When it comes to the future of the Traffic Bridge that’s now closed for public safety, Coun. Charlie Clark indeed is on the right track when he says a decision has to be based “on the next 50 years, not the past 50 years.”
Actually, it’s a decision that will have an impact on Saskatoon for at least the next 80 years because, whether council decides to completely refurbish the current structure or build a new bridge to replace the decrepit Traffic Bridge, that’s the life span being considered in evaluating the options.
Even though public input is being sought on various options, including demolishing and removing the current bridge at a cost of $4 million with no replacement, the soundest investment of public money is to erect a modern steel truss bridge or something that’s similar in form to this historic structure, at a cost of about $25 million. The money buys three-metre pedestrian walkways on both sides, as well as wider but non-standard width (3.3-metre) traffic lanes on the bridge deck.
It makes little sense to try to rehabilitate the current bridge in its current 2.9-metre lane width for vehicles, but with wider walkways on either side for pedestrians and cyclists, or to repair the current bridge or build something new for use solely by pedestrians and cyclists.
The $31-million cost of turning the structure into a “bridge park” with attractive landscaping, to be used for foot traffic and bicycles, is prohibitive for the result it yields, as is the $60-million cost of replacing the Traffic Bridge with a modern “architecturally significant” signature bridge with two standard-width traffic lanes and walkways for bikes and pedestrians.
Get breaking National news
Refurbishment or new construction both are expected to take two construction seasons — with the bridge piers needing to be shored up in either case and with the refurbishment process likely to uncover further work that might be needed — there’s no great advantage in costs or time to trying to save a structure that’s become a victim of decades of foolish penny-pinching by councils.
With a fully modern four-lane bridge not possible for the site because of geographical and development constraints at both ends, the best option is to get the best value for the public dollar by putting in place a river crossing that removes the white-knuckle element for motorists who avoided the Traffic Bridge because of its narrow lanes and serves as an essential pressure release valve when one or more of the University, Broadway and Buckwold bridges is restricted because of accident or repair.
That the permanent closure of the historic Traffic Bridge occurred in the midst of public consultations on its future might be unfortunate, but coming as it did while repairs to the Buckwold Bridge were adding to the road repair-related city-wide traffic snarls this summer actually might have served a useful purpose.
As Samuel Johnson said: “When a man knows he’s to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.” At least some who thought that to turn the Traffic Bridge, which moved 7,000 to 10,000 vehicles a day, into a bridge crossing for bikes and pedestrians only would be a viable and painless option might have cause to rethink.
Comments