Architecture

Floating cycle path proposed for the River Thames

The Thames Deckway proposal would stretch for up to 7.45 miles (12 km) along the Thames, from Battersea to Canary Wharf (Image: River Cycleway Consortium)
The Thames Deckway proposal would stretch for up to 7.45 miles (12 km) along the Thames, from Battersea to Canary Wharf (Image: River Cycleway Consortium)

Though cycling can be a great way to get around London, cyclists often need to share road space with fast-moving cars and vans. The River Cycleway Consortium, which includes Hugh Broughton Architects and engineering firm Arup, proposes to build a £600 million (roughly US$965 million) cycle path that floats on the Thames and offers cyclists a safer way of navigating the city.

The Thames Deckway would stretch for up to 7.45 miles (12 km) from Battersea to Canary Wharf, situated close to the river's edge and at a safe distance from all river traffic. The cycle path would rise and fall gently with the Thames' natural tide, and sport access ramps which rejoin the embankment at key points along the route.

According to the River Cycleway Consortium, the floating cycle path would take a fit cyclist around 30 minutes to complete, and command a flat-rate single journey price in the region of £1.50 ($2.40). There would be refreshment kiosks and stopping points available, and a bicycle fleet available which includes family-friendly infant carriages and kid's bikes.

Data such as traffic density, traffic flow, river motion, and any hazards would be monitored continuously by satellite, and all required power would derive from a combination of sun, tide, and wind energy.

The consortium is currently aiming to raise funds for a study of the project’s feasibility and, if all goes well, will seek private investment. The River Cycleway Consortium reports that the Thames Deckway could be up-and-running in as little as two years from being given the go-ahead.

Sources: Hugh Broughton Architects, Arup

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Flipboard
  • LinkedIn
13 comments
Robert Walther
For a Billion$ dollars$!! why not buy a province in France, cover the area in bike paths and run chunnel trains from London to the location every 20 minutes?
BigGoofyGuy
I think that is a neat idea. One could ride ones bike without the worry about being run over and one can have a great view of the river.
Jim Bruin
A billion dollars? For a bike path? Is that a misprint, or is someone actually crazy enough to build a billion dollar bike path?
Bob Flint
They are only now collecting funds for a feasibility study, we can do that for free.....this won't work.....you would need over 420 million fit people to ride this just to pay for it...
zevulon
as much as i myself like biking, and having seen the thames , i'm sure it would beautiful,
it is not only a complete butchering of the waterway, it is an expensive pointless project.
if we're going to go full retard why not discuss covering the thames over with massive buildings? or building huge buildings standing IN the thames...like oil platforms for people to live in.
Matthew Jacobs
That a $129.53 Million per mile. No land needs to be purchased, no digging or pouring of concrete needed etc etc.
Slowburn
The price does not seem unreasonable to me seeing all the silly donkey "green" jargon they are throwing at it.
Ford Shortland
It's a good idea, we've had a floating walkway/cycle path in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia for a good number of years now. Of course, ours wasn't privately built, but government funded, and thus there is no charge to use it. http://briscycle.com/riverwalk/
Mel Tisdale
Given the fact that despite the science, CO2 emissions are still rising, it will not be too long before London has to be abandoned to rising sea levels. They are already doing feasibility studies for where to move the Thames barrier to so that, Canute like, they can postpone the seemingly inevitable.
I suppose if they did build this cycleway, future generations could put it alongside the Cross Rail and HS2 railway projects as evidence of just how clueless the current generation is regarding the danger we face as a species. The sums involved would be far better spent on developing LFTR nuclear power technology.
JPAR
Seems cheap compared to the £1bn that was WASTED on a large tent on the Greenwich Peninsula.... (which was subsequently sold for £40m)