London SE1 community website

Southwark Bridge eaten away by rust

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  1 2 Next
Current: 1 of 2
Wednesday 2 September 2009 7.43am
They're working on it AGAIN. Like all London bridges any renovation and painting never seems to last more than a couple of years.
Would it not be a good idea to build an exact replica of all the bridges and instead of the hoarding eyesore, footpath closures and general inconvenience you could overnight lift out a section, slot in a renovated section overnight and work on the removed section off site somwhere.
Wednesday 2 September 2009 8.24am
Yes, if only. It appears to have 'Forth Bridge Syndrome', doesn't it?
Wednesday 2 September 2009 11.00am
I can't believe what they are doing to Southwark Bridge, I have lived by the Bridge since 2007 and walk into the City to work, I can honestly say that there has been one week of no roadworks since Sept 07. Now I am horrified that they have dug up the Cycle Barriers, I only hope they will be putting rumble strips back in place of the concrete barriers. I appreciate that some of you feel safer with the concrete barriers, but with the amount of work going on would that not be better for the time being! Roll on 2012, we may be roadwork free! Here's hoping.
Wednesday 2 September 2009 12.47pm
I wanted to start a thread on this ages ago,mostly because the quality of the paint job is poor.Last year the west side was sandblasted when the shuttering came down I could see no evidence of it.I could see that orange expanding foam was used to fill in some of the serious cracks and was already damaged.
I assumed the cycle barriers were there to stop vechicle parking there while tonnes of sand was used for the blasting work.I can't see the point of 2-3 summers of sand blasting.I notice on the northside a plaque stating the bridge is a Trust run by the City of London Corporation.Traffic flow on that bridge has always been poor but its now at an extreme level.I'm also trying to figure out when it was painted last.
Wednesday 2 September 2009 10.07pm
The City's 2008 press release said that Southwark Bridge was going to be a four year job.
Thursday 3 September 2009 9.32am
That press release is quite amusing:

'26,000 man hours to complete the Southwark Bridge job over a four - year period'

One person, working from 9 till 5, with an hour for lunch, taking a generous 4 weeks holiday a year would clock up 6,720 hours over a four year period.

Basically they are saying that they have four people working on the bridge. No wonder it is taking so long to finish.
Thursday 3 September 2009 4.38pm
Scarily it's only a little over 3 people working!

A standard working year, for HR purposes, is 1928 hours (8 hours, no weekends, 20 days holiday). This means 3.371 people working on Southwark Bridge on average.

The story over a Tower Bridge isn't much better. Just 5.7 workmen on average.
Thursday 3 September 2009 5.22pm
I want to see what a .371 person looks like.
Friday 4 September 2009 2.35pm
It hasn't been updated for a while but there's a website chronicling the work here:

Editor of the London SE1 website.
Subscribe to our SE1 Direct weekly newsletter.
Friday 4 September 2009 4.20pm
Cheers. That site explains why Spans 2/3 southbound are still encrusted with rust - they haven't been worked on yet. I wonder if the image on the site has been digitally enhanced as the southbound side Span 5 image bears no resemblance to what you see when cycling across.
I still think removing and replacing each parapet in turn with a temporary modern replica and working on the original elsewhere would be cost effective and less of an eyesore.
Pages:  1 2 Next
Current: 1 of 2

To post a message, please log in or register..
We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions