preferred-google-button
log in
register

The £65m ‘Rotherhithe’ Bike Bridge should be in Deptford

  • Creator
    Topic
  • January 23, 2017 at 8:03 pm #26697
    LAA

    The Bike Bridge approved by Mayor Sadiq Khan (in October 2016) is a great idea. But it’s in the wrong place, partly because it was planned using the Sustrans Cycle Map. Using data from the Strava App it is clear that it does not connect with the routes cyclists use.

    The LAA is calling for it to be moved to Deptford, where it will have a much better connection with Cycle Superhighway 4, on Evelyn Street, which the Mayor has approved. In this location it would also relieve congestion in the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, save Durand’s Wharf Park from becoming a grassy backdrop for engineering infrastructure, and provide commuters from SE London with a faster route to Canary Wharf and the City.

    East London needs new river crossings and a bike bridge would be very welcome. But the location needs to be chosen with regard to local cycle movements and the local landscape. So the Brunel Bike Bridge should be moved a 1500 m downstream, to Pepys Park. The west access ramp would flow into an existing footpath with an east-west alignment. The east access ramp would join the proposed north-south riverside cycle superhighway on the Isle of Dogs. Located here, the Bike Bridge would provide a short and direct connection to the CS4 Cycle Superhighway, which Mayor Sadiq Khan has approved. He has also approved the Brunel Bike Bridge and the two projects obviously need to work together and make their contribution to East Central London having cycle infrastructure which is as good as West Central London.

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • January 28, 2017 at 2:50 pm #885675
    0
    Al__S

    Question for LAA/Tom:

    Question for LAA/Tom:

     

    The bridge, as proposed, still needs extensive ramps- the idea is that high tide “air draft” with the bridge in the “closed” position matches that of bridges upstream, maybe a bit more, allowing most vessels to pass unhindered, only opening for sailing vessels and the occasional outsive power vessel.

    Your proposal sees a bridge that meets a riverside path (built out from the existing riverbank?) at current river bank level. It also seems to meet Pepys Park at ground level. Do you appreciate that what you propose would be a significant navigation restriction on what is a busy waterway?

    To put a bridge here realistically part of the Convoys Wharf developement would need to be requsitioned (thus sparing Pepys Park) and the Vanguard self store & helipad site on the Isle of Dogs would need to be cleared

     

    other alternatives more realistic than yours- the boat yard at Greenland Dock to the Millwall Splipway

    January 25, 2017 at 5:24 pm #885673
    0
    Man of Lard

    How about closing the

    How about closing the Rotherhithe Tunnel to motorised traffic and use that exclusively for cycles.

    Given the phenomenon of traffic evaporation as demonstrated in Paris when they closed the Voie Georges Pompidou, the effect on traffic should be negligible – anyone going through shouldn’t be long distance traffic so would  be perfect for modal shift to cycling or walking.

    Cost: less than the biscuit budget at City Hall

    January 25, 2017 at 12:50 pm #885671
    0
    Bikebikebike
    LAA wrote:
    The Garden Bridge Trust give this information:

    • 78% of the cost of the project will come from private sources.
    • The Trust has raised over £129m of the £185m cost of the Bridge.
    • A maximum of £60m of public funding will be received for the project, with £20m repayable as a loan to Transport for London (TfL).

    Although taxpayers will also be liable in the future for maintenance costs as well.

    January 25, 2017 at 12:45 pm #885669
    0
    Dnnnnnn

    Thanks for your reply, LAA. 

    Thanks for your reply, LAA. 

    When you say…

    LAA wrote:
    from the east into London

    … do you mean from the South East into central London?

    If so, such (understandably heavy radial) flows would seem irrelevant to a potential bridge going in the opposite direction. At the moment, I’m guessing many of those cycling from the SE to Canary Wharf would use the Greenwich foot tunnel. Can Strava (noting its limitations) provide you with more relevant origin/destination data (for a fee)?

    The ‘market’ for a bridge is mostly people who chose not to accept the inconveniences of current crossings, of course. You might also pursue Jubilee line data for those heading to Canary Wharf – some of those are potential bridge users. TfL can establish how many Canary Wharf passengers started from places which might become attractive for cycle commuters were there a bridge. The numbers swarming off the Overground at Canada Water for the one stop, cross-river trip to Canary Wharf are worth investigating, for example. DLR patronage too.

    January 25, 2017 at 11:21 am #885667
    0
    LAA

    The Garden Bridge Trust give

    The Garden Bridge Trust give this information:

    • 78% of the cost of the project will come from private sources.
    • The Trust has raised over £129m of the £185m cost of the Bridge.
    • A maximum of £60m of public funding will be received for the project, with £20m repayable as a loan to Transport for London (TfL).
    January 25, 2017 at 7:38 am #885665
    0
    LAA

    Thank you for your comments.

    Thank you for your comments.

    Re Duncann (1) I agree that the Strava dataset is fairly small – I have read that it is about 10%, and I don’t use the app myself (2) but my observations of route use-intensity in SE London is that the Strava data is pretty good and that it is a better reflection of reality than the DT sponsored PCT (Potential To Cycle) representation (3) as you say, Strava cannot show useage of a bridge which has not been built (4) Strava does show that the heaviest cycle flows are from the east into London. These cyclists will find the indirect journey through the Surrey Docks very off-putting (5) wrecking two riverside open spaces to build a bridge is not good.

    Re SuperPython59, I agree that £65m could be better spent on other cycle infrastructure. Also I am sceptical about the money being raised – Khan is not offering to pay for it.

    Re pockstone, it does seem odd that the bridge is being promoted by consultants but it has to be admitted that they sometimes come up with better ideas than bureaucrats.

    January 24, 2017 at 12:05 pm #885663
    0
    Dnnnnnn

    The LAA might be right but

    The LAA might be right but their arguments undermine their case. Not least suggesting that Strava data for that area is a guide to anything useful (it’s a small subset of atypical cyclists not going across the river – exactly what a bridge is not about!).  The example of Hyde Park/Park Lane is also nonsense in this context. And wouldn’t all three bridge alignments connect with the proposed CS4?

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.