If you were wondering, as you watch the towers go up at Greenwich Reach, whether there would be a bridge across the mouth of Deptford Creek to Millennium Quay (to make it easy to walk or cycle along the Thames without having to come inland) then you may be interested to hear that a planning application has now been submitted.
It's pretty ugly looking, but the proposed bridge has to be high enough to allow vessels to pass underneath at high tide (a lifting bridge is not permitted apparently). The "trapezoidal lattice girder bridge" would be six metres wide and fifty metres long, with lifts at both sides to make it fully accessible.
At the same time, the developer, Galliard Homes, is asking for permission to build an extra 22 flats on the two 4-storey blocks (presently under construction and hiding HMS Ocean from view) next to the Meridian estate – "to make the project viable". Public consultation begins next week.
More at www.greenwich.co.uk and matthewpennycook.org.uk
now let me see......could i make it look any more ugly? how about painted Kapoor red?
ReplyDelete100% yes we need a bridge and fully understand it has to be fixed to allow boats under - I can't see anyone objecting to that.
ReplyDeleteBut surely they could come up with something a bit better than an off the shelf bog standard design? The Creek is meant to be an artists quarter!!
Galliard know all too well that if locals object then they can get out of their planning obligations to build the bridge so we need to think carefully how we comment on the aesthetic design failings whilst at the same time supporting the proposal.
A truly vile and depressing piece of tasteless ugliness that only a developer of the calibre of Galliard could possibly come up with. Then to have the effrontery to horse-trade for permission for more “units”that, before they’re finished, will be below the new minimum EU standards……I suspect the passing of the odd brown envelope, or at least a nice foreign holiday !
ReplyDeleteThe PLA’s argument is weak, they allowed the Halfpenny Hatch upstream after all. It’s perfectly possible to have the bridges under co-ordinated control (look on any dutch waterway). This bridge will remove forever the chance for masted vessels to access Deptford Creek as they have been able to for hundreds of years.
The best solution…no bridge at all, leaving what little vista of the Thames from Creek Road that is left and ensuring that the sedentary residents on both sides get a little more exercise
There is no need for this bridge. Why bother building it? The walk is very pleasant and sometimes one gets to see the road bridge lifting and also get to look further up the creek.
ReplyDeleteAnon - that's exactly the problem...when the bridge goes up there is no easy way from Millennium Quay to get into Greenwich.
ReplyDeleteI walk along Creek Road every day on my way into Greenwich and am forever inhaling in exhaust fumes and dust from the cement place - not exactly the 'very pleasant'scenario you depict!
Sorry, I don't think there is any need for it either. I have lived off that road for years and even when the main bridge goes up it is dealt with in a very efficient manner adding maybe 5-10 mins maximum to your journey. It would take you that to walk round to the other bridge, through the new development and back onto the main road. An un-managed bridge with 2 lifts in a quiet area off the main road is asking for trouble.
ReplyDeleteAlso, when will the Thames Path reopen on the Greenwich side of the developement? It's been blocked at the WoodWharf apartment and failed champagne bar forever?!
I agree 5-10 mins is not much for people who don't have to get to work or have plenty of time to wait and watch - in fact I can imagine it is quite exciting esp for kids etc. But I'm speaking as someone who has missed trains in the past due to the bridge being up and have been disciplined at work for being late.
ReplyDeleteI agree if you are on Creek Road it would be just as quick to wait for it to close than to walk along the creek (ignoring the time the other year it got stuck up!), but for those at Millennium Quay or land further along the river (Paynes, Borthwick etc) it will not take any extra time to cross, on the contrary it will be quicker to get into Greenwich rather than having to walk out onto Creek Road.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like the design and can appreciate not everyone would use it, but any improvement for access across the Creek for elderly, disabled, cyclists etc surely has to be encouraged?
Anon2
While I love the idea of keeping the Creek open for tall masted ships, I'm not sure that the lifting bridge alongside the Ha'penny Hatch will ever be functional again. So the only time the lifting footbridge next to it has gone up is when the engineers come round and check that it still works.
ReplyDeleteCreek Road bridge is noisy, and intimidating for less road-weathered cyclists. The proposed bridge would form part of the Thames cycle path (NCN4). If the lift functions, it would encourage leisure and commuting cyclists, and one more person cycling is one person fewer driving a vehicle.
I'll abstain from any aesthetic considerations other than to invite comparison with the lifting railway bridge.
@shipwrights, I think red is a wonderful idea! In fact Kapoor's piece would be better if it had more colour, eg yellow instead of grey. This bridge should be red, blue, green...the only ugly thing about it is the lift carriage and stairs, so colour it up!
ReplyDeleteI love the fact that it spoils the aspect of Creekside Village (see other pictures on Greenwich Phantom), but it could be an enhancement if it were treated as a sculpture and given the life of colour. As Marmoset says, no one would let the Ha'Penny Hatch lifting bridge pass planning these days, well at least not in front of their expensive riverside pad.
I agree the bridge must go ahead. Powdercoat some colour on it and make a colourful sculpture out of an otherwise boring steel structure, how much more expensive can that be? I look forward (though I may not live to see it) to a path all the way from Greenwich to Tower Bridge, including a continuation at our end through P&B Wharf and, in particular, Convoys Wharf (at least, then, to the tunnel).
ReplyDeleteDoh, I suppose I should go an look it up, but isn't this a 106 agreement for something already built, or was it only if Galliard went to six storeys next to Meridian Estate? Haven't they already built six storeys there ANYWAY?
ReplyDeleteMarmoset, I am not advocating the passage of masted vessels upstream of the Halfpenny Hatch, the DLR has already put paid to that, but the creek to the north of that is a beautiful expanse of water wide enough not to be dwarfed by the great "reefs" of grey and overpriced flats that are fast breeding around it. The mud is soft and deep making ideal visiting berths for bilge-keeled yachts and sailing barges. The same yachts that developers decorate the artist's impressions of their bland offerings with though never encourage in reality. It's about time planners actually planned, rather than clocking up overtime in the pockets of developers.
ReplyDeleteAs to the red herring of the Creek road bridge Mr Anonymous, If you're that stressed and rushed you probably shouldn't be driving and the fumes you refer to are probably made worse by the containment of the oversize buildings and the fact that Greenwich seem to have ignored their own guidance re, density. More people, more cars......
@Nemo, wouldn't you like to see a straighter route to the King's Yard?
ReplyDeleteEr..Nemo, I think you mean my posting - if so, no red herring - I think you misread my post - I don't have a car I walk. Why would I be advocating a footbridge if I drove?!! ;-)
ReplyDeleteBottom line for me is that if there has to be a bridge then it should have a lifting section to allow masted vessels. As I understand it there is a right of "navigation" in the creek that can only be taken away by act of parliament (as was done by the DLR's enablement act in the upper creek in regard to air draft). Logically, the present application, if passed, could only be built after the passing of an act to reduce air draft.
ReplyDeleteApologies Anonymous, I see what you mean but in those situations there's always the Halfpenny Hatch.
Yeah. I agree, a lifting bridge or a pivot bridge to allow the boats is the best idea. Earlier I said no bridge but now you have convinced me otherwise. Make the council enforce the 106 agreement, do not let the developers off the hook on this. Shame on the council for not holding them to their obligation - to build a bridge that meets the right to navigate. Come on, lets have a lovely lifting bridge that we can ride bikes and walk and go in wheelchairs and meet lovers on!
ReplyDeleteBut a lifting bridge would leave us in the same situation as the Creek Road bridge - both would need to be raised and we cannot easily cross the creek into Greenwich.
ReplyDeleteI am amazed this bridge has drawn more comments than a post about Deptford High Street and its attendant problems. Not that this debate isn't just as important, but as yet the planning portal ain't open, and when it is, there will be further opportunities to comment. Can't wait to hear the Deptford Dame's report.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, may I remind anonymous above about the PLA statement quoted on the Pennycook site: “The PLA considers that this is not a suitable location for an additional (opening) bridge as it may deleteriously affect the viability of existing cargo handling operations within Deptford Creek..." and draw attention to Nemo's statement "It’s perfectly possible to have the bridges under co-ordinated control (look on any dutch waterway)".
Good point Sue. Mind you, for all the talk above, nobody seems to be picking up on the point that this bridge is not actually in our borough! It's a Greenwich Council planning application and as we all know we live in Lewisham borough so any comments received will be mainly considered by Greenwich council residents. I guess this is fair as it is the Greenwich borough residents who are more impacted - we wouldn't want them suppressing our planning applications!
ReplyDeleteBoundaries change and more importantly, historically and geographically as well as post-code THIS IS DEPTFORD as much as every developer this side of the Creek up to the new Paynes Wharf development (now described as West Greenwich) attempts to claim otherwise.
ReplyDeleteShipwright - sorry if I confused you - I was not denying this is in Deptford. It is (and god forbid I want to open that can of worms - this comment train is long enough!).
ReplyDeleteAs you correctly point out boundaries change but we have to face facts that, like it or not, this bridge sits in the Greenwich controlled bit of Deptford and I would imagine Greenwich council is consulting with its local residents in the area impacted by the scheme. We, on the Lewisham controlled bit can of course feed into the process but our views will be considered 'out of borough' and our views will not carry as much weight.
Thinking about it cool headed though I guess this does make sense though if not it would be like people living in rich swanky houses in the Greenwich Ashburnham triangle area telling us what we can/can't do on our (Lewisham) patch of Deptford!
Anyway, it will be fascinating to see how this one plays out over the coming weeks.
...and for example, a bridge that opens and is somewhere else in London, http://www.heatherwick.com/rolling-bridge/
ReplyDelete... also listen to http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01j5fw0/Start_the_Week_Thomas_Heatherwick_on_design_and_architecture/
this programme addresses many issues that Deptford faces. It is all about what could be going on at Convoys wharf and on the High Street.