Future of Big Eddy Bridge hinges on report
Email
Print
Letter to Editor
Share
Updated: June 30, 2009 9:17 AM
The Big Eddy Bridge was closed temporarily last week for repairs designed to maintain the bridge’s current reduced load restriction of 2 tonnes.
Ministry of Transportation spokesperson Jeff Knight said that repairs done last Friday, June 26 were being undertaken to maintain the Big Eddy Bridge’s load rating at its current 2 tonne restriction. The bridge had previously been downgraded to a 5-tonne restriction in the fall 2008.
“We are going to undertake some repairs tomorrow on the bridge, so the bridge will be closed for one day, and the purpose of those repairs are to ensure that the bridge will have that 2 tonne load rating,” said Knight in a telephone interview last week. “They’ll be doing some work that provides a bit of support to the structure and takes some of the stress off it.”
While the initial report focused on maintaining the 2 tonne rating over the short term, explained Knight, the Ministry of Transportation is also awaiting a more comprehensive report on the bridge’s status—a report which is expected in the next several weeks.
“What we’re waiting for ... is the full consultant’s engineering report and that’s going to identify the existing condition of the bridge and what rehabilitation requirements there are for the long-term,” said Knight. “We don’t know, long term, what load rating we can achieve on that bridge, or how long we could maintain it at whatever load rating.”
Knight explained that at 87 years old, the Big Eddy Bridge already exceeds the expected life span for new bridges such as the one at Clanwilliam.
“The Big Eddy [Bridge] is approximately 87 years old. And just to put that in perspective, the new structure that’s planned on the Trans-Canada Highway at Clanwilliam, that’s designed for a life expectancy of 75 years, and that’s with today’s modern engineering standards,” said Knight. “So we’ve got an 87-year-old bridge and this report we’re awaiting will help us identify what’s needed for the longer term, and what’s possible, in terms of a load rating.”
When asked about potentially increasing the bridge’s load rating, Knight said that the ministry would have to wait on their consultant’s engineering report before promising anything.
“That’s what the next report is going to tell us,” said Knight. “The purpose of that report is to see what the long-term requirements are to rehabilitate the bridge: what we’d have to do ... and what load rating is possible. We don’t know until we see that report ... in terms of the longer-term and whether we’re able to raise the load rating, that’s going to depend on what the findings are in the consultant’s engineering report.”
And as for speculation about a bridge closure, Knight simply said that only the coming engineering report will determine the bridge’s fate.
“[A bridge closure] is speculation at this point,” said Knight. “We need to see the report and we’ll see what comes out of the report. Until we get the report, it’s difficult to say what is possible, going forward, with that bridge. We’re hopeful that the load rating could be brought up; we have to see what’s in the report.”
v2
