Bridge Creates Gap With Those on First: One Man's Opinion

Tuesday, April 18, 2006 03:51 AM

-by Ben Meisner

When the voters headed to the polls last fall, just how many thought that a new Cameron St. Bridge was at least three years away?

There were after all two different camps on the issue, Colin Kinsley stood beside the bridge saying that it was an important part of his platform , and he criticized the approach of Dan Rogers who said that a study would be undertaken to see what best to do.

There is no doubt that Kinsley won the Hart vote based on the promise of a new bridge. He should at the very least know why he was elected.

Now we find that we will be into yet another civic election before the bridge is built. The Cameron St Bridge is scheduled for 2008 under the capital plan that does not mean that it will complete in that year. Will a promised bridge three or four years down the road be sufficient for 1st Avenue businesses to hang in? Not likely.

The whole issue was put into perspective recently by one of the merchants along the 1st Ave strip who asks, did the city not consider what would happen before it decided to shut the bridge down without considering them? The short answer is no they did not.

We could have several years ago sought (and no doubt would have received) infrastructure funding from the fFderal and Provincial governments. That would have reduced by two thirds the cost that would fall on the shoulders of the local taxpayers.

For whatever reason we have instead chosen to make our priorities in this city in areas which do not cover all of the taxpayers. The people of the down town core, who by the way the city has just announced special tax incentives to attract new development , the businesses along 1st Ave, and the truckers who need that road as a corridor through the city have all been placed on the back burner.

Promises tend to have little meaning in the final analysis.

I’m Meisner and that is one man's opinion.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Tuesday, April 18, 2006 03:51 AM in Views by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Palopu on April 18 2006 8:21 AM

Come on you guys, wake up and smell the roses. A number of us have been hammering this site and the local papers for a year trying to get your attention, and get you to think straight.
(1) Why do we need a new bridge??? Frank Blue stated that the Old Camerson St. Bridge can be repaired for $724,000.00. The City obviously has this money especially as they state they want to borrow $500,000.00 for a replay board at the CN Centre. They can if they choose borrow money internally and fix this bridge immediately. This was always the sensible solution. Fix the Bridge and maintain it correctly for the next 10 years and then re-evaluate the situation.

The rush to build a new steel super structure on the existing bridge struts, for 7/10 Million or building an entirely new bridge for 22 Million is strickly politically, and construction contract driven. It has nothing to do with common sense.

We need this bridge repaired and up and running this summer, and this can be done with little or no effort on the part of the City.

Its time that the interests of the Business on First Ave, and the Business of the taxpayers in Prince George were taken into account. Building a bridge because the Mayor wants one is not a good enough reason. I suggest to you that the City has not yet paid for the infrastructure for the Cameron St. overpass and they now want to tear it out and build a new one. This is absolute B.S.

I think the Mayor and those employed at City Hall forget who pays their wages and what they are acutally there for. Maybe next election people in this town will have the intestinal fortitude to kick these guys out and clean out City Hall.

Posted by: owl on April 18 2006 10:12 AM

Bang on Palopu!!!! As I have said several times before on here.

I just cannot figure out why it is so difficult for people to understand that the report Blues speaks of was available to the public and Council. To me, this is simply a sign that people do not read for content.

The other factor, of course, was that this information became public during the election. Most of those running did not read for content. Most of those running dealt with the big picture because most of those running did not understand such matters or did not wish to spend the time to understand such matters.

I would even suggest that it was advantageous for the "Colin" camp to promote such misinformation. Then again, I forget whether the "Dan" camp spoke about the report.

This thing will rear its head again shortly when the report dealing with the structural capacity of the piers will be presented to Council.

As far as I am concerned, the more quickly the powers that be come to the realization that they made a big mistake for not going for the 3/4 million $ fix, the less impact their mistake will have. Paving Fifth Avenue as a reult of the damage over this winter form the increase in traffic will cost that amount. I am sure no one took that into account.

For those who say "Council could not have forseen that", I say a good engineering and maintenance department at City hall certainly could have and should have.

As far as first avenue businesses go, I really thought they were all destination businesses. By definition, they will survive and even thrive almost anywhere because for them it is product, not location which dominates.

Posted by: diplomat on April 19 2006 10:24 AM

Pal:" Frank Blue stated that the Old Camerson St. Bridge can be repaired for $724,000.00. The City obviously has this money especially as they state they want to borrow $500,000.00 for a replay board at the CN Centre. They can if they choose borrow money internally and fix this bridge immediately. This was always the sensible solution. Fix the Bridge and maintain it correctly for the next 10 years and then re-evaluate the situation."

Thanks for bringing up the issue of the blasted replay board again, Pal!

Supposing a large sinkhole would destroy the street and the parking lot behind City Hall, between it and Connaught Hill. Would the city repair it immediately, even if it meant spending $724,000 to do it?

Of course. Within a week or less. City officials wouldn't have a place to park their cars!

It is all a question of priorities. The Cameron Street bridge REPAIR was ruled out as an option and given a very low priority, mistakenly.

Now those who made the wrong call don't want to admit it.

The Truckers Association should stage a protest rally with their logging trucks.

Undoubtedly this would get quick results, in my opinion.

Posted by: Rounder on April 20 2006 9:58 AM

Are you serious? Spend money to repair the bridge? Let's just throw away money this year and let the bridge fall apart again and keep dumping money into it. Spend the money on a new bridge now before soaring construction costs double in the next 3 years. Or save the money so the city can repave 5th Ave and Carney every year as well. Think long-term, the cost/life of a new bridge compared to keeping the "stick" bridge and roads "driveable". The existing bridge one day will have to be permanently shut-down and when it does, you will all be saying "they should have built that new bridge years ago".

Posted by: Palopu on April 20 2006 12:46 PM

Rounder. You are overlooking some important facts.

(1) A new bridge would cost 22 Million dollars

(2) A New steel superstructure on the existing piers would cost between 7 and 10 Million.

(3) Repairs to the existing bridge including surfacing would would $724,000.00 the city has stated in the past that upkeep on this bridge costs approx $175,000.00 per year.

Therefore you could repair this bridge and keep it in good condition for the next 10 Years for a cost of approx $2,000,000.00. Significantly less that Option (1) or Option (2)

I would agree with you that we should build a new bridge if the traffic that uses the Camerson St bridge warranted such an expenditure, however it doesnt. 8000 Vehicles per day on a bridge is nothing. A repaired one way bridge can handle this traffic without any problem. If 10 years from now traffic warranted building a new bridge then we could do so, however there is absolutley no reason to beleive that the population North of the Nechako, or Business North of the Nechako will ingrease substaintailly in the next 10 years.

You may think that spending 10 to 20 million dollars to reproduce what you already have makes sense, however I have to disagree with you.

Posted by: Rounder on April 20 2006 5:05 PM

Agree to disagree. The infrastructure that exists in this city does not allow for any expansion for future projects (Dangerous Goods Route, etc.). With talk of an inland container port, DGR, it would only make sense to have a crossing over the Nechako located near the existing Cameron St Bridge.

Trucks using 5th Avenue (especially ones hauling dangerous goods) makes no sense, I have personally seen trucks nearly take out the light standards trying to turn right onto 5th and have also seen trucks miss the left turn onto Carney, only to head into downtown, LOST.

A trucker not from PG could easily get lost and end up in the residential areas arounf 5th and Carney. Yes $22M is a lot to spend on a bridge that might have 10,000 vehicles travelling on it, but there is bound to be a spin-off related to this bridge. It could benefit an inland container port or future redevelopment of the CN yards.