Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire
The three lane bridge only makes sense if you look at it as the first phase of a project that involves the construction of two three-lane bridges to cross the floodway (like you see a bit further south at the TCH East where it crosses the floodway).
Surely the next phase must be to twin PTH 15 and build a second span next to the existing one?!?
|
Here's the skinny on the 'twinning' of the three lane bridge.
If there was any chance of twinning the bridge, that should have been done before they tore down the old bridge. The only problem with the old bridge was, it was six feet to short to endear a
700 year flood. They took the old railway bridge to the north of it, built a temporary bridge beside it, trimmed off the existing footings and piles, added six feet on to it, tore down the temporary bridge, and called it done. You the taxpayer, paid for that and CN picked up the old girders a dropped them in the East yards.
The old two lane car bridge was disassembled, the girders were last seen heading North, the balance was knocked down to the footings. A new gas line, fiber optics cable, telephone lines and what not were dug in to the south of the new bridge span. You can see the green consoles and manhole covers sitting on the south side. If there was any chance for a twin span, all that work, equipment and money would be gone. ( You paid for that too, Mr. Taxpayer )
So, if you think that those socialistic bastards that are in power know anything about bridgework and saving money, you'd be wrong.
Also, there are two lane roads on either end bottlenecking an serious traffic flow.