Sunday 20 October 2013

Revised footbridge designs for Greenwich Reach/Deptford Creek

New designs for the proposed swing bridge over the mouth of Deptford Creek have been submitted to Greenwich planners, and the design documents are on the planning website. Don't be fooled by the visualisations, however, they are the same as the ones that were posted with the (first revision)  application earlier this year

The pictures I've posted here are taken from the new detailed design planning statement. Galliard Homes - the developer of the New Capital Quay which has to provide the swing bridge as part of its section 106 commitment (although as I explained in my last post, got agreement for some extra floors on top of its existing buildings to 'pay' for the bridge) has now commissioned some proper bridge designers - Flint & Neill - to examine the proposal and ensure it is workable. Despite the fact that it's a small structure, a certain level of experience is required to properly design a cable-stayed swing span bridge. 

The revised design is a lot less flashy but according to those in the know, looks like it might actually work from a structural point of view. The mast height has been lowered, the arrangement of the counterweight has been changed and various details of the design have been adjusted to reduce the amount of future maintenance required. Reading the planning details, it sounds like the initial proposal was, shall we say, unworkable?

One glaring omission from the documents so far is any firm commitment on operation - an issue which is particularly thorny for the Creek's boat dwellers and those who use it for goods deliveries such as Priors.


Anonymous said...

Hi, will the new bridge look likes the design pictured here, or the design pictured on your previous article

Deptford Dame said...

@anon the clue's in the word 'revised'

@thetilbury said...

Hello. Does the swing bridge have a name yet? "Deptford Creek Swing Bridge" would be an unimaginative title. Wondered if anything official has been decided yet?