Would Ron have settled for a one-lane bridge?

I was taken aback by the recent announcement to replace the aging Sangsters Bridge with a one-lane bridge. Concerned, I spent a couple of weeks talking to people about the proposed construction. Many, like me, feel it is preposterous. In speaking to the Department of Transportation engineer overseeing the bridge construction, I was informed the replacement bridge was a one-lane modular structure. This is similar to the bailey bridges often used when a bridge is damaged beyond use and an alternative structure is required on a temporary basis.

In response to my query, why a one-lane bridge? I was told it was due to traffic volumes, a look at the area and the fact that area is considered to have no future development. Although pleased at the prompt response to my questions I continued, along with every one of the citizens of West Hants I had chatted with, to be mystified by this decision. I understand both Falmouth and West Hants are growth areas. A recent attempt was made to determine a priority list of bridges for repair or replacement in the province through a Freedom of Information request.

The response, it is a fluid list and therefore, subject to change and does not fall under the Freedom of Information. In an attempt to determine traffic volumes the department has been contacted and I'm still waiting for a reply.

Part of my bewilderment is a result of the policy on replacing Nova Scotia's aging single truss bridges. “Our steel truss program will enhance the safety of Nova Scotians and set the stage for continued economic growth across the province” stated in a news release by Transportation and Public Works Minister Michael Baker. “They were made for the days of horse and buggies, but survive in an era of 40-tonne trucks.” The recent news release on the one-lane bridge stated, “this new bridge will be sturdier and safer for local residents.” Confusing, this statement directly contradicts the government’s own policy!

Minister Baker goes on to explain the plan including the inspection and design approval and construction process. “Typically, however, they are one-lane structures, and were not built for today’s traffic needs.” So, are we attempting to experience a renaissance, go back to the 1880’s when many of the bridges were built?

I do not doubt the deterioration of the current structure and fully support the replacement. I do take issue with the fact that “a two-lane bridge was initially considered, but that would take about eight months to complete and cost more than twice as much. It would also have required larger approaches that would impact the riverbed and bank areas”. My understanding in speaking to the engineer is the sight distance continues to be an issue. Regardless of one or two-lane bridge, they will have to consider modification to the approaches.

To quote one of our local residents “we have received precious little since Ron has been gone, surely we can get a two-lane bridge.”

So I ask again, would Ron have settled for a one-lane bridge? I think we all know the answer.

Paula Lunn