Bridge Re-Opened, Charges Laid

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 11:00 AM

Damage visible on Simon Fraser bridge

The Simon Fraser Bridge has been reopened now that structural engineers have determined the damage caused by a hit last night, was not substantial enough to close the bridge for any long period of time.

The bridge was hit last night by a low bed truck carrying an over-height cargo that was traveling along the Queensway-Ferry Avenue section. That resulted in the bridge being reduced to one lane, and at times, traffic was backed up to PGSS on the by-pass.

The Ministry of Transportation’s Regional Manager, Gordon Wagner, pointed out to Opinion 250 that one of the beams was badly damaged but is in a low stress location. He said “We may have inconvenienced people, last night and again this morning, but I hope you can understand it was very dark, and we simply were not going to take any chances that the structure had been more severely damaged than first appeared, or jeopardized.”

The driver of the lowbed truck and the driver of the pilot car are both facing charges. The lowbed driver, a 29 year old man from Fort St. James, has been charged under the Commercial Transport Act with contravening load restrictions. The 48 year old driver of the pilot car has been charged under the Commercial Transport Act with operating an illegal pilot car. He is also from Fort St. James.

Police say their investigation continues, and it is possible further charges made be laid.

The bridge will require repairs, and the sidewalk above the beam which received the most extensive damage will be closed. That is the sidewalk on the south side of the bridge. ( see photo at right)

It has just been a few days since the Ministry of Transportation decided not to award the contract to twin the bridge until all options have been examined. The lowest bid for the twinning came in $15 million dollars over the budgeted $32.5 million.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Tuesday, October 17, 2006 11:00 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Chadermando on October 17 2006 12:13 PM

I drove by that and checked it out last night and there was about a foot of concrete on the ground that fell from the bridge across the whole width of the bidge. I wish I had my camera so you could post it, but to me it looked like if not for rebar the whole bridge would have collapsed.

Posted by: diplomat on October 17 2006 12:26 PM

Does the planned twinning of the bridge make more sense now?

Posted by: QuasiMe on October 17 2006 2:21 PM

dippy... why would the twinning make more or, for that matter, make less sense now than before this incident?

Posted by: Gofaster on October 17 2006 3:34 PM

They can use the truck companies insurance...lol

Posted by: Harbinger on October 17 2006 4:38 PM

Lowbed trailer? Obviously it wasn't low enough. First time this has happened? One would think the pilot car driver would/should be more knowledgable. After all, how many underpasses do we have up north here. Duh!

Posted by: diplomat on October 17 2006 4:42 PM

>"dippy... why would the twinning make more or, for that matter, make less sense now than before this incident?"<

Because those who expressed their opinion that the twinning doesn't make any sense have had a practical demonstration how close we got to having the one and only bridge closed altogether! Fortunately one lane stayed open, but it could have been worse, like fire breaking out under the bridge due to an accident.

The second bridge could have handled the traffic.

Posted by: Palopu on October 17 2006 5:17 PM

Diplomat. I assume that the fire wouldnt have effected the second bridge and would have kept itself to the first bridge.

Posted by: Foo738 on October 17 2006 6:31 PM

And the Cameron Street Bridge is important to be replaced compared to this? Who is running this City?

Posted by: Palopu on October 17 2006 7:21 PM

The Foothills Bridge, John Hart Bridge, and the Simon Fraser Bridge, are all part of the Highway system, and therefore are the responsibility of the Provincial Government and have nothing to do with the City. The Cameron St., bridge was sold to the City a number of years ago by the Provincial Government for the sum total of $1.00. Part of the agreement of sale was that the City would be responsible for the maintenance of this bridge. It is no longer a responsibility of the Provincial Government. Dont get the two issues mixed up. They are completely separate. The Mayor rarely if ever mentions the fact that the Cameron St. Bridge, which includes the Cameron St. overpass is a City problem. Not a Provincial, or Federal problem.

If he can get the Feds, or Provincial Government to build him a new bridge, then he doesnt have to maintain the old Camerson St. Bridge. If he cant then he will have to continue to maintain it, or build a new steel superstructure on the present pilings at a cost of 5/6 Million which will be paid for by the Prince George Taxpayers. (Whats new)

Posted by: Foo738 on October 17 2006 7:58 PM

Good point Palopu. I do recall that we got the Cameron Street Bridge for $1.00. Wasn't it at the time the John Hart Bridge was built and that we wouldn't really need it except as a pedestrian bridge?

Posted by: Palopu on October 17 2006 9:37 PM

That a big *Ten Four Buddie*