ChatterBank3 mins ago
Do Councils Just Sit There Dreaming Up Ways To Annoy People?
24 Answers
https:/
Just paint the bits you can!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
This is something often seen in other countries but it's not the only bridge to have locks removed.
https:/
"Just paint the bits you can!"
And then sit back and watch how many complain that their locks have paint on them. From what i can see, the only part of the bridge that could be safely painted is the bottom half where there are no locks.
Would be far better to find an alternative site for the locks, imho.
As an aside, whatever happened to carving a couple's initials within a love-heart on a tree?
I do believe that Councils often set out to annoy people. However, in this case I think they have a point.
I've seen this bridge and as far as I can recall the sides consist of tensioned steel cables stretched between a number of steel supports.
The far longer but much more slender "Pont des Arts" in Paris had an an estimated one million locks weighing around 45 tons attached to its parapets. In 2014 parts of the bridge's parapets collapsed under the weight and it had to be temporarily closed whilst the locks were removed and the parapets covered in sheeting so that locks could not be attached.
I doubt the locks in Bakewell pose a structural threat to the bridge itself but they may well threaten the integrity of the cable parapets. They were clearly not designed to support such a constant weight. As well as that, the nature of the parapets, being of steel cable, would require regular inspection which would be almost impossible whilst the locks are attached.
It's not helped with there being a shop in Bakewell will sells the locks and will engrave them. They should be politely asked by the council to desist as it adds an air of acceptability to the practice.
The locks should be removed and measures taken to ensure they can no longer be attached.
Yes councils do give the appearance of finding ways to annoy or abuse people for the sake of it. Or for other inappropriate reasons.
As for this bridge, it's sad people's tokens of love are under threat but if the bridge needs maintenance... Maybe the council can give folk time to remove their lock as a keepsake before they start work.
"Maybe the council can give folk time to remove their lock as a keepsake before they start work."
They have done that, OG. See the notice they posted towards the end of this report:
https:/
The problem, as I see it, is that the routine with this ritual is to lock the padlock in place and then chuck the key(s) in the river. So even if they were so minded, it is unlikely the owners of the locks would be able to remove them anyway.
"What the council should do is remove it all now for the maintenance of the bridge but then put them back near the bridge afterwards."
There's two problems I see with that:
1. They haven't got the keys.
2. Even if they had, council taxpayers should not be expected to fund that exercise. It is estimated that there are about 10,000 locks on the bridge. Assuming they had the keys and could readily match them up (very unlikley on both counts) and using a very conservative estimate of one minute per lock it would take around 170 manhours to remove them.
No, they should be cut off with boltcutters. When the maintenance is complete a sign saying "No locks allowed. Any put here will be removed." Then send a bloke round once a week on his way home on Friday night with a pair of boltcutters to remove any that do get fixed. The message will soon get round.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.