River Thames should be London’s ‘artery’

  • Thread starter Thread starter CJL
  • Start date Start date

CJL

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 May 2010
Messages
499
Location
London
Visit site
http://www.maritimejournal.com/feat...ruction/river-thames-should-be-londons-artery

River Thames should be London’s ‘artery’
06 Nov 2012

Now is the time to show the advantages of using the Thames as an artery across London for heavy lifting and transportation says Chris Livett of Livett’s Launches, adding that there’s plenty of room for it.

He should know. Livett’s was appointed by Balfour Beatty as principal marine services provider for the truly massive Blackfriars Bridge and Network Rail redevelopment project and has spent the past three years transforming the site.

Mr Livett said, “The river is a four lane highway that we are just not making the most of.” He explained that although 80,000 tonnes of construction material moved to and from the site, not one extra lorry was put on London’s roads.

“In fact, using the roads would have been impossible because of the shapes and sizes of these pieces of kit he added. “Now is the time to get the message through to Thames Water that the river is the right option. We can use Blackfriars and other projects as case studies to show that it can be done. They have some very tricky sites to feed and it makes perfect sense to put things on the water.”

Mr Livett believes that the use of the river for freight transportation is key for not only utilising London’s assets to assist projects like this, but to improve infrastructure, congestion and road safety in London, particularly for cyclists, by reducing numbers of lorries on the city’s roads.

“There is something of a renaissance going on. We are looking at four different, large jobs using the Thames to transport construction materials and spoil. The first one is the Battersea railway bridge, which also has plans for a public footpath running along it.

“Then there will be a lot of spoil coming out of Fulham. Vauxhall has a new residential development, and there is the Battersea Power Station development along with the refurbishment of the Northern Line tube and the whole of the Nine Elms quarter, all of which will be using the river.”

The biggest project, however, will be the Thames Tideway Tunnel to which Mr Livett referred earlier. It doesn’t sound dramatic but is actually a super sewer involving four main hub sites stretching between Putney and Greenwich, which will result in at least 2m tonnes of spoil from the build that will need to be transported by barge.

These projects together look likely to employ some 9,000 people and treble the amount of freight on the Thames over the next five years.
 
A bit of history.

Both the river Thames and Medway were used to transport cargos of all sorts over the years and in fact still do so,but during the 1970s due to govenment enthusiasm for the free market aka. road transport,both the rail and waterways system were left to rot.
Until not long ago any river or canal was something that the town planners turned their back on and you chucked your shopping trolley into.
The belated realisation that a ready made method of moving stuff around exists and that it could be a visual asset to sell dwellings as well,is slowly reappearing.
It is not to late.
Locally we have no public access to the Medway as all the piers have been removed due simply to no money to repair them,they literally fell to bits where they were..
It needs long term govenment action to sort this,there is no other way !
 
I absolutely agree with Chris Livett about the Tidal Thames and other rivers. So many unused wharves and jetties rotting away. Convoys at Greenwich with two ro ro berths taking hundreds perhaps thousands of lorry journeys off the roads was allowed to shut and now will be filled up with unaffordable housing.
Sainburys has a very large depot right beside the river at Charlton and has foreign lorries unloading all the time, but no useage of the river.
On the Medway we have a new incinerator at Allington beside the Tidal Medway but again no use of the river to transport the waste for burning. Just one of many oppotunities to ease traffic conjestion and pollution around the uk by using rivers, canals and small harbours.
Unfortunately the non tidal Medway has probably got no prospects of having any commercial traffic with regard to freight, but there must be oppotunities on the non tidal Thames?
 
Many opportunities, yes, but all require major investment as well as a will to make it happen.

Witness the problems we are having on the non-tidal Thames with regard to funding. Government intent on paying less, user groups unwilling to pay more, and a total lack of joined up thinking to create new revenue streams.
 
Many opportunities, yes, but all require major investment as well as a will to make it happen.

Witness the problems we are having on the non-tidal Thames with regard to funding. Government intent on paying less, user groups unwilling to pay more, and a total lack of joined up thinking to create new revenue streams.

At risk of getting the finer detail wrong, when Harleyford were applying for permission for their extension, they proposed that the spoil should be taken away by river.

AFAIK there was opposition to that!
In the end they dropped it saying it was not "economic".

So I echo B1, muddled and not joined up thinking.

Source: Planning application process.
 
This would be interesting.

Many opportunities, yes, but all require major investment as well as a will to make it happen.

Witness the problems we are having on the non-tidal Thames with regard to funding. Government intent on paying less, user groups unwilling to pay more, and a total lack of joined up thinking to create new revenue streams.



The main difference there though,the usual proposed upper Thames funding would be to enhance facilities for leisure users.
Investment for industrial and commercial might be easier to find.
However the mere prospect of a tug sporting tyres for fenders and towing 2 lighters full of highly whiffy "rough stuff" going into Bray lock with all you highly strung gin palace owners,would certainly have me rushing up there with my camera PDQ.:):):)
 
Top