IF THESE BRIDGE PILINGS ARE FOUND UNSUITABLE TO CARRY A NEW BRIDGE THEN MR. BLUES SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST OF THE STUDY.THIS IS WISHFULL THINKING SO I GUESS WE WILL JUST THROW ANOTHER COUPLE HUNDRED GRAND DOWN THE DRAIN--THE TAXPAYERS WILL JUST SHUT UP AND PAY. SAD ISN'T IT?

The succesful bidder will be charged with determining whether the original ***Cement*** not wooden pilings can support a new super-structure.

I suspect their never was any sincere attempt to get the money for a completely new bridge across the Nechako, mainly because we already have 2 other bridges ( 8 Lanes) and I doubt that the Provincial Government would be in a hurry to give us an additional 7 Million for their share for a new bridge. Nor would the Feds.

City Hall has been pushing for a new bridge across this river for years. (Especially our illustrious Mayor) You can rest assured that the report will state that the cement piers will support a new steel superstructure and then the City will advise us that we should spend 6/7 Million to build this bridge.

You havent seen the report condeming the bridge because it apparently states that two centre beams have wood rot, and that it can be repaired for $724,000.00 and that the brige could be opened to all traffic by mid summer.
The City wants to build this bridge come hell or high water (excuse the pun) and they have no intention of listening to Taxpayers, or business along River Road, and 1st Avenue who are losing money hand over fist because this bridge is out of service.

There is no money being spent by the CNR to see if its Rail Bridge across the Fraser River can hold its Steel Super Structure. These are essentially the same concrete pilings that hold up the Nechako Bridge. The CN Bridge was built in 1918, and the Nechako in 1933. 15 years later. I suggest if the Nechako Bridge Cement Piers are shot, so are the CN Piers. Therefore my conclusion is that the Piers will be found to be ok, and we will go ahead with the Super Structure Bridge and who cares about and 2 1/2 year wait for a bridge or a waste of 10 Million Dollars. Not our out of control City Councillors and Managers. They have absolutely no regard for Taxpayers or their money. They are the saddest bunch of Councillors and the Saddest example of a Mayor of any in the Province.

I read previously that the cement piers were poured on top of wooden pilings. Perhaps the railroad bridge was built using the same method.

Regardless, a study to determine if the wood is still sound is probably required for legal reasons. The city must have a lawyer that gives advice as far as liability goes.

Still, the unsound beams should have been replaced before winter and the bridge placed back in service, in my opinion.

Just to walk away from it and leave the traffic to fend for itself was not a sensible solution.

The piers could have been inspected before the arrival of winter as well in order to get a headstart on superstructure replacement or the eventual decision to scrap the bridge altogether some time in the future.

But....well, I suppose everything will proceed at the snail's pace that government is used to operating at.

Job security.

Palopu
Good point"I suspect their never was any sincere attempt to get the money for a completely new bridge across the Nechako, mainly because we already have 2 other bridges ( 8 Lanes) and I doubt that the Provincial Government would be in a hurry to give us an additional 7 Million for their share for a new bridge. Nor would the Feds."
If you will notice the last 2 bridges built in this area the Cotton Wood and Mud river bridges aren't even 4 lanes and you would think if the feds and provincal gov was concerned about our traffic woes they would have built these bridges for the future boom they are calling for.So as far as our old wooden bridge I don't think its on the radar.

By the way the Cotton Wood is 3 lanes out each end so way not a 4 lane bridge doesn't make sense.

>By the way the Cotton Wood is 3 lanes out each end so way not a 4 lane bridge doesn't make sense.<

The old two-lane bridge was a real death trap, the cause of many accidents, so I was only too glad to see it replaced (in a better location) with a brand new much wider one!

Budget constraints must have been the reason to not make it 4-lane, I am sure.

Still, it is a vast improvement!

Actually, I am amazed at how much highway work has been done in the last five years, as compared to the decade of the nineties when next to nothing was done north of Cache Creek!