Citys website on Cameron St. Bridge Sept. 30th stated that the rot was sufficiently far advanced that its structural capacity for vehicular traffic is at risk. On Oct. 4th it stated that the annual inspection conducted last week identified problem areas that resulted in the Bridges closure to all vehicular traffic until further notice. Repair items were being considered and a revised schedule to complete additional repair works are being prepared. Preliminary advice indicates the Bridge will be closed for the remainder of 2005. The website on Jan 18th 2005 stated the bridge would remain closed until Jan.24th due to unforeseen contractor delays related to the structural maintenance and deck repairs. **No mention of wood rot.**

Did all the rot take place from January 24th 2005 to Sept 30th 2005. Was it missed in the last few inspections by our Engineers, if so why?

We have a situation where we have fully loaded logging trucks making a left hand turn Eastbound at 5th and Carney with a service station on the right hand side. This is a major safety factor and would be much worse if a logging truck was to lose his load on this corner while a tanker truck was unloading gas at the service station.
We dont have time for the City to wax philosolphically about the Cameron St. Bridge. It has now been closed for 60 days, and will have been closed for 90 days before we even hear what they have in mind to fix the problem.
Are we to beleive that this traffic will continue to re routed down 5th Avenue until they decide, When, Where, and If a new bridge will be built. We are talking at least 2 years if they are actually considering a new bridge
Had the City taken immediate action on reparing this Bridge we would be using it now, and all the safety issues would be behind us.
This is a wooden structure, and the so called rotten beams can be removed and replaced with lttle or no problem.
Its time for more action and less talk.

Palopu ....
rumour has it that no matter how many (within reason) structural members are replaced, no engineer will approve the bridge for truck traffic for the very reason you have pointed out .... there may be rot there which is not visible, and then will suddenly show up a year later ....

There may be other ways to augment the structure using steel, even "threading" a new prefabricated structure through the bridge. That sort of approach may get the bridge back into commission within 4 to 6 months from the word "go".

If you wish to get traffic removed from the 5th and Carney route, then that would be the best approach. However, the new bridge can then not go where the existing bridge is. That is the $22.4 million plan which Council has approved - remove the existing bridge and build the new one. So, had the bridge been under construction by now, we would have had the same "problem" for two years.

The best option, for my point of view, if the existing bridge can be upgraded quickly and for, let’s say, under $1million, then build the $9 million option recommended by the engineers some three years ago in the first place, midway between there and cottonwood park, or the $11+ million option just west of the park which has for the longest time been the preferred route for many good reasons.

I was in Vancouver recently, and chuckled as I drove over the Lion's Gate Bridge...

You know the one... that fairly important suspension bridge between Vancouver and North Vancouver that recently got a $150 million upgrade...

The bridge is 'posted' prohibiting commercial vehicles over 13,000 kgs in total weight from using it...

Look at the traffic mix next time you're down there... it's all passenger cars, pick-ups, SUV's and small commercial vehicles...

Question for our civic administration and their consultants...

If the Lion's Gate Bridge can remain open, and provide an effective transportation link in one of the largest cities in the country, why can't the same be done for the Cameron Street bridge?

Do we have different gravity in the north?

Now that the election is over, and the ridiculous use of the Cameron Street bridge as campaign fodder is no longer required, maybe we could start driving over it again.

Please.

This is a basic bridge, and can be repaired without to much time or cost. I was trying to point out that the Engineers okayed it in January 2005 and said it was strucurally sound. So where did the rot come from. In any event if they wanted to repair it they would. If we were to lose the John Hart Bridge for some reason you can rest assured that the Cameron St. Bridge would be up and running in no time flat, and it would be handling truck traffic.

We can consider a new bridge only because the money might be available. If the Province and Feds do not come up with the money then I suggest that the new bridge wont be built.
A new bridge should be considered as a luxury item, and not a necessity.

Rumour has it that there is already a plan to build a steel structure on the existing cement foundation (two lane) approx 4 million dollars. Time will tell.

The safety feature at 5th and Carney will remain until these people get off their butts and take some action.

Where did the bridge go that they took out when they straightened the corner at the west end of the span across the Cottonwood river just north of Quesnel?
I think the reason it was replaced was not because the bridge was unserviceable, but more because the corner at the west end was a major traffic hazard, as well as the laborious climb up the hill at that end, for loaded trucks that had scrubbed off all their momentum to make it around the south corner safely.
Maybe that bridge could be used to replace the old Nechako span, -- it was two lanes wide, steel, and if my memory serves me right, about the same length that would be needed.
Then we could get on with the new Fraser bridge we need instead, connected to a city bypass, and dangerous goods route.
That'd be money far better spent in my opinion.

The less we spend on getting a bridge up and running using the same approaches at the same locations, the better it is from my point of view. If the $4million is an option, I would highly recommend it because I think it is the wrong location for the long range outlook. The rest of the $22+ million is better put to use on a bridge at a better location.

I think the 4 million option has been out there for sometime. The scenario will probably go something like this.

We cannot get any money from the Province or the Feds for a new bridge. We cannot afford to build a new bridge on our own, however we can repair the Cameron street bridge where it is, and double lane it for approx 4 million. All in favour say YAH'.
The YAH'S win.

The closing of the bridge prior to the election is in my opinion suspect, especially since it was inspected in January and there was no mention of wood rot.
BC Stats annual report shows a decrease in the population in Prince George this year of 678 people. This supports my contention that the population of Prince George has been in a steady decline for the past 10 years and will probably continue to decrease, therefore why are we proposing a new bridge to handle increased traffic, when in fact the traffic has been steadly decreasing. It must be to create jobs for contractors and job security for City Planners and Engineers, I cant think of any other sane reason.