TL;DR
Get bike and ride gear delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Westminster Council deputy leader Tim Barnes says the council does not know where cyclists displaced by Oxford Street’s recent pedestrianisation can travel safely. Former cabinet member Max Sullivan says the council already has plans for alternative routes, including New Cavendish Street, and funding commitments from Transport for London. The routes’ current status and delivery timetable remain unclear.
Westminster Council deputy leader Tim Barnes says the authority does not know where cyclists displaced by Oxford Street’s recent pedestrianisation can safely travel, while former council cabinet member Max Sullivan says the borough has alternative-route plans and Transport for London funding it can use. The disagreement puts the focus on whether safe routes around the newly car-free street are ready, as cyclists continue to be reported riding along the pedestrianised stretch.
Oxford Street became car-free the week before Barnes’s comments, according to the original report. Media coverage has since reported cyclists riding along the section between Orchard Street and Great Portland Street, where cycling is not allowed. Footage of people riding there circulated online. Barnes told the BBC that the council did not know where this level of bike traffic could sensibly go, and warned that taking London’s main east-west road out of use would affect travel times for multiple road users.
Barnes said the issue was not simply choosing a route for one stretch: it was creating continuous paths. He told the BBC that buses, taxis and emergency vehicles would also take longer because of the change, describing cyclists as one of several groups facing longer journeys or reduced convenience. In separate comments to the Daily Mail, he said collisions between cyclists and pedestrians would become common “only a matter of time.” That is his warning, not confirmation that such collisions have occurred or are inevitable.
Sullivan, a former Labour councillor and the council’s former cabinet member for streets, responded by pointing to plans prepared while Labour controlled the borough. In a post dated November 3, he said a proposal for routes was available for the council to carry forward. He cited New Cavendish Street as the council-backed option and said TfL had supported the plans. Sullivan also asked how the council would spend a previously approved £12.7 million cycleways programme. The source does not establish how much of that programme remains available or whether it was earmarked specifically for these routes.
Safe Routes Beyond Oxford Street
The dispute concerns whether people who previously cycled along Oxford Street have a safe and practical alternative nearby. If the parallel network is incomplete, cyclists may face longer journeys or use routes that campaigners consider unsuitable; pedestrians may also encounter riders on a street now intended for walking. Those are concerns raised by council figures and cycling advocates, rather than evidence in the source that a specific collision has taken place.
The timing matters because the street’s pedestrianisation has shifted travel patterns while the supporting network remains contested. The London Cycling Campaign welcomed the pedestrianisation but said Westminster had not moved quickly enough on parallel routes. It cited traffic counts showing that thousands of people cycled along Oxford Street daily; the report does not give the counts’ dates or methodology. Meanwhile, businesses have reported increased footfall, while bus journeys have lengthened, according to the report. The competing effects make route planning relevant to pedestrians, cyclists, public transport users and local businesses.
The disagreement also raises a practical accountability question: which plans, permissions and funds are currently in place, and who is responsible for putting them into operation? Oxford Street’s jurisdiction was moved from Westminster to a newly formed development corporation and TfL to allow pedestrianisation, but the report says the council still has responsibility for the area’s cycle networks. That division makes coordination among the borough, TfL and the development corporation central to the next steps.
Popular right now
Dyson V8 Cyclone Cordless Vacuum
Philips 2200 Series Fully Automatic Espresso Machine with Classic Milk Frother, 2 Coffee Varieties, Intuitive Touch Display, Ceramic Grinder
iRobot Roomba 105 Robot Vacuum with LiDAR Navigation
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Plans Predate the Pedestrianisation
Westminster had objected to the Mayor of London’s Oxford Street pedestrianisation plans. The street’s jurisdiction was transferred to a new development corporation and TfL to enable it to become car-free, while Westminster retained responsibility for cycle networks in the surrounding area, according to the report. Campaigners have criticised the council for not having alternative cycling routes ready before the change.
A public consultation in 2024, with results published the following December, found resident support for a cycle route on parallel Wigmore Street. The council said high traffic volumes and substantial loading activity created significant challenges, making that option not currently feasible. It instead said it would support a route along New Cavendish Street, which connects with Cycleway 27 and Hyde Park. Sullivan said TfL had contributed £835,000 to the borough’s cycleway programme for 2025–26 and provisionally committed another £475,000 for the following year.
The source describes these as a council plan and funding commitments, not as a completed route. It does not say that construction has started or provide an opening date. The distinction matters: a proposed alignment and budget support do not by themselves show that a continuous, usable route is ready for people displaced from Oxford Street.
“We just don’t know where this level of bike traffic can sensibly go.”
— Tim Barnes, Westminster Council deputy leader, speaking to the BBC
Route Delivery Remains Unconfirmed
The available information does not establish whether Westminster has formally adopted Sullivan’s proposed route, when work could begin, or when cyclists might be able to use a continuous alternative. It is also unclear what portion of the £12.7 million programme is still available, how the cited TfL contributions have been allocated, and whether the provisional £475,000 commitment for the next year has since been confirmed.
The report does not provide current cycling counts, a breakdown of reported journeys, or evidence that collisions have occurred on the pedestrianised stretch. Barnes’s prediction of future collisions should be understood as a warning. The council’s response to Sullivan’s account, including whether it considers the previous plans deliverable under current conditions, is not included. The source also does not set out the precise division of responsibilities between Westminster, TfL and the development corporation for approving and delivering each route.
Council and TfL Must Clarify Plans
The next practical developments to watch are whether Westminster confirms a route proposal, publishes a timetable and explains how it will fund and deliver the work with TfL. The council’s position on New Cavendish Street, and whether it will revisit Wigmore Street despite the previously stated traffic and loading constraints, would clarify which alternatives are being pursued.
In the meantime, the London Cycling Campaign is calling for safe parallel routes, and some dockless e-bike operators have begun using geofencing to prevent their rental bikes from being ridden along Oxford Street, according to the report. That limits use of those fleets on the pedestrianised stretch but does not provide a replacement route for cyclists generally. No completion date for a surrounding cycle network is given in the source.
Key Questions
What did Westminster Council say about cyclists displaced from Oxford Street?
Deputy leader Tim Barnes told the BBC: “We just don’t know where this level of bike traffic can sensibly go.” He said a solution would need continuous routes, not just isolated sections.
What alternative route plans did the former councillor cite?
Max Sullivan said the council had plans to support cycle routes on New Cavendish Street, linking with Cycleway 27 and Hyde Park. The source does not confirm that the route has been built or has a delivery date.
Why was Wigmore Street not selected?
After a public consultation, the council said high traffic volumes and significant kerbside loading made Wigmore Street challenging and not currently feasible for a cycle route.
Have collisions between cyclists and pedestrians been confirmed?
The source does not report confirmed collisions on the pedestrianised section. Barnes warned that collisions could become common, but that is a prediction attributed to him.
What funding has been mentioned for cycle routes?
Sullivan referred to a £12.7 million cycleways programme, £835,000 from TfL for the 2025–26 programme and a provisional further £475,000 for the following year. The source does not specify how much is allocated to Oxford Street alternatives or what remains unspent.
Source: road.cc
