Bexley could get Belvedere bridge as Gallions Reach crossing plans revealed

How a bridge at Gallions Reach could look.

How a bridge at Gallions Reach could look.

First published in News
Last updated
News Shopper: Photograph of the Author by , reporter

Bexley could be getting a new river crossing at Belvedere, it has been revealed.

The option of linking the industrial north of the borough to Rainham in Essex will be included in a Transport for London public consultation to be launched next week.

The news comes as the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry released striking images of what a bridge linking Beckton and Thamesmead at Gallions Reach would look like.

Bexley’s ruling Conservatives have long been opposed to such a crossing, saying it would choke the surrounding area with traffic.

But it is thought they may back it if a bridge at Belvedere was also given the go ahead, meaning Bexley could be in line for two new crossings.

A council spokesman said: “We welcome the fact that the link at Belvedere is to be included in the consultation because we think it could create significant opportunities for local residents and businesses on both sides of the river as well as help to deliver the mayor’s plans for London’s growth.

“However, any such link would need to include measures to minimise the risk of negative impacts on the environment and traffic in the north of the borough and be mindful of the infrastructure needed for growth.

News Shopper:

Architects HOK have designed the Gallions Reach plans. 

“Some of the options – including a link at Gallions Reach – may have an adverse impact on Bexley without any of the benefits that the right kind of growth could bring.”

It is thought a Belvedere bridge would link up with Crabtree Manorway North or Anderson Way.

Bexley Labour spokesman and Belvedere councillor Sean Newman backed plans for two bridges.

He said: "The more bridges there are the less traffic there is on any one of them.

"Two bridges are fine if they both compliment each other but I’m not sure the capital is there to invest in them.

"The Belvedere bridge would need a massive infrastructure investment to sort the roads out but we’re not going to be nimbys just because it’s in a Labour ward."

LCCI chief executive Colin Stanbridge hailed the new Gallions Reach designs by architects HOK.

He said: "Nearly half of London’s population lives east of Tower Bridge yet they are served by only two fixed road river crossings.

"New road river crossings linking east and south east London over the Thames will bring new jobs and homes to an area of the capital that has been overlooked for too long."

Comments (14)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:38pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Joelo says...

How long has this been going on? We should have had a bridge built years ago instead all we keep getting is consultations! Just get on and build the dam thing!
How long has this been going on? We should have had a bridge built years ago instead all we keep getting is consultations! Just get on and build the dam thing! Joelo
  • Score: 19

5:07pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Dimpydibbles says...

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail. Dimpydibbles
  • Score: -27

6:07pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Joelo says...

Dimpydibbles wrote:
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.
Yes there are better links for public transport in some areas, not Thamesmead however. but what about people who drive?

There are 22 river crossings in west London, is that area more polluted? No, it's more prosperous then East London.
[quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote: This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.[/p][/quote]Yes there are better links for public transport in some areas, not Thamesmead however. but what about people who drive? There are 22 river crossings in west London, is that area more polluted? No, it's more prosperous then East London. Joelo
  • Score: 28

7:00pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Gypo.Joe says...

Just get it built. Its long over due.
Just get it built. Its long over due. Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 15

8:08pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Lady Boy Erastusia says...

Tories vote against the bridge. Bacon plays a lead on London councils. The reason east London is poorer than west London is a lack of crossings. Nightmares at Thurrock are regular. Why do labour members have common sense
Tories vote against the bridge. Bacon plays a lead on London councils. The reason east London is poorer than west London is a lack of crossings. Nightmares at Thurrock are regular. Why do labour members have common sense Lady Boy Erastusia
  • Score: 4

8:08pm Wed 2 Jul 14

oBLiVioN 70 says...

Dimpydibbles wrote:
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.
We all know it's needed but nobody seems to want it near them, I'll believe this when I actually see contractors actually building it.

If the bridges are built with a public transport option included as the original gateway bridge had proposed then life would be better for everyone. It would cost me over £15 to get from Dartford to Grays by train and there is no other option after 7pm so obviously I drive when I need to go, I wonder how many other cars are on the crossing because they have no real alternative despite having, as you say, much better transport links, they all go toward london. A simple journey like woolwich to barking is a bit of a mission by public transport, not that I've ever wanted to do that journey but I bet a lot do.
[quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote: This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.[/p][/quote]We all know it's needed but nobody seems to want it near them, I'll believe this when I actually see contractors actually building it. If the bridges are built with a public transport option included as the original gateway bridge had proposed then life would be better for everyone. It would cost me over £15 to get from Dartford to Grays by train and there is no other option after 7pm so obviously I drive when I need to go, I wonder how many other cars are on the crossing because they have no real alternative despite having, as you say, much better transport links, they all go toward london. A simple journey like woolwich to barking is a bit of a mission by public transport, not that I've ever wanted to do that journey but I bet a lot do. oBLiVioN 70
  • Score: 21

12:11am Thu 3 Jul 14

mouthalmighty says...

Joelo wrote:
Dimpydibbles wrote:
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.
Yes there are better links for public transport in some areas, not Thamesmead however. but what about people who drive?

There are 22 river crossings in west London, is that area more polluted? No, it's more prosperous then East London.
Prosperity is the goal we all strive for. A little bit of help, ie the bridge/s, would go a long way for us southies.
[quote][p][bold]Joelo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote: This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.[/p][/quote]Yes there are better links for public transport in some areas, not Thamesmead however. but what about people who drive? There are 22 river crossings in west London, is that area more polluted? No, it's more prosperous then East London.[/p][/quote]Prosperity is the goal we all strive for. A little bit of help, ie the bridge/s, would go a long way for us southies. mouthalmighty
  • Score: 17

1:58am Thu 3 Jul 14

ron.1952 says...

What about the trees though ? No one cares about them.

Ron x
What about the trees though ? No one cares about them. Ron x ron.1952
  • Score: -14

11:07am Thu 3 Jul 14

bexley-is-bonkers says...

Dimpydibbles wrote:
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.
This isn't really true is it? The Inspector found against the original mid 1990s Oxleas Wood plan, not Ken Livingstone's less ambitious scheme.
[quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote: This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.[/p][/quote]This isn't really true is it? The Inspector found against the original mid 1990s Oxleas Wood plan, not Ken Livingstone's less ambitious scheme. bexley-is-bonkers
  • Score: 3

11:08am Thu 3 Jul 14

highway warrior says...

Its all marshland, industrial estates and factories. Build it and soon!
Its all marshland, industrial estates and factories. Build it and soon! highway warrior
  • Score: 15

6:34pm Fri 4 Jul 14

councillorwaters says...

bexley-is-bonkers wrote:
Dimpydibbles wrote:
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.
This isn't really true is it? The Inspector found against the original mid 1990s Oxleas Wood plan, not Ken Livingstone's less ambitious scheme.
Bexley is bonkers is wrong as usual. The inspector gave a devastating indictment of the Ken Livingstone scheme.
[quote][p][bold]bexley-is-bonkers[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote: This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.[/p][/quote]This isn't really true is it? The Inspector found against the original mid 1990s Oxleas Wood plan, not Ken Livingstone's less ambitious scheme.[/p][/quote]Bexley is bonkers is wrong as usual. The inspector gave a devastating indictment of the Ken Livingstone scheme. councillorwaters
  • Score: -1

6:20pm Sat 5 Jul 14

Dolly Rotten says...

This is a much better idea than the Silvertown tunnel. I was in support of the Thames Gateway Bridge, as it was not going to decimate any woodland like the old ELRC was going to, and we need a crossing this end. Sadly Bexley council are a bunch of NIMBYs and Boris likes to keep his Tory cronies happy.
This is a much better idea than the Silvertown tunnel. I was in support of the Thames Gateway Bridge, as it was not going to decimate any woodland like the old ELRC was going to, and we need a crossing this end. Sadly Bexley council are a bunch of NIMBYs and Boris likes to keep his Tory cronies happy. Dolly Rotten
  • Score: 5

8:45am Tue 8 Jul 14

PaulErith says...

Just fill the Thames in. No need for any bridges then.
Just fill the Thames in. No need for any bridges then. PaulErith
  • Score: 4

6:11pm Wed 9 Jul 14

VoteForMe says...

Put in better public transport or no bridge!

Either put more DLR stations in that area as is badly needed or any proposed bridge can do one.
Put in better public transport or no bridge! Either put more DLR stations in that area as is badly needed or any proposed bridge can do one. VoteForMe
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree