Debate rages over new Thames bridges at Thamesmead and Belvedere

Debate rages over new Thames bridges at Thamesmead and Belvedere

A new bridge is planned for Gallions Reach

TfL's map of the proposed bridges

First published in News
Last updated
News Shopper: Photograph of the Author by , deputy news editor

After scrapping the project when he first came to power, Boris Johnson's renewed plans for a bridge across the river at Thamesmead are proving as divisive as ever.

Transport for London (TfL) is now consulting on a package of river crossings to be built by 2030, including either a ferry or a £600m bridge at Gallions Reach - the same spot as the axed Thames Gateway Bridge.

The plans also include a bridge costing up to £900m linking Rainham and Belvedere, along with a new Woolwich ferry service.

TfL says the crossings are needed to boost development, jobs and homes, along with addressing increased demand to cross the river at Blackwall.

But a new campaign group, No to Gallions, has already sprung up in Plumstead, launching a Facebook page, planning a public meeting and warning of increased traffic congestion, noise and air pollution.

News Shopper:

Tracey Jensen from the group said: "We are really worried about the future of the area for the next generation. Plumstead is a lovely area for families.  Local people seem to be completely unaware of what’s going on.

"We need to act now. When your kids can’t cross the road or play in the street for traffic it will be too late to do anything about it."

Previous plans for a Thames Gateway Bridge were thrown out by a planning inspector in 2007 after a mass of objections from residents and environmental groups.

Stewart Christie, already camapigning against a new tunnel at the Greenwich peninsula, said: "Recent public transport improvements in south east London have only brought us up to the 20th century standards seen elsewhere in the capital for over 100 years.

"We need to be looking at new, radical ideas to improve this further before contemplating outdated, discredited schemes from a bygone era."

Environmental groups, including Friends of the Earth, have also hit out at the plans, arguing new roads will quickly fill with more traffic.

Green London Assembly Member Darren Johnson said: "It would be crazy for the mayor and TfL to push for a Gallions Reach crossing which would require more hugely expensive new roads to be built and would generate more pollution and more traffic in one of the dirtiest parts of London.

"TfL admit that a bridge at Belvedere would result in traffic changes throughout east and south east London and this would make poor air quality there even worse."

The Mayor of London said: "Delivering new river crossings to the east is going to be vital to the future success and prosperity of the capital."

He added: "From new bridges to ferry services, there's a range of options on the table. We want Londoners to tell us what they think and make their voices heard."

The consultation runs for 10 weeks until September 12. Visit the website to have your say and for more information.

The news comes as detailed plans for a similarly controversial Silvertown Tunnel link on the peninsula - which would be tolled along with the neighbouring Blackwall Tunnel - look set to be unveiled next month.

Comments (19)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:16pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Gypo.Joe says...

Build it and move on FFS.
Build it and move on FFS. Gypo.Joe
  • Score: 8

12:35pm Tue 8 Jul 14

PaulErith says...

It should be standard with all cars that they are able to travel on water. Then we just create 'roads' across the Thames at various points. Sorted.
It should be standard with all cars that they are able to travel on water. Then we just create 'roads' across the Thames at various points. Sorted. PaulErith
  • Score: 4

2:44pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Joelo says...

If the Thames gateway bridge was not scrapped we would have had it by now! Quite how making it easier to cross the river will create more road users I don't know!

It doesn't matter what change is proposed a small group of hardend moaners will try and stop it.

No more consultations just get on and build it. For every one person who's against it there will be 10 for it!
If the Thames gateway bridge was not scrapped we would have had it by now! Quite how making it easier to cross the river will create more road users I don't know! It doesn't matter what change is proposed a small group of hardend moaners will try and stop it. No more consultations just get on and build it. For every one person who's against it there will be 10 for it! Joelo
  • Score: 9

3:43pm Tue 8 Jul 14

oBLiVioN 70 says...

While it is true that building a new road attracts traffic to it the point is somewhat missed, a lot of this traffic already exists and will just be diverting to shorter or less congested routes, for the increase that will occur though, that might have something to do with a lack of public transport alternatives, the fact that it will be too little too late and that traffic will increase anyway and without new crossings the existing ones will just have become worse.

Maybe I should protest, after all the traffic will affect me through dartford, oh wait, I'm not a selfish b'stard that's unwilling to realise that if you live in these places you have to accept projects like this are a way of life.
While it is true that building a new road attracts traffic to it the point is somewhat missed, a lot of this traffic already exists and will just be diverting to shorter or less congested routes, for the increase that will occur though, that might have something to do with a lack of public transport alternatives, the fact that it will be too little too late and that traffic will increase anyway and without new crossings the existing ones will just have become worse. Maybe I should protest, after all the traffic will affect me through dartford, oh wait, I'm not a selfish b'stard that's unwilling to realise that if you live in these places you have to accept projects like this are a way of life. oBLiVioN 70
  • Score: 7

4:19pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Joelo says...

oBLiVioN 70 wrote:
While it is true that building a new road attracts traffic to it the point is somewhat missed, a lot of this traffic already exists and will just be diverting to shorter or less congested routes, for the increase that will occur though, that might have something to do with a lack of public transport alternatives, the fact that it will be too little too late and that traffic will increase anyway and without new crossings the existing ones will just have become worse.

Maybe I should protest, after all the traffic will affect me through dartford, oh wait, I'm not a selfish b'stard that's unwilling to realise that if you live in these places you have to accept projects like this are a way of life.
Exactly. Live in the capital city and you're going to have to expect busier roads and slightly more pollution. These people should pack up and move out to the country!
[quote][p][bold]oBLiVioN 70[/bold] wrote: While it is true that building a new road attracts traffic to it the point is somewhat missed, a lot of this traffic already exists and will just be diverting to shorter or less congested routes, for the increase that will occur though, that might have something to do with a lack of public transport alternatives, the fact that it will be too little too late and that traffic will increase anyway and without new crossings the existing ones will just have become worse. Maybe I should protest, after all the traffic will affect me through dartford, oh wait, I'm not a selfish b'stard that's unwilling to realise that if you live in these places you have to accept projects like this are a way of life.[/p][/quote]Exactly. Live in the capital city and you're going to have to expect busier roads and slightly more pollution. These people should pack up and move out to the country! Joelo
  • Score: 8

5:03pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Dimpydibbles says...

The people commenting above have clearly not read the documentation published by Newham Council and TfL. Traffic models from Newham indicate severe congestion in Griffin Road and all routes through to the A2 from there. The alternative is a four lane trunk road through hundreds of houses in Plumstead, Woodlands Farm and Oxleas and Shepherdleas. woods. TfL estimate up to 3,200 vehicles on the Gallions road bridge at peak times, and aim to divert more from the Dartford Crossing at times to keep that one free-flowing. NO2 levels in most areas in Plumstead are already two to two-a-half times higher than EU limits - is it any wonder that school medication cupboards are stacked high with asthma pumps?
The people commenting above have clearly not read the documentation published by Newham Council and TfL. Traffic models from Newham indicate severe congestion in Griffin Road and all routes through to the A2 from there. The alternative is a four lane trunk road through hundreds of houses in Plumstead, Woodlands Farm and Oxleas and Shepherdleas. woods. TfL estimate up to 3,200 vehicles on the Gallions road bridge at peak times, and aim to divert more from the Dartford Crossing at times to keep that one free-flowing. NO2 levels in most areas in Plumstead are already two to two-a-half times higher than EU limits - is it any wonder that school medication cupboards are stacked high with asthma pumps? Dimpydibbles
  • Score: -6

6:36pm Tue 8 Jul 14

oBLiVioN 70 says...

Dimpydibbles wrote:
The people commenting above have clearly not read the documentation published by Newham Council and TfL. Traffic models from Newham indicate severe congestion in Griffin Road and all routes through to the A2 from there. The alternative is a four lane trunk road through hundreds of houses in Plumstead, Woodlands Farm and Oxleas and Shepherdleas. woods. TfL estimate up to 3,200 vehicles on the Gallions road bridge at peak times, and aim to divert more from the Dartford Crossing at times to keep that one free-flowing. NO2 levels in most areas in Plumstead are already two to two-a-half times higher than EU limits - is it any wonder that school medication cupboards are stacked high with asthma pumps?
So what you're saying is it's better to have pollution all around the local roads rather than trying to get the traffic a bit more free flowing and containing more of the pollution on to trunk roads where it can be more easily managed by way of tree planting and other available options?
[quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote: The people commenting above have clearly not read the documentation published by Newham Council and TfL. Traffic models from Newham indicate severe congestion in Griffin Road and all routes through to the A2 from there. The alternative is a four lane trunk road through hundreds of houses in Plumstead, Woodlands Farm and Oxleas and Shepherdleas. woods. TfL estimate up to 3,200 vehicles on the Gallions road bridge at peak times, and aim to divert more from the Dartford Crossing at times to keep that one free-flowing. NO2 levels in most areas in Plumstead are already two to two-a-half times higher than EU limits - is it any wonder that school medication cupboards are stacked high with asthma pumps?[/p][/quote]So what you're saying is it's better to have pollution all around the local roads rather than trying to get the traffic a bit more free flowing and containing more of the pollution on to trunk roads where it can be more easily managed by way of tree planting and other available options? oBLiVioN 70
  • Score: 12

8:38pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Fizzy says...

I have occasion to teach in rural Cambridgeshire, or perhaps I shouldn't so as to relieve the despair of the good denizens of Blackwall - but I do find the wage useful. Of course, public transport is an 'option' (only joking ... life is too short and the wallet is not fat enough) but I would 'prefer' (again, only joking) for a number of personal (read that as selfish) reasons to take 20 mins extra on the road to queue through the Blackwall Tunnel. For the reasons already stated in previous posts, new opportunities do generate traffic but only because of the ghastly lack of capacity elsewhere. What on earth did Boris think (?) he was doing when he cancelled?

The anti-arguments are always centred on cars but don't the same economic forces apply to trains? Until recent memory, we did not have DLR or the upgraded ELL a.k.a Overground, or the Jubilee extension, all of which are now often stuffed. Wait for the 12 car SERailway trains and the rebuild at London Bridge to see what public transport really has to offer. And a new ferry? Oh dear.

So, apart from fomenting polemic ('Debate Rages'), does News Shopper actually have an editorial stance?
I have occasion to teach in rural Cambridgeshire, or perhaps I shouldn't so as to relieve the despair of the good denizens of Blackwall - but I do find the wage useful. Of course, public transport is an 'option' (only joking ... life is too short and the wallet is not fat enough) but I would 'prefer' (again, only joking) for a number of personal (read that as selfish) reasons to take 20 mins extra on the road to queue through the Blackwall Tunnel. For the reasons already stated in previous posts, new opportunities do generate traffic but only because of the ghastly lack of capacity elsewhere. What on earth did Boris think (?) he was doing when he cancelled? The anti-arguments are always centred on cars but don't the same economic forces apply to trains? Until recent memory, we did not have DLR or the upgraded ELL a.k.a Overground, or the Jubilee extension, all of which are now often stuffed. Wait for the 12 car SERailway trains and the rebuild at London Bridge to see what public transport really has to offer. And a new ferry? Oh dear. So, apart from fomenting polemic ('Debate Rages'), does News Shopper actually have an editorial stance? Fizzy
  • Score: 4

9:39pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Dimpydibbles says...

Fizzy, you are spot on when you mention the economic advantages of improved public transport. No references to the new public transport crossings have been made by news media when reporting the proposed bridge. People travelling to jobs from SE TO E London (and vice versa) are far more likely to use public transport. You have already pointed out that carriages are already packed at peak times? As Mr Christie stated in the article above, these new crossings only bring us in line with the rest of London as of the century and focus should be on the provision of 21st Century public transport before diverting and encouraging more long distance motor vehicles. As far as Woolwich Ferry is concerned, TfL is planning to scrap this. This is also envisaged in the Woolwich Master Plan.

oBLiVioN raised the idea of planting in association with a possible trunk road. The previously planned route went through woodland bordering Wickham Lane, Rockliffe Gardens, 'Fanny on the Hill' (E. Wickham Open Space for non-locals), fields next to Willowdene special needs school and thence via deep cuttings through Woodlands Farm and 8,000 year-old woodland at Oxleas and Shepherdleas. I am not sure how some roadside planting can possibly compensate - in so many ways. Furthermore, the road would have furrowed through the most densely populated part of Plumstead. Hundreds of homes were to be demolished and hundreds more were destined to sit directly beside it (or under it, if in the Edison Road area).

Be that as it may, for the time bring, TfL has not included a trunk road in its current proposals and so traffic will have to travel along narrow (Knee Hill being the narrowest example and pretty much the main option in that direction) residential streets between the A2 and the bridge.
Fizzy, you are spot on when you mention the economic advantages of improved public transport. No references to the new public transport crossings have been made by news media when reporting the proposed bridge. People travelling to jobs from SE TO E London (and vice versa) are far more likely to use public transport. You have already pointed out that carriages are already packed at peak times? As Mr Christie stated in the article above, these new crossings only bring us in line with the rest of London as of the century and focus should be on the provision of 21st Century public transport before diverting and encouraging more long distance motor vehicles. As far as Woolwich Ferry is concerned, TfL is planning to scrap this. This is also envisaged in the Woolwich Master Plan. oBLiVioN raised the idea of planting in association with a possible trunk road. The previously planned route went through woodland bordering Wickham Lane, Rockliffe Gardens, 'Fanny on the Hill' (E. Wickham Open Space for non-locals), fields next to Willowdene special needs school and thence via deep cuttings through Woodlands Farm and 8,000 year-old woodland at Oxleas and Shepherdleas. I am not sure how some roadside planting can possibly compensate - in so many ways. Furthermore, the road would have furrowed through the most densely populated part of Plumstead. Hundreds of homes were to be demolished and hundreds more were destined to sit directly beside it (or under it, if in the Edison Road area). Be that as it may, for the time bring, TfL has not included a trunk road in its current proposals and so traffic will have to travel along narrow (Knee Hill being the narrowest example and pretty much the main option in that direction) residential streets between the A2 and the bridge. Dimpydibbles
  • Score: -1

4:11am Wed 9 Jul 14

oBLiVioN 70 says...

Dimpydibbles wrote:
Fizzy, you are spot on when you mention the economic advantages of improved public transport. No references to the new public transport crossings have been made by news media when reporting the proposed bridge. People travelling to jobs from SE TO E London (and vice versa) are far more likely to use public transport. You have already pointed out that carriages are already packed at peak times? As Mr Christie stated in the article above, these new crossings only bring us in line with the rest of London as of the century and focus should be on the provision of 21st Century public transport before diverting and encouraging more long distance motor vehicles. As far as Woolwich Ferry is concerned, TfL is planning to scrap this. This is also envisaged in the Woolwich Master Plan.

oBLiVioN raised the idea of planting in association with a possible trunk road. The previously planned route went through woodland bordering Wickham Lane, Rockliffe Gardens, 'Fanny on the Hill' (E. Wickham Open Space for non-locals), fields next to Willowdene special needs school and thence via deep cuttings through Woodlands Farm and 8,000 year-old woodland at Oxleas and Shepherdleas. I am not sure how some roadside planting can possibly compensate - in so many ways. Furthermore, the road would have furrowed through the most densely populated part of Plumstead. Hundreds of homes were to be demolished and hundreds more were destined to sit directly beside it (or under it, if in the Edison Road area).

Be that as it may, for the time bring, TfL has not included a trunk road in its current proposals and so traffic will have to travel along narrow (Knee Hill being the narrowest example and pretty much the main option in that direction) residential streets between the A2 and the bridge.
I remember a similar thing with the A12 extension through Wanstead, some tunnels were used and as someone that lived in Barkingside at the time and went to Wanstead a bit, I can say the roads locally were better for it.

I would like to keep our green space intact also, so what you really need to be getting bothered about is the amount of new properties being built, more properties equal more people, thus more cars and so we need better roads. If England, and especially London is going to keep growing in population then this is just a fact of life that has to be accepted.
[quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote: Fizzy, you are spot on when you mention the economic advantages of improved public transport. No references to the new public transport crossings have been made by news media when reporting the proposed bridge. People travelling to jobs from SE TO E London (and vice versa) are far more likely to use public transport. You have already pointed out that carriages are already packed at peak times? As Mr Christie stated in the article above, these new crossings only bring us in line with the rest of London as of the century and focus should be on the provision of 21st Century public transport before diverting and encouraging more long distance motor vehicles. As far as Woolwich Ferry is concerned, TfL is planning to scrap this. This is also envisaged in the Woolwich Master Plan. oBLiVioN raised the idea of planting in association with a possible trunk road. The previously planned route went through woodland bordering Wickham Lane, Rockliffe Gardens, 'Fanny on the Hill' (E. Wickham Open Space for non-locals), fields next to Willowdene special needs school and thence via deep cuttings through Woodlands Farm and 8,000 year-old woodland at Oxleas and Shepherdleas. I am not sure how some roadside planting can possibly compensate - in so many ways. Furthermore, the road would have furrowed through the most densely populated part of Plumstead. Hundreds of homes were to be demolished and hundreds more were destined to sit directly beside it (or under it, if in the Edison Road area). Be that as it may, for the time bring, TfL has not included a trunk road in its current proposals and so traffic will have to travel along narrow (Knee Hill being the narrowest example and pretty much the main option in that direction) residential streets between the A2 and the bridge.[/p][/quote]I remember a similar thing with the A12 extension through Wanstead, some tunnels were used and as someone that lived in Barkingside at the time and went to Wanstead a bit, I can say the roads locally were better for it. I would like to keep our green space intact also, so what you really need to be getting bothered about is the amount of new properties being built, more properties equal more people, thus more cars and so we need better roads. If England, and especially London is going to keep growing in population then this is just a fact of life that has to be accepted. oBLiVioN 70
  • Score: 7

4:23am Wed 9 Jul 14

oBLiVioN 70 says...

Fizzy wrote:
I have occasion to teach in rural Cambridgeshire, or perhaps I shouldn't so as to relieve the despair of the good denizens of Blackwall - but I do find the wage useful. Of course, public transport is an 'option' (only joking ... life is too short and the wallet is not fat enough) but I would 'prefer' (again, only joking) for a number of personal (read that as selfish) reasons to take 20 mins extra on the road to queue through the Blackwall Tunnel. For the reasons already stated in previous posts, new opportunities do generate traffic but only because of the ghastly lack of capacity elsewhere. What on earth did Boris think (?) he was doing when he cancelled?

The anti-arguments are always centred on cars but don't the same economic forces apply to trains? Until recent memory, we did not have DLR or the upgraded ELL a.k.a Overground, or the Jubilee extension, all of which are now often stuffed. Wait for the 12 car SERailway trains and the rebuild at London Bridge to see what public transport really has to offer. And a new ferry? Oh dear.

So, apart from fomenting polemic ('Debate Rages'), does News Shopper actually have an editorial stance?
I live in Dartford so all these improvements to public transport do nothing for me and I'm sure even less for those that are from Gravesend or the Medway towns, the problem with our railways is the signalling basically, try to run a train more that every 5 to 10 minutes and it can't cope.
Perhaps future crossings should have a public transport infrastructure included but without the crossings things really will hit gridlock in years to come.

Congrats on only an extra 20 minutes by the way, it used to take me about 90 to go from Sidcup to Barkingside at 7am, a 30 minute journey when the roads were empty.
[quote][p][bold]Fizzy[/bold] wrote: I have occasion to teach in rural Cambridgeshire, or perhaps I shouldn't so as to relieve the despair of the good denizens of Blackwall - but I do find the wage useful. Of course, public transport is an 'option' (only joking ... life is too short and the wallet is not fat enough) but I would 'prefer' (again, only joking) for a number of personal (read that as selfish) reasons to take 20 mins extra on the road to queue through the Blackwall Tunnel. For the reasons already stated in previous posts, new opportunities do generate traffic but only because of the ghastly lack of capacity elsewhere. What on earth did Boris think (?) he was doing when he cancelled? The anti-arguments are always centred on cars but don't the same economic forces apply to trains? Until recent memory, we did not have DLR or the upgraded ELL a.k.a Overground, or the Jubilee extension, all of which are now often stuffed. Wait for the 12 car SERailway trains and the rebuild at London Bridge to see what public transport really has to offer. And a new ferry? Oh dear. So, apart from fomenting polemic ('Debate Rages'), does News Shopper actually have an editorial stance?[/p][/quote]I live in Dartford so all these improvements to public transport do nothing for me and I'm sure even less for those that are from Gravesend or the Medway towns, the problem with our railways is the signalling basically, try to run a train more that every 5 to 10 minutes and it can't cope. Perhaps future crossings should have a public transport infrastructure included but without the crossings things really will hit gridlock in years to come. Congrats on only an extra 20 minutes by the way, it used to take me about 90 to go from Sidcup to Barkingside at 7am, a 30 minute journey when the roads were empty. oBLiVioN 70
  • Score: 0

4:34am Wed 9 Jul 14

oBLiVioN 70 says...

Fizzy wrote:
I have occasion to teach in rural Cambridgeshire, or perhaps I shouldn't so as to relieve the despair of the good denizens of Blackwall - but I do find the wage useful. Of course, public transport is an 'option' (only joking ... life is too short and the wallet is not fat enough) but I would 'prefer' (again, only joking) for a number of personal (read that as selfish) reasons to take 20 mins extra on the road to queue through the Blackwall Tunnel. For the reasons already stated in previous posts, new opportunities do generate traffic but only because of the ghastly lack of capacity elsewhere. What on earth did Boris think (?) he was doing when he cancelled?

The anti-arguments are always centred on cars but don't the same economic forces apply to trains? Until recent memory, we did not have DLR or the upgraded ELL a.k.a Overground, or the Jubilee extension, all of which are now often stuffed. Wait for the 12 car SERailway trains and the rebuild at London Bridge to see what public transport really has to offer. And a new ferry? Oh dear.

So, apart from fomenting polemic ('Debate Rages'), does News Shopper actually have an editorial stance?
Also, trains are not that expensive, advance tickets help and I've got a 2 together card for when I travel with my partner, but I find its often quicker even with traffic. Each to their own but trains are much better value than a lot think if used wisely.

Not that season ticket holders would agree, understandably so in many cases.
[quote][p][bold]Fizzy[/bold] wrote: I have occasion to teach in rural Cambridgeshire, or perhaps I shouldn't so as to relieve the despair of the good denizens of Blackwall - but I do find the wage useful. Of course, public transport is an 'option' (only joking ... life is too short and the wallet is not fat enough) but I would 'prefer' (again, only joking) for a number of personal (read that as selfish) reasons to take 20 mins extra on the road to queue through the Blackwall Tunnel. For the reasons already stated in previous posts, new opportunities do generate traffic but only because of the ghastly lack of capacity elsewhere. What on earth did Boris think (?) he was doing when he cancelled? The anti-arguments are always centred on cars but don't the same economic forces apply to trains? Until recent memory, we did not have DLR or the upgraded ELL a.k.a Overground, or the Jubilee extension, all of which are now often stuffed. Wait for the 12 car SERailway trains and the rebuild at London Bridge to see what public transport really has to offer. And a new ferry? Oh dear. So, apart from fomenting polemic ('Debate Rages'), does News Shopper actually have an editorial stance?[/p][/quote]Also, trains are not that expensive, advance tickets help and I've got a 2 together card for when I travel with my partner, but I find its often quicker even with traffic. Each to their own but trains are much better value than a lot think if used wisely. Not that season ticket holders would agree, understandably so in many cases. oBLiVioN 70
  • Score: 1

12:09pm Wed 9 Jul 14

kentlad says...

Tracey Jensen from the group said: "We are really worried about the future of the area for the next generation. Plumstead is a lovely area for families. Local people seem to be completely unaware of what’s going on.

Really???? Oh yeah beautiful place with all the dodgy dealings that go on there let alone the rapes of numerous woman over the past year not forgetting the poor twelve year old recently - of course its a lovely for families NOT!!!!
Tracey Jensen from the group said: "We are really worried about the future of the area for the next generation. Plumstead is a lovely area for families. Local people seem to be completely unaware of what’s going on. Really???? Oh yeah beautiful place with all the dodgy dealings that go on there let alone the rapes of numerous woman over the past year not forgetting the poor twelve year old recently - of course its a lovely for families NOT!!!! kentlad
  • Score: 2

4:51pm Wed 9 Jul 14

emmalou41 says...

So all the people moaning about polution and congestion in their areas I suppose they never use Blackwall or Dartford crossings? Surely building more will help spread out the vehicles using them this will help the other two aforementioned areas by reducing the traffic. It won't create more vehicles or more pollution it will just even it out and give people more time as they should be spending less of it in traffic. Should have been built years ago, we shouldn't now have to wait until 2030!
So all the people moaning about polution and congestion in their areas I suppose they never use Blackwall or Dartford crossings? Surely building more will help spread out the vehicles using them this will help the other two aforementioned areas by reducing the traffic. It won't create more vehicles or more pollution it will just even it out and give people more time as they should be spending less of it in traffic. Should have been built years ago, we shouldn't now have to wait until 2030! emmalou41
  • Score: 0

5:13pm Wed 9 Jul 14

VoteForMe says...

The bridge is inevitable, Boris merely cancelled it until he had the opportunity to rebrand it the Boris bridge. The best thing for local residents to do (local residents like myself) is push for better public transport which is badly needed.

We need DLR stations on the south end of that bridge. No DLR?... No bridge!
The bridge is inevitable, Boris merely cancelled it until he had the opportunity to rebrand it the Boris bridge. The best thing for local residents to do (local residents like myself) is push for better public transport which is badly needed. We need DLR stations on the south end of that bridge. No DLR?... No bridge! VoteForMe
  • Score: 7

5:26pm Wed 9 Jul 14

Joelo says...

VoteForMe wrote:
The bridge is inevitable, Boris merely cancelled it until he had the opportunity to rebrand it the Boris bridge. The best thing for local residents to do (local residents like myself) is push for better public transport which is badly needed.

We need DLR stations on the south end of that bridge. No DLR?... No bridge!
Let's start a pro bridge group! And let's campaign for public transport to be included on the crossing as was the plan for the Thames gateway bridge.

There are plans to extend the London overground to the new developments at barking riverside, seems an obvious choice to then extend the route south of the river.
[quote][p][bold]VoteForMe[/bold] wrote: The bridge is inevitable, Boris merely cancelled it until he had the opportunity to rebrand it the Boris bridge. The best thing for local residents to do (local residents like myself) is push for better public transport which is badly needed. We need DLR stations on the south end of that bridge. No DLR?... No bridge![/p][/quote]Let's start a pro bridge group! And let's campaign for public transport to be included on the crossing as was the plan for the Thames gateway bridge. There are plans to extend the London overground to the new developments at barking riverside, seems an obvious choice to then extend the route south of the river. Joelo
  • Score: 8

6:25pm Wed 9 Jul 14

VoteForMe says...

Joelo wrote:
VoteForMe wrote:
The bridge is inevitable, Boris merely cancelled it until he had the opportunity to rebrand it the Boris bridge. The best thing for local residents to do (local residents like myself) is push for better public transport which is badly needed.

We need DLR stations on the south end of that bridge. No DLR?... No bridge!
Let's start a pro bridge group! And let's campaign for public transport to be included on the crossing as was the plan for the Thames gateway bridge.

There are plans to extend the London overground to the new developments at barking riverside, seems an obvious choice to then extend the route south of the river.
There is land allocated for a DLR station directly to the east of Gallions Hill. Despite misconceptions, the DLR tracks at woolwich does have a junction so it can extend into Thamesmead without reversing at Woolwich. Unless TFL commit to this to alleviate local concerns about induced traffic. Then the bridge can do one.

https://www.whatdoth
eyknow.com/request/1
8439/response/46991/
attach/4/Report%20Ho
rizon%202020%20Final
%20Issue.pdf

Extending the DLR line to the Southern ramp of the bridge will lead to further stations serving central Thamesmead which is desperately needed. This bridge does not serve the interests of local residents if the traffic in the area is gridlocked as local residents have no means of transport other than their cars. If you have ever tried catching a bus in Thamesmead you'd know how lucky you are to even get a seat during the day. It's overcrowded and inadequate.

No DLR?...NO BRIDGE!
[quote][p][bold]Joelo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoteForMe[/bold] wrote: The bridge is inevitable, Boris merely cancelled it until he had the opportunity to rebrand it the Boris bridge. The best thing for local residents to do (local residents like myself) is push for better public transport which is badly needed. We need DLR stations on the south end of that bridge. No DLR?... No bridge![/p][/quote]Let's start a pro bridge group! And let's campaign for public transport to be included on the crossing as was the plan for the Thames gateway bridge. There are plans to extend the London overground to the new developments at barking riverside, seems an obvious choice to then extend the route south of the river.[/p][/quote]There is land allocated for a DLR station directly to the east of Gallions Hill. Despite misconceptions, the DLR tracks at woolwich does have a junction so it can extend into Thamesmead without reversing at Woolwich. Unless TFL commit to this to alleviate local concerns about induced traffic. Then the bridge can do one. https://www.whatdoth eyknow.com/request/1 8439/response/46991/ attach/4/Report%20Ho rizon%202020%20Final %20Issue.pdf Extending the DLR line to the Southern ramp of the bridge will lead to further stations serving central Thamesmead which is desperately needed. This bridge does not serve the interests of local residents if the traffic in the area is gridlocked as local residents have no means of transport other than their cars. If you have ever tried catching a bus in Thamesmead you'd know how lucky you are to even get a seat during the day. It's overcrowded and inadequate. No DLR?...NO BRIDGE! VoteForMe
  • Score: 6

6:32pm Wed 9 Jul 14

VoteForMe says...

Trying to stop the bridge is a wasted effort. It's going to happen eventually and labour are committed to building it. Even Boris knows it's inevitable and doing U-Turn. He's just trying to spin it as his idea. Bojo Bikes? Bojo Island?

It's better the local residents put their effort into trying to get something out of it like some overdue public transport that serves their interest.
Trying to stop the bridge is a wasted effort. It's going to happen eventually and labour are committed to building it. Even Boris knows it's inevitable and doing U-Turn. He's just trying to spin it as his idea. Bojo Bikes? Bojo Island? It's better the local residents put their effort into trying to get something out of it like some overdue public transport that serves their interest. VoteForMe
  • Score: 7

7:33pm Wed 9 Jul 14

Bobbyse2 says...

we need something done now!! The A2 at blackwall tunnel is a joke now! And the ferry at woolwich as nice as it is does not help. Were not going to please everyone but we need a bridge asap not 10/15 years down the line.
we need something done now!! The A2 at blackwall tunnel is a joke now! And the ferry at woolwich as nice as it is does not help. Were not going to please everyone but we need a bridge asap not 10/15 years down the line. Bobbyse2
  • Score: 5

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