Post by Graeme Wall Post by Recliner Post by michael adams Post by Roland Perry Post by Recliner Post by Roland Perry
"Roads minister Baroness Vere, who heads the task force, told
the meeting that a full repair of the bridge would take six and
a half years, more than twice as long as previously feared.
It also emerged that a ferry service to allow pedestrians to
cross the Thames will not start operating until the spring.
That's bad. Seems like it's another victim of TfL's parlous finances.
Thanks to Boris's mismanagement when mayor.
It's the direct result of shared responsibility for the maintainance of
the Bridge beween two or more differenty bodies. TFL and its predecessors
and the LB of Richmond or whoever,
Hammersmith, I think.
Post by michael adams
to name but two Who or what was
responsible for paying for repairs following the IRA bomb is another
matter. It really is as simple as that.
That and a general shortage of cash as a result of all political parties
pandering to tax averse supporters, sponsers, newspapers and electorates.
Any ferry was always going to be problematic owing to the tidal range
at Hammersmith bridge. However it could probably have been overcome with
innovative sloping gangways. Where is Norman Foster when we really
need him ?
Foster+Partners is just a short boat ride away, by Battersea Bridge.
Pontoon and link span is a bit basic I would have thought.
The farcical standoff over the closure of a busy Victorian road bridge
escalated today after the local council was ordered to pay an
“unprecedented” £64 million towards repairs.
The Times has learnt that the Department for Transport wants a 50 per cent
“local contribution” to the repair of Hammersmith Bridge over the Thames on
London. The bridge has been shut for the past four months.
Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, told Hammersmith & Fulham council,
which is run by Labour, that the money would be needed to open the bridge,
suggesting that it could be raised through a council tax increase or by
raiding its reserves.
The council said the demand was a “cruel, unusual and unprecedented
punishment” for the authority, which has owned the bridge only since 1985.
Stephen Cowan, the council leader, said the bill was out of the authority’s
reach and far more than was in its available cash reserves. The bill could
also mean extra an £800 in tax for each local resident, more than double an
annual band A council tax charge.
The demand was also said to be out of step with contributions demanded from
councils for large bridge repairs elsewhere in the country. The authority
pointed out that the government has funded between 77 and 94 per cent of
bridge upgrades in areas such as Northumberland, Cleveland, Warwickshire,
Staffordshire and Dudley this year.