dense, well-used bus networks, such as the Netherlands.
Newham was the site of some of the first BSBs in London, on Stratford High Street, installed in 2012/13.Even though they don’t meet modern best-practice standards and the ergonomics could be improved, these bypasses have proven successful at eliminating bus/cycle conflicts.
We can only find a report of one collision between a pedestrian and cyclist (pp. 14) at a BSB in Newham, at the Warton Road stop on Stratford High Street. This collision was categorised “slight,” i.e. not requiring hospital treatment. The BSBs are some of the safest parts of Stratford High Street for walking and cycling. By comparison, the stretches where the protected cycle track disappears (including unprotected cycle lanes and junctions, and a “traditional” unprotected bus stop in a lay-by) have a very poor safety record for both pedestrians and for cyclists.
More BSBs have since been built in Newham, in Stratford Town Centre, the Royal Docks, Westfield Avenue, and Romford Road. These examples have better sightlines and ergonomics to make it easier for cyclists and bus users to navigate the space. We are glad that Newham is one of several councils leading the way in safer bus stop design in Britain.
We acknowledge, and empathise with, Disabled bus users who find interactions with cycling intimidating—especially those with sensory impairments (including blind, low-vision, and d/Deaf people.) We understand why they may feel apprehensive at BSBs. Designers should ameliorate these issues by improving tactile guidance marking, colour contrast, level delineation, avoiding shared footways wherever possible, and removing obstacles and visual clutter to make it easy for cyclists to see (and give way to) bus users crossing to and from the island. This should go hand-in-hand with physical bus priority measures to deliver measurable, meaningful improvements to bus services, and education and behaviour change campaigns to improve compliance.
On the other hand, “traditional” unprotected bus stop designs—the “status quo” where buses and cycles are expected to dodge each other—present inherent problems for inclusivity. For those who may prefer to cycle slowly, or who experience fear about a collision with motor traffic—including less experienced cyclists, Disabled cyclists using cycles as a mobility aid, children, older people, and families—BSBs are the only way they can cycle on a street also served by a bus route in a relaxed way. We highlight from charity Wheels for Wellbeing’s briefing on BSBs: “Bus stop bypasses are presently an essential part of inclusive active travel networks that enable (pan-impairment) Disabled people to make journeys […] Banning bus stop bypasses would cause ongoing exclusion of Disabled people from active travel and bus use, and additional deaths/injuries in motor vehicle collisions.”
We note and highlight Dr Harrie Langton-Spencer’s 2024 paper “Disabled people’s access needs in transport decarbonisation” in IPPR Progressive Review, which highlights the need for collective placemaking and understanding the diversity of Disabled voices in resolving seemingly incompatible access frictions. Dr Langton-Spencer specifically highlights bus stop bypasses as an example. She writes: “Instead of striving for an unobtainable ‘fully accessible’, which obscures access frictions […] is a better outcome not one in which […] nobody is excluded and everybody has the best experience possible?”
A ban on “floating” bus stops would be a gross overreaction to a small risk, and be damaging to those who rely on cycling and buses.
A ban would make building fully protected cycle tracks impossible.
This would in turn make targets around sustainable transport, decarbonisation, and road danger reduction impossible.
A ban would disproportionately exclude inexperienced cyclists, children, older people, and Disabled people using cycles as mobility aids from cycling, pushing them back into expensive car ownership or needing to be driven around by someone else. This changes the character of cycling from a mode of transport to an extreme sport.
It would lead to an increase in bodged and disproven non-”solutions” such as shared pavements and 2-tier provision, which are less satisfactory—both for people cycling, and for Disabled pedestrians and bus users with sensory impairments.
A ban would frame interactions with cycling as more risky and dangerous to bus users than interactions with motor vehicles. Casualty data from STATS19 shows this is simply untrue.
We caution the Bill Committee of cherry-picked evidence used as a “gotcha” to support a claim that all “floating” bus stops are dangerous (for instance, video of a particularly busy stop in a tourist area where people unfamiliar with UK traffic rules regularly walk into the path of all kinds of traffic; or a photo of a legacy paint-on-the-pavement cycle lane that isn’t representative of modern standards.) One could do the same exercise with “traditional” unprotected bus stops, or for other street design features—such as advanced stop lines, or indeed many bus stations. The evidence on the efficacy and safety of BSBs must be taken as a whole, and compared to other options in the highways design toolkit—which have overwhelmingly failed to deliver positive outcomes for bus patronage and for the safety of people cycling.
We urge the Bill Committee to reject amendments that would ban bus stop bypasses.Other European countries show that BSBs are a key component of comprehensive, well-used, and inclusive bus networks that are fit for the future. England should follow their lead, and focus on measures to make buses better—rather than a logically incoherent ban on BSBs that would only serve to make cycling worse.
We strongly oppose any clauses or amendments which would ban bus stop bypasses, also known as “floating” bus stops, which are a proven and safe solution to accommodate cycling and bus users on the same streets.
This is our 2024/25 annual report and Statement of Financial Affairs. We approved it at our AGM on Monday 28th April. For ease of reading and searching, we have copied the text of the annual report to this page; you can download the PDF original, and the SoFA, at the foot of the page.
Summary
2024-2025 was a busy year for cycling in our borough.
There were a number of very positive developments in terms of new, high-quality infrastructure being opened and being built. The first completed sections of the long-fought for Romford Road cycle track officially opened. So has the first section of the Westfield Avenue cycleway, turning one of the worst streets in the borough for cycling (a dreadful “stroad” type design left over from the Olympics) to one of the best. The Royal Docks Corridor scheme from Canning Town to Pontoon Dock and London City Airport is nearing completion, and is truly great. We have also seen a number of public realm improvements and permanent mode filter upgrades, and the roll-out of the borough-wide 20mph limit. Work has also just begun on phase 1a of Cycle Future Route 7 from Leyton to Stratford Town Centre, which will improve one of the worst parts of Cycleway 16 and deliver a much-needed cycling connection over the Great Eastern Railway.
The new West Ham Park LTN, despite some opposition, appears to have settled in and is working well. This scheme in particular is a game changer, as Newham are delivering it simultaneously with the Romford Road works. This is the first time the Council has treated both side roads and main roads at the same time, providing a joined-up network of safer streets.
We are pleased that the ambition shown by portfolio holders and officers at Newham Council is generally high. We have seen some positive consultations for future schemes, for instance for the crossing of Water Lane on the Stratford-Forest Gate backstreet Cycleway link.
Unfortunately, there were also negative developments, particularly the sudden long-term closure of the Greenway, TfL Cycleway 22, by Thames Water in September 2024. At time of writing the Greenway at West Ham has now been unusable for 7 months, which has had a serious impact on children, families, and NHS workers at Newham Hospital who relied on it for their travel. We have had more contact about the Greenway than any other campaigning issue in the history of Newham Cyclists. Newham Council’s diversion is not fit for purpose, after somewhat nebulous fears about traffic displacement from the Police led to them abandoning their original plan to close Abbey Road E15 to general traffic. It is also now clear the “temporary” closure of the Greenway will be longer than the originally planned 18 months. We have also been monitoring the long-term closure of the ExCeL waterfront path on NCN route 13, which raises similar concerns about the cycle network’s dependence on permissive paths that private landowners can close at will.
Considerable disruption has arisen from works for the construction and mitigation of the Silvertown Tunnel, an urban motorway project that TfL has mortgaged £2.2bn of future tolls on. The desultory “cycle shuttle” (bike bus) is not an adequate mitigation, and has already proven in its first weeks to be inadequate for the demand to cross the river by cycle east of Tower Bridge.
A continued lack of action on legacy unprotected junctions has also been evident. Tragically, Newham saw its first cycling fatality in 4½ years in mid-January 2025, at a known dangerous junction on TfL Cycleway 2 on Stratford High Street. The person killed was a man in his 20s. This section of Cycleway 2 features 4 of the 6 most dangerous junctions on our list, and at each, the physical separation for cycling disappears. We have pushed the Council and TfL to stop accepting the “Cycleway” designation as a fait accompli, and to get on with treating the dangerous junctions in line with best practice standards. We are pleased that both Newham Council and TfL recognise the need for rapid action, but they must work together to deliver a meaningful, permanent scheme, speedily, and without being watered down, mired in endless rounds of traffic modelling, or punted out to the next political cycle.
On Monday 20th January at 6pm, we held a vigil at the site of a crash the week prior, which claimed the life of a cyclist in his 20s. Our co-ordinator, Jonathan, read the following prepared remarks. We then held a minute’s silence to commemorate the man who was killed.
We’re here tonight to mark the sad events of last Monday. Details are still scarce to us, and no doubt will become clearer in the coming weeks and months as the Police and coroner make their inquiries.
Right now, we have no further details about the person who died, nor the circumstances of the crash.
Fatal crashes involving lorries and people cycling are a distressingly regular occurrence. The last one in London that we know about was only 10 weeks earlier, on 2nd November last year, when a 27-year-old man was hit and killed in Putney while he was on his way to meet his friends for lunch.
Last week’s crash took place just a few feet away from here, at a junction that was, between 2019 and 2023, Newham’s fourth most dangerous for cycling. Despite being a known danger spot, Carpenters Road junction has been left largely untouched and unprotected for over a decade—just like its neighbours at Cooks Road and Warton Road. It should not take someone, or someones, losing their life for the responsible authorities to take action to remove danger from our streets—at a location that the thousands of us who navigate Stratford on a daily basis know all too well. Even one death is one too many.
Today we are here to acknowledge yet another violent and premature end to a person’s life on London’s roads—and to pay our respects to the unknown rider whose life ended here. And it is easy to forget when policymakers, journalists, and indeed campaigners like us, so readily reduce traffic fatalities to statistics, but let us remember: Every single death or serious injury in traffic is someone’s personal tragedy.
No matter who the young gentleman who died here was, no matter what he was doing, no matter where he was going: no-one deserves a sudden and violent death while simply going about their lives.
We’ll now observe a minute’s silence to reflect, and to pay our respects to the person who was killed.
We support this scheme and hope that it will go together with a wider scheme to improve both the C-link and the Water Lane area, which is blighted by high volumes of high speed traffic despite not being a main road. We are very aware that there was recently a fatal crash here (two Fridays ago.)
We’ve asked for clearer visual priority for people walking and cycling, with a continuous surface treatment, to make more likely that drivers will give way to people crossing (as they legally should.)
You can find our response below, and use that to inform your own response to the survey.
Inspired by Camden Cyclists’ excellent series of the same name, this post is about the progress of the many cycling infras schemes with spades in the ground in Newham. We will post new ones as and when volunteer time allows and there’s something new to report.
Romford Road
As a large project which will take a number of years, the long-awaited Romford Road public realm improvement scheme is broken up into sections. Sections B eastbound (Water Lane to Radlett Close) and D eastbound (Woodgrange Road to Richmond Road) were the first to be consulted on, and are the first to have been substantively finished. Snagging work should now have been completed for both.
Work has now begun on section B westbound. We’d expect work on section D westbound to take a little longer, owing to the recent fire at Forest Gate Police Station. Work continues on sections H and I.
The open cycle track on sections B and D eastbound is already being very well used by people cycling. In particular a lot of cyclists want to turn right into Dyson Road and the West Ham Park area, and so are already cycling around the barriers to use the zebra crossing.
The massive carriageway on the Westfield Avenue bridge (2 lanes + central hatching!) has already been narrowed by the arrival of materials presumably associated with the construction work. This, combined with hatching on the opposite side, reduces the road width to its final configuration of one traffic lane in each direction. This appears to have already led to a significant reduction in vehicle speeds at what was a real danger spot for people driving, and bodes well for improved safety on the whole corridor for all road users.
West Ham Park LTN
The planters have been installed at the point closures on Ham Park Road for this LTN which is going live on Monday 4th November, although the formal “no motor vehicles” signage has yet to be installed. Signage for the other two point closures on Vicarage Road and Tavistock Road will also need to be installed soon. (UPDATE 8 November: This was an error in the traffic order, the implementation date is now 25 November.)
You don’t need to stand on Ham Park Road long to see why this LTN is desperately needed! Even at 2pm on a Saturday when this photo was taken, large bursts of traffic were forcing their way through this narrow residential street from both the east and the west. We were somewhat concerned for the safety of a cat crossing the street (alas, not visible in the photo!) We look forward to this LTN coming into effect soon, for a safer West Ham Park for all cats (and humans.)
Greenway diversion
We are still waiting for the delivery of any measures at all to make the appalling Greenway diversion via Abbey Road safer. Our latest understanding is that speed cushions are imminent (a purchase order having supposedly been raised by Thames Water) and the ETMO to close Abbey Road to motor vehicles will be coming in late November (UPDATE: now cancelled because Newham Council chickened out) followed by permanent works to build out the south pavement to become a shared cycle track. We will post when we have more confirmed details. There is still no sign of permanent signage for the diversion, with portable temporary signage still in use and still regularly going missing.
New “cyclists dismount” signage has appeared on the shared pavement under the bridge, which has been narrowed… by Thames Water’s own storage unit. “Cyclists dismount” signs are generally not helpful and should only be used as a last resort—they do little more than tell people cycling they’re unwelcome, and many people ignore them. They are also not inclusive of Disabled cyclists using cycles as mobility aids, who may not be able to easily dismount.
We feel this dismounted section can be avoided by extending the traffic light phase for the pedestrian crossing, sending cyclists on this phase through the section of carriageway under the bridge. This is eminently achievable, but requires Thames Water and Newham to collaborate on traffic light phasing, signage, and road markings that work.
Greenway users have now been exposed to over 6 weeks of unacceptable danger, all of which would have been avoided had Thames Water planned their works properly and not closed the Greenway until the diversion was kid-safe.
Work around Beckton station is continuing. The priority pedestrian and cycling crossing on the Frobisher Road arm of the roundabout (into the Asda car park) is now available for use. Drivers leaving the roundabout are generally respecting the priority of people walking and cycling here. It remains to be seen how this develops with time as the scheme nears completion and the volume of cyclists increases.
The connection with the Beckton Corridor route is closed for resurfacing. The traffic lights across the bus station are largely complete, although they’re not turned on yet. There’s an unusual detail of the cycle part of this crossing being separately marked as if it were a parallel crossing, although the traffic lights suggest a shared toucan crossing. The cycle part also uses non standard pedestrian “stud” markings, rather than the “elephants’ footprints” that are generally used in this country to mark a cycle crossing.
Royal Docks Corridor
This scheme is now well underway with work visible on site throughout the entire corridor from Canning Town to Connaught Roundabout. Kerblines have begun to appear on North Woolwich Road near Pontoon Dock, and the junctions are progressing nicely.
Extra work is now happening on the previously-opened eastbound cycle track near the Oasis Academy and petrol station at West Silvertown. The planting is generally in, although not looking as verdant as Romford Road just yet. Junctions south of the viaduct are still largely on temporary traffic lights.
Some value engineering is evident on the Silvertown Way viaduct, where the original plans for a fully stepped cycle track have been replaced by a semi-protected painted cycle lane with kerbs at intervals. The kerbed dividers seem sufficiently bulky that it seems unlikely people will be tempted to speed and risk crashing into them, but it remains to be seen whether drivers end up invading these lanes and parking in them.
Work on the northern end near Canning Town station and the connection with Cycleway 3 seems largely complete, albeit not including the more direct crossing of Cycleway 3 across Canning Town Roundabout which we suspect may come as part of a later scheme.
Tidal Basin Roundabout
Work appears largely complete at the new Tidal Basin Roundabout, although the new shared pedestrian and cycle crossings are still mostly closed off.
This scheme is primarily to accommodate the enormous volumes of traffic which are likely to use the new Silvertown Tunnel, an urban motorway project which wehaveconsistentlyopposed. Even with the new greenery, you only need to look at the wide, sweeping traffic lanes to see who the roundabout and tunnel are really designed for: heavy lorries, and large volumes of private cars. People walking and cycling will be expected to wait up to 5 times to cross this massive new incarnation of the roundabout, adding further delay and encouraging risk-taking on journeys to City Hall, Dock Road, and the proposed new housing at Thames Wharf.
It remains to be seen how this operates in practice. We remain deeply sceptical that the Silvertown Tunnel project will achieve its stated aims, and think it will be seen as an historic planning failure like the vestiges of the Ringway scheme from the 1960s. This roundabout, which expects those without a car to dance between traffic islands, is only part of that legacy.
Bow Roundabout
Work on this scheme has begun and will continue for some months. The usual “cycle gate” arrangement for Cycleway 2 at Bow Roundabout continues on temporary traffic lights.
The effect will be to add an additional traffic lane on one side of the roundabout, create an additional eastbound lane for traffic leaving the roundabout onto Stratford High Street, create an additional westbound lane for traffic entering the roundabout from High Street, reverse the direction of the connecting lane under the flyover, and cut back the contraflow lane so that uses this connection to join the main westbound carriageway to go around the roundabout.
TfL declined to assess the new layout under their Cycling Level of Service or Junction Assessment tools, because (cf. the FOI response) “the decision to separate cyclists from traffic at this location has already been established here and the route is a Cycleway.” We find this logic questionable:
The creation of additional lanes (and indeed this scheme being hurried through using the DCO before the Tunnel opens) suggests TfL believes traffic volumes will increase here.
CS2 eastbound is not physically separated from general traffic here. There is an existing issue where the painted lane is blocked by parked cars, forcing cyclists to merge into motor traffic that’s accelerating off the roundabout.
This issue will be compounded in the new layout by increased traffic volumes, the overwhelming majority of which will be through traffic, whose drivers may see the motorway-type design as an invitation to speed…
and by the new merge movement just west of Cooks Road, which runs the risk of drivers in the left-hand lane swerving into the cycle lane to avoid a collision with another vehicle merging from the right. While curtailing the contraflow lane is very welcome and will reduce the risk of motorists colliding head-on, we question why a new eastbound lane on High Street for the approx 60 yards before it merges into the first lane was considered necessary.
We will be monitoring this new layout very closely when it goes live, and won’t hesitate to hold TfL to account for any necessary mitigations to ensure the safety of people walking and cycling.
This is where 2 general traffic lanes off the roundabout will become 1—which may make the painted lane feel even more vulnerable than it currently is.
The new series of BBC1’s Ambulance was partly filmed at London Ambulance Service’s control room at Dockside earlier this year, and features locations and events many will recognise (including the fire at Forest Gate police station.)
The Romford Road cycle track’s new planting helped inspire a firefighter to rejuvenate Stratford Fire Station’s own garden space.He was interviewed recently on Gardeners’ Question Time on BBC Radio 4. We think the rain garden past the fire station makes it one of the loveliest cycle lanes in Newham.
Other news across London…
While Newham Cyclists focuses on Newham, your cycle knows no bounds and many of our journeys start and finish outside our borough. Here’s some news from our neighbours that may be of interest…
Hackney Cycling Campaign have done an extraordinary job pressuring Hackney Council over their unsafe Pembury Circus design (largely consisting of magic painted rectangles & early release traffic lights.) The decision has now been called in for review, and they are hoping to involve Active Travel England as the project uses Levelling Up Fund money. If you walk or cycle through Pembury or Hackney Central, get in touch with HCC to see how you can help them demand better from their council.
Redbridge Council have launched a draft of their Sustainable Transport Strategy.Contact our friends at Redbridge Cycling Campaign if you’re interested in helping them. Of particular interest to us is Ilford Garden junction, which will connect to the end of the Romford Road cycleway. Deadline 5th January.
Keeping track of the many ongoing projects in Newham is a lot of work for our committee and volunteers. If you live or work near one of these sites, we’d really appreciate it if you would volunteer to tell us when things make progress. Email newham@lcc.org.uk or join our discussion group if you can help us, or want to get involved in our campaigning.
We are frustrated by the apparent lack of progress on making Abbey Road, the most dangerous part of the Greenway diversion, safe for people walking and cycling. The result is that Thames Water’s closure of the Greenway is continuing to put local residents in danger on their day-to-day journeys.
A massive thank you to everyone who has shared pictures, videos, and stories of the Greenway diversion since we posted our statement last Monday. Please keep them coming to newham@lcc.org.uk or on Instagram and Twitter/X.
We have had a record amount of feedback about the closure. People are upset and angry that their safe route to work, school, or the park has been taken away, and that daily travel for them and their families is now unacceptably dangerous.
We are passing your feedback onto Newham Council and Thames Water to pressure them into taking action without delay.
We encourage you to write to your councillors (find out who they are here) and to complain to Thames Water too (quote ref BB00472913.) The more people tell them how this is affecting their day-to-day lives, the stronger our voice is.
We also invite everyone affected by the Greenway closure to our next meeting, where we will be discussing progress and our next steps. It will be at 7:30pm on Monday 30th September, at Forest Lane Lodge, Magpie Close, E7 9DE.
Our YouTube video showing the dangerous situation on the Greenway
Feedback we have received
This is just a selection of some of the feedback we have received. We have tried to credit the people who provided it where we can—please let us know if this is your feedback and you would like your name added (or removed.)
It was chaos this morning and the route is not safe. I had a 4×4 keeping at me over the bridge which then decided to overtake me on the bridge and beep her horn at me. —Kulsum, via Instagram
I was overtaken by a car who nearly crashed into the oncoming car on the bridge with my 6 year old on the back of my bike – we were both terrified —Anne Marie, via Instagram
I used the diversion today – not safe. —@SairaSundar, via Twitter
The crossing at the bottom of the West Ham exit is LETHAL! —Ben, via Instagram
This happened just yesterday morning with a car overtaking me and other cyclists on the blind hill which caused a car and bike coming the other way over the hill to brake sharply to avoid a crash. —Rachel, via email
We went in the pavement, my kids were nearly thrown on the road as there were pedestrians and it was narrow —a local mother with 2 children, via email
Then at the bottom right into i think Leywick Street is simply suicidal. I saw two cyclists nearly got run over. I cycled on the pavement. —@Emilybronte53 via Twitter
this [is] impacting the daily commute of NewhamHospital staff. It’s disappointing the closure was not delayed to help get alternative route safe. This was great route for new cyclists. —@CatrionaRowland via Twitter
Changes made on Manor Road
We are pleased that a small change has been made to the signage on Manor Road. People cycling west are now routed onto the shared pavement under the bridge, rather than to cross the road and ride on a narrow strip of kerbline. While a shared pavement is never a perfect solution, this should prevent near misses like those where people have fallen from their bikes on Manor Road. While this change should have been made before the diversion went live, it’s better late than never.
Lighting is also being improved under the bridge, which is welcome.
We understand some changes are coming in the next week to add tactile paving to the crossing of Manor Road. This is welcome, but should also have been in place prior to the closure.
Abbey Road is still abysmal
Abbey Road remains the worst and most dangerous part of the diversion, and we are frustrated to see no apparent movement on a safe solution for this part. Abbey Road is not part of the strategic road network. It cannot carry buses or heavy freight due to a 7.5t weight limit.
Some shots from Abbey Road on a Thursday rush hour. We have chosen to cover the faces of people cycling on the pavement. While it’s technically illegal, we don’t blame people for keeping themselves safe from impatient drivers.
Our view remains that an experimental traffic order (ETO) to close the bridge to motor traffic should be made without delay. The drivers who use Abbey Road would be better making a short detour via West Ham Lane, which is a main road and can accommodate large volumes of traffic more effectively and safely. Emergency vehicles, of course, would still be welcome to use Abbey Road.
Our position remains that Thames Water should not have closed the Greenway until the ETO was in place. If, for whatever reason, an ETO is going to take more than a week from today, Thames Water should pause their works, move their equipment out of the way, and re-open the Greenway until Abbey Road can be made safe.
We have also provided images for the next issue of Newham Voices.
We were very pleased to have the support of two of our local MPs, Sir Stephen Timms and Uma Kumaran, who have written to Newham Council to ask for an update on the application for the ETO.
Sir Stephen also wrote to Thames Water to pass on our concerns. The response he received, and passed on to us, claimed inexplicably that “there are no immediate and straightforward options available.” We don’t agree with this: an ETO is eminently feasible, as was delaying the start of the works until the ETO was in place.
Instead, Thames Water claim they are taking some “short term actions” to alleviate the problem, including… “Additional signage making it clear there should be no overtaking cyclists and the road is joint use.” This will not make any meaningful difference. Signs will not change the fact that Abbey Road is completely unsafe; in our experience, impatient drivers will simply ignore a sign that says “DO NOT OVERTAKE CYCLISTS.”
Thames Water also claim in their response to Sir Stephen that “The safety of everyone is our number one priority when it comes to carrying out any of our operations…” Our position is unchanged: if safety truly was their number one priority, Thames Water would have, as we asked, delayed the start of the structural works until the diversion via Abbey Road was to an acceptable standard. They declined to do this.
What needs to happen now
Newham Council urgently needs to make an ETO to close the Abbey Road bridge to motor traffic. This needs to happen without delay, within a matter of days, not weeks.
Going forward, Thames Water and Newham Council need to fix their processes so that nothing like this is allowed to happen again.
We are collecting people’s experiences, stories, pictures, and videos from Greenway users put at risk by the dangerous diversion. Please send to newham@lcc.org.uk or DM us on Instagram or Twitter/X. Thank you.
Newham Cyclists, part of the London Cycling Campaign, is today calling for Thames Water to immediately re-open the Greenway at Manor Road bridge until a safe diversion can be put in place.
As a volunteer group which exists to help more people access cycling, we are disappointed and angered by Thames Water’s and their contractors’ decision to close part of the Greenway, Newham’s only safe and inclusive north-south cycle route, while the diversion route is dangerously busy with car and van traffic. They chose to do this despite us warning them as early as July that this would be unacceptable and unsafe.
The result is that people who use the Greenway—from children and families cycling to school or the park, to dog-walkers, to workers at Newham Hospital—are being forced onto a narrow bridge at Abbey Road DLR with fast and heavy traffic. Cars and vans speed and emerge suddenly due to poor sight lines, which is a major collision risk. Some drivers are impatient, intimidating cyclists by revving and passing too close. Many people cycling, particularly children, are riding on the pavement in fear; the pavement is much too narrow for pedestrians as it is.
We have been inundated with messages from Greenway users reporting frightening encounters on the diversion. We think it is only a matter of time before someone is hurt, or worse.
Thames Water chose to close Manor Road bridge on the Greenway without waiting for Newham Council to deliver a safe diversion.
This is despite us asking Thames Water to plan for the possibility they’d need to close Manor Road bridge in mid-April; and despite us making clear in late July that any diversion must be “kid-safe”, particularly by the start of the school year.
Instead, Thames Water chose a course of action that deprived local residents of their safe route to work or school one week into the school year.
We have also raised concerns about the following:
confusing signage making it unclear where diverted cyclists are supposed to go and suggesting they should cycle on a narrow strip of kerbing. We are aware of at least one lady falling from her bike following these instructions
social safety on the diversion via Canning Road and Abbey Lane, particularly after dark for women and gender-diverse people
concerns about the attitude of some of Thames Water and Barhale’s workers on site. We received one report from a woman who has had contractors make comments towards her on two separate occasions. It should go without saying that we find this behaviour appalling and reprehensible.
Our demands
We are calling for the following measures:
Thames Water and Barhale: Re-open the Greenway to people walking and cycling until the diversion is safe. We don’t believe work has substantively started yet, so this should be possible. You can resume work once Newham have made the diversion safe by closing Abbey Road to motor traffic.
Newham Council: Get on with delivering a safe and inclusive diversion, with an experimental traffic order on Abbey Road.
What we want Thames Water to do
We want Thames Water and their contractors Barhale to immediately re-open the Greenway until Newham Council have delivered a safe and inclusive diversion that is suitable for everyone to use, including children. As of Sunday 15th September we believe work on the sewer barrels has not yet begun. It must be delayed, and the Greenway re-opened to people walking and cycling, until a safe diversion is in place.
To be clear, we told Thames Water in mid-April that they should start planning for the possibility they’d need to completely close the bridge. At this point, they should have contacted Newham Council to start planning a diversion and getting paperwork in order. As we understand it, they did not inform Newham Council of this possibility until early July, over two and a half months later.
Local people trying to go to work or school should not be put in danger by Thames Water’s utility works.
What we want Newham Council to do
Newham Council must deliver a safe diversion for the Greenway, quickly, so Thames Water can proceed with their sewer replacement work. The quickest and best solution is an Experimental Traffic Order to close Abbey Road to motor traffic, enforced with a traffic camera and fines. Abbey Road is not part of the strategic road network; no buses or heavy freight use it due to the weight limit on the bridge. The traffic that does use it can easily use the more appropriate route via West Ham Lane instead. Emergency vehicles would of course be welcome to use the bridge.
While we understand that Thames Water gave an unacceptably short notice period, particularly considering the summer holidays, Newham also needs to make sure it has the ability to respond to changes like this in a quicker fashion.
Given Thames Water’s history with closing the Greenway and failing to complete works on time, and their current precarious financial position, we suggest that the plans are prepared to extend the traffic order or make it permanent after 18 months.
Information for editors and casual observers
What is the Greenway?
The Greenway is an off-road walking and cycling path built on top of a Victorian sewer. It runs from Wick Lane (near Victoria Park) via Stratford, West Ham, and Plaistow, finishing in Beckton. It serves Roman Road Primary School, Brampton Manor Academy, Newham Sixth Form College/NewVIC, Newham University Hospital, and many other local amenities.
It is part of the London Cycleway network. It’s the only cycle route between the north and south of Newham that is traffic-free, and is generally safe for people to use at all times of day and night. Recent investments in lighting, barrier removal, adding greenery, and crime prevention have made a big difference. People use the Greenway round the clock. Greenway users are diverse: all ages, all genders, all ethnic backgrounds, all walks of life, making all kinds of journeys.
Because the Greenway is on top of a sewer, it is technically owned by Thames Water, the privatised water company in London. The Greenway is a so-called “permissive path” through private land. Recent improvements have largely been organised and funded by Newham Council.
What has happened?
Thames Water are currently refurbishing the sewer the Greenway lies on top of. Next to be refurbished is Manor Road bridge, which is near West Ham station. They need to close the entire bridge to walking and cycling in order to do their work. This is understandable.
What is unacceptable is that Thames Water closed the bridge to people walking and cycling with a diversion that is extremely unsafe.
Those following the official diversion are dumped onto Abbey Road, a narrow bridge over the DLR which is used by motorists as a shortcut to avoid West Ham Lane. Traffic comes thick and fast, with lots of cars and vans which speed around blind corners. Some drivers routinely intimidate people cycling by overtaking when that’s dangerous, passing too close (sometimes as ‘punishment’ for causing a few seconds’ delay), honking, or revving aggressively. The pavements are also much too narrow for large volumes of people walking, let alone cyclists who feel bullied off the road. No-one should have to deal with this on their way to work or school.
Abbey Road is owned by Newham Council, who are in the process of arranging an experimental traffic order (ETO) to close it to motor traffic (except emergency vehicles.) We think that Thames Water should have waited for the ETO to take effect before closing the Greenway. They chose not wait, and instead closed the Greenway on Weds 11th September.
This is an example of extremely poor planning and co-ordination on Thames Water’s part. At a site meeting with Thames Water in mid April, we told them that they should start planning for a “just in case” diversion in case they did need to close the Manor Road bridge completely. Had they engaged properly with Newham Council then, maybe the paperwork would have been ready for the ETO to go live on day one of the Greenway closure.
Instead, the Greenway has now been closed one week into the school year, with children, families, and other less confident cyclists expected to dice with death on Abbey Road in front of fast-moving traffic.
There are a number of other issues with the usability of the diversion:
Confusing signage making it unclear where people cycling are supposed to cross Manor Road, another busy road. We are aware of at least one near miss where a woman fell from her bike, while following signage that suggested she should ride on a narrow strip of kerbing rather than a wide shared footway. She is fortunately unhurt, but could easily have fallen into oncoming traffic.
Missing signage at turning points in the diversion making it unclear where people are supposed to go.
Poor lighting and environmental details on Canning Road leading to a poor feeling of social safety, particularly after dark and for children, women, gender-diverse and LGBTQ+ people, and those who feel more vulnerable in public.
Why does it matter?
The Greenway is the only safe cycle route that connects north-west Newham to south-east Newham, providing a connection between Cycleways 2 and 3 and serving schools, colleges, and Newham Hospital.
For many, cycling is more affordable, convenient, and reliable than public transport. Many people who live in Newham depend on walking and cycling for their day-to-day travel—particularly for non-discretionary journeys that they have to make, no matter what. People deserve to be able to make those journeys safely.
Timeline of events
2022: Newham Cyclists gets wind of the likelihood Thames Water will be planning long term closures or diversion to the Greenway in future.
Mid-April 2024: Thames Water starts work on the Manor Road bridge. At the time they believe they can keep the bridge open for walking and cycling at the same time as replacing the sewer barrels. Our co-ordinator at the time, Olawale Ajibola, spots the likelihood that this won’t be possible, and asks Thames Water to start considering what would happen if they needed to fully close the Manor Road bridge to walking and cycling.
Mon 8th July 2024: Thames Water contacts Newham Council to tell them they will be seeking to close the Greenway for 18 months at Manor Road bridge. Newham Council forwards this information to us and puts us in touch with contacts at Thames Water and Barhale, their contractors. We ask where the diversion will be, for how long, and how Thames Water proposes people will complete their journey without dismounting and without mixing with traffic. We receive no response.
Fri 12th July 2024: We follow up to ask if there is any information available. We are told we will have information on the diversion shared with us by Friday the following week at the latest.
Fri 19th July 2024: Thames Water tells us they plan to close the Greenway from Monday 19th August for 18 months, claiming they have made this “difficult decision” because there is no space on the bridge to maintain a through route and complete the work. When prompted, they provide us with a proposed diversion via Mitre Road. We tell them this is a concerningly short notice period, and won’t give time for them to address obvious issues with the diversion; we remind them of the importance of the Greenway to children and families. We arrange a site visit with representatives from Thames Water, Barhale, TfL, and Newham Council’s highways team on 29th July.
Mon 29th July 2024: Our Coordinator and Deputy Coordinator, Jonathan Rothwell and Dr Karen Flanagan, join the site meeting, and afterwards test the diversion together. We determine that the ramp down to Manor Road by West Ham station needs to be widened, but that Abbey Road is easily the worst part of the diversion—in fact both Jonathan and Karen receive a punishment pass from a driver while cycling safely and legally on the bridge. We explain in our summary email to those present that “no protection or traffic reduction here is not an option.” We urge LBN to start work on the traffic order at Abbey Road so that it can go live before the start of the school year in September. We receive confirmation from Thames Water’s representative that our notes match their recollection of the meeting.
Tue 30th July 2024: A representative from Thames Water tells us they will be making a press release about the closure of the Greenway, and asks if Newham Cyclists would like to provide a remark about the ongoing liaison. We don’t think this is appropriate at this stage because we don’t know what the ultimate state of the diversion will be like, so decline to provide a quote.
Weds 7th and Thu 8th August 2024: Thames Water runs a drop-in session at the Canning Road junction for Greenway users. While this engagement is welcome, it only runs from 10am-6pm.
Weds 14th August 2024: Thames Water tells us they will delay the closure of the Greenway until 2nd September, so that they can do work to widen the Manor Road ramp, one of the action points we identified on 29th July. We remind Thames Water that it is critical everything is done and ready by the start of the school year, noting: “If someone has a bad experience with them or their kids cycling to school in the first few weeks of the school year, they may end up driving for the rest of the year, which obviously isn’t what we want.”
Fri 16th August: We receive confirmation from a contact at Newham Council that they are working on the Abbey Road ETO option, within the resource constraints they have available.
Tue 27th August: We contact Thames Water and Newham Council to ask for an update, and receive no response as our contacts are on holiday. At this point it is clear the Manor Road ramp will not be ready for the proposed 2nd September closure date.
Fri 6th September: We again ask for an update. Thames Water now say they expect to finish the Manor Road ramp on Monday 9th September, and close the Greenway immediately after; Newham say they are working on the ETO to do the necessary statutory consultation with the emergency services in the following week; however it will not be done by then. We formally ask Thames Water once again if there is any possibility the Greenway closure can be delayed again until the ETO takes effect on Abbey Road, and receive no response.
Weds 11th September: Thames Water completes the widening of the Manor Road ramp, and closes the Greenway. Immediately Newham Cyclists begins receiving feedback on our website and social media about how dangerous and unsafe the diversion feels, particularly Abbey Road and the confusing signage crossing Manor Road.
Thu 12th September: We share the feedback we have received with Thames Water, and express our disappointment that our request to delay the closure of the Greenway until the ETO is in place was ignored—particularly in light of us having repeatedly made it clear that any diversion must be kid-safe if in use during the school year. We suggest that if work has not substantively begun, the closure be reversed until the ETO is put in place. We receive no response from Thames Water or Barhale. We are also contacted by a Greenway user who reports having received inappropriate remarks from Thames Water site workers while she was using the diversion.
Sun 15th September: Our Newham Parks Ride passes the Greenway closure, using the diversion. From both ends of the worksite, it appears work has not actually begun yet (see photos.) One of our riders has a near miss, falling from her bike while following signage that suggests she should ride on a narrow strip of kerbing rather than a wide shared footway. She is fortunately unhurt, but could easily have fallen into oncoming traffic. We are also contacted by a mother who cycles with her two young children to Victoria Park on the Greenway and had a frightening encounter on the diversion. We again ask Thames Water to re-open the Greenway to people walking and cycling until the issues with the diversion are resolved.
Who are Newham Cyclists?
Newham Cyclists is part of the London Cycling Campaign, a registered charity. We are a volunteer group who exist to help all kinds of people access cycling as a cheap, accessible, and convenient form of transport. We believe cycling should be for everyone, not just the fast and the brave.
Media contacts
Media enquiries should go to newham@lcc.org.uk, or to @NewhamCyclists on Twitter/X and Instagram. Your contacts are Jonathan Rothwell and Dr Karen Flanagan.
Please be mindful that we are a volunteer group, so will answer your queries amongst our work and personal commitments.
a £4 charge at “peak times” for drivers using the Blackwall and Silvertown Tunnels. Peak times are northbound 0600-1000 and southbound 1600-1900 on weekdays only
a £1.50 charge at “off peak times” for drivers. Off-peak times are all times between 0600-2200 that are not peak
no charge overnight
At the same time TfL announced details of a “green and fair package of supporting measures”, including: free bus journeys on routes 108, 129 and SL4 for “at least 12 months”; free DLR journeys between Cutty Sark-Island Gardens and Woolwich Arsenal-King George V for “at least 12 months”; free travel for those cycling on the Silvertown tunnel cycle bus for “at least 12 months”, with the service guaranteed to run for at least 3 years.
We neither supported nor opposed the proposals.
Generally we support a fair and equitable system of road user charging. But this requires practical alternatives for people to make their journeys without driving.
TfL has no coherent strategy for non-motorised river crossings in east London, meaning there is no practical alternative to driving for many journeys. Future political campaigns and administrations will target the user charge for abolition, allowing unfettered cross-river motor traffic.
We continue to oppose the Silvertown Tunnel as a crossing for private motor traffic. It is a 1960s-quality urban motorway project that shouldn’t have been approved. We still have no confidence in TfL or the current Mayor ever delivering a viable cycle crossing east of Tower Bridge, despite the clear need for one.
We do not believe the proposed road user charge is high enough to deter people from making unnecessary journeys or switching to a more sustainable mode. We also think the alternatives are too expensive and too impractical.
It is particularly concerning to us that the proposed off-peak tunnel user charge of £1.50 is 25p cheaper than a single bus fare. Even at peak times, the tunnel user charge for cars is £2 cheaper than the Cable Car fare, and 10p cheaper than the Doubletree Rotherhithe ferry. At off-peak times, the Cable Car fare is a whopping four times the price of the charge a driver would pay.
We are disappointed that the “green and fair” package that TfL has supposedly already agreed for pedestrians and cyclists only guarantees free river crossings for those without a car for the first year, and only in specific circumstances. We maintain our scepticism about the practicality of the cycle bus, particularly considering it will finish at 9:30pm.
To apply a crude analogy: the stick is not big enough to be a deterrent, but is big enough to be annoying. Meanwhile, the carrot isn’t substantial enough to get people to move to a mode other than driving.
We urge TfL to work with the national Government to invest in and urgently progress the desperately-needed walking and cycling river crossings that east London has needed for decades.
