This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/sep/14/london-garden-bridge-barking-up-wrong-tree

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
London’s Garden bridge: barking up the wrong tree? London’s Garden bridge: barking up the wrong tree?
(2 days later)
How could anyone not like this? A garden over water, “a chance to walk through woodlands”, as Joanna Lumley has put it, “over one of the greatest rivers in the world”. “For commuters,” she breathed, in the promotional video, “it will provide a quick and beautiful route… for dreamers a quiet place to linger among trees and grasses to look at the views.” It is the creation of a fascinating and adorable actor and two lovable moptops, Boris Johnson and the designer Thomas Heatherwick, creator of the Olympic cauldron, who has been described as the Leonardo da Vinci of our times. The mighty engineers Arup and the garden designer (and Observer writer) Dan Pearson are also involved. Yet the more you look at the proposed Garden bridge over the Thames, the less sense it makes.How could anyone not like this? A garden over water, “a chance to walk through woodlands”, as Joanna Lumley has put it, “over one of the greatest rivers in the world”. “For commuters,” she breathed, in the promotional video, “it will provide a quick and beautiful route… for dreamers a quiet place to linger among trees and grasses to look at the views.” It is the creation of a fascinating and adorable actor and two lovable moptops, Boris Johnson and the designer Thomas Heatherwick, creator of the Olympic cauldron, who has been described as the Leonardo da Vinci of our times. The mighty engineers Arup and the garden designer (and Observer writer) Dan Pearson are also involved. Yet the more you look at the proposed Garden bridge over the Thames, the less sense it makes.
Within the next few weeks, the proposal is be considered for planning permission by the committees of the London borough of Lambeth and Westminster city council. It appears to be the philosopher’s stone or holy grail of contemporary urban intervention, which is to do something as phenomenally successful as New York’s High Line, one of whose virtues is uniqueness, without looking too much like the High Line. There are projects all over the world, including at least two others in London, that lay claim to the magic of Manhattan’s railway viaduct turned park, but rarely as convincingly as the Garden bridge. It has the winning combination of being improbable and graspable at once. Anyone can get the idea. A child could get it. It is bound to be popular. Within the next few weeks, the proposal is to be considered for planning permission by the committees of the London borough of Lambeth and Westminster city council. It appears to be the philosopher’s stone or holy grail of contemporary urban intervention, which is to do something as phenomenally successful as New York’s High Line, one of whose virtues is uniqueness, without looking too much like the High Line. There are projects all over the world, including at least two others in London, that lay claim to the magic of Manhattan’s railway viaduct turned park, but rarely as convincingly as the Garden bridge. It has the winning combination of being improbable and graspable at once. Anyone can get the idea. A child could get it. It is bound to be popular.
Too often, bridges are seen purely functionally, as routes from A to B, rather than spaces in their own right – the Millennium bridge in front of Tate Modern, for example, is designed for brisk motion rather than lingering. There is a special poetry about structures that project the city over water, like the Rialto or the Ponte Vecchio. If Old London bridge still stood, the one with shops, homes, chapels and much seething humanity above the churning Thames, it would be one of the wonders of the world.Too often, bridges are seen purely functionally, as routes from A to B, rather than spaces in their own right – the Millennium bridge in front of Tate Modern, for example, is designed for brisk motion rather than lingering. There is a special poetry about structures that project the city over water, like the Rialto or the Ponte Vecchio. If Old London bridge still stood, the one with shops, homes, chapels and much seething humanity above the churning Thames, it would be one of the wonders of the world.
The fascination of this idea means that there have been previous attempts at it. In 1996, the Royal Academy ran an ideas competition for a habitable bridge in the same location as the current proposal, with two winners, the French architect Antoine Grumbach and Zaha Hadid. Lumley has been promoting her vision of a garden bridge, originally as a memorial to Princess Diana, since 1998. She has been lobbying mayors at least since 2002, when she had a meeting with Ken Livingstone on the subject.The fascination of this idea means that there have been previous attempts at it. In 1996, the Royal Academy ran an ideas competition for a habitable bridge in the same location as the current proposal, with two winners, the French architect Antoine Grumbach and Zaha Hadid. Lumley has been promoting her vision of a garden bridge, originally as a memorial to Princess Diana, since 1998. She has been lobbying mayors at least since 2002, when she had a meeting with Ken Livingstone on the subject.
So you have to be a real Grinch to oppose the Garden bridge. Paul Morrell, the distinguished construction expert who has decided to help realise the project, says that “it is impossible to hear Joanna Lumley talk about it without being seduced by her vision of what it might be” and that he got involved because “we all want to make a difference in this world”. But Grinches there are.So you have to be a real Grinch to oppose the Garden bridge. Paul Morrell, the distinguished construction expert who has decided to help realise the project, says that “it is impossible to hear Joanna Lumley talk about it without being seduced by her vision of what it might be” and that he got involved because “we all want to make a difference in this world”. But Grinches there are.
It’s partly about money. When the design was unveiled in June last year, it was widely reported to cost £60m, which by July was £100m and in December was £120m-£150m. It’s now put at £175m, which Morrell promises is “a genuine bottom line budget”. It includes such things as VAT and “real-estate issues” that weren’t there before. “It was never a £60m bridge,” he says. That figure came from “someone who looked at the bridge for Thomas – it was a very early number for construction only”. Lord Davies of Abersoch, the chairman of the Garden Bridge Trust, insists that he has always known that it was at least £150m. Yet the speculative lower figures somehow got into the public domain and weren’t corrected when they were reported. It’s partly about money. When the design was unveiled in June last year, it was widely reported to cost £60m, which by July was £100m and in December was £120m-£150m. It’s now put at £175m, which Morrell promises is “a genuine bottom line budget”. It includes such things as VAT and “real-estate issues” that weren’t there before. “It was never a £60m bridge,” he says. That figure came from “someone who looked at the bridge for Thomas – it was a very early number for construction only”. Lord Davies of Abersoch, the chairman of the Garden Bridge Trust, insists that he has always known that it was at least £150m. Yet the speculative lower figures somehow got into the public domain and weren’t corrected when they were reported.
It was also promised that the public contribution to the project was minimal. Everything would come from private sponsorship. In June 2013, the London transport commissioner Sir Peter Hendy stated that the public would meet no more than the “enabling costs” of the project of £4m, and that “its construction and ongoing maintenance costs would be funded by third parties”. In November, Boris Johnson said that “the Garden Bridge Trust has been set up to raise the funding necessary to build and maintain the bridge in future. The trustees, not TfL [Transport for London], will be responsible for putting together the overall funding package and will decide how best this is done.” Which seemed to suggest little change from Hendy’s position. It was also promised that the public contribution to the project was minimal. Everything would come from private sponsorship. In June 2013, the London transport commissioner Sir Peter Hendy stated that the public would meet no more than the “enabling costs” of the project of £4m, and that “its construction and ongoing maintenance costs would be funded by third parties”. In November, Boris Johnson said that “the Garden Bridge Trust has been set up to raise the funding necessary to build and maintain the bridge in future. The trustees, not TfL [Transport for London], will be responsible for putting together the overall funding package and will decide how best this is done.” Which seemed to suggest little change from Hendy’s position.
In December, the chief secretary to the Treasury, Danny Alexander, announced a government donation of £30m. Johnson applauded Alexander for “wielding his gigantic chequebook in favour of the Garden bridge”, without mentioning that he had himself authorised, in contradiction of Hendy’s promises, a further contribution of £30m from TfL funds. This detail had to be teased into the daylight by a parliamentary question from the shadow transport secretary, Mary Creagh.In December, the chief secretary to the Treasury, Danny Alexander, announced a government donation of £30m. Johnson applauded Alexander for “wielding his gigantic chequebook in favour of the Garden bridge”, without mentioning that he had himself authorised, in contradiction of Hendy’s promises, a further contribution of £30m from TfL funds. This detail had to be teased into the daylight by a parliamentary question from the shadow transport secretary, Mary Creagh.
In six months, the public cost had gone from minimal to £60m, with limited transparency, on the basis of wavering cost estimates. These facts were not made available at the time of the public consultation on the project in November 2013, which said no more than “the project will only proceed” if the Garden Bridge Trust “is able to raise sufficient funding to build the new bridge and maintain it in the future”.In six months, the public cost had gone from minimal to £60m, with limited transparency, on the basis of wavering cost estimates. These facts were not made available at the time of the public consultation on the project in November 2013, which said no more than “the project will only proceed” if the Garden Bridge Trust “is able to raise sufficient funding to build the new bridge and maintain it in the future”.
These rapid changes of position caused Caroline Pidgeon, the leader of the Liberal Democrats in the London Assembly, to spot a pattern. The mayor’s statements on the bridge had been “totally false, just as with his past claims about the funding of the cycle hire scheme and the Thames cable car”. These rapid changes of position caused Caroline Pidgeon, the leader of the Liberal Democrats in the London Assembly, to spot a pattern. The mayor’s statements on the bridge had been “totally false, just as with his past claims about the funding of the cycle hire scheme and the Thames cable car”.
They also prompted a different Lord Davies, of Oldham, to denounce the bridge as “a very expensive piece of public art, a vanity project of the mayor – and we know where his vanity projects have gone and what they have cost the country”, he said.They also prompted a different Lord Davies, of Oldham, to denounce the bridge as “a very expensive piece of public art, a vanity project of the mayor – and we know where his vanity projects have gone and what they have cost the country”, he said.
Such worries were brushed aside by Lord Deighton, the commercial secretary to the Treasury. “The key to the Garden bridge,” he said, “is that it will be two things for the price of one; it will be a garden and a bridge, and will combine the benefits of both.” This is not strictly accurate. The going rate for Thames pedestrian bridges is about £39m-£63m, which is the estimated range for a bridge proposed near Battersea power station. A public garden of 6,000 sq m, which is the area of the Garden bridge, might cost £3m-£4m at most. At £175m, the Garden bridge is therefore not two for the price of one.Such worries were brushed aside by Lord Deighton, the commercial secretary to the Treasury. “The key to the Garden bridge,” he said, “is that it will be two things for the price of one; it will be a garden and a bridge, and will combine the benefits of both.” This is not strictly accurate. The going rate for Thames pedestrian bridges is about £39m-£63m, which is the estimated range for a bridge proposed near Battersea power station. A public garden of 6,000 sq m, which is the area of the Garden bridge, might cost £3m-£4m at most. At £175m, the Garden bridge is therefore not two for the price of one.
If the footbridge aspect of the budget is worth about £50m-£60m, to put it another way, it costs a further £120m or so to make it garden-y, or an amazing £20,000 for every square metre. It could be argued that this is a matter for the trusts, corporates, philanthropists and private individuals who, it is hoped, will fund the balance, in return for such things as naming little gardens and inscribing handrails – the trust insists that the name of the bridge itself is not for sale. But this is money that could be spent on other good causes, so it is still important that it is well spent.If the footbridge aspect of the budget is worth about £50m-£60m, to put it another way, it costs a further £120m or so to make it garden-y, or an amazing £20,000 for every square metre. It could be argued that this is a matter for the trusts, corporates, philanthropists and private individuals who, it is hoped, will fund the balance, in return for such things as naming little gardens and inscribing handrails – the trust insists that the name of the bridge itself is not for sale. But this is money that could be spent on other good causes, so it is still important that it is well spent.
At this point, the Grinches are vulnerable to Oscar Wilde’s quip about cynics. Who would care about the price of the bridge, if its value is incalculable? But the project’s unnerving sketchiness about public funding raises doubts about other aspects. When Lambeth and Westminster decide on the planning application, they need to be sure that it really is as great as it seems.At this point, the Grinches are vulnerable to Oscar Wilde’s quip about cynics. Who would care about the price of the bridge, if its value is incalculable? But the project’s unnerving sketchiness about public funding raises doubts about other aspects. When Lambeth and Westminster decide on the planning application, they need to be sure that it really is as great as it seems.
When Lumley calls it “a walk through woodlands”, she should be challenged. The bridge is narrower than Temple Garden, a pocket of green near to the Garden bridge’s planned northern landing point. This garden is pleasantly peaceful, but a strip this wide will never – even with Dan Pearson’s plantsmanship – be woodland. She also calls the bridge a “vital link”, but there is no great evidence that, in an area already well served by bridges, it is.When Lumley calls it “a walk through woodlands”, she should be challenged. The bridge is narrower than Temple Garden, a pocket of green near to the Garden bridge’s planned northern landing point. This garden is pleasantly peaceful, but a strip this wide will never – even with Dan Pearson’s plantsmanship – be woodland. She also calls the bridge a “vital link”, but there is no great evidence that, in an area already well served by bridges, it is.
It is argued that the bridge will liven up the area around Temple underground station, one of the few parts of central London still to be on the quiet side, without asking why it should be so important to energise every fragment of the city. Perhaps there can be value in sleepiness. The southern end of the bridge, by contrast, hits the overactivated South Bank, which, as some local residents have pointed out, hardly needs another sugar rush of visitor attraction. Here, it is different from the High Line, whose purpose was to transform a neglected part of New York. It is argued that the bridge will liven up the area around Temple underground station, one of the few parts of central London still to be on the quiet side, without asking why it should be so important to energise every fragment of the city. Perhaps there can be value in sleepiness. The southern end of the bridge, by contrast, hits the overactivated South Bank, which, as some local residents have pointed out, hardly needs another sugar rush of visitor attraction. Here, it is different from the High Line, whose purpose was to transform a neglected part of New York.
At either end the bridge will have a significant impact on the conservation areas and listed buildings near its ramps and stairs, but it’s hard, given the available information, to know what these will be. There are distant views of the bridge, and there is a picture available of its (clunky) intersection with Temple tube, but not a great deal else.At either end the bridge will have a significant impact on the conservation areas and listed buildings near its ramps and stairs, but it’s hard, given the available information, to know what these will be. There are distant views of the bridge, and there is a picture available of its (clunky) intersection with Temple tube, but not a great deal else.
It could be questioned whether Heatherwick’s design best serves the vision of the bridge. It’s a characteristically expressive work, with two stalks rising from the river and spreading out to join each other, their curves emphasised with prominent ribs. In plan, there are assertive zig-zags running across the deck. But does the bridge need so much designer-y gesticulation? If the wonder of the Garden bridge is in putting plants above water, nature over nature, shouldn’t the architecture have the modesty to hold back, and not compete for attention? Here, it could again learn something from the High Line, part of whose genius is in the simplicity of its detail.It could be questioned whether Heatherwick’s design best serves the vision of the bridge. It’s a characteristically expressive work, with two stalks rising from the river and spreading out to join each other, their curves emphasised with prominent ribs. In plan, there are assertive zig-zags running across the deck. But does the bridge need so much designer-y gesticulation? If the wonder of the Garden bridge is in putting plants above water, nature over nature, shouldn’t the architecture have the modesty to hold back, and not compete for attention? Here, it could again learn something from the High Line, part of whose genius is in the simplicity of its detail.
A subtler design might also have found a way to include a cycle track, whose absence Pidgeon laments. “To spend lots of money and not allow cycling is madness,” she says. TfL says that cyclists will be well cared for by such things as the city’s proposed new superhighways. Morrell points out that to have cyclists “barrelling up and down” would destroy the serenity of the gardens. He’s right, but Pidgeon suggests a track at a different level, which a different design approach might allow.A subtler design might also have found a way to include a cycle track, whose absence Pidgeon laments. “To spend lots of money and not allow cycling is madness,” she says. TfL says that cyclists will be well cared for by such things as the city’s proposed new superhighways. Morrell points out that to have cyclists “barrelling up and down” would destroy the serenity of the gardens. He’s right, but Pidgeon suggests a track at a different level, which a different design approach might allow.
Perhaps the biggest question is whether the bridge can reconcile its apparently contradictory ambitions, to be at once a commuter route, an attraction with 7 million visitors a year and what Johnson has called “a bridge with no purpose other than to recreate the soul – with bosky nooks and bowery corners such as Kubla Khan might have called into being in Xanadu”. Lumley has said it will be “the slowest way to cross the river” but also “swift”. Paul Morrell says it can be both, and it will partly be a matter of timing – there will be busy times and quiet times.Perhaps the biggest question is whether the bridge can reconcile its apparently contradictory ambitions, to be at once a commuter route, an attraction with 7 million visitors a year and what Johnson has called “a bridge with no purpose other than to recreate the soul – with bosky nooks and bowery corners such as Kubla Khan might have called into being in Xanadu”. Lumley has said it will be “the slowest way to cross the river” but also “swift”. Paul Morrell says it can be both, and it will partly be a matter of timing – there will be busy times and quiet times.
He might again be right. But on all such questions the information so far offered has been on the sketchy side, and it’s premature that the Garden Bridge Trust should be asking for planning permission, and that parliament and the mayor should be dishing out millions, when so much of what is crucial to the project is shrouded in river mist, and when the fast-changing budget stories cast doubt on anything coming from Johnson. He might again be right. But on all such questions the information so far offered has been on the sketchy side, and it’s premature that the Garden Bridge Trust should be asking for planning permission, and that parliament and the mayor should be dishing out millions, when so much of what is crucial to the project is shrouded in river mist, and when the fast-changing budget stories cast doubt on anything coming from Johnson.
Nor are Heatherwick projects always glitch-free. His B of the Bang sculpture in Manchester was dismantled after it dropped a potentially lethal piece of metal, and threatened to drop more. His Routemaster is much more handsome than other recent buses, if over jazzy, but it is expensive and has suffered from overheating. This seems to arise from a conflicting ambition not unlike the bridge’s fast/slow problem: it wants to be modern and therefore have air conditioning and no opening windows, while also restoring the old-fashioned open platform, which doesn’t go well with mechanical ventilation. Nor are Heatherwick projects always glitch-free. His B of the Bang sculpture in Manchester was dismantled after it dropped a potentially lethal piece of metal, and threatened to drop more. His Routemaster is much more handsome than other recent buses, if over jazzy, but it is expensive and has suffered from overheating. This seems to arise from a conflicting ambition not unlike the bridge’s fast/slow problem: it wants to be modern and therefore have air conditioning and no opening windows, while also restoring the old-fashioned open platform, which doesn’t go well with mechanical ventilation.
Heatherwick is talented and inventive but, as has been pointed out a few times, he likes finding amazing solutions to problems that you didn’t know existed. “Can you squeeze a chair out of a machine,” he has asked, “the way you squeeze toothpaste out of a tube?” It turns out he can, but why stop there? “Can you make a submarine out of bottle tops?” you might also ask, or “Can you make an inflatable microwave?”Heatherwick is talented and inventive but, as has been pointed out a few times, he likes finding amazing solutions to problems that you didn’t know existed. “Can you squeeze a chair out of a machine,” he has asked, “the way you squeeze toothpaste out of a tube?” It turns out he can, but why stop there? “Can you make a submarine out of bottle tops?” you might also ask, or “Can you make an inflatable microwave?”
The point is that the location of this project is important. It occupies the middle of one of the great views of London, towards the City from Waterloo bridge. Normally, a proposal of the scale and placing of the Garden bridge would get a flat no from the planners. It is only being entertained because the concept is enticing, in which case it matters that it really will be what it says and won’t have an undesirable effect on its surroundings. It truly must “recreate the soul”. If it is not woodland, it must be more than a crowded walkway with planting. It must be more than an inflatable microwave for London.The point is that the location of this project is important. It occupies the middle of one of the great views of London, towards the City from Waterloo bridge. Normally, a proposal of the scale and placing of the Garden bridge would get a flat no from the planners. It is only being entertained because the concept is enticing, in which case it matters that it really will be what it says and won’t have an undesirable effect on its surroundings. It truly must “recreate the soul”. If it is not woodland, it must be more than a crowded walkway with planting. It must be more than an inflatable microwave for London.
It needs to prove that it is worth its £60m of public money, over and above other deserving projects. Other crossings, both in Battersea and downriver, are more obviously needed. The nearby Southbank Centre, for the want of these sorts of sums, has had to put on its fishnets and lipstick, and tout for trade from whatever passing retail chain might want a bit of action. Wouldn’t it be better to sort this out first? Johnson, Mary Creagh says, “spends too much time listening to luvvies at dinner parties… His focus should be on a new crossing in east London to boost jobs and growth.”It needs to prove that it is worth its £60m of public money, over and above other deserving projects. Other crossings, both in Battersea and downriver, are more obviously needed. The nearby Southbank Centre, for the want of these sorts of sums, has had to put on its fishnets and lipstick, and tout for trade from whatever passing retail chain might want a bit of action. Wouldn’t it be better to sort this out first? Johnson, Mary Creagh says, “spends too much time listening to luvvies at dinner parties… His focus should be on a new crossing in east London to boost jobs and growth.”
Danny Alexander has said that the government’s largesse depends on “a business case demonstrating that the project represents good value for money”. I hope he’s true to his word. But, business case or no, the more I contemplate this project the less sense it makes. Part of the joy of walking on to Waterloo bridge is the release it gives into emptiness; the Garden bridge manifests an urge to fill voids, the belief that open space must be exploited and made busy. It’s too Vegas and too twee for what the Kinks called, in their immortal Waterloo Sunset, the “dirty old river”. Lumley calls it a “tiara”, but would a shiny headpiece really look good on Father Thames? Danny Alexander has said that the government’s largesse depends on “a business case demonstrating that the project represents good value for money”. I hope he’s true to his word. But, business case or no, the more I contemplate this project the less sense it makes. Part of the joy of walking on to Waterloo bridge is the release it gives into emptiness; the Garden bridge manifests an urge to fill voids, the belief that open space must be exploited and made busy. It’s too Vegas and too twee for what the Kinks called, in their immortal Waterloo Sunset, the “dirty old river”. Lumley calls it a “tiara”, but would a shiny headpiece really look good on Father Thames?
This project perpetuates the idea that you can plan a city by headlines, stunts and novelties, a culture of I’m-a-celebrity-build-me-some-infrastructure, rather than addressing what it really needs. It’s hard to say this in the face of the genuine enthusiasm of Morrell, Davies and other believers but, sorry, I’m a Grinch. This project perpetuates the idea that you can plan a city by headlines, stunts and novelties, a culture of I’m-a-celebrity-build-me-some-infrastructure, rather than addressing what it really needs. It’s hard to say this in the face of the genuine enthusiasm of Morrell, Davies and other believers but, sorry, I’m a Grinch.