I’ve nothing against the Garden Bridge as such, but I do agree that funding a public / private space in the middle of a river, with £60Million from transport and treasury coffers is bit much.
Just think of how many smaller improvements to cycle paths and pavements for everybody that could make…….it could be literally life changing for some city streets but it is being spent on a London Vanity project instead ……Sigh….
It looks like Westminster Council will today follow Lambeth Council in approving planning permission for the Garden Bridge.
I’ve been wondering what constitutes the most offensive thing about this project. Is it the way £30m of transport funding (and an additional £30m from the Treasury) is being used fund a scheme that quite explicitly has no transport function at all?
This isn’t just to do with cycling not being included – or even considered – as a mode of transport. Everything about this bridge suggests that it is a place to visit – a garden – and not something to move through. It’s not even a park. Westminster – tellingly – refer to it as ‘a popular visitor attraction’.
This huge amount of public funding comes despite claims last year that Transport for London’s contribution would be limited to £4m, with the Garden Bridge Trust itself raising the funding for…
View original post 747 more words