Sounds like the old left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.

I understand that most of the original beams were sold at auction. Hopefully the balance is still in storage.

Citizens of Prince George, your tax dollars at work.

Just what we need as a PG heritage attraction, partial span of an old bridge. Toronto with the CN tower, Vancouver with Stanley Park, and PG with part of an old bridge. Can you say ShamWow.

They should have kept the Old Bridge and repaired it for $750,000.00 instead of spending $11 or $12 Million on the new one.

Has anyone noticed that there is hardly any traffic on the new bridge. The Cities numbers of 8000 vehicles per day are bogus, and their projection that this will increase to 14000 vehicles per day in the future it also worth a belly laugh.

The misrepresented traffic numbers, and the plan to save a span for the heritage people were all part the the Scamoroo so that they could justify building the new bridge.

Its these types of projects that get us into, and keep us in debt. Add on the Police Station, Performing Arts Centre, Co-Generation Plant, Boundry Road, etc; and you have enough projects to keep us in debt for the next 25 years.

Have a nice day.

I would think that you should of started 50 years ago keeping your heritage. Where is the old fort?? Let than run into the ground. Now you are going to spend a ton of money on a "part of a bridge"? For what reason? Geesus...does it and will it ever stop. I am so sick of this council. Thanks to everyone who voted for Dan Rogers.

I got idea, I got idea. We can build a pier in the middle of the Fraser River at the South Fort George Park, the other end tied to the bank, and the kids can jump off of it during the summer. Dude, that is wicked.

I am kind of Glad, they did go ahead and build the Colin Kinsley Bridge. If we were to plow in 750,000 to fix the old bridge, we would then have to spend another 15 million in 2017 to replace it. We need that bridge anyway, so we might as well have bit the bullet and went through with it.

Municca - the old fort burned to the ground 30 years ago. It caught fire in the middle of the winter and wasn't equipped with sprinklers. If I remember correctly (it's been awhile) the fire fighters ended up throwing snowballs at the fire because the road into the fort wasn't plowed back then and they couldn't get the equipment close enough.

I agree with "He spoke"

If the span ever gets erected lets put a bust of Kinsley onit.

At the risk of sounding like a philistine, was the old bridge really of such beauty, uniqueness, or historic significance as to be worth spending $200,000? I am having a hard time seeing this is a worthwhile expenditure. There are a lot of other things I would rather see that money spent on.

"Has anyone noticed that there is hardly any traffic on the new bridge"?

Whenever I breeze through the roundabout I always encounter a vehicle or two. It's not like the old days when traffic had to wait for a light on either side and sat backed up for 5 minutes. Maybe it just seems like the numbers aren't there. An accurate count would be enlightening. I think it is getting well used. I'm happy to have it back.

Palopu: I don't know when you go near the new bridge and roundabout, every time I have had to go across it is was packed with a nonstop flow of traffic from all three sides.
Even the b-trains seem to manage just fine. It would be nice to hear from the truckers that use the bridge for their impressions.

I still think a roundabout was a lame cheap answer for a real solution which I envision to be a bridge straight across from Cameron street to the Hart on ramp with a cloverleaf servicing the PG Pulp mill Road/North Nechako and river road.

Too late, it is a done deal.

A ramp to the Hart Highway from Cameron Street and cloverleaf servicing Pulpmill road? You're kidding right?

200k to keep a piece of the old bridge seems like a lot of money, but I suppose it is something for our grandkids to look back on. Since they tore down the one in Willow River.

There spending a lot of money on the one in Quesnel, and thats only a foot bridge.

I think there is one going towards Valemount.

Remember, if we do not study history, we will continue to repeat the mistakes of the past. Thus we keep museums to remind us of where we were, and what we have done.

Has anyone noticed all the black tire marks on the brick circle?

Its them chip truck drivers trying to do smokestands.

There is a big difference between traffic around the bridge, and traffic using the bridge.

The Citys first count after the new bridge was built was approx 5/6000 vehicles per day. This is extrapolated over a 24 hour period, so in essence you have approx 3 cars per minute using the bridge. The peak traffic times would of course be higher, and the off time lower, but anyway you compute it, it sure as hell did not warrant an $12 Million expenditure to handle this piddly amount of traffic. The old bridge was quite capable of handling the traffic.

People in this town never seem to be able to figure out that the City and others are pulling the wool over their eyes on a continuous basis. This never was about traffic over the bridge. It was about letting contracts, and City job security.

How in hell do you explain the fact we were without the bloody brige for FOUR YEARS. If we didnt need it for four years, then there is a pretty good chance we never needed it. People in Vancouver spend more time trying to get on the freeway than we ever did waiting for a light on the old bridge.

My point is|||| If you are going to allow the City to continue to build BS projects, that have no return on your investment such as this Bridge, the PAC Centre, the State of the Art Police Station, and the Phony Boundry Road cut off, then dont complain about your taxes going up.

Now that the Bridge has been torn down they may as well sell of the rest of the beams, as no one gives a S--t about them anyway. That was just a **red herring** to pacify the heritage people. Much like keeping a couple of 2x4's from the King George the 5th. School.

Dont hold your breath waiting for another traffic count from the City, because they know full well that their original numbers were inflated, and they will not be in a hurry to give out the new numbers.
When and if they do, you can rest assured that they will use the Recession as the excuse for the low numbers, and not the fact that this town is shrinking, not growing, and has been for the past ten years.

"Remember, if we do not study history, we will continue to repeat the mistakes of the past. Thus we keep museums to remind us of where we were, and what we have done."

Sure, but the question is, do we need to preserve a large chunk of this bridge in order to study history? We've got records of where it was and what it looked like, and we've got plenty of other information about bridge construction techniques, metal-working techniques, etc. What aspects of history require the preservation of this particular bridge? And how do they balance against all the other uses to which that money could be put?

How about the city using that money to fix these damn roads. I have potholes 3 feet wide and a foot deep on my road. Why is it the city can't seem to do much right?

"Why is it the city can't seem to do much right?"
It is because you have not yet won the next council election.

To paraphrase, "a bridge FROM nowhere". Ha ha ha Thanks, Sarah.