Hammersmith Bridge Closed Indefinitely

[clemattlee]

 Is the sign on the bridge that soldiers must break step when marching on the bridge still there.

I think thats Albert bridge

[toshes mate]

Even a child would question the actions of Central Government in failing to take appropriate action upon funding for the Bridge a very long, long, time ago in order to make its future sensible use secure. 

But it's not central government's responsibility to fund the bridge maintenance, it's TfL's, from their multi-billion pound budget.

I'm sure TfL will in turn blame the termination of their grant from central gov't but that's TfL's case to make, not H&F council. So I'm not sure why it's in H&F council's statement... except of course to politicise the whole thing because they are a labour-led council.

Naturally the garden bridge also gets a mention. That was never my cup of tea but at least if it was built, people could have judged it for themselves and seen whether it generated decent revenues as a tourist attraction. But of course it was easier for Sadiq Khan to cancel it then he could just say all money spent on the planning etc. was "wasted" because it never got built. Again, absolutely no relevance to the Hammersmith Bridge but Khan and Labour spin it as a totem of Tory hypocrisy and will of course mention it wherever they can.

The £43m plus loss on the garden bridge doesn't even begin to take account of build costs had it been constructed.  Money can only be spent once; if you have the choice of maintaining an essential and strategic route into and out of London then do you spend it on that first or blow it on a project that may never see the light of day because of costs and construction issues.  The politics of the parties involved in those decisions is largely irrelevant as they change and have changed through time but the problems of Hammersmith Bridge and the damage caused by excessive loading, has been known about since before I was born.  It should not, IMO, be a contentious subject.  It needs fixing, period.

[toshes mate]

Is the sign on the bridge that soldiers must break step when marching on the bridge still there.

I think thats Albert bridge

Hammersmith Bridge is a suspension bridge. 

Albert Bridge is, since modification in 1973, now a unique and unusual combination of cable stayed, suspension and simple beam bridge, and so breaking step would probably no longer apply to it.  It was found to be structurally unsound eleven years after completion in 1873.

[snarks]

Can't blame the Mayor, It's all the Mugs who voted for the Clown.

London hasn't voted for a decent mayor since they reinstated the post, but the current one is better than the last lying duplicitous clown

[Statto]

It needs fixing, period.

Agreed. Tell TfL.

[WokinghamWhite]

On the very rare times when I drive to Craven Cottage - usually because South Western Railways is up the spout - I park on Lonsdale Road and walk over Hammersmith Bridge. Is it still open to pedestrians?

[toshes mate]

On the very rare times when I drive to Craven Cottage - usually because South Western Railways is up the spout - I park on Lonsdale Road and walk over Hammersmith Bridge. Is it still open to pedestrians?

Yes, and cyclists.

[john dempsey]

pedestrians and ox carts still ok.

[BigbadBillyMcKinley]

It needs fixing, period.

Agreed. Tell TfL.

Why is it TfL's responsibility to fix it? H and C council own the bridge.

[Statto]

It needs fixing, period.

Agreed. Tell TfL.

Why is it TfL's responsibility to fix it? H and C council own the bridge.

According to the council, quoted up this thread by another poster, "The 132-year-old Hammersmith Bridge is part of TfL's strategic road network which they have responsibility for maintaining."

To be honest I don't care which of them is responsible, my objection is simply to the bridge being used by a Labour-led Council or Labour-led TfL (Sadiq is its chairman) to score points against the Tory central gov't, austerity etc.

[Andy S]

Why do people want to make political points out of this?just find some cash and repair it ASAP

[Twig]

Mods, this thread is blatantly political. In this case pro Tory.  I thought we avoided these silly threads?

[Mince n Tatties]

Mods, this thread is blatantly political. In this case pro Tory.  I thought we avoided these silly threads?

Most things  boil down to political views in a way,since that p**** became Mayor and Dick became head of Police,the City has gone to pot.
One spends more time on holiday and worrying about what the Yank is doing,and the other spends its time worring if there are enough ethnic and transgender police recruits....How about serving the general public of London that's what their paid for.

[BigbadBillyMcKinley]

The central government are the blame. If they hadn't cut TfL's subsidy by £700 million; not keeping on top of cross rail delays, costing TfL a further £600 million, they may have had money to maintain the bridge.

However; if TfL has also kept the suggestion from the council to only allow one bus at a time to cross the bridge, it may have lasted a bit longer.

There are more than one party to blame. I still think blaming khan, when he's barely been in job, is harsh. Boris was there for a lot longer and spunked money on other things. £500 million Boris wasted. He would have been told it was damaged.

[deadcowboys]

Let us not forget that the bridge has been struggling for years. The current Mayor was Transport Minister in the last Labour Government & his current Fare Freeze has left a huge hole in TFL coffers. They are all as bad as each other.

[toshes mate]

It needs fixing, period.

Agreed. Tell TfL.

Why is it TfL's responsibility to fix it? H and C council own the bridge.

Ownership means they have a right to determine who uses the Bridge and TfL run the 'bus services which are the predominate reasons for damage to the bridge's bearings.  This has been known for a long time but traffic is heavier in sense of weight and volume and the bridge simply cannot take it.  H&F could charge a toll but instead have an agreement that TfL carry out maintenance of road surface and general repair which is a system that predates both H&F council and TfL by several decades.

[Statto]

The central government are the blame. If they hadn't cut TfL's subsidy by £700 million; not keeping on top of cross rail delays, costing TfL a further £600 million, they may have had money to maintain the bridge.

However; if TfL has also kept the suggestion from the council to only allow one bus at a time to cross the bridge, it may have lasted a bit longer.

There are more than one party to blame. I still think blaming khan, when he's barely been in job, is harsh. Boris was there for a lot longer and spunked money on other things. £500 million Boris wasted. He would have been told it was damaged.

With all due respect you are just making assumptions that suit your politics. TfL has a budget of something like £10 billion and I'd be astounded if you've enough knowledge of all their items of income and expenditure to have any idea how efficiently they're run and whether they need/deserve another £500m from the public purse that could otherwise go somewhere like the NHS or the army.

Similarly I'm no big fan of BoJo but what did he "waste" money on? The early stages of a project that Khan then chose to cancel, and a cannon that Khan chose to scrap at a massive loss on its value. If you sympathise with Khan's politics then you'll swallow what he tells you but I doubt anyone here knows the truth.

We could argue all day but the problem is surely, why are H&F politicising the issue? Their statement is about them and Hammersmith Bridge, why are they droning on about TfL's grant and the garden bridge?

[toshes mate]

The central government are the blame. If they hadn't cut TfL's subsidy by £700 million; not keeping on top of cross rail delays, costing TfL a further £600 million, they may have had money to maintain the bridge.

However; if TfL has also kept the suggestion from the council to only allow one bus at a time to cross the bridge, it may have lasted a bit longer.

There are more than one party to blame. I still think blaming khan, when he's barely been in job, is harsh. Boris was there for a lot longer and spunked money on other things. £500 million Boris wasted. He would have been told it was damaged.

With all due respect you are just making assumptions that suit your politics. TfL has a budget of something like £10 billion and I'd be astounded if you've enough knowledge of all their items of income and expenditure to have any idea how efficiently they're run and whether they need/deserve another £500m from the public purse that could otherwise go somewhere like the NHS or the army.

Similarly I'm no big fan of BoJo but what did he "waste" money on? The early stages of a project that Khan then chose to cancel, and a cannon that Khan chose to scrap at a massive loss on its value. If you sympathise with Khan's politics then you'll swallow what he tells you but I doubt anyone here knows the truth.

We could argue all day but the problem is surely, why are H&F politicising the issue? Their statement is about them and Hammersmith Bridge, why are they droning on about TfL's grant and the garden bridge?

Everything in life is arguably political (relating to our opinions about social relationships and authority) but you have slanted it toward party politics which may be your agenda.  The rub of the politics is that the cost of maintaining Hammersmith Bridge or entertaining a garden bridge project are roughly equal.  If you cannot have both, which one does a sensible person (no matter what their politics are) choose?  Hammersmith Bridge has needed the maintenance work referred to for over a decade and there was a plan for this maintenance to begin this Spring.  In other words the Bridge would have been closed anyway for the duration of the required major work.  The Council is simply doing what has been done before and that is to close the Bridge until the work can begin. 

[BigbadBillyMcKinley]

The central government are the blame. If they hadn't cut TfL's subsidy by £700 million; not keeping on top of cross rail delays, costing TfL a further £600 million, they may have had money to maintain the bridge.

However; if TfL has also kept the suggestion from the council to only allow one bus at a time to cross the bridge, it may have lasted a bit longer.

There are more than one party to blame. I still think blaming khan, when he's barely been in job, is harsh. Boris was there for a lot longer and spunked money on other things. £500 million Boris wasted. He would have been told it was damaged.

With all due respect you are just making assumptions that suit your politics. TfL has a budget of something like £10 billion and I'd be astounded if you've enough knowledge of all their items of income and expenditure to have any idea how efficiently they're run and whether they need/deserve another £500m from the public purse that could otherwise go somewhere like the NHS or the army.

Similarly I'm no big fan of BoJo but what did he "waste" money on? The early stages of a project that Khan then chose to cancel, and a cannon that Khan chose to scrap at a massive loss on its value. If you sympathise with Khan's politics then you'll swallow what he tells you but I doubt anyone here knows the truth.

We could argue all day but the problem is surely, why are H&F politicising the issue? Their statement is about them and Hammersmith Bridge, why are they droning on about TfL's grant and the garden bridge?

Boris wasted money on;
Routemaster buses, that don't work how they should. Scrapping the bendy buses as a result.
Garden bridge.
(Both the above designed by the same company......weird)
Olympic stadium conversation.
Thames estuary airport
Boris bike (initial idea by livingstone admittedly.
The water cannons where bought and looked after by Johnson at a cost of just under £500k. Even though he'd been told he could never use them.

I have attached a small link for your perusal..... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/18/bridge-940m-bill-boris-johnsons-mayora-vanity-projects-garden-bridge-routemaster-bus

And I work for TfL, I know how little money they have.

[Statto]

The rub of the politics is that the cost of maintaining Hammersmith Bridge or entertaining a garden bridge project are roughly equal.  If you cannot have both, which one does a sensible person (no matter what their politics are) choose? 

My last post was a statement of reality, not 'slanted' it all. Your question here on the other hand is 'slanted', because it starts from the assumption that TfL's costs are so constrained they can only afford one of these bridges, not both. For all I (or you) know, they could easily afford both if they operated more efficiently and paid their senior management less.

Even if we assume they did indeed have to choose, well the garden bridge was fundamentally supposed to be a profit-making tourist attraction, so it may have incurred a one-off cost to build but then generated new (possibly indirect) revenues that would have paid for the maintentance of Hammersmith bridge for years to come. In that case, the garden bridge would of course be the more 'sensible' option.

Again, I'm sure neither of us knows enough to make a proper judgment but clearly you shouldn't just unquestionably swallow what Sadiq Khan and the Guardian tell you.