Seven Reasons why Westminster’s Labour Councillors oppose the proposed Nine Elms to Pimlico bridge

  1. There was no consultation with anybody in Westminster prior to Wandsworth launching the competition for this bridge. Wandsworth simply went ahead with no discussion or consultation, hardly a positive start to a project which says it wants to link the two sides of the river. Since then there has been no real discussion.
  2. The proposed bridge is entirely developer-driven and its sole aim is to make the expensive flats in the Power Station more attractive to overseas buyers by advertising a new direct route to Westminster and the West End.
  3. Some people claim that opposition is because we “don’t want nasty south Londoners to come through super posh St. George’s Square”. However, the truth is that we have been welcoming thousands of pupils from Lambeth, Wandsworth and Southwark to Pimlico School for over 50 years and continue to do so.
  4. The favoured landing site for the proposed bridge is near the Westminster Boating base, on the only piece of public green space in the area opposite the Churchill Gardens estate. Residents do not welcome the prospect of this small piece of public green space being lost to them.
  5. Some people have claimed that this is “the longest stretch of river in the capital without a pedestrian and cycle crossing”. However, there is already a brand new cycle super highway along Vauxhall Bridge Road and Vauxhall Bridge which has just been installed and was built for cyclists entering Pimlico/Westminster from the south. There is simply no need for another a few hundred yards away.
  6. We are very concerned about costs, given Westminster’s experience in 2000 when the costs of the Jubilee Bridge escalated because of the costs of excavating in the Thames where there are many UXBs from WW2 and where expensive ‘hand-digs’ are necessary for foundations. We believe that if there are extra costs involved (and there usually are) the public sector will be asked to pay.
  7. We would argue that the developer’s financial contribution to the community should be spent on new affordable housing, rather than on a vanity project that enhances the sales values of the new private flats