The 64-year-old James River Bridge could be closing in the next few years, say officials.
During a recent Clearwater County council meeting, council was provided with four options that were suggested from an engineering assessment on the bridge, which is located on Rge. Rd. 53 about 16 kilometres north of Sundre.
Council chose not to replace or repair the bridge, but to close it when it is required, which could be in the next few years, according to Marshall Morton, director of public works with Clearwater County.
Clearwater County residents who live near the bridge are rallying against this decision, and a petition is currently in the works.
“I don't think it should close at all. For one thing, if they look at the fatalities that have happened on (Highway) 22, there has been quite a few,” said Kathy Cameron, county resident who lives one mile east of the James River Bridge Store.
She said many drivers in the area choose to take the bridge rather than Highway 22 because they feel safer.
“There's so many logging trucks and semis on 22 that, especially during the winter, we just don't feel safe taking that one,” she said.
She has lived in the area for more than 20 years and has always made use of the bridge.
There was a time when someone from the area was killed on Highway 22, and emergency personnel closed it and rerouted all traffic to the James River Bridge, she noted.
“If there's a major emergency out here that that has to happen again, what will they do with the people?” she said.
“There's so many farmers that move equipment and cattle across that river and they go across the old James River Road, so if they close that, that will force them to move the equipment on to 22, so what's going to happen there?”
She believes it would poorly affect numerous businesses in the area, including the James River Bridge Store, Al Saunders Contracting & Consulting Inc., and several home-based businesses.
“I just don't think the council people that voted for this really, really looked at it,” she said.
“Yes it's going to cost money to upgrade the bridge, but in the long run won't it be better? There are a lot of people that live out here, and a lot of us use it. There are tourists that use it.”
According to Morton, the options presented to council were completely replacing the bridge at a cost of approximately $6.7 million; spending close to $290,000 on repairs, which would buy 10 years before completely replacing it; major rehabilitation for roughly $1.1 million, which would buy 15-20 years before replacing it; do nothing and close the bridge when required.
“So without doing anything to it, it would continue to deteriorate and we would have to put weight restrictions and so on it until such time as it would need to be closed for the safety of the travelling public. That is the option that council chose,” said Morton.
“There's not a definite time frame associated with the closure, but there is the potential that the bridge could be closed in the near future based on overall condition.
“Based on what we've seen historically, we're going to have to start significantly reducing the load carrying capability of the bridge in the next two years. So any time after that two years, you may be looking at a closure.”
But Cameron believes the bridge should be upgraded.
“If that's what they were planning on, maybe they should have contacted us taxpayers and informed us and got our opinion and let us discuss with them how that will affect our lives,” said Cameron.
“And if they do close it, what are they going to do with the bridge? They can't just leave the bridge sitting there. So that means we're losing the bridge, reclaiming environmentally those banks, and then you have a road that goes to the end of the banks, is that going to be an accident waiting to happen?”
She said people in the area feel the same way and they are starting a petition against the closure.
Morton said if the bridge closes, it would be reclaimed and removed and the area would go back to its natural state.
He said Highway 22 is a mile west of the bridge, and on either side of the bridge there is a local road that runs east and west over to Highway 22.
“That's why council probably won't put $6 million into the bridge, because it's only a one-mile detour. And when you look at the amount of money that is required to go into all bridges in Alberta right now, there's going to be some hard decisions that have to be made,” said Morton.
“And when you're looking at the closure of one bridge that really is only adding a mile to everybody's detour, that one's probably going to be a pretty easy decision in relation to other ones.”
Betty Christensen, owner of the James River Bridge Store, said she is completely against council's decision.
“I am not liking it one little bit. I think that bridge should not be taken out,” Christensen told the Gazette.
“If that's not there, it's an extra two miles to get to town, it's an extra two and a half miles to get to the James River Hall, it closes access off from here down to the hall, and for people to go back east, they have to go back out to Highway 22 back down 27 or 57,” she said.
She believes the closure of the bridge would poorly affect business for the store.
“It will really be bad. Because people, if they can't come across the bridge, they'll just go to town instead,” she said.
The James River Bridge Store was built in 1915, and she has owned it for 35 years.
She noted that during flooding events throughout the years, the road washed out on several occasions, but never the bridge.
“If they take the James River Bridge out, it's going to create a lot more traffic on Highway 22 and it's very busy now, and there's more accidents there, so it will make a lot more accidents and confusion on the road,” she said.
“A lot of people that live between the bridge and Sundre like to come up this way, and it would cause a lot more traffic problems.”
Morton said the county is currently running under a $90-million bridge deficit, and owns 173 bridges.
“The province has said that they're going to zero fund bridges for at least the next three years. So the province isn't putting any money into bridges for the next three years,” Morton explained.
“So when you're looking at, we're sitting there with a $90 million bridge deficit for 173 bridges, council is going to have to decide what the priorities are. And those priorities are going to be based on how isolated each individual bridge is and how long of a detour it would be, because they obviously don't have $90 million to go fix all the bridges today.”
A common problem in the county, as well as across the province, is that the majority of bridges were all constructed in the '50s and '60s and they are all wearing out around the same time, he said.
The bridge is completely located within the boundaries of Clearwater County, however, the Mountain View County (MVC) boundary starts just south of the bridge, he added.
Therefore, some MVC residents may be affected by the closure as well.
“This bridge will be re-evaluated at the time that it needs to be closed. Right now they haven't committed any money to doing the repairs that it requires to make the life longer,” he said.
“When there is a decision required to close the road, council will be re-evaluating that decision at that time. Quite possibly they could decide to put money in it at that time and not close it. It's not 100 per cent sure that it will be closed, but as of right now they've chosen not to put any funds towards it.”
