daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy (aug.2, 2013) | DMCA policy | flipboard magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > London Metro Area

London Metro Area London Calling...



Reply

 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 4 votes, 5.00 average.
Old September 5th, 2012, 11:09 PM   #1
jack_jones
Registered User
 
jack_jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 323
Likes (Received): 60

New Thames River Crossings

Due to common discussions within certain threads about new Thames Crossings, I thought I would create a new thread focusing on various projects within the London area.

West London

- Nine Elms pedestrian and cycle bridge linking Nine Elms with Pimlico (Approved) (A)



East London

- Thames Cable Car (Complete)
- Silvertown Tunnel (Proposed) (A)
- Second ferry service at Gallions Reach (Proposed) (B)
- Thames Gateway Bridge (Cancelled but could arise again due to popular demand) where the proposed new ferry crossing is located (B)



Greater London

- New Dartford Thames Crossing (Proposed). Three options available: Option A to build a new bridge next to the existing Dartford bridge and remove the tunnels currently part of the Dartford crossing. Option B connecting the A2 near Dartford (south) to the A1089 road, north of Tilbury Docks. Option C connecting the M2 motorway and M20 motorways in the south with the M25.

jack_jones no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old September 6th, 2012, 08:58 AM   #2
The Champ
Registered User
 
The Champ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 817
Likes (Received): 147

Why build a bridge and remove the tunnels? makes no sense, surely 2 in either direction has to be a better option

to be honest they dont need another crossing there, they just need to get rid of the Toll Booths, they're the real bottleneck
__________________
"The public suddenly saw him in a new light, the two-handed fighter who stormed forward, a flame of pure fire in the ring, strong, native, affable, easy of speech, close to the people in word and deed and feeling."
The Champ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 6th, 2012, 11:56 AM   #3
Rational Plan
Registered User
 
Rational Plan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Slough
Posts: 3,267
Likes (Received): 263

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Champ View Post
Why build a bridge and remove the tunnels? makes no sense, surely 2 in either direction has to be a better option

to be honest they dont need another crossing there, they just need to get rid of the Toll Booths, they're the real bottleneck
They must mean remove the tunnels from the motorway network, a new four lane bridge for the M25, while the tunnels remain for local traffic.

I suspect that option A will happen as it is the cheapest and the easiest to get through planning.

They should also build option C as well or instead of A, as it would relieve the M2 and A13 and the M25 between those points as well as providing better links to both Tilbury and the new container port.
Rational Plan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 6th, 2012, 11:30 PM   #4
neilio84
Registered User
 
neilio84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London
Posts: 271
Likes (Received): 31

I'm surprised there's no Option D here, further east into the estuary to connect to Lord Foster's proposed airport and transport hub. Although I don't want to open that particular can of worms here...
neilio84 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 12:48 AM   #5
Bezben
Registered User
 
Bezben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Norwich
Posts: 212
Likes (Received): 10

I guess it's too out the way? I live in Essex and I always go to Europe and I would have though option C was good as an alternative for people on the M25 clockwise who want to go to Kent or Europe while the Tilbury crossing could instead just be for people going Surrey or Sussex or whatever?
Bezben no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 02:24 PM   #6
Glom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 61

What was Boris's problem with the Thames Gateway Bridge anyway?

I know he killed a couple of other schemes due to being unfunded, but it sounded like he had other objections to this one.

The Dartford Tunnels will surely need to be kept. They are a useful backup when winds close the QE Bridge. I'm surprised with the technology available to us today that toll booths are still in use on the Dartford Crossing. Surely, something like ANPR could be used to allow free flowing.
Glom no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 02:28 PM   #7
ill tonkso
Portsmouths Finest, Maybe
 
ill tonkso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: A slab of Portsmouth with just a dash of Spalding
Posts: 15,084
Likes (Received): 773

At the time is was at the height of the recession, TfL couldn't afford it.
ill tonkso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 03:28 PM   #8
kerouac1848
Registered User
 
kerouac1848's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NW London
Posts: 2,900
Likes (Received): 326

I think there is more to it than that, he’s never really backed it, certainly as a bridge. There were moans about the design and size iirc and no doubt Tory strong holds in Outer SE London were chomping in his ear.
kerouac1848 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 05:31 PM   #9
SF-02
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 474
Likes (Received): 78

Bexley Council and their dodgy ex leader didn't want it and Boris relied on them for votes. He then made Bexley's leader his deputy mayor before he was caught out for fraud. Eventually convicted and given suspended sentence. Here's another story about him http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...inese-spy.html

Bexley Council are happy to leave Thamesmead to rot as a bit of a dump with hardly any amenities, facilities or transport. A bridge would open it up a hell of a lot. A ferry is a crap alternative.

They could stagger demand with tolls, and there's a decent amount of dual carriageway all the way along the river to the site that is hardly at peak capacity, designed as it was for a crossing going all the way back to the 60s. Stick a branch of DLR on it, or an express bus and Thamesmead and outer SE London would have much better connections to east London.
__________________

metroranger liked this post

Last edited by SF-02; September 7th, 2012 at 05:43 PM.
SF-02 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 06:36 PM   #10
kerouac1848
Registered User
 
kerouac1848's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NW London
Posts: 2,900
Likes (Received): 326

Sounds as bad as that arsehole Stephen Greenhalgh who I often met some years ago because I worked in the same building. Clueless nob who shouldn't have been near a council let alone leading it.
kerouac1848 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 09:07 PM   #11
DarJoLe
Registered User
 
DarJoLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 16,883
Likes (Received): 1525

Quote:
Originally Posted by ill tonkso View Post
At the time is was at the height of the recession, TfL couldn't afford it.
Good job they cancelled the cable car and new bus for London too with all that lack of money.
DarJoLe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 09:46 PM   #12
citybus
Registered User
 
citybus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Belfast
Posts: 1,327
Likes (Received): 49

I'm not sure of the logistics of it but it would be more suitable to have the Pimlico bridge further to the west
citybus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 11:18 PM   #13
Core Rising
Ampersands & What
 
Core Rising's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: London/ Nottingham
Posts: 5,415

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarJoLe View Post
Good job they cancelled the cable car and new bus for London too with all that lack of money.
How much are they costing the tax payer? I'm sure it was nowhere near as much as the bridge which was quoted as being £100 million +

Wasn’t the bus was £3.2ish million with RnD and for the first 6 prototypes? Whole different scale in terms of project size.
Core Rising no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 11:40 PM   #14
jack_jones
Registered User
 
jack_jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 323
Likes (Received): 60

I loved this design of the Thames Gateway bridge....such a shame it didnt get the go ahead. Hopefully Boris Johnson will change he's mind because another ferry would be a useless solution.

__________________

Vnofd5 liked this post
jack_jones no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 7th, 2012, 11:49 PM   #15
Yorkshire Boy
Registered Loser
 
Yorkshire Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Leeds
Posts: 2,570
Likes (Received): 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by jack_jones
I loved this design of the Thames Gateway bridge....such a shame it didnt get the go ahead. Hopefully Boris Johnson will change he's mind because another ferry would be a useless solution.
That's gorgeous. Echoes a pebble splashing across a pond, I love it.
Yorkshire Boy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2012, 05:50 PM   #16
SF-02
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 474
Likes (Received): 78

Quote:
Originally Posted by Core Rising View Post
How much are they costing the tax payer? I'm sure it was nowhere near as much as the bridge which was quoted as being £100 million +

Wasn’t the bus was £3.2ish million with RnD and for the first 6 prototypes? Whole different scale in terms of project size.
A Thames Gateway bridge would cost hundreds of millions but was planned to be tolled, so would have a regular income and would pay for itself in time. Plus in this economic environment with construction down 10% in the last year and the sector in dire straights this would employ thousands and aid the economy of SE and E London massively.
SF-02 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 11th, 2012, 03:32 PM   #17
Trances
, , and , Fade to Black.
 
Trances's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Living in London
Posts: 7,858
Likes (Received): 19

Not that it was going to happen. But it was proposed and did garner some attention and there is a need.

Sustrans Rotherhithe-Canary Wharf Bridge

http://www.sustrans.org.uk/assets/fi...d_Forecast.pdf

http://brockleycentral.blogspot.co.u...rf-bridge.html
__________________
"Are we ready to go farther or have we already gone to far?"
“He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.”
Trances no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2012, 12:09 PM   #18
jack_jones
Registered User
 
jack_jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 323
Likes (Received): 60

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trances
Not that it was going to happen. But it was proposed and did garner some attention and there is a need.

Sustrans Rotherhithe-Canary Wharf Bridge
Interesting project although I don't like the design of it. However, a bridge is really needed in this area. What are the constraints of having a bridge in this area though?
jack_jones no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2012, 02:00 PM   #19
Bob
Registered User
 
Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,323
Likes (Received): 10

The Thames gateway bridge was more like £500m. So quite a lot, but not really when you spread that over 5 years for an organisation which handles billions. Mindless comparison - We could have had 32 such bridges for the price of Crossrail.

The reason it didn't go ahead is complex.
1.Political (votes).
2.It was a very easy way to save a bit of money and call it ruthless efficiency savings. And
3.Practically where it went in the South was unresolved. It needs further investment to support it, such as a tunnel to the South Circular. But hang on this just highlights the problems of the South Circular which couldn't cope so doh, let's just abandon it.

I'd like to see several pedestrian bridges too. The one at Rotherhythe only affects a few developers as is, not thousands of individual property owners.

I look at it this way, when has anyone ever suggested taking down one of London's existing bridges because it was superfluous? Never. The problem needs an holistic approach though due to The complexities of juristiction and funding. There is no money at the moment so I'd like to see several built with very long term bonds with a holiding company owning the bridges which TfL or the highways agency then rent access from. Messy, but I can't see where the money will come from otherwise.
Bob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2012, 02:49 PM   #20
kerouac1848
Registered User
 
kerouac1848's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NW London
Posts: 2,900
Likes (Received): 326

I prefer Tfl owning and managing all of London's road bridges (instead of boroughs) rather setting up a holding company, with the Mayor/Tfl able to issue infrastructure bonds for new ones (20-25 years). Tolls would pay for the vast bulk of the repayment, but the pot but Tfl could use other parts of its revenue to cover a slice, such as the cash given to smaller projects. This would require changes to both how much (the debt celling) and what types of borrowing Tfl can get.
kerouac1848 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
millennium bridge

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu