I'm cheering for the home team.

Guess which of the 10 engineering companies has a great big slab of the old Cameron Street bridge deck for a fancy boardroom table in their office?

I wonder if they paid anything for it or just helped themselves.

Hopefully the wood is encased in a polymer coating so that the creosote or copper arsenate does not offgas into the room and the rest of the office.

But then they are engineers. ;-)

The BCR used to give away old railway ties. Was cheaper for someone else to cart hazardous material away.

The stuff on the Cameron Street bridge isn't any old railway tie stuff. It's Ipe (iron wood) and SUPER expensive.

I know lots of people that would like to get their hands on some (especially when its free from the City).

I wonder if the engineers had a boardroom table in mind when they condemned the Cameron Street bridge.

Now that you wrote that, I do recall hearing that.

from an IPE site:

"Toxicity: Ipe boards can have a fine yellow dust on the surface that may cause dermatitis in some individuals that have skin sensitivities and/or cause allergic reactions in those who breathe it in... so wearing a dust mask is recommended. Ipe hardwood is an amazing wood but no sense in risking your health!"

http://www.woodsthebest.com/ipe_decking/ipe-wood.htm

Other woods, such as cedar, have similar problems, some more than others. I do not know how extensive this is with IPE. Likely only minor. However, it appears that those woods which are naturally better able to withstand the elements may have chemicals in them which are more toxic than those which break down more easily. Intuitively that would stand to reason. Whether true or not, someone else may have that answer.

Anyway, sound like the kind of table I would love to have. :-)

I seem to remember that this wood was bought from South America, and that it was supposed to last for years and years. It seems that in fact it was not much better that the normal wood they had been using. The major difference between the two was the horrendus cost.

The original deck was iron wood but I think the latter planking was just good old fir or pine due to costs...and maybe I am wrong... but regardless ,had they kept the heavy vehicles off of it the deck would have lasted a long time.
But that is all water under the bridge. Nice to see at least one PG company threw their hat in there...
Now with luck we may have an updated bridge by 2010... or not

This is all rather like "Joseph's Coat" or casting lots at the foot of Jesus' crucifix.

You are sickening.

The decking is not the problem. The problem is at the nodes of the truss members. There is internal rotting which is not fully visible with the naked eye. Each connection area has to be scanned for internal rotting.

Whatever the bridge will be used for, whether footbridge, small vehicles, logging trucks, it really does not matter. once wood starts to rot one has to find out why, take remedial action, and keep testing each year.

One can also replace all parts of the bridge with new materials and more reliable connectors (although 70+ years seems to be quite good).

No one at City Hall seems to be in the mood for that. They are more prone to put in a new bridge which may not last as long as the original one. Remember, the foothills bridge is not even 3 decades old and already additional girders have to be added to strengthen it.

I think we need to resurrect a few Roman engineers from their graves to solve this problem of deteriorating infrastructure.

I wonder if anyone has ever considered talking to Quesnel to see how their bridge is standing up to the elements. They really should have similar problems. If not, why not. It can't be just the fact that there are no longer major kinetic forces acting on it.

There is no point in us trying to decide what is wrong with the old Bridge. The City had it inspected and this is what they said at the time.

**Over the two years previous to closing the bridge last fall, annual repair costs had averaged $175,000.00. And when the bridge was closed, the City was facing a bill of $564,000.00 to repair a section of the crossing and a further $160,000.00 to replace the deck for a total of $724,000.00**

Thats all there is to it. The bridge could have been repaired and resurfaced for $724,000.00 however the City in their wisdom wants to build a new bridge. This will cost us $9.5 Million. $2 Million from Senior Government, $1.55 Million from the Citys development cost reserve, and the City will borrow $5.95 Million over 20 years. Interest on the loan would be approx $4 Million. Total cost $13.5 Million. You could do a lot of repairs for a lot of years for $13.5 Million.

In addition we havent heard a word about the Cameron St. overpass. Will this overpass have to be redone for the new bridge, and if so what will be the cost of that?

The obvious thing to do is repair the bridge and get on with our lives, however there is not much chance of that happening.

And that my friends is why this City is so far in debt.