Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Bridges No.35 - Walton Bridge


Walton Bridge is not going to win any awards for beauty. This crossing at Walton-on-Thames has a long history, and my thanks go to the excellent resource on the bridge on the Surrey County Council website. There have, to date, been five bridges at Walton, the sixth should be on its way in the not too distant future.

THE 1750 BRIDGE
The first Walton Bridge was built in 1750 to replace a long standing ferry service. It was funded by a local landowner, Samuel Dicker, MP for Plymouth. Dicker was first and foremost a business man, with plantations in Jamaica, but he was also an MP and he would have travelled through Walton to reach Westminster from his constituency. There was also the businessman's nouse of reaping some tolls from one of the few physical river crossing at the time. Construction work began in 1748 and was built from wood, using an unsual lattice structure. It was designed by William Etheridge. The bridge is most famously captured in a painting of 1754 by Caneletto (shown above) where the design is very striking. To me it looks quite a modern design and reminds me of the Olympic stadium currently being constructed in Beijing.

The bridge, like many of the Thames's early wooden bridge, became expensive to maintain. In 1760 Dicker died and ownership passed to his nephew Michael Dicker Sanders. In 1778 John Smeaton reported on the bridge's condition and recommend it me taken down and replaced by a brick arch. Five years later the bridge was dismantled to make way for the construction of the second bridge.

THE 1788 BRIDGE
The second bridge followed Smeaton's recommendation for a brick built bridge and James Pain designed it, also making use of stone. Five years passed between the demolition of the first bridge and the completion of Pain's structure. The bridge stood for 73 years until disaster struck in August 1859. The twon central arches collapsed suddenly into the river. The theory was that settlement of the foundations under the central pier led to the collapse. There was an urgent need for the bridge to be replaced and until that could happen ferries returned to ply their trade at Walton.

THE 1864 BRIDGE
Following the collapse the then owner, Thomas Newman Allen, promoted a Parliamentary Bill for a new bridge at Walton, together with two further bridges downstream to fill the gap between Walton and Hampton Court. These two bridges never became a reality, but Walton Bridge was rebuilt and opened in 1864. The bridge was of iron girder construction resting on brick and stone piers. It was designed by E T Murray. On the Walton side of the river a brick arch viaduct was also built acorss the area of floodplain. This section of the bridge remains to this day. Tolls were removed in 1870 when ownership of Kingston and Walton bridges passed to the Metropolitan Board of Works.

In 1940 the bridge was damaged during a German air raid. The structure was weakened as a result and weight limits were imposed. After the war, and the construction of the fourth bridge, the third bridge remained in use for pedestrians and cyclists but by the 1980s it became to costly to maintain it and it was demolished in 1985.

THE 1953 BRIDGE
With the 1864 bridge become ever more weaker following the war, Middlesex County Council built a bridge immediatley alongside it in 1953. It was intended to be built quickly and to act as a temporary crossing before a more permanent solution was found. The bridge was known as the 'Callender-Hamilton' bridge. However, the bridge still stands to this day on the downstream side of the crossing and is the section shown in my main picture at the top of this entry.

Given the temporary nature of the bridge it was never designed to require long-term maintenance. For instance the metal work on the bridge was never painted, and no waterproofing was provided between the roadway and the steel supporting plates. When the third bridge was demomlished in 1985 the fourth bridge also underwent a thorough inspection and a weight limited was imposed. The plan was to allow continued use of the bridge, with maintenance work as required, until such a time as permanent replacement could be constructed. However, by 1993 this had still not happened, and further assessments of the bridge's structure led to a further reduction of the weight limit.

In June 1998 the then six-monthly safety inspections showed the need for more strengthening works, but once again the weight limit had to be reduced, down to 7.5 tonnes. The fourth bridge remains in place today, but like the third bridge before it, it is now only used by pedestrians and cyclists.

THE 1999 BRIDGE
The 1998 inspection of the fourth bridge led to the urgent requirement for a new bridge for road traffic. That inspection determined that it would now be too costly to continue to maintain the fourth bridge. The fifth bridge was built in the same position as the third, alongside the 1953 bridge. The 1999 bridge is was built very quickly. An application to Government for funding for a temporary crossing was submitted in August 1998. Planning permission was granted in June 1999 and construction began in August. By December the bridge was complete.

THE 2009 BRIDGE?

A condition of the planning permission for the 1999 bridge was that bridge would only be in place for a maximum of 10 years. Therefore a brand new bridge is required for February 2009, although that deadline is looking increasingly ambitious. In 2003 different design options were made available for public consulatation. The Tiered Arch design, shown above, was subsequently selected in Sepetember 2003. The scheme also includes some improvements to the road layout in the immediate area of the bridge. For this a compulsory purchase order in required, but in December 2006 the Department of Transport decided not to confirm the CPOs drafted by Surrey County Council. Consequently the scheme is on hold until the issues are resolved, and it is now highly unlikely that a new bridge will be in place by 2009 and some maintenance work will be needed on the current crossing.

No comments: