A planning application for a spectacular cycling and walking bridge across the River Trent in Nottingham has been submitted.
Work on the structure, called the Waterside Bridge, is due to start this summer, with completion of the project expected for late next year.
Funding for the scheme comes from the government’s Transforming Cities programme.
It will be the first bridge across the river since the Clifton Bridge was built six decades ago, and will link Nottingham’s Waterside regeneration zone with Colwick Park, Lady Bay and West Bridgford.
Nottingham City Council is leading the project, in partnership with Rushcliffe Borough Council and in consultation with Nottinghamshire County Council.
Councillor Angela Kandola, Nottingham City Council’s Portfolio Holder for Transport, said: “During a difficult time for Nottingham, it’s great to see this major project to create a link across the river for cyclists and pedestrians is progressing.
“The new Waterside Bridge will join the Waterside regeneration area on the north bank of the river, and the Lady Bay and West Bridgford area on the south bank, creating easier access to open spaces south of the river, as well as the sports grounds and leisure facilities, and to Colwick Park on the north side.
“Encouraging more sustainable, lower-carbon journeys is an important part of our plan to achieve Carbon Neutral Nottingham 2028. This project will enable people to make smarter choices about how they travel, reducing our collective impact on climate change.”
Councillor Jonathan Wheeler, Rushcliffe Borough Council’s Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Leisure and Wellbeing, ICT and Member Development, said: “The bridge could create further positive connectivity for residents on both sides of the river and we welcome government funding that has enabled the project to come to fruition.
“We have been pleased to work with our city colleagues on designs for this new community bridge so far and look forward to seeing the next stage of the project progress subject to an independent planning process,” he added.
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
16 thoughts on “Spectacular new cycling and walking bridge across River Trent in Nottingham planned”
Looks great.
Looks great.
A few too many sharp corners though, 90 degree bends going uphill create problems and if vision is obscured can create conflict with pedestrians.
I’m thinking Readings newish bridge.
Designed perhaps by
Designed perhaps by architects who haven’t cycled since they were children?
Also – just looking at
Also – just looking at visualisations – baking in conflict as usual because it’s shared space and it looks barely even wide enough for a proper cycle path. Of course in the UK because”no one cycles” and there may not be a ton of pedestrians (because “everyone drives” and some drive distances not much longer than this bridge) by self-fulfilling prophecy it will probably not seem too inadequate…
Also, while bridges to
Also, while bridges to connect to eg. recreational areas are good, what we desperately need in the UK are not “spectacular” bits of infra in somewhat isolated grandeur. We need thousands of boring, cheap-but-just-expensive- enough bits of cycle infra that don’t just connect point A and point B but form routes – indeed networks of routes. And by “routes” we’re not talking Sustrans-NCN-style (“possibly passable, on MTB in a dry summer”) or “quiet streets” (eg. round the houses, where “it was easiest to send cyclists”). The routes need to go where people go – eg. generally where the cars go now.
Right next to this proposed
Right next to this proposed bridge, is ‘Ladybay Bridge’ with a cycle lane. This new bridge goes from nowhere to nowhere.
What is needed, is a bridge to connect the two country parks, Colwick and Holme Pierrepont. There is already a structure there, that could be added too.
This bridge is not needed.
mcmahonsport wrote:
Which means you need to look at who in the council is connected to the architects and/or to the final appointed bridge builders… Follow the money, as they say.
Where is the cycle lane on
Where is the cycle lane on Lady Bay Bridge? I see a grotty looking, narrow, footway with no indication that it is shared use on the bridge itself or its approaches.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/fTXdPWmAxkzM4XiJ6
I seem to remember Nottinghamshire Police as one of the forces that loves fining cyclists for the serious crime of riding where they technically shouldn’t.
isnt this council one of the
isnt this council one of the bankrupted ones ? Id imagine the money for this is coming from the owners of this waterfront regeneration space.
that said I dont think Lady Bay Bridge is a particularly great cycling bridge or safe route, and whilst this new bridge might seem unnecessary, I think overall it is needed there.
Funding is a combination of
Funding is a combination of
1 – Pre-approved active travel funding (before the time when it was cut off at the ankles by the Govt) for a bridge in aiui that general area (3 possible sites were identified).
2 – Encouraged, as you say, by the landowner one side.
The Council took advantage, and we have this project.
As a semi-regular visitor to
As a semi-regular visitor to Nottingham, I’ve often lamented the lack of crossings over the Trent. I was hoping this headline was going to be about a new crossing west of the Clifton Bridge. I’ve always felt it would make sense to link Nottingham Trent University with the station at Beeston with a pedestrian/cycle bridge. At the moment getting from Beeston to Clifton is a pain in the arse.
I grew up around Nottingham,
I grew up around Nottingham, and am in the Nottingham Cycle Chat facebook group. It seems at proposed £12m to be quite an economical scheme.
The existing Lady Bay bridge is pretty notorious as a risky place to cycle. This scheme will help, for example, access to Colwick Park country park (eg normal receation, lake swimming, Park Run). It’s also likely relevant to the industrial areas and Forest, County stadia and Trent Bridge cricket ground, plus Holme Pierrepoint watersports and anything else there.
It is also a further route by which the army of the not-very-socialist republic of West Bridgeford could invade The North; Lady Bay Bridge even used to have a checkpoint on it.
There are a few obvious things wrong with the scheme imo – no Equality Impact Assessment afaics, a 30 step staircase directly oppsite the top of the access ramp on the S side so long cane users and mobility aid users who slip or push the wrong button risk flying down the steps like Eddie the Eagle, and quite a bit of “absolute legal minimum possible” -itis around gradients, turning radii etc.
And that completely bonkers wiggle-woggle halfway down the access ramp.
This pic highlights a couple of these issues.
Video etc here:
https://westbridgfordwire.com/council-reveals-new-images-and-fly-through-video-of-new-river-trent-bridge-plans-with-start-date-of-summer-2024/
(Interested as I spend part
(Interested as I spent part of my youth in Nottinghamshire and have crossed Trent / Lady Bay bridges countless times. Long time now…)
One cheer for this – it’s not nothing, and routes to / from green space / “quiet routes” between places are obviously needed. We’re still heading in the wrong direction in general (see transport budgets etc.) We should pay attention to links between smaller places too (like this example). Otherwise everyone just gets in the car (and mostly they still do – where it’s easy to drive, Brits drive).
HOWEVER all the buzzwords about “sustainability, lowering carbon emissions” etc. bug me. (Almost bad estate agent technique – say the exact opposite of the truth). I reckon this will have minimal effect on current journeys. I’d imagine you can demonstrate this simply through a back-of-envelope capacity calculation (even with very optimisic assumptions and allowing for cycling and walking being higher capacity modes). Does it even really address the immediate locality’s projected future demand for active travel if the area is being redeveloped?
That’s leaving aside that to make a difference in the immediate future this has to tempt people to change mode. It’s about half a kilometer from the current “desire line” e.g. Trent Bridge and 200m from Lady Bay…
As you and others have noted it’s a not-super-convenient shared-use feature There are several flaws which have been identified in this thread. I’d say it’s basically “for walking” * and walkers have to put up with cyclists (probably very few, who knows though) and vice-versa. It’s tempting to see “providing for cycling” in these as “if we fix it so people don’t complain about accessibility we can shut up the cycling lobby too!”
If we walked the walk rather than just talking big about active travel, sustainability, lowering carbon emissions etc. I’d expect to see something like removing motor traffic (but with bus exemption?) from Lady Bay Bridge.
* Note – this can work – in NL they often – but not always – seem to build longer bridges only marked up for cycling (e.g. without a separate pedestrian area). However (a) “cycle infra” generally means “wide” – to accommodate side-by-side cycling in both directions and (b) cycling tends to predominate and (c) it’s always legal to walk on the cycle path.
I note that the bridge in
Thanks for the reply. I enjoyed the report on the Dutch bridge.
I note that it is in some ways similar – the deck is 4.5m wide compared to 3.9m for the new one in Lady Bay giving 3.5m effective due to the railings.
The Dutch also has a honking great bridge-supporting 0.8-1m wide structural pole that the whole structure dangles off coming straight through the middle of the cycle track !
For me, I think if convenient this should create new links locally – I have covered Lady Bay bride. Trent Bridge is not that brilliant either.
This will be Nottingam City’s third walking / cycling only crossing – I agree with the poster that another one on the Beeston side would be helpful.
On the journeys, I would perhaps think more about journeys and routes that DON’T happen, and now can.
I’m reminded of that church in Altrincham where the Vicar said his driving congregants might not come anymore – but the cycle-ped crossing bridges a 20k a day A-Road that slices his parish in half with no current crossings within 500m. Now the 40% of disabled people and 25% of non-disabled people who do not actually have driving licences can get to his church far more easily.
What’s mindblowing about NL
What’s mindblowing about NL is that the first example I found – the Willem Letschertsbrug is only 200m at its farthest from the main road bridge (Bergsebrug) which itself has a proper Dutch cycle path on either side (at least in 2023 per Google maps). Not only that there is another bridge about half a kilometer to the West, and that in turn ALSO has a cyclepath (bi-directional in this case, usual Dutch quality and width). This is between two rather small places – the biggest of them about 2/3 the size of West Bridgford – which is smaller than Nottingham! (To be fair, the river may be a bit smaller than the Trent…)
What’s the useable width on the proposed bridge?Sorry, see you’d noted that. The Dutch example above has 4.5m between the railings (vertical) which from screenshots looks luxurious. Though it narrows as you say (this looks more like “style” at work…) this is just at one point and as it’s in the middle this is where you’ll be slowest also. Still looks wide enough for side-by-side cycling on either side of it. No issues with tight turns on entry / exit, odd kinks in paths and it looks fine for accessibility / no hazards you can fall down!Perhaps the other example is
EDIT – misplaced that, this should be in reply to your reply…
Perhaps the other example is more comparable – the Nescio bridge in Amsterdam (designed by a London-based consultancy!)? Connects som areas which are currently being developed. This one appears to be higher and wider though.
This also have a pedestrian staircase (but have a walkway marked – colour only though not level change). However that’s separated from the cycleway and has a 180 degree turn at the top so e.g. out-of-control pedestrians or errant cyclists are not likely to fall down it!
Not sure the exact dimensions but here it says 5.5m (but that might be the widest dimension of the deck, not the usable width?) Given that it’s got a pedestrian area I suspect that may be about right (the railings lean in slightly but are at the edge).
Uses more land for the ramps (due to extra height) but that avoids a sharp turn at the end of the bridge.
Of course the next bridge downstream carries a major high-volume/speed road (so no cycle lanes – indeed no cycling) but the one after that (Amsterdamsebrug)? Yep – cycle paths either side.
All good and lovely but that
All good and lovely but that’ll be 5 crossings in Nottingham. What is really needed is a bridge across the Trent between Clifton and Sawley – I’d imagine that it’d have more use with universities either side.
Unfortunately they’re still seeking permission for gravel extraction for an area south of the river – opposite Attenborough Nature Reserve.