This website is one step on an awareness campaign. We are a growing group of concerned Victoria and CRD residents who feel Victoria's Johnson Street Bridge or "Blue Bridge" is an issue of vital importance for the city and region.The goal is to provide a central information platform - information from City Hall, media, articles, blogs and opinions so everyone can make an informed decision.
August 10th is the deadline for public feedback on the decision to rehabilitate or replace the Johnson Street Bridge, and the City of Victoria is not wasting time. In a staff decision request, published today on the City’s bridge website, Council members will receive an “information report” on the morning of Wednesday, August 11, which will include all public correspondence sent since mid-June and every household survey. Ipsos-Reid will present the results of their phone survey at the Governance and Priorities meeting on August 12th – the meeting where Council will decide on which option to put to a November 20th referendum through a borrowing bylaw. (The bylaw itself will get first, second and third readings at a special Council meeting on the afternoon of Friday, August 13th. The public will not be allowed to speak.) The document is interesting reading as to where the City is trimming capital funding to reduce the possible borrowing – which we will deal with in a followup post.
Your Letters
Dear Sirs,
Upon returning to our condominium on Wednesday evening, we found a stack of “The Future of the Johnson Street Bridge” publications in our lobby. We took one of the publications and proceeded to read the contents very carefully.
As I read the contents, I was not impressed with the message that this publication was trying to convey. (And when I returned the feedback page, I pointed out that the information was blantantly one-sided, and that in my opinion, the only result the City can realistically expect, will be to upset an already upset electorate even more.)
Ironically, while I was completing the City’s feedback page, our telephone rang. The caller was a polite young woman who said she was working for Ipsos Reid (sp?), and she was calling on behalf of the City of Victoria regarding a survey on the Johnson Street Bridge. I agreed to participate in the survey. And with all due respect to the young woman, I was incensed at the blatant attempt to create a result which will clearly favor the City of Victoria’s not-so-subtle wishes regarding the Johnson Street Bridge.
I feel that this entire “survey”, was an insult to my intelligence, and I told the woman this. Hopefully, my complete disgust will be passed on to the City.
My reason for writing to you, is to ask … “if this same type of manipulative, non-question is placed before us in a City referendum, how is a person who wants NO expenditures, (or borrowing), to vote?”
i.e. I do not believe that it is necessary to have [a] Johnson Street Bridge that is capable of withstanding a ‘significant’ earthquake of 7, 7.5, 8, or 8.5 magnitude, because IF such a major earthquake was to occur in Victoria, the damage to most of the City, plus the injury and death to our citizens, will render the Johnson Street Bridge a non-issue. I discussed this matter with Mr. Crockford before (willingly) signing his petition, and my fear now is that the City of Victoria is stubbornly continuing to avoid placing all facts, and all options before the public.
I refer to my very unsatisfactory experience with the ‘future of the Johnson street bridge’ publication, and the Ipsos Reid ‘survey’, to illustrate my concerns.
Sincerely,
Frank J. Gatto
Regarding Rail
I do support the replacment of the Blue bridge.
I agree with almost everything the engeneers say.
BUT I want there to be rail – we have to start thinking about tomorrow – and getting something going for rapid transit. A lot of the snarls with evening traffic could be lessoned and get people out of their cars with a commute train to colwaood etc.
Thora
Our History
Victoria holds many events that make it a favourite tourist destination,
apart from its weather, gorgeous scenery and walkability. Conveniently,
everything is close at hand including its famous Beacon Hill Park. Tourism
Victoria does a credible job promoting these attributes.
However, the city falls short on highlighting one attraction that is
unique: the Johnson Street Bridge (“Blue Bridge”, as it is known by many).
In all of Canada there is only one other historic movable steel bridge
like it: the LaSalle Causeway Bridge in Kingston, Ontario. This two-lane,
Strauss designed heel-trunnion, bascule structure, built in 1917, also had
“terrible accumulated pack rust caused by winter road salt” (there is far
more snow and ice there than here). But it was rehabilitated for–hold
it–just $3.1 million!
Where is city hall when it comes to refurbishment? Doesn’t it (Councilor
Geoff Young excepted) pay any attention to the popular vintage car and boat
shows held in Victoria every year without fail? There, where once there was
rust or faded paint, is now polished metal and burnished mahogany lovingly
reconditioned by caring owners. Surely the Mayor’s and the Council’s
interests are pricked more than just a little by such increased dollar
values.
How about it, then: do the right thing by Blue Bridge, by repairing it
properly using local trades’ skills and by encouraging its promotion in
print, including postcards and other memorabilia. Such images then would be
seen far and wide.
More than merely another icon, Blue Bridge IS Victoria and, accordingly,
ought no longer remain an understatement.
Redner Jones
Seismic
We do not need to make the bridge earthquake proof. There are land routes to Esquimalt that could be used in emergency situations. Earthquake proofing every bridge, building, etc. is unrealistic, and taxpayers have reached the point where increasing taxes needlessly will not be tolerated. Besides, if we get hit by a major earthquake that knocks out both our bridges (Bay & Johnson) there will be so much damage in Victoria that it will take days before many people receive any assistance.
Mayor Fortin must think we are all idiots. Does he really believe we will buy the newly, revised rehabilitation costs?
It’s time we stop trying to protect ourselves from every conceivable, worst case scenario, hazard. It is not affordable or possible.
Thomas
On Art & Advertising
It is imperative that the Blue Bridge is retained and rehabilitated. I have yet to receive my voting form from the City and I wonder why such hasty decision-making has to occur in the middle of these lazy hazy days of summer, when vacation is really on most people’s minds.
I recently came back late one evening from visiting a friend in Esquimalt. The night was warm and velvet and the top was off the car…the yellow warning lights began to flash and slowly the bridge rose, one section at a time reared above the horizon, lights flashing, like a mechano structure from some giant model railway kit. It was one of those ‘only in Victoria’ moments. It was art, it was an event and I could imagine a refurbished bridge with programmed lights washing the girders, in different colours creating moving shadow patterns as the bridge swung up or down.
Working at Market Square for many years has given me a unique opportunity to see the bridge in action and the effect its transformation has on people in the street. It is a moment when a normally solid industrial structure takes to the air as it were. You can’t get better street theatre than that.
The advertising industry in Victoria understands the emotional impact of the Blue Bridge….witness the many photos of cars and visiting entertainers taken with the BB as a background. The bridge is becoming as iconic as the Empress Hotel and the current controversy as to its replacement has only highlighted public appreciation for a previously overlooked industrial gem in our own backyard!
I wish City Hall understood and supported the refurbishment of the present structure…instead they seem intent on pushing a design that I would be very surprised actually looked like what is pictured. When developers are selling a project they always show that wonderful rendering. The reality is often different. With a refurbished Blue Bridge we know what we will be getting.
Tom Palfrey
That’s just a small selection of the emails received over the past few days. Public engagement does not end with the August 10th feedback deadline – the Mayor and pro-replacement Councillors still must convince a majority of voters to support borrowing an historical amount of money in the November referendum.
As many people have noted, the estimated cost of rehabilitating the Johnson Street Bridge has steadily risen, from $23.6 million (Delcan in April 2009) to $35 million (MMM in November 2009) to $80 million (MMM in June 2010).
Less discussed is how the scenarios for closing the bridge to rehabilitate it have undergone a similar inflation curve.
Back in April 2009, the City said rehabilitating the bridge would need 12 days of full closure. Then it was “some” lane closures for an extra year, to minimize full closures. Then, this past June 14, the City’s engineers said rehab would require full closure for 12 months – a claim which has predictably scared some downtown businesses, and rallied them to favour replacement.
Let’s see how the closure scenarios have dramatically expanded. Here’s the first part of a news item from April 2009:
Lengthy bridge closure unlikely
Bill Cleverley. Times – Colonist. Victoria, B.C.: Apr 4, 2009. pg. A3
City engineers hope the public will be able to cross that bridge when they get to it — even if it’s in the middle of being replaced.
They’re optimistic repair or replacement work on the Johnson Street Bridge would at most see total road closures of only a day or two at a time. “We’re not looking at shutting down the bridge for 18 months. I don’t think that would be totally acceptable,” said Mike Lai, Victoria’s assistant director of transportation and bridge project manager. Consultants’ preliminary estimates call for road closures totalling 12 working days — not likely consecutive — if the decision is made to refurbish the 85-year-old landmark blue bridge. The number of closure days if the bridge is replaced is unknown, but the goal would be to minimize the impact by building a new three-lane bridge beside the existing one.
In September 2009, Mike Lai wrote the following in an email to Focus magazine editor Leslie Campbell:
Another option would be to minimize or eliminate the possibility of full bridge closures. This would add about a year to the 18-24 month project [as noted in the April 23, 2009 slide presentation to Council which is on the Bridge website]. This would require smaller areas to be addressed for recoating due to the operational nature of the bridge. However, as work progresses to areas above the road / bridge deck, it again becomes more challenging to have workers on scaffolding and to climb down each time the bridge must open. Consequently, in order to eliminate the need for a full bridge closure, more time is required to recoat the bridge and the project could not be completed by the March 31, 2011 deadline stipulated under the Federal Infrastructure Stimulus Funding Program. Therefore, the project would not quality for 2/3s cost shared funding. It should also be noted that this approach [i.e., adding a year to the 18-24 month schedule] does not necessarily preclude the need for some lane closures that may be required during the work.
Then, on February 18, 2010, Mike Lai presented a Decision Request to Council, outlining possible closure scenarios for rehabilitating the bridge. (You can download the full document here.) Scenario #1 was full closure for 10 months – which Lai rejected. “In our professional opinion, this scenario is not deemed acceptable from an economic impact perspective, as well as impact to the community and region.” Scenario #2 was night-time closure, which he also rejected because the noise and lighting would affect nearby residents and hotels.
Scenario #3, daytime lane closures, was Lai’s preference:
Bridge rehabilitation could be conducted during the day only and would likely require lane closures to accommodate the necessary work on the bridge. It also assumes that some full bridge closures may be required to accommodate the need to move materials or equipment. However, to accommodate this work, this scenario would likely take 3 years in consideration of the need to work in smaller sections since bridge openings during the day would still be required for marine traffic as governed by federal requirements …. In our professional opinion, this scenario would have the least economic impact to the downtown area and traffic impact compared with Scenarios 1 or 2; however, it would have the greatest risk in construction capital and interest cost increases.
Now, despite their previous statements, and their own recommendations, the City’s engineers are calling for 12 months of full closure to rehabilitate the bridge. Why haven’t our councillors demanded an explanation?
Judging by information presented by the City of Victoria’s engineers, rehabilitating the Johnson Street Bridge will be an expensive nightmare, costing $80 million and requiring closure to all traffic for an entire year.
But rehabilitating historic movable steel bridges is not always so expensive, or so disastrously complex – and for a eye-opening contrast, it’s worth examining the recent rehabilitation of the LaSalle Causeway Bridge (photo left) in Kingston, Ontario.
This two-lane bridge, a Strauss heel-trunnion bascule like Victoria’s Johnson Street Bridge, was built in 1917, and connects downtown Kingston to east Kingston and the Royal Military College. (Its location is indicated on Google Maps here.) Carrying average daily traffic of 23,000 vehicles, it’s a crucial route for the city; the only alternative for crossing the Rideau Canal to east Kingston is to use Highway 401, five kilometres further north.
The LaSalle bridge is owned by Public Works and Government Services Canada. As you can see in a video here, the bridge had accumulated terrible pack rust caused by winter road salt, so in 2007, the federal government conducted an environmental assessment to prepare for rehabilitation of the bridge. (As the assessment shows, the feds dictated the terms from the outset, requiring that the bridge remain open to car traffic.) Last September, federal infrastructure minister John Baird announced $2 million for the project, declaring it would extend the LaSalle’s lifespan for another 25 years. The rehab started soon afterward, and finished this past May.
Total cost: $3.1 million.
A communications manager for the Engineering Assets Strategy division of PWGSC recently provided more details about the LaSalle rehabilitation. A condensed version of an email discussion with him is posted below.
Admittedly, some differences exist between Kingston’s project and Victoria’s. The feds did little or no expensive seismic upgrading. They didn’t gut and replace the bridge’s entire mechanical system, which Victoria’s engineers have proposed as part of the dubious “apples-to-apples” comparison with a “100-year” new bridge. (Instead, PWGSC replaces electrical and mechanical parts as needed, in a regular maintenance program.) But it is remarkable that in Kingston, the feds were able to do much of the same work that’s required here – removing pack rust, replacing corroded steel, grit-blasting off old lead-based paint and repainting the entire bridge – all while keeping the bridge open to car traffic, and at 4% of the rehab cost quoted by City of Victoria engineers.
Our city’s engineers have some explaining to do. Our councillors should demand answers. And if they don’t, Victoria’s citizens should hold them to account.
A Q&A WITH PUBLIC WORKS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES CANADA
Q: What work was done on the LaSalle bridge?
A: Previous inspection reports and the 2007 LaSalle Causeway inspection identified a need to complete steel structural repairs and repainting of the bascule lift bridge to address public health and safety. The report identified the current state of the coating system as the largest overall structural deterioration observed on the bridge. The project involved: removing the existing lead paint; inspecting the steel members and replacing/repairing, if necessary; and recoating using a three-layer process (primer, mid-coat, and top coat). The paint is anticipated to last approximately 30 to 40 years.
The associated minor repair work included installation of guard rails, and sidewalk railing and decking. Throughout the project, PWGSC was committed to preventing the rusting and loss of structural steel on the bridge; mitigating harm to pedestrians/cyclists, and vehicle traffic; and restoring bridge operations in a timely manner to address the needs of marine traffic.
Q: How much did the LaSalle work cost?
A: The total cost of the project was approximately $3.1 million and took place during the winter and spring of 2009/2010. The bridge reopened to marine traffic on May 21, 2010.
Q: How long did it take?
A: The LaSalle Causeway underwent standard preventative repair work from September 2009 to May 2010. This project was required to ensure the continued safe operation of the bridge.
Q: What was the state of deterioration of the LaSalle bridge, and what was done to remediate it?
A: Repairs made to the LaSalle Causeway were done to address severe corrosion issues to the steel structure of the bridge and the removal of flaking lead paint. To remediate this problem, the lead paint was white-blasted off the bridge, and captured in an enclosed environment (the bridge was encapsulated). The lead paint was then taken off site and was properly disposed.
Once the paint was removed, repairs to the steel structure were completed, as required. The corroded areas that were repaired included: the toe-gussets; main tie-plates; the operating arm; sidewalk brackets; wind gusset connections; and other localized corrosion.
Q: Both bridges have trusses made of intricate steel latticework, which can be difficult to blast clean and repaint. How thorough that work was on LaSalle, and how it was performed?
A: You are correct in saying that the box-beam lattice girders are exceptionally hard to clean.
The specification called for a high standard that essentially requires that all metal be cleaned to bright clean, and that very little residue is present on the surface. Cleaning the metal was an arduous and difficult task as it involved cleaning sometimes difficult areas to access.
Again, the bridge was encapsulated to capture the residual material resulting from white-blasting the bridge. The work was done in sections, followed by an inspection of the steel structure to determine repair requirements. Once steel repairs were complete, the painting surface was primed, followed by a second coat of paint, then a final top-coat of paint.
The thoroughness of the paint job included hand painting approximately 1.4 million rivets and bolts (for the primer, second coat, and top coat).
Q: Did contractors remove pack rust from between the beams, and/or replace beams and rivets, and in what quantities?
A: Yes, pack rust was removed from between the beams. Beams, steel plates, rivets and bolts were replaced or repaired where required and all significant rusted plates were replaced. Rivet replacements have yet to be totaled.
Q: Victoria engineers claim they will have to close our bridge for at least a year to refurbish it. It sounds like there were no closures at all in Kingston to do similar work. Is there any information about how road and marine traffic were managed to minimize closures?
A: The rehabilitation work on LaSalle Causeway was mostly conducted during the winter season when the Rideau Canal was closed to marine traffic. This meant that the LaSalle Causeway did not have to address marine traffic requirements and only needed to address vehicle and pedestrian traffic. While most of the work was done in the winter months, PWGSC did negotiate with commercial marine operators to facilitate their needs while the bascule was inoperable.
PWGSC established a good relationship with the City of Kingston and worked with the repair contractor to devise a scheme that required the least disruption to traffic. Without this co-operation, the project would have been extremely difficult.
During the day, both [car] lanes were available to traffic. At night, both lanes were also available to traffic; however, when required by the contractor, one lane was closed, with traffic flow alternating across the bridge. In addition, a separate pedestrian sidewalk was constructed to allow cyclist and pedestrian access.
Q: During the repairs, was any work done on the electrical and mechanical systems? This an issue in Victoria, because many parts of our bridge are 86 years old.
A: No electrical or mechanical work was performed on the LaSalle Causeway during this project. The focus of the project was to repair the steel structure and to paint the bridge. Repairs and replacement of mechanical and electrical systems are part of our on-going routine maintenance.
Q: Considering the age of the LaSalle bridge (93 years old), why did Public Works decide to refurbish it, instead of replacing it outright?
A: PWGSC decided upon refurbishment as it was the most economical option available.
There are so many reasons admire Portland, Oregon. It’s a dynamic city which has set an example for planning, transport, housing and public engagement – and has developed a community of innovation and “thinking outside the box”. It is also a city of historic bridges that are not left to die of neglect, but are cared for, repaired, enhanced, and celebrated.
In stark contrast to Victoria, Portland is highlighting its historic bridges with this month’s PDX Bridge Festival, a two-week event of concerts, picnics, tours, art shows, fireworks, movies, poetry, and lectures. The entire city is bridge-themed this month, which is drawing locals and tourists alike.
So while Victoria debates whether to spend up to $103 million to rehabilitate or replace the 86-year-old Johnson Street Bridge, Portland is throwing a 100th birthday party for its Hawthorne Bridge. One wonders how they can be so happy when their historic bridges don’t have five-metre multimodal paths and 8.5 seismic upgrades. [Said with an ironic smile.]
The Oregonian’s video report on the 100th birthday party for the Hawthorne Bridge:
And a report about the Brunch On The Bridge the following weekend:
Blue Bridge, Train and Bike. Photo by Patrick Lawson
While the City of Victoria has extended its public engagement and survey to August 10th, plenty of people have been weighing in with emails, and comments on the website. Our supplemental survey has over 500 downloads. It will be interesting to see how many reach City Hall, and how they are included as information to council on August 12th.
The public engagement process continues with a Johnson Street Bridge Forum on Wednesday August 4th (7:30am to 9:30am, Swans Hotel) hosted by the Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce and the Downtown Victoria Business Association. You must be a member of either the GVCC or DVBA to attend.
Here is a selection of recent letters and comments, and thank you to everyone who has provided feedback – it is always welcome.
…”Calling city hall….can you hear us?
To begin with, I will quote an excellent article in the latest edition of Focus Magazine, …“Victoria City Hall exists in a kind of economic bubble floating well above the reality of the ordinary people that pay City Hall’s bills …”
This is an extra frustration as Victoria residents are all on the other side of the economic spectrum. Individuals who work for organizations who receive their funding through the provincial government, public service and UVic, have settled for a zero percent increase. Most who do not work for employers like those have seen no increases if they are among the lucky ones who kept their jobs. Then there is the many groups of fixed incomes, and those declining incomes of seniors who have lived too long.
The city of Victoria is on the high end of the Municipal salary scale, given the population it serves. Serves. Now there is a word that seems foreign to me. There spending habits remind me of my daughters – spend without a care in the world, and once the money runs out, ask for more.
This mayor and council continue not to serve this community’s best interest. At the beginning of an economic crisis the newly elected council give themselves a raise, which is in sharp contrast to Oak Bay mayor and council who took a decrease.
On the surface to an outsider, it would appear Victoria experienced no economic impact from the Canadian and global financial crisis.
It does present itself to insiders, we taxpayers and residents that this mayor and council are not interested in our opinions. Really, it is a battle of will – will they ever listen to us and respect our needs.
William Perry Victoria, BC
on rail
I have not engaged in the bridge issue until today when I read the City’s ad in the newspaper whereby both options do not include saving the railroad. This is madness! We desperately need public transit up and down the Island and the best way to do it is to rejuvinate the railroad and make it functional to commute on. Not to include it on the Blue Bridge to save a few million is a terrible and short sighted decision. Why is this not being discussed?
Karen
on the survey and city staff
Just to let you know that I rec’d a call from City Hall this a.m. in response to my email re not receiving their JSB information pkg and feedback form. They advised that they will deliver one to my home in Fairfield this aft. So, I shall follow the directions on your website and incl. your Feedback form and get it into City Hall p.d.q. I just hope we can trust those who will tally the results (just a wee bit paranoid here).
I just caught the tail end of an interview on CFAX from “someone” (I didn’t hear the name) from City Hall doing his fear mongering routine. If this bridge was in such dire need of attention to now be so critical, I’d like to know why the City neglected it for so long. It reminds me of the “demolition by neglect” attitudes of many developers. I also wonder why it hasn’t had regular maintenance. If we did that with our furnaces or automobiles, we’d have safety issues too. It would seem to me there ought to be some engineers’ heads rolling downhill! I suspect somebody, i.e., City engineers and/or bridge builders are responsible for the fear mongering just like the architects and developers had our beautiful SJD School demolished and replaced due to their “earthquake” fear mongering.
Keep up the good fight!
Cheers!
Marilyn
and
Wordy and one sided survey. However, I did fill it out and helped others in our building do the same. Many didn’t understand what it entailed.
Personally I believe the survey to be a token gesture on the part of the city anyway, and the information fed to us, conveniently too little and too late. At least they hope! Using the ‘threat’ of closure in 2012 are scare tactics. The Bay St. bridge will never be able to handle the traffic. So let’s make the public panic and make the decision in favor of a new bridge huh?
It makes no sense to me, that a new bridge could cost less or the same as refurbishing one that’s already standing and fits in with the structure and ‘ambiance’ of our city.
I had to walk over it daily for years and always came across tourists and locals alike that were fascinated by it and it’s mechanical works.
It needs to be saved! It’s a unique and a vital link to Victoria as well as it’s past.
The city should have shown more pride in the Johnson Street Bridge and taken care of it’s old bones long before this and getting it ready for it’s 100th birthday.
It’s needed, wanted, a tourist attraction and it’s ours!!!
Dolores
a pro-replacement letter
Most likely my opinion wont’ make any difference but allow me to give a little opinion . I believe This bridge is due to be replaced , I am sure many people see this bridge as a heritage, but is it really ?? . Let’s see !! it was built modern in it’s time when the city area was industrial and traffic was not grater than two single lanes , yes , or not ?? It has passed now many years , the industry on the water front has almost gone, and traffic has quadruple , yes, or not ?? , Our city has grown exponentially and tourism has increased , This bridge is” ugly ” it has the looks of industry rear street, and we are past due for a replacement , perhaps not one supper modern but a conservative one to represent our city and give our people better traffic comfort, one with four lanes would be in order , and this also will benefit towards the future , which don’t forget, this bridge will eventually have to be replaced and lets not forget prices will definitively increase as times goes by . Up grading to save dollars is a false assumption which we are only passing the increased costs to our children for what ??? .
Yes it would be a traffic nightmare during reconstruction , and I will hate it also but finally we can be proud of a new decent bridge, thank you for listening .
Sergei
pro-replacement, and angry at City Hall
Have we all lost our collective minds? Let got things into perspective. Reality Check !!! It’s a bridge. It’s not a work of art or historic monument, it’s a bridge. It needs replacement. Now let’s get real. Why do we need a lift bridge? The only reason I can see is for Port Hope Ship Yard. Do we, the collective residents have an obligation to Port Hope Ship Yard? I think we have a moral obligation but not a ridiculous financial obligation. Port Hope Ship Yard is not a “HUGE” profit enterprise. So, lets as a city, just pay them to move and that ends the need to put up an outrageously expensive bridge. The city can buy the land, rezone it for a hotel with a small boat marina and end up WITH A PROFIT. Wouldn’t that be a novel idea in the land of TAX AND SPEND !!! Second, E&N is a white elephant. The costs to maintain this relic make it a cash guzzling dinosaur. Move the end of the railway back to the rail yard where there is room for parking and low and behold, the bridge becomes a project, where, if the Feds anti up 21 million, could probably be a break even proposition. A simple two lane bridge NO NEED TO BE A STRAIGHT LINE on the other side, but a little enlightened thought and it makes room for Commercial/Residential projects on both sides… leading to MORE TAX ASSESSMENT and a POSITIVE CASH FLOW which MORE and SUPPORTS any costs for construction and maintenance. THIS IS A LETTER TO ALL OUR POLITICIANS. LET’S DO WHAT YOU ARE PAID TO DO, WHAT WE ELECTED YOU TO DO, WHAT YOU ARE SWORN TO DO — BUT DON’T. I AM FED UP AS A CITIZEN OF THIS CITY. LET’S ALL TAKE TIME TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX AND START DOING WHAT IS RIGHT INSTEAD OF WHAT IS POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT AT THE MOMENT. I EAGERLY AWAIT A RESPONSE FROM THE MAYOR…. BUT THEN AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE A BRIDGE TO FAR, JUST LIKE THE ALASKA BOONDOGGLE.
Barry
finally – a comparison with a similar bridge in Ontario
I have been reading with some interest recent developments regarding the fate of the Johnson Street Bridge. As a former resident of Victoria, and now making my home in Kingston ON (which coincidentally also has a similar lift bridge of the Strauss Trunion Bascule type) I note that the path chosen in Kingston was refurbishment rather than replacement. Perhaps the decision in Kingston was made more easily as the Lasalle Causeway Bridge is owned and operated by the Federal Government, thus clearing the city of any responsibility for maintenance and repair. Clearly the costs of repair were in the case of Kingston were orders of magnitude less than replacement.
In the case of Victoria, any new bridge over the gorge would, I presume, be of a lift variety, be considerably more expensive to build than to repair the existing bridge, and introduce new and quite probably greater costs associated with servicing it. But I am sure this is obvious to the citizens of Victoria. What is rather less clear is why the City Council would ignore this option altogether.
Curious that the City of Victoria seems not to have investigated the repair option, especially given that costs associated with refurbishing a nearly identical bridge in a city of similar size handling similar amounts of traffic must have been readily available to its engineers.
Junior
Your comments, feedback, letters and photos are always welcome by Email. Remember – City Council will make its decision on repair or replacement August 12th. You have until August 10th to send in your survey, and provide your thoughts.
Another dynamic week for Victoria’s Johnson Street Bridge
The City of Victoria mail in survey deadline, which was August 3rd, has been extended to August 10th.
The city bulk-mailed about 25,000 of the information packages, each with a detachable feedback form and postage paid envelope with an original deadline of Aug. 3 to respond. However, some buildings, which have a no-unsolicited-mail policy, did not receive them
There are over 45 000 households within the City of Victoria, so it is no surprise many did not receive a survey, and, why was only one survey form offered when the likelihood of more than one respondent per household is high? This also raises a question on why the City’s johnsonstreetbridge.COM website still claims:
The City of Victoria wants to hear how you would like to see the 86 year old Johnson Street Bridge addressed.
An information package and feedback form will be mailed to every Victoria household in early July and a scientific poll will be conducted at the end of the month.
Ipsos Reid is currently conducting a phone poll of residents but it appears they are not asking the question that concerns most – Rehabiliatation or Replacement. If you have not received your mail-in survey phone City Hall at 250-361-0288 or email johnsonstreetbridge@victoria.ca – and make sure you include our Supplemental Survey (Download to Print)
_______________________________
Focus Magazine Poll
If the City of Victoria is avoiding asking residents what their preference is for the Blue Bridge, Focus Magazine is not afraid. Their online poll offers the City’s choice of a $77 million new bridge or $80 million rehabilitation PLUS a basic repair. Take the quick online poll and let us see if the Victoria Council takes any notice.
Once again, Focus’s investigator of all things civic is enlightening us. Sam Williams notes the pay increases for city staff and questions if taxpayers are getting the intelligence ‘bang’ for those ‘big bucks’…
But wait. There was one person who seemed to be paying attention to what the consultants were saying. Referring to the $50,000 peer review study done by Stantec Consulting’s Andrew Rushforth, Geoff Young said “Rushforth appears to be saying that the probability of occurrence of the event for which the bridge is being designed or repaired is not 30 percent over 50 years, but less than three percent. If correct, this is a significant difference that should be explained in the material [the City is sending to residents], in my view, since the increase in the cost of repair to this standard is far greater than the increase in the cost of new construction.” Bingo.
Rushforth’s peer review made an unusual concession for the sake of comprehension. He listed magnitudes of earthquakes alongside the probability they would occur at the Johnson Street Bridge site. He gave a “478 year event (approximate magnitude 6.5)” a “10 percent chance of occurring in 50 years” and a “1 in 2500 year event (approximate magnitude 8.5)” a “3 percent chance of occurring in 75 years.” For those few zany people who want to know, interpolating between Rushforth’s figures for a 1 in 1000 year event (approximate magnitude 7.5), you get a 5 percent chance of occurring in 50 years. The City staffer who authored the high-probability major quake claim, Johnson Street Bridge project manager Mike Lai ($128,347.14), didn’t respond to a request for an explanation by press time. And also no word on whether councillors Madoff, Hunter and Luton are questioning the science behind Rushforth’s peer review.
Sam Williams is a Victoria writer who predicts this is the end.
and finally. Rail or no Rail on the bridge. The current options presented to the public do not include a rail line into downtown. Council directed staff to seek funding from the Capital Regional District before their August 12th decision, which they duly attempted on July 28th at the CRD Transportation Committee. However, there was not a direct ‘ask’ for a set amount, simply a presentation on the bridge options and a request for ‘funding approval in principle’ – for both the rail line, and the already included 5 metre wide, multi-modal-path. Graham Hill, the Mayor of View Royal and Chair of the committee noted the CRD cannot ‘approve anything in principle’, however CRD staff were directed to seek funding options to keep the rail line on the bridge.
That was followed with a coalition of Westshore Mayors, and the Island Corridor Foundation, endorsing the goal of municipalities other than Victoria sharing the cost. The CRD Transportation Committee will meet again in September, but only after Council has made a decision on the bridge and put forth a borrowing bylaw, to consider if funding is available. Read the Times Colonist article
Anyone confused yet?
Council plans to decide on August 12th for a $77 or $80 million replacement or rehabilitation of the Blue Bridge – that is what has been sent out to the public for survey feedback. Or they could choose to include rail, which most councillors want, but which jacks up the cost to $89 million for replacement and $103 million for rehabilitation – that without any guarantee of regional funding. The timeline is tight as a borrowing bylaw must be set by August 20th in time for a planned referendum in late November.
The Blue Bridge pictured through Old Town - Eric Porcher
Media attention to local issues comes in waves, with the Johnson Street Bridge reaching a crest in the lead up to an August 12th Council decision. The City of Victoria is undergoing a Blue Bridge public engagement process with a mail in and Ipsos Reid phone survey, designed to guide Mayor Dean Fortin and Council in their choice of a borrowing bylaw for a planned November referendum. That stands currently at $77 million for replacement, or a $80 million rehabilitation of the bridge. That rises when rail is included.
Residents have until August 3rd to submit their City of Victoria mail in survey forms to City Hall, and the johnsonstreetbridge.ORG supplementary questionnaire.
Meanwhile, at the request of Mayor Dean Fortin, he and staff met with the Times Colonist Editorial Board, and outlined his new vision of the bridge…
Mayor Dean Fortin, who has been a strong supporter of replacement, now says he doesn’t care which option is chosen.
“For me at this stage, the best option is the one that has the most likelihood to succeed at referendum,” Fortin said. If a referendum fails, he said, “in the next two or three years we would have to decommission [the bridge]. We’d have to take it away.” Full Article
and Peter Sparanese, City of Victoria Operations Manager, and recently former Director of Engineering…
The bottom line, say engineers, is that the bridge can’t be left as is.
“We’re looking at a potential closure of this bridge in 2012 based on the condition assessment information provided by our engineering consultants,” city director of operations Peter Sparanese said.
“That’s a serious consideration for the city. We don’t want to be there.”
with Katie Josephson, City of Victoria Director of Communications, stating in a followup Times Colonist article…
Katie Josephson, city director of communications, told the Times Colonist editorial board that residents weren’t asked in the householder survey whether they favoured replacement or refurbishment for two reasons.
The mail-in survey is not a scientifically representative sample, whereas the Ipsos Reid survey the city is also conducting is.
Further, she said, the householder survey does not provide a broad representation from a wide demographic.
“Mail-ins are predominantly from property owners in specific neighbourhoods, often male versus female. We want to hit all corners of the community.”
Which of course raises a question to the City of Victoria communication staff. If these problems were noted before the mailout, why go ahead with an expensive public engagement process when it is admitted, in the media, the results might be flawed? How will that be presented to Council as part of their August 12th decision?
That is reflected in the responses…
City’s mailer on bridge just fear-mongering
BY BRUCE WALE, TIMES COLONIST JULY 25, 2010
I actually laughed out loud while reading the mailer I received from the City of Victoria entitled “The Future of the Johnson Street Bridge.” It was a political document pretending to be a call for public input.
The publication is replete with threats and fear-mongering. “If nothing is done to address the Johnson Street Bridge within in the next two years it will face closure,” the city threatens. Write back to city council if you want, but you should know the decision’s already been made.
I challenge anyone to find evidence that the city engineering department was warning council about serious seismic issues with the Johnson Street Bridge prior to Dean Fortin taking office.
And don’t be surprised that the refurbishment option turned out to be more expensive than building a new bridge. The fix is in.
That discussion was overtaken by one about the Johnson Street Bridge. A nearly deaf mem was concerned over the possible demolition of the Johnson Street bridge. He shouted that 30 years ago the rusty viaduct was covered with leftover blue paint from light poles.
The populace, showing creative skills, immediately renamed it “the Blue Bridge.” It was built by the same chap who designed the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, and remains a brilliant example of technical genius, all the better for the city fathers to tear it down. The reason cited: It is falling apart, or as any thinking person would say, neglect and negligence. He just hoped the names of the guilty city elders are remembered.
By numbering the mail in surveys the City of Victoria has implied the mail survey responses will be taken at a greater level of contribution and credibility than an online, or phone survey poll, in terms of advising council. Yet they have only provided a single respondent form to households, when the reality is each household should have more than one potential voter. There is no alternative to pick up another numbered survey form through City Hall or another location, or download online. This after the previous Ipsos Reid survey clearly stated that businesses were looking for an interactive website.
The mail survey is also flawed as it may have not reached all households. There are concerns about postal delivery.
Finally – let’s go back to a Times Colonist article in 2009 – Lengthy Bridge Closures Unlikely, as quoted…
Lengthy bridge closure unlikely
Bill Cleverley. Times – Colonist. Victoria, B.C.: Apr 4, 2009. pg. A.3
City engineers hope the public will be able to cross that bridge when they get to it — even if it’s in the middle of being replaced.
They’re optimistic repair or replacement work on the Johnson Street Bridge would at most see total road closures of only a day or two at a time. “We’re not looking at shutting down the bridge for 18 months. I don’t think that would be totally acceptable,” said Mike Lai, Victoria’s assistant director of transportation and bridge project manager.
Consultants’ preliminary estimates call for road closures totalling 12 working days — not likely consecutive — if the decision is made to refurbish the 85-year-old landmark blue bridge. The number of closure days if the bridge is replaced is unknown, but the goal would be to minimize the impact by building a new three-lane bridge beside the existing one.
An estimated 30,000 vehicles use the Johnson Street bridge daily.
The first step would be to decommission the rail portion of the bridge, Lai said, then construction of a new road bridge, decommissioning of the existing road bridge, and construction of the new rail portion.
Lai said the work would slow traffic and could reduce the lanes from three to two — one in each direction. The consultants estimate it would take 18 months to two years to refurbish the bridge and two to four years to replace it. “At this point, we don’t see it as a lengthy full closure for two years or anything like that.”
Replacement would mean the Esquimalt and Nanaimo Rail terminal would be temporarily relocated to the west side of the bridge, but it would also provide the opportunity to straighten out the S-curve on that side and eliminate the underpass.
An assessment by consultants Delcan Corp. of the 85-year-old steel bridge found it would fail in a significant earthquake, because of its timber piles and aged laced steel beams. The bridge deck could also unlock and open in a quake and the counterweight would collapse.
A refurbished Johnson Street Bridge is estimated to cost between $25 million and $30 million and last another 40 years, while a new bridge would cost $35 million to $40 million and likely last 100 years.
Councillors will receive a final report on bridge options April 23. The city hopes to secure funding from senior levels of governmentfor $5-million worth of improvements to the two-lane Point Ellice Bridge at Bay Street, which would help handle additional traffic. The improvements would add sidewalks and bikeways to both sides of the bridge and improve approach roads.
City communications staff have said that they welcome feedback on the bridge project. We take them at their word. We believe they should include our survey in the information that Victoria’s councillors will receive before they decide on August 12 whether to rehabilitate or replace the bridge.
But it’s most important to fill out the City’s survey, which is on page 7 of the information package you received in the mail. Here are our suggestions about how to complete it.
Johnson Street Bridge Feedback
This is the crucial part of the survey. It appears the City will total the check marks from the surveys it receives, and that considerations finishing in the “top three” will influence the councillors the most.
If you believe the City should rehabilitate the existing bridge, you should check “Preserve heritage” – and nothing else.
Why not check the others? Unfortunately, every other consideration listed above can be interpreted to favour replacement, if you accept the information presented by the City. We don’t. Here’s why.
LaSalle Causeway Bridge
Construction Costs: The City says it will cost $77 million to replace the bridge without rail, and $80 million to rehabilitate it. We question this estimate for rehabilitation, which has tripled from the $24 million quoted by Delcan in April 2009, and the $35 million quoted by MMM last November.
The new estimate greatly exceeds what other governments have recently paid for rehabilitating similar bridges. This spring, for example, the federal government finished rehabilitating the LaSalle Causeway Bridge in Kingston, Ontario, a Strauss trunnion bascule bridge similar to ours, built in 1917. That rehabilitation involved removing pack rust, replacing and repairing steel where required, grit-blasting the bridge down to the metal to remove its lead paint, and then repainting it. Cost: $3.1 million.
Lefty O'Doul Bridge
Much of the City’s estimated rehabilitation cost is for seismic upgrading. We question how much of it is necessary: although the bridge was not designed to any seismic standard, it was designed to carry trains, and did withstand the largest earthquake ever recorded on Vancouver Island, a 1946 quake of 7.3 magnitudeat its epicentre in Courtenay. Seismic upgrading also need not be outrageously expensive: in 1999, San Francisco seismically upgraded its “Lefty O’Doul” bridge, another Strauss trunnion bascule bridge, for $10 million.
A further $15 million of the City’s refurbishment estimate is for upgrading the Blue Bridge to the maximum 8.5 earthquake standard, to make it the “lifeline” bridge to Vic West. The Bay Street Bridge, which carries water and gas mains, and phone and electrical cables, is a better candidate for a “lifeline” seismic upgrade.
Maintenance Costs: The City says it will cost $42 million to maintain the existing bridge for the next 100 years, versus $22 million for a replacement. However, the architect’s design for a replacement “rolling bascule” bridge uses a unique open-wheel lift mechanism, which has rarely been employed elsewhere. It is premature to estimate the maintenance costs for the new bridge until it has been built and operating for several years.
Construction closures or impacts: The City says that rehabilitating the existing bridge will require fully closing it to traffic for 12 months. This needs further examination. The federal government was able to keep Kingston’s LaSalle bridge open to traffic during the eight months it was being repaired. A June 2010 report by Banjar Management examining various rehabilitation options for the Johnson Street Bridge cited only several months of “restricted vehicle, pedestrian, and cycle access,” spread out over three years. The City has not explained why 12 months of full closure is now required. It has also not explained why it cannot do on-site rehabilitation work at night, which would minimize closures and the impact on downtown.
Improved access for cyclists, pedestrians, and other users: Both the rehabilitation and replacement proposals call for improved surfaces and connections for cyclists and pedestrians, which we welcome. The only difference is that replacement includes on-street bicycle lanes. These are important, but we question whether 60 metres of bike lanes warrant the cost of a new bridge.
Improved road approaches on both sides: The replacement proposal will do little to change the existing configuration of traffic on the east side of the bridge; the major change would be the conversion of the west side’s “S-curve” into a straightaway. Some Vic West residents want the S-curve to remain, to calm traffic.
You are, of course, free to check any considerations as you see fit. We’re just checking “Preserve heritage.” If you really want to check three, “Construction costs,” and one of the “access” options would be the next best.
COMMENTS and ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
We hope the above notes will suggest comments for you to add to the rest of the City’s survey. Here are some examples of ones that members of our group will be sending:
2) What comments do you have about the replacement option?
The costs are too high.
I want rail included on this bridge.
3) What comments do you have about the rehabilitation option?
I want a bare-bones, minimum-cost rehabilitation.
I want the City to do rehabilitation work at night to minimize all closures to traffic.
An 8.5 seismic upgrade is unnecessary. The Bay Street Bridge should be the “lifeline” bridge.
4) In moving forward to a referendum, what additional information would you like to receive on the selected project, prior to voting on borrowing?
I want the City to explain how it will pay for all the other facilities and work that Victoria needs. Nearly all of our manageable debt will be consumed by the bridge project.
I want a list of all City properties that have not been seismically upgraded, and an assessment of which ones are most likely to cause casualties in an earthquake.
5) Is there anything you would like to add?
I want you to ask all Victoria residents a direct question about whether they prefer replacement or rehabilitation.
City council should not make an $80-million decision largely on the results of a telephone survey.
The City must receive responses by August 3. Please complete the City’s survey, and our supplementary survey, put them together in the City’s business-reply envelope, and get them in the mail right away!
Thank you for taking the time to provide this feedback to the City of Victoria.
The Mayor and engineering consultants have claimed that construction and material costs are the major factor in driving up the ‘Class C’ estimates of the Johnson Street Bridge refurbishment and replacement plans. Delay has nothing to do with the dramatic rise in costs, in fact according to the Vancouver Island Construction Association, labour and material costs have fallen 15-20% since 2008, and the strengthening Canadian Dollar means materials purchased in the US are cheaper.
It was a long day for the City of Victoria Council, and due credit to them and staff who stuck through what ended up being over two hours debating the merits of the Johnson Street Bridge project. Realizing that this is the largest capital spend and potential borrowing for Victoria, maybe they should have held a special meeting, especially as the final documents for consideration were not released until after 9pm the night before…
Despite a spirited debate on including rail as the base refurbishment or replacement projects for the public to consider over the next six weeks, council has ratified a motion which excludes the rail option from the public engagement consideration – but they reserve the right to re-include a rail path if other funding is forthcoming by August 12th 2010.
Media Roundup
Times Colonist – Bill Cleverley – June 18th 2010: A rail crossing is not in the cards for a new or refurbished Johnson Street bridge unless outside funding can be found or the public demands it. Victoria councillors, facing soaring costs on the bridge project, say they’d like to include rail but can’t afford it alone.If alternate funding can be found by Aug. 12 — the date councillors are scheduled to decide between replacement or refurbishment — they will consider including a rail crossing. If no funding for rail is secured, they will maintain a future rail right-of-way and push ahead to referendum without it.
CFAX NEWS – A COMMITTEE OF VICTORIA CITY COUNCIL WILL CONTEMPLATE OPTIONS FOR THE JOHNSON STREET BRIDGE THURSDAY AFTERNOON. THEY’LL REVIEW AN ENGINEERING REPORT, PRESENTED EARLIER THIS WEEK, ON BOTH REPLACING AND REFURBISHING SPAN, WHICH SUGGESTED REFURBISHING WOULD BE MORE EXPENSIVE THAN REPLACING THE BRIDGE.
Vic News – Roszan Holman – June 17 2010: Given how few people use the rail line, Victoria city council faces a tough decision: whether to pay between $12 million and $23 million to maintain the service to the downtown rather than ending it on the west side of the bridge.
Vibrant Victoria – Robert Randall – June 17th 2010: The debate was sometimes heated during the four-hour meeting as councillors faced off on the topic of rail, who would be paying for it and what the implications would be if rail was left off the November referendum question, with some fearing the prospect of a bridge without rail would trigger a backlash and a certain “no” vote.
Bridge cost $8.9 million in 2009. Same engineer: $80 mill.+ in 2010. Heads are spinning http://ow.ly/2x8kS #YYJAugust 31, 2010 5:43
RT @YuleHeibel: My notes on today's #yyj City of Victoria Special Meeting re @johnsonstbridge: Done deal all done http://bit.ly/clLapHAugust 14, 2010 2:30
RT @VibrantVictoria: Councillor Young sole dissenting vote in bridge decision. Madoff defends heritage record. #yyj http://ow.ly/2p2GuAugust 13, 2010 6:06
So let me get this straight. Focus Magazine has a writer, "Sam Williams" who hides behind a fictitious name, and they're taking the moral high road?? Bill Cleverley is a real reporter, and that's his real name. Whoever "Sam Williams" is, he or she could learn many lessons from Bill. […]
Comments