Increasing opposition to a £175 million ‘ garden bridge ’ championed by Boris Johnson could scupper the mayor ’ s plans for a new green space spanning the Thames . Local campaigners vigorously opposed to the bridge are calling for a parliamentary inquiry into the scheme ahead of a crucial judicial review next month , the Observer reported . They want lawmakers to look into the misuse of public funds . When the project first began it was promised it would be paid for in its entirety through private funds . £60 million of public money has been pledged by Boris Johnson and George Osborne - £30 million each – for the project . Local campaigners vigorously opposed to the bridge are calling for a parliamentary inquiry into the scheme ahead of a judicial review . The promises were made against a tide of criticism likening the scheme more to a privately managed tourist landmark than a bridge . The particulars of how the garden will actually operate indicate limited group sizes and perhaps even a ticketing system . The bridge will close for private , corporate events once a month and shut between the hours of midnight and 6 am . There will also be no provision for a cycle path across the bridge as previously outlined . Those opposed to the bridge garden have accused the Mayor and the Chancellor of disregarding guidelines while using money meant for public transport which would not normally benefit such a small group of people . The Director of the Waterloo Community Development group , Michael Ball , has said the £175 million could fund 30 million new London parks or the equivalent of 30 times the area of open space the bridge would give . Calling the bridge a ‘ vanity project ’ Ball was quoted as saying money should be available for the bridge through the Heritage Lottery Fund as is common practice . It has been claimed the garden could not be classified as transport structure as it would have no public right of way . He claimed the garden could not be classified as transport structure as it would have no public right of way . Ball asked how the scheme could be approved of through ‘ normal processes ’ . The chair of the London Assembley ’ s budget and performance committee , John Biggs , accused Mr Johnson of sophistry . He highlighted the mayor ’ s previous statements that public money would not be used for the bridge only to reveal last month that public funds would be needed in perpetuity to underwrite the bridge ’ s yearly £3.5 million maintenance bill . George Osborne ( left ) and Boris Johnson ( centre ) have promised £30 million each for the scheme which Michael Ball ( right ) has called a vanity project . It was recently put forward by the London Assembly that the public have free access to the proposed bridge , considering how much taxpayers ’ money was being used for it . In May a judicial review will consider Lambeth council ’ s handling of approval for the scheme . The bridge increasingly seems to be losing support of environmentalists who are sceptical of the garden . Grahame Madge , from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds , said : 'Our view is very clear . It is an extremely expensive project for limited wildlife gain . 'Helping people get access to London 's wildlife is a big priority for us - but the money could be spent elsewhere . 'We were quite interested in the project in the beginning but we realised it had limited benefits . ' The bridge increasingly seems to be losing support of environmentalists who are sceptical of the garden .
Opposition to garden spanning the Thames , favoured by George Osborne , gathers speed as use of funds criticised . Boris Johnson and the mayor have promised £60 million in funds but opponents say the public wo n't have access . Critics want a parliamentary inquiry into the bridge ahead of a judicial review in May which could end the plans .