(05-09-2017, 01:42 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(05-09-2017, 01:40 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: If a truck that would collapse the bridge needs to be prevented from using it as a shortcut, I can understand the motivation.
This already happened in Wilmot. Taxpayers are going to be on the hook for a million dollar repair. It's a damn shame.
It's worse in this case because it has already been decided the bridge won't be repaired or replaced once it becomes structurally unstable, so a single heavy truck crossing could mean a permanent closure. It already had barriers to prevent large trucks from crossing, but the load limit is only 3 tonnes which is not hard to exceed with detoured traffic ignoring the single vehicle limit. I have no problem with the temporary bridge closure, but I think the detour is extremely onerous for 8 months. I wonder if they could have staged it a bit differently to allow some traffic through during construction.