Tories want to dump Lift Bridge

scotto

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 15, 2004
6,985
218
63
The Beach Strip
#21
Tolls, spiral ramps and taller structure ideas examined

Federal consultant says building a prettier, user-friendly bridge would make it easier to give away to prospective new owners like Hamilton


Hamilton Spectator
By Matthew Van Dongen

The Canadian government should spend $198 million to rebuild the decrepit Burlington canal lift bridge, charge tolls to cross it, and offload the structure on a new owner such as Hamilton, says a federal consultant.

The cost-benefit analysis, obtained by The Spectator via a Freedom of Information request, suggests a rebuilt bridge will be easier to unload - especially if the new version is prettier and safer for users of the waterfront trail linking Burlington and Hamilton.

The study looks at options ranging from tearing down the 53-year-old structure to building a 13-storey pedestrian bridge to digging a $650-million tunnel. The recommendation, however, is to build a taller, slimmer replacement bridge with bike lanes - and maybe tolls - that would only lift for large commercial vessels.

The report calls the Hamilton Port Authority a "key stakeholder" in achieving a long-standing federal goal to offload the breakdown-prone bridge, which now costs $3.8 million a year to repair and run. But the consultant also points to nearby cities and the province as potential new owners.

Minister Diane Finley got a frosty response from councillors in Hamilton and Burlington when she suggested a municipal bridge takeover last year. Talks with prospective bridge owners are "ongoing," said Michele LaRose, spokesperson for Public Works and Government Services Canada, but no decisions have been made.

Hamilton officials have had wide-ranging property discussions with the Canadian government in recent months - talks that just resulted in the handover of Pier 8 land to the city in return for a settled lawsuit.

But Mayor Fred Eisenberger said Thursday the lift bridge was not included in recent negotiations.

"In any event, the answer would be the same: we're not interested," he said. The report acknowledges cities are "very concerned" about the idea of taking over the bridge, which now has annual maintenance costs that exceed the $3.6-million price of construction in the late 1950s. Hamilton says it has a $3-billion infrastructure backlog.

But the consultant suggests adding dedicated walking and cycling paths to an "anesthetically pleasing" bridge would make a municipal takeover more attractive.

Coun. Chad Collins has pushed for years to add dedicated paths to the bridge, but he's unmoved by the sales pitch.

"Not a chance," he said. "As a city, we don't have the budget to deal with the bridges we already have on the books."

Burlington Coun. Rick Craven said he welcomes the creation of a "signature bridge" that better-serves trail users - "just so long as the federal government continues to own it."

Representatives with the province and port authority say they've also been involved in bridge discussions, but have no updates to offer. The port authority, however, told the consultant that bridge breakdowns are a "key risk factor" for port business. Closing the bridge completely would cause $70 million in "negative economic impact."

The recommended rebuild would see the bridge slimmed down from four to two vehicle lanes, but with dedicated lanes for cyclists. The taller bridge would allow most sailboats to pass underneath, reducing annuals lifts from 3,300 to about 1,900.

The consultant also suggests the new bridge could be tolled, built and run by a private-public partnership. The report reveals the government studied the prospect of tolling the current bridge in 2010, but it was judged not "politically feasible."



Lift bridge replacement options are up in the air

Morrison Hershfield priced out replacement options - from the mundane to the wacky - for the Burlington Canal Lift Bridge in

a 2013 study. Here's a look:

Status quo: keep the bridge, which suffers annual breakdowns and will cost about $164 million to maintain over 30 years;

Knock it down: The cheapest option at $67 million would require demolition, the creation of cul-de-sacs on roads leading to the canal and a special nesting platform to replace lost bridge towers popular with peregrine falcons.

Taller, four-lane lift bridge: Would allow most sailboats to pass without lifting bridge, but is one of costliest bridge options at $287 million to build.

Taller, two-lane bridge: the recommended $198 million option, it's slimmer - even with bike lanes - and therefore cheaper to build. Traffic shouldn't be slowed because fewer lifts mean less queuing of vehicles.

Four-lane conventional bridge: the $291-million bridge needs less maintenance but would encounter the same wind closure problems as the skyway.

Pedestrian-only bridge: this novel $48 million option would force pedestrians to climb 13-storeys worth of stairs - or take an elevator - to follow the waterfront trail across the canal. Also, vehicle traffic would be out of luck.

Pedestrian bridge with EMS access: The same tall bridge - but bookended with spiral ramps to allow ambulances across in a pinch. The report does not attach a monetary value to how cool this would look.

A tunnel: Study of this option was short-circuited by the $650-million construction cost. The need to push a "large amount of earth" into the bay likely didn't help.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5786927-tolls-spiral-ramps-and-taller-structure-ideas-examined/

http://www.scribd.com/doc/273761072/Lift-bridge-concepts
mvandongen@thespec.com

905-526-3241 | [MENTION=650]matt[/MENTION]atthespec



Matthew Van Dongen is city hall reporter for the Hamilton Spectator. Reach him on Twitter [MENTION=650]matt[/MENTION]atthespec




The Spectator's View: Tell Ottawa we don't want the Burlington Canal bridge
Hamilton Spectator
August 10th, 2015
Repaired and upgraded or not, Hamilton and Burlington do not need a lift bridge added to their inventory of owned assets. So it's a very good thing that municipal leaders are standing firm against the idea of the federal government downloading responsibility for the Burlington Canal bridge.

It costs nearly $4 million a year to maintain and operate the aging facility. And Hamilton is already saddled with a $3 billion infrastructure backlog. The last thing we need are more costs and responsibility added, especially for something that is more appropriately owned by the feds or the province. Access to the harbour, which is federal jurisdiction, is the sole reason for having the bridge.

This is all about the Harper government downsizing to save money. Another description is downloading, which Ottawa and Queen's Park have become adept at.

Not this time. Let Ottawa, perhaps working with the port authority, make other ownership arrangements. Maybe a private sector partnership is an option, although that would also be an invitation to tolls which would annoy many people. Just don't dump the problem on our cities.



Howard Elliott
 
Top Bottom