VIDEO: New cycle and pedestrian bridge to be London's newest river crossing

£22m bridge will be funded by corporate naming sponsorship and link Chelsea and Battersea

by Sarah Barth   December 7, 2013  

Diamond Jubilee Footbridge

A pedestrian and cyclist bridge across the river Thames has been granted planning permission, making it London’s newest river crossing, due to be built next winter.

The Diamond Jubilee Footbridge, made from white steel and linking Chelsea Harbour and the new retail and residential developments in Battersea, will cost £22m to build, but taxpayers will not foot the bill.

Instead, the 18.4m high, 170m long bridge will be sponsored by a company which would then be able to name the bridge.

As early as 1924, two year before Her Majesty the Queen’s birth, Viscount Curzon MP acknowledged in the House of Commons that a bridge for pedestrian access situated between Wandsworth Bridge and Battersea Bridge was needed.

It is to be named after the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee celebrations, as it was the location from which the Queen boarded the royal barge to join the flotilla.

Given that cycle and pedestrian access to the South Bank is a major part of the Nine Elms and Battersea regeneration, the cycle bridge will provide an important link with the north bank of the Thames.

It is expected to carry 1.2 million people a year.

Chris Medland, the architect of the bridge, told the Evening Standard: “It will join together two riverside areas that are burgeoning with bars, restaurants and hotels, so people can come up here to visit this area rather than it just be somewhere to live.”

Nicholas Botterill, leader of Hammersmith & Fulham council, said: “A new bridge has the potential to give the south of our borough a real boost by improving the local economy, bringing jobs to the area and making transport links better and faster.”

A video of the proposed bridge outlines its location and design:
 

 

12 user comments

Oldest firstNewest firstBest rated

Shared path?

I can imagine what the moral outrage headlines will be before it's even opened (if it is) will be.

posted by northstar [1106 posts]
7th December 2013 - 13:04

31 Likes

"Why are you cycling on a footbridge?!"
A good idea to have a bridge there, but good design, implementation and integration with other infrastructure is more important.

posted by teaboy [166 posts]
7th December 2013 - 13:30

21 Likes

It does look nice, but from the video it seems the only way of getting on to it by bike is to use the lift.

Noli porcum linguere

captain_slog's picture

posted by captain_slog [272 posts]
7th December 2013 - 15:16

19 Likes

a bad design for cyclists, you should be able to cycle up and over it without dismounting, also sharing a common path for cyclist and walking public doesn't acknowledge the difference in speed between the two category's.

posted by KnightBiker [44 posts]
7th December 2013 - 15:46

29 Likes

Hate railings that lean inwards towards the path, might look nice but it's not practical.

posted by kie7077 [503 posts]
7th December 2013 - 16:47

23 Likes

captain_slog wrote:
It does look nice, but from the video it seems the only way of getting on to it by bike is to use the lift.

Or the stairs; extreme mountain biking down the stairs on the other side Sir? Inevitable.



Suffering from Low Cadence.

bikeboy76's picture

posted by bikeboy76 [1314 posts]
7th December 2013 - 17:21

20 Likes

I'm sure it will look nice, but it will not be practical for cyclists.
Too narrow as a min you would need room for two people walking side by side and stopping looking at the view, while two riders from each direction try to squeeze past, and that's it its not busy.
and the steps and lift access, well it just nuts.

posted by Mart [102 posts]
7th December 2013 - 17:34

17 Likes

Narrow bridge with stairs? That's what they call a narrow pedestrian bridge with a lift that cyclists can use to push their bikes across!

The Human Cyclist A blog. Try it, you might like it...

sm's picture

posted by sm [347 posts]
7th December 2013 - 18:01

13 Likes

Gatesheads Millenium Bridge was meant to be cyclist one side pedestrian the other, from the start pedestrians ignored the signage and within two weeks the cycles only side was changed to shared use, still like that 13yrs later. Sad

onward ever onward

bikecellar's picture

posted by bikecellar [224 posts]
7th December 2013 - 20:07

13 Likes

The 2014 edition of the OED has under the entry, shared use; A system where people walk and cyclists push their bikes At Wits End

FATBEGGARONABIKE's picture

posted by FATBEGGARONABIKE [592 posts]
7th December 2013 - 20:26

20 Likes

If you're starting from scratch with a bridge that's meant to be for bikes, why would you design it like that? After crossing, you can use the "Thames cycle way" (ie the pavement along the embankment) where people taking the dog for a dump can tut at you for riding on the pavement and you can lose your wheel on a manhole cover and fall into the road. Just like Holland!

posted by deblemund [106 posts]
8th December 2013 - 21:25

9 Likes

Meanwhile, the proposed Hetherwick garden bridge at Temple has absolutely no provision planned for cyclists (you can comments on that in the current consultation). The cantilevers off the Hungerford Bridge are pedestrian only - again, you have to carry your bike up steps and walk it across.

On the Millenium footbridge you can at least wheel your bike up from the embankment, but still you have to push.

Further east, there is a serious dearth of river crossings of any kind, but what is proposed? A new ferry, and the Silvertown tunnel which will be motors only. Cyclists and pedestrians are offered only one option - the laughably named "Emirates Airline" cable car, for which you have to pay £3.40 each way. Perhaps Boris plans only motors for Silvertown because he is desperate to force some custom onto the airline as it is seeing its passenger numbers nosedive?

The only bridge currently with anything approaching cycling provision is Southwark Bridge, a road bridge with cycle paths behind high concrete kerbs. Even these weren't installed for cyclists though - their real purpose was to prevent coaches parking on the bridge, apparently because the structure was not considered strong enough to support all that weight. Didn't stop the City of London spending an entire year's LCN grant from TfL, £200k on it though. (Actually, like all City cycling projects, the budget was split fairly evenly htree ways, between consultants reports, a raid to pay City highways dept salaries which should have been funded by the City's own humungous tax income, and shovels on ground).

Meanwhile, on all the other road bridges, cyclists outnumber all private cars and taxis combined in rush hour, and in some cases outnumber all motor traffic. Shame they are still so unsafe.

posted by Paul M [312 posts]
8th December 2013 - 23:42

11 Likes