Preh correspondent
BBCCzech capital Prague is one of the architectural gems of Europe: a large extent is untouched for ten centuries of attack and war, attracting some 8 meters of tourists in a year.
This is a living tableau of architectural styles; From medieval to baroque, from industrial to modern. So when a Prague landmark is slapped for demolition or reconstruction, it always increases strong passion.
“I think this bridge is absolutely important for Prague,” Architect and Bridge Engineer, Petra Tej said, 123-year-old Vyasrad Railway Bridge, running his hand on the war-loaded girders.
“Panorama This is formed in combination with the Yaserad Fort, behind it is at the same level of Panorama of Charles Bridge with Prague Castle. These are both Panorama – in my view – is important for Prague, and we need to preserve them,” Tej told the BBC.
Standing on the pedestrian walkway running with the Rusty Steel Bridge, we focused on the trio of the arches, which became a prestigious feature of the southern horizon of Prague.
As we talked that a train escaped above the river, moving towards Smichov station of Prague, and from there Carlovie is separated, Pilsen or Germany.
“These bits are the most affected by the war here,” Petra told me, pointing to a nest nest and beam nest.
The Petrarad is a part of the Bridge Foundation, an international alliance of experts who have restored similar steel bridges worldwide – some of them are very worse than it.
They say that the Railway Authority’s plan to destroy this prestigious industrial landmark – made during the day of the Austro -Hangerian Empire in 1902 – is completely unnecessary.
“Previous expert reports stated that 70% of steel should be replaced. Our study says it is only 15%. It is a huge difference.”
The proposal of the foundation is simple: in the repair place of the bridge, keep trains on, reduce the disruption, and save money in the process.
His findings were supported by UNESCO earlier this year, which greatly saves the historical center of Prague. They are also supported by more than 25,000 inhabitants, who have signed a petition, which is restored rather than replaced the Yaserad Bridge.
After a while, in the shadow of metal girders, Pavel Peder, director of the construction of the Railway Authority, nodded his head in disagreement.
Peder told the BBC, “This bridge already handles the railway traffic of three-fourths of preh. It can handle more, but due to the war, it can only carry about 60% of its capacity.”
“With an estimated increase in rail travel, this is going to be a major transport problem. Yes, it is a protected historical monument, but it is rapidly becoming clear that it is not possible to cover these two things – transport needs and inheritance protection.”
The new bridge will include a third track and according to the visualization, there will be a proper tribute to the original. The entire area will be revived, and transport links will be improved from the main station of Prague to the west and beyond of the country.
Meanwhile, the old bridge will be destroyed and to start a new life as a crossing for pedestrians and cyclists, 8 km (5 mi) to the south will be transferred to the south.
Sparava Zeleznic (Railway Authority)However, this idea has also been criticized by campaigners. The Vltava river in Modrany is about half like the city center. An urban railway bridge, they say, will be completely out of the place below in the middle of a meadow.
“There is a misconception that there are two conflicting interests in playing here-to protect our cultural heritage,” said Tomas Bistric, philanthropist and co-founder of the Wishrad Bridge Foundation, which proposes a second, thin bridge with the original to provide the third track.
“But our study shows that there is really no conflict; on the contrary, these two things support each other.”
This is a centuries -old dilemma: to tear in the name of modernity, or to preserve in the name of tradition. It stimulates especially strong emotions in a city that is proud of its architectural protection.
Finally, and perhaps as soon as possible later, this is the one that will have to be decided by the government not by railway engineers or heritage campaigners.
