Deptford Open House

This weekend sees the annual Open House event where buildings all across London open their doors to the general public for a free weekend of seeing what goes on behind closed doors.

As a borough, Lewisham's offerings seem woefully few, but Deptford and environs has some notable opportunities to visit buildings which should not be missed, as well as a few walks.

Deptford Town Hall on New Cross Road is open on Saturday, 10am till 5pm and offers "lavish, nautically-themed baroque features" both inside and out.

Have a nebby* behind the great black gates of the Master Shipwright's House on Watergate Street - open Saturday 10.30 till 5 and Sunday 10 till 2, with promises of re-enactors, tea and cakes, and the presence of the Lenox Project and Sayes Court Garden community groups. The oldest remaining building of the former Royal Dockyard. If you haven't been here before, you'll be gobsmacked at what you've missed. If you have been before, you'll be back for more.

(*northern slang for 'nosey' where I'm from)

If the weekend is clear, there are always great views to be had from the top of the Seager Distillery Tower - certainly one local building where it's preferable to be in looking out. Saturday 10-5 and Sunday 10-1. There's usually a short wait to enter, as there's a limit on numbers at the top, but it's worth a look if you want to see Deptford from a different angle.

Walking tours include Sayes Court (pre booking online only), Pepys Park & Surrey Canal Linear Park (meet outside Deptford Park School on Saturday at 11am) and Deptford Town Centre (meet at the north end of the high street outside Boa Lang on Saturday at 2pm).

Despite the lack of places open in Lewisham, Deptford residents have Greenwich and Southwark not too far away so it's worth looking at those parts of the guide if you want something close at hand - and there's plenty a bit further afield that's worth travelling to.

One particular recommendation is the Deptford Creek Swing Bridge (or as the guide would have it, the Greenwich Reach Swing Bridge) where the architects and engineers who designed it will be present on Sunday from 1pm till 5pm. The bridge will be opened on Sunday at 3pm so if you've always wanted to see it swing without being inconvenienced, now's your chance!

Full information is online at http://www.openhouselondon.org.uk

New riverside path finally on the horizon

On a morning pootle earlier this week I discovered that the riverside route from Wood Wharf through to New Crapital Quay is finally open! Yes, the much-misused cul-de-sac that used to serve as an impromptu rain shelter for fisherman, not to mention a venue for the misplaced youth of Greenwich, has finally achieved a more useful purpose. 

It's not much of a change at the moment, but does continue the traffic-free link a few hundred yards further towards Deptford. In due course there will be a new pub on the riverside as another stopping off point, but right now it's just a swathe of underwhelming public realm with more oddly-positioned seating (a view directly into someone's front room, anyone?).

From next Monday, of course, the route will continue still further with the opening of the new Deptford Creek swing bridge. The official opening takes place at 9am, for anyone who wants to attend and doesn't have a job to go to.

Deptford Creek footbridge

You may recall that a new footbridge is due to be built to provide a direct link from Millennium Quay to New Capital Quay across Deptford Creek on the Thames Path. (Some of you may refer to it as Greenwich Reach. It's a free world after all.)

It will make it a much more pleasant trip along the river for walkers and cyclists than having to do the detour over the road bridge and past the pointless public realm.

Reliable sources inform me that next week updated: first delivery now due on 26th August we should actually get to see bits of the new footbridge arriving on site, with completion scheduled for later this year.

Don't get too excited/underwhelmed by these photos, which my source has received from the companies that were contracted to build it. They show the bits of steel being welded together in the works of SH Structures up in North Yorkshire to create several large pieces that will be brought to the site and assembled to make the bridge structure. Turns out it's the same company that supplied the large steel props that hold the Cutty Sark in place.

Photo above is the access at the tower end, I think, with the triangular bits being where the cables will be attached behind the mast (far right in the visualisation at the top).

I think the photo above shows the main deck of the bridge, but it's upside down so that the welders can get access to the joints.

(From Twitter @Mnthorogood)

The pictures above show the equipment that will used to rotate the mast and span of the bridge when it opens and closes. Take a good look as they will probably be hidden away once the bridge is built. The company designing this part of the bridge is Eadon Consulting while the overall design of the bridge is being done by Flint & Neill.

The company building the bridge is Raymond Brown Construction - they have a nice time-lapse film on their website showing the access ramps being built. 

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.

New footbridge for Deptford Creek - at what cost?

This week Greenwich Council's planning board approved a planning application for a new swing bridge over the mouth of Deptford Creek. This is great news for pedestrians and cyclists using the Thames path, and once access along the front of New Capital Quay is fully open, will make the journey from Deptford to Greenwich so much more pleasant.

The original proposal put forward by NCQ developer Galliard was pretty gruesome, and thankfully died a fairly rapid death under the derision heaped upon it. It's fair to say that the new design, a cable-stayed swing bridge, is a vast improvement from an aesthetic point of view and also in terms of accessibility.

But while the bridge will offer improved amenity to pedestrians and cyclists, if its operation is not properly managed it could well become a serious obstacle for those who live on boats on the creek itself, or who use its waters for pleasure or business.

Being entirely cynical it's easy to suggest that this is not a concern that Greenwich Council loses much sleep over - as boaters have pointed out, the Greenwich banks of Deptford Creek are noted for their long line of signs proclaiming 'No Mooring'. While they don't have any signs saying 'Keep orf my land!' you can kind of read that between the lines.

As recently as five or ten years ago there was a thriving community of houseboats on the Creek, now there are only a handful left. Many of those moored on the Greenwich side were evicted when the creekside sites were redeveloped; no provisions to support the continued presence of these boats were considered and they were moved on as if they were illegal squatters. A more enlightened local authority might have seen the benefit in opening up the banks of the creek and encouraging houseboats to moor there, adding colour, interest and vibrancy to the creek side.

The river is also used by James Prior boats to deliver aggregates to the site right next to the Creek Road lifting bridge; here the aggregate is mixed into concrete and supplied to construction sites locally. This system keeps a large number of lorries off our local roads.

During the consultancy phase for the Thames Tunnel project, it was suggested that the traffic impact of construction work at the Greenwich pumping station might be reduced greatly by the use of the creek for deliveries of shaft lining units and removal of spoil. The developer at Faircharm has also given a (somewhat vague) commitment to exploring the use of the creek for deliveries, but at least the idea is there. All this could come to naught, however, if it proves impossible to synchronise the operation of two movable bridges within the limited tidal window to enable boats to get upstream and service the sites.

Practicalities aside, what really gets my goat about this particular planning decision is the fact that New Capital Quay developer Galliard has demanded permission for extra storeys on two riverside buildings in order to 'pay' for the bridge. At the same planning meeting, permission was given for an additional 22 residential units to be built on top of two blocks on the riverside. The two applications were inextricably linked.

If this pedestrian bridge had been a last minute demand from the council, dreamed up recently and imposed on the developer without any thought, I would have considered such a request reasonable. But the bridge was part of the S106 agreement drafted when planning permission was granted for the initial development, and as such I believe it should have been honoured by the developer (or indeed demanded by the local authority). In fact Galliards has said it can't afford to build the bridge because of the change in the housing market since it bought the land.

I was staggered to read the following statement in the planning department's report on the application:

"The applicants have been in discussions with the Council about the requirement to provide the footbridge stating that the Greenwich Reach site was purchased at the top of the market at the end of 2007 for a premium just prior to the financial crisis in 2008 and subsequently the reduction in house prices and value of this site means that the site is only now marginally viable. The obligation to provide the footbridge without providing the additional residential proposed by this application would make the scheme unviable. The scheme has been assessed by the Council’s Independent Viability Assessor who has agreed with the finding of the viability appraisal."

So: "We speculated on the purchase of a piece of land and we got burned. We can't make enough profit because house prices crashed."

Anyone who's taken a peek behind the new Waitrose will be aware of the density of this development. The handkerchief-size square of open land outside the store is probably the biggest bit of public space between buildings on the peninsula. The road through the middle is a soulless chasm of sheer-sided apartment blocks which, given its east-west orientation is unlikely to see sunshine for much of the year. Aside from building taller blocks, the developer couldn't have fitted many more units on this site.

So 'in return' for fulfilling an obligation made five years ago in specific circumstances, the devcloper has now been given permission to increase the density further by adding more units to two waterfront buildings. Galliard shareholders can rest easy now, their annual dividend assured by the local authority.

Sneak peek at new footbridge proposals

Apparently there was a bit of a hoo-ha last week when someone at Greenwich planning department prematurely posted the documents for the revised proposal for a new footbridge over the mouth of Deptford Creek.

I wrote earlier in the year about the initial design, which was clunky, ugly and generally pretty piss poor. Unsurprisingly it attracted a lot of complaints.

For once Greenwich Council stood up to the developers (who are building the footbridge in exchange for getting a few more storeys on top of the biggest block) and insisted something more appropriate was  developed.

The documents were published on the planning website last week, only to be hastily pulled a couple of days later, apparently because the details were still being finalised.

Happily they were up there long enough for us snooping bloggers to take advantage, hence I offer you the following (possibly exclusive?) sneak peek of what to expect.

Credit where it's due - this elegant little cable-stayed bridge which presumably rotates around the tower to open the Creek for larger boats, looks like it might do the trick very nicely. As someone who's regularly disappointed by the architectural calibre of local developments, I await further details and an official announcement with some excitement.

Until then, shhh!

Deptford Creek - a tale of two footbridges

So it seems that progress is expected this year on TWO new footbridge links across Deptford Creek, one of which you may be aware of, the other of which is a past project risen from the dead; the Lazarus of creek footbridges. 

We've all heard the story about the Millennium Quay footbridge, which is intended to connect Millennium Quay to New Capital Quay across the mouth of the creek, built with the express intention of providing a direct route from Deptford to Waitrose thank you very much. 

Originally it appeared rendered on the images of the new development as some kind of slender, white-winged angel of the bridge world, the deck held aloft by magic with no visible means of support. It was an architect's impression of how all bridges would look if you didn't have to get those pesky engineers involved.

There was talk of a design competition and promises of some glorious swing bridge that would elevate the riverside walk into a transport of delight.

But when it came to actually delivering the bridge, the developer not only demanded a couple of extra storeys on top of the tower block to 'pay' for the bridge, but also delivered this lumpen monstrosity as the proposed solution.

Could it be further from the original rendering? Quite aside from the fact that it ain't up to much in the looks department, there's the small matter of navigation on the creek. Apparently there is a right of navigation on the creek for all vessels, including those with masts, which is why the bridges that exist already are opening structures. After outrage was heaped on the design from all sides, the council asked the developer to perhaps give a bit more consideration to the bridge proposal. Apparently a new submission is expected soon, let's hope they have found something more appropriate both to its location and its operational requirements.

Meanwhile a planning application has recently been submitted to Greenwich Council for another bridge across the creek, further upstream, which is intended to provide a direct link from the land next the Laban Centre (and the odious Creekside 'Village') to Greenwich railway station.

Again, the footbridge is part of the 106 agreement relating to the Creekside Village development, and has been on the wishlist of Greenwich Council for more than a decade. Previous proposals have come and gone, and when this latest incarnation bobbed up on the incoming tide like an unflushable turd, one long-term Deptford resident was heard to comment: 'Blimey, that old chestnut surfaces again!'

No sexy renderings I'm afraid, this was obviously a low-budget report. There are some technical drawings in the feasibility study if you are interested, but the main usp of the Laban bridge is the unusual tilt and twist opening mechanism by which it intends to retain the clear navigation height on the waterway. It will be interesting to see how achievable this is - it's unusual for such a structure to be designed to tilt AND twist and it raises questions about the amount of space needed behind the abutment to achieve this. 

It's also interesting to note that the proposed bridge will not offer a clear span across the creek; for some reason the designers have put a pier in the river on the Greenwich side, something which is unlikely to be welcomed by authorities such as the Environment Agency and the Port of London Authority. Maintenance and operation costs of this type of structure are likely to be relatively substantial, considering the unusual nature of the bridge and the hydraulics required to open it, and I suspect may have been somewhat underplayed in the report.   

The impact these additional bridges could have on vessels using the creek has not been given any consideration. With four opening bridges potentially having to be operated by a single person, it could take some time for masted or large boats to get from one end of the creek to another, possibly longer than the available tide, putting severe restrictions on the type of vessels that could access the waterway.