Discussion about this post

User's avatar
John Campbell's avatar

The county said a new bridge over the Trent

In Campbellford would be money well spent

So they planned and they planned

To build a new span

But when asked when it would be they said: "No comment."

Expand full comment
Alan Langford's avatar

The original plan has no accommodation for pedestrian / scooter / cycle access from Saskatoon Ave. This struck me as more than a little odd for a community with such an economic dependence on tourism and one that so heavily promotes lifestyle when trying to attract new residents. If they've corrected that (and one hopes they have) then the footprint of the project will have grown a bit. Maybe that's a factor.

As for 17 and 25, while it's indeed sad to lose them, when looking at the last plan I wondered how they planed to manage construction there in the first place. I wonder if the cost of acquisition and demolition is actually lower than the projected cost of working around them during construction. I also note that these projects don't just get dropped in from the air(*). Considerable space is required for equipment, storage, on-site offices, et. al. Maybe as they got into detailed planning the design team collaborated with a civil engineering team that pointed this out, and that sealed the fate of 17 and 25? It's a pity that the process isn't sufficiently transparent that we don't have to speculate like this.

* Although it would be very cool (and reduce construction time) if they craned prefabricated spans in once the substructure was in place!

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts