London SE1 community website

Garden Bridge

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Current: 7 of 52
Wednesday 17 September 2014 3.11am
When I went to the exhibition at WAC, they told me they didn't plan to have any retail outlets under the 'landing station', although they were very unclear about how that space would be used.
Wednesday 17 September 2014 7.38am
I suspect it might be used as an open urinal considering there are no public toilets at all, factored into their ' plans'. Imagine coach loads of school groups and OAPs gathering in that open space with no loos....

Anthony Marley the GBT Programme Director, told me people would have to use toilets at the London Eye - yes, seriously
Wednesday 17 September 2014 8.11am
Oh I don't know, I still like the idea. Re urinals: besides the London Eye public toilets there are also those relatively new facilities near the Wonderground that look quite capacious, as well as for example the National Theatre, so trying to use the lack of facilities as an argument seems a bit far-fetched.
Wednesday 17 September 2014 8.25am
Oh stuff it...why don't we just pave over the Thames entirely? It only gets in the way, doesn't it?

...if you press it, they will come.
Wednesday 17 September 2014 10.28am
Ivanhoe wrote:
Oh stuff it...why don't we just pave over the Thames entirely? It only gets in the way, doesn't it?

As one of London's main attractions, that would defy the purpose, no?
Wednesday 17 September 2014 10.50am
eDWaRD WooDWaRD wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:
Oh stuff it...why don't we just pave over the Thames entirely? It only gets in the way, doesn't it?

As one of London's main attractions, that would defy the purpose, no?

The river's definitely one of the main attractions of the Southbank, imo.

Which is one of the main reasons that I think this "bridge" (can you even call it a bridge if it's closed in the evenings?) is misguided.

It will block the view of the river from existing vantage points, and there's no need for an additional crossing in the proposed location (unless the logic is that we need bridges every 1/4 mile along the whole central stretch of the Thames).

Enough people come to the Southbank already. It's very well served with bridges, and with tube/bus routes that cross the river. I'd argue that the problem on the Southbank at the moment is how to reduce the congestion by giving existing visitors more room to spread out and enjoy things. This bridge will do the opposite.

As for the "It will regenerate the area around Temple" argument...that's completely barmy for so many reasons.

...if you press it, they will come.
Wednesday 17 September 2014 11.20am
And still not a single bridge east of Tower bridge ?????!!!!!!!!!!! I can't believe how cut off that part of the south bank is from the north !
Wednesday 17 September 2014 11.31am
National Theatre loos are built for the National Theatre; Wonderground loos are installed for the Wonderground; London Eye loos are ... you got it! For the London Eye. A new tourist attraction needs to support it's potential FOUR million + visitors without relying on existing resources which are stretched already... common sense I would've thought.
Wednesday 17 September 2014 11.41am
qwerty wrote:
National Theatre loos are built for the National Theatre; Wonderground loos are installed for the Wonderground; London Eye loos are ... you got it! For the London Eye. A new tourist attraction needs to support it's potential FOUR million + visitors without relying on existing resources which are stretched already... common sense I would've thought.

The Wonderground loos are public. I dont think they belong to Wonderground, they just happen to be nearby. I regularly use the NT loos (going about my business, have a weak bladder, don't ask..). If there are plenty of facilities available, what's the point of building more? And anyway, as I've already said, seems a bit desperate to use that as an argument.
Wednesday 17 September 2014 11.52am
Dear Edward; I'm sorry to hear you have a weak bladder and I'm happy that you can use the NT loos. However they can really only accommodate as many people as we have using them currently and an extra 4 million + people (which you seem to be in denial about) will put a strain (forgive the pun) on toilet facilities. Have you ever wondered why the loos appeared around the Wonderground site? You got it! (Or maybe not still!) because there are always public attractions there and with each tourist attraction, facilities ought be provided. Someone sensible has recognised that and installed toilets there (goodness, am I spelling it out enough do you think folks?) You're only right in saying it's 'desperate' when referring to those who need the loo but otherwise it's quite a valid point. What we have is enough for what we have right now but it won't be enough for the future tourist attraction.
Current: 7 of 52

To post a message, please log in or register..
Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from:

We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions