Dollars to Save Portion of Cameron Street Bridge Pondered

Monday, October 01, 2007 07:59 PM

Cameron Street Bridge, last Spring, photo Opinion250 archive.

Prince George City Council has decided to wait for more information before deciding to spend $200 thousand dollars to preserve a section of the Cameron Street Bridge.

The Community Heritage Commission Chair, Jo Graber says the money would cover the amount to prep the site, move the span, and the reassembly of the bridge. He says the Commission is willing to work with the City to see if there are some other sources of funding, possibly Heritage funding.

Project leader, Frank Blues, says the real concern is to make sure the heritage aspect is worked within the overall tender design if Council wants to save a piece of the bridge. Councilor Debora Munoz wanted to know if the amounts estimated for demolishing the bridge include the careful removal of one span (approx 50 metres) and Blues says the Consultants think it can be done.

Councilor Glen Scott says he will need a lot of information before being convinced to spend the $200 thousand and referred the matter to staff for more information.

The Commission says the Railway and Forestry Museum is interested in having the section of bridge at it’s site. The consultant suggests having the bridge sit on a strip of land, and a pond on either side of the span would create the illusion of the bridge spanning water, but without the costs associated with making it actually perform that function.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Monday, October 01, 2007 07:59 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Foo738 on October 1 2007 8:13 PM

Not a single dime should be spent on preservation of "parts" of the old Nechako Bridge.

It is sheer "tokenism" to even suggest it

How condescending can the Heritage Commission be?

You either stand your ground and believe in heritage and preserve what we have but never insult the true heritage of this community by "tokenism". It only adds insult to injury.

Posted by: owl on October 2 2007 12:18 AM

I think anytime a heritage structure is moved from its original location the heritage value is split into two.

One part is the original site, which remains behind and continues to be a heritage site whether officially recognized or not.

The other is the structure which has been removed, which becomes an artifact or museum piece.

The Railway and Forestry Museum has several such artifacts, the most popular one is likely the Penny Station. The there is the beehive burner. Artifacts become pieces to be displayed in museums. Each museum decides what type of artifacts it wants to collect and how it will go about getting them.

From the report above, it sounds like the R&F Museum has expressed an interest in taking on part of the bridge as an artifact.

It will be interesting to see whether someone will provide them with the funds.

Posted by: diplomat on October 2 2007 7:42 AM

How many pictures can be taken for $200,000 dollars? Quite a few.

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on October 2 2007 8:03 AM

In the park? It will burnt or taken down after the first kid falls off it.

Posted by: giterdun on October 2 2007 8:17 AM

THE BRIDGE IS ALREADY IN A STATE OF DECAY. WHO IS GOING TO PAY TO REBUILD IT AND KEEP IT SAFE EVERY TWO YEARS OR SO. TAKE A PICTURE OF IT, BURN THE BRIDGE AND SPEND $5,000 OR SO ON A MONUMENT PRESERVING ITS MEMORY. TAKE THE OTHER $195,000 AND SPEND IT ON DRIVER EDUCATION IN ROUNDABOUTS. SOUNDS LIKE WE ARE GOING TO NEED IT.

Posted by: owl on October 2 2007 8:37 AM

"TAKE THE OTHER $195,000 AND SPEND IT ON DRIVER EDUCATION IN ROUNDABOUTS. SOUNDS LIKE WE ARE GOING TO NEED IT."

I think you might be right ...... I wonder where ICBC gets its statistics from on roundabout safety compared to signalized intersections. I do not recall ever going through one in BC, at least not on a public road. I think the Casino one is a private road.

However, if they are right, then we should be putting in roundabouts at those intersections which are the major accident locations - Domano-HWY16; Ferry-HWY16; HWY16-HWY97, etc. After all, we need to do as much as we can to make our highways safe. So if ICBC has those stats and we should be putting a replacement program in place to get rid of signalized intersections and reduce injuries and property damage so that our insurance rates will drop and people live longer and happier lives.

Posted by: diplomat on October 2 2007 4:39 PM

Roundabouts are great for saving much of the fuel that is now being wasted idling, waiting for the lights to change!

The City has committed itself to become *Carbon Neutral" so here is the opportunity by doing it owl's way, in a roundabout fashion!

;-)

Posted by: diplomat on October 2 2007 4:45 PM

"...and a pond on either side of the span would create the illusion of the bridge spanning water, but without the costs associated with making it actually perform that function."

Rats, there goes Colin's idea of an artificial creek which would have created a much bigger illusion, probably at the bargain price of less than a couple of hundred thousand bucks, at least during the summer months when the water is not frozen solid!

Posted by: Harbinger on October 2 2007 5:11 PM

How about selling it off as "heritage firewood?"

Posted by: Harbinger on October 2 2007 5:14 PM

I seem to remember the roundabout in the movie European Vacation taken by the Griswolds.