Printable View
I've just been watching an item on the news, apparently the council say it will cost £250 million to repair the bridge, I know anything councils or the government get involved in always seems more expensive but that ridiculous,
Does anyone here understand how it can cost so much?
Its listed; its made of cast iron; they are working in a very constrained envrironment, with very limited access; it wasn't designed for the loads it has to support today; they haven't properly maintained it for decades; if they could just knock it down and replace it with a simple concrete bridge it would be a fraction of the cost
We have the same issue with the iconic Transporter Bridge. Years of neglect and zero maintenance and inspection has left it closed and in a sorry state of affairs. When it was open it saved quite a trek, especially in the days when people got the bus to work or rode their bike. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...6e3832f26e.jpg
But still not a quarter of a billion, all the navies must be eating caviar and the bridge must be made of Gold or unobtainium of some sortQuote:
Originally Posted by tertius
They've lost all sense of perspective
Also from the Council:
https://www.putneysw15.com/default.a...mbridge044.htm
The price quoted is astronomical but is that just not the price of construction in this country at the moment?
In the thread about builders for home extensions and people talking about £150k for a kitchen diner extension, does it not marry up that delivering a complex civil engineering project re building a listed structure, whilst ensuring it doesn’t collapse in London would cost in the hundreds or millions?
The question about its management is complex, there are historical bridges all over the country that local authority’s just don’t have the budget to maintain. The re painting of the Tyne Bridge is in excess of £40m for a “lick of paint”. No LA has that sort of surplus.
Ross
I think it's a lot more than a 'lick of paint'. It's a rust bucket. I go over it regularly and see the issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigstam
There will be a lot of extensive repairs whilst being sensitive to the kittywake bird population that nest on it.
Precisely! I’m certain it will be looked upon as a paint job by most when the reality of maintaining these historic bridges is far more in depth than the headlines suggest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod
Ross
Meh not so bad it's 250 million not even equivalent to 1 days interest on the national debtQuote:
Originally Posted by adrianw
just think if we weren't paying 112 billion in interest on 2.7 trillion of debt we would have money to spend on 'preventative & periodical maintenance'
Current debt is £ 37'900 per person in U.K.
Oh dear
=====
In the financial year 2022/23, government revenue – from taxes and other receipts – was £1,027 billion while government spending was £1,157 billion (£1.2 trillion). The deficit was therefore £131 billion, equivalent to 5.1% of GDP.
At 5.1% of GDP, the deficit was the UK’s fifteenth largest since 1948. During 2022/23, the Government was providing support for households with the cost of living and both households and businesses with energy costs.
Borrowing of £131 billion is equivalent to around £1,950 per head of the UK’s population.
=====
No way is it sustainable in short, medium or long term.
stuff is crumbling around us roads, bridges, sewers ,schools and hospitals but .... 'Frog in the pan of water'
UK's been coasting along on the 'fat' laid down by the Victorians for too long now, even their buildings and infrastructure, marvels of the world in their time, will still need maintenance and investment...This alongside running up the debt to no discernible benefit. Double trouble.
The bridge is roughly 10% of the length of the Queensferry Crossing which was built to remove traffic from the Forth Road Bridge.
Queensferry crossing cost around £1.35bn… but that was a new build so no consideration required to maintaining the existing structure and that was built between 2012-2017… so no doubt would be substantially more if built today.
All things considered, I don’t think the cost quoted for Hammersmith bridge is wild.
I didn’t know this had happened but it’s probably been a few weeks since I last came over the bridge!Quote:
Originally Posted by Toshk
It was nothing really. No damage to the boat either.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajw232
Quote:
Originally Posted by sish101
I thought they sold that to the Native Indians of USA.
I am sure a concrete bridge will go down well with the local nimbysQuote:
Originally Posted by tertius
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...88e18b4d4b.jpg
Well of course nobody would want that, I'm a local myself ... in fact I cycled over it just half an hour ago. My point was that if they were doing that it would be much much cheaper.Quote:
Originally Posted by noTAGlove
Indeed if only it had actually collapsed when (or before) the problem had been spotted we'd probably have a new bridge in place by now.
250 000 000 divided by 213 (length) is just over a mil a metre. Madness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wiki
I like an old building as much as the next man, but when it costs 25x as much to mend than it did to build...
That's what happens to old buildings - Notre Dame being one of many examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cornholio
Probably easier and a lot cheaper to dismantle it, then rebuild with modern materials and to modern standards with a replica.
I wonder if the Americans would buy itQuote:
Originally Posted by noTAGlove
Well I'm a local and I think 95% of local residents would take any kind of bridge to relieve the massive local traffic congestion since the bridge closed.Quote:
Originally Posted by noTAGlove
Fake bridge?Quote:
Originally Posted by noTAGlove
Box and papers?
Service istory
AgreedQuote:
Originally Posted by IanK
Local as well. It has created havoc for years now. I remember there being issues whist I was a school (used to travel across and back everyday) the bridge has needed a total renovation for 30 years or so.