Whether it is rebuilt or replaced, the Traffic Bridge must continue to carry motor vehicles, Mayor Don Atchison said Thursday.
"My first preference is that we’re not going to have nothing there at all," Atchison told reporters. "For a few more million dollars (more than a pedestrian-cyclist-only bridge) we can have vehicles as well, so I’m more on the page of vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians with dedicated lanes for pedestrians and cyclists."
The bridge, which carries 7,000 to 10,000 vehicles per day, is "an integral release valve for motorists," Atchison said.
The iconic but rickety steel truss bridge was closed indefinitely two weeks ago after inspectors found significant corrosion and deterioration that left city officials unable to certify the structure for crossing and forced administration to undertake the difficult task of sorting out what to do with the bridge smack in the middle of public consultations on its future.
Ten options and preliminary costs for the future of the bridge are laid out in a report that will be debated Monday night at city council and presented at a community meeting Wednesday night.
Several councillors said Thursday they expect the list to be narrowed to only include options that involve vehicles and to rule out an expensive $60-million signature bridge, a $4-million demolition and a basic $26-millon concrete bridge as possibilities.
That would leave only two options: Rebuilding the current bridge with narrow lanes while adding three-metre-wide walkways for pedestrians and cyclists on either side for an estimated $27-million; or building a new replica bridge with wider traffic lanes and attached walkways for pedestrians and cyclists for roughly $25 million.
Atchison said it would be "disingenuous" for council to go out to the public with cyclist-pedestrian bridge options when there isn’t the political will to follow through.
"I don’t want to have us going out to the public when we’ve already (made a decision) and then people are going to ask: Why did you make us go through that charade?" Atchison said. "Council will make a decision (to narrow down the options) on Monday night and people will be able to deal with reality and that should focus the discussions much better."
It does not make sense to close the bridge to cars given the small difference in cost to keeping it open and the ability to add wide walkways on either side for bikes and pedestrians, Coun. Pat Lorje said.
The question of whether to refurbish the current structure or build a new bridge with wider lanes in its place may come down to time, Lorje said. Building a new bridge is less complicated and could be done within the next construction season while refurbishing the structure may take two years without a guarantee it’s going to last as long, she said.
"It is absolutely imperative that we get something in place to get that structure reopened," she said. "I think that will take a longer time (to refurbish the bridge) than (building) a new traditional-looking structure."
Coun. Charlie Clark said ruling out any possibility at this stage risks "undermining the important public process."
"This is a critical piece of our infrastructure and it doesn’t delay the process at all to lay all the options out and hear from the public first," he said. "I think that anybody who thinks that making a quick decision is going to somehow resolve the issue (is wrong). It’s not going to be resolved for at least over a year so we’re insulting people’s intelligence to pretend that we have to march through this any faster. We need to get the numbers, look at the options, hear from people, then make a decision."
Clark said the decision has to be based "on the next 50 years, not the past 50 years."
Major repairs upcoming in the next decade on the University Bridge and the Broadway Bridge, which will put the bridges out of commission for long periods of time, make it imperative to choose a path for its future soon, Atchison said.
"We need to get this bridge up and running again," he said.
Comments