Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Would you use a floating bicycle toll road along the Thames?

Thames Deckway inventors will start crowd funding the idea this week - it's likely to cost more than £600m though...

Remember seeing this floating bicycle toll road along the Thames last year? Thought it was consigned to the 'seemed like a good idea at the time' pile? Well, you were wrong. Someone still thinks it's a good idea and, yes, they're crowd funding it.

Plans for the Thames Deckway appear the same as they were last October, when the projected cost was a whopping £600m for a 12km route from Battersea to Canary Wharf. Now its inventors want it to stretch from Battersea to Greenwich instead, a distance of around 17km (11 miles).

If built the floating pontoon on the Thames' south bank will, for a section, run parallel with the East-West cycle superhighway, which is currently being built on the river's north side, whose entire 18 mile length is expected to cost just £47m. The original proposal was to charge £1.50 for a single Deckway journey.

 - Poll shows massive support for new London Cycle Superhighways

Anna Hill, a co-inventor of the project, said the Thames is a resource that is currently being under used, and the Deckway, which would also generate energy through solar cells, could be ready as early as 2019.

"With the success of this campaign we're ready to go. We're now so close to making this happen; we have the engineers, we have the designs and we have a plan," she said.  

Inventors hope the Indiegogo campaign, which opens on 5 November, will raise £250,000 to develop a master plan, develop engineering further, and try to find out how many cyclists will use it.

Peter Murray, Chairman of New London Architecture, said: "The Thames Deckway is inspirational because the Thames has been London's lifeline throughout history. If you look at images of 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th Century the river was buzzing with activity...today it's pretty dead by comparison, really, so why don't we use it for cycling?"

What do you think? Would you use a cycle toll road along the river? Is it worth £600m? 

Add new comment

41 comments

Avatar
zanf | 8 years ago
0 likes

The campaign is now up at Indiegogo, and lo and behold, its under "flexible funding", which means they keep whatever money is raised.

Their idea is bad, and they should feel bad.

Avatar
ConcordeCX replied to zanf | 8 years ago
1 like
zanf wrote:

The campaign is now up at Indiegogo, and lo and behold, its under "flexible funding", which means they keep whatever money is raised.

Their idea is bad, and they should feel bad.

just noticed that it's a cyclng and pedestrian path, which takes it into another realm of stupidity altogether. 

Avatar
TchmilFan | 8 years ago
0 likes
Avatar
ConcordeCX | 8 years ago
0 likes

I live in Greenwich. One of the great joys of living by the river is being able to look out over it and enjoy its changing moods from one day, one hour even, to the next, and to enjoy the tides and the beach. This historic and relatively unspoilt treasure has inestimable value to possibly millions of people, today and hopefully long into the future.

The river is more than just an economic or transport resource to be exploited for someone's vanity.

This stupid scheme and numerous others like it that have come and gone in the 20+ years I've been living and cycling here have nothing whatsoever to do with cyclists or their needs.

If implemented this hideous monstrosity would destroy the river for the millions of people who treasure it, who would resent any cyclists dumb enough to use it, and resent them perhaps even more if they didn't use it so that it was just a useless decaying eyesore. It would do nothing to improve a great city that is choked, literally and metaphorically, by motor vehicles.

Spend the money, but spend it on getting cars and lorries off the roads so that our cities became civilised and livable.

Avatar
CAAD8105 Tourer | 8 years ago
0 likes

Absolute Nonsence.

 

Avatar
CAAD8105 Tourer | 8 years ago
0 likes

What is this crap. The country cannot afford the up keep of main roads let alone this. 

All of the other answers opposing this ludicrous idea are brilliant .

 

Let me add my own to the list.

Lets start with Rescue Escapes. Oh sorry can't get to you right now hang on to the handrails and tell the next person who comes up behind you to do the same.!!!

How many months a year do we have sunshine? Not many people enjoy riding in sub zero temperatures. Might as well convert your ride to Ice Skates when this happens.

London can be bloody windy. What happens to water going over the path. Oh sorry torrential rain began at 11.47 today and the Thames is expected to rise significantly. Oh Shit Tsunami!!!

Once it falls into any disrepair it needs fixing and who is going to pay for that. What do I hear. 

We regret that we will be required to raise the tariff.... 

Borris Johnson should oppose this for ethical / humanitarian reasons.

People are homeless/lifeless in London. I don't see anyone crowdfunding £600,000,000 to help the Vulnerable

Say No to this project in its infancy

The country is bankrupt apparently. 

Avatar
PhilRuss replied to CAAD8105 Tourer | 8 years ago
0 likes
CAAD8105 Tourer wrote:

Absolute Nonsence.

 

  [[[[[[  Spot on, squire.  I feel sea-sick already....passing boats create bow-waves, don't they? Six hundred million pounds seems an expensive way to get a few pesky cyclists out of the way of delivery lorries and skip-trucks. And never mind plastic helmets---get those water-wings on. Ye godz wot next!

Avatar
antigee | 8 years ago
1 like

presumably the consultancy fee will include flights to Melbourne to check out the Yarra Pontoons that lead into the city next to the (heavily congested) tolled citylink 

Picture shows that silting underneath was an unforeseen (or underestimated problem) - also despite being in Aus' rain and the odd icey morning are a problem.

Also built too narrow for safe peak use with some horrible pinch points on entry and exit ramps

Having said that it is a beautiful ride into the City only to dump you onto roads that are only slowly becoming cycle friendlier. 

picture from https://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/general/policy-and-campaigns/2649/

you have to scroll down the history to find the article

Avatar
Matt eaton | 8 years ago
1 like

Is this simply a scam?

They are after £250k to carry out a feasibility study from what I understand. Given that the idea will never get any further this seems like a cunning way to pay yourself or your mate's constancy firm a pretty penny to carry out some completely unnecessary work. They haven't even figured out how many people might use it but somehow have worked out what the toll costs should be already; it just doesn't add up.

Avatar
Matt eaton | 8 years ago
1 like

Is this simply a scam?

They are after £250k to carry out a feasibility study from what I understand. Given that the idea will never get any further this seems like a cunning way to pay yourself or your mate's constancy firm a pretty penny to carry out some completely unnecessary work. They haven't even figured out how many people might use it but somehow have worked out what the toll costs should be already; it just doesn't add up.

Avatar
Matt eaton | 8 years ago
1 like

Is this simply a scam?

They are after £250k to carry out a feasibility study from what I understand. Given that the idea will never get any further this seems like a cunning way to pay yourself or your mate's constancy firm a pretty penny to carry out some completely unnecessary work. They haven't even figured out how many people might use it but somehow have worked out what the toll costs should be already; it just doesn't add up.

Avatar
barbarus | 8 years ago
0 likes

Or we could completely drain the Thames, re-route the water into selected London streets and use them for water taxis while making the now empty river bed into a 9 lane mega highway. Seems at least as practical as this!

Avatar
Leviathan | 8 years ago
1 like

Will there be a Strava segment down it? I'd pay for a cheap timetrial course.

Avatar
levermonkey | 8 years ago
1 like

Wait for the first cyclist to hit, injure or kill a swan! Cue headline competition.angel

Avatar
PaulBox | 8 years ago
0 likes

I think it's great / mental in equal measure.

I don't commute around that way, but if it worked for me, I'd pay £1.50 to be able to cycle 10+ miles in central London without having to worry about traffic, absolutely.

It's mental because it just is, far too expensive, will never get off the ground etc. etc. But don't people say that about a lot of the best ideas?

Avatar
thereverent | 8 years ago
1 like

These kind of rubbish ideas just don't seem to want to die.

This idea would have too many conflicts with bridges, river traffic, listed buildings etc. Then add to that the likelyhood it wouldn't cover its costs with the £1.50 charge conpeting with the free roads alongside (included the east-west superhighway for a large part).

This fundraising will get no-where, then it will be relauched again in a few months.

Avatar
Al__S | 8 years ago
1 like

good plan. Lets go

Avatar
theloststarfighter | 8 years ago
2 likes

 I've an idea...

 

Avatar
Airzound | 8 years ago
2 likes

This a joke right?

Avatar
redhanded | 8 years ago
3 likes

So we've had Norman Foster with his stupid Sky Cycle concept, putting bikes above streets, then a design company, Gensler, came up with another stupid idea to put bikes in tube tunnels then we have this idiot putting bikes on the river.

What is it about architects and design firms that means they come up with completely mad ideas about where to put bikes when we already have these things called roads.

However of course putting bikes on roads needs all that boring highway engineering stuff to do with junction design, kerbing, drainage, traffic lights and no architect or design company would lower themselves to all that boring, useful stuff when they can grab headlines with yet another idiotic idea.

The irony being that the idiotic ideas that have or may get built, like the cable car and garden bridge, don't actually allow for bicycles.

Avatar
bikebot replied to redhanded | 8 years ago
0 likes
redhanded wrote:

So we've had Norman Foster with his stupid Sky Cycle concept, putting bikes above streets, then a design company, Gensler, came up with another stupid idea to put bikes in tube tunnels then we have this idiot putting bikes on the river.

The overall concept deservedly took a lot of flack, but I still think building cycle tracks above and alongside railways deserves a lot more consideration.  That's not "build a network", as the Foster project was, but look at places where urban routes can be linked up by running parrallel to and crossing railway cuttings.

Railway cuttings are often huge, but their use is barely considered because planners just throw up their hands in the face of legal problems.

Avatar
Al__S replied to bikebot | 8 years ago
0 likes
bikebot wrote:

ilway cuttings are often huge, but their use is barely considered because planners just throw up their hands in the face of legal problems.

 

Most railway cuttings in London are very much discontinuous. They often have short tunnels, and more importantly they tend to have stations over them, often on streets lined with businesses .

The illustrative example for Foster's folly seemed to involve Stratford to Liverpool Street. Now, that is free, for most of the way, of aerial obstacles. Because the railway itself is elevated- as, indeed, are quite a few of the railways approaching the centre of London.

Avatar
bikebot replied to Al__S | 8 years ago
0 likes
Al__S wrote:
bikebot wrote:

ilway cuttings are often huge, but their use is barely considered because planners just throw up their hands in the face of legal problems.

 

Most railway cuttings in London are very much discontinuous. They often have short tunnels, and more importantly they tend to have stations over them, often on streets lined with businesses .

The illustrative example for Foster's folly seemed to involve Stratford to Liverpool Street. Now, that is free, for most of the way, of aerial obstacles. Because the railway itself is elevated- as, indeed, are quite a few of the railways approaching the centre of London.

Absolutely, that's why the idea of it being a network is daft.

But on the other hand, going back to the LCN routes you can find many places in London which could be better linked up and made more direct with access to short sections of railway land.  At the moment the railways do the exact opposite, they get in the way and causes some quite convoluted diversions.

Avatar
peted76 | 8 years ago
0 likes

Not being a London based cyclist, I'm not really in a position of knowledge, however the idea of using 'free space' on the thames seems great (if it's possible).

The price however is ludicrous! The cost certainly wouldn't be in engineering or manufacturing costs.

The scheme is as close to happening as we are to achieving world peace.

May as well build a floating bus type of device which could transport people and cargo up and down the river... oh hang on. How about a fixed line transportation device, under the earth which could hold thousands of people and run every five mins back and fourth... oh hang on.

Avatar
Brodie | 8 years ago
0 likes

No. 

Avatar
bikebot | 8 years ago
4 likes

Worth another read.

http://www.copenhagenize.com/2015/02/the-village-idiot-of-urban-innovati...

Quote:

The second act of our absurd vaudeville production is a floating cycleway on the River Thames. £600 million. That's 5,963,800,635.36 Danish kroner at today's rate, which makes it sound even more stupid. I don't even know where to start with this one. The rendering, above, doesn't even have any off ramps. Is it recreational? Who knows. Who cares. Another architect so far removed from the reality of life in cities. Take a number, pal.

Avatar
Al__S | 8 years ago
1 like

£600million would provide for building a significant % of the original proposed Cycle Superhighway network to the stadards of the E-W, N-S and new CS5.

Avatar
Al__S | 8 years ago
0 likes

I really hope their crowdfunding die, horribly, on it's arse.

Avatar
Paul_C | 8 years ago
1 like

is it April Fool's Day 6 months early?

Avatar
PaulBox replied to Paul_C | 8 years ago
0 likes
Paul_C wrote:

is it April Fool's Day 6 months early?

5?

Pages

Latest Comments