Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

The BC NDP/Green government has just approved spending of $1.4 billion to replace the "dangerously old" Pattullo Bridge. Dangerously old? What bloody nonsense. At 80 years, we're talking of the Pattullo Bridge. England's Tickford Bridge, built 1810, carries main road traffic today. It's not the oldest steel bridge, one being built in 1779. I see the replacement for the Pattullo as a gift to the Steelworkers for the cancellation (?) of a bridge, to replace the Deas Tunnel. That bridge started prematurely with the aim to get it to the point of no return, by the previous government. Whether a riveted or or bolted structure, there's no bridge that can't be strengthened by welding - if necessary. For the Steelworkers' Union much steel will also be required in a tunnel construction - if that is the path chosen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Champlain bridge in Montreal is not even that old, about 60 years, but it seriously needed replacement. Certainly capacity was one issue, but even more serious is that it was falling apart. Many things built in the 50's,60', and 70's were done very poorly; before that time we had much better quality, and after that time we recognized the failures of that time and have improved on things. I can't answer for the Pattullo bridge, but age is not the only factor that needs be considered.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Philip Hebbard said:

The BC NDP/Green government has just approved spending of $1.4 billion to replace the "dangerously old" Pattullo Bridge. Dangerously old? What bloody nonsense. At 80 years, we're talking of the Pattullo Bridge. England's Tickford Bridge, built 1810, carries main road traffic today. It's not the oldest steel bridge, one being built in 1779. I see the replacement for the Pattullo as a gift to the Steelworkers for the cancellation (?) of a bridge, to replace the Deas Tunnel. That bridge started prematurely with the aim to get it to the point of no return, by the previous government. Whether a riveted or or bolted structure, there's no bridge that can't be strengthened by welding - if necessary. For the Steelworkers' Union much steel will also be required in a tunnel construction - if that is the path chosen. 

The Patullo bridge was constructed to last 50 years by its builder.  It certainly needs replacing.  

http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/pattullo-bridge-history-built-in-1937-the-span-was-expected-to-last-50-years

Tell us again how it is supposed to last a few hundred more years....    

I wish people would at least do a Google search before posting so they have a modicum of knowledge about what they’re posting....

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Philip Hebbard said:

No, seriously? Many a DC3 has  given over 50 years service. Are we really to believe that a bridge that at any moment may be supporting a thousand tonnes of traffic, may be toppled by the wind? With such a claim I'd look very closely for vested interest of those looking for a new bridge over renovating.

I didn’t say anything about being toppled by the wind, although it doesn’t meet current standards for wind or earthquake resistance.  It is past due for replacement, so why not replace it?

are you an engineer?  How much do you know about bridges?

What does a DC3 have to do wth this bridge?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Philip Hebbard said:

Many a DC3 has  given over 50 years service.

Not sure that comparison has any relevance. In addition to the design and stress issues being completely different, a 50 year old airplane has been rebuilt many times in order to keep flying.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2018 at 9:06 AM, ?Impact said:

Not sure that comparison has any relevance. In addition to the design and stress issues being completely different, a 50 year old airplane has been rebuilt many times in order to keep flying.

I say replace the bloody thing before the liberals get back in power. The liberals started putting tolls on all new bridges. They would do the same for a new Pattulo Bridge. At least the NDP took those tolls off which now saves many BC drivers hundreds of dollars every year. At least this is one time when I can say that I was quite happy to have an NDP government in power. They are saving me plenty of money. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2018 at 1:46 PM, ?Impact said:

Great, then you are totally against any user fees. I will remember that.

I think that I made myself clear when I said that I was against tolls on bridges. Remember that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, taxme said:

I think that I made myself clear when I said that I was against tolls on bridges. Remember that. 

I see, only user fees which apply to you personally. You want those who don't take that bridge to support your habit, but you don't want to reciprocate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2018 at 6:31 PM, ?Impact said:

I see, only user fees which apply to you personally. You want those who don't take that bridge to support your habit, but you don't want to reciprocate.

Well, when some BC roads in the interior get repaved, which I will probably never use, I am being forced to pay some of my taxes for those using that road. Maybe there should be tolls on some of those roads in the interior for their habit of using those roads? You need to think before you speak. It does work. 

Anyway life sucks, kid. Live with it. :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...