Concerned resident shares another vision for Hammersmith Bridge
Two ‘ribbon roads’ arching across the Thames will restore this ‘vital gateway’ - story 24
This was released over the weekend. It is the work of two companies - design studio Sybarite and engineers Buro Happold. Like most renders, it looks rather fabulous.
Indeed the design bears a resemblance to the relatively new Duke Meadows Footbridge, downstream at Barnes Bridge. Modern aesthetics meet historic structure.
History lesson
This is the third noteworthy proposal for a new Bridge
Foster + Partners/COWI suggested a temporary double-decker crossing - this was response to a good challenge from H&F Council. It would allow vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists to use the bridge during its restoration. Those parts of the the Bridge that “need repair, including pedestals, anchors and chains, would be lifted away and transported by barges to an off-site facility for safe repair and restoration”. This useful video explains how this would work.
Possible’s solution for for a car-free crossing in London. I have written about this. (I am going to return to this proposal too in much more detail. It is the most cogent challenger to the ‘car as default’ mindset. It needs to be tested.)
Eccentric or interesting?
Sybarite co-founder Torquil McIntosh is quoted in the Standard saying
“London’s bridges are powerful symbols of our city’s identity. My vision for Hammersmith Bridge is both deeply rooted in its historic legacy and boldly focused on the future - transforming it into a catalyst for wider regeneration. As both a resident and business owner, I see firsthand the urgent need to restore this vital gateway. The time to act is now—we must invest in its revival and unlock the full potential of the surrounding area through strategic urban renewal.”
What to make of this?
Mr McIntosh is clearly local. A ‘resident’. I am guessing from this he lives in Barnes, not Hammersmith.
I don’t understand why Hammersmith and Fulham council (H&F) describe this as ‘eccentric’. It is entirely logical. It represents a 2025 take on the challenge at hand. Like several other modern pieces of architecture, it takes old, restores that and wraps something new around it.
Unlike H&F, I rather like third parties offering ideas. We need to challenge our bias, our assumptions. Foster+Partner/COWI and Possible asked different questions. The first, asked could we do things more quickly? The second asked wouldn’t it be better to prioritise pedestrians and cyclists?
The challenge presented by the ‘ribbons’ design is in how to best separate cars and people. The old bridge is kept for those walking and wheeling. There is a physical gap provided by the ‘ribbons’ between those and the drivers. It creates the most spectacular of dedicated walking and biking lanes. The sort of thing the Danes would build.
Any problems?
Well. I like concepts. They make you think about the fundamentals of a topic. That is how I reacted to this image. I know there’s no lighting on the bridge, as someone put on social media but that is a third order item. My issues were more significant.
This is a pro-driver solution. If you look at the image, you’ll see there are two lanes in either direction. Sybarite and Buro Happold are proposing a two dual carriageways over the Thames. Do we want or need four lanes over the Thames, given the road structure either side the Bridge?
If you look closely it is not obvious how the ends of the Bridge will work. The walking/cycling lanes would be in the centre of the road the ‘ribbon roads’, whether one or two by that stage would be on the outside. How do you flip them over?
Next, H&F’s frosty put-down didn’t include any comment about cost. I am guessing this will cost at least the same as the existing H&F plan. T here’s nothing in here that looks to save on construction costs and were it to cost more ..
Then there’s this quote from Mr McIntosh,
We must invest in (the Bridge’s) revival and unlock the full potential of the surrounding area through strategic urban renewal.
What part of the surrounding area has unlocked potential? And potential for what? Factories? Commercial units? Housing? What area, either North or South of the Bridge? And how does allowing 20,000 cars to drive though this area more quickly than now aid that growth?
Indeed what effect would any new Bridge have on economic growth? A good question that deserves a strong answer. More on this later.
I don’t support this proposal but I applaud the contribution. More please. More people suggesting more ways to improve our corner of this great city.