Venezia ObServer, Bareteri Bridge
A so called "restoration"

In these photos of the right side of the bridge (moving in direction of St. Mark's Square) can be seen, indicated from the red arrows, the mortar plasterings. We know from previous observation on other buildings that these plasterings have lives of few months, while sulphuric athmosphere persists.
One of the columns was clearly substituted by a new one, while on three of the others is visible the sign of a glued fracture.
Clic on the images to enlarge.

Red arrows point plasterings here too, but the pics want to show how the disposition of the columns was respected not: on the right side the columns have radial disposition, perpendicular to the banister inclination, therefore inclined respect the gravity axis.
In the left side photos published below, the lubber's lines, in green, state the application of a perfectly vertical set-up, arranged with wedges made of the usual plastering mortar.

In the insane attempt to carry on concealing the gravity of the danger, the patchings become more an more fussy. Smaller and smaller pieces are glued together, aiding with mortar and lead. The building symmetry of the left and right parapets is destroyed, more than disturbed.
The fragility of the Istria stone, already deeply changed in chalk by sulphation, seems to force the use of copper stitches instead of the traditional iron ones.

Looking at the left parapet, always moving in direction of St. Mark's Square, we can see how. here, the columns are all pointing streight to the sky, and are linked up to the banister through mortar wedges.
One is taken to think that they shared the contract also at project level, and that the left parapet has been cared by an architect of the so called "left party", while the other by a colleague of the "Berlusconi party"...
Venetians, save your town by the hands of these figures, and from their system!
At least three columns can be seen to be completely new, while some others have a suspicious aspect.

Lead, mortar and copper stitches on the left parapet too.
Did they really choose the copper for sensibility towards the already crumbling stone, or must we think that the use of such a metal was a way to help justifying the incredible cost of 180.000 euro for this intervention, as declared on the newspapers?.

Hypocrite and embellisher as they are, the bridge "restorers" curbed their zeal at the parapets, as is on the at sight part of the manufact.
But the bridge's arch is decaying, the capstone is out of seat by several centimetres, the abutments are runned by fractures.
Who knows if the yes-man of Canale 5 will notice these slips in the "restoration", when he will ever come back to ask more news about the Bareteri Bridge at the councillor Rumiz.