Dave Umahi reveals the 3rd Mainland Bridge rehabilitation will cost N3.8 trillion while reconstruction will cost N3.6 trillion (video)
ABUJA — In a development that could reshape Nigeria’s infrastructure conversation for years to come, the Minister of Works, Senator David Umahi, has disclosed that the Federal Government is weighing a critical decision: whether to spend ₦3.8 trillion rehabilitating the ageing Third Mainland Bridge or ₦3.6 trillion completely reconstructing it.
Speaking after a Federal Executive Council meeting chaired by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu at the Presidential Villa, Abuja, Umahi explained that engineering assessments had revealed alarming deterioration beneath the bridge’s surface that could compromise one of the most vital arteries in Nigeria’s transport network.
The session also approved ₦493 billion for two other strategic projects, ₦359 billion for the rebuilding of Lagos’ Carter Bridge and ₦134 billion for the upgrading of the 152-kilometre Kano–Katsina Road, marking one of the most consequential infrastructure briefings in recent memory.
The Third Mainland Bridge, inaugurated in 1990 and spanning about 11.8 kilometres, is more than just a link between Lagos Island and the mainland. It is a lifeline for commerce, mobility, and daily living for millions. Over the decades, it has endured immense vehicular pressure, carrying an estimated 117,000 vehicles daily, a number far above what it was originally designed to handle. It has also faced the corrosive effects of saltwater from the Lagos Lagoon, weather extremes, and decades of deferred deep maintenance.
Umahi said assessments showed underwater structural issues, making repairs unavoidable. He revealed that rehabilitation would cost ₦3.8 trillion, while reconstruction would cost ₦3.6 trillion. The government, he noted, would decide which path to take based on technical and economic considerations.
The fact that rehabilitation is projected to cost more than reconstruction has raised questions, but Umahi explained that engineering economics is not always intuitive. Rehabilitation would involve intricate work to salvage and reinforce underwater foundations, substructures, and superstructures, a painstaking process that requires marine engineering precision with specialised equipment to operate in the lagoon, traffic management to keep the bridge partially open during repairs, and material compatibility to ensure new reinforcements bond with ageing structural components.
Full reconstruction, by contrast, could allow for a complete teardown and rebuild using modern materials and designs without being constrained by the limitations of an existing structure. Infrastructure analysts note that a new build could be designed with future-proofing in mind, offering higher load capacity, better corrosion resistance, and integrated smart traffic management systems.
YOU MAY READ
While You Were Sleeping: Tinubu’s Administration Approves ₦787.14 Billion and $651.7 Million for New Road Infrastructure in 13 States
The announcement that Carter Bridge, one of Lagos’ oldest bridges opened in 1901 and rebuilt in 1973, had been declared irreparable after structural damage came as a shock to many Lagosians. The rebuild will cost ₦359 billion. This cost, while steep, pales in comparison to the Third Mainland Bridge dilemma but underscores the larger reality that Lagos’ coastal infrastructure is ageing and under strain. Officials say the Carter Bridge damage is so severe that patchwork maintenance is no longer viable and that a full rebuild is the only option.
The ₦134 billion allocation for the Kano–Katsina Road upgrade reflects the government’s recognition of strategic northern road corridors. The 152-kilometre stretch is a key commercial artery connecting agricultural zones to urban markets. Umahi said the cost escalation from earlier projections was due to rising prices of bitumen, steel, and cement, along with adjustments for security measures in vulnerable sections.
The ₦3.6–₦3.8 trillion question over the Third Mainland Bridge is not just an engineering issue but a political, economic, and social decision with far-reaching consequences. Nigeria’s 2025 budget is already under strain, with debt servicing consuming more than 60 percent of federal revenue. Allocating such a massive sum to a single project will require creative financing, whether through public-private partnerships, concession agreements, or international infrastructure loans.
Public perception and trust will also play a key role. The Third Mainland Bridge has been the subject of repeated partial closures and repair works, often accompanied by accusations of inflated contracts. Nigerians are likely to scrutinise any new cost projections with suspicion, demanding transparency and proof of value for money. Lagos, which accounts for over 30 percent of Nigeria’s GDP and serves as the country’s primary commercial hub, cannot afford a prolonged disruption to the bridge, as it could have cascading economic effects nationwide.
Civil engineers familiar with large-scale bridge projects point out that Nigeria’s coastal infrastructure faces unique challenges. Saltwater corrosion accelerates deterioration of reinforced concrete, heavy-duty vehicles often exceed weight limits, contributing to faster structural fatigue, and climate impacts such as rising sea levels and changing tidal patterns add long-term stress. Some experts argue that the government should take the reconstruction path, citing the lower cost and potential for a modern design lifespan of up to 100 years with proper maintenance. Others warn that the disruption from a full teardown could paralyse Lagos traffic for years unless alternative transport routes are developed first.
The Ministry of Works is reportedly exploring several mitigating measures, including phased closure and repair, temporary ferry services to divert commuter traffic during closures, and expedited completion of the Fourth Mainland Bridge project, which could absorb some displaced traffic.
The most striking element in Umahi’s briefing was the leap in cost estimates compared to earlier government figures. In early 2025, the government pegged rehabilitation of the Third Mainland Bridge at ₦21 billion and the Carter Bridge at ₦25 billion. The shift from billions to trillions in less than a year has sparked debate among economists, opposition politicians, and civil society groups. Umahi attributes the spike to more detailed engineering assessments, inflationary pressures in the construction sector, and inclusion of long-term structural reinforcement and ancillary works.
Within hours of the announcement, social media lit up with reactions ranging from disbelief to anger. Some Nigerians called the figures fantastical, accusing the government of preparing another white elephant project. Others, especially those who endure daily bridge traffic, said they would support any cost as long as the bridge is made truly safe. One Lagos commuter, Chika Anozie, said they had been hearing about repairs for years and that if trillions would be spent, Nigerians should see the work, the materials, and the timeline, not just announcements.
Opposition figures have already hinted at raising the issue in the National Assembly, calling for a full audit of the engineering reports and procurement process before any contract is awarded.
Internationally, major bridge rebuilds vary widely in cost. The new Bay Bridge in San Francisco cost about $6.5 billion for a 3.5-kilometre span, completed in 2013. The Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macau Bridge, a 55-kilometre mega project with multiple spans, cost about $20 billion. At ₦3.6 trillion, about $2.4 billion at current exchange rates, the Third Mainland Bridge reconstruction would be on the lower end for such an extensive structure, though local economic conditions and currency volatility complicate direct comparisons.
If the Federal Government decides to proceed, the question becomes how to pay for it. Options include sovereign infrastructure bonds targeted at both domestic and international investors, concession arrangements with private firms allowing toll collection for a fixed term, or multilateral financing from bodies like the African Development Bank or the World Bank. Each option comes with political risks. Tolling, for example, could trigger public backlash if commuters feel they are paying twice, once through taxes and again at the toll gate.
Umahi indicated that the Federal Executive Council has not yet made a final decision between rehabilitation and reconstruction. The choice will depend on technical feasibility, long-term cost-effectiveness, funding availability, and disruption minimisation strategies. Meanwhile, the Third Mainland Bridge remains partially open, but last week’s ban on heavy-duty vehicles reflects growing safety concerns.
The fate of the Third Mainland Bridge could set a precedent for how Nigeria handles ageing megaprojects nationwide. If managed transparently and efficiently, it could restore public faith in government-led infrastructure renewal. If mishandled, it could deepen cynicism and stall similar projects in the future.
As Nigeria stands at this infrastructural crossroads, the bridge, both literal and symbolic, now embodies the nation’s challenge: to connect the past and future, safely and sustainably, without collapsing under the weight of its own ambition.