Fogwoft Thinks it’s Time to Pass the Baton

Founding Fogwoft

Fogwoft was formed in September 2013 to promote the enjoyment of the Greenwich and Woolwich foot tunnels.  The packed inaugural meeting specifically addressed the need for completion of the aborted refurbishment of the two tunnels and the reasons that work had seemingly ended. 

Answers to both questions were given swiftly by the Greenwich Council (the Council), the managers of the tunnels.  Work recommenced, and was largely finished in later 2014.  A report on the work was made public in October 2013 – the Wilmoth Report.  Although a “grey-wash” that report did highlight major flaws in the whole contractual and management system.  Both the Council and the supervisory Homes and Communities Agency were criticised.  There should be lessons for The Council and other public bodies.  We trust they are learned.

Both tunnels are used by well over 3000 people a day.  These are fairly equally divided between walkers and those with cycles.  On the whole users continue the pattern set by people in the early 20th century.  People go north to work; initially in the docks and ancilliary trades on the north bank, now to banks and their ancilliary business.  People go south to have fun; in parks, museums, and “hospitality”.

Emerging Issues 2014/15

Fogwoft could have been wound up in 2014, having achieved its two key objectives.  The Council Deputy Leader, Assistant Chief Engineer and key officers met early with us.  A senior officer was appointed as project manager and worked well with fogwoft.  The Council Scrutiny Committee delved into the Wilmot Report and we gave some evidence to it.  The breath of fresh air continued throughout succeeding years.  One senior official volunteered that a more transparent approach to thorny problems had helped operations and liaison with the public.  Openness is perhaps the key lesson we hope will continue to inform policy.

Emerging issues suggested that a friends group could continue to be useful to both users and the managers of the tunnels.  These were:

  • lift problems, especially in the Greenwich Tunnel
  • the cleaning regime
  • tension between cyclists and walkers in the tunnel.


The Council have addressed the many causes of lift failure over the years since their commissioning.  Those causes have ranged from the technical (electronic lifts in a Victorian/Edwardian tunnel, especially one where the mechanism is housed in a greenhouse, as is the Greenwich Tunnel), over-optimistic forecasts of part lifetimes, electricity failure, spare parts supply problems, third party interventions (often the Fire Service), and vandalism (especially in the Woolwich Tunnel).

Until 2020 lift downtime was improving markedly; in 2020 the North lift of the Greenwich Tunnel has been bedevilled by problems, especially fogwoft has been told, because of unpredicted cable faults.  We, both fogwoft and the users it represents, expect outstanding problems to be addressed swiftly and openly.  There is little that can be done to prevent much vandalism (such as that which ripped the whole roof off the Woolwich Tunnel entrance – a roof that was rather worthless faux copper to its thieves).  Much else has been and must continue to be promptly fixed.

Fogwoft supported the Council idea for an “app” that would show the status of the lifts, before users set out for the tunnels.  We were involved in the trials which were not at all promising.  The idea of the app was withdrawn but maybe could be revived if technology improves.  The lift status signs in the entrances are at least a help to users, especially wheelchair users.


The cleaning regime was also largely successful until the last year.  Underwater tunnels suffer from two inevitable pollutants:

  • water leakage
  • dust condensation on the white lining tiles

Water leakage leaves unsightly stains in places and can contribute to the degradation of the nearly 120 year old tiles.  We shouldn’t expect the tunnels to look like our newly-tiled bathroom.  Two possible solutions were discussed.  The first could have been to retile the tunnels, especially the more used Greenwich tunnel.  The second could have been to line the tunnels with plastic.  Both were rejected by fogwoft (possibly to the relief of the Council) on grounds of cost, disruption and historicity.

Cyclists and Walkers

The tension between cyclists, or rather those who refused to dismount to walk the tunnel, and walkers was clear at the inaugural meeting of fogwoft.  It seemed destined to grow as traffic increased and crucially the lift attendents were dispensed with as the lifts became 24 hour.  The fogwoft committee, supported by many users, decided to try to reconcile both user groups.  It commissioned an online survey in 2014 which attracted over 270 respondents.  The great majority (64%) backed allowing cycling under certain conditions or at certain times.

The Council cautiously met this call for managing tunnel traffic in an age that automated tunnel facilities by an innovative proposal to be funded by Transport for London (TfL).  The history since the first proposal in 2016 has been tortuous and will only be briefly summarised here.  In the meantime, safety issues had led to the removal of internal tunnel barriers that may have interrupted cycling at the barrier but also deterred wheelchair users.  Early events in the saga were:

  • technical proposals to regulate cycling by an IT-based system
  • funding of a trial of this innovative approach by TfL, and full support by fogwoft
  • a “technical” trial of the system, using signs to indicate when cycling was allowed
  • drafting of the byelaws for the tunnels by the Council (after fogwoft had insisted this be done before any further testing which was confusing users)
  • consideration of the draft bylaws by the two other host Boroughs (Tower Hamlets and Newham)
  • drafting of Terms of Reference by fogwoft for a full trial and their acceptance by the Council
  • reconsideration of more permeable barriers in the event of the trial failing.

The Byelaws

The existing byelaws were last modified in 1938.  Their infringement fines, for cycling and many other more arcane transgressions (such as spitting or dropping orange peel) are set at 20 shillings for a first, and 40/- for subsequent offences.  It’s not surprising that the Met Police who may have bigger priorities do not police the tunnels.  So long as the byelaws remain unamended there is little legal deterrence for cyclists actually cycling.

A byelaw amendment needs not only the assent of the other two London Boroughs but has to be publicly consulted and then approved by the Secretary of State (which one is rather unclear to fogwoft).  So it is a long-winded process.  And we understand that this process has fallen at the first hurdle.  The London Borough of Tower Hamlets has not approved the new draft since it was presented in late 2017.  Fogwoft understands that Newham is content with the draft.

The Future

Fogwoft celebrated its seventh birthday in September 2020.  It should have held its seventh AGM by then but circumstances got in the way.  The Committee, which has been reduced to three with the recent sad death of one member and the retirement of another after losing a Woolwich representative some years ago, now feels that many of its initial objectives can be assured without its agency.  Apart from fogwoft’s campaign activities it has celebrated the tunnels through social events (which partly raised funds for a non-subscription group), public talks, discussions (e.g. with Institution of Civil Engineers) and articles (such as that in Subterrania Britannica).  There has been discussion about using the entrances as space for small exhibitions – an idea which could be taken forward.  It encouraged the Council to place interpretative plaques outside and inside the Greenwich tunnel.

This is an age that stresses the importance of walking and cycling as paramount transport options.  But walkers and cyclists must, face to face, agree on how to use the tunnels.  We suggest that relying on an intermediary to achieve this is no longer an option.  It is the responsibility of government to provide a framework for agreeable compromise between different users of the tunnels.  The public should continue to press all three London Boroughs for a resolution of the byelaw impasse.  The Royal Borough of Greenwich should continue to resolve continuing lift issues, and reinstitute its effective cleaning regime. 

The importance of these modest tunnels has been stressed by many of our followers over the last seven years.  They remain the only non-motorised crossings downstream of the Millenium Bridge, now that the London Mayor has cancelled the Durrand’s Wharf cycling and walking bridge.  Apart from the Rotherhithe Tunnel they will be the only free fixed crossings of the Thames east of the City.  They feature as strategic in the transport networks of Greater London, Sustrans, London Cycling Campaign, England Coastal Path, National Trail, and connect both banks of the Maritime Greenwich World Heritage Site.  They have formed a key element of the activities of many civic societies – the “small platoons” of our civic life.  The tunnels are another functioning bequest to this City from the last century.  They will continue but must be constantly updated to serve their purposes.

The fogwoft committee feels that it has achieved the feasible objectives set on its formation.  Issues remain.  But they are either political, or largely technical, in neither of which spheres can fogwoft play a major role.  It’s been a full seven years but time to pass the baton to the community and to the relevant public agencies.

23 March 2021

Greenwich Foot Tunnel Lift Problems
The Foot Tunnel has had much lift downtime in the last few months.  Fogwoft have been pressing Greenwich Council to provide explanations for this.  We realise these are extraordinary times.  Also we know of the initial contract problems in 2013, the fact that the lift cage is very big and that the lift operation is 24/7 unlike many public transport lifts.  Even so, we really do hope for better performance in future especially when the current “crisis” is over.  The Council statement is that:
“The lift has been beset by three different problems over the last few months.
The most serious was that of safety concerns with the means of lifting and lowering the car, a situation that required the services of a specialist contractor that had, unfortunately, coincidentally furloughed its work force. That challenge was resolved in July.
Following, there were been power problems, but also since resolved.
More recently an intermittant issue with the operation of the doors has arisen. A consequent passenger lock-in and release effected by the emergency services, rather than the lift maintenance contractor,  undoubtedly has not helped their operation.  Odd repairs were promptly effected last week and I have had no report of current faults.”
Ian Blore
September 2020

Will Norman’s Letter about Alternative River Crossings in Full 

Dear Ian

Thank you for writing to the Mayor on 6 April about the Greenwich Foot Tunnel and alternative means of crossing the river. As I am sure you can appreciate, during these challenging times the Mayor is very heavily engaged with leading London’s response to Covid-19 and he has therefore asked me to respond to your letter on his behalf.

Transport for London (TfL) and the boroughs understand that the tunnel is an important route for essential workers travelling to and from work, which is why it is being kept open on working days for key workers making essential journeys. In order to protect public health, the tunnel was closed over the Easter long weekend, but was then reopened on 13 April. The decision to close it on weekends is being kept under close review.

Crossing the river will still be possible using the DLR and TfL is permitting passengers to bring bikes onboard on this section even in peak times. However, TfL does not plan to introduce free travel on any section of the DLR. At this time, public transport should only be used by critical workers making essential journeys and introducing free travel would undermine this aim and potentially put lives at risk. Furthermore, administering free travel on a small section of the service would be resource intensive, at a time when TfL staff is rightly focussed on providing a safe and reliable service for our amazing NHS staff and other critical workers.

TfL has introduced various other practical support options for both the general public and for NHS staff. You can find out more here:

Thank you again for writing to the Mayor and for your understanding. I hope you and your family are keeping well in these challenging time.

Best wishes


Mayor’s Walking and Cycling Commissioner

And Here’s our Response

Dear Will

Thank you for responding to fogwoft’s suggestion about the DLR under the river at Greenwich/IOD.  We appreciate the difficulties and constraints but clearly welcome the lifting of the restrictions on cycles during peak hours.  Every little helps to provide as much travel space as possible especially to encourage walking and cycling.  Greenwich Council are keeping us informed of the current status of both tunnels and we are doing our best to publicise this to our following.
When normality returns, could the Mayor’s Office assist in the stalled “trial” for sharing space considerately in the Foot Tunnels when appropriate?  TfL has been involved financially in this since 2016 and fogwoft has supported (indeed “partnered”) the idea.  Any move is now entirely dependent upon a revised byelaw.  This is crucially necessary to establish sensible infringement fines (they are currently 20/- for many offences including cycling!).  Greenwich Council drafted a new byelaw, in 2017, but we understand this has not met with the approval of other host Boroughs.
We would appreciate your keeping in touch with us at fogwoft on this and other issues.  And perhaps use your good offices to find a way forward to break the logjam on this  issue for both tunnels.  Of course, this must wait till a future time but we hope to return to it.
Best wishes,
Ian Blore, Sec., fogwoft

21 May 2020


Greenwich Council have just advised us of the following:

“The decision to close the Greenwich Foot Tunnel over the  (Bank Holiday) weekend has had to be made. Monitoring via cctv led to this decision and the Council is currently putting out a range of communication about this in liaison with LBTH.
The closure will be from 10pm Thursday until 10pm Monday.
On Tuesday we expect to have a very visible staff presence advising users the tunnel is only for essential use and to adhere to social distancing rules – arrangements are being put in place now.
I’m also arranging signage to advise users on the ground.
We did enquire with the DLR. Whilst they can carry bikes over the weekend as far as I understand they can not offer free travel between the two stops.
Woolwich Foot Tunnel has seen much lower levels of use and users very easily adhere to social distancing. The tunnel will therefore stay open but this is being monitored (and will be monitored over the weekend)”

UPDATE 7 April 2020

Greenwich Council have advised us that it has considered the management of the foot tunnels during the coronavirus crisis.  Its current policies :

1.  recognise the strategic importance of the tunnels for key and critical workers

2.  will endeavour to keep the tunnels open over Easter weekend

3.  stress that people should only use the tunnels for essential journeys and use them sensibly

4.  recognise that these policies will be under constant review and they may need to be changed swiftly

5.  will be signing more clearly and institute patrolling.

We will try to update this information as necessary

Closure of Greenwich Foot Tunnel in Coronavirus Crisis

We understand that the Greenwich Tunnel was closed only for yesterday owing to concerns about coronavirus.  Fogwoft have written to Mayor Khan and Greenwich Council supporting that action but requesting free travel on the DLR between Cutty Sark at Maritime Greenwich and Island Gardens if the closure becomes more extensive.

Fogwoft’s letter and proposal can be read by clicking the link below.

Khan Poposal 2

Ian Blore, 6 April 2020

We understand from Greenwich Council that the tunnel should only be closed at weekends and possibly bank holidays but that more extensive closures are under review.

Greenwich Town Centre Liveable Neigbourhood Consultation – Comments from fogwoft to Royal Borough of Greenwich (RBG)

Fogwoft welcome the chance to make some initial comments on the published approach to improving the town centre.  We have asked our Friends to personally and in detail engage in the advance consultation process.  Our collective comments serve to stress the common needs of most tunnel users in Greenwich.  They are either pedestrians or cyclists and have an interest in the immediate surroundings of the Foot Tunnel.

RBG have indicated that the scheme goes well beyond pedestrianising 2 town streets.  We’d just like to flag up some key ways in which the scheme may affect the Foot Tunnel and how any approach to it may be improved.  We will not comment on the tunnel itself which is the subject of ongoing improvements and experiments.

What may be termed “joining up the dots” around the scheme include:

  1. Clarifying walking and cycling in Cutty Sark Gardens (there was a public consultation some years ago which should be revisited)
  2. Managing clearly the route that emerges from the Park and continues down (the contraflow) on King William Walk, across Nelson Rd and a possibly pedestrianised KWW, onto the northern bit of KWW and into Cutty Sark Gardens
  3. Managing better access to the Gardens from the east (through the University grounds) and the west (towards Capital Quays)
  4. Clearly signing the entrances to the DLR for all forms of travellers to the town centre
  5. Carefully considering the location of bus routes that are a major travel mode for visitors and an important interchange to the DLR and Thames ferries
  6. Improving the rather lamentable state of Cutty Sark Gardens and the eateries on the pier head; they are a poor setting for an almost unique (and mercifully largely original) example of Victorian tunnelling expertise.

We would welcome discussion with the Royal Borough of Greenwich around these issues.  Fogwoft hope to address them at its Annual General Meeting well before any formal consultation in 2019.

Dr Mary Mills, Ian Blore, February 2019

Tunnel Closed Overnight (4/1/19)

We have received this urgent message from Greenwich Council:

An emergency has arisen at Greenwich Foot Tunnel following a critical fault to a key faulty electricity power supply cable.EdF have to carry out emergency repair works which entails the closure of the foot tunnel to all users for the next 10 to 12 hours. For safety reasons a deferral until next week is not possible.The council apologies for any inconvenience this causes to any tunnel users.The gates to both lifts and the helical stairs will be closed off to public use.Fortunately, the alternative means of crossing the river, is available by use of the DLR and its stations at Cutty Sark Gardens and Island Gardens are a short walk away from the tunnel entrances.Council staff will be available on site until 10.00pm tonight to explain the situation to foot tunnel users.

Fogwoft will tweet about the situation again tomorrow.


What’s Happening Down Tunnels? A Brief Update on Byelaw and Cycling
Greenwich Council (RBG), managers of both tunnels, have succeeded in confusing everyone, including fogwoft, over the last 18 months about what is happening in the foot tunnels. Here is my best interpretation of what is happening and fogwoft’s position on the two linked issues of (a) the tunnels byelaw and (b) the movement management project (MMP). First, a bit of history.
Before the tunnel refurb was finished in 2014, RBG asked fogwoft to partner them in a bid for funds from the Mayor’s “Incubator Fund” to trial a MMP. We agreed. That bid failed the following year but RBG persisted with the Mayor and got funding in 2015 for a trial. That would simply allow cycling when foot traffic is low and not when it is high. The Project was highly dependent on a high tech approach and also required a change in the byelaw (1915 updated 1938).
Fogwoft was kept informed and attended a preliminary seminar about the Project late 2016. We asked a few questions but still agreed to partner RBG and the other 2 Boroughs on a trial basis. It was agreed that there would be a short technical trail and then, when the byelaw was changed a full operational trial with good publicity and a “behavioural management” component (carrots and sticks put simply).
Introduction, and Suspension, of MMP
The system went live technically in April 2016 and kept going … Finally fogwoft at its AGM in 2017 decided to request a complete review of what was happening and had a meeting with RBG in June 2017. At this we asked for the MMP system to be suspended and for a sight of the new byelaw. There was no draft, but one emerged several weeks later. Fogwoft’s comments are on website – briefly we welcomed the draft byelaw with some revisions. These were not accepted and we’ll make them again during the public consultation. Fogwoft did insist that any trials should not begin till the byelaw is changed, till terms of reference (ToR) for the MMP trial are agreed with us and till there is a decent behavioural management plan published.
What May Happen Now
Changing the byelaw is a slow process. It needs agreement with the other 2 Boroughs, then public consultation and then agreement by Sec of State. That’s what we understand. Till then we will continue to call for a suspension of the MMP but fogwoft have drafted ToR (attached) which have been accepted as the basis for discussion by RBG. My guess is that the stages will not be finished till at least Spring 2018.
The critical point will be the Public Consultation on the new Byelaw.
Public opposition to any relaxation of the ban on cycling is growing on the Isle of Dogs and that is expressing itself in opposition in Tower Hamlets (LBTH) to the byelaw change itself.
Delay or Derailment?
The Greenwich FT has banned cycling for 115 years. This is an opportunity to allow it under certain circumstances. But the process could come unstuck for a number of reasons. We believe that tightening the byelaw wording and agreeing ToR for the MMP are critical issues in which fogwoft can play a constructive role.
We will publicise the forthcoming Consultation: please have your say in that

November 2017

Greenwich South Lift Failure
Fogwoft have asked questions of Greenwich Council about the extended south lift failure in Greenwich foot tunnel. The answers are given unexpurgated below with our questions in bold.
We make no comments as yet except that this comes after a time when lift service was comparatively good and the problem appears to have been caused by an action by the fire service. Fogwoft also noted however, at the time of the publication of the Wilmoth report (2013), that problems may recur and could be due to an original overdesign of the lifts especially of their doors.
We will be asking for further information after the current problems have been resolved.

1. a time schedule for completion
I am sorry I am unable to provide this. As you’ll have seen from my email to Cllr Smith the over-winding caused a range of damage. This could not be fully assessed until the scaffolding was erected within the shaft (which in itself was a major exercise) allowing the lift to be released. Thankfully the lift cables were not damaged, as first feared, but damage to the top of the car needs several replacement parts which are not stock items. These are therefore on order from the German supplier. A technician is on standby to fit these parts as soon as they arrive.

Following the parts being fitted some further work may still be required but that won’t be known until the lift is moving. I can assure you we are pressing the various parties hard to get the lift back in operation as soon as practicably possible.

2. whether costs will delay any completion or if the repair is under warranty
The damage is due to over-winding of the manual lifting gear and is therefore not something that is covered by warranty. We are taking a number of steps to try and avoid a repeat including:
· Following up our earlier communications to the London Fire Brigade to explain the situation and
· Seeking a meeting and arranging a training session with key members of the LFB to ensure a future repeat is avoided
· Reviewing the call out procedures. The lift contractor is required be on site within one hour of call so in most circumstances issues would be dealt with by expert engineers familiar with the tunnel lifts and there should be no need for the LFB to attend site.

3. an assurance that the cause of the problem will not affect both lifts in future
With the above steps a repeat of this should be avoided.

4. whether a preventative maintenance schedule can, and will, be put in place to avert future major disruptions
There is already very frequent planned preventative maintenance. This includes scheduled monthly maintenance shut downs of each lift to replace parts on a pre-planned basis, service the equipment and complete safety checks. I am confident that our maintenance regime is “fit for purpose”. However if operational experience identifies additional maintenance that would make the operation more reliable/better for users we will, of course, give proper consideration to adding it to the regime.

5. whether such major lift failures will not result in the closure of the tunnels per se.
There are no plans, and I cannot foresee a situation, where a lift failure would result in a closure of one or both tunnels save for the most extreme event that requires the tunnel to be temporarily evacuated.”

July 2017

Greenwich to Consider New Bye-Laws for Tunnels

Fogwoft have examined the Draft (for GFT only) collectively. We welcome the key changes, the new realistic level of fines and the relaxation of some banned activities by the use of written (or licence) permissions by the Council (acoustic music can be humanising).

Now is not the time to suggest detailed edits. There will be time for all after Council Cabinet (12th July) for consultation. Nor is it time to look forward to the renewal of the Movement Management Scheme (MMS) and its operation under the new bye-law. The enforcement of any bye-law is critical and difficult, but we hope you can discuss the operations before the bye-law comes into force. We expect this not to be before 2018. Before then we recommend a full, best public discussion, of all these operations and would be keen to participate.

One major point that did strike us, however, was the definition of “vehicle” in Clause 3. This omits many forms of wheeled device whose use can be problematic in the tunnels. Skateboards, Scooters, Roller-blades* and -skates, Segways, and devices yet undreamed of should be covered. So should unicycles, perhaps by changing “bicycle” to “cycle”. (One of our committee just happens to be a unicyclist). Cl. 3 appears to ban any of these from being carried through the tunnel as well as being ridden. We won’t suggest an amendment, since the lawyers must have some form of wording, but recommend that “vehicle” should be defined up top.

We also suggest that, if the use of wheeled devices is to be permitted anywhere, its boundaries should be absolutely clear. That, we think, should only be between any signage permitting such riding. The bye-law itself may not be the place to write this in (since you may want it to be flexible) but the publicity campaign should make it clear. We should remember that fogwoft called for a suspension of the MMS because it was sending wholly unclear messages to tunnel users. Please let’s avoid that in future.

The proposed new bye-laws and a comparison with the existing may be viewed here; go to page 152 following.

July 2017

How many people are using the tunnels?

Usage data for both the Greenwich and Woolwich Foot Tunnels (GFT and WFT) are shown in the tables below.  The data should be treated with caution since collection and analysis methods differed over time.  Manual part-day counts gave way to automatic counts and wholly manual analysis to electronic.  The data here is scaled to 24 hour 2 way flows.  The new CCTV gives night time data which can be used to scale up part-day counts.

The data distinguishes between pedestrians and cyclists.  This is how it’s presented here although some of the earlier manual counts differentiated more finely (such as between pedestrians with buggies, wheelchairs etc.).  Fogwoft is exploring whether the CCTV data capture may distinguish between walking and riding cyclists.

Usage growth since 2012

The longest time period is for weekday use of the GFT beginning in 2009 and ending (as all the data does) in 2016 (Sept).  The graph below shows the results.  Interpretation should be cautious but some simple lessons may be drawn:

  • Usage seems to have recovered from the refurbishment disruption (2010-2014)
  • Since 2012 pedestrian traffic has grown fastest (about 40% a year)
  • Cyclist traffic has grown about 15% a year, and total usage about 30%
  • The high pedestrian usage in August 2014 may well just reflect peak tourist season

Data for GFT weekend and all Woolwich use only begins in 2014.  We should treat these figures with even more caution, but so far:

  • GFT Sunday use has grown about 10% a year
  • WFT weekday and Sunday use has grown at less than 10% and about 20% respectively.

Demand to cross the river is growing fast, on foot or by cycle

Whatever the likely data errors, these results appear to point to high growth, especially on weekdays for the GFT.  Comparative data for 2017 may confirm this and will be available after September.  If it confirms these trends then there is clear evidence of high and growing demand for people to cross the river with or without bikes.  All those engaged in transport planning should take note of this and respond with better infrastructure for walkers and cyclists.

Growth of Usage in Greenwich and Woolwich Foot Tunnels to 2016

Total 2 Way 24 hour Flows

Greenwich                        Peds      Cyclists Total                  Woolwich            Peds      Cyclists Total

May-09 Monday               1972       1612       3584

Sep-09  Wednesday        2707       1676       4383

May-12 Monday               1348       1187       2535

Sep-12  Wednesday        1739       1535       3274

Feb-14  Wednesday        1729       1576       3485

Aug-14  Wednesday        3910       1824       5734         Aug-14  Wednesday     670     314         984

Sep-15  Wednesday        2252       2160       4412         Sep-15  Wednesday      652    403        1055

Sep-16  Wednesday        3873       1878       5751         Sep-16  Wednesday      804    459         1263

Monday May 2009 is shown for illustration only since it was based on a disrupted count

Greenwich                                                                                          Woolwich

Aug-14  Sunday              3385       596         3981            Aug-14  Sunday             412     139         551

Sep-15  Sunday              4438       847         5285            Sep-15  Sunday              678     149         827

Sep-16  Sunday              3873     1878         5751            Sep-16  Sunday              806     203       1009

Click here to see a graph : usage graph

The Trial Goes On

You will notice electronic signs in the tunnel asking cyclists either not to cycle or to behave considerately. This is part of a trial of a system that will allow slow cycling through the tunnel.

For now, the system is only being technically tried
We expect the trial to go live in early 2017

This is because Byelaw changes take a long time and the current byelaws do not allow cycling at all.

So Please

Use the tunnel considerately whether you are a cyclist, pedestrian or have a scooter or skate-board and please be patient for the rest of 2016.
After all, we have waited 115 years to be allowed to cycle in this foot tunnel.
August 2016

We welcome new projects and a new Honorary President for 2016
At its second AGM on 25 January, held in the Town Hall, fogwoft welcomed the anticipated completion of improvements to both tunnels.
These cover the long awaited “App” giving alerts of lift status, and a planned new sign in Cutty Sark Gardens interpreting the Greenwich Foot Tunnel. The Borough is leading an ambitious scheme to better manage movements in both tunnels. Some may remember that this stalled in 2014, due to lack of Transport for London funding, but is back on track to be completed this spring.
Long term fogwoft priorities include better signs, especially at Woolwich, and a better recognition of that tunnel’s location when the surrounding area is redeveloped.
Finally fogwoft honoured the designer of the Greenwich Tunnel and great Victorian engineer, Sir Alexander Binnie, by electing his great grandson, Chris Binnie, as Honorary President.
28 January 2016

New tunnel movement management project comes alive again
Fogwoft and others were briefed about the proposed “movement management system” for both tunnels at a meeting at the Woolwich Centre on 18 November. The new system will be trialled first in Woolwich tunnel, hopefully by Christmas, before being installed in the much more used Greenwich tunnel in the new year.
The system is experimental and could be a model for other short routes where pedestrians and cyclists share limited space. The design appears simple and would appear not to overload users with too much information. It’s best to see the concept as traffic lights that will reinforce when cyclists must dismount and walk because of heavy tunnel use.
Fogwoft is a partner to this project, funded mainly by Transport for London, as are the Boroughs of Tower Hamlets and Newham. The project, when coupled with behavioural change management measures and perhaps random enforcement, could both enhance the capacity of the tunnels and reduce the friction between tunnel users.
We are certain that the system will not please everyone. There will however be a carefully-designed “satisfaction study” after it goes live. Only new purpose-built pedestrian and cycling tunnels, like that in Newcastle, would satisfy the demand for truly sustainable river crossings.
We will post more detailed news on this very welcome project when further briefed.
22 November 2015

Lift performance
Recent data from the Royal Borough and comment from us can be viewed here : Foot Tunnel Lift Performance 2014-15

Fogwoft talks to the Royal Borough again
Fogwoft members, Mary Mills, Ian Blore and John Philips met with Tim Jackson and Mark Hodgson of Greenwich to discuss tunnel management. This followed a hiatus after the failed bid to TfL to install an experimental cycling management system in both tunnels.
The meeting ranged over reports on traffic counts and lift performance (which we will soon post on this site) to the proposed remote lift alert system and tunnel maintenance and signs.
The new remote lift status alert system should be active in 2 months. It will consist of a simple webpage available on any internet device, plus a twitter feed which will alert followers of any change in lift status. We hope to be involved in the trials, and whole-heartedly welcome the initiative. It will, at least, save some wasted journeys for tunnel users.
We agreed that the benches in the Greenwich tunnel, continually vandalised, not be replaced but asked for better masking of the scored graffiti on the wood panelling of those lifts.
A new sign outside entrances, perhaps to both tunnels, was discussed which may help tourists distinguish them from public toilets, and would contain heritage information. Another sign on the bomb damage part of the Greenwich tunnel was raised. There was agreement however to keep the space uncluttered as far as possible.
Stop Press
Fogwoft have heard that discussions between the Borough and Transport for London, to fund an experimental system to manage the increasing traffic in the tunnel, have been successful. The scheme will be fleshed out in consultation with us. It will however try to control cycling when many are using the tunnel but allow it when there are few users. We’ll keep you posted about this on this site and on twitter. We have agreed to be partners in the experiment. If you have strong feelings please send us an email.
Ian Blore, 1 June 2015

Woolwich south lift down for 8 days in August
The south lift of the Woolwich tunnel was out of action for 8 days (8 to 14 August) due to serious vandalism of its doors. We have called on Greenwich Council again to warn us early of serious outages for whatever reason. We have also asked for serious discussions about the use of the revamped CCTV systems in both tunnels. Could we also ask the public to either tweet or let us know about lift breakdown?
The serious outage at Woolwich marred a good month for all tunnel lifts as the most recent report of the Council shows.
Ian Blore, 2 September 2014

Both lifts working at Woolwich
On Saturday, 31st May, a group travelled through the Woolwich Foot Tunnel using the new lifts. They then took the Woolwich Ferry to admire the refurbished roofs and the lack of hoardings and scaffolding. New lights now need to be installed and the tunnel deep-cleaned. But everyone was relieved that, after nearly 5 years, the tunnel is working again.
Ian Blore, 5th June 2014

End of refurbishment works in sight
The scaffolding is now coming down at the Woolwich Tunnel and both sites are starting to be cleared. The Woolwich North lift went into service at the end of last week without incident, and the South lift there should be operating next week.
The green of the pre-patinated copper roof may look a little too green, but it’s as agreed as part of the listed building consent and the roofing contractor assures us that it will tone down a bit over the next few months.
At Greenwich the lamps in all the emergency lights (the ones with a little green LED in them) need to be replaced by warm lights. There are about sixty to do. The mix may look a little odd to start with but after a year should be getting close to a uniform light colour.
Static signage is going up at both sites except the lift status indicators, and a tunnel wash is scheduled in the Greenwich tunnel for next week. There has been some slippage in timing, of about 4 weeks in total. With the exception of the lighting at Woolwich (which has only just started) the works are coming to an end. We can all breathe a sigh of relief and move onto the next issues, which are those of considerate use and the visual enhancement of the tunnels.
Ian Blore, 24th May 2014

New lights are now being installed in the Greenwich Tunnel
The lights are being completed in sections from the north to south and will limit traffic through the work areas to single file during the works. The first section of new lights are bright white lights; the second section lights will be softer.
Could you comment which you prefer? We are in dialogue with the Borough Council about possible adjustment if the new lights are considered too bright or harsh. First, though we’d like your views. Post them on the blog or send us an email.
Ian Blore, Sec., Fogwoft

Stairwells Closed at Greenwich Tunnel
Both north and south stairwells will be closed for about 2 weeks between 8am and 3.30pm on weekdays. This is to allow the painting of the stairwells with least disruption.
Let us hope the lifts do not fail during this time.
Ian Blore
14th March 2014

Tunnel Refurbishment Works Programme
(January- April 2014)

In outline, this is the programme the Royal Borough provided us with and is working to. It would be helpful if users could send fogwoft details if the programme appears to be behind schedule.

Woolwich – lifts
‘First fix’ complete by 2nd working week in January – final works / testing & commissioning to follow completion of roof installation (so lifts will appear to be installed but not working for two months or so)

Woolwich – roofs
Installation to start as soon as possible after Christmas. 12 week programme for each

Greenwich North – rotunda roof
To start immediately after Christmas. Basic 5/6 week installation period

Tunnel lighting improvements
Final programme to be agreed; works can be done without closing tunnels (pedestrians and bikes will need to be in single file past rolling secured works area), complete by April over about a 5 week period

Other Mechanical & Electrical Works
To be undertaken without tunnel closures

There are two areas remaining for instructions – one is remedial painting to Greenwich shafts and the other is around the final form of the remote alerts / info system for the lifts.