-
The 6-lane, £1/2 billion scheme is being promoted as a "local" crossing,
but in reality would be a strategic link, joining up dual carriageways
to the North Circular and M11 in the north, and all the way to the M25
in the south.
-
Transport for London's interim figures show that only 24% of vehicle
journeys in the morning peak hour would be within the four most immediate
local boroughs, and so would be in any way genuinely "local". TfL on
the other hand count as "local" any journey that begins or ends in one
of the four local boroughs (which could be Brussels to Beckton, or John
O'Groats to Greenwich).
-
In the two most affected boroughs, 41% of people in the borough
of Greenwich and 49% of people in the borough of Newham, do not own
a car (2001 census).
-
Professor John Whitelegg said the bridge would "bring more noise,
pollution and traffic to some of the poorest areas of Britain". At public
meetings in July 2003 he said that this air pollution "would make people
ill".
-
The Mayor has introduced the congestion charge that has reduced
traffic in central London. The Thames Gateway bridge would, by contrast,
increase traffic levels in the poorer areas of outer east and south
east London.
-
A previous scheme proposed for the same location, but continuing
to the A2, was rejected by the Government in part because of the traffic
impact on local areas.
-
Half TfL's Board voted against progressing the Thames Gateway bridge
at a board meeting on 19th November 2003. The scheme only survived because
of the Mayor's casting vote.
-
TfL admit the bridge would generate traffic and encourage people
to change to car use from other forms of transport ("modal shift").
TfL's interim report says it is likely that 40% of trips in the morning
peak time would be those that "would not otherwise cross the river in
East London by car", and previously "might have employed any of a range
of transport options (car, public transport, cycle etc)".
-
Even for car drivers the bridge would create, not solve, problems.
John Elliott says that the bridge would likely result in "worse journey
times for most people". Further, a July 2003 report for the Office of
the Deputy Prime Minister says congestion on existing crossings east
of Tower Bridge would be "not significantly alleviated by the additional
capacity provided by the Thames Gateway bridge and Silvertown Link".
The latter is a proposed 3rd crossing at Blackwall. The report is "Relationship
between Transport and Development in the Thames Gateway" by consultants
Llewelyn Davies and Steer Davies Gleave, with Roger Tym and Partners
and Atkins.
-
The July 2003 report (see above) also states that any potential
benefits from the bridge to business development in the local area would
be "not great in scale", and "should not be over-played", and "could
even be counter-productive" (because of added congestion).
-
Professor John Whitelegg said that the bridge "would do little
or nothing to alleviate unemployment". At public meetings in July 2003
he pointed out that "backers of the Thames Gateway bridge keep trying
to get evidence that roads regenerate, but even then they cannot". John
Elliott has queried whether new jobs that it is claimed would be created
by the bridge would "reduce unemployment in the Thames Gateway boroughs
or will be taken by people outside the area".
-
Despite two of the six lanes on the bridge being proposed as dedicated
for public transport, TfL figures show that access to jobs within 45
minutes travel time by public transport would only be increased by 1%,
much less than that for access by car and other private vehicles.
-
TfL propose to help finance the estimated £425 million cost of
the bridge, using funds from the continued tolling of the Dartford crossing.
This revenue has been promised for transport in East London, and building
the bridge would mean other things loosing out.
-
Local authorities have been reassured by the fact that proposed
tolls to help fund the scheme would have a preferential rate for local
journeys, even though these may be found to be not legal by the European
authorities.
-
Professor John Whitelegg told public meetings in July 2003 that
a much cheaper bridge could be built for walking, cycling and bus use.
This could link up transit schemes proposed for north and south of the
river. There would probably be money over to pay for a further Docklands
Light Rail extension between Royal Docks on the north side of the river
to Thamesmead on the south. The Woolwich Ferry could be revamped rather
than closed as would likely happen if the Thames Gateway bridge were
built.
-
The Government is keen to make best use of development sites in
the Thames Gateway. Whereas building roads tends to require spread out,
car-based development, public transport based development would allow
higher densities to be built, making better use of land available. The
transport expert John Elliott has also made it clear that land is "more
valuable away from large roads".