You're missing the point entirely of what has been said. The last road bridge to be replaced in central London was London Bridge in 1970. The only capacity improvements for crossing the river since 1970 without using a train or cable car or being expected to dismount have been the replacement of an existing footbridge (Hungerford), the Millennium Jelly, and the QE2 Bridge. And Tower Bridge is supposed to be the principal road crossing to avoid paying the CCZ, so it is doubly stupid that a bascule bridge with a 17t weight limit is the main route across the city centre. That is exactly what KeithW would describe as a turkey.Herned wrote: ↑Sat Oct 31, 2020 18:51 Waterloo, Blackfriars, Southwark and London Bridges do all have proper cycling provision, so looking at Tower Bridge in isolation is pretty selective. Apart from the Gallions Reach bridge, I can't think of any other proposed bridge which hasn't happened (the Boris bridge farce doesnt count). Certainly none which have been cancelled for heritage reasons
How many places can you cycle across the Hudson?
Right now Vauxhall Bridge is subject to "uh oh we didn't do repairs before" work, Hammersmith is ready to fall into the Thames, and heaven only knows what the other bridges have waiting in the wings. The three bridges you mention with cycle provision only got them in the last 5 years after much protracted wrangling about it. This is not the approach from a city that wants to be taken seriously.
As for the Hudson, let's see, despite the limited number of crossings and the fact it's crossing a state boundary around Manhattan and is largely rural north of there so not remotely comparable to London:
You can't use the Lincoln or Holland Tunnels, which is to be expected given the fact they were designed for motorised traffic in the 1920s but that far south on Manhattan you'd take a free ferry anyway.
However, the George Washington Bridge allows it. The next crossing upstream, the replacement Tappan Zee Bridge, now has a dedicated cycling route across it. The Bear Mountain Bridge has hard shoulders for bikes. The I-84 Bridge has a segregated bike path. The Mid Hudson Bridge has a segregated bike path. The Kingstone-Rhinecliff Bridge has a segregated bike path, you're all the way up to the Rip Van Winkle Bridge before bikes are banned from crossing on the side paths (and even here they're tolerated on the main carriageway). The next bridge is the New York State Thruway and beyond that you're in Albany.
So if even the car centric yanks can provide rudimentary bike facilities, what's London's excuse?