New Bridge name?

Status
Not open for further replies.
EchoMan said:
The bridge is forecast to cost £118m of which £83m comes from central government and the other £35m from Sunderland Council.

This comes at a time of council tax rises and job cuts ---

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/sunderland-braced-46m-cuts-council-12541598

At the end of the day - it's just a bridge, which is probably needed. But why such an expensive one; that's all I'm asking.

And I'm asking as a relative of somebody worried about their council job as a result of the cuts.

They could have built a lower cost design and erected a landmark like the Angel of the North; something appropriate in a more prominent position - and still saved millions and a few jobs.

As for the abusive threads from a couple on here - spare a thought for those facing tax rises and job losses as you admire the design.
Click to expand...

For starters the link has nothing to do with the bridge
At the last local election, The labour candidates leaflets made a big deal how 100% of the funding was now grant funded from central governmemt & wouldn't cost the council tax payer anything

BTW, you originally quoted £60m, which you've now dropped to £35m
 


Montgomery bridge

No one deserves more recognition than this bloke for what he did and is still doing to represent our City and Club.
 
EchoMan said:
The bridge is forecast to cost £118m of which £83m comes from central government and the other £35m from Sunderland Council.

This comes at a time of council tax rises and job cuts ---

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/sunderland-braced-46m-cuts-council-12541598

At the end of the day - it's just a bridge, which is probably needed. But why such an expensive one; that's all I'm asking.

And I'm asking as a relative of somebody worried about their council job as a result of the cuts.

They could have built a lower cost design and erected a landmark like the Angel of the North; something appropriate in a more prominent position - and still saved millions and a few jobs.

As for the abusive threads from a couple on here - spare a thought for those facing tax rises and job losses as you admire the design.
Click to expand...
Investing in infrastructure is *good* for jobs, businesses and the local economy.

The more money that is spent building bridges, railways, trains, planes, roads, munitions etc the better it is for everyone.
 
Le Chuck said:
For starters the link has nothing to do with the bridge
At the last local election, The labour candidates leaflets made a big deal how 100% of the funding was now grant funded from central governmemt & wouldn't cost the council tax payer anything

BTW, you originally quoted £60m, which you've now dropped to £35m
Click to expand...

The figures I gave are from the BBC web site -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-32724404


Read what I said again. I said a bridge over that span should cost half what it has - that's where you've got the £60m from.

Thurston said:
Investing in infrastructure is *good* for jobs, businesses and the local economy.

The more money that is spent building bridges, railways, trains, planes, roads, munitions etc the better it is for everyone.
Click to expand...
I agree - the bridge is needed. But it didn't have to be so expensive.
 
EchoMan said:
The figures I gave are from the BBC web site -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-32724404


Read what I said again. I said a bridge over that span should cost half what it has - that's where you've got the £60m from.


I agree - the bridge is needed. But it didn't have to be so expensive.
Click to expand...

the link is 2 year out of date, and it doesn't matter what it 'should' cost, as according to your rationale the absolute maximum the council would save is £35m
Which I'd reiterate my point about giving the rest to London, as that's exactly what would happen
 
Could see it from the Wearmouth bridge today. Looking good.

The Mickey cool as fridges bridge.

gillythedilf said:
It's got to be of a local icon /hero .

Jack Crawford bridge
Havelock bridge
Joseph swan bridge
Venerable Bede bridge
Cretehauser crossing (after the concrete tub)


Something like that
Click to expand...

If its local then Raich Carter and Bobby Gurney should get a mention. Nowhere near enough representation in the city for Gurney in particular.
 
Last edited:
EchoMan said:
The bridge is forecast to cost £118m of which £83m comes from central government and the other £35m from Sunderland Council.

This comes at a time of council tax rises and job cuts ---

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/sunderland-braced-46m-cuts-council-12541598

At the end of the day - it's just a bridge, which is probably needed. But why such an expensive one; that's all I'm asking.

And I'm asking as a relative of somebody worried about their council job as a result of the cuts.

They could have built a lower cost design and erected a landmark like the Angel of the North; something appropriate in a more prominent position - and still saved millions and a few jobs.

As for the abusive threads from a couple on here - spare a thought for those facing tax rises and job losses as you admire the design.
Click to expand...

Civil engineering projects cost a lot of money mate. Its been tendered and as such should be the market price. You either believe that these things benefit your economy and invest in them like Germany, or you don't and don't invest in them like Ireland. It takes an hour in rush hour traffic to get from Dublin airport to O'Connell street. In that hour you can whizz 60+ miles between German cities. You get what you pay for....

jarramackem said:
Montgomery bridge

No one deserves more recognition than this bloke for what he did and is still doing to represent our City and Club.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Carter and Gurney did far more and Gurney has next to nothing named after him in his home town. So much so that many Sunderland fans don't even know who he was.
 
Last edited:
tynevalleyblackcat said:
Civil engineering projects cost a lot of money mate. Its been tendered and as such should be the market price. You either believe that these things benefit your economy and invest in them like Germany, or you don't and don't invest in them like Ireland. It takes an hour in rush hour traffic to get from Dublin airport to O'Connell street. In that hour you can whizz 60+ miles between German cities. You get what you pay for....



I disagree. Carter and Gurney did far more and Gurney has next to nothing named after him in his home town. So much so that many Sunderland fans don't even know who he was.
Click to expand...

WTF.......Dublin? Gorman cities? And a bridge in S'land.....
 
tynevalleyblackcat said:
Civil engineering projects cost a lot of money mate. Its been tendered and as such should be the market price. You either believe that these things benefit your economy and invest in them like Germany, or you don't and don't invest in them like Ireland. It takes an hour in rush hour traffic to get from Dublin airport to O'Connell street. In that hour you can whizz 60+ miles between German cities. You get what you pay for....
Click to expand...

The US looking to spend $20bn dollars on a wall that will have very little benefit to its economy apart from a few short-term jobs building it. Meanwhile its rail network is the envy of absolutely no developed nation on earth with no high speed rail links planned or being built (even Morocco has one now). The quickest you can do the 700 miles between NY and Chicago is 20 hours by train. The 800 miles between Beijing to Shanghai can be done in 5 hours.
 
Le Chuck said:
the link is 2 year out of date, and it doesn't matter what it 'should' cost, as according to your rationale the absolute maximum the council would save is £35m
Which I'd reiterate my point about giving the rest to London, as that's exactly what would happen
Click to expand...
We would still have a bridge and most of the £35m. What's your point? It's like you don't think the council is short of cash.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top