Forum Topic

Hammersmith Bridge

Have seen a few posts on Facebook this morning regarding Hammersmith Bridge. Not opening to vehicles only for cyclists and pedestrians. 2 lanes for cyclists another for pedestrians, all that time so Putney still will get all the traffic.

Barbara Stevens ● 564d15 Comments

All what traffic? You've obviously not seen the data that shows fewer motor vehicles crossing Putney Bridge than before the closure.

Richard Carter ● 564d

How long before the cyclists decide 2 lanes is not enough and start using the pedestrian lane , as if it's a pavement on a normal street?

Andy Pike ● 564d

Oh, Richard.  Statistics!  GrrrYou just need to see the High Street and the Hill on the rare occasion that there are no road works along the line and it is dire!I know you are ultra keen on the closure of the bridge.  Please find an equal solution for the traffic at the end of the A3 and perhaps then, we can start talking.But, before then, please find a solution to all the traffic that originates outside London and prevent them from entering London.  Good luck!!!!

Ivonne Holliday ● 564d

Ivonne, yes, there is too much traffic, but there is a straightforward solution to that: variable road pricing, such that the cost of using valuable road space varies according to demand.  So it would be highest at peak period, lowest when few people are about. Unfortunately, the politicians have been frightened off this because they're understandably concerned about the inevitable bleating of "the war on the motorist"

Richard Carter ● 564d

What a lovely sight!

Richard Carter ● 564d

Hello Richard, A lovely sight in your view after £48m spent.  Congratulations!  So far, BJ spent £38m on a bridge that was not built, plus this which makes it a total of £86m of tax payers money.  As far as I am concerned, it is absolutely preposterous!   Here comes another photograph that will delight you:

Ivonne Holliday ● 563d

So who is going to post the picture of a passenger cargo bike going over the bridge?  Someone must have one by now!

Philippa Bond ● 563d

After all these years of being repaired it looks a complete mess.Many features are now completely enclosed. Possibly hiding the high energy cooling and heating system needed to stabilise the structure.One wonders also how much iron has been replaced with steel or other non period materials??Even after repairs are completed it will probably not come with any guarantee that it will not simply close again a few months later for yet more repairs.There needs to be greater transparency and accountability for the large sums of public money being spent.Unfortunately as with other areas of UK life - extreme political ideology is driving policy.

Ed Robinson ● 563d

Ivonne, Johnson's spaffing millions on the ludicrous "Garden Bridge" is nothing to do with this. And the money spent on Hammersmith Bridge was mainly to make it safe and secure, not just to resurface it: you're muddling two separate things here.And thanks for the excellent photo of Jeremy Vine.

Richard Carter ● 563d

No, Richard, I am not muddling two separate things - just mentioning millions of pounds down the drain!Supposedly, and I stress supposedly, a lot of the £48 million was spent reinforcing the bridge for future vehicular traffic.  That amount of work and expenditure was not required for cyclists and pedestrian traffic only!  It is akin to the HS2 fiasco.  I suppose the photo opportunity was celebrated by many....

Ivonne Holliday ● 563d

No, you are wrong, you are confusing work to make the bridge safe with work to improve its surface for pedestrians and cyclists. Of the £48 million total, £45 million was needed to restore and keep the bridge safe, and that work woukd have been needed whatever. £2.9 million was spent on preparing the surface for pedestrians, cyclists and e-scooter users.https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/news/2025/04/hammersmith-bridge-main-carriageway-open-pedestrians-and-cyclists

Richard Carter ● 562d

If a political decision has been made not to open the bridge for vehicles then that should have been communicated clearly years ago and options with costs assessed accordingly.The options and costs would be very different from the ones that were taken.Yet again we see people dismiss the lack of transparency, poor practice and the abuse of public money just because it aligns with their political view.

Ed Robinson ● 562d

No, Richard, I am not confusing anything at all.Making the bridge safe was a non-negotiable requirement.  However, the reinforcement of the bridge was always required for vehicular traffic and that is what they were working towards.  No, £48m worth of reinforcement for cyclists and pedestrians traffic is a scandal and robbery.Is it not odd how the successive Governments have always parroted that Hammersmith Bridge is owned by H&FB.  On the other hand, Albert Bridge required reinforcement and work done in 2010-11 and, surprise surprise, the RBKC (who by then owned the bridge) paid 25% of the expenditure and the remaining 75% was paid for TfL.  Hmmmmmmmmmmm

Ivonne Holliday ● 562d

"£48m worth of reinforcement for cyclists and pedestrians traffic is a scandal and robbery."It would have been if that was the case, but it wasn't: the work to prepare the bridge for pedestrians and cyclists, as I pointed out, was £2.9 million; the remainder of the £48 million, £45 million, was to restore and keep the bridge safe, which would have been needed even if it hadn't been made ready for pedestrians etc.And the restoration of Albert Bridge cost £7.2 million (https://citydays.com/places/albert-bridge/), somewhat less than the £250 million (and counting) that would be needed for Hammersmith!

Richard Carter ● 562d

How many bicycles and pedestrians do you need on the bridge to reach the maximum current beareing of 44 tonnes?Yes, the restoration of Albert Bridge in 2010-11 was £7.2 million because the extent of its "damage" was nowhere near that of Hammersmith Bridge following the boat crashing into one of its pilons.  I still have a nagging thought though.  What would the outcome of the repair of Hammersmith Bridge been had it been in a Conservative borough, such as K&C.....The original estimate for the repair of Hammersmith Bridge was £40 million in 2019.  It has escalated to eye watering £250 million.  I do not understand why it has reached such enormous proportions and, still niggling in the back of my mind, could the full go ahead not have been given in 2019.  I think it is and was politics, even if Hammersmith Bridge was considered, prior to its closure, a strategically important river crossing and main London transport artery...

Ivonne Holliday ● 562d