Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reply | |
Posted by: | Jeremy Parkinson | |
Date/Time: | 23/06/25 09:19:00 |
I'm surprised you believe COWI should be the ultimate arbiter of structural viability given that it has a clear vested interest in the project proceeding. Any decision on the integrity of the piling has to be based on the Fugro ground investigations, independently assessed. While I would agree it is perplexing this hasn't been published, if there was anything that undermined (in every sense) the business plan for Hammersmith Bridge, the DfT would have been delighted to have an easy way to put to aside a decision which is bound to upset some people whichever way it went. We do know that Hammersmith Bridge matches the criteria for consideration for support from the Structural (sic) Fund, because Heidi Alexander has confirmed it is being considered and active discussions are taking place about its inclusion. |