| Topic: | Re:Re:ReHammersmith Bridge The real world | |
| Posted by: | Bruce Hammal | |
| Date/Time: | 26/09/24 14:48:00 |
| What a dilemma! Do you think the same cost/benefit arguments raged in the 1880s when the original Hammersmith bridge, only built in 1827, was reaching the end of its natural life? Of course not, they just hired Joseph Bazalgette to build them a nice new one, capable of dealing with the traffic demands of the day. Many of London's bridges have been rebuilt over the years - they just wear out, but as far as I know Hammersmith is the only case in which an argument has been made for permanently closing a busy and valuable river-crossing while leaving some sort of glorified patched up footbridge in its place because it looks nice. Knock it down and build a new one. It's what the Romans (and Victorians) would have done. |