Tag: structures fund

• Who needs the Structures Fund?

  The trouble with “confirming” funding for a road scheme prematurely is that you look silly when you announce the funding a year later – and the trouble with announcing a “Structures Fund” is that you look silly when you announce cash to protect a structure from an existing fund.

  And you look even sillier, as the Department for Transport (DfT)does today, when you issue a press release with a photo of the wrong location.

  The DfT says:

  King’s Road, on Brighton’s seafront, is supported by a series of Victorian-era arches that are in urgent need of replacement to avoid the crucial road from being closed.
  
  That’s why the government will invest £22 million to replace dozens of these arches, avoiding the risk of collapse and making sure the road is safe for the next century.

  The road with one of the best views along the south coast connects people to Brighton Pier, Brighton Beach and the i360 observation tower, attracting tourists from across the world.

  

  The photo they have used is clearly looking across Volk’s Electric Railway (a massive clue) and Madeira Drive towards Marine Parade.

  And, although the press release doesn’t say it, the scheme is under the Major Road Network (MRN) and was one of the MRN schemes the DfT claimed to have given a “green light” last year, with “funding confirmed”.

  In fact, the scheme was awaiting a full business case, which has now been approved, which means it will go ahead.

  And, as I have written, the “Structures Fund” that the DfT also announced last year is not a discrete fund at all, but a decision to share £1bn between the MRN and structures on local authority roads.

  Once again, giving MRN funding to a scheme to reconstruct key structures shows that you don’t need a separate structures fund at all.

  Which is just as well, because they haven’t got one.

  Leave a comment Cancel reply

  Δ

  2026.07.06

• Funding gaps can’t be bridged

  Hammersmith and Fulham council has accepted that it cannot fund a £300m full restoration – or replacement – of Hammersmith Bridge, but will instead seek funding amounting to approximately a quarter of the value of the government’s non-existent “Structures Fund” for a partial fix.

  A report to the council’s cabinet says:

  The Hammersmith Bridge restoration works are extensive. They essentially require a brand-new bridge to be built as all of the Grade II listed heritage structure needs to be replaced or strengthened or restored. The cost of a full restoration of Hammersmith Bridge to allow its use for motor vehicles is now estimated to be £300m.

  …

  Following discussions with the DfT, it is recommended that the Council submits a bid for a phased repair focused on the most critical life-expired elements of the structure, with the immediate aim of keeping the bridge open and safeguarding access for pedestrians, cyclists and river traffic. The DfT has confirmed its preference for this phased repair bid to the Structures Fund. There is no financial option available that would allow its full restoration.

  

  In three separate places, the report gives the value of the Structures Fund as “£1bn”. This is inaccurate: as I have written extensively, the fund does not have a fixed amount and is to get an unstated (and possibly undecided) share of the £1bn with local authority road upgrades.

  This matters when:

  (more…)

  2026.07.01