Widgetized Section
Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Cornwall News
That Fearless Ballsy Website From Up North
Real Whitby
The Real Whitby Motto - Dont Feed The Moose.
“A Bridge Too Far-gone?”
‘Scarborough Valley Bridge – Neglect or incompetence?’ –
by John Henderson
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Recently was brought to our attention some videos on the YouTube website, showing Valley Bridge in Scarborough.
This bridge, according to the Scarborough Borough Council website, is “inspected and maintained” by the Borough Council, for North Yorkshire County Council (under a Highways Agreement).
Put simply, Scarborough Borough Council would appear to be charged with regularly inspecting the bridge for damage, ‘wear and tear’, or any other issue that could affect the structure, and safety of the people who use the bridge.
That said, it could be quite logical to assume that the bridge is inspected on a monthly, bi-annual, or even annual basis, to ensure that it is in excellent condition, and that any issues are remedied as soon as practicable. This would certainly ensure that the bridge remained in good order, and would last for generations to come.
Although it hasn’t been possible to find out, before publishing this article, it is somewhat safe to assume that Scarborough Borough Council is spending some money on the “inspection” and “maintenance” of the bridge; that someone, at least, is employed to inspect, and that at least one person is employed or contracted to carrry out maintenance/repairs when needed; also, that some of this is paid for by money raised through the Council Tax charged to people throughout the Borough.
The bridge is an historic structure, built originally in 1865, and widened in 1928, it has become an iconic part of the town and is a vital link for the town from the South. It stands to reason that because this is such an important structure it would be well maintained, and inspected often to ensure it is in good order.
However, it now seems that this is not the case.
Real Whitby has been sent two YouTube links detailing some of the horrifying damage and neglect to the bridge.
Video 1 can be seen here.
Video 2 can be seen here.
As can be seen in both videos, there appears to be a lot of damage to the bridge. Whilst it is clear that the bridge is still standing and appears to be structurally sound, there is cause for some questioning of this.
Worse, it would seem that because of the poor condition of some of the structure, that there is a case for endangerment of human life.
In a Scarborough Evening News article from November 2011, there is the suggestion that a glass bottle dropped from the bridge could kill someone if they were to be hit by it. At the very least, they could be seriously injured. However, what if a piece of the metal work of the bridge were to fall and hit you? There could be no doubt that serious injury and likely death would occur.
In Video 2 from the link above, a piece of metal easily smashes a thick glass jar from a small height. Valley Bridge is dozens of feet above ground, and this piece of metal is not insignificant.
After these videos were made, a search under the bridge was made, and it was discovered that there are indeed a good number of metal fragments that have fallen from the bridge – quite a number were collected, and lots of these would be lethal if they were to hit you. One piece is much bigger than that shown in the videos, and we’ve managed to get a photo comparing some of these pieces.
It is easy to see from the picture that large fragments of metal almost half an inch thick would do some serious damage to life and limb, not even bothering to mention property (remember a road and several footpaths work their way under Valley Bridge).
The following photo show just a selection of fragments picked up from underneath the bridges. It should be noted that some of these were picked up next to footpaths, and the Valley Road itself. Imagine one of these larger fragments falling and hitting a motorist during the busy summer…
We are left to wonder just who is responsible for this neglect. How can it be that the bridge is in such a poor state of repair that such large and lethal objects are just falling off without anything being done to prevent this?
We are left with the idea that anyone brave enough to venture under the bridge is in serious danger. Could it be that Scarborough Borough Council and North Yorkshire County Council are so negligent or incompetent that they are happy to endanger human life?
Further to this concept is the possibility that it isn’t the public underneath the bridge who are at risk, but those using the bridge itself. When images like the following one show very clearly that the structure underneath the thick iron cladding is so badly corroded, and so much so that it disintegrates at the lightest touch.
Neglect of a structure such as this is a clear indication that someone is not doing his or her job. This sort of behaviour would likely get someone working in the private sector sacked for gross misconduct. Might that be the case here, or might it be a case that it will be swept under the carpet as so often seems to be the case.
So, what are the two Councils doing about this?
Taking a look at the NYCC website showing bridge repairs, it is readily apparent that no work is scheduled for Valley Bridge.
Scarborough Borough Council doesn’t appear to have a page dedicated to maintenance works of this nature. One can only conclude that no work is scheduled at all.
Once more, we are at liberty to ask the all important question, ‘why?’
North Yorkshire County Councillor, Gareth Dadd, is the Portfolio-Holder for this sort of thing, and has been involved in controversy before over the Spa Bridge in Scarborough, which showed problems shortly after that bridge had been refurbished at the significant cost of around £800K. Details of this can be found on the Scarborough News website here.
Whilst Real Whitby has so far not been able to Contact Cllr Dadd , we will be making every endeavour to do so over the coming days for a full statement regarding this serious issue.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Related reading:
35 Responses to “A Bridge Too Far-gone?”
Leave a Reply
Say No To Joe
Suggested Reading
Tim Thorne
January 2, 2013 at 10:50 pm
I seem to remember a Valley Bridge refurb in not too distant past, though it might be ten to fifteen years ago. I believe a local firm was heavily involved in the paint job. It might be worth asking them what they recommended for the ongoing maintenance of the bridge and if those procedures have been adhered too.
Is the music for video 2 intentional because it may take at least 28 weeks to get an FOI response!
Frank Chalmers
January 2, 2013 at 10:52 pm
Safe to say that the cost will fall on John Q-taxpayer.
I’m no genius, and it doesn’t take one to work it out.
These people are wasting our money.
wendy
January 2, 2013 at 10:59 pm
There are sections in a poorer condition than those shown. Work was done on one small section during the summer but each time I go across I remind myself never to hold onto the matal work as it looks as though fresh air is holding it together.
DKP
January 2, 2013 at 11:28 pm
Whitby looks like that these days, from Parkol to the end of the west pier. You can’t even get to the end of the east pier! Never mind, you’re getting a new one in Algerinoland. How come there’s always money for new, but nowt to maintain what we’ve already got? Does it have to be new to win prizes? Does it have been new to get skim off?
Damon
January 3, 2013 at 12:01 am
I guess I am going to go against the council basher’s with my comments. oh well.
It reads as if your blaming Scarborough district council and North Yorkshire Council? surely as its a two tear system only one of them would have responsibility for the up keep. i.e bins fall under district, social services are County council you can’t blame a organisation that has nothing to do with it. That to me would be like blaming coca cola for pepsi issues.
Why suggest someone should be sacked without all the information? have you had a structural engineer who specializes in bridges look at it?
One comment from a reader suggests skimming? is that a reference to fraud, does this reader have evidence and if so I suggest he contacts the Councils fruad line or don’t make stupid suggestions.
If you don’t like what the council does you all have votes, as per normal local elections are poorly turned out. did you all vote I doubt it and why not get yourself elected to make a difference? mmmm I doubt that too.
Still if its not safe and errors have been made if its gross misconduct then someone will get fired, if you sack people without good reason the council will loose even more money in court.
oh well enough said!
Frank Chalmers
January 3, 2013 at 2:25 am
Did you even read the same article as the rest of us?
The County Council is the “owner” of the bridge and the Borough Council is responsible for maintaining it.
The Borough Council haven’t maintained the bridge. They have been negligent.
The County Council don’t seem to have ensured it is maintained and safe for us to use. They have been negligent.
In both Councils there are people not doing their jobs properly.
According to what I saw in the article there are big bits of metal falling off the bridge. They could kill someone. Do you seriously believe that no one should be held accountable for this? If someone got killed would that be okay with you?
You sound like a Council worker or maybe even a Councillor. You aren’t a plant are you?
Paul
January 3, 2013 at 3:27 am
Word!
jgh
January 3, 2013 at 6:22 am
It’s very simple. I own my windows, But I pay somebody else to clean them. If they fail to clean them they are failing in their duty to do the service I am contracting them to do. If I fail to ensure they do the cleaning, I am failing to do my duty to keep my windows clean.
Nigel Ward
January 3, 2013 at 9:19 am
“This bridge, according to the Scarborough Borough Council website, is “inspected and maintained” by the Borough Council, for North Yorkshire County Council (under a Highways Agreement).”
One does not have to be a “council basher” to recognise, from the video footage and the photgraphs, that not much of either inspection or maintenance can have taken place for quite some considerable time.
Quite aside from the obvious risk, to pedestrians and/or motorists passsing under the bridge, of being struck by pieces of rusty steel plate falling from a height of 25m plus,the present state of the larger structural elements is really quite disconcerting.
[@ Frank Chalmers: I have observed (and noted) the petty illiteracy of apostrophising plurals before; I think you may be right about the identity of the poster who seemingly did not bother to read the article properly.]
Tom Brown
January 3, 2013 at 9:47 am
Real Whitby tells it as it is.
Now I would like to see reports on this subject in Scarborough Evening News and the Whitby Gazette.
Im not holding my breath.
Tom Brown
January 3, 2013 at 9:48 am
No wonder Real Whitby is read country wide.
Damon
January 3, 2013 at 10:26 am
Hello all,
Not a Council Worker, or anything to do with either Council. I do though live in North Yorkshire if that’s OK?
I love fact I have a different opinion and I am a plant, that is class. Who is the Head of the Council? Maybe I could pretend to be them.
I think in my opinion it is a crap article and missing loads of information that I would need before saying the Council is failing in its duties etc.
I cam across the article on twitter from someone posting it on it.
After reading it again I still think its a load of crap.
Best Wishes Damon
Tim Thorne
January 3, 2013 at 11:51 am
“I love fact I have a different opinion”
That’ll be the concussion caused by one of those falling pieces of steel.
Richard Ineson
January 3, 2013 at 5:41 pm
Damon, when you say, “I am a plant”, does that mean that you are member of the family Plant?
Jon Risdon
January 3, 2013 at 12:17 pm
Will it take a tragedy for ‘something to be done’? I’m not a betting man, but even I might be prepared to punt a few bob on that one.
pete budd
January 3, 2013 at 12:32 pm
Maintenance costs must come from revenue which is already allocated to salaries and pensions. They don’t care anyway and demolition protects them from vicarious liability at small cost. Lets have it down so they know what it feels like.
ken graham
January 3, 2013 at 4:02 pm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01jv5nr/The_Bridges_That_Built_London_with_Dan_Cruickshank/
Readers maybe interested in this link. London Bridge is falling down my fair lady, see at 24 minutes.
Jane Swales
January 3, 2013 at 5:06 pm
I would be interested to know how the Councils reconcile the evidence of those videos with their statutory duty of care for life and property.
I think I will write an email to Mr Dillon and Councillor Fox. Perhaps they can explain
Can anyone tell me if these are the correct email addresses, please?
Jim.Dillon@scarborough.gov.uk
Cllr.Tom.Fox@scarborough.gov.uk
Richard Ineson
January 3, 2013 at 5:37 pm
The extensive corrosion to the bridge, which must have occurred over many years, and then the cracks in the castings, which may be attributable to movement of the foundations, are all very alarming. Is the bridge safe? Has someone been paid to inspect the bridge, and failed to carry out their duties? Who will be held responsible if the bridge collapses? Should a STAKEHOLDER STEERING GROUP be established to consider these matters? I think that we should be told.
Frank Chalmers
January 3, 2013 at 6:31 pm
Bridge collapse in North Yorkshire…
Is this the first of many?
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/two-rescued-after-bridge-collapses-in-north-yorkshire-1-5274921
http://www.lynnnews.co.uk/news/traffic-transport/st-john-fen-end-bridge-collapse-leaves-couple-stranded-in-home-1-4595500
Bridges in working order DO NOT collapse.
“Duty of care” is a requirement by law.
Nigel Ward
January 3, 2013 at 6:43 pm
U have carefully documented all of my correspondence with SBC on the topic of maintenancae (and other matters). Newcomers to Real Whitby will learn a great deal by refeering to my article of 15th April 2012:
http://www.real-whitby.co.uk/towering-incompetence-neglect
The facts speak for themselves – coming, as they do, from the most impeccable of all possible sources – the emails of SBC Heads of Department. It’s all part of the Public Record.
Sally h
January 3, 2013 at 10:14 pm
This is a serious matter. Can we assume that SBC were aware of it ? Maybe they intend to use leftover material from the new pier project to patch it .
The answer is that those currently in power are not re-elected . Part of the problem is that a great deal of people do not know what goes on at SBC and they will never read about it in the Scarborough Newspaper . They probably won’t even mention it.
It’s comforting to know that whatever problems Scarborough has Robert Goodwill MP will be able to hang his hat ( chances are he doesn’t wear one) on his £629.00 hatstand paid for by the taxpayer . They seriously need to prioritise.
mark h
January 3, 2013 at 10:57 pm
another problem where sweet nothing will get done.
its just not right.
these council people earn loads of money and they are lazy and greedy.
they are worse than people who cheat on there benefits.
Frank Chalmers
January 4, 2013 at 3:06 am
“The Court of Inquiry indicated that if the piers, and in particular the wind bracing, had been properly constructed and maintained, the bridge could have withstood the storm that night, albeit with a low factor of safety”
Key words here are “if the piers” “had been” and “maintained”.
http://taybridgedisaster.co.uk/?oo=10000906
i>”Bridges can, and will fail, if not properly designed, constructed and maintained”
From Page 3 of this presentation:
http://mceer.buffalo.edu/education/bridge_speaker_series/2009-2010/presentations/P1%20Lessons%20learned%20from%20Bridge%20Failures_FINAL.pdf
A picture starts to emerge about what should be done.
peter anderson
January 4, 2013 at 3:25 pm
Yet more geglect from the award winning council.Well done tom fox.
peter anderson
January 4, 2013 at 3:31 pm
Sorry should read NEGLET
rahjibugha
January 5, 2013 at 1:15 am
Neglect?
Frank Chalmers
January 5, 2013 at 2:17 am
Neglect.
Tom Brown
January 5, 2013 at 8:43 am
Aren’t road bearing bridges County Council resposibility
rahjibugha
January 5, 2013 at 9:41 am
Maybe, but don’t expect a “response” from them.
Just thought you might be pulling our legs Tom.
DKP
January 5, 2013 at 1:47 pm
I see Badwill has jumped on the bandwagon.
http://www.yorkshirecoastradio.com/news/local-news/859455/scarborough-mp-calls-for-urgent-survey-of-bridge/
mark h
January 5, 2013 at 5:38 pm
something i was reminded of today was that this bridge hasnt been painted since 1993 when the new barryers were installed
that was 20 year ago!
Nigel Ward
January 6, 2013 at 9:29 pm
I see we have an update:
http://www.real-whitby.co.uk/valley-bridge-negligence-story-update
Patricia David
January 7, 2013 at 11:44 am
But isn’t this what SBC do? Leave everything to deteriorate to such a degree that it is beyond repair then bring in Consultants, Developers and major Project Companies to suggest demolition, build a brand new one (ideally to incorporate flats, retail parks, hotel or two, encompassing the whole area,) using Grant Funding or Loans or Joint Funding lenders?
Tim Thorne
January 9, 2013 at 6:13 pm
The Ravine bridge at Filey is supposed to be having problems too.