Hammersmith Bridge has moved away from a £300 million full restoration for motor traffic and into a proposed £128.05 million phased repair programme intended to keep the Grade II* crossing safely available to pedestrians, cyclists and river traffic.
The strategic change was endorsed by Hammersmith & Fulham Council in July 2026 after the authority concluded that full restoration could not be delivered through the Government’s Structures Fund within its required programme. The £128.05 million scheme is currently a funding bid, not an awarded construction programme, and no main works contractor has been appointed for the permanent phased repair.
The bridge is therefore neither simply “closed” nor restored. Pedestrians and cyclists can cross it, motor vehicles remain excluded, and continuing repair activity beneath the structure is currently affecting navigation on the Thames. Those live works are separate from the proposed £128 million programme that still awaits funding.
Hammersmith Bridge over the River Thames. The current delivery strategy centres on a proposed phased repair programme intended to preserve pedestrian, cycle and river access. Photo: London Construction Magazine.
Key Takeaway: Hammersmith Bridge’s current delivery strategy is a £128.05m phased repair focused on preserving pedestrian, cycle and river access. The former £300m vehicle-restoration plan is not funded, and procurement of the next major works package has not yet begun.
The £300m Vehicle Restoration Is No Longer the Current Plan
The decisive change came through the council’s Hammersmith Bridge Restoration Programme decision in July. Cabinet endorsed phased repair as the current strategy and said any future proposal to strengthen the bridge for motor vehicles would require a further Cabinet decision.
The council’s position is shaped by the Government’s £1 billion Structures Fund. The fund requires supported programmes to be completed by 31 March 2030, while Hammersmith & Fulham concluded that the full restoration needed to return cars and buses could not be delivered within that period. The estimated cost of that broader scheme had risen to around £300 million.
Instead, the public Structures Fund submission sets out a £128.05 million phased proposal focused on the most critical life-expired elements. It seeks £120.35 million from the Department for Transport, with £4.5 million identified as local-authority contribution and £3.2 million from another contribution source.
| Figure | What It Represents | Current Position |
|---|---|---|
| £300m | Estimated full restoration allowing motor traffic | Not funded and no longer the current delivery strategy |
| £128.05m | Structures Fund phased-repair proposal | Funding bid; no award confirmed as at 24 October 2026 |
| £54m | Council-reported expenditure from the April 2019 closure to the end of 2025/26 | Already spent across stabilisation, safe operation and preparatory works |
| £1.5m/year | Monitoring, inspection and maintenance budget from 2026/27 | Approved while the bridge remains a substandard structure |
What the Stabilisation Works Actually Achieved
The £128 million proposal follows years of engineering intervention that have already changed how the bridge behaves structurally. The immediate crisis began with micro-fractures in the four cast-iron pedestals supporting the suspension system. The bridge closed to motor traffic in April 2019, before further crack movement during the August 2020 heatwave led to a full closure.
Investigations linked the pedestal problem to seized bearings that restricted the movement needed as the suspension system expanded and contracted with temperature. Instead of the bridge moving through its intended articulation, additional forces were transferred into brittle cast-iron components.
The subsequent Phase One stabilisation design was developed by Mott MacDonald and delivered by FM Conway, with specialist involvement from Freyssinet and Taziker Industrial. The works included removal of the decorative pedestal casings, strengthening the four pedestals with bespoke fibre-reinforced concrete, installation of temporary and permanent steel support frames, hydraulic jacking and replacement of seized Victorian bearings with modern elastomeric bearings.
The construction sequence required controlled load transfer around historic cast-iron elements rather than a conventional bridge repair approach. Off-site trials were used before key interventions, while structural and temperature monitoring remained integral to keeping the crossing safely managed during the works. FM Conway’s project account records the specialist stabilisation and access work undertaken on the structure.
A separate problem emerged in early 2024 when hanger bearings were found to have seized, restricting deck movement and increasing strain within the hanger system. An engineered bypass arrangement was subsequently installed before further bearing repairs.
Pedestal stabilisation was completed in early 2025 and the main carriageway reopened to pedestrians and cyclists in April after resurfacing and redecking. That work reduced the immediate structural risk and enabled restricted use; it did not restore the bridge for normal road traffic. The council continues to classify Hammersmith Bridge as a substandard structure requiring monitoring, inspection and further intervention.
Funding Has Moved Faster Than Procurement
The distinction between a funding bid and a construction programme is particularly important for contractors. The July Cabinet decision authorises officers to complete a procurement strategy to deliver the phased repair only if the Structures Fund application succeeds. That means the £128.05 million figure is not a contract value and does not represent an awarded package.
No main works contractor, preferred bidder, PCSA or confirmed Early Contractor Involvement arrangement for the permanent phased works has been publicly identified. FM Conway’s appointment relates to the earlier stabilisation programme and should not be read as an appointment to the future repair scheme.
The funding structure has also changed materially since 2021. The earlier position envisaged costs being shared broadly between central government, Transport for London and Hammersmith & Fulham. The council had expected its contribution to be supported through future road-user charging once vehicles returned. With full vehicular restoration no longer the current strategy, that revenue model no longer underpins the proposed phased repair.
Cabinet records show continuing discussions with DfT and TfL about contributions towards stabilisation and other bridge costs already incurred. What does not exist at present is an agreed £300 million funding package waiting for construction to begin. The live proposition is the smaller phased scheme, subject to a Government funding decision and subsequent procurement.
Repair Work Is Still Taking Place in October 2026
Although the main permanent programme remains unfunded, Hammersmith Bridge is not sitting untouched. Port of London Authority Notice U37-26 introduced navigation restrictions from 5 October to 2 December while contractors working for Hammersmith & Fulham carry out repair works beneath the bridge.
Arch 1 is closed for the period covered by the notice, while restrictions and overnight closures affect the other navigable arches as access equipment is used beneath the structure. These works should not be confused with commencement of the proposed £128 million phased programme: they are current repair and access operations within the bridge’s continuing safety-management regime.
Future major works are likely to require the same type of specialist engineering disciplines already demonstrated during stabilisation: temporary support and load transfer, jacking, structural monitoring, restricted marine access, heritage-sensitive dismantling and specialist structural repair. The detailed methodology and package structure for the phased scheme have not yet been published, so there is not yet a verified future tender pipeline that can be attributed to individual contractors or trades.
The wider problem extends beyond one Thames crossing. LCM has previously examined how London’s ageing bridge network is becoming a logistics and programme risk for construction sites, particularly where weight restrictions and diversions reduce route certainty for deliveries and plant movements.
That pressure sits alongside the capital’s broader infrastructure-renewal problem. LCM’s recent analysis of TfL’s £6.5 billion renewals backlog found that ageing bridges, tunnels, tracks and other assets are increasingly competing for long-term funding. Hammersmith Bridge is owned by Hammersmith & Fulham rather than TfL, but its funding and delivery difficulties illustrate the same challenge of turning an identified engineering requirement into an affordable, procured programme.
The next material step is the Department for Transport’s decision on the Structures Fund application. Until funding is confirmed, the £128.05 million phased repair remains a proposal and procurement of the main permanent works cannot move into an awarded construction package.
Expert Verification & Authorship
Founder & Author, London Construction Magazine | Construction Testing & Investigation Specialist