While I can appreciate that the city council's approach to the Bowstring Bridge which is no longer of use as far as they are concerned – and the necessity to be 100% safe when dealing with public access – I still believe that the decision to close it some years ago was based only partially on engineering considerations.

The corrosion damage is similar to, but not as extensive as, that on the Braunstone Lane Bridge, given the difference in design, size and complexity, and the impression gained from this can only add to the general concern that not only was it possible to save it but the various cost estimates, including a high figure of £2.5m were, in my opinion, more likely to be a scare-mongering figure than a practical evaluation.

Considering its age and the quality of these early steel sections, we can now see, with the grass, tarmac, ballast and bitumen removed, that the general condition is not at all bad.

Also, with an estimated 200 to 300 tons weight having been removed from the bridge, the safety factor against its own weight has improved considerably.

Some sections would benefit from cosmetic repair and, in the case of a very few end supports, restoration work would involve the use of a steel needle concrete mix encapsulation, as used effectively on repairs to the 1832 Glenfield Tunnel. However, a decent application of protective coating would ensure that the structure would probably stand for a few dozen more years.

I would be interested to hear the views of the experts called in for demolition, who may well have experience of such structures, as to the necessity of demolition, although they may well, of course, be biased towards the existing contract.

As the council do not normally consider U-turns, I can only assume that demolition will continue, despite public outcry and condemnation from many sources.

They are about to demolish an iconic West End structure and well-liked pub against much opposition, with little or no tangible evidence of public interest betterment.

David Lyne, Leicester.