To be fair, the surface of the bridge already looked knackered like the article alludes to. It looks like cheap, shoddy work and for how much the bridge ended up costing its a bit of a farce.
I use it twice a day and its appalling. Surface is all rippled, steps fill up with water and when its cold like the other day the water freezes making them dangerous to use.
Used it earlier today, no problems whatsoever(or ever). The lifts on the other hand are out of action, that's bad for anyone that relies on them.
I don’t live in the town so forgive the maybe stupid question: the article says it links the glasshouse to the transport hub. How does it do that? Surely you don’t need to cross the bridge from that side to get a bus or train?
It doesn't. You can get from glasshouse to bus/train station without using the bridge. All it does is get you over the train tracks and then you have to cross 4 roads before you can start walking up the hill to Oakwell.
I've been over it once since it was opened, on my way from town to Oakwell, so that is why I asked the question. Why would you cross over the railway line to then double back - without being sure I don't suppose you can. Therefore the article is inaccurate and this white elephant has nothing whatsoever to do with accessing any transport hubs. Quelle surprise
I suspect it was procured under a Design & Build Contract in which case the council will have lost some control over the quality aspects. It's all well and good saying the surface is within acceptable tolerances but it looks an absolute mess and such a cheap finish when you consider they've spent £13m on the entire thing. There's also lots of standing water on the steps which isn't acceptable. The council seem quite dismissive about it and don't want to be questioned on it, I wonder who within the council signed off on that surface finish.
It is within legal tolerances so regardless of the council's opinion on the bridge surface finish they cannot do anything unfortunately.