New Thames bridge must bridge Thames first

Ken Livingstone must devise a “smarter” plan for charging drivers who use the proposed Thames Gateway Bridge¹ to deter long distance traffic and ensure the project benefits Londoners locally, a report² by the London Assembly warns today.

The failure of the tolling system proposed by the Mayor’s Transport for London (TfL) to differentiate satisfactorily between local and long distance traffic would encourage drivers from far and wide to consider the bridge as the best route between the Channel Ports, M25 and North Circular and M11.

TfL’s definition of “local” is too loose, the report by the Assembly’s Transport Committee³ says. Journeys only need to begin or end – rather than begin and end -- in any of the four boroughs⁴ adjoining the proposed site for the bridge for the trips to be deemed local. For example, a journey finishing in Newham, whether it began in Bexley or Brussels, would be classified the same; a local journey.

But even when journeys would be defined as long distance, TfL’s proposed £2 charge would fail to act as a deterrent. According to the report: “It is important that the premium imposed on long-distance through traffic – especially freight lorries – should be set at a level which will ensure that the Bridge does not become a second Dartford Crossing”. 

The Committee also questions the level of the Mayor’s commitment to public transport in the design of the £425 million bridge. Although two of the proposed six lanes are to be assigned solely for the use of public transport, the Mayor has opted for the “less expensive intermediate mode guided busways⁵ rather than a fully-fledged tram scheme”.

A busway is unlikely to provide the necessary public transport capacity and, unlike tram lines, could easily be converted to extra lanes for cars.

Chair of the Assembly’s Transport Committee Lynne Featherstone AM said: ‘We’re all broadly in support of the construction of a bridge but it is vital that it brings regeneration and economic benefits to the surrounding areas and represents a significant improvement to local Londoners’ lives. The Mayor must come up with smarter means of charging drivers to discourage long distance journeys. But we are not convinced that even doubling the local toll for long distance traffic is sufficient to have this effect.’

Londoners losing out to development along Thames

Encroachment by new developments along the Thames is threatening people’s enjoyment of the river, a report,¹ published today by the London Assembly, warns.

According to the Assembly’s Planning and Spatial Development Committee, the Thames is being barricaded from the rest of London by new riverside developments, and the enjoyment of what is the capital’s greatest natural asset is being destroyed.

Gated riverside apartments leave only a windswept and often forbidding riverside path for public use, which has no link to life in the rest of the city just a street behind.  The worst examples of this are to be found to the east of Tower Bridge.

Although the Mayor² addresses the issue in his draft London Plan, the Committee report says there is room for improvement.  To ensure Londoners as a whole – and not just owners of upmarket riverside apartments – are enjoying the benefits of the river, the report suggests providing a better-planned path, with occasional open spaces and links into communities inland from the river.  The design of riverside buildings also needs to be of better quality. 

Developments such as the Tate Modern, Coin Street and Millennium Wheel are hailed as good examples of what can be achieved by giving stretches of the river back to Londoners through a more imaginative mix of uses and attractions. 

To boost the enjoyment of the river and to counteract the pressure of developers, the report proposes that the Thames Path be extended by 38km³ to include the whole of Greater London, and that the whole of the Path be awarded National Trail status.  This would raise the standard of the Path.  Thought also needs to be given to the creation of landmarks and destination points to the east. 

The report says the introduction of a warden scheme could help combat symptoms of neglect, such as poor signage and vandalism, which is evident along the full length of the Path.  

John Biggs AM⁴, who led the seven-month investigation on behalf of the Committee, said: ‘London’s riverside should not be allowed to become the preserve of the wealthy.  In East London, where there is so much anticipated economic and population growth, there is an opportunity to ensure that past mistakes are not repeated and a new, more inclusive riverside is created.  The river is valuable to Londoners and is an important draw for visitors, and the principles of wide use, of public enjoyment and of showcasing should dominate our treatment of it.’

The Committee hopes the report can accelerate the process that ensures that the Thames’ defining environmental, geographical and historical role at the heart of the capital can be further enjoyed, protected and enhanced.

Submit A Press Release