Johnson Street Bridge Victoria BC

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.

We welcome your comments and feedback

Blue Bridge News!

Archives

Closure Inflation, From 12 Days to 12 Months

Closure Inflation, From 12 Days to 12 Months

South Park Bridge closed, Seattle

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?

  • Share/Bookmark
Closure Inflation, From 12 Days to 12 Months

How to Rehab a Bridge For $3.1 Million: The Kingston Comparison

How to Rehab a Bridge For $3.1 Million: The Kingston Comparison

LaSalle Causeway Bridge, Kingston

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.

____________________________________________________________________

Built in 1917, and repaired to last

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.

  • Share/Bookmark
How to Rehab a Bridge For $3.1 Million: The Kingston Comparison

A Tale of Two Bridges: Portland Parties, Victoria Ponders

A Tale of Two Bridges: Portland Parties, Victoria Ponders

Hawthorne Bridge

Hawthorne Bridge

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:


  • Share/Bookmark
A Tale of Two Bridges: Portland Parties, Victoria Ponders

Your Letters – For, Against, and Confused

Your Letters – For, Against, and Confused

Blue Bridge, Train and Bike. Photo by Patrick Lawson

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.

  • Share/Bookmark
Your Letters – For, Against, and Confused

Media Roundup – Johnson Street Bridge

Media Roundup – Johnson Street Bridge

The Blue Bridge pictured through Old Town - Eric Porcher

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.

Bruce Wale

and even the Major has weighed 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.

Your comments and feedback are welcome….

  • Share/Bookmark
Media Roundup – Johnson Street Bridge

CHEK TV – Construction Costs NOT Driving up Johnson Street Bridge Estimates

CHEK TV – Construction Costs NOT Driving up Johnson Street Bridge Estimates

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.

CHEK News Video – Reported by Tim Chung

  • Share/Bookmark
CHEK TV – Construction Costs NOT Driving up Johnson Street Bridge Estimates

Johnson Street Bridge Media Roundup – No Rail (well maybe)

Johnson Street Bridge Media Roundup – No Rail (well maybe)

Victoria's Johnson Street Bridge

Victoria's Johnson Street Bridge

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.

  • Share/Bookmark
Johnson Street Bridge Media Roundup – No Rail (well maybe)
Page 1 of 141234510...Last »